Journal of Academic Research 02:4(2017), pp.

53-61

First Filial Generation Performance of the

Crossed Native and Kabir Chickens Under
Semi-Intensive Rearing System
Feleciano R. Bejar*, Reynaldo R. Aquino, Lagrito Ebert B. Mante
San Jorge Campus, Northwest Samar State University, Philippines
bejar_43@yahoo.com

Abstract: The study focused on the performance of progenies from crossing native-native
and Kabir-native chickens, conducted for an 18-months period. The parameters
considered were; the growth performance, laying performance and egg characteristics.
Completely Randomized Designed was used in the study and analyzed using T-test. The
result indicated significantly higher percentage of egg production, fertility and
hatchability for the NC x NC parental stock than the KC x NC parental stock. Progeny of
KC and NC crosses showed significantly improved performance than NC x NC cross in
terms of body weights and average weight gains, feed consumption, survivability, age at
sexual maturity, egg production, and egg characteristics. Results suggest that mating a
native chicken with Kabir had a potential for improving growth performance and egg
qualities under semi confinement system of production and indigenous feeding practices.

Keywords: Progenies, crosses, parent stock, production performance, egg qualities

1. Introduction 2007), most of which are managed under

scavenging systems. In 2005, the inventory
Livestock production in the consisted of 54% native chickens, 30%
Philippines has expanded by 4.66 percent broilers and 16% layer chickens (ibd).
accounting for 17.18% of the total Native chicken production is widespread,
agricultural output (PSA-1, 2016). Poultry highest of which is in Western Visayas
subsector improved by about 1.01 percent contributing about 13,331 metric tons which
with a total number of about 178.77 million are about 16.04% of the country's
heads; 80.85 million is native or improved production followed by Central Luzon and
chickens (PSA-2, 2016). The poultry Davao Region having 10.51% and 9.85%
industry, specifically chicken and egg share for the year 2015 (PSA-2, 2016).
production contributes around PhP 29.6
Billion, about 46.4% of the entire value of While the native chicken market is a
all livestock and poultry combined (PSA-1, small niche market as most are grown for
2016), which plays a significant role in household consumption, the demand is
human nutrition and as income sources. growing. Increasingly, many consumers now
Most of the chicken supplies are produced prefer eggs from native chickens because
largely by the commercial sector, on the they are believed to be more nutritious due
other hand, the backyard sector is made up to their diverse diet compared to the uniform
of many smallholders who keep few native poultry diet (Poultry Farming Manual,
crossbreeds for their consumption (Chang, 2016).
JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC RESEARCH Vol. 02 No. 4

The role of native chicken in The reproductive characteristics of

Philippine agriculture and the entire Kabir Chicken, one male Kabir is capable of
economy cannot be ignored. Backyard breeding 15 to 20 female Kabir, Normally
native chicken production is one of the begins laying after 26 weeks or 6 ½ months
complimentary farming activities and Kabir layer can lay 200 eggs/cycle.
contributing to the overall wellbeing of rural Kabir does natural brooding although may
households. It provides income through the be late, thus should be encouraged to brood
sale of birds and eggs. (Pinoy Farmer, 2008).

Native chicken has always been part of the Establishment of a strong breeding program
rural sitting often turn loose to scavenge. The age to combat constraints related to poultry
at first egg is about 144-184 days. Average production is highly essential, for which a
chicks weight was 24.2-26.4 grams. Average egg wider genetic base of germplasm is a
production, fertility, and hatchability under semi prerequisite. However, the low survivability
confinement is 24-27%, 70-87%, and 30-46%
of chicken production in the Philippines is
respectively (Lambio & Grecia, 1998).
obvious due to various forms of external
factors such as diseases, climate changes
and predations especially those chicken
raised in the free-range management system.
According to Mangesha (2012), semi
intensive farming is a way to raise chicken
in a small fence space with routine feeding.
Thus the growth of the poultry can be
observed, and therefore chicken can produce
meat and eggs more than traditional ones.

