The effect of age, genotype and sex on carcass traits, meat quality and sensory attributes of geese

  • Uhlirova, Linda (Department of Animal Husbandry, Czech University of Life Sciences) ;
  • Tumova, Eva (Department of Animal Husbandry, Czech University of Life Sciences) ;
  • Chodova, Darina (Department of Animal Husbandry, Czech University of Life Sciences) ;
  • Vlckova, Jana (Department of Animal Husbandry, Czech University of Life Sciences) ;
  • Ketta, Mohamed (Department of Animal Husbandry, Czech University of Life Sciences) ;
  • Volek, Zdenek (Department of Physiology of Nutrition and Product Quality, Institute of Animal Science) ;
  • Skrivanova, Vera (Department of Physiology of Nutrition and Product Quality, Institute of Animal Science)
  • Received : 2017.03.13
  • Accepted : 2017.07.28
  • Published : 2018.03.01


Objective: The aim of this study was to compare carcass traits, meat quality and sensory attributes in two different genotypes of geese according to age and sex. Methods: The experiment was carried out on 160 birds of two genotypes of geese: the Czech Goose (CG) breed and a Eskildsen Schwer (ES) hybrid. One-d-old goslings were divided into four groups according to genotype and sex. Two dates for slaughtering (at 8 and 16 wk of age of goslings) were undertaken. Results: The slaughter weight, cold carcass weight and dressing percentage were affected by all the studied factors, and significant interactions between age, genotype and sex were detected in the slaughter weight (p<0.001) and cold carcass weight (p = 0.004). The pH was not affected by any of studied factors, whereas in terms of meat colour parameters there were observed significant effects of age on $L^*$ and $b^*$ value and a significant effect of sex on $a^*$ value. The meat fat content was higher (p = 0.002) in ES. Higher score for overall acceptance of goose meat was recorded for ES at both ages compared to CG. Conclusion: ES had higher dressing percentage and better sensory attributes, whereas CG exceled in the favourable nutritional value of the meat.


