CHICKEN AND COMMERCIAL BROILER UNDER INDIAN CONDITION
S.EZHIL VALAVAN1, A.V. OMPRAKASH2, A. BHARATIDHASAN3 AND V. RAMESH
SARAVANA KUMAR4
1
Associate Professor, Poultry Research Station
2
Professor and Head, Poultry research Station
3
Assistant Professor, Department of Animal Nutrition
4
Director, CAPS, TANUVAS Tamil Nadu veterinary and Animal Sciences University Chennai, India
Abstract
An experiment was carried out to compare the proximate composition of breast and thigh meat from broiler (cobb), native chicken reared under intensive system of management. Native chicken breast and thigh meat had highly significant (P < 0.01) higher crude fiber and calcium levels, highly significant (P < 0.01) lower crude fat level and higher ash content. Broiler breast and thigh meat had highly significant (P < 0.01) lower crude fiber and calcium levels, highly significant
(P < 0.01) higher crude fat level and lower ash content. Broiler thigh meat had significant (P < 0.01) higher protein content than native chicken. There were no significant difference were observed in moisture and gross energy of native chicken and broiler meat.
I. INTRODUCTION
With recent increases in household income, meat consumption is increasing rapidly and consumers' preferences for meats are changing to higher-quality products. Thus, there exists a growing interest in improving the meat quality of chickens. As poultry meat is a fat, low-cholesterol, low-calorie, and high-protein food, consumers have begun to prefer chicken to red meat, resulting in a dramatic increase in the quantity of available chicken meat, due to the development of new processed products (Ahn et al., 1997). Despite these recent increases in the preference for and consumption of chicken meat, traditional native chickens have not been produced in sufficient numbers, because large amounts of much cheaper commercial broilers have been produced.
factors that influence the taste and texture of these chickens and their contribution towards each cuisine. Therefore, the objectives of the current study were to compare proximate composition of native chicken and commercial broilers raised under standard management condition.
II. MATERIALS AND METHODS
The proximate composition of thigh and breast muscles of broiler and native chicken were studied at the Poultry Research Station, Chennai. Broilers were procured from retail market. The intensive native chicken were collected from the farms where native chicken are grown under deep litter system with no outdoor paddocks. Twelve birds as representative samples with target weight of about 1.3 kg were selected from each group. The birds were subjected to slaughtering process as per Arumugam and Panda (1970). The breast, thigh and skin samples were collected and stored at -20o C. The collected meat samples were subjected to complete analysis (moisture, crude protein, crude fibre, ether extract, total ash, calcium and phosphorus) as per A.O.A.C. (2003). The complete analysis of meat sample was done at the laboratory of Animal Feed Analytical and Quality Assurance Laboratory (AFAQAL), Namakkal and it was expressed as per cent dry matter.
Determination of moisture
Moisture was determined by subjecting the sample to oven drying method. Well-mixed sample was accurately weighed and taken in clean, well dried crucible (W1). The crucible was
allowed in an oven at a temperature above the boiling point of water (135 ± 2º C for 2 hours). Then the crucible was placed in the desiccator for 30 minutes to cool. After cooling, it was weighed again (W2).
The per cent moisture was calculated by following formula W1 - W2
Moisture (%) = --- X 100 Weight of sample
Where W1 - Initial weight of crucible + Sample, W2 - Final weight of crucible + Sample
Dry matter (%) = 100 - moisture (%)
Determination of crude protein
Protein in the sample was determined by Kjeldhal method. Around 2 g of dried meat sample was taken in digestion flask. 30 ml of concentrated H2SO4 and a pinch of catalyst mixture
were added to the digestion flask. The flask was swirled in order to mix the contents thoroughly and then placed on heater to start digestion and allowed to remain in digestion chambers until the complete digestion took place. The digest was cooled and transferred to 100 ml volumetric flask and volume was made up to mark by the addition of distilled water.
In a clean dry Kjeldahl’s flask, 5 ml of digest was introduced in the distillation tube to which 2-3 drops of phenolphthalein indicator and 10 ml of 40 per cent NaOH were added and allowed for distillation in Kjeltec system. Distillation was continued and free NH3 produced was
collected into a conical flask containing 0.1 N H2SO4. It was titrated against 0.1 N NaOH to find
out the amount of acid that was not neutralized by ammonia. The per cent of crude protein content of the sample was calculated by using the following formula:
Per cent Crude Protein = 6.25* x % N (*. Correction factor) (S - B) x N x 0.014 x D
% N = --- X100 Weight of the sample x V
cotton and then introduced into the extraction tube. The receiving beaker was weighed, cleaned, dried and then filled with 50-70 ml of petroleum ether and finally fitted into the apparatus. Water and heater are turned on to start extraction. After 4-6 siphoning, allow ether to evaporate and disconnect beaker before last siphoning. Extract with ether washing was transferred into the clean glass dish and ether was evaporated on water bath. Then the dish was placed in an oven at 103ºC for 30 minutes to complete evaporation of solvent and cooled in a desiccator.
The per cent crude fat was determined by using the following formula: Weight of ether extract
Crude Fat (%) = --- X 100 Weight of sample
Determination of crude fiber
A moisture free and ether extracted sample was first digested with dilute H2SO4 and then
with dilute NaOH solution. The undigested residue collected after digestion was ignited and loss in weight after ignition was registered as crude fiber.