In Samar Island, studies to determine

the production potential of chickens in semi-
confinement system have never been
commissioned and documented. Hence, this
investigation was initiated to evaluate and
Figure 1. The Kabir Chicken (Source Lopeh compare the growth and production
Poultry Farm) potential of native chicken crossed with
Kabir breed and raising them under semi-
Pinoy Farmer, (2008), described intensive management system.
Kabir as superior for meat conversion
because of its rapid growth, good body
2. Objectives
conformation, and efficient feed conversion.
The chicken is resistant to disease and heat This study aimed to:
stress, large and has a "native" taste and
texture. When cross-breed with native 2.1 Determine and compare the laying
chickens, the Kabir qualities are retained in performance and egg characteristics of
the new breed. Feeding cost is low since the female native chicken crossed with
Kabir chicken can also survive by Kabir and native male chickens (parent
themselves. They can be raised in the same stock) under semi-intensive rearing
manner as "native chickens," and their eggs system.
are low in cholesterol.

Bejar et al. (2017) 54

JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC RESEARCH Vol. 02 No. 4

2.2 Determine and compare the fertility, ingredients mixed and given to the birds
hatchability, chicks weight and survival with same levels, time and frequency of
rate of the F1 crosses. feeding. The feed ingredients include
rice/corn bran, rice shavings, corn grits,
2.3 Find out and compare the egg coconut grates and other kitchen refuse
production, and egg qualities of the collected from the researchers houses.
chickens produced by the F1 cross under Feeding was made in the morning and
semi-intensive rearing system. afternoon with provision of clean drinking
water. Wet and dry feeding was uniformly
2.4 Determine and compare the growth rate, practiced to all experimental units.
feed consumption, body weight at sexual Medication program was applied to all
maturity, weight gain, feed efficiency experimental animals as it was needed.
and return on investment of the F1
crosses at maturity age. 3.4 Breeding Management
At the age of 8 months old of the
3. Methodology male Kabir, the breeding study started using
1 male and 6 females in each experimental
3.1 The Breeder stock/Experimental animals
unit. A breeding period took for 3 incubation
The two months old male Kabir cycles of the eggs produced from each of the
chicken was purchased from reliable source. experimental units. Hand mating was often
They are reared until reaching sexual applied with the Kabir and female chicken
maturity. At age 8 months old, they are used to avoid breeding failure due to the larger
as breeder to the female native chicken of size of the male Kabir.
varied ages. Likewise, the native males were
3.5 Incubation Management
acquired with different plumage colors but
almost of the same age. One male to six Eggs from every experimental unit
female ratio was adapted in this breeding was incubated separately with the use of
study. artificial incubator. A 54-egg capacity
incubator was used to incubate the eggs
3.2 Experimental Design
produced by the female chicken in each
A total of 36 birds, randomly experimental unit. Holding period of eggs
distributed into two treatments with three was 5 days before loading in the incubator.
replication using Completely Randomized Uniform incubation management practices
Design (CRD). At the start, each of the 3 was employed to all animals under study.
males of Kabir and 3 males of native
3.6 Rearing Management
chickens were assigned to the breeding pens
containing six female native chickens by At hatching period, the chicks were
drawing lots. Average weight and brooded separately for a period of 8 weeks.
phenotypic characteristics of the birds was After which, the chicks were hardened and
recorded to obtain the desired basic data of reared in the same pens where the parent
the animals. stock were housed until they reach sexual
maturity or until point of lay. The
3.3 Feeding Management
parental/breeding stock were removed from
The experimental animals were fed the experimental pens and transferred to the
with various local and commercial other rearing areas to give way for the

Bejar et al. (2017) 55

JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC RESEARCH Vol. 02 No. 4

Table 1. Production performance of the parent stock.

