Current IssueEditorial BoardOnline First ArticlesArchive
Current IssueEditorial BoardOnline First ArticlesArchive

Full Research Article

Major Nutrient and Fatty Acid Compositions of Kadaknath Chicken Reared under the Eastern Himalayan Ecosystem

S
Sourabh Deori1,*
M
Melody Lalhriatpuii1
S
S.N. Abedin1
R
R. Katiyar1
D
Dipan Rudra Paul1
H
Himsikha Chakravarty1
S
Sunil Doley1
1ICAR-Research Complex for NEH Region, Umiam-793 101, Meghalaya, India.

ABSTRACT

Background: Kadaknath is an indigenous chicken breed known for its unique meat quality and adaptability to diverse environments. This study assessed the nutrient composition and fatty acid profile of Kadaknath chicken meat reared in the eastern Himalayan ecosystem.

Methods: Eighty Kadaknath chicks were reared under a deep litter system and at 32 weeks, eight birds were randomly selected for meat nutrient and fatty acid analysis.

Result: The live weight, carcass weight and dressing percentage were 1.83±0.14 kg, 1.167±0.11 kg and 63.19±1.27 % respectively. The weight of liver, heart and gizzard was 21.64±1.16, 8.48±0.29 and 33.28±1.12 g individually, whereas the organ percentage of liver, heart and gizzard was 1.19±0.02, 0.47±0.02 and 1.84±0.08% respectively. The moisture, crude protein, ether extract and total ash of the meat were 72.46±0.43, 23.31±0.23, 1.11±0.06 and 0.50±0.09% respectively. Among saturated fatty acids, palmitic acid (32.120±0.18) was the major fatty acid, followed by stearic acid (7.605±0.12). Oleic Acid (43.661±0.29) and palmitoleic Acid (1.677±0.17) were the main monounsaturated fatty acids detected, while linoleic Acid (12.754±0.13) was the chief polyunsaturated fatty acid in Kadaknath meat.

INTRODUCTION

The growing demand for organic meat and eggs has boosted backyard poultry farming, with indigenous breeds preferred for their low input needs, disease resistance and higher market and cultural worth (Sokołowicz et al., 2016). Indigenous chickens, often termed slow-growing (Haunshi and Prince, 2021; Haunshi et al., 2022), are valued for their superior taste and nutrition (Fanatico et al., 2007). Their growth and feed conversion rates are comparable to male layer-type chickens (Petkov et al., 2013), supporting sustainable, high-quality meat production (Popova et al., 2023). In recent years, there has been an increase in demand for meat from indigenous and local birds as consumers perceive that birds reared under extensive system are low in antibiotic and toxic residues (Bai et al., 2022). Meat quality is strongly influenced by genetic factors like breed and strain (Jaturasitha et al., 2004; Shahin and Elazeem, 2005).
       
Kadaknath is a dual-purpose indigenous breed from central India, mainly found in Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh (Attri and Tyagi, 2010). Traditionally reared by tribal communities (Parmar, 2003), it is known for its dark plumage, distinct blood color and meat valued for taste and nutritional benefits (Parmar, 2003; Thakur et al., 2006). The breed is highly profitable, fetching 2-3 times the price of regular chickens (Prakash et al., 2023) and shows superior disease resistance and lower fat content compared to exotic breeds (Rao and Thomas, 1984). Kadaknath meat had a higher antioxidant capacity than the meat of commercial broiler (Sehrawat et al., 2021). The growth performance and adaptability of Kadaknath chicken under the agroclimatic conditions of Meghalaya were satisfactory (Deori et al., 2024). Tribals in Meghalaya typically slaughter them at around 7-8 months of age, often during festivals, religious ceremonies, or weddings. Today, the rising demand for poultry products from extensive production systems presents an opportunity to enhance the role of native chicken breeds, which are especially well-suited for free-range and organic farming due to their strong adaptation to local conditions (Sokołowicz et al., 2016). The present investigation was conducted to assess the major nutrients composition and fatty acid fractions of the meat of Kadaknath chicken reared in a deep litter system under hilly region of Meghalaya.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was conducted at the ICAR Research Complex for NEH Region, Umiam, Meghalaya, India in the Eastern Himalaya under standard housing system and managemental practices. The farm is located at 21.5°N to 29.5° N latitude and 85.5°E to 97.5°E longitude with an altitude of 1010/ m altitude, the site experiences 2500-3000 mm annual rainfall, with temperatures ranging from 5.50°C in winter to 29.30°C in summer. All experimental protocols were approved by the Institutional Animal Ethics Committee, ICAR Research Complex for NEH Region, Umiam, Meghalaya.
       
