Comparative study of growth and layer economic traits in Aseel and Kadaknath chicken breeds under intensive rearing system

Abstract

Aseel and Kadaknath are two of the most important native chicken breeds of India. Aseel having an aggressive behavior and fighting ability is well known for its meat qualities and Kadaknath is popular for its black meat and eggs having proven medicinal and added nutritional values. The present study was designed to evaluate the effect of genetic and non genetic factors on growth and layer economic traits and compare the estimated phenotypic and genetic parameters in the two indigenous breeds. Single generation data was collected from Aseel and Kadaknath birds reared under intensive system in Desi Fowl Unit of ICAR-Central Avian Research Institute, Izatnagar, Uttar Pradesh, India. The least square means of growth traits revealed a higher body weight gain at 20 (BW20) and 40 (BW40) weeks in Aseel i.e. 1036.02 ± 13.64 g and 1561.32 ± 19.67 g respectively compared to Kadaknath measuring 602.53 ± 19.73 g and 1158.79 ± 23.44 g respectively. Both the breeds took almost same time to reach sexual maturity. Least square means of egg weight at 28 (EW28) and 40 (EW40) weeks, egg production up to 40 weeks (EP40) were 38.22 ± 0.72 g, 43.68 ± 0.49 g, 40.88 ± 2.70, respectively in Aseel and 33.68 ± 0.79 g, 40.06 ± 0.73 g and 35.82 ± 2.13, respectively in Kadaknath. All the concerned traits were found to have medium to high heritability suggesting scope for further improvement in growth and production traits in both the breeds via proper selection and mating program.

Full text

~ 1553 ~
The Pharma Innovation Journal 2022; SP-11(6): 1553-1557
ISSN (E): 2277-7695
ISSN (P): 2349-8242
NAAS Rating: 5.23
TPI 2022; SP-11(6): 1553-1557
© 2022 TPI
www.thepharmajournal.com
Received: 23-03-2022
Accepted: 29-04-2022
Manjari Pandey
Ph.D. Scholar, Department of
Animal Genetics and Breeding,
ICAR-Indian Veterinary
Research Institute, Izatnagar,
Bareilly, Utter Pradesh, India
Sanjeev Kumar
Principal Scientist & Head,
Department of Avian Genetics
and Breeding, ICAR-Central
Avian Research Institute,
Izatnagar, Bareilly,
Utter Pradesh, India
Chandrahas
Principal Scientist, LPM,
ICAR-Central Avian Research
Institute, Izatnagar, Bareilly,
Utter Pradesh, India
Amit Kumar
M.V.Sc. Scholar, Department of
Animal Genetics and Breeding,
ICAR-Indian Veterinary
Research Institute, Izatnagar,
Bareilly, Utter Pradesh, India
Chirag Parbatbhai Chaudhari
Ph.D. Scholar, Department of
Animal Genetics and Breeding,
ICAR-Indian Veterinary
Research Institute, Izatnagar,
Bareilly, Utter Pradesh, India
Hanumant L Kanadkhedkar
Subject Matter Specialist,
BGDSRDTC Borgaon Manju,
Akola, Maharashtra, India
Ruhi Meena
Ph.D. Scholar, Department of
Animal Genetics and Breeding,
ICAR-Indian Veterinary
Research Institute, Izatnagar,
Bareilly, Utter Pradesh, India
Corresponding Author
Manjari Pandey
Ph.D. Scholar, Department of
Animal Genetics and Breeding,
ICAR-Indian Veterinary
Research Institute, Izatnagar,
Bareilly, Utter Pradesh, India
Comparative study of growth and layer economic traits
in Aseel and Kadaknath chicken breeds under intensive
rearing system
Manjari Pandey, Sanjeev Kumar, Chandrahas, Amit Kumar, Chirag
Parbatbhai Chaudhari, Hanumant L Kanadkhedkar and Ruhi Meena
Abstract
Aseel and Kadaknath are two of the most important native chicken breeds of India. Aseel having an
aggressive behavior and fighting ability is well known for its meat qualities and Kadaknath is popular for
its black meat and eggs having proven medicinal and added nutritional values. The present study was
designed to evaluate the effect of genetic and non genetic factors on growth and layer economic traits and
compare the estimated phenotypic and genetic parameters in the two indigenous breeds. Single
generation data was collected from Aseel and Kadaknath birds reared under intensive system in Desi
Fowl Unit of ICAR- Central Avian Research Institute, Izatnagar, Uttar Pradesh, India. The least square
means of growth traits revealed a higher body weight gain at 20 (BW20) and 40 (BW40) weeks in Aseel
i.e. 1036.02 ± 13.64 g and 1561.32 ± 19.67 g respectively compared to Kadaknath measuring 602.53 ±
19.73 g and 1158.79 ± 23.44 g respectively. Both the breeds took almost same time to reach sexual
maturity. Least square means of egg weight at 28 (EW28) and 40 (EW40) weeks, egg production up to
40 weeks (EP40) were 38.22 ± 0.72 g, 43.68 ± 0.49 g, 40.88 ± 2.70, respectively in Aseel and 33.68 ±
0.79 g, 40.06 ± 0.73 g and 35.82 ± 2.13, respectively in Kadaknath. All the concerned traits were found
to have medium to high heritability suggesting scope for further improvement in growth and production
traits in both the breeds via proper selection and mating program.
Keywords: Genetic factors, non-genetic factors, heritability, correlation, Aseel, Kadaknath
Introduction
Poultry industry is one amongst the fastest growing industries in India. India is the second
largest poultry market in the world. It produces about 122.09 billion eggs (with an average
growth rate of 6.70%, BAHFS, 2021-22) and 4.34 million tonnes of poultry meat (growing @
8-10%, BAHFS, 2020). Total meat production (including poultry) in the country is 8.80
million tonnes in 2021-22.
Globally, India ranks third in egg production and fifth in broiler production. The egg and
broiler production has been rising @ 8-10% per annum. Total poultry population in India is
851.81million (20th livestock census) and is at seventh rank across the globe.
The demand of poultry products in the market is increasing day-by-day with the increase in
human population. In developed countries, the per capita consumption of eggs is 240 and
chicken meat is 20 kg per annum. As per National Institute of Nutrition, India, the
recommended per capita consumption of poultry eggs is 182 eggs and that of meat is 11.5 kg
but the actual consumption is 89 eggs and 6.52 kg meat only. This wide margin between the
two signifies that still the poultry industry is far from saturation and also there is a long way to
bridge the gap between the developed and developing countries. Poultry sector contributes
about Rs. 125 lakh Crores accounting for about 1% of the national GDP and about 14% of the
Livestock GDP.
The local/ indigenous breeds contribute maximum poultry genetic resources playing an
important role in developing countries like India. Indigenous chickens comprise a greater part
of the national flocks in India. Even though their growth rates and egg production are low,
they are generally better in disease resistance and comparatively have higher levels of
performance even under poor nutrition and high environmental temperatures than the
commercial strains under village systems. It has been reported that Aseel and Kadaknath
native chicken breeds had higher immuno-competence than White Leghorn chicken (Kokate et
al., 2017) [10].

~ 1554 ~
The Pharma Innovation Journal https://www.thepharmajournal.com
The original home tract of Aseel is Andhra Pradesh. It is a
source of income for the tribals. Aseel is known for its
delicious and flavored meat. Eggs are generally kept for
hatching and are not eaten or sold. Aseel is popularly a game
bird and is well known for its hostility, high stamina, majestic
gait and fighting qualities. The home tract of Kadaknath is
Jhabua and Dhar districts of Madhya Pradesh and adjoining
districts of Rajasthan and Gujarat. Its flesh is a black delicacy
with medicinal values. The tribals treat chronic diseases in
human beings by the blood of Kadaknath and use its meat as
an aphrodisiac. The meat and eggs of Kadaknath are a rich
source of protein and iron. The annual egg production is
around 80 eggs.
The low productivity of the indigenous chicken breeds has
attracted the interest of researchers. Nowadays, the
indigenous chicken breeds are being genetically improved for
their productivity so as to make them economically viable.
Further, these improved indigenous breeds are being used for
developing crosses for backyard poultry farming. However,
not many studies have been conducted on Aseel and
Kadaknath regarding their growth and egg production
performance. Hence, genetic evaluation and comparative
studies of Aseel and Kadaknath is much needed. Moreover,
the knowledge of genetic and non genetic factors affecting the
growth, production and reproduction of birds along with
estimation of genetic and phenotypic parameters helps in pure
line selection and cross bred production which is mainly used
in poultry breeding.