Native x Native Kabir X Native

Parameters
(Male-Female parent) (Male-Female parent)

Body Weight (kg.) (M) 1.47±0.03 (M) 3.05±0.13

(F) 1.13±0.01 (F) 1.06±0.09
Egg characteristics:
ns
Egg weight (g) 34.26±2.33 34.87±1.42
ns
Egg Length ((g) 4.92±0.02 4.98±0.10
ns
Egg width (g) 3.58±0.06 3.60±0.05
ns
Shape/size 72.29±0.04 72.76±0.09
Percent Egg Production (%) **31.0±1.00 26.67±5.03
Fertility (eggs retained after 2nd candling) **81.0±3.46 73.67±8.02
Hatchability (%) **31.0±16.52 18.17±15.22
** significant (p≤0.05)
ns
not significant (p>0.05)

brooded chicks to be hardened and reared 3.8 Data Analysis

until sexual maturity. Both parent stock and
progenies were reared in semi-confined All observations in each parameter
environment where each group of six were subjected to analysis of variance, and
chickens had scavenging area of 3x3 meters comparison was made using t-test.
and 3x3 meter house for roosting at night.
3.7 Data Collection 4. Results and Discussion

Data collected during breeding period 4.1 Production Performance of the

includes laying performance of the native Experimental Animals (Parent Stock)
chicken in terms of percent egg
production,egg characteristics produced by Table 1 presents the body weight,
the parental stock in terms of color, egg egg weight, length, width, size or shape
size/shape (SI=W/L x 100, a formula used index of the eggs, egg production and
by Carter, 1975), egg weight, egg length, hatchability of the parent stock used in the
egg width, shell thickness, surface area study.
(SA=4.5118 x L.289 x B.3164 x (EW).4882,
formula adopted from Carter, 1975) and As indicated, the body weight of the
breaking strength (BS=50.86 x (EW).915 male stock which was significantly higher or
formula adopted from Ar, et al. cited by heavier for the Kabir male (3.05 kg.) than
Arad and Marder, 1982. At brooding period the native male (1.47 kg.) breeders. During
onward, the data collected includes; egg mating time, the native female was tossed to
fertility, hatchability, chicks weight, the Kabir male to effect breeding and
survival/mortality rate, age and body weight fertilization, while the native chicken pairs
at sexual maturity, egg qualities produced by were just on its natural way of mating in the
the F1, and its growth performance. Data area where they were confined.
gathering was made until the end of the
breeding study. Eggs produced from the two crosses
did not vary significantly in terms of egg

Bejar et al. (2017) 56

JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC RESEARCH Vol. 02 No. 4

weight, length, width and egg size or shape. 4.2 Performance of the F1 Progenies
Female layers of the two groups were all Body weights and sexual maturity
native females. Thus, egg characteristics
produced may not be affected even if the Table 2 shows the body weights and
male breeder of the other group was Kabir. weight gains, age at sexual maturity, feed
It can be deduced from this study that egg consumption, feed conversion ratio, feed
characteristics is not heritable from the male cost, survivability, and percent egg
parent no matter how large it is unless the production of the two groups of progenies
female parent is the one larger than the from mating NC x NC and KC x NC. The
male. Female chicken has the greater result indicated very close initial weights
influence on the eggs characteristics obtained (27.97±7.41 vs. 28.33±5.03g)
produced considering its maternal from the two groups of progenies, but
characteristics being responsible for egg significantly higher body weights, weight
formation and development. The result gain, and average daily gain for the progeny
conforms with the idea of Niknafs, (2012), between KC x NC than those siblings of NC
that magnitudes of heritability for egg x NC. The observation on these parameters
production traits showed smaller heritability was all apparent from the start of the study
compared with growth traits. up to the age at sexual maturity of the
chickens under study. The result can be
In terms of the percentage of egg implied by the fact that Kabir is fast growers
production, fertility and hatchability, the than their native counterpart. This result
result showed significantly higher in both corroborates with the study of Leotarakul
native parent stocks than the Kabir and and Pimkamlai, (1999), revealing that
native parent stocks. As indicated NC x NC improved breeds of chicken grow faster than
parent obtained significantly higher egg the pure native chicken. Native, hybrid
production (31.0±1.00), fertility (81.0±3.46) chicken can reach a marketable live weight
and hatchability (31.0±16.52) than the KC x of 1.2-1.4 kg after 8-12 weeks while pure
NC parent stock. native chicken reaches the same weight after
reaching 16 weeks of age given the same
The result corroborates with the feeding management.
study of Bondoc, 1998, on the performance
of the native chicken under semi Sexual maturity age was
confinement system of production. The significantly lower for the KC/NC progeny
result can be implicated to the fact that with 190.33±23.54 days than the NC/NC
native chicken can perform well if progeny with 247.67±14.74 days.The result
management is altered by doing semi- can be implicated to the fact that chicken
confinement. The result on the lower near to sexual maturity is with reddish face
fertility and hatchability of the KC x NC and complete plumage, this characteristic is
parental stock can be reflected to the less favored by various areas or regions. Most
aggression of the Kabir male on mating with chemical constitutions of animal muscles
female native chicken due to its heavier other than moisture increase with age
weights as compared to the female (Lawrise, 1985). At sexual maturity, there is
counterpart and production was only considerable amount of vitamins, amino
effected as a consequence of hand mating acids, minerals and (intramuscular) fat in
or teasing the female to the male Kabir to bird's body. Therefore, meat from chicken
enhance mating. close to sexual maturity is especially

