Hama, Z., Mohammed, H., Ali, K., Rashid, S. (2021). Intermittent Lighting Schedule effects on Broiler Production Performance and Carcass Traits. Journal of Animal and Poultry Production, 12(1), 27-30. doi: 10.21608/jappmu.2021.149448
Zainab O. Hama; Hemin N. Mohammed; Khasraw A. Ali; Saman A. Rashid. "Intermittent Lighting Schedule effects on Broiler Production Performance and Carcass Traits". Journal of Animal and Poultry Production, 12, 1, 2021, 27-30. doi: 10.21608/jappmu.2021.149448
Hama, Z., Mohammed, H., Ali, K., Rashid, S. (2021). 'Intermittent Lighting Schedule effects on Broiler Production Performance and Carcass Traits', Journal of Animal and Poultry Production, 12(1), pp. 27-30. doi: 10.21608/jappmu.2021.149448
Hama, Z., Mohammed, H., Ali, K., Rashid, S. Intermittent Lighting Schedule effects on Broiler Production Performance and Carcass Traits. Journal of Animal and Poultry Production, 2021; 12(1): 27-30. doi: 10.21608/jappmu.2021.149448
Intermittent Lighting Schedule effects on Broiler Production Performance and Carcass Traits
Department of Animal Science, College of Agricultural Engineering Sciences, Sulaimani University, Sulaimani, Kurdistan Region, Iraq.
Abstract
The current research aim is to examine the impact of light rhythm on development characteristics in broiler chicken before and after slaughter. One hundred and eighty-eight 11-day Ross 308 broilers were picked and reared between 11 to 42 days under an intermittent illumination schedule of either control illumination 6 hours of light: 18 hours of darkness T1 (6L:18D) or 2 hours of light: 2 hours of darkness T2(2L:2D) or 4 hours of light: 4 hours of darkness T3(4L:4D) or 6 hours of light: 6 hours of darkness T3(6L:6D). The results show that there are no significant differences for body weight and body weight gain at 23-42 days and body weight gain at 11-22days of age between treatments, but body weight in intermittent light (2L:2D) was significantly better than control group with other treatments group (P<0.05). The results also demonstrate that here is no significant difference between treatments for feed intake. Use of intermittent lighting schedule improved feed conversion ratio but not significantly (P<0.05). Also for mortality, there is no significant difference between treatments. Similarly, the chest and thigh percentage in birds reared in all photoperiods are not significantly different from each other. In addition, the dressing percentage of birds reared in the (2L:2D) treatment group is greater than measurements observed in the control or other lighting program. Therefore, we can conclude that in broiler managing, the (2L:2D) lighting schedule was preferable compared to 4L:4D, 6L:6D photoperiod and control.
View on SCiNiTO
Top