Material and Methods
Data
The required data were recorded on 180 pedigreed birds of
Aseel and 120 pedigreed birds of Kadaknath native chickens,
maintained at the ICAR- Central Avian Research Institute’s
Desi Farm unit, for the proposed study. The data generated
was from a single generation. Traits were recorded from
individual birds which were kept in separate cages and were
identified by wing and leg band numbers. Standard feeding
and management was practiced along with proper vaccination
schedule being followed in the farm.
Traits recorded
The growth and layer economic traits such as age at sexual
maturity (ASM) for individual pullet calculated as the number
of days from hatching to the laying of the first egg, body
weights (g) of all the pullets at 20 (BW20) and 40 (BW40)
weeks of age, average of egg weights of three consecutive
days for each pullet at 28th (EW28) and 40th (EW40) weeks of
age, individual daily egg production of each pullet up to 40
weeks of age (EP 40) were recorded.
Statistical analysis
Data recorded on growth and egg production traits were
analyzed using mixed model least squares analysis of variance
and maximum likelihood program (Harvey, 1990). Sire was
taken as random effect and hatch as fixed effect wherever
applicable in the model. Following statistical model was used:
Yijk= µ + Si + Hj + eijk
Where
Yijk =Value of a trait measured on kth individual belonging to
ith sire and jth hatch.
µ = Population mean
Si = Random effect of ith sire
Hj = fixed effect of hatch (j= 1 in case of Aseel, j=2 in case of
Kadaknath)
eijk = Random error associated with mean zero and variance
σ2e.
The chicks were also evaluated for the inheritance pattern of
all the recorded traits. Genetic and phenotypic parameters of
body weights and layer economic traits were estimated using
paternal half-sib correlation method (Becker, 1975).
Results
In Aseel females, the least squares means of growth traits viz.,
BW20, BW40 and production traits viz., ASM, EW28, EW40
and EP40 were 1036.02 ± 13.64g, 1561.32 ± 19.67g, 214.39 ±
2.22 days, 38.22 ± 0.72g, 43.68 ± 0.49g and 40.88 ± 2.70
eggs, respectively. Least squares analysis of variance of all
the growth and production traits of Aseel native chicken are
presented in table 1. The overall least squares means and
standard errors of all the considered traits are presented in
table 2. Sire was found to have a significant (P≤0.05) effect
on BW20 and EP40 but not on other traits. The hatch effect
was not taken into account as all the experimental birds
belong to same hatch.
In Kadaknath females, the estimated least square means of
growth traits viz., BW20, BW40 and production traits viz.,
ASM, EW28, EW40 and EP40 were 602.53 ± 19.73 g,
1158.79 ± 23.44 g, 213.04 ± 2.80 days, 33.68 ± 0.79 g, 40.06
± 0.73 g and 35.82 ± 2.13 eggs respectively. The least squares
analysis of variance of all the considered traits are represented
in table 3. The least squares means along with their standard
errors are depicted in table 4. Hatch and sire were found to
have non-significant effects on all the growth as well as layer
economic traits. In the present study, Aseel native chicken
breed showed higher body weight at twenty and forty weeks
of age compared to that of Kadaknath native chicken breed.
The heritability estimates for both BW20 and BW40 were
found to be higher in magnitude in both the breeds viz., 0.81 ±
0.31 and 0.75 ± 0.23, respectively in Aseel and 0.81 ± 0.39
and 0.79 ± 0.34, respectively in Kadaknath. ASM was found
to have higher heritability in Aseel (0.42 ± 0.25) as compared
to Kadaknath (0.24 ± 0.11). Egg weights showed higher
heritabilities whereas egg production up to forty weeks
showed medium heritability in both Aseel as well as
Kadaknath birds. For Aseel birds, heritabilities ± standard
errors along with phenotypic and genetic correlations among
the concerned traits are shown in table 5. The same
parameters are represented in table 6 for Kadaknath birds
under study. In present investigation, the genetic correlation
among the various traits lies within the range of -0.97 ± 0.16
to 0.83 ± 0.66 in Aseel birds and -0.83 ± 0.25 to 0.87 ± 0.11
in Kadaknath birds, although no definite pattern of genetic
correlation was observed amongst the traits. The phenotypic
correlation ranges from -0.60 (among ASM and EP40) to 0.57
(among BW20 and BW40) and from -0.58 (among ASM and
BW20) to 0.50 (among BW20 and BW40) in Aseel and
Kadaknath birds respectively.

