Phenotypic, Hematological, Immunocompetence and Carcass Parameters Comparison between two Crosses From Sudani Duck (Egyptian Muscovy)

Authors

A. H. EL- Attar A. Galal A. MAKRAM

INTRODUCTION

OBJECTIVE OF STUDY

Choosing the Suitable Mating from two Commercial ducks With Sudani Duck

Evaluate Phenotypic, Carcass, immune response and Hematological Parameters of The tow Hybrids From Sudani Duck

Material & Methods

Mating Design

Female (S) Male(M) Cross (MS)

Female (S) Male(P) Cross (PS)

Phenotypic Parameters Comparison between two Crosses From Sudani Duck (Egyptian Muscovy) A. H. EL- Attar A. Galal A. Makram

Measurements

Body Weight Gain Body Weight Bi Weekly Growth Rate

Feed Consumption Body Weight Gain Feed Conversion

Body Measurements Body Circumference Body length Keel Length Shank Length

MAIN RESULTS

Female (S) Male(M) Cross (MS)

Muscovy (M) Cross (MS) Sudani (S)

Female (S) Male(P) Cross (PS)

Fig 1 : Body weight of MS and PS cross from0-5wks of age

Fig 2 : Body weight of MS and PS cross from 6-9 wks of age

Fig 3 : Body weight at marketing age of MS and PS cross

Fig 4 : Feed conversion from 2wk- marketing age of MS and PS cross

Fig 5: Shank Length of MS and PS cross

Fig 6: Keel Length of MS and PS cross

Fig 7: Body Circumference of MS and PS cross

Fig 8: Body Length of MS and PS cross

Fig 9: Growth rate of MS and PS from 0-9 wks of age

Hematological and Immunocompetence Parameters Comparison between two Crosses From Sudani Duck (Egyptian Muscovy) A. H. EL- Attar A. Galal A. Makram

Measurements

Blood Paramters

Blood Parameters HCT RBCs Thrombocytes HB

Immune Response

BLOOD PARAMETERS WBCs Heterophils Monocytes Lymphocytes H/L Ratio Eosinophils H/L Ratio

PHA-P Injection

PHA-P Injection - - D1 D2 D3 - Before Injection 0 h 24 h After Injection 48 h D3 72 h

Bursa

Spleen

Mortality & Defects

Neck defect Short Beak Wings defect

Main Results

Fig 10: Toe-web swelling (difference) of PS and MS cross

Fig 11: Bursa and spleen of PS and MS cross

Fig 12: Some blood parameters of PS and MS cross

Fig 13: Bursa and spleen of PS and MS cross

Mortality & Defects

Fig 14: Mortality and Defects of PS and MS cross

Hetrosis

Fig 15: Effect of heterosis on CMI response after PHA-P injection between two crosses

Fig 16: Effect of heterosis on bursa and spleen between two crosses

Fig 17: Effect of sex on heterosis of CMI response after PHA-P injection of MS cross

Fig 18: Effect of sex on heterosis of bursa, spleen, WBCs and H/L ratio of MS cross

A. H. EL- Attar Carcass Parameters Comparison between two Crosses From Sudani Duck (Egyptian Muscovy) A. Galal A. Makram

Measurements

Non-Edible Meat Parts Blood Weight Feather Weight Live Body Weight Weight after Slaughter Weight after Feathering Non-Edible Meat Parts Head Weight Leg Weight

Edible Meat Parts Liver Weight Dressed Carcass Heart Weight Gizzard Weight

Drumstick Weight Thigh & Drumstick Thigh Weight Minor Weight Major Weight

Skin Weight Neck Weight Wings Weight Abdominal Fat Weight Gizzard Fat Weight

Main Results

Fig 19: Relative giblets of PS and MS cross

Fig 20: Relative edible meat parts of PS and MS cross

Fig 21: Relative breast muscles of of PS and MS cross

Fig 30 : Relative abdominal and gizzard fat of PS and MS cross

Hetrosis

Fig59: Effect of heterosis on edible- meat parts between two crosses

Fig 60: Effect of heterosis on carcass muscles between two crosses

Fig 61: Effect of heterosis on carcass fat between two crosses

Conclusion

The PS cross exhibited a higher figure in growth performance, immune response and some carcass traits, when compared to MS cross. So it can be used as a commercial hybrid.

On the other hand, the MS cross unsterile birds can be improved for several generations through crossing with their parents.

THANKS E-Mail Am150@Fayoum.Edu.eg