SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.20 issue3The Effects of Fucoxanthin Dietary Inclusion on the Growth Performance, Antioxidant Metabolism and Meat Quality of BroilersEffect of Botanical Extracts on Amino Acid and Fatty Acid Profile of Broiler Meat author indexsubject indexarticles search
Home Pagealphabetic serial listing  

Services on Demand

Journal

Article

Indicators

Related links

Share


Brazilian Journal of Poultry Science

Print version ISSN 1516-635XOn-line version ISSN 1806-9061

Braz. J. Poult. Sci. vol.20 no.3 Campinas July/Sept. 2018

https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9061-2018-0733 

Articles

Different Selection Strategies for the Improvement of the Growth Performance and Carcass Traits of Japanese Quails

S AhmadI 

S MehmoodI 

K JavedII 

A MahmudI 

M UsmanI 

A RehmanI 

HM IshaqIII 

J HussainI 

A GhayasI 

IDepartment of Poultry Production, Faculty of Animal Production and Technology, University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Lahore, 54000, Pakistan.

IIDepartment of Livestock Production, Faculty of Animal Production and Technology, University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Lahore, 54000, Pakistan.

IIIDepartment of Livestock and Poultry Production, Faculty of Veterinary Science, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, 60000, Pakistan.


ABSTRACT

The present study evaluated different selection strategies to improve the growth performance and carcass traits of Japanese quails. To this end, 540 Japanese quails previously selected for high body weight at three ages (10, 12 and 14 weeks) from four close-bred flocks (Major, Kaleem, Saadat and Zahid) were subjected to three selection strategies: pedigree-based, mass selection or random-bred (controls). For pedigree-based selection, 108 birds (4 close-bred flocks × 3 age groups × 9 replicates × 1 bird each) with full pedigree and selected for high body weight were used, whereas in mass selection 324 birds (4 close-bred flocks × 3 age groups × 9 replicates × 3 birds each) with high body weight were selected to be the parents of next generation. Random-bred controls included 108 birds (4 close-bred flocks × 3 age groups × 9 replicates × 1bird each) which were not previously submitted to selection. The effects of selection strategies of Japanese quail parents from four close-bred flocks (CBF) at three ages on the performance growth and carcass traits of their progenies were measured. The parent flocks were selected at three ages (10, 12 and 14 weeks) and reared for 20 weeks, and their progenies were reared for four weeks. The progeny of pedigree-based selected parents presented better feed intake (g), body weight gain (g), feed conversion ratio, live and carcass weights (g), and carcass yield. The progeny of 10- and 14-week-old parents showed better growth performance and carcass traits, respectively. Moreover, there was no influence of CBF on growth and carcass traits. It was concluded that pedigree-based selection had pronounced effect on the growth performance and carcass traits of the progeny compared with mass selection and random breeding. It is suggested that parental ages of 10 and 14 weeks of age promote better progeny growth performance and carcass traits.

Keywords: Pedigree Selection; Mass Selection; Parental Age groups; Close-bred Flocks; Feed Conversion Ratio; Carcass yield

INTRODUCTION

Selection is a basic tool to exploit and improve the productive potential of birds. Different selection strategies have been working throughout the world comprising mass selection to fully pedigree selection (Marks, 1991, 1996; Minvielle et al., 1997; Narinç et al., 2016; Durmuş et al., 2017). Selection programs remarkably improve economic traits in broilers with2.4-fold improvements in growth rate and carcass traits; however, feed conversion ratio has improved only 0.025% per year.

In Japanese quails, genetic improvements of 9.6, 8.8 and 8.2g in body weight at four weeks of age (4-wk BW) were observed in generations 2, 3 and 4, respectively (Varkoohi et al., 2010). Over the same period of selection for 4-wk BW, the improvement in feed conversion ratio (FCR) was 0.16 units. These results indicate that selection for reduced FCR increases body weight and weight gain and reduces feed intake and residual feed intake as correlated responses (Varkoohi et al., 2010).

Moreover, a strong genetic correlation between 4-wk BW and carcass traits was recorded (Khaldari et al., 2010). Another study reported that slaughter age significantly influenced the carcass traits of Japanese quails (Narinc et al., 2014). The findings of Tukmut et al. (1999) revealed that slaughter weight, carcass weight, carcass yield, abdominal fat weight, organ weight and organ yields of female quails were affected by selection. Carcass weight, carcass percent, breast weight and thigh percent were significantly affected by Japanese quail strain (Vali et al., 2005)

Selection experiments provide background knowledge of the inheritance of complex traits and allow the evaluation of the hypothetical predictions by comparing observations against expectations (Szwaczkowski, 2003). The selection objectives may be short-termed, i.e., using genetic additive variance and covariance test to estimate genetic response or long-termed to measure the selection response or additive variance caused by the selection procedure (Hill & Mackay, 2004). Long-term response to selection is more focused on fixing the probabilities of alleles responsible for the trait(s) under consideration and it is generally agreed that to achieve most of the goals of long term selection more than thirty generations will be required (Reddy, 1996). On the other hand, short-term selection response might be attributed to alleles segregating in the population (Fuller et al., 2005).

Japanese quails have called significant attention in recent years due to their high resistance to diseases as well as for its use for meat and egg production. They mature at an early age of 6 weeks and females are usually in full production by about 8 weeks of age (Ashok & Prabakaran, 2012). Due to their faster growth rate and high egg production, quails may be an interesting option to study production, reproduction, egg quality traits, as well as metabolic and immunological traits. Moreover, their generation interval is short, of almost 3-4 generations per year, and present high recombination rate, which makes of Japanese quails a very suitable species for genetic studies (Burt & Pourquie, 2003).