A total of 80 Kadaknath chicks were raised in the farm in four separate pens following deep litter system (20 in each room) with proper ventilation (Deori et al., 2024). Birds were fed age-appropriate rations ad libitum as per NRC (1994) standards (Table 1) and had access to clean water and 16 hours of light. Vaccination and deworming were done following standard farm protocols. At 32 weeks, eight birds were randomly selected, fasted overnight and slaughtered following Arumugam and Panda (1970). Meat samples (~150/ g) from breast, leg and wing (with skin) were pooled, packed and stored at -20°C. Liver, heart and gizzard were collected and weighed as a percentage of body weight.

Table 1: Rations provided to Kadaknath chicken during the growth trial.


       
Proximate analysis in triplicate was carried out within 24 hours of storage following the methods of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC, 2007). Parameters investigated on a dry matter basis included crude protein (CP) by Kjeldahl method; nitrogen × 6.25, ether extract (EE) by ether extraction method and total ash by burning at 500°C for 3 h. The fatty acid profile of Kadaknath meat was evaluated in triplicate as described by O’Fallon et al. (2007) with a slight modification and expressed as a percentage. Meat samples were thawed and ground at room temperature using a standard grinder. Approximately 1.0 g samples were placed into a 16 × 125 mm screw-cap PYREX culture tube and 1.0 mL of the C13:0 internal standard (0.5 mg of C13:0/mL of methanol), 0.7 mL of 10 N potassium hydroxide in water and 5.3 mL of methanol were added. The tube was incubated in a 55°C water bath for 1.5 h with vigorous hand shaking for 5 s every 20 min to permeate, dissolve and hydrolyze the sample properly. After cooling below room temperature in a cold tap water bath, 0.58 mL of 24 N sulfuric acid in water was added. The tube was mixed by inversion and, with precipitated potassium sulfate present, was incubated again in a 55°C water bath for 1.5 h with hand-shaking for 5 s every 20 min. Subsequently, allowing the content for fatty acid methyl ester (FAME) synthesis, the tube was cooled in a cold tap water bath, 3 mL of hexane was added and the tube was mixed for 5 min on a multitube vortex mixer. The tube was then centrifuged for 5 min in a tabletop centrifuge and the hexane layer, comprising the FAME, was placed into a GC vial. The fatty acid composition of the FAME was determined by a GC Model 2010 Plus from Shimadzu. The standard used was obtained from Sigma-Aldrich, Supelco 37 Component FAME Mix (Product Code: CRM47885 with Lot No: LRAC6213).
       
Data obtained were statistically analyzed using SPSS version 23. The mean value, standard error and percentage attained were used to draw results and conclusions.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The carcass yield and chemical compositions of the meat of Kadaknath chicken are given in Table 2. In the present study, Kadaknath chickens recorded a live weight of 1.83 ±0.14 kg, carcass weight of 1.167±0.11 kg and a dressing percentage of 63.19±1.27%, similar to the values reported by Bhardwaj et al., (2006) and Haunshi et al., (2013). Indigenous breeds like Kadaknath generally show lower dressing yields due to higher feather mass and a greater proportion of non-edible parts (head, shanks, feathers). Ekka et al., (2018) reported higher dressing yields (67.57% in males and 67.38% in females) at 20 weeks, while Haunshi et al., (2022) found 70.5% at 27 weeks. Variations in dressing percentage can be influenced by age, diet and rearing systems (Wattanachant et al., 2002; Od-Ton et al., 2004; Lawrie, 1991). Compared to commercial broilers, Kadaknath grows slower and has lower muscle mass. These values align with observations in other native breeds such as Aseel Peela and Ghagus (Arora et al., 2011; Rajkumar et al., 2016).

Table 2: Carcass yield and meat chemical composition of kadaknath chicken.


