Indian Research
By
K. Abhijeet*1, B. K. Malik2 &P.S. Majesh3, I. Naik4 and A. Katiyar5
1&4CPDO (ER), Bhubaneswar, CPDO (ER), Bhubaneswar CPDO 7 T1 Bangalore, 5CPDO (ER), Bhubaneswar
The study was conducted to compare the productivity performance of layer breeder under conventional house and automatic house. Both houses were studied under small farms with an average of 250 birds. This study covered a period of 22 weeks with five replicates. Based on the results, the effect of different rearing systems on the mean body weight and FCR from week eighteen to forty weeks of age on weekly and cumulative basis were significantly (P≤0.05) influenced among the various treatment groups in HH-260 birds. The body weights of both the treatment groups were uniform till thirty weeks (P<0.05). From thirty one to forty weeks optimum body weight achieved in birds reared in automatic rearing system as compared to birds reared in conventional rearing system. Production performance of the ARS houses had significantly (P<0.05) better FCR compared to conventional house type with significant difference. The FCR comparative productivity under both ARS and CRS. Egg production in experimental birds in automatic rearing system was significantly different from birds reared in conventional rearing system. Similarly, Hen housed egg production and Hen day egg production was significantly (P<0.01) higher in automatic rearing system as compared to conventional rearing system. The effect of rearing system energy on egg production (no’s) in HH-260 birds on weekly basis (18-40 weeks). Improving feed conversion ratio achieving optimum body weight will improve the total egg production. It can be statistically induced that interest in improving any trait will simultaneously improve the other traits and otherwise. It showed that ARS birds had better liveability as compared to birds under conventional rearing systems. The effect of different rearing system on the overall liveability percentage HH-260 birds different treatments during twenty-two weeks of experimental period. Litter quality analysed based on the proximate analysis and E. coli count and found significant (P<0.01) difference among the two-rearing systems. The proximate analysis of build up litter was significantly higher (P<0.01) in conventional rearing system than the automatic rearing system. The higher proximate values like crude protein, crude fat, crude fibre, total ashand energy value were mainly due to feed wastage in conventional rearing system which leads to elevation of these values. The effect of different rearing systems on the litter quality of HH-260 birds among different treatment groups during the beginning and end of the study. The working time measured for feeding, watering and medication of HH-260 experimental birds. There was highly significant difference (P<0.01) in working time measurement of automation over conventional system of rearing. However, there were no significant difference observed in percent settable eggs, fertility per cent, hatchability percent, external and internal quality of eggs. It accepted the hypothesis of the study that ARS housing has better productivity and profitability over conventional, this is testified by the general better FCR, egg production, liveability and litter quality in CCS houses.
Influence of Photoperiod on Production Performance of Broiler Chicken
By
Senthilkumar, P. Shamsudeen, J. Ramesh, G. Raj Manohar and S. Prakash
ICAR-Central Institute from Women in Agriculture, Bhubaneswar, Odisha
A biological experiment was conducted in broiler chicken to assess the influence of photoperiod on production performance of broiler chicken. Two hundred and fifty-two sex separate day old broiler chicks were randomly grouped into seven treatments with three replicates per treatment and containing twelve chicks per replicate. The treatment groups were provided with experimental lighting programme as follows. The control group (T1) was given continuous photoperiod of 23 hours (hours of light) and scotoperiod of 1 hour (hours of dark) i.e. 23L:1D from 0 to 42 days; The treatment groups T2, T3 and T4 were given lighting programme of 23L:1D from 0 to 21 days followed by 22L: 2D (T2), 20L:4D (T3) and 18L:6D (T4) from 22 to programme of 42 days of age, respectively. The treatment groups T5, T6 and T7 were given lighting programme of 23L:ID from 08 to 35 days of age, respectively followed by 23L:1D from 36 to 42 days of age in T5, T6 and T7. The chicks were reared in deep litter system in a gable roofed, open sided house under standard management conditions. All the birds were provided with uniform light intensity of 5-10 lux during the photoperiod at night with natural day light during day hours. The result revealed that the groups with 18L:6D lighting programme from 8th day to 35th day of followed by 23L:1D from 35-42 days of age (T7), 22L:2D lighting programme from 8th day to 35th day of followed by 23L:1D from 35-42 days of age (T5) and T4 (23L:1D up to 21 days; 18L:6D from 22-42 days) had significantly (P<0.05) higher body weight and weight gain than the control (T1) at 35th day of age. The group T5, T6 and T7 had significantly (P<0.01) higher body weight and weight gain than the control (T1) and T2 at 42nd day of age. One 35th day of age, the group T7 and T5 had significantly higher feed intake than the control (T1), whereas the other treatment groups (T2T3, T4 and T6) did not differ with both the groups, however, on 42nd day of age, the groups T5 and T7 had significantly (P<0.1) higher feed intake than T2 and control T1. The feed conversion ratio at 42nd day of age was significantly (P<0.1) better in T5 and T6 than T2 and the control (T1), whereas the other treatment groups (T3, T4 and T7) did not differ significantly with both the groups. The overall liability was 100 per cent in T4 and T7 with 6 hours scotoperiod from 22-42 days and from 8-35 days, respectively. Hence, it is suggested that lighting programme of 18L:6D with single phase photoperiod and scootperiod could be followed over continuous lighting programme of 23L:1D up to 35th day of age to improve production performance of broiler.
Source : XXXVII Indian Poultry Science Association Conference (IPSACON 2022)