23.10.2012 Views

Tackling the future challenges of Organic Animal Husbandry - vTI

Tackling the future challenges of Organic Animal Husbandry - vTI

Tackling the future challenges of Organic Animal Husbandry - vTI

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

RAHMANN G & GODINHO D (Ed.) (2012): <strong>Tackling</strong> <strong>the</strong> Future Challenges <strong>of</strong> <strong>Organic</strong> <strong>Animal</strong> <strong>Husbandry</strong>.<br />

Proceedings <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> 2 nd OAHC, Hamburg/Trenthorst, Germany, Sep 12-14, 2012<br />

reared under conventional 3- tier cages (standard cages <strong>of</strong> 48 x 42 x 45 cm with stocking rate <strong>of</strong> 4<br />

birds per cage with density <strong>of</strong> 504 cm 2 ). All birds were housed in a closed computerized control<br />

system. Similar feed composition (14.6 % CP, 2800 kcal ME / kg feed, 3.95 % Ca and 0.37 %<br />

available P) and 16L:8D photoperiod were provided for hens in both systems. Feed and water were<br />

supplied ad. libitum. However, birds on organic system fed ration with all ingredients <strong>of</strong> organically<br />

produced (<strong>the</strong> ingredients and <strong>the</strong>ir percentages were corn 36.653, soybean meal 20.035, oat 10,<br />

milo 10, soybean meal by products 8, alfalfa meal 3.509, biotine 0.5, choline chloride 0.045, DL<br />

methionine 0.123, probiotics 0.0075, limestone 9.9885, mono-ca-p 0.726, salt 0.207, oyster meal,<br />

0.131and clover mixture feed 0.01). On <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, birds on <strong>the</strong> conventional system were fed<br />

commercial diet with <strong>the</strong> following ingredients and <strong>the</strong>ir percentages corn 53.073, soybean meal<br />

12.141, DDGS 12.0, wheat middling 9.442, canola oil 1.85, biotine 0.5, limestone 9.948, mono-ca-p<br />

0.599, salt 0.163, oyster meal 0.081, rhodinmet (ca) 0.072, Rouch mix feed 0.010 and L-lysine<br />

0.121). A total <strong>of</strong> 240 eggs were randomly obtained on August 9, 2011from hens <strong>of</strong> 48-wk old . The<br />

120 eggs <strong>of</strong> each system were randomly assigned to 2 storage treatments (one day vs. 7 days) before<br />

chemical analysis, which were analyzed at Biological Lab., Michigan State University. Fatty acid<br />

pr<strong>of</strong>iles were measured for <strong>the</strong> 120 eggs/system (15 samples, each was taken from a pooled <strong>of</strong> 8<br />

eggs yolk). Lipid extraction <strong>of</strong> egg yolk and preparation <strong>of</strong> fatty acids methyl esters (FAME) was<br />

performed using a direct 2-step transesterification procedure (Jenkins, 2010). FAME was quantified<br />

using a GC-2010 plus gas chromatography (Shimmadzu, Kyoto, Japan). Whereas, eggs proximate<br />

and amino acids analysis were done on 15 samples/system, each was taken from a pooled <strong>of</strong> 8 whole<br />

eggs, at Agricultural Experiment Station Chemical Lab., Missouri University, according to<br />

AOAC (2006a and 2006b, respectively). Hen-day egg production was 165 and 175 at 48 wk for<br />

organic and cages system, respectively. Feed consumption was 108.7 gm/day for both systems.<br />

Feed efficiency was 141.6 and 116.3 gm feed/egg for organic and cages system, respectively. As<br />

<strong>the</strong> purpose <strong>of</strong> this investigation was to examine if production system (organic or conventional<br />

cages) affects <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> eggs, several traits were studies (weights and percentages <strong>of</strong> egg albumin,<br />

yolk and shell) as well as percentages <strong>of</strong> dry matter (DM) <strong>of</strong> whole egg, albumin and yolk,<br />

also albumin, yolk and whole egg solids. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, egg quality traits (specific gravity, Haugh<br />

unit, yolk index, yolk color, shell thickness and egg shape index) were studied. Statistical analyses<br />

were performed using GLM <strong>of</strong> SAS (2001). The model used for data included <strong>the</strong> effects <strong>of</strong> rearing<br />

system, storage period and <strong>the</strong> interaction between <strong>the</strong>m. Duncan's multiple range tests was used to<br />

separate group means.<br />

Results<br />

Hen-day egg production, were measured at 48 being 165 and 175 for organic and cages system,<br />

respectively. Feed consumption was 108.7 gm/day for both systems. Feed efficiency was 141.6<br />

and 116.3 gm feed/egg for organic and cages system, respectively. Result <strong>of</strong> statistical analysis<br />

showed that storage treatments as well as <strong>the</strong> interaction between rearing system and storage treatments<br />

had significant effects on some traits studied. Generally, storage at 5-7 °C for a week caused<br />

unfavorable effects on egg quality and chemical analysis. Result <strong>of</strong> proximate analysis revealed that<br />

eggs produced under organic system had significantly (P < 0.05) more ash (1.93 vs. 1.74%) and less<br />

fat (13.88 vs. 11.95 %). Storing eggs for 7 days decreased crude protein significantly (P < 0.05)<br />

from 31.18 to 28.95 %, but did not influence crude fat and ash percentages. Moreover, eggs produced<br />

under organic system had significantly (P < 0.05) lower egg weight (59.60 vs. 61.00 gm),<br />

yolk weight (17.45 vs. 19.13 gm). Shell weight (6.65 vs. 6.27), yolk solid (7.40 vs. 8.27 %), egg<br />

solid (22.69 vs. 23.22 %), yolk percent (29.36 vs. 31.41 %), but more shell weight (11.16 vs. 10.30<br />

%), albumin percent (59.48 vs. 58.29 %), egg shape index (76.63 vs. 75.40 %), yolk color (8.15 vs.<br />

6.98), shell thickness(0.45 vs. 0.39 mm), Haugh unit (81.87 vs. 77.79 %), and yolk index (0.47 vs.<br />

0.45). Results also showed that eggs produced under organic system had significantly (P < 0.05)<br />

lower amino acids Proline (1.17 vs. 1.28 %), Hydroxylysine (0.010 vs. 0.005%) and Ornithine<br />

165

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!