Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Veterinary and Animal Science logoLink to Veterinary and Animal Science
. 2022 Nov 23;18:100272. doi: 10.1016/j.vas.2022.100272

Growth performance, meat yield and blood lipid profile of broiler and Sonali chickens

Mohammad Aminul Islam a,⁎, Ainul Haque a, Masahide Nishibori b
PMCID: PMC9706611  PMID: 36458153

Highlights

  • •

    Comparative growth, meat yield and lipid profiles of broiler and Sonali chickens were investigated.

  • •

    Broiler chickens performed better than Sonali chickens in terms of growth and meat yield traits.

  • •

    Sonali chicken tended to reduce serum cholesterol and increase net profit (p>0.05).

  • •

    Sonali chicken was superior to broiler in terms of preference, net profit and serum cholesterol content.

Keywords: Chicken type, Cholesterol, Growth, Meat, Production cost, Net profit

Abstract

A total of 14,200, day-old broiler chicks were allotted into two batches (B1=Winter and B2 = Summer) with 6 replicates each for 30 days, and 16,000, day-old Sonali chicks were allotted into 2 batches with 4 replicates each for 60 days to assess the growth performance, meat yield, and lipid profiles of the blood of chickens. Broiler chickens showed significantly higher body weight, feed intake, and lower FCR and production cost with a tendency to increase mortality compared with Sonali chickens. However, net profit tended to be higher in Sonali chickens compared to broiler chickens. The higher meat yield traits were observed in the broiler chicken compared with the Sonali chicken (p<0.001). Lipid profile did not differ (p>0.05) between chicken types. However, lipid profiles tended to be higher in broiler chicken than in Sonali chicken, except for the low-density lipoprotein (LDL). Growth performance, meat yield traits, and lipid profiles did not differ (p>0.05) between batches, except for the dressing percentage. Dressing (%) was higher in B1 than in B2 (p<0.05). No interaction between batch and chicken type was found in the growth performance, meat yield, and blood lipid profile of chickens. Therefore, broiler chickens performed better than Sonali chickens in terms of growth and meat yield traits. Nevertheless, Sonali chickens tended to perform better than broilers in terms of consumer preference, net profit, and lowering total cholesterol and triglyceride. However, more studies are needed to confirm the present findings and make the suggestion to use a suitable chicken type for meat production.

Graphical abstract

Image, graphical abstract

Open in a new tab

1. Introduction

Chicken meat is one of the cheapest and most available sources of animal protein, preferred by all classes of people irrespective of religion and age. Poultry farming provides meat and egg essential for humans (Regar et al., 2019). Poultry contributes about 22–27% of the total animal protein from different animal sources (Islam et al., 2019). Poultry is the most important and emerging sector of Agriculture in Bangladesh. Over the years, the demand for poultry products (meat and eggs) in Bangladesh has grown significantly; the consumption (per capita per year) of poultry meat and egg in 2019 was 8.5 kg and 104 pieces, respectively. However, to meet the growing domestic demand for meat and eggs, there is a need to increase poultry production (EKNB, 2020).

As per the Department of Livestock Services (DLS) report (2020), the total poultry population of Bangladesh is about 356.318 million of which chickens are 296.602 million. An adult person needs 120 g of meat per day and 104 eggs annually. Therefore, the availability of meat (g/day/person) and egg (per person per year) is 126.20 and 104.23, respectively. The annual meat and egg production in Bangladesh is 7.67 million metric tons and 17,364.30 million, respectively which can satisfy the requirement of the people (DLS, 2020). The poultry industry is growing rapidly and contributes 1.5-1.6 percent to the country's GDP, involving at least 6.0 million people in this sector (Karmoker, 2022). In the poultry sector, broiler meat is produced within the shortest possible period with a minimum investment having maximum profit (Whitehead, 2002).

Poultry meat and eggs are easily digestible and minimize the risks of blood pressure, heart diseases, and prevent cancer in human beings (Mazmanyan, 2021). Broiler meat is very popular with consumers regardless of age and religion because of its availability, digestibility, and lower price. It is also advantageous because of its rapid growth, better feed conversion efficiency, and meat quality, especially for breast meat or lean meat (Amin et al., 2013).

