Comparison of Production Performance and Egg Quality Characteristics of Five Strains of Korean Native Chickens

  • Wickramasuriya, Samiru Sudharaka (Dept. of Animal Science and Biotechnology, Chungnam National University) ;
  • Yi, Young-Joo (Division of Biotechnology, College of Environmental and Bio Resource Sciences, Chonbuk National University) ;
  • Yoo, Jaehong (Dept. of Animal Science and Biotechnology, Chungnam National University) ;
  • Kim, Nu Ri (Dept. of Animal Science and Biotechnology, Chungnam National University) ;
  • Kang, Nam Kyu (Dept. of Animal Science and Biotechnology, Chungnam National University) ;
  • Shin, Taeg Kyun (Dept. of Animal Science and Biotechnology, Chungnam National University) ;
  • Jung, Samooel (Dept. of Animal Science and Biotechnology, Chungnam National University) ;
  • Kang, Bo-Seok (Poultry Science Division, National Institute of Animal Science, RDA) ;
  • Oh, Ki-Seok (Hanhyup Breeder Inc.) ;
  • Heo, Jung Min (Dept. of Animal Science and Biotechnology, Chungnam National University)
  • Received : 2015.11.03
  • Accepted : 2015.12.11
  • Published : 2015.12.31


The production performance and egg quality traits among five strains of Korean native chickens (KNC) were evaluated in conventional cages. A total of 240 KNC were housed in a controlled environment. Each strain had 12 replicates with 4 chickens per cage. Feed intake, body weights, egg production and egg quality were measured at 24, 28 and 32 of weeks. Egg quality parameters were analyzed using 150 eggs. Results indicated significant (P<0.05) difference in average body weights, egg production and egg weight among five strains of KNC. In contrast, KNC strains effect was non-significant (P>0.05) for feed efficiency. The difference among those KNC strains on egg shell color, egg shell strength and egg shell density were not different (P>0.05) at the age of week 24 while it was significant (P<0.05) at the age of week 28 and 32. There was no effect (P>0.05) on egg length and egg shape index from five strains of KNC. The significant difference (P<0.05) was observed in egg width with KNC strains during early ages (week 24 and 28) and it was not significant (P>0.05) at the age of 32 weeks. Regarding internal quality parameters, albumen height and Haugh unit were significantly (P<0.05) affected with KNC strains while the effect on yolk color was not significant (P>0.05). Based on the egg weight and the production performance, GS-10 KNC strain was superior when compared with the other strains.


