Professional Documents
Culture Documents
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303668653
CITATIONS READS
0 180
2 authors, including:
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Ewonetu Kebede Senbeta on 06 October 2016.
DOI: 10.5455/jasa.20160524124303
Original Article
Abstract
The study was conducted to assess retailers egg storage system and retention periods and to evaluate
internal and external quality of chicken table eggs at retail levels in major urban markets of Eastern Ethiopia.
Three major urban open markets from different agro-ecology were purposively selected for the study based on
their market potentials and ten retailers from each market were involved in egg selling for more than a year
were purposively selected and interviewed. A total of 480 eggs were randomly taken to determine external and
internal quality. Data obtained through measuring internal and external egg quality were analyzed using SAS.
Majority of retailers stored eggs any place in their living room and they did not give attention for environmental
conditions during storage or transit as to where and how the eggs are stored. The physical data revealed a good
uniformity for most of the studied external and internal traits, as the highly statistical significant differences
found among the market retailers. Longer egg storage duration, poor storage condition; exposure of eggs to
sunlight in the market and during transportation might have contributed for lower internal and external qualities
of eggs retailed in open markets. The results confirmed prolonged retention of eggs at retailers without proper
storage facilities during storage or transit lower egg quality. Therefore; awareness about the management and
carefully handling practice of eggs should be organized to create well-informed retailers and consumers to
maintain egg quality then offer safe and good quality eggs for consumption.
Keywords: Eastern Ethiopia, market, physical quality of eggs, table eggs, retailers.
Table 1: Retailers egg storage system and duration in study site (n=30).
Egg storage system or Urban setting
Duration Harar (%) Haramaya (%) Dire Dawa (%)
Storage system
Refrigerator 10 - 30
Any place 50 70 60
In cold room 40 30 10
Duration(weeks)
<1 10 20 40
1-2 30 10 50
2-3 40 40 10
3-4 20 30 -
Where - indicates no retailers select the indicated storage duration, % indicates the percentage of retailers
in selected area that selected particular storage duration.
Table 2: Average value of external and internal quality of table eggs at retail levels.
Parameters Destination sites
HUPF Haramaya Harar Dire Dawa SEM SL
Egg weight (g) 50.66a 43.23b 41.16b 42.52b 0.81 ***
a b b b **
Egg length (mm) 51.60 49.71 49.00 49.14 0.30
Egg width (mm) 41.61a 40.09b 39.70b 39.46b 0.212 ***
Albumen and Yolk Weight might be caused by a diffusion of water from the
Relatively lower yolk weight and higher albumen to the yolk through retention at retailers,
albumen weight was recorded in this study (Table resulting in changes of the vitellin membrane and in
2). It can be seen that the larger eggs have a greater a liquefaction of the yolk similar to the result
proportion of albumen, but a lower proportion of reported by Dauda et al., (2006). Also, the lower
yolk which was in agreement with the results of yolk index in market table eggs might be due to
(Scott and Silversides, 2001; Akyurek and Okur, vibrations in shaking during transportation causing
2009). deterioration of yolk quality, duration of the transit
With storage at retail levels and transportation and environmental temperature under the hot
of eggs until they reach the consumers, the albumen climate of the market which has the greatest effect
weight of these eggs might be decreased because of on egg quality.