Sonali is a crossbred of Rhode Island Red (RIR) x Fayoumi with a phenotypic appearance similar to a local chicken called ‘Sonali’ are well adapted to tropical climates that require less care and attention to rear compared with broiler chickens (Saleque & Saha, 2013). At present, Sonali provides about 30% of the total required chicken meat in Bangladesh (Huque et al., 2011). Consumers prefer Sonali chicken meat over regular broiler meat and it looks like indigenous chicken meat. In 2018, the percentage of preference for Sonali chicken and around 20% of total poultry meat reached 23% in 2019 (EKNB, 2020).

Although Sonali crossbred is popular with the farmers but the problem is a slower growth rate. It takes more than 60 days to get a marketable live weight (1.00 kg). The rearing of Sonali birds is more profitable than commercial broilers. Practically it has been found that farmers earned more returns from Sonali chicken farming than from commercial broiler farming. Because of the higher prices of Sonali birds compared to the commercial broilers (Azharul et al., 2005; Jahan et al., 2021). In addition, the price fluctuation of Sonali chickens is lesser than commercial broilers, because consumers prefer Sonali chickens to broilers (Uddin et al., 2015). Nowadays, consumers are so conscious of the carcass quality and lipid profile content of the bird (Jahan et al., 2015). In the case of a broiler, fat is deposited into the abdomen which deteriorates the meat quality and increases the cholesterol level in the meat which is so harmful to the body of human beings (Tohala, 2010). On the other hand, Sonali chickens have no abdominal fat which is why Sonali chickens produce quality meat. Therefore, consumers prefer Sonali chicken meat more than broiler chicken meat.

Considering the above points, the present study was planned to assess the growth performance, meat yield, and lipid profiles of broiler and Sonali chickens to identify a potential chicken type for producing quality, preferable and cost-effective chicken meat.

2. Materials and methods

2.1. Experimental site

The experiment was carried out at different commercial broiler and Sonali chicken farms located at Subarnachar Upazila, Noakhali district, and the laboratory of the Department of Dairy and Poultry Science, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman Agricultural University, Bangladesh

2.2. Preparation of poultry house and diet

The house was prepared before receiving the day-old chicks in the house. The diets were prepared by ‘Nahar Poultry Feed’ and ‘Teer Poultry Feed’ Mill for broiler and Sonali chickens as per their requirements, respectively.

2.3. Feeding trial

A total of 14,200, day-old broiler chicks were allotted into two batches (B1 = Winter and B2 = Summer) with 6 replicates each for 30 days, and 16,000, day-old Sonali chicks were allotted into 2 batches with 4 replicates each for 60 days (Table 1). The birds were reared on a littered floor management system. The broiler chicks were fed a starter diet containing 22% CP and 3035 Kcal ME/kg (1–10 days) and a finisher diet containing 21% CP and 3150 Kcal ME/kg (11–30 days) (Table 2). The Sonali chicks were fed a starter diet containing 19.50% CP and 2950 Kcal ME/kg (1–30 days) and a finisher diet containing 19.00% CP and 3000 Kcal ME/kg (31–60 days) (Table 2). Clean and fresh water was provided ad-libitum to the birds during the experimental period. The standard management practices as per the standard of the breeder were provided to the birds during the investigation.

Table 1.

Layout for the determination of the growth performance of the broiler and Sonali chickens.

Chicken type (S) Batch (B) Number of birds Total
Replication ®
R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
S1 B1 1500 1000 1600 1000 1200 800 7100
B2 1500 1000 1600 1000 1200 800 7100
S2 B1 1500 1500 2500 2500 – – 8000
B2 1500 1500 2500 2500 – – 8000
Total 6000 5000 8200 8200 2400 1600 30,200
Open in a new tab

S1= Broiler chicken, S2= Sonali chicken, B1= Batch 1(Winter: November 2020- February 2021), B2= Batch 2 (Summer: March-June 2021).

Table 2.

Composition of diets for broiler and Sonali chickens used in the experiment.

