Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ttngx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-06T21:56:39.267Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Egg production potentials of certain indigenous chicken breeds from South Africa

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 May 2010

J.A.N. Grobbelaar ,
B. Sutherland  and
N.M. Molalakgotla
J.A.N. Grobbelaar*
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Council, Livestock Business Division, Irene, Private Bag x2, Irene 0062, South Africa
B. Sutherland
Affiliation:
Faculty of Science, Department of Animal Sciences, Tshwane University of Technology, Private Bag x680, Pretoria 0001, South Africa
N.M. Molalakgotla
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Council, Livestock Business Division, Irene, Private Bag x2, Irene 0062, South Africa
*
Correspondence to: J.A.N. Grobbelaar, Agricultural Research Council, Livestock Business Division, Irene, Private Bag x2, Irene 0062, South Africa. email: jgrob@arc.agric.za
Get access

Summary

The aim of this study was to determine the egg production potentials of four different indigenous chicken breeds in South Africa: Potchefstroom Koekoek, Venda, Ovambo and Naked Neck. The White Leghorn breed was used as the control. The egg production potentials were evaluated over two consecutive production cycles of 52 weeks (used as replicates). Data were collected at the experimental farm of the Agriculture Research Council at Irene. Treatment means were separated using Fisher's protected t-test least significant difference at the 5 percent level of significance and the percentage mortality rate by means of a row by column chi-square test. No significant differences were observed between breeds on the mean age to the production of the first egg. The White Leghorn was superior (p ≤ 0.05) to all four of the indigenous breeds for the mean number of eggs and percentage hen-housed egg production produced per production cycle. The Potchefstroom Koekoek was also superior (p ≤ 0.05) to the other three indigenous breeds for these parameters. There was no difference between the Ovambo and Naked Neck breeds. The percentage mortality rate for the White Leghorn (39.5 percent) was significantly (p ≤ 0.05) different from that of the Venda, Ovambo and Potchefstroom Koekoek (22.2 percent). No differences were observed among the Potchefstroom Koekoek, Venda, Ovambo and Naked Neck (32.3 percent) or between the White Leghorn and Naked Neck with regard to the mean percentage mortality.

Résumé

Le but de l'étude était de déterminer le potentiel de production en œufs de quatre espèces de poules d'Afrique du Sud (Potchefstroom Koekoek, Venda, Ovambo et Naked Neck) ainsi que la Leghorn Blanche. Le potentiel de production en œufs fut évalué sur deux cycles de production consécutifs de 52 semaines (utilisé comme résultats reproductibles). Les données furent recueillies à la ferme expérimentale du Conseil de Recherche Agricole, à Irene. Les moyens de traitement furent séparés en utilisant le test t protégé de Fisher différence la moins significative au niveau d'importance de 5 percent et le pourcentage du taux de mortalité au moyen d'un test d'une ligne par colonne χ2. Aucune différence significative ne fut décelée entre les espèces de l'age moyen jusqu'à la production du premier œuf. Des différences significatives (p ≤ 0.05) se présentèrent pour le pourcentage moyen des poules hébergées et le nombre d'œufs produit par cycle de production entre les Leghorn Blanches et les quatre espèces indigènes. Avec ces paramètres le Potchefstroom Koekoek, diffère de façon significative des autres trois espèces. Aucune différence ne soit obtenue entre le s Ovambo et les Naked Neck. Une différence significative (p ≥ 0.05) c'est produit pour le pourcentage moyen du taux de mortalité entre Les Leghorns Blanches et les Potchefstroom Koekoek, les Venda et les Ovambo. Aucune différence ne fut obtenue entre les Potchefstroom Koekoek, les Venda, les Ovambo et les Naked Neck ainsi que entre les Leghorn Blanches et les Ovambo par rapport au pourcentage moyen de mortalité.

Resumen

El objetivo de este estudio fue determinar el potencial de puesta de cuatro diferentes razas locales de gallinas presentes en Sudáfrica. Éstas fueron la Potchefstroom Koekoek, la Venda, la Ovambo y la Naked Neck (cuello desnudo). Se utilizó a la Leghorn Blanca como control. Los potenciales de puesta fueron evaluados a lo largo de dos ciclos consecutivos de producción de 52 semanas (utilizados como duplicados). Los datos fueron tomados en la granja experimental del Consejo de Investigación Agrícola en Irene. Los medios del tratamiento fueron separados utilizando la prueba T protegida de Fisher, diferencia menos significativa al nivel de importancia del 5 percent, y el porcentaje de tasa de mortalidad por medio de una fila a través de la prueba χ2. No se hallaron diferencias significativas entre razas con respecto a la edad de puesta del primer huevo. La Leghorn Blanca fue superior (p ≤ 0.05) en cuanto al número medio de huevos producidos, y para el porcentaje de huevos puestos por ciclo de producción con respecto a las cuatro razas locales. La Potchefstroom Koekoek fue también superior (p ≤ 0.05) con respecto al número de huevos producidos en comparación a las otras tres razas locales para los parámetros mencionados anteriormente. No se evidenciaron diferencias entre la Ovambo y la Naked Neck. El porcentaje de mortalidad para la Leghorn Blanca (39,5 percent) fue significativamente diferente (p ≤ 0.05) a las de la Venda, Ovambo y Potchefstroom Koekoek (22,2 percent). No se observaron diferencias entre la Potchefstroom Koekoek, la Venda, la Ovambo y la Naked Neck (32,2 percent), o entre la Leghorn Blanca y la Naked Neck, con respecto al porcentaje de mortalidad medio.