The profitability of quail enterprises largely depends on carcass quality, and many research studies have been conducted to describe quail carcass traits (Odunsi & Kehinde, 2009). Among these, carcass yield is considered as trait of interest and in conventional selection experiments, quail can serve as the best avian model due to several reasons, including that they are relatively easy to handle and have cheap maintenance costs (Daikwao et al., 2013).

Despite having enormous potential, very little research has been conducted on the acclimatization of Japanese quails to Pakistan’s environment. Keeping above in view, Japanese quail parents from four close-bred flocks of three ages were subjected to three selection strategies and the growth performance and carcass traits of their progenies were evaluated.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The present study was conducted at Avian Research and Training (ART) Centre, Department of Poultry Production, University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Lahore, Pakistan, to evaluate effect of the selection for higher body weight at 4 weeks of age of 4 close-bred flocks of three age groups of Japanese quails during 4th generation.

A total of 540 quail breeders previously selected for 4-wk BW were subjected to selective breeding. Birds were distributed according to completely randomized design in a 3x4x3 factorial arrangement. The treatments consisted of three selection strategies (pedigree-based, mass-selected, and random-bred), four close-bred flocks (Major, Kaleem, Saadat & Zahid; Jatoi et al., 2013) and three parental age groups (10, 12 and 14 weeks), totaling 36 treatments with nine replicates or 324 experimental units.

The parent flocks were selected at three ages (10, 12 and 14 weeks) and reared for 20 weeks a density of 220 cm2/bird); however, their progenies were reared under standard managemental conditions during the four experimental weeks [83.61cm2/bird during brooding (1-14 d of age) and 150 cm2/bird during the growing phase (15-28 d of age)],as previously described by Narinc et al. (2013a).

Selection Procedures

Birds were divided in three main groups according to selection strategies, i.e., pedigree-based, mass-selected and random-bred groups, with 108, 324, and 108 birds, respectively. In first group, quails (4 close-bred flock × 3 age groups × 9 replicates × 1 bird each) having higher body weight with full pedigree record were selected to draw comparison with birds subjected to mass selection and random-bred group. In second group, quails (4 close-bred flock × 3 age groups × 9 replicates × 3 bird each) were subjected to mass selection in which birds with the highest body weight were selected to be the parents of the next generation. In the third group, quails (4 close-bred flock × 3 age groups × 9 replicates × 1 bird each) were randomly selected and were considered the control group (Hussain et al., 2013).

Housing and Management

All experimental birds were maintained in well-ventilated octagonal quail house (21.68 m2) equipped with multi-deck cages specially designed for separate quail rearing and breeding. The breeder quails were reared for 20 weeks (provided with 16 hours light). Meat-type quails were reared for 4 weeks and provided with 24 hours light. During brooding (first two weeks) 25 lux were provided and light intensity was decreased up to 5-10lux during the rearing period of two weeks (Narinc et al., 2013b). Two feeds were formulated as recommended by the NRC standards (1994): one for breeders (20% CP and 2900 kcal ME/kg) and one for meat-type quails (24% CP and 2900 kcal ME/kg). The nipple drinker system ensured the availability of clean drinking water. In case of pedigreed and random-bred control birds, one individual female was kept per replicate, whereas in mass-selected birds, three females were kept per replicate. The stud-mating system was performed in pedigreed and random-bred control groups, whereas pen-mating system was practiced in mass-selected groups.

Growth performance parameters were determined at 4 weeks of age. Feed intake (g) was record as average feed intake/ bird /day and converted into weekly basis for the calculation of weekly feed conversion ratio. Feed intake (g) was calculated as feed offer (g) - feed residue (g). Body weight gain (g) was calculated by subtracting final from initial body weight. Feed conversion ratio (FCR) was calculated on weekly basis by the following formula:

FCR=Feedintake(g)Body weightgain(g)

Mortality (%)recorded on daily basis (if any) and converted into weekly basis to calculate mortality % as:

Mortality=Dead BirdsTotal Birds×100

At the end of 4th week, three birds per replicate were slaughtered and following parameters were recorded. To record live weight (g), each bird was weighed on a digital scale to the nearest 0.5 g. Birds were slaughtered, and carcass weight (g) was determined after plucking and evisceration on a digital scale to the nearest 0.5 g. Carcass yield, liver, gizzard and heart weights were calculated relative to body weight and expressed in percentages, according to following formula:

Carcasspartsyield(%)=carcasspartsweight (g)Livebody weight at slaughter (g)x100

Statistical Analysis

Data were analyzed by analysis of variance using the PROC MIXED of SAS software (version 9.1). Means were compared by Tukey’s HSD test, assuming the following mathematical model:

Yijkl=µ+Si+Aj+Ck+(SA)ij+(SC)ik+(AC)jk+εijkl

Where,

Yijkl = Dependent variable

µ = Overall population mean

Si = Effect of ith Selection Strategy assumed as fixed effect (i = 1, 2, 3; Pedigree, Mass-selected, Random-bred Control)

Aj = Effect of jth Parental Age group assumed as fixed effect (j = week 1, 2, 3; 10, 12 and 14)

Ck= Effect of kth Close-bred Flock assumed as random effect (k = 1, 2, 3, 4; Major, Kaleem, Sadaat & Zahid)

(SA)ij = Interaction effect between selection strategy and parental age groups

(SC)ik= Interaction effect between selection strategy and close-bred flock

(AC)jk= Interaction effect between parental age groups and close-bred flock

εijkl = Residual error associated with ith, jth and kth treatment NID ~ 0, σ2

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Growth Performance

Means and standard errors of cumulative feed intake (g), weight gain (g), FCR and mortality% are presented in Table 1. Significantly (p≤0.05) higher feed intake was observed in pedigree birds (433.13±0.77 g) compared with random-bred (429.36±0.80 g) and mass-selected (428.90±0.51 g) birds. However, no significant effects of CBF or parental ages were observed on feed intake in present study; however, a significant interaction of selection strategies interact with CBF and parental age were observed for cumulative feed intake. The significantly higher feed intake of pedigree birds compared with random-bred and mass-selected birds may be attributed to their higher nutrient requirements for growth. Consistently, in another study (Khaldari et al., 2010), higher feed intake was observed in Japanese quails selected for high body weight compared with the controls. In study with Japanese quails, significantly higher weekly feed intake differences were observed in mass-selected birds compared with the control group (Narinc & Aksoy, 2012). In addition, Hussain et al. (2013) suggested that a selected line presented better feed efficiency than the control group. However, no significant effect of age on feed intake was also observed among three age groups of indigenous Peshawari Aseel chicken (Sohail et al., 2013).

Table 1 Effect of selection strategies of parent Japanese quails from four close-bred flocks of three different age on the growth performance of their progenies. 

Cum. FI Cum. Gain Cum. FCR Mortality
----------(g)---------- ---(%)---
Selection Strategies
Pedigree 433.13±0.77a 182.19±0.79a 2.38±0.01b 12.12±0.07
Mass Selection 428.90±0.51b 179.96±0.50b 2.39±0.01b 12.19±0.07
Random-bred 429.36±0.80b 175.57±0.76c 2.45±0.01a 12.21±0.06
Close-bred Flocks
Major 429.59±0.74 179.30±0.96 2.40±0.01 12.30±0.10
Kaleem 431.71±0.65 179.56±0.94 2.41±0.01 12.09±0.06
Saadat 430.32±0.91 178.39±0.72 2.42±0.01 12.16±0.05
Zahid 430.21±1.01 179.70±0.76 2.40±0.01 12.15±0.09
Parental Age Groups
10 weeks 430.87±0.70 180.81±0.81a 2.39±0.01b 12.17±0.06
12 weeks 429.59±0.80 179.40±0.66ab 2.40±0.01b 12.13±0.06
14 weeks 430.93±0.67 177.52±0.71b 2.43±0.01a 12.21±0.08
Selection Strategies × Close-bred Flocks
Pedigree × Major 433.41±1.32a 184.74±1.56a 2.35±0.02c 12.17±0.16
Pedigree × Kaleem 433.52±1.29a 183.35±1.70ab 2.37±0.02bc 11.99±0.11
Pedigree × Saadat 432.96±1.95a 179.28±1.56bc 2.42±0.02b 12.06±0.08
Pedigree × Zahid 432.63±1.61ab 181.40±1.32abc 2.39±0.02bc 12.26±0.16
Mass Selection × Major 429.56±0.86abcd 181.16±1.11abc 2.37±0.02bc 12.36±0.22
Mass Selection × Kaleem 430.78±0.76abc 181.05±0.94abc 2.38±0.01bc 12.19±0.11
Mass Selection × Saadat 426.89±1.26cd 178.16±0.87cd 2.40±0.02bc 12.17±0.09
Mass Selection × Zahid 428.37±1.02bcd 179.48±0.98bc 2.39±0.01bc 12.05±0.10
Random-bred × Major 425.81±1.22d 172.00±1.25e 2.48±0.02a 12.36±0.15
Random-bred × Kaleem 430.89±1.20abc 174.29±1.65de 2.48±0.03a 12.08±0.09
Random-bred × Saadat 431.11±1.20abc 177.75±1.28cd 2.43±0.02ab 12.25±0.08
Random-bred × Zahid 429.63±2.32abcd 178.23±1.58cd 2.42±0.02b 12.15±0.18
Selection Strategies × Parental Age Groups
Pedigree × 10 weeks 434.31±1.55a 185.99±1.44a 2.34±0.02c 12.18±0.12
Pedigree × 12 weeks 432.67±1.24ab 181.37±1.05b 2.39±0.02bc 12.22±0.13
Pedigree × 14 weeks 432.42±1.21ab 179.22±1.34bc 2.42±0.02ab 12.06±0.09
Mass Selection × 10 weeks 428.36±0.84c 180.38±0.90b 2.38±0.01bc 12.25±0.13
Mass Selection × 12 weeks 428.28±0.97c 181.20±0.76b 2.37±0.01bc 12.09±0.08
Mass Selection × 14 weeks 430.06±0.83bc 178.32±0.87bcd 2.41±0.01ab 12.23±0.14
Random-bred × 10 weeks 429.94±0.93bc 176.06±1.31cd 2.45±0.02a 12.09±0.07
Random-bred × 12 weeks 427.83±1.74c 175.63±1.30d 2.44±0.02a 12.19±0.06
Random-bred × 14 weeks 430.31±1.36bc 175.01±1.35d 2.46±0.02a 12.35±0.17
Close-bred Flocks × Parental Age Groups
Major × 10 weeks 430.93±1.33 181.38±1.67ab 2.38±0.02bcd 12.31±0.20
Major × 12 weeks 429.37±1.34 180.87±1.64abc 2.38±0.02cd 12.17±0.08
Major × 14 weeks 428.48±1.18 175.66±1.51d 2.44±0.02ab 12.41±0.22
Kaleem × 10 weeks 432.19±1.12 184.52±1.64a 2.35±0.02d 12.07±0.10
Kaleem × 12 weeks 431.26±0.91 177.86±1.40bcd 2.43±0.02abc 12.04±0.12
Kaleem × 14 weeks 431.74±1.33 176.31±1.45cd 2.45±0.02a 12.14±0.09
Saadat × 10 weeks 429.67±1.80 178.21±1.12bcd 2.41±0.02abc 12.19±0.08
Saadat × 12 weeks 428.85±1.58 178.99±1.05bcd 2.40±0.02abcd 12.16±0.08
Saadat × 14 weeks 432.44±1.25 177.98±1.58bcd 2.43±0.02abc 12.12±0.09
Zahid × 10 weeks 430.70±1.31 179.14±1.78bcd 2.41±0.02abc 12.11±0.10
Zahid × 12 weeks 428.89±2.31 179.86±1.00bcd 2.39±0.02bcd 12.16±0.15
Zahid × 14 weeks 431.04±1.50 180.11±1.00bcd 2.40±0.02abcd 12.18±0.19

Note: Means with different superscripts in the same column are significantly different (p≤0.05); CBF: close-bred flocks; Cum: cumulative; FI: feed intake; FCR: feed conversion ratio

Pedigree-base selected birds presented the highest body weight gain (182.19±0.79 g), followed by mass-selected birds (179.96±0.50 g) and random-bred controls (175.57±0.76 g). Among different parental age groups, birds from 10-week-old parents had higher weight gain (180.81±0.81 g) than those from 14-week-old parents (177.52±0.71 g). There were significant interactions (p≤0.05) between selection strategies × parental age groups and selection strategies × CBF for cumulative weight gain. However, no significant effect of CBF on weight gain was observed in present study; however, CBF was compared among ages on overall basis significant (p≤0.05) body weight differences were observed. Pedigree-base selected birds presented the highest body weight gain followed by mass-selected and random-bred controls, which may be due to the positive response to selection, differences in genetics of sub-strains of pedigree-based selected progenies, and the superior potential of pedigree birds selected for high body weight. The observed higher body weight may be the result of intense selection, which ultimately improves productive potential of birds. Pedigree birds showed better feed utilization, which resulted higher weight gain. Higher body weight in selected birds were also reported in other studies (Khaldari et al., 2010). Similarly, higher body weight gain was observed in Japanese quail lines selected for high body weight (Anthony et al., 1986). Among different parental age groups, the progeny of 10-week-old parents presented higher weight gain compared with the progeny of 14-week-old parents, which may be attributed to the fact that younger birds present higher weight gain potential compared with older ones. At different ages, significant body weight difference among strains and generations were also reported by Varkoohi et al, (2011). Similarly, in another study (Ahmad et al., 2013), a significant effect of age on body weight was observed in Mushki Aseel chickens.

In the present experiment, significantly (p≤0.05) better FCR was observed in pedigree birds (2.38±0.01) compared with mass-selected birds (2.39±0.01) and random-bred controls (2.45±0.01). Birds from 10-week-oldparents showed better FCR (2.39±0.01) compared with those from 12 (2.40±0.01) and 14-week-old (2.43±0.01) parents. In the present experiment, CBF had no effect on FCR; however, FCR was significantly affected (p≤0.05) by the interactions between CBF and selection strategies and age groups. The interaction of selection strategies with parental age groups significantly influenced (p≤0.05) cumulative FCR. However, no significant effect of selection methods, CBF or parental age groups on mortality % was observed in the current experiment. In the present experiment, pedigree birds presented significantly better FCR compared with mass-selected and random-bred control birds, which may be due to the lower maintenance requirements and lower fat deposition of pedigree-base selected birds. Usually, there is a favorable correlation between feed conversion ratio and growth because of enhanced pulsative growth hormone release and ultimately live weight gain. The selection for better feed conversion in broiler chickens resulted in direct selection for carcass leanness. Similarly, in another study (Marks, 1980), better FCR was observed in Japanese quails selected for high body weight for 42 generations compared with random-bred controls. Birds from 10-week-old parents showed better FCR compared with the progenies of 12- and 14-w-oldparents, possibly because younger birds have better feed conversion ratio than older ones. However, Sohail et al. (2013) did not report any significant effect of age on the FCR of Peshawari Aseel chickens.

No significant cumulative mortality differences (p> 0.05) were observed among the different selection strategies, close-bred flocks, parental age groups or their interactions. However, other study reported significant effect of different selection strategies on the mortality of Japanese quails (Hussain et al., 2013), who argued that the lower mortality of intensively-selected birds resulted in the better exploitation of superior genes, and therefore, increased livability (Hussain et al., 2013).

Carcass traits

Means and standard errors of live body weight (g), carcass weight (g), and carcass yield (%)are presented in Table 2. Significant live body weight (g) differences (p≤0.05) were observed among the evaluated selection strategies. The progeny from pedigree-based selected birds were the heaviest (192.10±1.02 g) followed by mass-selected (185.35±0.50 g) and random-bred control (181.45±0.67 g) progenies. The higher body weight of the pedigree-based selected birds might be attributed to the effect of continuous selection and to the positive relationship associated with higher four-week body weight. The superior genes expressed in pedigree-based selected birds increased their live body weight. Higher body weight was reported in Japanese quails selected for high body weight were reported by Baylan et al. (2009). Higher pre-slaughter body weight was observed in Japanese quails selected for high four-week body weight for 19 generations (Dhaliwal et al., 2004). Regarding interaction between selection strategies and close-bred flocks and selection strategies and parental age groups significant differences live body weight were determined (p≤0.05). However, different close-bred flocks and parental age groups as well as their interaction had no significant effect (p>0.05) on progeny live body weight.

Table 2 Effect of selection strategies of parent Japanese quails from four close-bred flocks of three different age on the slaughter Parameters (mean ± standard error) of their progenies. 