Ingredients Amount (Kg)
Broiler Sonali
Starter diet (1–10 days) Finisher diet (11–30 days) Starter diet (1–30 days) Finisher diet (31–60 days)
Maize 56.50 63.50 52.00 55.50
Soybean meal 25.50 18.50 20.00 20.40
Rice polish 8.00 8.50 13.00 10.00
Protein concentrate 7.50 7.00 7.50 7.40
Limestone 2.00 1.50 3.80 2.50
DCP – – 0.50 0.50
Oil – 0.50 2.50 3.00
Lysine – – 0.25 0.25
Methionine – – 0.15 0.15
Salt 0.50 0.50 0.30 0.30
Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00
Calculated composition
ME (kcal/kg) 3035.00 3150.00 2950.00 3000.00
Crude protein (CP) (%) 22.00 21.00 19.50 19.00
Crude fiber (CF) (%) 3.00 3.00 5.50 5.50
Crude fat (%) 4.5.0 5.50 3.50 3.00
Calcium (Ca) (%) 0.90 0.84 0.85 0.85
Phosphorus (P) (%) 0.45 0.42 0.42 0.42
Lysine (%) 1.32 1.19 1.15 1.10
Methionine (%) 0.50 0.48 0.48 0.45
Open in a new tab

2.4. Data recording

The following data were recorded during the investigation.

  • a
    Growth performance
    • i
      Body weight and feed intake: bi-weekly replication-wise.
    • ii
      Dead birds: when occurred.
    • iii
      FCR (Feed intake/live weight) = FeedintakeLiveweight
    • iv
      Production cost (Taka/kg live weight) was calculated considering the chick cost, feed cost, labor cost and vaccine cost, etc.
    • v
      Net profit (Taka/kg live weight) = Price of per kg live bird – production cost of per kg live bird.
  • b

    Meat yield traits

A total of 20 birds at the end of the experiment, 1 bird in each replicate were taken randomly and then slaughtered and processed (slaughtering, bleeding, scalding, de-feathering, evisceration, washing) to make dressed/ready-to-cook carcass. Thereafter, the dressed carcass was processed as cut-up parts.

The following meat yield data were recorded:

Live weight (g), dressed weight (g), dressing (%), breast meat weight (g), breast meat (%), dark meat weight (g), dark meat (%), thigh weight (g), giblet weight (g).

  • a

    Lipid profiles

At the end of the experiment, blood samples were collected from the birds during slaughter. Thereafter, the serum of the blood was separated from the blood samples using a centrifuge machine (4000 rpm for 10 min). Then the lipid profiles (total cholesterol, triglyceride, HDL, and LDL) of the samples were measured using a lipid profiles kit (Crescent Diagnostic Lab) by spectrophotometric method.

2.5. Statistical analysis

The collected data were analyzed in 2 chicken type × 2 batch factorial design using the Statistix10 computer package program.

2.5.1. Statistical model

The following statistical model was used for the analysis of data.

Yijk=μ+Si+Bj+(S×B)ij+eijk

Where Yijk is the observation in the kth replication of the ith chicken type and the jth batch.

µ is the overall mean.

Si is the fixed effect of the ith chicken type (i = 1, 2).

Bj is the fixed effect of the jth batch (j = 1, 2).

(S × B)ij is the interaction effect of the ith chicken type and the jth batch. eijk is the random error.

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Growth performances of broiler and Sonali chickens

Body weight, feed intake, feed conversion ratio (FCR), and production cost differed significantly between chicken types (Table 3). Broiler chicken had a higher body weight and feed intake than Sonali chicken. On the other hand, broiler chicken had a lower FCR and production cost than Sonali chicken. Mortality did not differ (p>0.05) between broiler and Sonali chickens (p>0.05). Although there was no significant difference between broiler and Sonali chickens for net profit, Sonali chickens tended to show a higher net profit than the broiler chickens.

Table 3.

Growth performance of broiler and Sonali chickens at different batches for 30 days and 60 days of age.