moisture losses, causing a lower egg weight. Yolk
weight is expected to increase with a longer period Yolk Color
of storage as amino acids and moisture move The logistic regression results for yolk color
through the vitelline membrane from the albumen showed significant difference (pr >chisq <0.0001 at
(Senkoylu, 2001). In contrast, Parmar et al., (2006) = 0.05) among the various markets of egg sources
reported that albumen and yolk weights did not (Table 2). Consumers in most areas accept the
change within 10 days of storage at any Roche color fan number of 7 to 8 (deeper yolk
temperature. Higher albumen and yolk weight color) (Li-Chan et al., 1995). Nevertheless, the
found in the farm chicken eggs might be due to result of the present study was higher than this level
freshness of eggs, good management and genetic for eggs evaluated from the retailers which agreed
differences. to (Joardar, 2003) who reported that the yolk colour
score of free range local hens is higher compared to
Yolk Index (YI) eggs collected from hens managed under intensive
The significant difference in yolk index values chicken management condition. Eggs collected
among the market retailers which was also lower from retailers had a higher yolk color which might
than the YI of fresh, good quality eggs (45%) have come from free range chicken production
reported by (Leeson and Summers, 1997). system because scavenging birds have free access to
Pavlovski et al., (1981) reported yolk index values green plants and other feed sources rich in
ranging from 35 to 38% for indigenous Kadaknath xanthophylls.
breed of poultry in India, which were closely
similar to yolk index of eggs collected from Egg Percentage Components
retailers. According to the works of Adenowo et al., The weights of egg components are presented
(1999), a yolk index value of 45% was obtained for as percentage in Table 3. The percentage of yolk
Ethiopian naked-neck chickens under intensive found in current study was significantly lower (P <
management, which is higher than that of the 0.0001), with subsequent higher percentage
present study. The lower YI in the current study albumen in poultry farm comparative to eggs
collected from retailers.
Table 3: Average composition of chicken table eggs at retail levels in selected urban settings, in percent (%).
Destination sites
Fraction HUPF Haramaya Harar Dire Dawa SEM SL
Shell 10.88 10.43 10.73 9.93 0.1432 NS
Albumen 59.76a 53.22bc 51.43c 53.94b 0.6977 ***
b a a b ***
Yolk 28.96 34.66 34.43 29.60 0.591
a,b,c,
Means with in a row with different superscripts are significantly different, ***=Significant at (P<0.0001),
NS=Non- significant (P>0.05), SL = significant level, SEM = standard error of mean, HUPF=Haramaya university
poultry farm.
Adenowo et al., (1999) reported 33.04% and University for covering the research cost and
57.1% for chicken egg yolk and albumen values, allowing laboratory equipments.
respectively. Li-Chan et al., (1995) reported 32.8,
56.9 and 10.3% for yolk, albumen and shell of References
chicken eggs, respectively. Also, Joardar (2003)
Adenowo JA, Awe F, Adebambo OA, Ikeobi CON (1999).
reported that the total egg weight, shell forms about Species variations in chemical composition of local
10%, albumen 60% and yolk 30%. Nevertheless, poultry eggs. In: Book of Proceedings 26th Annual NSAP
the study revealed higher yolk and lower albumen Conf., 21-25 March, 1999 Ilorin, Nigeria. 278-280.
percentage from retailers. This might be due to long Ahmadi F, Rahimi F (2011). Factors affecting quality and
period retention of eggs at the hands of retailers quantity of egg production in laying hens: A Rev. World
Appl. Sci., 12(3): 372-384.
which lead to moisture and other chemical Akyurek H, Okur AA (2009). Effect of storage time,
movements from albumen to yolk. temperature and hen age on egg quality in free-range
layer hens. J. Anim. Vet. Adv., 8: 1953-1958.
Conclusions Alemu Y (2008). Socio-economic impacts of flooding in Dire
Dawa, Ethiopia. International Center for Water Hazard
Longer egg storage period of retailers without and Risk Manag. (ICHARM), PWRI, Japan. 2-3.
proper storage facilities, lack of attention for Al-Rubaiee MAM (2012). Comparison of egg quality of
brown and white shell eggs produced by Iraqi local
environmental conditions during storage or transit chicken breeds. Res. Opin. Anim. Vet. Sci., 2(5): 318-
could be related with high evaporation of water and 320.