~ 1555 ~
The Pharma Innovation Journal https://www.thepharmajournal.com
Table 1: Least squares analysis of variance of various layer economic traits in Aseel native chicken breed
Source of variation
Mean sum of squares
df
ASM
df
BW20
df
BW40
df
EW28
df
EW40
df
EP40
Sire
27
640.84
30
27416.41*
25
42172.65
6
8.77
12
8.71
15
484.66*
Error/ Remainder
107
485.36
125
16569.79
95
46804.72
10
8.94
45
13.94
55
217.18
df = Degrees of freedom;*P≤0.05.
Table 2: Least squares mean ± standard error of various layer economic traits in Aseel native chicken breed
Factors
Least squares means± standard errors
ASM (days)
BW20(g)
BW40(g)
EW28(g)
EW40(g)
EP40 (No.)
Overall
214.39 ± 2.22
(135)
1036.02 ± 13.64
(156)
1561.32 ± 19.67
(121)
38.22 ± 0.72
(17)
43.68 ± 0.49
(58)
40.88 ± 2.70
(71)
Figures within parentheses denote number of observations.
Table 3: Least squares analysis of variance of various layer economic traits in Kadaknath native chicken breed
Source of variation
Mean sum of squares
df
ASM
df
BW20
df
BW40
df
EW28
df
EW40
df
EP40
Sire
24
355.64
21
34338.86
22
35274.56
10
11.13
6
8.62
21
185.18
Hatch
1
396.02
1
35389.84
1
44660.79
1
2.21
1
10.86
1
11.52
Error/ Remainder
61
680.31
77
22274.25
42
36116.67
22
21.02
13
11.28
19
178.44
df = Degrees of freedom
Table 4: Least squares mean ± standard error of various layer economic traits in Kadaknath native chicken breed
Factors
Least squares means± standard errors
N
ASM (days)
BW20(g)
BW40(g)
EW28(g)
EW40(g)
EP40 (No.)
Overall
87
213.04 ± 2.80
602.53 ± 19.73 (100)
1158.79 ± 23.44 (66)
33.68 ± 0.79 (34)
40.06 ± 0.73 (21)
35.82 ± 2.13 (42)
Hatch
1
40
215.63 ± 4.55
625.26 ± 27.89(43)
1192.01 ± 38.84 (31)
33.39 ± 1.27 (15)
40.94 ± 1.14 (11)
34.98 ± 3.81 (23)
2
47
210.44 ± 4.26
579.79 ± 25.52 (57)
1125.56 ± 37.08 (35)
33.98 ± 1.15 (19)
39.18 ± 1.18 (10)
36.65 ± 4.02 (19)
N= Number of observations; Figures within parentheses denote number of observations.
Table 5: Heritability (at diagonal), genetic (above diagonal) and phenotypic (below diagonal) correlations of various layer economic traits in
Aseel native chicken breed
Traits
ASM
BW20
BW40
EW28
EW40
EP40
ASM
0.42 ± 0.25 (104)
-0.66 ± 0.08 (104)
0.52 ± 0.26 (104)
NE
0.20 ± 0.09 (80)
-0.97 ± 0.16 (104)
BW20
-0.44 (104)
0.81 ± 0.31 (104)
0.68 ± 0.26 (104)
NE
-0.44 ± 0.11 (80)
0.83 ± 0.66 (104)
BW40
-0.09 (104)
0.57 (104)
0.75 ± 0.23 (104)
NE
NE
0.51 ± 0.31 (104)
EW28
-0.16 (33)
0.16 (33)
0.17 (33)
0.41 ± 0.28 (33)
NE
NE
EW40
0.12 (80)
0.04 (80)
0.26 (80)
0.004 (33)
0.73 ± 0.39 (80)
-0.34 ± 0.11 (80)
EP40
-0.60 (104)
0.29 (104)
-0.03 (104)
-0.03 (33)
0.04 (80)
0.28 ± 0.06 (104)
Figures within parentheses denote number of observations; NE = the estimate is not estimable
Table 6: Heritability (at diagonal), genetic (above diagonal) and phenotypic (below diagonal) correlations of various layer economic traits in
Kadaknath native chicken breed
Traits
ASM
BW20
BW40
EW28
EW40
EP40
ASM
0.24 ± 0.11 (89)
-0.54 ± 0.22 (89)
-0.53 ± 0.26 (58)
-0.83 ± 0.25 (24)
NE
-0.49 ± 0.010 (30)
BW20
-0.58 (89)
0.81 ± 0.39 (89)
0.72 ± 0.29 (58)
0.74 ± 0.39 (24)
NE
0.37 ± 0.07 (30)
BW40
-0.25 (58)
0.50 (58)
0.79 ± 0.34 (58)
NE
NE
0.87 ± 0.11 (30)
EW28
-0.23 (24)
0.39 (24)
0.27 (24)
0.66 ± 0.24 (24)
NE
-0.06 ± 0.05 (24)
EW40
-0.22 (16)
0.36 (16)
-0.04 (16)
0.27 (16)
NE
NE
EP40
-0.34 (30)
0.34 (30)
-0.05 (30)
-0.05 (24)
0.23 (16)
0.31 ± 0.12 (30)
Figures within parentheses denote number of observations; NE= the estimate is not estimable
Discussion
Growth and layer production traits
Comparatively higher estimates of BW20 and BW40 i.e.
1381.4 ± 18.2 g and 1704.4 ± 23.2 g respectively were
reported in Aseel by Rajkumar et al. (2017) [14]. Thangadurai
et al. (2020) [16] reported BW20 and BW40 as 820 g and 1400
g respectively in TANUVAS Aseel which were lower than
the present estimates in Aseel native chicken. Haunshi et al.
(2011) [6] reported the BW20 and BW 40 as 769.11 ± 12.41 g
and 1,321.6 ± 18.4 g respectively in Kadaknath, the estimates
being higher than the one estimated in the present study.
Similar results were obtained by Bhagora et al. (2022) [1]
where they reported the higher estimates of BW20 and BW40
week as 1247.07 ± 30.31 g and 1520.44 b ± 39.85 g
respectively in Kadaknath chicken breed. The differences
found in the estimates of various body weights as reported in
different reports might be due to the different genetic
background of the stocks used during the studies and also due
to differences in the various environmental factors like feed,
heat and cold stress management, disease condition,
vaccination schedule etc followed during the experiment.
Haunshi et al. (2012) [7] reported a comparatively lower ASM
i.e. 174 ± 0.9 days in Aseel birds. Rajkumar et al. (2017) [14],
in their study found ASM of Aseel birds as 214.0 ± 6.0 days.

~ 1556 ~
The Pharma Innovation Journal https://www.thepharmajournal.com
The estimate is close to the estimate obtained in present study.
Yet another study by Dalal et al. (2019) [4], reported ASM as
182.66 ± 1.98 days in Aseel which is lower than that of the
present estimate. Miazi et al. (2020) [11] reported ASM as 210
days in Aseel birds. Lower ASM estimate than the present
estimate in Kadaknath Breed were reported by Dalal et al.
(2019) [4] and Bhagora et al. (2022) [1] as 210 days, 169.83 ±
0.95 days and 195.22 ± 3.62 respectively. The different
genetic groups reared and selected in different environments
might be the reason for differences in the estimates of age at
sexual maturity as reported in different reports.
Haunshi et al. (2012) [7] reported egg weight at 28 weeks and
40 weeks as 42.57±0.30 g and 47.57±0.34 g respectively in
Aseel which are higher than the estimates of present study.
Rajkumar et al. (2017) [14] reported a lower egg weight at 40
weeks i.e. 38.8 ± 0.6 g as obtained in their study on Aseel
birds. Comparatively higher estimates of EW28 and EW40
were reported by Haunshi et al. (2019) [8] i.e. 43.4±0.23 g,
48.9±0.28g respectively in PD-4 Aseel. In Kadaknath higher
estimates of EW 28 and EW40 compared to the one obtained
in present study were reported by Haunshi et al. (2012) [7] as
36.02±0.33 g and 46.68± 0.71 g respectively. Almost similar
i.e. 41.99 ± 0.29 g EW40 was reported by Dalal et al. (2019)
[4]. Bhagora et al. (2022) [1] reported higher EW28 and EW40
as 41.56±0.19 g and 41.06 ± 1.83 g. Variations in the weights
of egg at different ages might be attributed to genetically
variable stocks used in the study along with the differences in
the observed age at sexual maturity of these stocks in the
experiments.