Bejar et al. (2017) 57

JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC RESEARCH Vol. 02 No. 4

nourishing and nutritive and has good taste the opposite group of progeny. Based on
and flavor (Chan and Sun, 1997). Selection computed feed consumption up to sexual
for earlier sexual maturity would favor maturity age, cost of feeds, and with the
production efficiency and also marketing assumption of selling the chicken to an
value of the chicken. equal price of 140 pesos per kilo live
weight, both showed negative return over
4.3 Feed Consumption, FCR and feed cost feed cost. However, lower negative values
was shown by the Kabir-native crossed. The
Table 2 presents the feed higher feed cost of 243.15 pesos per head
consumption, feed conversion ratio and feed for the Kabir-native group is attributed to
cost at sexual maturity of the two groups of their higher feed consumption being noted in
F1 progenies. As indicated, feed its inherent characteristics as voracious
consumption from the first month of age to eaters and being also raised in semi-
sexual maturity between the two crosses confinement where natural food is limited
were significantly higher in the Kabir-native which makes the chicken more dependent on
group than the native-native progeny. Feed the feeds are given during the day. Pinoy
efficiency was significantly lower in the Farmer, (2008), described Kabir as superior
crossbred (progeny of the Kabir and native) for meat conversion because of its rapid
with 7.5 g as compared to 8.93 g for the growth, good body conformation and
progeny from the native-native parent stock. efficient feed conversion and the present
The lower feed efficiency value signifies study conform with the idea.
better response in body weight out of the
feed consumed by the animals. Thus, the 4.4 Survival Rate
result indicated better feed efficiency of
KC/NC progeny than the NC/NC progeny. As also presented in Table 2, the two
Feed cost was very much higher for the groups of progenies had a very acceptable
progeny of Kabir and native chicken than survival rate from the first month throughout

Table 2. Performance of the F1 Crosses

Native x Native Kabir x Native

Parameters
(Pure bred) (Cross bred)
ns
Initial weight (g) 27.97±7.41 28.33±5.031
Weight at sexual maturity (g) 1020.0±45.23 **1586.0±84.36
Weight gain @ sexual maturity 992.03±50.00 **1557.67±158.79
Ave. daily gain (g) 4.02±0.43 **8.34±1.90
Age at sexual maturity (d) 247.67±14.74 **190.33±23.54
Feed Consumption 8821.7±640.34 **11486.0±1644.89
FCR **8.93±1.03 7.5±1.82
Feed cost at sexual @ sexual maturity(Php) 184.28±13.13 **240.51±34.76
Return over feed cost (Php) **-41.48±0.04 -21.11±0.11
Survivability (%) 86.67±4.27 **93.33±2.85
% egg production 58.67±10.26 **74.0±6.56
ns
** significant (p≤0.05) not significant (p>0.05)