Live weight ---(g)--- Carcass weight ---(g)--- Carcass yield ---(%)---
Selection Strategies
Pedigree 192.10±1.02a 109.60±0.96a 57.07±0.42a
Mass Selection 185.35±0.50b 106.91±0.50b 57.70±0.29a
Random-bred 181.45±0.67c 97.24±0.53c 53.63±0.33b
Close-bred Flocks
Major 186.22±1.05 104.47±1.04 56.08±0.42
Kaleem 185.78±1.32 104.68±1.19 56.35±0.51
Sadaat 188.33±1.13 104.96±1.26 55.71±0.51
Zahid 184.87±0.79 104.23±1.05 56.38±0.49
Parental Age Groups
10 weeks 185.53±0.87 101.89±0.72b 54.93±0.35b
12 weeks 186.07±0.91 103.18±0.57b 55.49±0.29b
14 weeks 187.30±1.06 108.69±1.27a 57.97±0.48a
Selection Strategies × Close-bred Flocks
Pedigree × Major 191.47±1.58ab 109.13±1.49a 57.00±0.67a
Pedigree × Kaleem 194.33±2.48a 109.71±2.19a 56.50±1.01a
Pedigree × Sadaat 194.13±2.41a 110.56±2.38a 56.94±0.91a
Pedigree × Zahid 188.47±1.28bc 109.01±1.69a 57.83±0.74a
Mass Selection × Major 186.87±1.17cd 107.02±1.05a 57.30±0.67a
Mass Selection × Kaleem 183.47±0.68def 107.08±1.07a 58.37±0.57a
Mass Selection × Sadaat 186.80±1.08cd 107.09±1.10a 57.34±0.57a
Mass Selection × Zahid 184.27±0.73cde 106.45±0.90a 57.78±0.54a
Random-bred × Major 180.33±1.45ef 97.24±1.09b 53.94±0.55b
Random-bred × Kaleem 179.53±1.16f 97.24±109b 54.19±0.66b
Random-bred × Sadaat 184.07±1.04cdef 97.24±1.09b 52.85±0.62b
Random-bred × Zahid 181.87±1.44ef 97.24±1.09b 53.52±0.77b
Selection Strategies × Parental Age Groups
Pedigree × 10 weeks 189.15±1.61bc 181.95±1.06c 55.72±0.50bc
Pedigree × 12 weeks 192.10±1.54ab 105.39±0.68c 54.93±0.54cd
Pedigree × 14 weeks 195.05±1.97a 118.12±1.38a 60.55±0.30a
Mass Selection × 10 weeks 185.95±1.16cd 105.24±0.72c 56.62±0.43b
Mass Selection × 12 weeks 185.20±0.71de 104.97±0.63c 56.69±0.36b
Mass Selection × 14 weeks 184.90±0.66de 110.51±0.65b 59.78±0.38a
Random-bred × 10 weeks 181.50±1.24ef 95.12±0.34e 52.46±0.41e
Random-bred × 12 weeks 180.90±1.19f 99.17±0.93d 54.84±0.51cd
Random-bred × 14 weeks 181.95±1.06ef 97.44±1.10de 53.58±0.64de
Close-bred Flocks × Parental Age Groups
Major × 10 weeks 187.87±1.78 101.84±1.46d 54.19±0.48d
Major × 12 weeks 186.20±1.57 103.50±1.23bcd 55.57±0.37d
Major × 14 weeks 184.60±2.11 108.06±2.27abc 58.48±0.80a
Kaleem × 10 weeks 183.80±2.46 101.90±1.48d 55.52±0.86bcd
Kaleem × 12 weeks 185.60±2.11 103.07±1.14cd 55.59±0.65bcd
Kaleem × 14 weeks 187.93±2.29 109.06±2.77ab 57.95±0.98ab
Sadaat × 10 weeks 186.33±1.18 101.90±1.48d 54.69±0.73d
Sadaat × 12 weeks 188.00±1.90 103.07±1.14cd 54.87±0.67d
Sadaat × 14 weeks 190.67±2.50 109.92±2.95a 57.56±1.04abc
Zahid × 10 weeks 184.13±1.17 101.90±1.48d 55.33±0.66cd
Zahid × 12 weeks 184.47±1.71 103.07±1.14cd 55.91±0.62bcd
Zahid × 14 weeks 186.00±1.19 107.72±2.34abcd 57.90±1.11ab

Note: - Means with different superscripts in the same column are significantly different (p≤0.05)

Significant differences (p≤0.05) were observed in carcass weight (g) among progeny form different selection strategies and parental age groups. Pedigree-based selected bird also presented heavier carcasses (109.60±0.96 g) followed by mass-selected (106.91±0.50 g) and random-bred control (97.24±0.53 g) groups. The interactions among selection strategies, close-bred flocks and parental age groups significantly influenced (p≤0.05) carcass weight. However, different close-bred flocks presented similar (p>0.05) carcass weight. The heavier carcasses of pedigree-based selected birds may be attributed to the positive correlation between body weight and carcass weight. Similarly, another study reported significant effects of selection on the carcass weight of Japanese quails selected for 11 generations (Alkanet al., 2010). Among different parental age groups, birds from 14-week-old parents presented highest carcass weight (108.69±1.27 g) compared with those from 10- (103.18±0.57) and 12- (101.89±0.72) week-old parents. Another study also observed significant effect of age on the carcass weight of Japanese quails (Tarhyel et al., 2012).

Significant carcass yield differences (p≤0.05) were observed among different selection strategies and parental age groups. The progeny of selected birds (pedigree-based and mass-selected) presented higher (57.07±0.42%, 57.70±0.29%) carcass yield compared with random-bred controls (53.63±0.33%). However, no significant effect of selection on carcass yield was reported in Japanese quails selected for high 5-week body weight (Alkanet al., 2010). Among different parental age groups, the progeny of14-week-old parents presented higher (57.97±0.48) carcass yield compared with those from 12- (55.49±0.29) and 10- (54.93±0.35) week-old parents. A significant effect of age on carcass yield was also observed in Pharaoh quails by Wilkanowska & Kokoszynski (2011). The interaction among selection strategies, close-bred flocks and parental age groups significantly influenced (p≤0.05) carcass yield. However, non-significant differences (p> 0.05) were observed among the different close-bred flocks.

