Effects of short light regimes and lower dietary protein content on the reproductive performance of White Roman geese in an environment-controlled house

•Geese under short light regimes have higher laying intensity fertility, hatchability than under long light regimes.•Geese under short light regime at prelaying period along with low CP diet are sufficient to sustain regular reproduction.•Short light regimes with low CP diet would be benefit farmers...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Animal reproduction science 2016-07, Vol.170, p.141-148
Hauptverfasser: Chang, Shen-Chang, Chiang, Hsin-I, Lin, Min-Jung, Jea, Yu-Shine, Chen, Lih-Ren, Fan, Yang-Kwang, Lee, Tzu-Tai
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:•Geese under short light regimes have higher laying intensity fertility, hatchability than under long light regimes.•Geese under short light regime at prelaying period along with low CP diet are sufficient to sustain regular reproduction.•Short light regimes with low CP diet would be benefit farmers in the perspectives of energy saving and prolonged laying period. The objective of this study is to investigate the effects of short light regimes and lower dietary protein content on the reproductive performance of White Roman geese in an environment- controlled house. Thirty-two ganders and 80 geese during the third laying period were allotted into 16 pens, randomly assigned into a split-plot design with two different lighting regimes: (1) short light regimes (SL) with 6.5h of light and 17.5h of dark (6.5L:17.5D), and (2) long light regimes (LL) with 19L:5D during the 6-wk prelaying period, followed by two different levels of protein diets (Low CP: 15% vs. High CP: 18%) for the laying period. The results showed that birds treated with the SL light regime had a heavier body weight compared to those treated with LL at the arrival of the peak period of egg production (6.19 vs. 5.87kg, P
ISSN:0378-4320
1873-2232
DOI:10.1016/j.anireprosci.2016.05.003