Bejar et al. (2017) 58

JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC RESEARCH Vol. 02 No. 4

sexual maturity. The crossbred (KC/NC production of 74 percent for the BC x NC

progeny) had significantly higher survivability crossbred compared to the NC x NC
of 93.33±2.85 percent survival rate than the progeny with only 58.67 percent egg
NC/NC progeny having only 86.67±4.27 production closer to 57 percent as revealed
percent from the first month up to sexual in the study of Coligado, (1985). Namkhun
maturity, The result of this study is in contrary
et al., (2001), also revealed that the native
to the study of Namkhun et al., 2001 by which
laying, growth and survival rates of improved chicken does not lay eggs continuously but
native chicken were lower than the pure native tend to produce eggs in clutches, typically 2
chicken. The result of the present study may be to 4 per year.
attributed to the fact that chickens were confined
in a partition, modified or altered management 4.6 Egg characteristics of F1 crosses
practice were applied which probably affected
the natural fitness of the native chickens. As indicated in Table 3, the shell
Kajaroen et al., (1989), revealed that indigenous color of the native-native chicken F1 as
chicken is well-adapted to the conditions of evaluated by a panel of evaluators was able
typical resource-poor small-scale farms. Their to obtain a shell color values of 1.0-1.3
resistance to hot climate and diseases is
classified as white, while the Kabir-native
considerable higher than high-performance
breeds or hybrids if they are reared naturally. F1 eggs were rated 2.0-2.4 which are the
Lambio, (2000), also claimed that native brown color. The color of eggs of both
chickens are predominantly raised under the groups was pattern to their ancestral egg
free-range system. And most farmers prefer to color dominance were native chicken
raise native chickens over the exotic breeds usually produce white to creamy shell eggs
because of the low inputs and their inherent while Kabir produces brown shelled eggs.
ability to survive in harsh environment. The weight of eggs produced by the F1
4.5 Egg Production crosses was significantly heavier for Kabir-
native cross with 38.78±2.68g, while native-
Egg production between the two native cross was 33.88±0.96 g eggs weights.
progenies was evaluated and compared. The This result may be attributed to the bigger
result showed a significantly higher egg

Table 3. Characteristics of the Eggs Produced by the F1 Crosses

Native x Native Kabir x Native

Egg Characteristics
(Pure bred) (Crossbred)
Egg shell color 1.0-1.3 (white) 2.0-2.4 (brown)
Egg weight (g) 33.88±0.96 **38.78±2.68
ns
Egg Length (cm) 4.83±0.08 5.06±0.06
ns
Egg width (cm) 3.62±0.04 3.84±0.08
Shape/size 74.04±1.75 **76.82±1.51
ns
Shell thickness 0.045±0.005 0.05±0.007
Breaking Strength (g) 1277.45±33.24 **1448.65±86.71
Surface Area 59.91±1.51 **65.59±2.14
ns
** significant (p≤0.05) not significant (p>0.05)

Bejar et al. (2017) 59

JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC RESEARCH Vol. 02 No. 4

size of the crossbred layer than the native 6. Acknowledgement

chicken layers, Koelkebeck, (1999),
claiming that hen’s size and age primarily The authors express their
affect egg qualities being laid. Other egg acknowledgment to the Department of
characteristics such as egg length, egg Agriculture – Bureau of Agricultural
width, shell thickness, did not vary Research for the financial assistance to this
significantly between two groups of F1 project.
crosses, but egg size/shape, breaking
strength and surface area were all
significantly different and highly shown by 7. Bibliography
the Kabir-native F1 group as compared to
the native-native F1 group. The result was AACMC (Australian Agricultural Consulting and
attributed to the larger size and younger age Management Company). (1984) Livestock
of the Kabir-native F1 than the native-native Subsector Review 1 (Annex 3). Addis
F1 which has a direct influence on their eggs Ababa, Ethiopia: Ministry of Agriculture
produced. The same idea was reported by and the innate characteristics. Asian Journal
Koelkebeck, (1999), claiming that hen’s size Arad, Z., Marder, J.. (1982). Differences in Egg
and age primarily affect egg qualities being shell Quality among the Sinai Bedouin
laid. fowl, the commercial White Leghorn, and
their Crossbreds. Br. Poultry Science. 23
Based on the results of the study,
breeding/mating Kabir male with female Bondoc, OL. (1998) Biodiversity of Livestock
native chicken needs teasing the female to and Poultry Genetic Resources in the
effect mating to improve fertility and Philippines. IAS-CA/UPLB and PCARRD-
hatchability to avoid refusal of the native DOST.
female chicken due to heavier weights of
the Kabir. Weight increase and weight gains Carter, TC. (1975). The Hen's Egg:
Relationships of Seven Characteristics of the
were notably shown by the F1 crosses from Strain of Hens to the Incidence of Cracks
Kabir, and native chicken since weight and other Shell defects. Br. Poultry Science,
characteristics of the Kabir breed is 16
considered heritable trait. Feed consumption
and costs were also highly performed by the Chan, K. and Sun, AY. (1997). The present and
progeny of Kabir and native chicken as future of (semi) quality chicken in China. In:
influenced by its voracious eating habit. As Proceedings of the 8th Conference of
to the egg qualities produced, progenies of Chinese Poultry Science Association.
Kabir and native chicken improved the Suzhou, China.
physical qualities of the eggs as a result of
the combination of the ideal egg Chang, C. (2007). Analysis of the Philippine
Chicken Industry: Commercial versus
characteristics of both parents. Crossbred of Backyard Sectors. Asian Journal of
Kabir and native chickens elicit Agriculture and Development, 3(1).
improvement of egg production and egg
qualities performance under semi- Coligado, EC. (1985) Potentials of the
confinement systems. Philippine Native Chickens. Animal
Production Technology. 1