Means and standard errors of cumulative relative weight (%) of the liver, gizzard, and heart has been presented in Table 3. Significant liver relative weight differences (p≤0.05) were observed among different selection strategies and parental age groups. Random-bred control birds presented the highest liver relative weight (3.67±0.04%) followed by mass-selected (3.19±0.02%) and pedigree-based selected (3.08±0.02%) progenies. However, higher liver yield was observed in Japanese quails selected for high body weight (Ojedapo et al., 2008). Among the different parental age groups, the progeny of14-week-old parents presented higher liver relative weight (3.50±0.05%) followed by the progenies of 12- (3.31±0.04) and 10- (3.14±0.02) week-old parents. A study with Japanese quails also found significant differences in liver relative weight at 3, 4 and 5 weeks of age (Akram et al., 2016). The interactions among selection strategies, close-bred flocks and parental age groups significantly influenced liver relative weight (p≤0.05).

Table 3 Effect of selection strategies of parent Japanese quails from four close-bred flocks of three different age giblet relative weights of their progenies. 

Liver Gizzard Heart
---------------------(Mean% ± Standard Error) --------------------
Selection Strategies
Pedigree 3.08±0.02c 3.09±0.03b 0.97±0.01c
Mass Selection 3.19±0.02b 3.17±0.03b 1.01±0.01b
Random-bred 3.67±0.04a 3.55±0.04a 1.03±0.01a
Close-bred Flocks
Major 3.30±0.05 3.28±0.05 1.01±0.01
Kaleem 3.31±0.05 3.29±0.05 1.00±0.01
Sadaat 3.29±0.05 3.22±0.05 0.99±0.01
Zahid 3.35±0.05 3.30±0.05 1.01±0.01
Parental Age Groups
10 weeks 3.14±0.02c 3.05±0.02c 0.95±0.01c
12 weeks 3.31±0.04b 3.27±0.04b 1.00±0.01b
14 weeks 3.50±0.05a 3.49±0.04a 1.05±0.01a
Selection Strategies × Close-bred Flocks
Pedigree × Major 3.08±0.04bc 3.09±0.08b 0.97±0.02cde
Pedigree × Kaleem 3.03±0.05c 3.07±0.04b 0.96±0.02de
Pedigree × Sadaat 3.04±0.03c 3.05±0.06b 0.96±0.01e
Pedigree × Zahid 3.17±0.04bc 3.14±0.03b 0.99±0.01bcde
Mass Selection × Major 3.18±0.04bc 3.15±0.04b 1.00±0.02abcde
Mass Selection × Kaleem 3.21±0.03b 3.22±0.07b 1.02±0.01abc
Mass Selection × Sadaat 3.19±0.04bc 3.10±0.04b 1.00±0.02abcde
Mass Selection × Zahid 3.20±0.04bc 3.21±0.08b 1.01±0.02abcd
Random-bred × Major 3.64±0.09a 3.59±0.09a 1.05±0.02a
Random-bred × Kaleem 3.69±0.06a 3.57±0.07a 1.03±0.01ab
Random-bred × Sadaat 3.66±0.07a 3.50±0.08a 1.01±0.01abc
Random-bred × Zahid 3.70±0.07a 3.55±0.08a 1.03±0.02ab
Selection Strategies × Parental Age Groups
Pedigree × 10 weeks 2.99±0.03f 2.96±0.03f 0.93±0.01e
Pedigree × 12 weeks 3.05±0.03ef 3.06±0.03ef 0.97±0.01cd
Pedigree × 14 weeks 3.20±0.03d 3.24±0.06d 1.01±0.01b
Mass Selection × 10 weeks 3.08±0.02e 2.97±0.02f 0.95±0.01de
Mass Selection × 12 weeks 3.16±0.01d 3.16±0.02de 1.01±0.01b
Mass Selection × 14 weeks 3.35±0.02c 3.39±0.05c 1.07±0.01a
Random-bred × 10 weeks 3.34±0.02c 3.21±0.03d 0.98±0.01c
Random-bred × 12 weeks 3.72±0.04b 3.60±0.04b 1.03±0.01b
Random-bred × 14 weeks 3.95±0.02a 3.84±0.03a 1.08±0.01a
Close-bred Flocks × Parental Age Groups
Major × 10 weeks 3.09±0.04d 3.01±0.04e 0.94±0.01f
Major × 12 weeks 3.28±0.08bcd 3.28±0.08bcd 1.01±0.01cd
Major × 14 weeks 3.53±0.10a 3.54±0.09a 1.07±0.01a
Kaleem × 10 weeks 3.14±0.06cd 3.10±0.05de 0.96±0.01ef
Kaleem × 12 weeks 3.31±0.08abcd 3.28±0.07bcd 1.00±0.01cd
Kaleem × 14 weeks 3.48±0.09ab 3.48±0.09ab 1.05±0.01ab
Sadaat × 10 weeks 3.15±0.04cd 3.01±0.04e 0.95±0.01f
Sadaat × 12 weeks 3.29±0.09bcd 3.21±0.07cde 0.99±0.01de
Sadaat × 14 weeks 3.44±0.10ab 3.43±0.09ab 1.03±0.02bc
Zahid × 10 weeks 3.16±0.05cd 3.07±0.04de 0.96±0.01ef
Zahid × 12 weeks 3.36±0.09abc 3.33±0.08abc 1.01±0.01cd
Zahid × 14 weeks 3.54±0.07a 3.50±0.07a 1.06±0.01ab

Note: - Means with different superscripts in the same column are significantly different (p≤0.05)

Significant differences (p≤0.05) were observed in gizzard relative weight among different close-bred flocks and parental age groups. Random-bred control birds presented higher gizzard relative weight (3.55±0.04%) compared with mass-selected (3.17±0.03%) and pedigree-based selected (3.09±0.03%) birds. This may be due to the negative association between carcass and gizzard weights, as birds selected for high body weight have proportionally lower gizzard relative weight. However, another study indicated higher gizzard weight % in Japanese quails selected for high body weight (Abdel-Azeem et al., 2007). Among the different parental age groups, birds from 14-week-old parents presented higher gizzard relative weight (3.49±0.04%) followed by the birds from 12 (3.27±0.04%) and 10 (3.05±0.02%) week-old parents. Similarly, another study revealed significant effect of age on gizzard relative weight in Japanese quails (Kaye et al., 2016).