Keywords

chickenegg productionindigenousindigènepoulesproduction d'oeufslocalgallinaproducción de huevos
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Genetic Resources/Resources génétiques animales/Recursos genéticos animales , Volume 46 , April 2010 , pp. 25 - 32
Copyright
Copyright © Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adetayo, A.S. & Babafunso, S.E. 2001. Comparison of the performance of Nigerian indigenous chickens from three agro-ecological zones. Livestock Res. Dev., 13: 2 (available at http://www.cipav.org.co/lrrd/lrrd13/2aded132.htm).Google Scholar
Demeke, S. 2004. Egg production performance of local and White Leghorn hens under intensive and rural household conditions in Ethiopia. CIPAV (available at http://www.cipav.org.co/lrrd/lrrd16/2/deme1602.htm).Google Scholar
Fourie, C. & Grobbelaar, J.A.N. 2003. Indigenous poultry breeds, pp. 20–21. Krugersdorp, Germany, Wing Nut Publications.Google Scholar
Grobbelaar, J.A.N. 2008. Egg production potentials of four indigenous chicken breeds in South Africa. Pretoria, Tshwane University of Technology. (M.Tech. thesis)Google Scholar
Gueye, E.F. 1998. Village egg and chicken meat production in Africa. World Poult. Sci. J., 54: 73–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naidoo, M. 2003. Indigenous poultry production systems in Northern Kwazulu-Natal, South Africa, pp. 66–73. Paper presented at the 1st National Workshop on Indigenous Poultry Development, Nature and Development Group of Africa (NGO Registration No. 026-851-NPO).Google Scholar
Nhleko, M.J., Slippers, S.C. & Nsahlai, I.V. 2003. A preliminary report of on-farm performance of rural chickens kept under farmers' management, pp. 79–83. Paper presented at the 1st National Workshop on Indigenous Poultry Development, Nature and Development Group of Africa (NGO Registration No. 026-851-NPO).Google Scholar
Nhleko, M.J., Slippers, S.C., Lubout, P.C. & Nsahlai, I.V. 2003. Characterisation of the traditional poultry production in the rural agricultural system of Kwazulu-Natal, pp. 74–78. Paper presented at the 1st National Workshop on Indigenous Poultry Development, Nature and Development Group of Africa (NGO Registration No. 026-851-NPO).Google Scholar
North, M.O. & Bell, D.D. 1990. Commercial chicken production manual, 4th edition.New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold.Google Scholar
Ramlah, A.H. 1996. Performance of village chickens in Malaysia. World Poult. Sci. J., 52: 75–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramsy, K., Harris, L. & Kotze, A. No date. Sa. Landrace breeds: South Africa's indigenous and locally developed farm animals. Pretoria, Farm Animal Conservation Trust.Google Scholar
Snedecor, G.W. & Cochran, W.G. 1980. Statistical methods, 7th edition, p. 507. Ames, IA, USA, Iowa State University Press.Google Scholar
Sonaiya, E.B. 2003. Village poultry and its role in rural Africa, pp. 16–30. Paper presented at the 1st National Workshop on Indigenous Poultry Development, Nature and Development Group of Africa (NGO Registration No. 026-851-NPO).Google Scholar
South African Poultry Association. 2006. Official mouthpiece of the South African Poultry Association. Pluimvee Bull./Poult. Bull., April: 166.Google Scholar
Van Marle-Koster, E. & Nel, L.H. 2000. Genetic characterization of native southern African chicken populations: evaluation and selection of polymorphic microsatellite markers. S. Afr. J. Anim. Sci., 30(1): 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Marle-Koster, E. & Casey, N.H. 2001. Phenotypic characterisation of native chicken lines in South Africa. Anim. Genet. Resour. Info., 29: 71–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Viljoen, W.C.J. 1979. Hoenderrasse – pluimvee. Boerdery in Suid Afrika, Pamphlet A.2. Pretoria, Department of Agriculture and Water Supply.Google Scholar
Yami, A. 1995. Poultry production in Ethiopia. World Poult. Sci. J., 51: 197–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar