Carcass and meat quality of dual-purpose chickens (Lohmann Dual, Belgian Malines, Schweizerhuhn) in comparison to broiler and layer chicken types

Abstract

Currently, there is an intensive ethical discussion about the practice of culling day-old layer cockerels. One solution to avoid this practice could be using dual-purpose types, where males are fattened for meat and females used for egg production. The aim of the present study was to compare fattening performance, carcass conformation, and composition as well as meat quality of Lohmann Dual, a novel dual-purpose type, and 2 traditional dual-purpose types (Belgian Malines and Schweizerhuhn) with 2 broiler types and 1 layer type (Lohmann Brown Plus). Broilers included a conventional line (Ross PM3) and a slower-growing line (Sasso 51) fulfilling requirements of organic farming. Nine birds of each type were fed on a conventional broiler diet. Feed intake and metabolizability of nitrogen and energy were recorded per pen (n = 3), the latter through excreta sampling. For each bird, carcass conformation was assessed, and weights of body, carcass, breast meat, legs, wings, and inner organs were determined. Additionally, breast angle, an indicator for carcass appeal, and skin color were recorded. Meat quality assessment included determinations of thaw and cooking loss, shear force, meat color, and proximate composition of the breast meat. None of the dual-purpose types (20 to 30 g ADG) performed as well in growth as the intensively growing broiler line (68 g ADG). However, Lohmann Dual could compete with the slower-growing broiler line (slower growth but better feed efficiency, similar in carcass weight and breast proportion). Also breast angle was quite similar between Lohmann Dual (100°) and the extensive broiler type (115°C) compared to the intensive broiler line (180°). Meat quality was most favorable in the intensive broilers with the smallest shear force and thawing loss, whereas meat quality was not different between the other types. The Schweizerhuhn performed only at the level of the layer hybrid, and the Belgian Malines was ranked only slightly better.

Performance and Meat Quality of Dual-Purpose Cockerels of Dominant Genotype Reared on Pasture

“…The growth ability of dual-purpose chickens is very small in comparison with broilers [31]. In the present study, the highest body weight on the 77th day of the experiment (1842 g) and the nonsignificantly lowest feed conversion (2.79) was found in Dominant Brown D 102 cockerels.…”

“…The greatest ultimate pH was found in the meat of the Dominant Tinted D 723 cockerels. Glamoclija et al [35] and Mueller et al [31] showed that meat pH was lower in broilers fattened for a longer time or in slow-growing genotypes. Berri et al [36] attained similar findings.…”

Growth Performance of Local Chicken Breeds, a High-Performance Genotype and Their Crosses Fed with Regional Faba Beans to Replace Soy

“…In contrast, Lichovníkova et al [47] reported values of 3.1 for Ross Broilers and 3.8 for ISA brown cockerels after a fattening period of 90 days under free-range husbandry conditions. Local breeds as the Belgian Malines and the Schweizerhuhn required 2.55 and 2.73 kg of feed to produce 1 kg life weight [48] and Perella et al [49] reported a FCR of 3.8 kg/kg for the Italian slow growing genotype Gaina. In the case of layer males, FCRs of up to 10.0 kg/kg have been reported, depending on the husbandry system and length of the fattening period [50].…”

Basic morphometry, microcomputed tomography and mechanical evaluation of the tibiotarsal bone of a dual-purpose and a broiler chicken line

“…An evaluation of the quality and integrity of the tibiotarsus includes the examination of morphological variables such as bone mass and length [22] as well as details of the microstructure properties of both trabecular and cortical bones including bone mineral density, plus the assessment of mechanical properties such as bone fracture strength and stiffness [20,21,23,24]. Tibiotarsal bone strength is influenced by numerous properties including shape, size, mass, structure, and composition [25][26][27].…”