       
The moisture, crude protein, ether extract and total ash of the Kadaknath meat in the study were 72.46±0.43, 23.31±0.23, 1.11±0.06 and 0.50±0.09 % respectively. The moisture content of Kadaknath meat in the current work aligned with the moisture level in Kadaknath meat reported by other researchers. The protein and ether extract concentrations in the present study were comparable to the protein and ether extract % of Kadakanth meat reported by Haunshi et al., (2022) and Balakumar et al. (2024). On the other hand, Kumar et al., (2018) and Gnanaraj et al. (2020) found a lower protein concentration than the current study, whereas Singh and Pathak (2017) found a higher protein concentration (27.25%). The amount of total ash in Kadaknath meat in the current work could be associated with that of the total ash in Kadaknath meat reported by Singh and Pathak (2017) and Kumar et al., (2018), while other researchers reported a slightly higher total ash content in the meat of Kadaknath (Gnanaraj et al., 2020; Haunshi et al., 2022).
       
The chemical composition of chicken meat is influenced by factors such as species, breed, age, muscle type and processing methods (Ding et al., 1999; Lombardi-Boccia et al., 2005; Wattanachant and Wattanachant, 2007). Slow-growing native chickens, like Thai indigenous birds, show higher protein and lower fat content than broilers (Wattanachant et al., 2004). Fanatico et al., (2007) and Zotte et al., (2020) also reported similar trends in slow-growing breeds. These findings suggest that both genotype and growth rate significantly impact the nutritional profile of chicken meat, with native breeds generally offering leaner, protein-rich meat.
       
The organ weight and percent of organ weight are given in Table 2. The weight of liver, heart and gizzard were 21.64±1.16, 8.48±0.29 and 33.28±1.12 g respectively, while the percentage of liver, heart and gizzard of the live weight were 1.19±0.02, 0.47±0.02 and 1.84±0.08 % respectively. The organ findings in the present study could be associated with the organ weight of 20th and 27th week old Kadaknath chicken reported by Haunshi et al., (2013) and Haunshi et al., (2022), correspondingly. However, the liver and gizzard weight and their percentage of live weight of 10th week old Kadaknath reported by Haunshi et al., (2013) were superior to the current findings. The proportion of internal organs’ weight varies and is influenced by factors such as species, age, size and type of animal (Ressang, 1984). Auza et al., (2021) reported a similar percentage of liver and heart weight in 12-week-old native chickens (140 DOC), yet they found a superior percentage of gizzard weight.
       
Native chickens, due to their slower growth and lower feed intake, typically have smaller internal organs involved in digestion and metabolism compared to fast-growing broilers. Liver size reflects its detoxification role and metabolic activity, including bile secretion and protein breakdown (Price and Wilson, 1985; Auza et al., 2021). Heart size is influenced by species, age and activity, adapting to physiological demands (Ressang, 1984). The gizzard, a muscular organ essential for feed grinding, increases in size with high-fiber diets (Amrullah, 2004). These organ variations are linked to genotype, diet and physiological needs of the bird.
       
The individual fatty acid fractions of Kadaknath meat have been given in Table 3. Among the saturated fatty acids, palmitic (32.120±0.18) was the major saturated fatty acid, followed by stearic acid (7.605±0.12). The concentration of monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFA) was higher, especially oleic acid (43.661±0.29), whereas linoleic acid (12.754±0.13) was the chief polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA).

Table 3: Fatty acid compositions of Kadaknath meat (pooled sample).


       
Polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) like linoleic and á-linolenic acids cannot be synthesized by the body, making their tissue levels diet-dependent (Wood and Enser, 1997). In contrast, saturated and monounsaturated fatty acids are endogenously synthesized and remain stable. The present fatty acid profile of Kadaknath meat aligns with Gnanaraj et al., (2020) and varies among native breeds due to dietary differences (Cherian et al., 2002). Lean meats, including poultry, have low fat content and favorable P:S ratios, while meat from grazing ruminants naturally offers a beneficial n-6 to n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid balance (Wood and Enser, 1997). Poultry respond rapidly to dietary changes in PUFA levels, especially n-3 fatty acids, which inversely affect n-6 levels (Tougan et al., 2018).
       