Traits Batch (B) Chicken type (S) Mean LSD value & level of significance+
S1 S2 S B SxB
Body weight (g/bird) B1 1549.90 661.50 1105.70 136.050⁎⁎⁎ 124.200NS 157.100NS
B2 1590.00 601.00 1095.50
Mean 1569.90 631.20 1100.60
Feed intake (g/bird) B1 2471.10 2148.40 2309.80 382.000* 348.720NS 441.100NS
B2 2425.50 1875.80 2150.60
Mean 2448.30 2012.10 2230.20
FCR (Feed intake/live weight) B1 1.58 3.07 2.33 0.232⁎⁎⁎ 0.212NS 0.268NS
B2 1.52 2.96 2.24
Mean 1.55 3.01 2.28
Mortality (%) B1 2.61 1.27 1.94 1.409NS 1.287NS 1.627NS
B2 1.98 2.09 2.03
Mean 2.29 1.68 1.99
Production cost (Tk/kg live bird) B1 102.84 203.77 153.31 7.995⁎⁎⁎ 7.299NS 9.232NS
B2 104.53 199.59 152.06
Mean 103.69 201.68 152.68
Net profit (Tk/kg live bird) B1 17.16 16.22 16.392 7.995NS 7.299NS 9.232NS
B2 15.47 20.41 17.942
Mean 16.31 18.32 17.317
Open in a new tab

+NS, p>0.05; *, p<0.05; **, p< 0.01; ***, p< 0.001; NS= Not significance; S1= Broiler chicken; S2= Sonali chicken; B1= Batch 1(Winter: November 2020- February 2021); B2= Batch 2 (Summer: March-June 2021); Sale (BD Tk/kg live broiler) =120.00; Sale (BD Tk/kg live Sonali) = 220.

As for the effect of the batch, no significant difference was observed between broiler and Sonali chickens for body weight, feed intake, FCR, production cost, net profit, and mortality. Similarly, no significant difference was found in the interaction of chicken type and batch for the growth performances (p>0.05).

In this study, the broiler performed better than the Sonali chicken in terms of body weight, feed intake, FCR, and production cost. Khawaja et al. (2013) reported that the body weight gain and FCR of Rural Leghorn (RLH), Fayoumi Rhode Island Red crossbred (FRIR), and Rhode Island Red Fayoumi crossbred (RIRF) crossbreds were 1253.68 g and 4.46, 1230.00 g and 4.55 and 1188.00 g and 4.40, respectively which partially supported the present findings. However, Sonali chicken tended to show a higher net profit than broiler chicken because of the preference of consumers and the higher price of Sonali chicken. The higher price of chickens depends on the preference of consumers and meat quality. The quality and taste of Sonali chicken meat are close to the indigenous chicken meat. Sarker et al. (2008) reported a higher net profit in Sonali chicken than in broiler chicken consistent with the present findings. Dutta et al. (2012) reported that the broiler had the highest body weight gain as well as FCR compared to the Fayoumi, ISA Brown and Sonali chicken, whereas the highest net profit was in the ISA Brown, followed by Sonali, Fayoumi, and broiler chicken, respectively. The net profit in the present study tended to show higher in the Sonali chicken compared to the broiler chicken which corroborates with Hannan et al. (2020). They reported the highest net profit in Sonali chicken followed by Cockerel and Cobb 500 chickens, respectively. A previous study showed a lower net profit in Sonali chickens than in broilers or layers, but higher than in deshi chickens (Sarker et al., 2008).

The interaction between chicken type and batch was not significant for the growth performance traits. No previous work was found on the interaction effect of batch and chicken types on their growth performance traits.

3.2. Meat yield traits of broiler and Sonali chickens

The chicken type was different for live weight, dressed weight, dressing percentage, thigh weight, breast weight, breast meat percentage, dark meat weight, dark meat percentage, and giblet weight (p<0.001) (Table. 4). Meat yield traits; live weight, dressed weight, dressing percentage, thigh weight, breast weight, breast meat percentage, dark meat weight, and giblet weight were higher in broiler compared to the Sonali chicken, except for dark meat percentage. Sonali chicken yielded higher dark meat than broiler chicken.

Table 4.

Meat yield traits of broiler and Sonali chickens at different batches for 30 and 60 days of age.