Significant differences (p≤0.05) were observed in heart relative weight among different selection strategies and parental age groups. Random-bred control birds had the highest heart relative weight (1.03±0.01%), followed by mass-selected (1.01±0.01%) and pedigree-based selected (0.97±0.01%) progenies. Lower heart weight was also reported in commercial broilers selected for high body weight (Gaya et al., 2007; Tarhyel et al., 2012). Among different parental age groups, the progeny of14-week-old parents showed the highest heart relative weight (1.05±0.01%) followed by the progenies of 12 (1±0.01%) and 10 (0.95±0.01%) week-old parents. The results may be explained by the fact that, as birds age, body organs also follow the general body growth pattern to meet their anatomical and physiological demands. Consistently, significant differences in heart relative weight were observed among the progenies of different parental age groups of Japanese quails (Akram et al., 2013).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the present study show that pedigree-based selection had pronounced effect on the growth performance and carcass traits of Japanese quails. In addition, it is suggested that parental ages of 10 and 14 weeks of age promote better progeny growth performance and carcass traits. The progenies of the different close-bred flocks did not present any differences in growth performance or carcass traits.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The contribution made by the administration of Avian Research and Training Centre, Department of Poultry Production, University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, is highly appreciated.

REFERENCES

Abdel-Azeem AS, Abdel-Azim AM, Darwish AA, Omar EM. Litter traits in four pure breeds of rabbits and their Crosses under prevailing environmental conditions of Egypt. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Rabbit Production in Hot Climate; 2007; Hurghada. Egypt. p.39-51. [ Links ]

Ahmad S, Hussain J, Akram M, Aslam F, Mahmud A, Mehmood S, et al. Comparative study on production performance and hatching traits of three age groups of indigenous Mushki Aseel chickens. Agriculture Advances 2013;2:146-149. [ Links ]

Akram M, Hussain J, Ahmad S, Mehmood S, Rehman A, Iqbal A, Usman M. Study of body measurements and slaughter characteristics in Japanese quail as influenced by age. Scientific Journal of Zoology 2013;2:23-26. [ Links ]

Alkan S, Karabag K, Galic A, Karsli T, Balcioglu MS. Effect of selection for body weight and egg production on egg quality traits in Japanese quail (Coturnix coturnix Japonica) of different lines and relationship between these traits. Kafkas University of Veterinary FakDerg 2010;16:277-280. [ Links ]

Anthony NB, Nestor KE, Bacon WL. Growth curves of Japanese quail as modified by divergent selection for 4-week body weight. Poultry Science 1986;65:1825-1833. [ Links ]

Ashok A, Prabakaran R. Effect of Non-Genetic Factors on Absolute Growth Rate in Short Term Selection for Different Ages in Japanese quail (Coturnix coturnix japonica). Journal of Livestock Science 2012;3:52-56. [ Links ]

Baylan M, Canogullari S, Sahin A, Copur G, Baylan M. Effect of different selection methods for body weight on some genetic parameters. Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances 2009;8:1385-1391. [ Links ]

Burt D, Pourquie O. Genetics. Chicken genome - science nuggets to come soon. Science 2003;300(5626):1669. [ Links ]

Daikwo SI, Momoh OM, Dim NI. Heritability estimates of genetic and phenotypic correlations among some selected carcass traits of japanese quail (Coturnix coturnix japonica) raised in a sub-humid climate. Journal of Biology Agriculture & Healthcare 2013;13:60-65. [ Links ]

Dhaliwal SK, Chaudhary ML, Brahand GS, Sandhu JS. Growth and carcass characteristics of selected and control lines of Japanese quails (Coturnix coturnix japonica). Indian Journal of Poultry Science 2004;39:112-119. [ Links ]

Durmus I, Alkan S, Narinç D, Karabag K, Karsli T. Effects of mass selection on egg production on some reproductive traits in Japanese quail. European Poultry Science 2017;81:1-8. [ Links ]

Fuller RC, Baer CF, Travis J. How and when selection experiments might actually be useful. Integrated Comparative Biology 2005;45:391-404. [ Links ]

Gaya LG, Costa A, Ferraz JBS, Rezende FM, Mattos EC, Eler JP, et al. Genetic trends of absolute and relative heart weight in a male broiler line. Genetics Molecular Research 2007;6:1091-1096. [ Links ]

Hill WJ, Mackay TFC. Falconer DS and introduction to quantitative genetics. Genetics 2004;167:1529-1536. [ Links ]

Hussain J, Akram M, Sahota AW, Javed K, Ahmad HA, Mehmood S, et al. Selection for higher three-week body weight in Japanese quail: 1. Effect on growth performance. The Journal of Animal & Plant Sciences 2013;23(6):1496-1500. [ Links ]

Jatoi AS, Sahota AW, Akram M, Javed K, Jaspal MH, Hussain J, et al. Effect of different body weight categories on the productive performance of four close-bred flocks of Japanese quails (Coturnix coturnix japonica). The Journal of Animal & Plant Sciences 2013;23(1):7-13. [ Links ]