  1. Afolayan SB, Dafwang II, Sekoni A, Jegede JO 2013 Effect of dietary maize substitution with sweet potato meal on performance of growers (10-22 weeks) and subsequent egg production (23-35 weeks). Asian J Poult Sci 7(2):55-64.
  2. Anderson KE, Tharrington JB, Curtis PA, Jones FT 2004 Shell characteristics of eggs from historic strains of single comb White Leghorn chickens and the relationship of egg shape to shell strength. Int J Poult Sci 3(1):17-19.
  3. Choi NR, Seo DW, Jemaa SB, Sultana H, Heo KN, Jo C, Lee JH 2015 Discrimination of the commercial Korean native chicken population using microsatellite markers. J Anim Sci Technol 57:5.
  4. Hagan JK, Adjei IA, Baah A 2013 Effects of extended period of storage and strain of layer on quality of chicken eggs. J Sci Tech (Ghana) 33(2):1-11.
  5. Haunshi S, Niranjan M, Shanmugam M, Padhi MK, Reddy MR, Sunitha R, Rajkumar U, Panda AK 2011 Characterization of two Indian native chicken breeds for production, egg and semen quality, and welfare traits. Poult Sci 90: 314-320.
  6. Hunton P 2005 Research on eggshell structure and quality: An historical overview. Braz J Poult Sci 7:67-71.
  7. IBM Corp. 2012. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 21.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.
  8. Jayasena DD, Cyril HW, Jo C 2012 Evaluation of egg quality traits in the wholesale market in Sri Lanka during the storage period. J Anim Sci Tech 54(3):209-217.
  9. Jones DR, Broussard V, Lawrence KC, Yoon SC, Heitschmidt GW 2012 Dynamic and static shell properties of white and brown shell eggs exposed to modified pressure microcrack detection technology. Poult Sci 9:2658-2661.
  10. Joseph NS, Robinson NA, Renema RA, Robinson FE 1999 Shell quality and color variation in broiler breeder eggs. J Appl Poult Res 8:70-74.
  11. Kabir M, Sulaiman RO, Idris RK, Abdu SB, Daudu OM, Yashim SM... & Adedibu II 2014. Effects of strain, age and the interrelationships between external and internal qualities of eggs in two strains of layer chickens in northern guinea savannah zone of Nigeria. Iranian J Appl Anim Sci 4:179-184.
  12. Khawaja T, Khan SH, Mukhtar N, Parveen A, Fareed G 2013 Production performance, egg quality and biochemical parameters of three way crossbred chickens with reciprocal $F_1$ crossbred chickens in sub-tropical environment. Ital J Anim Sci 12:127-132.
  13. Kocevski D, Nikolova N, Kuzelov A 2011 The influence of strain and age on some egg quality parameters of commercial laying hens. Biotechnol Anim Husb 27(4):1649-1658.
  14. Lokaewmanee K, Yamauchi K, Komori T, Saito K 2011 Enhancement of egg yolk color by paprika combined with a probiotic. J Appl Poult Res 20:90-94.
  15. Monira KN, Salahuddin M, Miah G 2003 Effect of breed and holding period on egg quality characteristics of chicken. Int J Poult Sci 2:261-263.
  16. Moula N, Ait Kaki A, Leroy P, AntoineMoussiaux N 2013 Quality assessment of marketed eggs in Bassekabylie (Algeria). Braz J Poult Sci 15:395-400.
  17. Riley A, Sturrock CJ, Mooney SJ, Luck MR 2014 Quantification of eggshell microstructure using X-ray micro computed tomography. Br Poult Sci 55:311-20.
  18. Roberts JR, Chousalkar K, Samiullah 2013 Egg quality and age of laying hens: implications for product safety. Anim Prod Sci 53:1291-1297.
  19. Romanowska PE 2009 Consumer preferences and willingness to pay for certification of eggs. M.Sc. Thesis, Department of Rural Economy, University of Alberta.
  20. Scheideler SE, Jaroni D, Froning GW 1998 Strain and age effect on egg composition from hens fed diets rich in n-3 fatty acids. Poult Sci 77:192-196.
  21. Scott TA, Silversides FG 2000 The effect of storage and strain of hen on egg quality. Poult Sci 79(12):1725-1729.
  22. Seo DW, Hoque MR, Choi NR, Sultana H, Park HB, Heo KN, Kang BS, Lim HT, Lee SH, Jo C, Lee JH 2013 Discrimination of Korean native chicken lines using fifteen selected microsatellite markers. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 26: 316-322.
  23. Silversides FG, Budgell K 2004 The relationships among measures of egg albumen height, pH, and whipping volume. Poult Sci 83(10):1619-1623.
  24. Singh R, Cheng KM, Silversides FG 2009 Production performance and egg quality of four strains of laying hens kept in conventional cages and floor pens. Poult Sci 88 (2):256-264.
  25. Stadelman WJ 1977 Quality identification of shell eggs; In Egg Science and Technology; 2nd edition. AVI Publishing Company Inc. Westport, Connecticut.
  26. Stadelman WJ 2002 Quality identification of shell eggs. In: Egg Science and Technology. (Eds: William J. Stadelman and Owen J. Cotterill). 4th ed. CBS publishers & distributors. New Delhi pp. 39-64.
  27. Usman M, Basheer A, Akram M, Zahoor I 2014 A Comparative study of production performance and egg quality parameters of naked-neck and indigenous Aseel chicken of Pakistan. J Basic Appl Sci 10:160-163.