Traits Batch (B) Chicken type (S) Mean LSD value & level of significance+
S1 S2 S B SxB
Live weight (g/bird) B1 1583.30 916.30 1249.80 220.930⁎⁎⁎ 220.930NS 279.460NS
B2 1348.20 990.50 1169.30
Mean 1465.80 953.40 1209.60
Dressed weight (g/bird) B1 965.33 528.00 746.67 158.410⁎⁎⁎ 158.410NS 200.370NS
B2 790.17 497.50 643.83
Mean 877.75 512.75 695.25
Dressing (%) B1 60.37 57.86 59.11 4.101* 4.101* 5.187NS
B2 58.45 50.51 54.48
Mean 59.41 54.18 56.80
Thigh weight (g) B1 295.17 184.50 239.83 41.692⁎⁎⁎ 41.692NS 52.736NS
B2 246.17 185.00 215.58
Mean 270.67 184.75 227.71
Breast weight (g) B1 273.67 86.75 180.21 57.270⁎⁎⁎ 57.270NS 72.441NS
B2 221.17 88.00 154.58
Mean 247.42 87.38 167.40
Breast meat (%) B1 27.87 16.67 22.27 2.439⁎⁎⁎ 2.439NS 3.086NS
B2 27.65 17.70 22.68
Mean 27.76 17.19 22.48
Dark meat weight (g) B1 691.67 441.25 566.46 105.440⁎⁎⁎ 105.440NS 133.370NS
B2 569.00 409.50 489.25
Mean 630.33 425.37 527.85
Dark meat (%) B1 72.12 83.32 77.73 2.439⁎⁎⁎ 2.439NS 3.085NS
B2 72.34 82.28 77.31
Mean 72.24 82.80 77.52
Giblet weight (g) B1 135.83 64.95 100.39 7.891⁎⁎⁎ 7.891NS 9.982NS
B2 131.83 66.29 99.06
Mean 133.83 65.62 99.73
Open in a new tab

+NS, p>0.05; *, p<0.05; **, p< 0.01; ***, p< 0.001; NS= Not significance; S1= Broiler chicken; S2= Sonali chicken; B1= Batch 1(Winter: November 2020- February 2021); B2= Batch 2 (Summer: March-June 2021).

The batch was not different for live weight, dressed weight, dressing percentage, thigh weight, breast weight, breast meat percentage, dark meat weight, and giblet weight (p>0.05), except for dressing percentage (p<0.05). The B1 had a higher dressing percentage than B2.

The interaction between chicken type and batch was not significant for meat yield traits (p>0.05).

In the present study, broiler chicken performed better than Sonali chicken in terms of live weight, dressed weight, dressing percentage, thigh weight, breast weight, breast meat percentage, dark meat weight and giblet weight. However, broiler chicken had lower dark meat percentage (p>0.05) than Sonali chickens. The previous findings showed the highest edible meat in the cockerel, moderate in the broiler, Sonali, and indigenous chickens, and the lowest in RIR chicken which partially supported the present findings (Islam & Dutta, 2010). On the other hand, Khawaja et al. (2013) reported the highest dressing percentage in Fayoumi male_ Rhode Island Red female (FRIR) moderate in reciprocal F1 crossbred of RIR_Fayoumi (RIRF) and the lowest in White Leghorn male_F1 female (RLH) which was also partially supported the present findings.

There was no literature of previous work found on the effect of the batch and the interaction of chicken type and batch on meat yield traits of broiler and Sonali chickens.

3.3. Lipid profiles of broiler and Sonali chicken

The chicken type was not different for total cholesterol, triglyceride, high-density lipoprotein, and low-density lipoprotein (p>0.05) (Table. 5). However, broiler tended to increase total cholesterol, triglyceride, and high-density lipoprotein compared to Sonali chickens.

Table 5.

Lipid profiles of broiler and Sonali chickens at different batches for 30 days and 60 days of age.

Traits Batch (B) Chicken type (S) Mean LSD value & level of significance+
S1 S2 S B SxB
Cholesterol (mg/dl) B1 153.30 153.74 153.52 15.696NS 15.696NS 19.854NS
B2 156.15 135.56 145.86
Mean 154.72 144.65 149.69
TG (mg/dl) B1 181.34 160.60 170.97 20.833NS 20.833NS 26.352NS
B2 164.86 155.98 160.42
Mean 173.10 158.29 165.69
HDL (mg/dl) B1 48.96 45.21 47.08 16.669NS 16.669NS 21.085NS
B2 53.75 38.50 46.12
Mean 51.35 41.85 46.60
LDL (mg/dl) B1 68.08 76.41 72.24 26.080NS 26.080NS 32.988NS
B2 69.43 65.87 67.65
Mean 68.75 71.14 69.95
Open in a new tab

+NS, p>0.05; *, p<0.05; **, p< 0.01; ***, p< 0.001; NS= Not significance; S1= Broiler chicken; S2= Sonali chicken; B1= Batch 1(Winter: November 2020-February 2021); B2= Batch 2 (Summer: March-June 2021); TG= Triglyceride; HDL= High-density lipoprotein; LDL= Low-density lipoprotein.

