Variability, Heritability and Correlations of Egg Shape in the Zatorska Goose

Rabsztyn, A.; Andres, Krzysztof; Dudek, Michał

doi:10.5513/jcea01/11.4.856

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The differences between values obtained in the present study and the other studies were associated with the fact that the geese used in this study had different breed, age, origin, and egg weight and were reared under breeder conditions. The shell surface area of the present study was lower than the values (139.8, 141.5, and 134.6 cm 2 ) reported by Mazanowski and Adamski [4] for White Italian × Cuban geese in early, peak, and late periods and the value (140.60 cm 2 ) declared by Rabsztyn et al [26] for Zatorska geese. Mazanowski and Adamski [4] reported that the laying period had no effect on shell density in White Italian × Cuban geese.…”

Section: External Quality Traitscontrasting

confidence: 84%

The effect of laying period on egg quality traits and chemical composition of Lindovskaya (Linda) geese reared under breeder conditions

Sarı¹,

Buğdayci²,

Akbaş³

et al. 2019

Turk J Vet Anim Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionLivestock support in recent years has enabled the introduction of various goose breeds into the Turkish poultry sector. These mainly include two broiler breeds, the Emden and Toulouse, alongside one laying breed, the Chinese goose. Random crossbreeding has been realized especially between Chinese geese and domestic geese; thus, various goose breeds and eggs other than these breeds have also been introduced to the Turkish poultry sector and they have even been reared a little. One of these breeds is the Lindovskaya.The Lindovskaya breed constitutes the majority of the goose population in Russia and was obtained by crossbreeding the domestic breeds from the Nizhny Novgorod region of Russia and breeds from China, including the Adler, Solnechnogorsk, and Gorky. Their number accounts for more than 60% of the country's geese. Lindovskaya was registered as a breed in 1994. They are heavy-bodied birds, and their feathers are generally white. They have a cone-like bump referred to as a knop on their foreheads. This bump is larger in male adult geese than it is in females. A slight swelling or dewlap is seen on their necks. Their body is deep, wide, and long. The average live weight of an adult Lindovskaya goose is 6 to 7 kg; males tend to generally be heavier than females. Females are reported to lay 40 to 50 eggs per year [1] (https://yaroslavskaya.all.biz/en/lindovskiyes-geese).Goose eggs are generally used to obtain goslings and they may be eaten as well, albeit rarely. Thus, identifying the quality traits of eggs of geese in the flock is necessary in order to use them for goslings as well as a food source. Traits such as egg weight, form index, shell weight, shell thickness, shell ratio, surface area of egg shell, shell weight per unit surface area, and shell density are used to identify the external quality traits of the eggs. Dawson and Clark [2] reported that egg weight affected the vitality of goslings as well as their walking/swimming and growth performances in the first 2 weeks. Vargare et al. [3] determined the egg weight of Landes and Hungarian geese as 153.9 and 154.2 g, respectively. The internal quality traits of eggs are identified

show abstract

Section: External Quality Traitscontrasting

confidence: 84%

The effect of laying period on egg quality traits and chemical composition of Lindovskaya (Linda) geese reared under breeder conditions

Sarı¹,

Buğdayci²,

Akbaş³

et al. 2019

Turk J Vet Anim Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similarly, Razmaite et al (2014) Bednarczyk and Rosiñski (1999). Rabsztyn et al (2010) have reported considerably smaller average egg mass of approximately 165 g of the autochtonous Zator goose (Poland), and Scripnic and Modvala (2010) report the average egg mass of the Italian White goose of 160 g.…”

Section: The Data Inmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…The following authors have significantly contributed to establishing genetic and non-genetic factors influencing incubation values of goose eggs and gosling quality: Meir and Ar (1991), Bednarczyk and Rosiñski (1999), Mazanowski and Chelmonska (2000), Rosiñski (2000), Mazanowski and Adamski (2002), Bobko and Svetlik (2002), Pakulska. (2003) Saatci et al (2005), as well as: Mazanowski and Bernacki (2006), Meir and Ar (2008), Ðermanovic et al (2008), Rachwal (2008), Rabsztyn et al (2010), Scripnic and Modvala (2010), RazmaitP et al (2014), Kucharska-Gaca et al (2016a), Kucharska-Gaca et al (2016b), Mitrovic et al (2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of egg mass of the white italian goose on fertilisation, loss of weight during the incubation period, hatchability and gosling quality

