scholarly journals GOOSE EGGS HATCHING TECHNIQUE IMPROVEMENT WITH THE USE OF PRE-INCUBATION

2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 37-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna Kucharska-Gaca ◽  
◽  
Marek Adamski ◽  
Joanna Kuźniacka ◽  
Emilia Kowalska ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
2015 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 223-233 ◽  
Author(s):  
Š. Nedomová ◽  
V. Kumbár ◽  
J. Trnka ◽  
J. Buchar

2013 ◽  
Vol 163 (6) ◽  
pp. 1781-1783
Author(s):  
Ellen S. Plummer ◽  
Shelley E. Crary ◽  
George R. Buchanan

2002 ◽  
Vol 80 (2) ◽  
pp. 333-341 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shannon S Badzinski ◽  
C Davison Ankney ◽  
James O Leafloor ◽  
Kenneth F Abraham

Fresh and pipped eggs were collected to provide data on nutrient composition of eggs and neonates, respectively, of Canada Geese (Branta canadensis interior) and Lesser Snow Geese (Chen caerulescens caerulescens). We sought to determine how well a commonly used and simple index like estimated egg volume or "egg size" predicted egg composition and neonate characteristics including body composition, structural size, and digestive-organ mass. For both species, egg constituents were positively correlated with egg size, but relations for Canada Geese consistently had higher coefficients of determination than did those for Lesser Snow Geese. These differences suggest that there is more among-female variation in nutrient composition of Lesser Snow goose eggs relative to Canada Goose eggs. Most neonatal nutrient constituents were positively correlated with egg size in both species, but the relations between nutrient constituents and egg size were consistently stronger in Lesser Snow Geese than in Canada Geese. Several measures of structural size of neonates were positively correlated with egg size in both species, but egg size was a better predictor of neonate size for Lesser Snow Geese than for Canada Geese. Egg size was a relatively poor predictor of digestive-organ mass for both species. We hypothesize that the stronger relations between neonate quality and egg size in Lesser Snow Geese are a reflection of greater stabilizing selection for embryonic metabolic rates in species that nest at high latitudes and have a short incubation period. The fact that nutrient constituents of eggs were more strongly related to egg size than were the analogous constituents of neonates suggests that variation in metabolic rates of embryos limits the utility of egg size as an accurate and precise predictor of nutrient constituents in the two study species, but especially in Canada Geese.


2003 ◽  
Vol 59 (9) ◽  
pp. 1052-1056 ◽  
Author(s):  
Randal S Stahl ◽  
Kurt C VerCauteren ◽  
Dennis Kohler ◽  
John J Johnston
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
O Karabulut

In this study, we investigated whether the mathematical formulas, which generally reveal the external quality characteristics of living organisms, yield the correct results in goose eggs. For this purpose, three genotypes and 555 eggs were studied that were grouped into Native (n = 356), Chinese (n = 163) and Linda (n = 36), which were raised in Aksaray province. The averages in the Native, Chinese and Linda geese were 5.43, 5.38 and 5.7 cm, respectively, in breadth; were 8.12, 8.03 and 8.67 cm in length, respectively; the shape index was 66.9, 67.2 and 66.7 cm, respectively; the egg volume was 142.8, 138.8 and 172.5 cm<sup>3</sup>, respectively; the egg surface area was 136.9, 134.3 and 155.4 cm<sup>2</sup>, respectively; the egg weight was 159.1, 154.5 and 192.3 g, respectively; the specific gravity of the eggs was 1.11, 1.11 and 1.12 g/cm<sup>3</sup>, respectively; the shell thickness was 0.510, 0.504 and 0.555 mm, respectively; the shell weight was 14.79, 14.32 and 18.26 g, respectively; the shell volume was 70.06, 67.82 and 86.41 cm<sup>3</sup>, respectively; the shell specific gravity was 2.111 3, 2.111 0 and 2.113 5 g/cm<sup>3</sup>, respectively; and the shell ratio was 9.29, 9.26 and 9.49 g, respectively. The number of pores is calculated as 14 828, 14 502 and 17 152, respectively. Although the formulas used give compatible results, there is a need for formulas that calculate closer to the truth rather than formulas that calculate the egg weight and egg shell weight.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document