Haunshi et al. (2011) [6] and Rajkumar et al. (2017) [14]
reported EP40 in Aseel as 36.23 eggs and 18.0 ± 1 eggs
respectively, lower than the estimate of present study.
Comparatively higher estimate of EP40 in Aseel was reported
by Dalal et al. (2019) [4] viz. 64.89 ± 2.10 eggs. Similar result
as that of present study was reported by Chitra (2021) in
TANUVAS Aseel as 42.5±0.32 eggs. Chatterjee et al. (2010),
Haunshi et al. (2011) [6], Haunshi et al. (2012) [7] and Dalal et
al. (2019) [4] reported EP40 in Kadaknath chicken as 44.68
eggs, 49.40 eggs, 62.39 eggs and 55.48 ± 1.22 eggs
respectively which are higher than the present estimates of
EP40 in Kadaknath. The variations reported by different
studies can be due to the genetic backgrounds of the stocks
that varied in every single study.
Effect of genetic and non- genetic factors
Dalal et al. (2019) [4] reported that sire effect was highly
significant on BW20 but was non-significant on EP40 in
Aseel birds. They also reported non-significant effect of sire
on all the traits under study in case of Kadaknath birds. For a
successful execution of breeding program aimed at
improvement of population performance, the main pre
requisite is the proper and efficient selection of sire as sire is
considered as half of the flock. Contrary to the present
finding, Dalal et al. (2019) [4] reported highly significant
effect of hatch on BW20, BW40 and ASM.
Heritability (h2)
Kabir et al. (2006) estimated the heritability for BW20 and
BW40 of Aseel as 0.70 ± 0.35 and 0.42 ± 0.21 in the female
line. Dalal et al. (2019) [4] reported that the growth traits
showed moderate to high heritability (0.35–0.70) in Aseel and
low to medium (0.12–0.37) in Kadaknath.
Dalal et al. (2019) [4] found EP40 as medium heritable trait
viz. 0.35 in Aseel. The extreme variations in the heritability
estimates as per different reports might be attributed to the
differences in genetic background and variation in
environmental conditions.
Lower heritability estimate for ASM (0.19), EW40 (0.22) and
EP40 (0.14) in Kadaknath were reported by Dalal et al.
(2019) [4].
Genetic and phenotypic correlations
Contrary to present study, Dalal et al. (2019) [4] found that the
genetic correlation between BW40 and AFE was positive in
Kadaknath and negative in Aseel chicken. Negative genetic
correlation among AFE and EP40 was also reported. This
indicated that earlier the birds achieve sexual maturity, more
will be the number of eggs produced. Negative genetic
correlation between EP40 and EW40 are similar to the reports
of Sreenivas et al. (2012) [15] in white leghorn chicken and
Rahim et al. (2016) in Rhode Island Red chicken. Greater the
number of eggs, lesser will be the per egg weight. The
positive phenotypic correlation between BW20 and BW40
obtained in present study are in agreement with the findings
of Qadri et al. (2013) and Dalal et al. (2019) [4]. The genetic
and phenotypic correlations obtained in present study did not
reveal any specific trend in Aseel as well as in Kadaknath
native chicken birds which might be due to the fact that males
were not considered and the study was conducted only on
female birds. Also, not many reports are available to compare
the present estimates of heritabilities and genetic correlation
in Aseel and Kadaknath native chicken breeds.
Conclusion
Kadaknath and Aseel are the two most important native
chicken breeds of India. The present study concluded that
Aseel birds, being selected for fighting abilities showed
greater body weight gain compared to that of Kadaknath
birds. Both the breeds were observed to start egg laying
almost at similar age. However, Aseel breed was found to lay
more number of eggs up to forty weeks with higher egg
weight compared to that of Kadaknath. The study also
revealed that birds with lower body weight at twenty weeks
attain age at first egg late. Moderate to high heritability
estimates of various traits in Aseel and Kadaknath provide
scope for improvement in the flock using different means of
selection in future. High and positive genetic correlations
found among body weights and layer economic traits can be
exploited in developing models for genetic improvement in
production performance of native chicken breeds.
Acknowledgement
The authors are thankful to DST, GoI for providing the
necessary fund in the form of INSPIRE fellowship and to the
Director, ICAR-CARI, Izatnagar and Director, ICAR-IVRI
for providing all the necessary facilities to carry out the
experiment.