Indigenous chickens are considered healthier due to lower fat, cholesterol and favorable fatty acid profiles (Jaturasitha et al., 2008). Fat and triacylglycerol composition in muscle significantly influence meat quality, affecting flavor and tenderness (Miller, 1994). Despite similar diets, differences in fatty acid composition may arise from breed-specific feeding behaviors (Hunton, 1995). Indigenous chickens often show higher saturated and lower polyunsaturated fatty acids than broilers (Wattanachant et al., 2004). In poultry, dietary fats are absorbed and deposited directly without modification (Wood and Enser, 1997). Fatty acid profiles are influenced by breed, anatomy and rearing practices (Zlender et al., 2000).

CONCLUSION

Kadaknath chicken meat from the Eastern Himalayan region showed high protein, low fat and favorable fatty acid composition. The hilly ecosystem did not adversely affect meat quality, as the nutrient and fatty acid profiles were comparable to those reported in other Indian regions. Further research on amino acid, mineral content and muscle fiber characteristics of breast and thigh meat can provide a complete nutritional profile of Kadaknath chicken.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors gratefully acknowledge the All India Coordinated Research Project (AICRP) on Poultry Breeding for providing necessary support.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors also declare that they have no conflict of interest in this study.

REFERENCES


  1. Amrullah, I.K.  (2004). Nutrisi Ayam Broiler, 2nd Ed (Bogor: Gunung Budi).

  2. AOAC. (2007). Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists International, 18th edn. Gaithersburg, MD, USA.

  3. Arora, G., Mishra, S. K., Nautiyal, B., Pratap, S.O., Gupta, A., Beura, C.K. and Singh, D.P. (2011). Genetics of hyperpigmentation associated with the fibromelanosis gene (Fm) and analysis of growth and meat quality traits in crosses of native Indian Kadaknath chickens and non-indigenous breeds. British Poultry Science. 52(6): 675-685.

  4. Arumugam, M.P. and Panda, B. (1970). Processing and Inspection of Poultry. Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Izatnagar, Uttar Pradesh.

  5. Attri, S.D. and Tyagi, A. (2010). Climate profile of India. Environment Monitoring and Research Center, India Meteorology Department: New Delhi, India.

  6. Auza, F.A., Purwanti, S., Syamsu, J.A. and Natsir, A. (2021). The relative weight of internal organs and digestive tract in native chickens age 12 weeks that are given various levels of BSF larvae meal (Hermetia illucens L.) in the ration. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 788(1): 012064.

  7. Bai, A., Ruban, W.S., Spandan, P.V., Barry, I.G.A., Kumar, N.S., Indresh, H.C. and Nagaraja, C.S. (2022). Carcass and meat quality characteristics of native chicken reared under backyard and farm setting in Karnataka. Asian Journal of Dairy and Food Research. 41(1): 111-115. doi: 10.18805/ajdfr.DR-1699.

  8. Balakumar, A., Pandian, C., Selvan, S.T. and Valavan, S.E. (2024). Effect of feeding different dietary protein levels on meat characteristics of kadaknath chicken. The Indian Veterinary Journal. 101(2): 22-26.

  9. Bhardwaj, R.K., Kumar, S., Pant, D., Kumar, A. and Sharma, R.K. (2006). Study of growth, reproductive and carcass traits in purebred and crossbred chicken. Indian Journal of Poultry Science. 41(3): 301-303.

  10. Cherian, G., Selvaraj, R.K., Goeger, M.P. and Stitt, P.A. (2002). Muscle fatty acid composition and thiobarbituric acid- reactive substances of broilers fed different cultivars of sorghum. Poultry Science. 81(9): 1415-1420.

  11. Deori, S., Doley, S., Abedin, S.N., Lalhriatpuii, M., Wankhar, J.B.M., Dutta, P.R. and Katiyar, R. (2024). Growth and reproductive performance of kadaknath chicken reared under deep litter system in the hill ecosystem of Meghalaya, India. Uttar Pradesh Journal of Zoology. 45(4): 34-39.

  12. Ding, H., Xu, R.J. and Chan, D.K.O. (1999). Identification of broiler chicken meat using a visible/near infrared spectroscopic technique. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture. 79(11): 1382-1388.

  13. Ekka, P., Singh, M., Mukherjee, K., Barwa, D.K., Jain, A. and Choudhary, M. (2018). Carcass characteristics of Kadaknath fowl reared under intensive system in Chhattisgarh. International Journal of Advanced Biological Research. 8(1): 106-109.

  14. Fanatico, A.C., Pillai, P.B., Emmert, J.L. and Owens, C.M. (2007). Meat quality of slow-and fast-growing chicken genotypes fed low-nutrient or standard diets and raised indoors or with outdoor access. Poultry Science. 86(10): 2245-2255.