factors that affect the egg quality. The physical data Al-shami MA, Salih ME, Abbas TE (2011). Effects of dietary
revealed a good uniformity for most of studied inclusion of alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) leaf meal and
external and internal traits, as highly statistical Xylan enzyme on laying hens performance and egg
quality. Res. Opin. Anim. Vet. Sci., 2(1): 14-18.
significant (p<0.001) differences found among Anderson KE, Carey J, Ruszler P (2004). Egg quality and how
retailers which was related with the poor to conserve it. National Egg Quality School Proceedings.
management practices such as storing eggs for 2-3 Atlanta, GA. 47-53.
weeks without appropriate storage facilities. The Arturo MM, Navarretea JV, Ontiveros Corpusa ML,
higher Roche color fan reading recorded for eggs Valenciaa SD, Huidobroa DL, Tenorio Gutirreza VR
(2005). Identification of Salmonella Enteritidis in table
evaluated at retailers indicate as most eggs came eggs in Mexico City Tc Pecu Mx., 43(2): 229-237.
from free range chicken production system which Asuquo BO, Okon BO, Ekong AO (1992). Quality parameters
have free access to green plants and other feed of Isa-Brown and Nigerian local chicken eggs. Niger. J.
sources rich in xanthophylls. The results Anim. Prod., 19: 1-5.
demonstrated as many external and internal egg Bekele F, dny T, Gjen HM, Kathle J, Abebe G (2010).
Production performance of dual purpose crosses of two
qualities from retailers were significantly poor and indigenous with two exotic chicken breeds in sub-
did not fit for consumption. Therefore; awareness tropical environment. Int. J. Poult. Sci., 9(7): 702-710.
about the management and carefully handling Brake J, Walsh TJ, Benton IR, Petitte CF, Meijerhof R,
practice of eggs should be organized to create well- Penalva G (1997). Poult. Sci., 76: 144-151.
informed retailers and consumers to offer safe and Bufano S (2000). Keeping eggs safe from farm to table. Food
Technol., 54: 192.
good quality eggs for consumption. Retailers in Chatterjee RN, Sharma RP, Niranjan M, Reddy BLN, Mishra
particular should be endeavor to store and retail A (2006). Genetic studies on egg quality traits in
their eggs under refrigeration or good sanitary different White Leghorn populations. In. J. Anim. Genet.
condition for better quality maintenance and where Breed., 27: 51-54.
facilities are not available; eggs must be stored and Dauda TO, Adetayo AO, Tiamiyu AK (2006). Effects of
weather on egg characteristics of Isa brown layers
protected from direct sun light. inIbadan, Nigeria. J. Anim. Sci., 77: 117-121.
El Full EA, Abd El Wahed HM, Namra MM, Osman AMR,
Acknowledgements Hataba NA (2005). Results of random sample test for
laying performance of nine Egyptian strains of chickens.
We would like to thank Kefelegn Kebede for Egypt Poult. Sci., 25: 195-208.
his help with the statistical analysis and Haramaya
Gast RK, Holt PS (2001). Assessing the frequency and Eggs and Egg Products, September, Kusadasi, Turkey,
consequences of Salmonella Enteritidis deposition on the Proceed., 435-443.
egg yolk membrane. Poult. Sci., 80: 997-1002. Scott TA, Silversides FG (2001). The effect of storage and
Joardar D (2003). Weight losses in weight to measure your strain of hen on egg quality. J. Poult. Sci., 79: 1725-
hatchability and chick quality. Page 149-151 in: proc. 3rd 1729.
International Poultry show and seminar. Worlds Poult. Silversides FG, Scott TA (2001). Effect of storage and layer
Sci. Assoc., Bangladish. age on quality of eggs from two lines of hens. Poult. Sci.,
Jones DR, Musgrove MT (2005). Effects of Extended Storage 80: 1240-1245.
on Egg Quality Factors. Poult. Sci., 84: 1774-1777. Sonaiya EB, Swan SEJ (2004). Small-scale poultry
Kemps B, Bamelis F, De Ketelaere B, Mertens K, Tona K, production, technical guide manual. FAO Animal
Decuypere EM, De Baerdemaeker JG (2006). Visible Production and Health 1. FAO (Food and Agriculture
transmission spectroscopy for assessment of egg qulaity. Organization of the United Nations), Rome, Italy.
