| Literature DB >> 35299663 |
Maryse Guinebretière1, Julie Puterflam2, Alassane Keïta1, Sophie Réhault-Godbert3, Rodolphe Thomas1, Pascal Chartrin3, Estelle Cailleau-Audouin3, Edouard Coudert3, Anne Collin3.
Abstract
This study was designed to improve the hatching performance, chick robustness and poultry health in the event of long-term egg storage and suboptimal age of the reproductive flock. A total of 9,600 eggs from one young breeder flock (28 weeks of age, batch B) and 9,600 eggs from an older breeder flock (59 weeks of age, batch E) were used (ROSS 308). Each batch was separated into three sub-groups and stored for 14 days. The first sub-group of eggs (Cool, group C) was stored at 11.6°C. The second sub-group of eggs (Warm, group W) was stored at 18.3°C with two pre-incubation on days 6 and 10 of the storage period. The final sub-group of eggs (Control, group Ct) was stored at 18.3°C throughout the storage period. Eggs were similarly incubated and hatched birds were raised on the same experimental farm. In both batches, embryonic development was significantly more advanced in W eggs than in C and Ct eggs ( p < 0.01). In both batches, C and W treatments decreased early embryonic mortality by more than 10% compared with Ct, decreased the proportion of late-hatched chicks and improved the percentage of first grade chicks: in batch E, 42% of Ct eggs were first grade chicks vs. 57% in group W and 59% in group C. Benefits were even higher in batch B, where only 60% of Ct eggs gave first grade chicks vs. 83% in others groups. The hatching rate was thus higher in groups C and W regardless of flock age: for batch B eggs, 85% hatched in W and 84% in C vs. 62% in Ct, while for batch E eggs, 59% hatched in W and 61% in C vs. 45% in Ct. Day-old Ct chicks from batch E were heavier than W and C ones, and heavier than W chicks from batch B ( p < 0.05). Long-term parameters on farm were not significantly different between groups. Thermal treatments during the storage of eggs from both young and old breeder flocks counterbalance the negative effects of prolonged egg storage on hatching rate, without altering chicken performance during rearing.Entities:
Keywords: antioxidant status; breeder flock age; broiler performance; chick quality; embryo mortality; embryonic development; hatchability; storage conditions
Year: 2022 PMID: 35299663 PMCID: PMC8921499 DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2022.852733
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Physiol ISSN: 1664-042X Impact factor: 4.566
Figure 1Experiment workflow (B: eggs from breeder flock at the beginning of the laying period and E: end of the laying period). Ct: control group; C: cool storage; and W: warm storage. *pre-incubations (for groups W), dotted box: unhatched products, bold box: hatched chicks.
Figure 2Ventral view of the blastoderm from stages EGX to EGXIII—©ANSES.
Mean (SD) of weight loss (% of initial weight), albumen pH and embryo staging (EG&K classification) after 14 days of storage.
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| Weight loss | 1.0 (0.3)b | 1.9 (0.5)a | 1.7 (0.3)a | <0.001 | |
| Albumen pH | 8.7 (0.03)c | 8.9 (0.04)a | 8.8 (0.04)b | <0.001 | |
| Embryo staging | 10.0 (0.00)b | 12.4 (1.04)a | 10.1 (0.67)b | <0.001 | |
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
| ||
| Weight loss | 1.1 (0.5)b | 1.8 (0.4)a | 1.7 (0.3)a | <0.001 | |
| Albumen pH | 8.8 (0.04)c | 9.0 (0.04)a | 8.9 (0.05)b | <0.001 | |
| Embryo staging | 10.4 (0.70)b | 12.6 (1.09)a | 10.2 (0.63)b | <0.001 | |
Ct, control group; C, cool storage; and W, warm storage. B: eggs from breeder flocks at the beginning of the laying period; E: end of the laying period. n per group = 50 eggs (weight loss), 20 eggs (pH) and 15 eggs (embryo staging). p indicates the statistical difference between groups within batches. a, b and c: values not associated with common letters within batches are statistically different (p < 0.05).
Number of incubated eggs (Ni), semi-transparent eggs eliminated at ED18, eggs kept in the incubator after the candling process (Ns), unhatched products—detailed as unhatched dead in shell embryos, hatched dead chicks and unhatched live in shell chicks; number of hatched chicks (Nh)—detailed as first and second grade chicks including wet chicks.
|
|
| ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| Incubated eggs (Ni) | 3200 | 3200 | 3200 | – | 3200 | 3200 | 3200 | – | |
| Semi-transparent eggs | 297b | 285b | 788a | <0.001 | 1024b | 1036b | 1384a | <0.001 | |
| Viable eggs (Ns) | 2903b | 2915b | 2412a | <0.001 | 2176b | 2164b | 1816a | <0.001 | |
| Unhatched products | Unhatched dead | 104b | 74c | 175a | <0.001 | 158b | 173b | 229a | <0.001 |
| Hatched dead | 36 | 41 | 44 | 0.663 | 38 | 52 | 37 | 0.186 | |
| Unhatched live | 74b | 67b | 196a | <0.001 | 39b | 41b | 96a | <0.001 | |
| Hatchlings (Nh) | 2689b | 2733b | 1997a | <0.001 | 1941b | 1898b | 1454a | <0.001 | |
| 1st grade chicks | 1st grade chicks | 2649b | 2666b | 1919a | <0.001 | 1889b | 1830b | 1358a | <0.001 |
|
|
|
|
| – |
|
|
| – | |
|
|
|
|
| – |
|
|
| – | |
| 2nd grade chicks | 2nd grade chicks | 40b | 67a | 78a | 0.002 | 52b | 68b | 96a | <0.001 |
|
| 15b | 21b | 60a | <0.001 | 21b | 18b | 36a | 0.024 | |
Ct, control group; C, cool storage; and W, warm storage. B: eggs from breeder flocks at the beginning of the laying period; E: end of the laying period. p indicates the statistical difference between groups within batches, comparing numbers relative to Ni. a, b: values not associated with common letters within batches are statistically different (p < 0.05).