As to the effect of the batch, there was no significant difference between batches for total cholesterol, triglyceride, high-density lipoprotein, and low-density lipoprotein (p>0.05). Lipid profiles did not differ between B1 and B2.

The chicken type did not interact with the batch for total cholesterol, triglyceride, high-density lipoprotein and low-density lipoprotein.

Chicken types did not differ for lipid profiles (total cholesterol, triglyceride, high-density lipoprotein, and low-density lipoprotein (p>0.05). However, broiler chickens tended to increase lipid profiles, except for low-density lipoprotein compared with Sonali chickens. The present findings contradicted the findings of Dutta et al. (2013). They estimated the highest amount of cholesterol in RIR, followed by Sonali, Cobb 500, Cockerel, Fayoumi, and Indigenous chickens, respectively.

No previous work was found on the effect of the batch, and the interaction between chicken type and batch on the lipid profile content of the blood of broiler and Sonali chickens.

4. Conclusions

The present study reveals that broiler chicken performed better than Sonali chicken in terms of growth performance and meat yield traits. The chicken type did not affect lipid profiles (total cholesterol, Triglyceride, HDL, and LDL) content in the blood of chickens and net profit. However, Sonali chicken tended to show higher net profit and lower total cholesterol and triglyceride compared to broiler chicken. As to the effect of batch (B), batches (B1 and B2) did not affect growth performance, meat yield, and lipid profile content in the blood of chickens. No interaction between chicken type and the batch was found in growth performance, meat yield traits, and lipid profile content in the blood of chickens. Therefore, Sonali chicken may be suitable for producing consumer preferable and profitable chicken meat. However, more studies are needed to confirm the present findings and suggest to use of a suitable chicken type for commercial purposes.

Funding

This research received no specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or private sectors.

Ethical statement

The study was approved by the Institutional Committee on Animal Care and Use in Research (ICACUR) of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman Agricultural University (No. BSMRAU/DEAN/FVMAS/25/ICACUR/19).

Declaration of Competing Interest

No potential conflicts of interest to declare

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to commercial farmers at Subarnachar Upazila, Noakhali district, and the Department of Dairy and Poultry Science, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman Agricultural University, Bangladesh for allowing us to carry out field and Lab based research works.