J. Sci. Food Agr., 86: 1399-1406. Tilki M, Saatci M (2004). Effects of storage time on external
Kumari BP, Gupta BR, Prakash MG, Reddy AR (2008). A and internal characteristics in partridge (Alectoris
study of egg quality traits in Japanese quails. Tamilnadu graeca) eggs. Revue Med. Vet., 155(11): 561-56.
J. Vet. Anim. Sci., 4(6): 227-231. Watkins S (2004). Clean Eggs-our most important
Leeson S, Summers JD (1997). Commercial Poultry Nutrition. merchandizing tool. National Egg Quality School
2nd Ed. Guelph, Ontario. 350. Proceedings. Atlanta, GA. May 17(20): 54-60.
Li-Chan ECY, Powrie WD, Nakai S (1995). The chemistry of Yakubu A, Ogah DM, Barde RE (2008). Productivity and Egg
eggs and egg products. In: Stadelman WJ, Cotterill OJ Quality Characteristics of Free Range Naked Neck and
(eds.), Egg Science and Technology, 4th edition. Food Normal Feathered Nigerian Indigenous Chickens. Int. J.
Products Press, New York. 105. Poult. Sci., 7(6): 579-585.
Matt D, Veromann E, Luik A (2009). Effect of housing Zaky HI (2006). The effect of heterosis between Faoumi and
systems on biochemical composition of chicken eggs. White Leghorn chickens on egg quality traits under
Agron. Res., 7: 662-667. desert conditions. Egypt. Poult. Sci., 26: 39-52.
Monira KN, Salahuddin M, Miah G (2003). Effect of breed
and holding period on egg quality characters of chicken.
Int. J. Poult. Sci., 2: 261-263.
Niranjan M, Sharma RP, Rajkumar U, Chartterjee RN, Reddy
BLN, Battacharya TK (2008). Egg quality traits in
chicken varieties developed for backyard poultry farming
in Indian. Livest. Res. Rural Dev., 2(20): 2-7.
Nonga HE, Kajuna FF, Ngowi HA, Karimuribo ED (2010).
Physical egg quality characteristics of free-range local
chickens in Morogoro municipality, Tanzania. Livest.
Res. Rural Dev., 22(12).
Olivier A, Budka H, Buncic S, Colin P, Collins J, Koeijer A
(2009). Special measures to reduce the risk for
consumers through Salmonella in table eggs- e.g. cooling
of table eggs. Europ. Food Safety Authori. J., 957: 1-29.
Orheruata AM, Adegite AV, Okpeku M (2006).
Morphological and egg characteristics of indigenous
chicken in Endo State, Nigeria. University of Benin,
Nigeria. 120.
Parmar SNS, Thakur MS, Tomar SS, Pillai PVA (2006).
Evaluation of egg quality traits in indigenous Kadaknath
breed of poultry. Livest. Res. Rural Dev., 18: 1782-1789.
Pavlovski Z, Masic B, Apostolov N (1981). Quality of eggs
laid by hens kept on free range and in cages. In:
Proceedings of first European symposium by World
Poult. Sci. Assoc., 231-235.
Rajkumar U, Sharma RP, Rajaravindra KS, Niranjan M,
Chatterjee RN (2009). Effect of genotype and age on egg
quality traits in naked neck chicken under tropical
climate from India. Int. J. Poult. Sci., 8: 1151-1155.
Schwaegele F (2003). Egg quality assurance system under
aspect of the EU requirements and demand of the
consumer. IX European Symposium on the quality of
1649 J. Anim. Sci. Adv., 2016, 6(5): 1642-1649