Figure 3Mortality stage of embryos from unhatched eggs (at ED21) and semi-transparent eggs (at ED18; B: eggs from breeder flock at the beginning of the laying period and E: end of the laying period). Ct: control group; C: cool storage; and W: warm storage. a, b and c: values not associated with common letters within stages are statistically different at threshold p < 0.05 [comparing numbers relative to the number of incubated eggs (Ni)].
Mean (SD) of first grade chick weight (g; n = 50 chicks, by sex per group) and percentage of vitellus weight related to body weight (n = 20 chicks, by sex per group).
|
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Chick weight | 36.5 (2.9)a | 35.6 (2.2)b | 36.7 (2.5)a | 0.0095 | 0.004 | 0.542 |
| Vitellus % | 8.0 (2.0) | 7.5 (1.8) | 8.3 (2.0) | 0.169 | 0.847 | 0.626 |
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Chick weight | 45.0 (3.6)b | 45.0 (3.6)b | 47.0 (3.3)a | <0.001 | 0.037 | 0.096 |
| Vitellus % | 8.3 (3.4)b | 8.5 (2.5)b | 10.4 (4.0)a | 0.011 | 0.019 | 0.656 |
Ct, control group; C, cool storage; and W, warm storage. B: chicks from breeder flocks at the beginning of the laying period; E: end of the laying period. p indicates the statistical difference between groups within batches; a, b and c: values not associated with common letters within batches are statistically different (p < 0.05).
Mean (SD) of body weight (BW, g) at 4, 11, 21, 28 and 32 days of age and relative breast muscle weight (pectoralis major PM, % in relation to body weight) at 31 (E) and 32 (B) days of age.
|
| ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 72 (7)b | 73 (6)b | 74 (7)a | 73 (6) | 73 (7) | 0.005 | 0.675 | 0.161 |
|
| 281 (23) | 281 (26) | 280 (24) | 285 (26) | 276 (22) | 0.801 | <0.001 | 0.300 |
|
| 884 (77) | 891 (74) | 897 (72) | 929 (68) | 852 (60) | 0.251 | <0.001 | 0.835 |
|
| 1494 (161) | 1513 (147) | 1519 (159) | 1618 (118) | 1396 (95) | 0.272 | <0.001 | 0.358 |
|
| 1925 (239) | 1918 (183) | 1923 (220) | 2078 (153) | 1765 (129) | 0.940 | <0.001 | 0.254 |
|
| 18.4 (1.3) | 18.6 (1.1) | 18.0 (1.2) | 18.4 (1.2) | 18.4 (1.2) | 0.287 | 0.946 | 0.636 |
|
| ||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 89 (7) | 89 (7) | 90 (8) | 89 (7) | 89 (7) | 0.311 | 0.152 | 0.563 |
|
| 315 (24) | 316 (24) | 315 (23) | 322 (24) | 310 (22) | 0.983 | <0.001 | 0.583 |
|
| 962 (85) | 956 (90) | 965 (80) | 1,022 (73) | 915 (62) | 0.244 | <0.001 | 0.251 |
|
| 1632 (182) | 1610 (166) | 1591 (166) | 1759 (139) | 1507 (106) | 0.130 | <0.001 | 0.244 |
|
| 2037 (235) | 1994 (247) | 1987 (233) | 2,198 (196) | 1856 (140) | 0.749 | <0.001 | 0.951 |
|
| 18.0 (1.2) | 17.6 (1.2) | 17.9 (1.1) | 17.6 (1.4) | 18.0 (1.0) | 0.628 | 0.263 | 0.788 |
Ct: control group; C: cool storage; and W: warm storage. B: chickens from breeder flocks at the beginning of the laying period; E: end of the laying period. n, by sex per group = 100 animals (body weight), eight animals (PM). p indicates the statistical difference between groups within batches; a and b: values not associated with common letters within batches are statistically different (p < 0.05).
Figure 4TBARS plasma index [expressed as Malondialdehyde concentration (MDA)] for E chickens (from eggs of breeder flock at the end of the laying period) at 7 and 31 days, depending on egg storage conditions and age of broilers (n = 8 animals, by sex per group). Ct: control group; C: cool storage; and W: warm storage. a, b: values not associated with common letters are statistically different ( p < 0.05).
Figure 5Total antioxidant power (TAS) of plasma for E chickens (from eggs of breeder flock at the end of the laying period) at 7 and 31 days, depending on egg storage conditions and age of broilers (n = 8 animals, by sex per group). Ct: control group; C: cool storage; and W: warm storage.