Egg quality of commercial laying hens stored at different temperatures and periods

Keywords: Albumen, Cooling, Temperature, Haug Unit

Abstract

The objective of the present study was to evaluate the quality of eggs from commercial laying hens stored at different temperatures and periods. A total of 140 eggs from commercial laying hens of the Hy-Line Brown strain at 59 weeks of age were used in the study. These were stored in commercial cardboard packaging under two conditions: refrigerated (refrigerator, n=60) and shelf (room temperature, n=60) for 7, 14 and 21 days. Twenty eggs were also used for egg analysis on the day of laying. The minimum and maximum temperatures were checked daily, with a variation of 2.7 °C to 7.5 °C in the refrigerated environment, and from 21.8 °C to 26.8 °C at room temperature. The variables evaluated were egg weight (g), albumen height, Haugh unit, resistance (kgf) and shell thickness (mm). Characteristics such as egg weight, shell strength and shell thickness were maintained, however, albumen height and Haugh unit were influenced by the storage method. It was also observed that there is a high correlation between albumen height and Haugh unit (variables benefited by refrigerated storage), as well as between shell thickness and strength. It is noted in the present study that eggs kept under refrigeration maintained their characteristics after 21 days of storage, therefore, it is recommended that the consumer preferably consume fresher eggs or those that were conditioned under refrigeration.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Barbosa, V. C. Gaspar, A. Calixto, L. F. L. Agostinho, T. S. P. 2011. Stability of the pigmentation of egg yolks enriched with omega-3 and carophyll stored at room temperature and under refrigeration. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia, 40(7):1540-1544. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-35982011000700020

Brant, A.W.; Otte, A.W.; Norris, K.H. 1951. Recommend stands for scoring and measuring opened egg quality. Food technology, 5:356-361.

Carvalho, B. C. Stringhini, J. H. Jardim Filho, R. M. Leandro, N. S. M. Café, M. B. Deus, H. A. S. B. 2007. Qualidade interna e da casca para ovos de poedeiras comerciais de diferentes linhagens e idades. Ciência Animal Brasileira, 8(1):25-29. https://www.revistas.ufg.br/vet/article/view/1155/1245

Carvalho, L. S. S. Ferandes, E. A. 2013. Formação e qualidade da casca de ovos de reprodutoras e poedeiras comerciais. Medicina Veterinária, 7(1):35-44. http://www.journals.ufrpe.br/index.php/medicinaveterinaria/article/view/604/483

Climate Data. Clima Catalão: Temperatura, Tempo e Dados climatológicos Catalão – Climate-data. 2021. https://pt.climate-data.org/america-do-sul/brasil/goias/catalao-43452/

Freitas, P. V. D. X. Leite, P. R. S. C. Brainer, M. M. A. Resende, V. C. S. Barbosa, L. M. Silva, J. M. S. 2020. Efeito do sistema de criação de poedeiras comerciais em gaiolas e em piso. Research, Society and Development, 9(2): el40922209, 2020. https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v9i2.2209

Brown®. Guia de manejo hy-line brown®. Hy-line brown poedeiras comerciais. 1018. Brn. Com. Por. 04-15 rev. 4-12-19.

Giampauli, J. Pedroso, A. A. Moraes, V. M. 2005. Qualidade de ovos de poedeiras após a muda forçada suplementadas com probióticos em diferentes fases de criação. Ciência Animal Brasileira, 6(3):179-186. https://www.revistas.ufg.br/vet/article/view/366/341

Hammer, Ø. Harper, D. A. 2001. Past: paleontological statistics software package for educaton and data anlysis. Palaeontologia electronica, 4(1), 1. http://palaeo-electronica.org/2001_1/past/issue1_01.htm

Hilbe, Joseph M. 2007. Statistica 7: an overview. The American Statistician, 61.1: https://doi.org/10.1198/000313007X172998

Lana, S. R. V. Lana, G. R. Q. Salvador, E. L. Lana, A. M. Q. Cunha, F. S. A. Marinho, A. L. 2017. Qualidade de ovos de poedeiras comerciais armazenados em diferentes temperaturas e períodos de estocagem. Revista Brasileira de Saúde e Produção Animal, 18(1):140-151. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1519-99402017000100013

Pires, M. F. Pires, S. F. Andrade, C. L. Carvalho, D. P. Barbosa, A. F. C. Marques, M. R. 2015. Fatores que afetam a qualidade dos ovos de poedeiras comerciais. Nutritime, 12(6):4379- 4385. https://www.nutritime.com.br/arquivos_internos/artigos/339_-_4379-4385_-_NRE_12-6_nov-dez_2015.pdf

Resende, V. C. S. Brainer, M. M. A. Modesto, K. P. Leite, P. R. S. C, Freitas, P. V. D. X. 2017. Effects of enzyme supplementation on diets of médium-heavy laying hens at 28 to 40 weeks. Revista Ciência Agronômica, 48(4):683-689. http://ccarevista.ufc.br/seer/index.php/ccarevista/article/view/4641/1603.

Rutts, F. Anciuti, M. A. Xavier, E. G. Roll, V. F. B. Rossi, P. 2007. Avanços na fisiologia e desempenho reprodutivo de aves domésticas. Revista Brasileira Reprodução Animal, 31(3):307-317. http://www.cbra.org.br/pages/publicacoes/rbra/download/307.pdf

Santos, M. S. V. Espíndola, G. B. Lobo, R. N. B. Freitas, E. R. Guerra, J. L. L. Santos, A. B. E. 2009. Effect of temperature and storage of eggs. Ciência e tecnologia de alimentos, 29(3):513-517. https://www.pubvet.com.br/artigo/1463/efeito-do-periacuteodo-de-armazenamento-local-e-tipo-de-tratamento-sobre-a-qualidade-de-ovos-brancos-para-consumo-humano

Sfaciotte, R. A. P. Barbosa, M. J. B. Wosiacki, S. R. Cardozo, R. M. Martins, R. R. 2014. Efeito do período de armazenamento, local e tipo de tratamento sobre a qualidade de ovos brancos para consumo humano. Pubvet, 8(19). https://doi.org/10.22256/pubvet.v8n19.1782

Xavier, I. M. C. Cançado, S. V. Figueiredo, T. C. Lara, L. J. C. Lana, A. M. Q. Souza, M. R. Baião, N. C. 2008. Qualidade de ovos de consumo submetido a diferentes condições de armazenamento. Arquivo Brasileiro de Medicina Veterinária e Zootecnia, 60(4):953-959. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-09352008000400026

Published
2024-07-09
How to Cite
Silva, Ralston Borges da, Ana Carolina de Souza Guedes, Michele Laboissière, Carlos de Melo e Silva Neto, and Paulo Vitor Divino Xavier de Freitas. 2024. “Egg Quality of Commercial Laying Hens Stored at Different Temperatures and Periods”. Archivos Latinoamericanos De Producción Animal 32 (2 in progr), 69-75. https://doi.org/10.53588/alpa.3202002.
Section
Original paper