Effect of Breed and Diet Type on the Freshness and Quality of the Eggs: A Comparison between Mos (Indigenous Galician Breed) and Isa Brown Hens

Abstract

Eggs are a nutritious food, offering a balanced source of essential amino and fatty acids, minerals, and vitamins. Genetic and diet factors can modify hen egg traits. Thus, the effects of breed and feed on egg quality using two laying hens, Mos (autochthonous breed) and Isa Brown (commercial hybrid), and three feeds, commercial fodder (CF), corn/pea/triticale (CPT) and corn/wheat (CW), were investigated. Freshness parameters (egg weight, eggshell weight and thickness, albumen height, Haugh units and yolk color), chemical composition, color and textural parameters, as well as fatty acid profile, were assessed on a total of 288 eggs, from the two breeds. The samples were divided in 96 eggs, corresponding to each of the three dietary treatments. There were significant differences (p < 0.001) in albumen height and Haugh units, obtaining the highest values for Isa Brown genotype; meanwhile, laying hens fed with CF had the highest weight, as well as the greatest eggshell thickness. Cooked yolks of Isa Brown eggs presented the highest values of luminosity, while the yellowness was higher for Mos eggs. Regarding the texture of eggs, genotype was again the parameter having the greatest impact, obtaining higher values in hardness, gumminess and chewiness in those eggs from the Mos breed. Concerning egg chemical composition, it was affected by breed and diet type, but Mos eggs were characterized by a significantly (p < 0.001) higher contents of fat (9.53% vs. 7.58%), protein (12.31% vs. 11.66%) and ash (1.10% vs. 1.04%) than Isa Brown ones. Finally, diet type influenced the fatty acid profile, mainly affecting oleic and linoleic acids, which showed significantly (p < 0.05) highest values (42.90 and 14.66 g/100 g of total fatty acids) in CW and CF diets, respectively. Overall, breed and bird diet factors had a strong effect on egg quality and nutritional profile. Moreover, eggs from Mos hens had more attractive nutritional indices, and they could even be improved more by changing the diet.

Biometric Characterization of the Portuguese Autochthonous Hens Breeds

“…The morphometric measurements show highly significant sexual dimorphism, due to hormonal growth effects [ 39 ], in accordance with several authors [ 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 22 , 24 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 ]. Breed had significant effect ( p ≤ 0.05) in males, with the superiority of the “Branca” roosters, being the heaviest, largest and with the highest shank diameter and the “Preta Lusitânica” roosters, the lightest, shortest and with the smallest chest circumference.…”

“…The sustainability of production is becoming an increasingly strong consumer argument for the choice of products and producers that are part of their diet [ 17 , 18 , 19 ]. The breeding system for indigenous species is balanced by the use of natural resources, land and water, making it environmentally “friendlier”, and particularly adjusted in less favored regions where these resources are scarce [ 16 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 ].…”

Assessment of Dietary Selenium and Vitamin E on Laying Performance and Quality Parameters of Fresh and Stored Eggs in Japanese Quails

“…The most common egg quality characteristics are egg shape index, breaking strength, shell thickness, specific gravity, albumen height and weight, pH of albumen and yolk, Haugh unit and oxidative status of yolk lipids [30,31]. Despite having a significant effect on Haugh unit, albumen height, eggshell thickness, and egg surface area (p < 0.05), other egg traits were not influenced (p > 0.05) by VE or Se supplementation ( Table 2).…”

Effect of Breed and Diet on Carcass Parameters and Meat Quality of Spent Hens

“…Moreover, several studies had demonstrated that local breeds (e.g., Mos, Polverara, Black-Boned, Thai Native) are known for their great rusticity, allowing them a better adaptation to different diets and production systems than those showed by hybrids (Zotte et al, 2020;Franco et al, 2016Franco et al, , 2020Jaturasitha et al, 2008;Pateiro et al, 2018).…”