Food and Agriculture Organization, FAO.

(2003). Status of the Philippine Animal

Bejar et al. (2017) 60

JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC RESEARCH Vol. 02 No. 4

Genetic Resources: A Country Report.

Rome, Italy: Mangesha, M. (2012). Native chicken
production and the innate characteristics.
International Livestock Center for Africa, ILCA. Asian J. Poult. Sci. 6(2)
(1993). Sustainable Production from
Livestock. ILCA Medium Term Plan. Addis, Namkhun, S., Ob-Aun, T., and Leotarakul, A.
Ababa. Ethiopia. 18 pp. (2001). Prediction of annual egg production
from partial egg production in Rhode Island
Kajaroen, Y., Theerapuntuwat, S., Red. Livestock Magazine no 5. 3(3):
Sivaprapakorn, A., Saki-Ya, P., Sripra-Ya,
P., Chaiput, S., and Saingam, Y. (1989) Niknafs, S., Nejati-Javaremi, A., Mehrabani-
Poultry on-farm trial at the village level in Yeganeh, H., and Fatemi, SA. (2012)
Khon Kaen Province: Results. The Estimation of genetic parameters of Five
development and improvement of small Genetic Groups of Philippine Native
animal production for smallholders in the Chickens for body weight and egg
Northeast. Final report, Faculty of production traits in Mazandaran native
Agriculture, IRD Khon Kaen University and chicken. Trop Animal Health Prod. 44(7)
USAID
Pinoy Farmer (2008) Native Chicken Production
Koelkebeck, KW. (1999). What is Egg Quality in the Philippines.
and Conserving It? The University of
Illinois. Pinoy Farmer. (2008). The Wonder of Kabir
http://livestocktrail.illinois.edu/poultrynet/pa
perDisplay.cfm?ContentID=522 Accessed Philippine Statistics Authority, PSA-1 (2016).
June 3, 2015 Chicken Industry Performance Report
(January – December 2015).
Lambiao, AL. (2000). Germplasm and New
Breeds of the Philippine Native Chickens”. Philippine Statistics Authority, PSA-2 (2016).
The Philippine Agricultural Scientist. Vol. Performance of Philippine Agriculture,
83(1). (January to March 2016)

Lambiao, AL., and Grecio, MC. (1998). Poultry Farming Manual, (2016). Raising Native
Reproductive Performance of Five Genetic Chicken in the Philippines.
Groups of Philippine Native Chickens http://poultrymanual.com/2016/07/24/raisin
Under Semi-confinement Condition. g-native-chicken-philippines/ Accessed
Proceedings of the PSAS National December 12, 2016
Convention. 15-16 October 1998. Metro
Manila, Philippines.

Leotarakul, A. and Pimkamlai, O. (1999).

Economic return of indigenous chicken and
crossbred indigenous and Rhode Island Red.
Livestock Magazine no 5. 3(1)

Lopeh Poultry Farm. (2009). Kabir Chicken.

http://lopehpoultry.blogspot.com/2009/10/ka
bir-chicken.html Accessed December 2,
2016

Bejar et al. (2017) 61