References
1. Bhagora NJ, Mishra R, Savaliya FP, Patel AB, Lonkar
VS. Production Performance, Phenotypic and Carcass
Quality Sensory Evaluation of Kadaknath, Rhode Island
Red Chicken and their Reciprocal Crosses. Indian Journal
of Veterinary Science and Biotechnology. 2022;18(1):54-
60.
2. Chatterjee RN, Niranjan M, Sharma RP, Dange M,
Bhattacharya TK. Estimation of genetic heterogeneity of
chicken germplasm being used for development of rural

~ 1557 ~
The Pharma Innovation Journal https://www.thepharmajournal.com
varieties utilizing DNA markers. Journal of Genetics
2010;89:33-37.
3. Chitra P. Comparative Study of TANUVAS Aseel and
Desi Chicken Rearing Under Backyard in Rural Areas of
Tiruppur District in Tamil Nadu, India. IJAEB.
2021;14(03):485-488.
4. Dalal DS, Ratwan P, Yadav AS. Genetic evaluation of
growth, production and reproduction traits in Aseel and
Kadaknath chickens in agro-climatic conditions of
northern India. Biological Rhythm Research, 2019. DOI:
10.1080/09291016.2019.1621081
5. Harvey. User’s guide for LSMLMW, mixed model least
squares and maximum likelihood computer program.
Ohio State University (Mimeograph), 1990.
6. Haunshi S, Niranjan M, Shanmugam M, Padhi MK,
Reddy MR, Sunitha R, et al. Characterization of two
Indian native chicken breeds for production, egg and
semen quality, and welfare traits. Poultry Science.
2011;90(2):314-320.
7. Haunshi S, Padhi MK, Niranjan M, Rajkumar U,
Shanmugam M, Chatterjee RN. Comparative evaluation
of native breeds of chicken for persistency of egg
production, egg quality and biochemical traits. Indian
Journal of Animal Sciences. 2012;83(1):59-62.
8. Haunshi S, Rajkumar U, Padhi MK. Improvement of PD-
4 (Aseel), an indigenous chicken, for growth and
production traits. Indian journal of Animal Science.
2019;89(4):419-423.
9. Kabir M, Oni OO, Akpa GN, Adeyinka IA. Heritability
estimates and the interrelationships of body weight and
shank length in Rhode Island red and white chickens.
Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences. 2006;9:2892–
2896.
10. Kokate LS, Kumar S, Rahim A, Das AK. ELISA based
kinetics of serum antibody response to Newcastle disease
vaccine in Aseel, Kadaknath and White Leghorn chicken.
Indian Journal of Animal Science. 2017;87(1):35-38.
11. Miazi OF, Khan MKI, Miah G, Hassan MM, Khan SA.
Fertility, hatchability and livability up to first laying age
of Aseel and F1 of Hilly (Red Jungle × Hilly) chicken
under intensive rearing system. Bangladesh Journal of
Veterinary and Animal Sciences. 2020;8(1):74-79.
12. Qadri FS, Savaliya FP, Patel AB, Joshi RS, Hirani ND,
Patil SS. Genetic study on important economic traits in
two strains of White Leghorn chicken. Indian Journal of
Poultry Science. 2013;48(2):149-153.
13. Rahim A, Kumar S, Jagadeesan KL, Shafee U, Jowel D,
Yadav R, et al. Genetic analysis of growth, production
and reproduction traits after long term selection in Rhode
Island Red chicken. Indian Journal of Animal Research.
2016;50(5):646-651.
14. Rajkumar U, Haunshi U, Paswan C, Raju MVLN, Rao
SVR, Chatterjee RN. Characterization of indigenous
Aseel chicken breed for morphological, growth,
production, and meat composition traits from India.
Poultry Science. 2017;96(7):2120-2126.
15. Sreenivas D, Prakash M, Gnaana P, Chatterjee RN,
Mahender M. Genetic analysis of productive and
reproductive traits in White Leghorn chicken. Indian
Journal of Poultry Science. 2012;43(3):274-280.
16. Thangadurai R, Venilla MA, Sivakumar C. Performance
of TANUVAS Aseel under Backyard Condition in
Dharmapuri District. Biotica Research Today.
2020;2(7):645-648.