不同鴨床材質對土番鴨生長性能與屠體性狀之影響

The effects of different floor materials on the growth performance and carcass traits of Mule duck

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

《畜產研究》 52卷2期 (2019/06) Pp. 114-121

摘要

本試驗旨在探討不同鴨床材質對土番鴨生長性能、屠體性狀、主翼羽長度及足墊損傷之影響，以評估舍內高床飼養土番鴨之可行性。0－3週齡三品種土番鴨飼養於育雛室內，於飼養滿3週齡後，將土番鴨逢機分成4處理組，飼養於4種不同高床床面，分別為不銹鋼網狀床面、塑膠床面、木條床面及橡膠止滑床面，每處理組三重複，每重複20隻，各組皆等蛋白質及等代謝能。在試驗鴨隻第3、7、10及12週齡時，測定鴨隻個別體重及各組飼料消耗量，以計算鴨隻之採食量、增重、飼料轉換率等生長性能及測定主翼羽長度與足墊損傷情況，並於12週齡每處理組犧牲6隻，測定鴨隻之屠體性狀。試驗結果顯示：各處理組12週齡活體重介於2,663－2,875 g之範圍，但飼養在木條床面組鴨隻活體重為2,875 g與飼養在不銹鋼網狀床面組為2,862 g，皆顯著較飼養在橡膠止滑床面組2,663 g為重（P ＜ 0.05）。於12週齡時測定，得知不銹鋼網狀床面組的足墊損傷評分為1.80分顯著較塑膠床面組3.25分、木條床面組2.67分及橡膠止滑床面組3.58分為佳（P ＜ 0.05）。各處理組3－12週齡飼料轉換率介於3.45－3.78之範圍，各組間並無顯著差異，但以飼養在木條床面組其飼料轉換率為3.45，有較其它三組為佳之趨勢。各處理組12週齡主翼羽長度介於19.0－21.1 cm之範圍，但以飼養在橡膠止滑床面其主翼羽長度為19.0 cm，有較其它三組為短之現象。各處理組屠宰率介於80.3－82.7% 之範圍，各組間並無顯著差異。各處理組胸肉重介於412－504 g之範圍，各組間亦無顯著差異。綜合本試驗結果顯示若同時考量活體重、飼料轉換率及足墊損傷等因素，室內鴨舍建議採用不銹鋼網狀床面為宜。

關鍵字

鴨床材質 ； 土番鴨 ； 生長性能 ； 屠體性狀

並列摘要

The purpose of this experiment was to investigate the effects of different floor materials on the growth performance, carcass traits, main feather length development and footpad damage of the Mule duck to evaluate the feasibility of the indoor production model of mule duck. 240 three-way crossbred mule ducks were raised in the brooding house from hatched to 3 weeks of age. After 3 weeks of age, the Mule ducks were divided into 4 treatment groups, with the floor materials being stainless steel mesh, plastic wooden slats and rubber anti-slip and three replicates per treatment, 20 ducks per replicate. Diet was isocaloric and isonitrogenous in each group. The individual body weight and the feed consumption of each group were determined to calculate the growth performance such as feed intake, body weight gain, feed conversion ratio, and the development of the main feather length, damage of the footpad were also determined. When ducks were at 3, 7, 10 and 12 weeks of age, six ducks were selected from each treatment and sacrificed at 12 weeks of age for carcass traits determination. The results showed that the average temperature and relative humidity in the duck house were 31.4℃ and 65.5%. In terms of body weight, the body weight of each treatment was ranged from 2,663-2,875 g at 12 weeks of age. Yet the results of the wood slat floor and stainless steel mesh floor treatments were 2,875 g and 2,862 g which were significantly higher than 2,663 g of the rubber anti-slip floor treatment (P ＜ 0.05). The damage score of footpad indicated that stainless steel mesh floor treatment was 1.80 which were significantly better than plastic floor (3.25), wooden slats floor (2.67) and rubber anti-slip floor (3.58) treatments at 12 weeks of age (P ＜ 0.05). In terms of body weight gain, the body weight gain of ducks from 3 to 7 weeks of age in each treatment were ranged from 1,348 to 1,496 g. The body weight gain of the wood slat floor group was 1,496 g which was better than that of the other three groups; However, the body weight gain of each treatment were ranged from 2,328-2,529 g at 3-12 weeks of age and there was no significant difference between the treatments. The average daily feed consumption of each treatment were ranged from 137 to 140 g at 3-12 weeks of age, with no significant differences between the treatments. The feed conversion ratio of each treatment were ranged from 3.45 to 3.78 at 3-12 weeks of age and there was no significant difference between the groups, but the feed conversion ratio of the wood slat floor group was 3.45 which was showed better trend than the other three groups. With regard to the length of the 8^(th) primary feather at 12 weeks of age, the length of the main feathers of each treatment group were ranged from 19.0 to 21.1 cm, and there was no significant difference between the treatments. The dressing percentage of each treatment were ranged from 80.3 to 82.7% and there was no significant difference between the treatments. The weight of breast meat in each treatment were ranged from 412 to 504 g, and there was no significant difference between the treatments. According to the results of this experiment, it is recommended to use stainless steel mesh floor for indoor duck house if ducks body weight, feed conversion rate and footpad damage are taken into concern simultaneously.

並列關鍵字

Floor material ； Mule duck ； Growth performance ； Carcass traits