References

  1. Amin J.R., Mercier Y., Iji P.A. Proceedings of the 19th European Symposium on Poultry Nutrition. German Branch of WPSA: World's Poultry Science Association; 2013. Gross response and meat yield of broiler chickens fed different levels of digestible methionine. [Google Scholar]
  2. Azharul I.M., Ranvig H., Howlider M.A.R. Comparison of growth rate and meat yield characteristics of cockerels between Fayoumi and Sonali under village conditions in Bangladesh. Livestock Research for Rural Development. 2005;17(2):77–82. [Google Scholar]
  3. DLS (2020). Livestock Economy at a Glance 2019-2020. Retrieved from DLS web portal: Https://dls.portal.gov.bd 1p.
  4. Dutta R.K., Islam M.S., Kabir A. Vol. 31. University Journal of Zoology Rajshahi University; Bangladesh: 2012. pp. 13–18. (Assessment of the production performance and economic efficiencies of available chicken breeds (Gallus domesticus L.) in rajshahi). [Google Scholar]
  5. Dutta R.K., Islam M.S., Kabir M. Haematological and biochemical profiles of indigenous, exotic and hybrid chicken breeds (Gallus domesticus L.) from Rajshahi, Bangladesh. Bangladesh Journal of Zoology. 2013;41(2):135–144. [Google Scholar]
  6. Hannan M.A. Performance of three meat type chicken farms maintained at different bio-security levels. Bangladesh Journal of Animal Science. 2020;49(1):63–70. [Google Scholar]
  7. Huque K.S., Saleque M.A., Khatun R. Proceedings of the seminar, 7th international Poultry Show and Seminar. World's Poultry Science Association, Bangladesh Branch; 2011. Commercial poultry production in Bangladesh. [Google Scholar]
  8. Islam M.S., Dutta R.K. Morphometric analysis of indigenous, exotic and crossbred chickens (Gallus domesticus L.) in Rajshahi, Bangladesh. J. bio-sci. 2010;18:94–98. [Google Scholar]
  9. Islam O., Khatun S., Famous M., Uddin M.M., Azad S.A.K., Uddin M.N., Khayer A. Productive performance of different broiler strains under intensive management in Kishoreganj district of Bangladesh. Mirror of Research in Veterinary Sciences and Animals. 2019;8(2):13–23. [Google Scholar]
  10. Jahan S.S., Islam M.S., Hossain K.M.M., Islam M.A., Islam M.S., Kabir A., Alim M.A. Comparative study of growth performance of Deshi, Fayoumi, RIR and Sonali chicken reared under farm and semi scavenging condition. Journal of Agriculture, Food and Environment. 2021;2(2):30–36. [Google Scholar]
  11. Jahan S.S., Islam M.S., Islam M., Ali M. Effect of genotype and sex on meat yield characteristics of different chicken breeds reared at 48 weeks of age under farm and semi-scavenging condition. International Journal of Agriculture Foresty and Fisheries. 2015;3(6):232–236. [Google Scholar]
  12. Karmoker Y. Self Sufficiency in Protein: Poultry Industry in Bangladesh, Report on Industry. Business Inspection BD; 2022. https://businessinspection.com.bd/poultry-industry-in-bangladesh/ [Google Scholar]
  13. EKNB (2020). Poultry sector study Bangladesh, Final Report, Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands in Bangladesh, 1-76. Retrieved from https://www.lightcastlebd.com.
  14. Khawaja T., Khan S.H., Mukhtar N., Parveen A., Ahmed T. Comparative study of growth performance, meat quality and haematological parameters of three-way crossbred chickens with reciprocal F1 crossbred chickens in a subtropical environment. Journal of Applied Animal Research. 2013;41(3):300–308. [Google Scholar]
  15. Mazmanyan V. Yerrvan state Medical University; Eastern Europe, Armenia: 2021. Egg vs meat –Health impact and nutrition. [Google Scholar]
  16. Regar M.N., Tulung B., Londok J.J.M.R., Moningkey S.A.E., Tulung Y.R.L. Blood lipid profile of broiler chicken as affected by a combination of feed restriction and different crude fiber sources. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 2019;387(1) https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/387/1/012053/pdf [Google Scholar]
  17. Saleque M.A., Saha A.A. Proceedings of the seminar, 8th international poultry show and seminar. World's Poultry Science Association, Bangladesh Branch; 2013. Production and economic performance of small scale Sonali bird farming for meat production in Bangladesh; pp. 20–24. [Google Scholar]
  18. Sarker P.K., Chowdhury S.D., Kabir M.H. Comparative study on the productivity and profitability of commercial broiler, cockerel of a layer strain and cross-bred (RIR Cock× Fayoumi Hen) chicks. Bangladesh Journal of Animal Science. 2008;37(2):89–98. [Google Scholar]
  19. Tohala S.H. The relationship between blood lipid profile and performance of broilers fed two types of finisher diets. Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences. 2010;24(2):87–91. [Google Scholar]
  20. Uddin M.T., Rahman M.H., Saleque M.A., Thieme O. FAO Animal Production and Health Working; Rome, Italy: 2015. Comparative performance of sonali chickens, commercial broiler, layers and local non-descript (deshi) chickens in selected areas of Bangladesh; p. 14. [Google Scholar]
  21. Whitehead C.C. Nutrition and poultry welfare. World's Poultry Science Journal. 2002;58(3):349–356. [Google Scholar]

Articles from Veterinary and Animal Science are provided here courtesy of Elsevier

RESOURCES