不同飼養環境對褐色菜鴨產蛋性能及床蛋率之影響

The effect of different rearing environment on laying performance and floor laying rate of Brown Tsaiya ducks

蘇晉暉(Chin-Hui Su) ； 林育安(Yu-An Lin) ； 曾再富(Tsai-Fuh Tseng) ； 鄭智翔(Chih-Hsiang Cheng) ； 黃振芳(Jeng-Fang Huang) ； 劉秀洲(Hsiu-Chou Liu) ； 林榮新(Jung-Hsin Lin)

《畜產研究》 50卷1期 (2017/03) Pp. 15-21

摘要

本試驗旨在探討不同飼養環境對褐色菜鴨產蛋性能及床蛋率之影響。褐色菜鴨於0－14週齡依鴨隻營養分需要量手冊推薦之營養標準餵飼，14週齡後餵飼蛋鴨飼料。蛋鴨飼養80天時逢機分組，分別飼養於4種不同飼養環境（分別為室內鴨舍不銹鋼網狀地面、室內鴨舍稻殼墊料地面、非開放式鴨舍水泥地面及非開放式鴨舍木條地面），每處理組三重複，每重複20隻，共240隻供試驗。試驗期間採自由飲水及任食。產蛋性能之試驗期間為20週齡起至40週齡止，測定試驗期間之採食量、蛋重、蛋殼強度、產蛋率、飼料換蛋率及床蛋率等性狀，每4週測定一次，每次測定5天。試驗結果顯示：在全期（20－40週齡）平均採食量方面，各組間並無顯著差異，室內鴨舍不銹鋼網狀地面組其平均隻日採食量為121.7g，有較其他三組平均隻日採食量少之趨勢。在全期蛋重方面，非開放式鴨舍水泥地面組其平均蛋重為63.0g，有比其他三組重之趨勢。在全期平均產蛋率方面，各組間並無顯著差異，但非開放式鴨舍水泥地面組其平均產蛋率為84.8%，有較其他三組平均產蛋率高之趨勢。在全期平均飼料換蛋率方面，各組間並無顯著差異，但非開放式鴨舍水泥地面組其平均飼料換蛋率為2.56，有較其他三組平均飼料換蛋率佳之趨勢。在全期平均床蛋率方面，各組間並無顯著差異，但非開放式鴨舍水泥地面組其平均床蛋率為8.3%，有較其他三組低之趨勢。考量蛋重、產蛋率、飼料換蛋率與床蛋率等各方面，以及平時目測觀察鴨隻，以飼養於非開放式鴨舍水泥地面之鴨隻較清潔，故建議蛋鴨飼養於非開放式鴨舍水泥地面。

關鍵字

飼養環境 ； 褐色菜鴨 ； 床蛋率

並列摘要

The purpose of this experiment was to investigate the effect of different rearing environments on laying performance and floor egg rate of Brown Tsaiya ducks. Brown Tsaiya ducks were fed with the diet formulated by the Duck Nutrient Requirement Manual during 0 - 14 weeks of age. Layer diet was provided after 14 weeks of age. Tsaiya ducks were allocated randomly at 80 days of age and reared at four different environments respectively (i.e. indoor duck house with stainless steel mesh ground, indoor duck house with rice hull on ground, non-open duck house with cement ground and non-open duck house with slatted wood). Each treatment has three replicates, each one has 20 ducks, with a total of 240 ducks. Feed and water were given ad libitum during the experiment. Ducks' laying performance was determined from 20 to 40 weeks of age. Feed intake, egg weight, egg shell breaking strength, laying performance, feed conversion ratio and floor egg rate were collected for five continuous days every four weeks from 20 to 40 weeks of age. The results indicated that no difference on feed intake among treatments in the experimental period was found. Nevertheless, ducks reared in indoor duck house with mesh ground showed a trend of reduced feed intake. For the egg weight, ducks bred in the duck house with cement ground tend to lay heavier egg than other treatments. No difference was found on the laying performance. However, ducks reared in non-open duck house with cement ground tend to have higher laying performance than other treatments. For the feed conversion ratio, no difference was found among treatments. Nevertheless, ducks reared on non-open duck house with cement ground tend to have better conversion ratio than other treatments. In the floor egg rate, there was no difference among treatments, however, ducks reared on non-open duck house with cement ground tend to lower less floor egg rate than other treatments. In conclusion, ducks reared in non-open duck house with cement ground had better egg weight, egg laying performance, feed conversion ratio and floor egg rate. Considering the egg weight, laying performance, feed conversion ratio, floor laying rate and the visual cleanness of ducks, ducks reared on non-open duck house with cement ground is recommended.

並列關鍵字

Rearing environment ； Brown Tsaiya ； Floor laying rate