Mitrovic¹,

Mekić²,

Milojevic³

et al. 2018

IJAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The main purpose of the study was to determine the effect of egg mass and egg weight groups (group I eggs under 160 g, group II egg mass 160 g to 180 g and group III eggs over 180 g) on incubation results, loss of egg weight (moist) during incubation, gosling hatchability and the relative share of the gosling in the egg mass. Eggs with mass between 160 g and 180 g (group II) demonstrated the highest fertilisation rate (91.28 %) and the highest hatchability out of the number of incubated eggs (83.14 %), while the eggs from the group I (lighter than 160 g) showed the highest number of gosling hatchability out of the number of fertilised eggs (91.08 %). The lowest embryo mortality was that of the group I (5.17 % and 6.06 %), while the highest is reported for the group III (14.29 % and 16.67 %). The lowest relative loss of egg mass (moist) by day 25 of the incubation period was established for the group I eggs (10.98 %), and the highest for the group III (11.71 %), with a statistically significant (P<0.01) difference of -0.73 %. Other differences were not statistically significant (P>0.05). Gosling percentage in the egg mass was significantly higher (P<0.001) in the group III of incubated eggs (67.81 %) than in the group II (66.61 %) and the group I (65.24 %).

show abstract

“…The average length of goose eggs varies between (approximately) 8 cm to 10 cm (Paganelli et al 1974;Rabsztyn et al 2010;Nedomova and Buchar 2014;Kumbar et al 2016;Ahmad et al 2017;Sreten et al 2018;Onk and Kirmizibayrak 2019), the width averages vary between 5 cm to 6 cm (Rabsztyn et al 2010;Nedomova and Buchar 2014;Kumbar et al 2016;Ahmad et al 2017;Sreten et al 2018;Onk and Kirmizibayrak 2019), and the shape index averages vary between 65 cm and 69 cm (Saatci et al 2002;Saatci et al 2005;Rabsztyn et al 2010;Nedomova and Buchar 2014;Kumbar et al 2016;Sreten et al 2018;Onk and Kirmizibayrak 2019).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Paganelli et al (1974) calculated the egg shell surface area as 146.15 ± 7.08 cm 2 depending on the egg weight of Embden geese. The average volume of goose eggs varies between approximately 125 cm 3 to 175 cm 3 (Paganelli et al 1974;Saatci et al 2002;Nedomova and Buchar 2014;Kumbar et al 2016) and the average surface area varies between approximately 135 cm 2 to 150 cm 2 (Paganelli et al 1974;Rabsztyn et al 2010;Nedomova and Buchar 2014;Kumbar et al 2016). Paganelli et al (1974) calculated the volume of Embden geese as 158.74 ± 10.95 based on the egg weight.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimation of the external quality characteristics of goose eggs of known breadth and length

Karabulut¹

2021

Vet. Med. - Czech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, we investigated whether the mathematical formulas, which generally reveal the external quality characteristics of living organisms, yield the correct results in goose eggs. For this purpose, three genotypes and 555 eggs were studied that were grouped into Native (n = 356), Chinese (n = 163) and Linda (n = 36), which were raised in Aksaray province. The averages in the Native, Chinese and Linda geese were 5.43, 5.38 and 5.7 cm, respectively, in breadth; were 8.12, 8.03 and 8.67 cm in length, respectively; the shape index was 66.9, 67.2 and 66.7 cm, respectively; the egg volume was 142.8, 138.8 and 172.5 cm3, respectively; the egg surface area was 136.9, 134.3 and 155.4 cm2, respectively; the egg weight was 159.1, 154.5 and 192.3 g, respectively; the specific gravity of the eggs was 1.11, 1.11 and 1.12 g/cm3, respectively; the shell thickness was 0.510, 0.504 and 0.555 mm, respectively; the shell weight was 14.79, 14.32 and 18.26 g, respectively; the shell volume was 70.06, 67.82 and 86.41 cm3, respectively; the shell specific gravity was 2.111 3, 2.111 0 and 2.113 5 g/cm3, respectively; and the shell ratio was 9.29, 9.26 and 9.49 g, respectively. The number of pores is calculated as 14 828, 14 502 and 17 152, respectively. Although the formulas used give compatible results, there is a need for formulas that calculate closer to the truth rather than formulas that calculate the egg weight and egg shell weight.

show abstract

Variability, Heritability and Correlations of Egg Shape in the Zatorska Goose

Cited by 9 publications

References 8 publications

The effect of laying period on egg quality traits and chemical composition of Lindovskaya (Linda) geese reared under breeder conditions

The effect of laying period on egg quality traits and chemical composition of Lindovskaya (Linda) geese reared under breeder conditions

Effect of egg mass of the white italian goose on fertilisation, loss of weight during the incubation period, hatchability and gosling quality

Estimation of the external quality characteristics of goose eggs of known breadth and length

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About