  15. Gnanaraj, P.T., Sundaram, A.S., Rajkumar, K. and Babu, R.N. (2020). Proximate composition and meat quality of three indian native chicken breeds. Indian Journal of Animal Research. 54(12): 1584-1589. doi: 10.18805/ijar.B-3905.

  16. Haunshi, S. and Prince, L.L.L. (2021). Kadaknath: A popular native chicken breed of India with unique black colour characteristics. World’s Poultry Science Journal. 77(2): 427-440.

  17. Haunshi, S., Sunitha, R., Shanmugam, M., Padhi, M.K. and Niranjan, M. (2013). Carcass characteristics and chemical composition of breast and thigh muscles of native chicken breeds. Indian Journal of Poultry Science. 48(2): 219-222.

  18. Haunshi, S., Ullengala, R., Prince, L.L., Ramasamy, K., Gurunathan, K., Devatkal, S. and Chatterjee, R.N. (2022). Genetic parameters of growth traits, trend of production and reproduction traits and meat quality status of Ghagus, an indigenous chicken of India. Tropical Animal Health and Production. 54(3): 170.

  19. Hunton, P. (1995). Poultry Product. Elsevier Science, B.V. Amsterdam, 600p.

  20. Jaturasitha, S., Khiaosaard, R., Pongpaew, A., Leowtharakul, A., Saitong, S., Apichatsarangkul, T., Leaungwunta, V. and Langani, N. (2004). The Effects of Strain, Sex, Weight and Muscle on Fat Quality of Thai Native and Crossbred Chickens (Kai Baan Thai), In: Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Conference. Kasetsart University, Bangkok, Thailand. pp.137-146.

  21. Jaturasitha, S., Srikanchai, T., Kreuzer, M. and Wicke, M. (2008). Differences in carcass and meat characteristics between chicken indigenous to northern Thailand (Black-boned and Thai native) and imported extensive breeds (Bresse and Rhode Island Red). Poultry Science. 87(1): 160-169.

  22. Kumar, R., Malapure, C.D., Sharma, J., Singh, R. and Singh, B.P. (2018). Studies on organoleptic and nutritional properties of Kadaknath birds in different agro-climatic zones. International Journal of Farm Sciences. 8(2): 79-84.

  23. Lawrie, R.A. (1991). Meat Science. Pergamon Press, Oxford, 293p.

  24. Lombardi-Boccia, G., Lanzi, S. and Aguzzi, A. (2005). Aspects of meat quality: trace elements and B vitamins in raw and cooked meats. Journal of food Composition and Analysis. 18(1): 39-46.

  25. Miller, R.K. (1994). Quality Characteristics. In Muscle Foods: Meat Poultry and Seafood Technology. Boston, MA: Springer US. pp. 296-332

  26. NRC. (1994). Nutrient Requirements of Poultry. Natl. Acad. Press, Washington, DC.

  27. O’Fallon, J.V., Busboom, J.R., Nelson, M.L. and Gaskins, C.T. (2007). A direct method for fatty acid methyl ester synthesis: application to wet meat tissues, oils and feedstuffs. Journal of Animal Science. 85: 1511-1521.

  28. Od-Ton, V., Wattanachant, C. and Wattanasit, S. (2004). Phenotypic characteristics and carcass quality of naked-neck chicken reared under backyard production systems. Thaksin. J. 7(1): 58-67.

  29. Parmar, S.N.S. (2003). Characterization of Kadaknath Breed of Poultry (Famous Black Bird of Jhabua). Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vidyalaya, Jabalpur (M. P.) Technical Bulletin DRS/ 2003/01. pp. 1-21.

  30. Petkov, E., Popova, T., Todorova, M. and Ignatova, M. (2013). Quality traits of breast and thigh muscles in three chicken genotypes. World’s Poultry Sci. J. pp. 69.

  31. Popova, T., Petkov, E., Ignatova, M., Vlahova-Vangelova, D., Balev, D., Dragoev, S. and Dimov, K. (2023). Meat quality of male layer-type chickens slaughtered at different ages.  Agriculture. 13(3): 624.

