Influence Of Rearing System On The Production  Performance Of Commercial Layers

R Pourouchottamane; V Ramesh Saravana Kumar; V Venkatsubramanian,; M A Kataktalware; Aditya Mishra; Showkeen Muzamil; P K Pankaj

doi:10.48165/

Authors

R Pourouchottamane National Research Centre on Pig (Indian Council of Agricultural Research), Rani, Guwahati, Assam - 781 113 (India)
V Ramesh Saravana Kumar Department of Livestock Production and Management, Veterinary College and Research Institute, Namakkal, Tamil Nadu - 637 002 (India)
V Venkatsubramanian, Department of Livestock Production and Management, Veterinary College and Research Institute, Namakkal, Tamil Nadu - 637 002 (India)
M A Kataktalware Department of Livestock Production and Management, Veterinary College and Research Institute, Namakkal, Tamil Nadu - 637 002 (India)
Aditya Mishra Department of Livestock Production and Management, Veterinary College and Research Institute, Namakkal, Tamil Nadu - 637 002 (India)
Showkeen Muzamil Department of Livestock Production and Management, Veterinary College and Research Institute, Namakkal, Tamil Nadu - 637 002 (India)
P K Pankaj National Research Centre on Pig (Indian Council of Agricultural Research), Rani, Guwahati, Assam - 781 113 (India)

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.48165/

Keywords:

Egg production, feed efficiency, layer, livability, rearing system

Abstract

A study was conducted by collecting data from 60 commercial layer

farms (15 farms in deep litter system, 25 farms in cage system and 20

farms in cages on elevated platform system) to assess the influence of

housing system on production performance of commercial layers. The

overall hen day egg production (21-72 weeks) was significantly higher in

conventional cage system (78.85±0.70) and cages on elevated platform system (80.15±1.19) comparedtodeep litter systemof rearing(72.41± 0.51). The system of rearing had significant influence on feed efficiency for each production period as well as full production period. The values were 1.66 ± 0.02, 1.63 ± 0.02 and 1.86 ± 0.02 in conventional cages, cages on elevated platform and deep litter system of rearing, respectively. The feed consumption was significantly higher in deep litter system in comparison to other two rearing systems. The livability was significantly lower in deep litter system of rearing (85.94 ± 0.36) than conventional cage system (89.32 ± 0.90) and cages on elevated platform system (89.39 ± 1.08).

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Bhardwaj, R. 2010. Indian poultry industry its overview and outlook: The time has come to review our strategy. Poultry Express, 1(6): 4.

Dogra, V. and Aggarwal, A.K. 2010. Association of poultry farms with housefly and morbidity: A comparative study from Raipur Rani, Haryana. Indian Journal of Community Medicnie, 35: 473- 477.

Farooq, M., Mian, M.A., Durrani, F.R. and Syed, M. 2002. Feed consumption and efficiency of feed utilization by egg type layers for egg production. Livestock Research for Rural Development, 14: 76-79. (http://www.cipav.org.co/lrrd/lrrd14/1/faro141a.htm)

Harvey, W.R. 1979. Least Squares Analysis of Data with Unequal Sub-class Numbers. pp: 54-84. In: USDA Agricultural Research Science and Education Administration, Washington, USA. Kramer, C.Y. 1957. Extension of multiple range tests of group means with unequal number of replication. Biometrics, 12: 307.

Muthusamy, P. and Viswanathan, K. 1998. Effect of rearing systems on performance of commercial layers. Indian Journal of Poultry Sciences, 33: 264-267.

Nimmermark, S., Lund, V., Gustafsson, G. and Eduard, W. 2009. Ammonia, dust and bacteria in welfare-oriented systems for laying hens. Annals of Agricultural and Environmental Medicine, 16: 103-113.

Petek, M., 2004. The productivity of commercial laying hens housed in battery cage, aviary, perchery and free-range housing systems. pp. 332-332. In: Proceeding of the 22th World`s Poultry Congress, June 8-13, 2004, Istanbul, Turkey.

Prabhakaran, R. 2003. Good Practices in Planning and Management of Integrated Commercial Poultry Production in South Asia. FAO Animal Production and Health paper. No. 159, Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome, Italy.

Sekeroglu, A. 2002. The Effects of Free Range System on Egg Productions and Egg Quality of Brown and White Layer Genotypes. Ph.D. thesis submitted to the Animal Science Department, Institute of Science, Gaziosmanpasa University, Turkey.

Sekeroglu, A., Musa, S., Ergun, D., Zafer, U., Muammer, T., Mustafa, S. and Hussain, O. 2010. Effects of different housing systems on some performance traits and egg qualities of laying hens. Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances. 9: 1739-1744.

Sivakumar, K., Muralidharan, M.R., Viswanathan, K and Radhakrishnan, K. 2002. Microclimate and production performance of commercial layers under different roof types and rearing systems. Indian Journal of Poultry Science, 37: 258-263.

Suhila, S.G.K., Muralidharan, M.R., Ramesh, V., Arunachalam, S. and Sivakumar, T. 2002. Effect of microclimate and microbial quality in layer house on egg production. Indian Journal of Animal Science, 72: 939-940.