Age;Carcass Traits;Genotype;Meat Quality;Sensory Attributes;Sex


Supported by : Ministry of Agriculture of the Czech


  1. Kapkowska E, Gumulka M, Rabsztyn A, Poltowicz K, Andres K. Comparative study on fattening results of Zatorska and White Koluda geese. Ann Anim Sci 2011;11:207-17.
  2. Hamadani H, Khan AA, Salahudin M, Sofi AH, Banday MT. Slaughter and carcass characteristics, sensory attributes and consumer acceptability of geese meat. Indian J Poult Sci 2013;48:223-7.
  3. Saatci M, Tilki M, Kaya I, Kirmizibayrak T. Effects of fattening lenght, feather colour and sex on some traits in native Turkish geese. II. Carcass traits. Arch Geflugelkd 2009;73:61-6.
  4. Kirmizibayrak T, Onk K, Ekiz B, et al. Effects of age and sex on meat quality of Turkish Native Geese raised under a freerange system. Kafkas Univ Vet Fak Derg 2011;17:817-23.
  5. Okruszek A, Woloszyn J, Haraf G, Orkusz A, Werenska M. Chemical composition and amino acid profiles of goose muscles from native Polish breeds. Poult Sci 2013;92:1127-33.
  6. Okruszek A, Ksiazkiewicz J, Woloszyn J, et al. Changes in selected physicochemical parameters of breast muscles of geese from Polish conservation flocks depending on duration of the post slaughter period. Arch Tierz 2008;3:255-65.
  7. Le Bihan-Duval E. Genetic variability within and between breeds of poultry technological meat quality. Worlds Poult Sci J 2004;60:331-4.
  8. Tilki M, Saatci M, Kirmizibayrak T, Aksoy A. Effect of age on growth and carcass composition of Native Turkish Geese. Arch Geflugelkd 2005;69:77-83.
  9. Isguzar E, Pingel H. Growth, carcass composition and nutrient content of meat of different local geese in Isparta region of Turkey. Arch Tierz 2003;46:71-6.
  10. Buzala M, Adamski M, Janicki B. Characteristics of performance traits and the quality of meat and fat in Polish oat geese. Worlds Poult Sci J 2014;70:531-42.
  11. Wezyk S, Rosinski A, Bielinska H, Badowski J, Cywa-Benko K. A note on the meat quality of W11 and W33 White Koluda geese strains. Anim Sci Pap Rep 2003;21:191-9.
  12. Liu BY, Wang ZY, Yang HM, et al. Influence of rearing system on growth performance, carcass traits, and meat quality of Yangzhou geese. Poult Sci 2011;90:653-9.
  13. Geldenhuys G, Hoffman LC, Muller M. Sensory profiling of Egyptian goose (Alopochen aegyptiacus) meat. Food Res Int 2014;64:25-33.
  14. CIElab Colour System. Commission International de l'Eclairage. Paris, France: CIE Publication; 1976.
  15. AOAC International. Official methods of analysis. 18th Ed, Maryland, USA: AOAC International; 2005.
  16. Diemar W. Laboratoriumbuch fur den Lebensmittelchemiker (Laboratory Manual for Food Chemists); Dresden und Leipzig, Germany: Theodor Steinkopff Verlag; 1963.
  17. Dvorak Z. Nutritional evaluation of meat of fatstock (in Czech). Praha, Czech Republic: Statni nakladatelstvi technicke literatury; 1987.
  18. ISO 8586-1. Sensory analysis methodology. General guidance for the selection and training and monitoring of assessors. Part 1. Selected assessors. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organisation for Standardisation; 1993.
  19. ISO 8589. Sensory analysis. General guidance for the design of test rooms. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organisation for Standardisation; 1988.
  20. Tumova E, Chodova D, Uhlirova L, et al. Relationship between muscle fibre characteristics and meat sensory properties in three nutria (Myocastor coypus) colour types. Czech J Anim Sci 2016;61:217-22.
  21. SAS Institute Inc. The SAS System for Windows. Release 9.4. Cary, NC, USA: SAS Institute Inc.; 2013.
  22. Abdullah AY, Marwan MM, Maharmeh HO, Maharmeh SK, Ishmais MAA. Effects of strain on performance, and age at slaughter and duration of post-chilling aging on meat quality traits of broiler. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2010;23:1645-56.
  23. Dransfield E, Sosnicki AA. Relationship between muscle growth and poultry meat quality. Poult Sci 1991;78:743-6.
  24. Jassim JM, Riyard KM, Majid HA, Yanzhang G. Evaluation of physical and chemical characteristics of male and female ducks carcasses at different ages. Pak J Nutr 2011;10:182-9.
  25. Baeza E, Salichon MR, Marche G, et al. Effects of age and sex on the structural, chemical and technological characteristics of mule duck meat. Br Poult Sci 2000;41:300-7.
  26. Maiorano G, Filetti F, Gambacorta M, Ciarlariello A, Cavone C. Effects of rearing system and genotype on intramuscular collagen properties of pigs. Ital J Anim Sci 2003;2:385-7.
  27. Matitaputty PR, Wijaya CH, Bansi H, Laudadio V, Tufarelli V. Influence of duck species and cross-breeding on sensory and quality characteristics of Alabio and Cihateup duck meat. CyTA-J Food 2015;13:522-6.
  28. Baeza E, Salichon MR, Marche G, Juin H. Effect of sex on growth, technological and organoleptic characteristics of the Muscovy duck breast muscle. Br Poult Sci 1998;39:398-403.
  29. Chartrin P, Meteau K, Jin H, et al. Effects of intramuscular fat levels on sensory characteristics of duck breast meat. Poult Sci 2006;85:914-22.
  30. Crouse JD, Koohamaraie M, Seideman SD. The relationship of muscle fibre size to tenderness of beef. Meat Sci 1991;30:295-302.

Cited by

  1. Fatty acid composition of goose meat depending on genotype and sex vol.32, pp.1, 2019,