查詢結果分析
來源資料
相關文獻
- 光照週期對母鵝產蛋之影響
- 鴨與鵝之卵巢抑制素α-次單元基因表現與血中抑制素含量之探討
- 飼糧粗纖維與粗蛋白質含量對種母鵝初產之影響
- 法國用以調控種鵝產蛋期之光照技術
- 飼糧粗纖維與粗蛋白質含量對種母鵝產蛋性能與血液性狀之影響
- 鵝品系選育對體型與產蛋量的影響
- 籠飼白羅曼鵝之產蛋模式
- Change and Stability in the Dietary System of A Prehistoric: Coastal Population in Southern Taiwan: A Research Design
- 光照對母鵝產蛋性能之影響(1):人工補充光照強度對母鵝產蛋性能之影響
- 光照對母鵝產蛋性能之影響(2):光照長度對母鵝產蛋性能之影響
頁籤選單縮合
題名 | 光照週期對母鵝產蛋之影響=The Effect of Photoperiod on Egg Production of Geese |
---|---|
作者 | 賴銘癸; 胡見龍; 葉力子; | 書刊名 | 畜產研究 |
卷期 | 29:2 1996.06[民85.06] |
頁次 | 頁129-135 |
分類號 | 437.75 |
關鍵詞 | 光照週期; 鵝; 產蛋; Photoperiod; Geese; Egg production; |
語文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 鵝為季節性生殖的家禽,在本省的氣候環境下種鵝的產期多集中在每年的秋天至翌年的春天;本試驗的主要目的在探討光照節律對種鵝產蛋的影響。36隻白羅曼母鵝自8月齡(79年8月)起逢機分為3組,以鐵骨籠飼養在密閉的鵝舍,同時給予不同的人工光照制度,點燈與黑暗的時間分別為8L:16D、12L:12與16L:8D。16L:8D與8L:16D組的光照週期在35個月的試驗期間(自79年8至82年6月)曾作調整,12L:12D光照則維持不變。 試驗結果發現光照週期顯著的影響鵝的產蛋季節,16L:8D組在整個產期中僅有2隻母鵝共產下5個蛋,而12L:12D組的產期自9月底始至翌年的7月結束,8L:16D組則自12月產至翌年8月,初產日齡8L:16D組較12L:12D組延後80日。第一產期的產蛋數8L:16D與12L:12D組分別為63.6±33枚與66.3±21枚,兩組之間無顯著差異。16L:8D組的光照時數自翌年2月起每週縮短光照時數1小時至4月底止其光照週期為8L:16D,經此調整後,該組母鵝6月起開始產蛋12月停產,平均每鵝產蛋33.4±10枚,產蛋數顯著低於另二處理(P<0.05)。當產蛋數劇減後延長點燈時間至每日16小時,直至停產而後立即調整光期為8L:16D,經195±66日母鵝開始第二產期。12L:12D與8L:16D之產期間距則分別為276±81日與346±65日,各組間均差異顯著(P<0.05)。第二產期各組之產蛋數分別為38.1±15、27.6±19與64.8±45,8L:16D組顯著高於12L:12D組(P<0.05)。然而,42月齡之總產蛋數則以16L:8D組最少與8L:16D組之間有顯著差異。上述結果顯示,人工光照制度可以有效地改變種鵝的產期,但光照時數必須隨產蛋情況予以調節。 |
英文摘要 | In Taiwan, geese lay initially from autumn to next spring when natural conditions are suitable for reproduction. This experiment was to study the effect of diurnal rhythm change for geese on egg production. Thirty-six White Roman geese were divided into three treatments. The geese were reared in wire cages individually and moved in windowless houses at eight months of age (Aug. 1, 1990). The geese were exposed to different artificial light regimen which were 8L:16D, 12L:12D and 16L:8D, respectively. Photo-periods for Groups 16D:8D and 8L:16D changed, however, that for Group 12L:12D was not changed during the experimential period of 35 months (from August, 1990 to June, 1993). The results revealed that the photoperiod influenced the laying season of geese. Group 16L:8D laid only 5 eggs from two geese in all the laying period. However, Group 12L:12D and 8:16D began their laying time from the end of September to next July and from December to next August, respectively. The initial laying age of Group 8L:16D was 80 days later than that of Group 12L:12D. The total egg production of Group 12L:12D and 8L:16D was 63.6±33 and 66.3±21 in the first laying period. No significant difference was found between them. The lighting hours of Group 16L:8D was decreased gradually one hour per week from March of the next year; its photoperiod was 8L:16D at the end of May. They started laying in June and ceased in December and the total egg production per goose was 33.4±10. That was significantly lower (P<0.05) than that of the other treatments. A sharper decline of egg production was found as soon as lighting time were increased for 16 hours per day until egg production stopped. When the lighting time was decreased to 8L:16D, the geese laid again. The geese began their second laying period after 195±66 days. However, the interval of Groups 12L:12D and 8L:16D were 276±81 days and 346±65 days, respectively. There was a significant difference (P<0.05). Average numbers of eggs laid of Groups 16L:8D, 12L:12D and 8L:16D were 38.1±15, 27.6±19 and 64.8±45 in the second laying period, respectively. Number of eggs laid of Group 8L:16D was significantly greater than that of Group 12:12D, but the total egg number of Group 8L:16D was greater (P<0.05) than that of Group 8L:16D at 42 months of age. The present study illustrated that the laying season could be changed by the artificial lighting program in geese but the photoperiod should be regulated according to the egg laying status. |
本系統之摘要資訊系依該期刊論文摘要之資訊為主。