A Comparative Study of Production Performance and Egg Quality Parameters of Naked-Neck and Indigenous Aseel Chicken of Pakistan


 Production performance, Egg quality, Genetic potential, Naked-neck, Aseel.

How to Cite

Muhammad Usman, A. Basheer, M. Akram, & I. Zahoor. (2014). A Comparative Study of Production Performance and Egg Quality Parameters of Naked-Neck and Indigenous Aseel Chicken of Pakistan. Journal of Basic & Applied Sciences, 10, 160–163. https://doi.org/10.6000/1927-5129.2014.10.21


The present study was conducted to evaluate production performance and egg quality of four different varieties of native Aseel chicken in comparison with naked neck. A total of 105 adult chickens, 21 birds from each of four varieties of Aseel namely Lakha, Mushki, Peshawari and Mianwali, and 21 birds from naked neck, were maintained separately. The data of daily egg production, daily egg weight and weekly egg quality were calculated for up to ten weeks and analyzed under Completely Randomized Design (CRD) through SAS 9.1 software. Comparison among treatment means were made through Duncan’s Multiple Range (DMR) test. The results showed that egg production of Naked-neck (47.42) was significantly higher (P<0.05) than that of Mushki (34.08), Lakha (31.43), Mianwali (29.59) and Pesahwari (28.7). However,egg weight of Naked-neck (57.52) and Peshwari (55.65) was significantly greater (P<0.05) compared with lakha (54.03), Mushki (53.7) and Mianwali (51.62). Regarding egg quality traits, shell % of Peshawari (13.57) and Nakedneck (13.16) was significantly higher (P<0.05) than that of Lakha (11.89), Mushki (10.19) and Mianwali (9.36). Similarly, Haugh Unit Score of Naked-neck (82.76) and Peshawari (81.95) was significantly greater (P<0.05) than other varieties of Aseel. Albumen % was significantly higher in Mushki (61.83) variety (P<0.05) while yolk % was significantly higher in Mianwali (59.36) variety of Aseel (P<0.05) whereas yolk index showed non-significant (P>0.05) difference in Naked-neck and all varieties of Aseel.



Ani I. Indigenous chicken production in South-east Asia. World’s Poultry Congress 1990; 46: 51-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1079/WPS19900010

Roberts JA. The scavenging feed resource base in assessments of the productivity of scavenging village chickens. Workshop held on Newcastle disease in village chickens control with thermo-stable oral vaccines. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia 1992.

Romanov MN, Wezyk S, Cywa-Benko K, Sakhatsky NI. Poultry genetic resources in the countries of Eastern Europe: History and current state. Poult Avian Biology Rev 1996; 7: 1-29.

Grobbelaar JAN, Sutherland B, Molalakgotla NM. Egg production potentials of certain indigenous chicken breeds from South Africa. Animal Genetic Resources 2010; 46: 25-32.

Horst P. Native fowl as reservoir for genomes with direct and indirect effects on productive adaptability. 18th World’s Poultry Congress. Nagoya, Japan 1988; pp. 99-105.

Anonymous. Country report on state of animal genetic resources in Pakistan 2005.

Ndegwa JM, Kimani CW. Rural poultry production in Kenya: Research and development strategies. 5th Kenya Agricultural Research Institute Conference Nairobi, Kenya 1997.

Okeno TO, Kahi AK, Peters KJ. Breed selection practices and traits of economic importance for indigenous chicken in Kenya. Livestock Research for Rural Development 23 2011; 23: 60-3.

ICAR. DARE/ICAR Annual Report 2008-2009. Indian Council of Agricultural Research (wwwicarorg/cari/nativehtml) 2009.

Korver DR, Saunders-Blades JL, Nadeau KL. Assessing bone mineral density in vivo: Quantitative computed tomography. Poult Sci 2004; 83: 222-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ps/83.2.222

Usman M, Ahmad Z, Akram M, Hussain J, Mehmood S, Shafiq M, et al. Pre and Post moult productive performance of three age groups in four varieties of Aseel Chicken 33rd Pakistan Congress of Zoology (International). Islamabad, Pakistan 2013; p. 355.

Hurwitz SE, Wax Y, Nisenbaum M, Ben-Moshe I. The Response of Laying Hens to Induced Molt as Affected by Strain and Age. Poult Sci 1998; 77: 22-31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ps/77.1.22

Joseph NS, Moran ET. Effect of age and post emergent holding in the hatcher on broiler performance and further processing yield. J App Poult Res 2005; 14: 512-20.

Lima LR, Junior JBFS, Melo AS, Torquato JL, Filho GF. Performance and egg quality of naked neck hens in semi-arid. World´s Poultry Sci J 2012; Expanded Abstract - Poster Presentation.

Monira KN, Salahuddin M, Miah G. Effect of breed and holding period on egg quality characteristics of chicken. Int J Poultry Sci 2003; 2: 261-3. http://dx.doi.org/10.3923/ijps.2003.261.263

Ali A, Ali A, Akram M, Hussain J. Evaluation of egg Quality traits among different breeds and varieties of chicken locally available in Pakistan National science conference of agriculture and food security issues in global environment perspective. University of Ponch Rawalakot AJ&K 2012.

Shafiq M, Usman M, Ahmad Z, Akram M, Hussain J, Rehman A, et al. Pre and post-molt egg quality parameters as influenced by age in four varieties of aseel chicken. 33rd Pakistan Congress of Zoology (International). Islamabad, Pakistan 2013; p. 363.

Haunshi S, Niranjan M, Shanmugan M, Paddhi MK, Reddy MR, Sunitha R, et al. Characterization of two Indian native chicken breeds for production, egg and semen quality, and welfare traits. Poult Sci 2011; 90: 314-20. http://dx.doi.org/10.3382/ps.2010-01013

Gupta JJ, Singh KS. Force molting by nutritional manipulation. Indian J Poult Sci 1987; 22: 221-2.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2014 Muhammad Usman, A. Basheer, M. Akram, I. Zahoor