Kaye J, Akpa GN, Adeyinka IA, Nwagu BI. Estimates of genetic parameters for body weight and some economic important traits in the Japanese quails (Coturnix Coturnix Japonica). Researchjournali's Journal of Agriculture 2016;3(1):1-15. [ Links ]

Khaldari MA, Pakdel H, Yegane M, Javaremi NA, Berg P. Response to selection and genetic parameters of body and carcass weights in Japanese quail selected for 4-week body weight. Poultry Science 2010;89:1834-1841. [ Links ]

Marks HL. Divergent selection for growth in Japanese quail under split and complete nutritional environment. 4. Genetic and correlated responses from generations 12 to 20. Poultry Science 1991;70:453-462. [ Links ]

Marks HL. Feed efficiency of selected and non-selected Japanese quail lines. Poultry Science 1980;59:6-10. [ Links ]

Marks HL. Long-term selection for body weight in Japanese quail under different environments. Poultry Science 1996;75:1198-1203. [ Links ]

Minvielle F, Monvoisin JL, Costa J, Frenot A. Quail lines selected on egg number either on pure line or on crossbred performance. Proceedings of the 12th International Symposium on Current Problems in Avian Genetics (Aviagen); 1997; Pruhonice. Czech Republic. [ Links ]

Narinç D, Aksoy T, Kaplan S. Effects of multi-trait selection on phenotypic and genetic changes in japanese quail (Coturnix coturnix Japonica). The Journal of Poultry Science 2016;53:103-110. [ Links ]

Narinc D, Aksoy T, Karaman E, Aygun A, Firat MZ, Uslu MK. Japanese quail meat quality: Characteristics, heritabilities, and genetic correlations with some slaughter traits. Poultry Science 2013a;92(7):1735-1744. [ Links ]

Narinç D, Aksoy T. Effects of mass selection based on phenotype and early feed restriction on the performance and carcass characteristics in japanese quails. Kafkas Universitesi Veteriner Fakultesi Dergisi 2012;18:425-430. [ Links ]

Narinc D, Aygun A, Sari T. Effects of cage type and mating ratio on fertility in japanese quails (Coturnix coturnix japonica) eggs. Agriculture Science Developments 2013b;2(1):4-7. [ Links ]

Narinç D, Karaman E, Aksoy T. Effects of slaughter age and mass selection on slaughter and carcass characteristics in two lines of Japanese quail. Poultry Science 2014;93:762-769. [ Links ]

NRC - National Research Council. Nutrient requirement table of poultry. 9th ed. Washington: National Academy Press; 1994. [ Links ]

Odunsi AA, Kehinde MO. Influence of sex on carcass and organoleptic characteristics of meat from Japanese quails. Proceedings 14th Annual Conference of Animal Science Nigeria; 2009; Ogbomoso. Nigeria. p.226-228. [ Links ]

Ojedapo LO, Akinokun O, Adedeji TA, Olayeni TB, Ameen SA, Amao SR. Effect of strain and sex on carcass characteristics of three commercial broilers reared on deep litter system in the derived savannah area of Nigeria. World Journal of Agriculture Science 2008;4:487-491. [ Links ]

Reddy RP. Symposium: the effects of long term selection on growth of poultry. Introduction. Poultry Science 1996;75:1164-1167. [ Links ]

SAS Institute. SAS(r) Users guide: statistics. Version 9.01. Cary; 2003/2004. [ Links ]

Sohail A, Muhammad A, Hussain J, Iqbal A, Usman M, Rehman A, et al. Comparative study on productive performance, egg quality, egg geometry, and hatching traits of three age groups of indigenous Peshawari Aseel chickens. Scientific Journal of Veterinary Advances 2013;2:21-25. [ Links ]

Szwaczkowski T. Use of mixed model methodology in poultry breeding: estimation of genetic parameters. In: Muir WM, Aggrey SE, editor. Poultry genetics, breeding and biotechnology. Wallingford: CAB International; 2003. p.165-210. [ Links ]

Tarhyel R, Henab SA, Tanimomo BK. Effects of age on organ weight and carcass characteristics of Japanese quail (Coturnix coturnix Japonica). Scientific Journal of Agriculture 2012;1:21-26. [ Links ]

Türkmut L, Altan O, Oguz I, Yalçin S. Effects of selection for four week body weight on slaughter, carcass, and abdominal fat and some organ weights and blood serum parameters in Japanese quail. Turkish Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences 1999;23(1):63-68. [ Links ]

Vali N, Edriss MA, Rahmani HR. Genetic parameters of body and some carcass trait in two quail strains. International Journal of Poultry Science 2005;4:296-300. [ Links ]

Varkoohi S, Babak MMS, Pakdel A, Javaremi AN, Zaghari M, Kause A. Response to selection for feed conversion ratio in Japanese quail. Poultry Science 2010;89:1590-1598. [ Links ]

Varkoohi S, Pakdel A, Babak MMS, Javaremi AN, Kause A, Zaghari M. Genetic parameters for feed utilization traits in Japanese quail. Poultry Science 2011;90:42-47. [ Links ]

Wilkanowska A, Kokoszynski D. Comparison of slaughter value in Pharaoh Quail of different ages. Journal of Central European Agriculture 2011;12:145-154. [ Links ]

Received: January 22, 2017; Accepted: February 19, 2018

Corresponding author e-mail address Sohail Ahmad Department of Poultry Production, Faculty of Animal Production and Technology, University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Lahore-Pakistan. Phone: +92-313-4288381 Email:sohail.ahmad@uvas.edu.pk

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

No potential conflict of interest was found by the authors.

Creative Commons License This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License