Procedure
One gram of sample (W0) was weighed and transferred to porous crucible. Then the
crucible was heated in the fibretec digestion unit with dilute acid and alkali for about 30 minutes each. Then the sample was dried in an oven at 150ºC for 1 hour and allowed to cool in a desiccator and weighed (W1). The sample crucibles were kept in muffle furnace at 55ºC for
3-4 hours. the sample was cooled in desiccator and weighed again (W2).
Calculations were done by using the following formula: W1 – W2
Crude Fiber ( % ) = --- X 100 W0
Determination of ash
Clean empty crucible was placed in a muffle furnace at 600ºC for an hour, cooled in desiccator and then weight of empty crucible was noted (W1). Five gram of sample was taken in
crucible (W2). The sample was ignited over a burner with the help of blow- pipe, until it is
charred. Then the crucible was placed in muffle furnace at 600ºC for 2 hours. The appearances of grey white ash indicate complete oxidation of all organic matter in the sample. After ashing, furnace was switched off; the crucible was cooled and weighed (W3).
Per cent ash was calculated by following formula:
Difference in weight of Ash
Per cent Ash = --- X 100 Weight of sample
Difference in weight of Ash = W3 - W1
Ash in the crucible was treated with dilute acids such as HCl (1+3) and HNO3 (1+3), boiled for few minutes and filtered through Whatman No.42 filter paper to separate
the soluble ash from insoluble ash. After complete filtration, the filter paper was folded and kept in the same crucible until a completewhitish ash obtained.
The insoluble ash was calculated by following formula:
Insoluble ash (%) =
(Crucible + insoluble ash weight) – Empty crucible weight
X 100 (Crucible + sample weight) – Empty crucible weight
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Comparison of nutrient composition of native chicken and broiler meat (breast and thigh) is presented in the table 1. There was no significant difference observed between breast and thigh muscles of native chicken (breast meat -72.31 + 0.37; thigh meat - 72.65 + 0.66) and broiler (breast meat -73.12 + 0.55; thigh meat - 70.94 + 1.19) in this study. Similarly, there was non-significant difference found between breast muscle of native chicken and broiler. However, higher quantity (P < 0.01) of protein was recorded in thigh muscle of broiler when compared to native chicken. Crude fiber content of native chicken breast and thigh muscle was higher (P < 0.01) when compared to breast and thigh muscles of broiler. Similar results was reported by Choe et al. (2010) found that crude fat contents of the thighs of Korean native chicken (2.98%) were significantly lower than (4.74%) those recorded in the commercial broilers.
Table.1 Comparison of nutrient composition of native chicken and broiler meat
Nutritive values in terms fat content in Thai native chicken tended to be lower than broiler fat content (0.12 vs 0.34%, respectively) (Jaturasitha, et al.2002). In contrary, crude fat content was significantly (P < 0.01) lower in breast and thigh muscles of native chicken and higher amount of crude fat content was noted in breast and thigh muscles of broiler. This result is consistent with the report of Young and Choi (2003), in that the fat contents of traditional Korean chickens were lower than those of the general broilers.
Highly significant (P < 0.01) higher amount of ash content was noticed in breast and thigh muscles of native chicken than broiler meat samples. The present result of the study is in agreement earlier reports of Choe et al. (2010) and found that crude ash contents measured in the Korean native chicken (0.96%) were higher than those of commercial (0.47%) broilers. Fuzhu and Zhuye, (2008) found that ash components of both breast muscle and thigh muscle were higher for native quality chicken white Lueyang (W) L than Arbor Acres (AA). Higher level of calcium and phosphorus was recorded in breast and thigh muscles of broiler than native chicken. There exist no significant different was found in gross energy of breast and thigh muscles of broiler than native chicken.
We conclude that the relatively low fat and high ash content of the native chicken thigh meat may be considered a unique compositional characteristic. The low fat contents of the native chicken breast and thigh meat indicate a lower caloric content than the commercial broilers.
[2] Ahn, D. H., Park, S. Y., Kwon, Y. J., and Sung, S. K. (1997) Postmortem changes in myofibrillar protein in muscle of Korean native chicken. Korean J. Anim. Sci. 39, 577-586.
[3] Arumugam, M.P., Panda, B. 1970. Processing and Inspection of Poultry.Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Izatnagar, U.P.
[4] Choe, J.H, N. Kichang, J. Samooel, K. Binna, Y. Hyejeong and J. Cheorun, 2010. Differences in the Quality
Characteristics between Commercial Korean Native Chickens and Broilers, Korean J. Food Sci. Ani. Resour., 30: 13-19
[5] Fuzhu L and Zhuye N, 2008. Carcass Quality of Different Meat - Typed Chickens When Achieve a Common
Physiological Body Weight, International Journal of Poultry Science 7 : 319-322, 2008
[6] Jaturasitha1, S., V. Leangwunta1, A. Leotaragul, A. Phongphaew1, T. Apichartsrungkoon, N. Simasathitkul, T. Vearasilp, L. Worachai, U. ter Meulen, 2002. A Comparative Study of Thai Native Chicken and Broiler on Productive Performance, Carcass and Meat Quality, Conference on International Agricultural Research for Development, Deutscher Tropentag 2002, Witzenhausen, October 9-11, 2002
[7] Saegusa, H., Hirano H., Ozawa S., Goda, Y., Shimada, N and Saito, S. (1987) Differences in concentration of
free amino acid in breast and thigh muscles from Japanese game chicken and broiler. Jpn. J. Zootech. Sci. 58, 707-710.
[8] Wattanachant, S., Benjakul, S., and Ledward, D. A. (2004) Composition, color, and texture of Thai indigenous