  32. Prakash, A., Singh, Y., Chatli, M., Sharma, A., Acharya, P. and Singh, M. (2023). Review of the black meat chicken breeds: Kadaknath, silkie and ayam cemani. World’s Poultry Science Journal. 79(4): 879-891.

  33. Price, S. A. and Wilson, L. (1985). Pathophysiology of Clinical Concepts of Disease Processes 1st Ed Dharma A (Jakarta:  EGC Medical Book Publisher). 

  34. Rajkumar, U., Muthukumar, M., Haunshi, S., Niranjan, M., Raju, M.V.L.N., Rama Rao, S.V. and Chatterjee, R.N. (2016). Comparative evaluation of carcass traits and meat quality in native aseel chickens and commercial broilers. British Poultry Science. 57(3): 339-347.

  35. Rao, G.V. and Thomas, P.C. (1984). The Breed Characteristics of kadaknath breed of indigenous (Desi) chicken. Avian Research. 68(1-2): 55-57.

  36. Ressang, A. (1984). Veterinary Specific Pathology 2nd Ed (Denpasar: Bali Printing). 

  37. Sehrawat, R., Sharma, R., Ahlawat, S., Sharma, V., Thakur., S.M., Kaur, M. and Tantia, S.M. (2021). First report on better functional property of black chicken meat from India. Indian Journal of Animal Research. 55(6): 727-733. doi: 10.18805/IJAR.B-4014.

  38. Shahin, K.A. and Elazeem, F.A. (2005). Effects of breed, sex and diet and their interactions on carcass composition and tissue weight distribution of broiler chickens. Arch. Tierz Dummerstorf. 48: 612-26.

  39. Singh, V. P. and Pathak, V. (2017). Physico-chemical, colour and textural characteristics of Cobb-400, vanajara, aseel and kadaknath meat. International J. Livest. Res. 7(11): 98-106.

  40. Sokołowicz, Z., Krawczyk, J. and Świątkiewicz, S. (2016). Quality of poultry meat from native chicken breeds-A review.

  41. Thakur, M.S., Parmar, S.N.S. and Pillai, P.V.A. (2006). Studies on growth performance in Kadaknath breed of poultry. Livestock Research for Rural Development. 18(8): 116.

  42. Tougan, U.P., Youssao, I.A., Yayi, E.L., Kpodekon, M.T., Heuskin, S., Beckers, Y. and Thewis, A. (2018). Fatty acids composition of meat of five native chicken (Gallus gallus)- ecotypes of benin reared under organic or conventional system. Journal of Experimental Food Chemistry. 4(2).

  43. Wattanachant, C., Suwanapugdee, A., Suksathit, S. and Mongkol, M. (2002). Growth performance of naked-neck chicken under village production systems. Thaksin University Journal. 5: 53-61.

  44. Wattanachant, S. and Wattanachant, C. (2007). Chemical composition, properties and microstructure of Thai indigenous chicken muscles as influenced by age and rearing systems. [Research report], Prince of Songkla University. Songkhla, Thailand, 77p.

  45. Wattanachant, S., Benjakul, S. and Ledward, D.A. (2004). Composition, color and texture of Thai indigenous and broiler chicken muscles. Poultry Science. 83(1): 123-128.

  46. Wood, J. D. and Enser, M. (1997). Factors influencing fatty acids in meat and the role of antioxidants in improving meat quality. British Journal of Nutrition. 78(1): S49-S60.

  47. Zlender, B., Holcman, A., Stibilj, V. and Polak, T. (2000). Fatty acid composition of poultry meat from free range rearing. Poljoprivreda Osijek. 6(53): 4.

  48. Zotte, A. D., Gleeson, E., Franco, D., Cullere, M. and Lorenzo, J. M. (2020). Proximate composition, amino acid profile and oxidative stability of slow-growing indigenous chickens compared with commercial broiler chickens. Foods. 9(5): 546.
Published In
Asian Journal of Dairy and Food Research
Article Metrics
Metrics Icon
0
Views
0
Citations
Reviewed By
Share Article
Download Article
In this Article
    Contact us
    Follow us

    Full Research Article

    Major Nutrient and Fatty Acid Compositions of Kadaknath Chicken Reared under the Eastern Himalayan Ecosystem

    S
    Sourabh Deori1,*
    M
    Melody Lalhriatpuii1
    S
    S.N. Abedin1
    R
    R. Katiyar1
    D
    Dipan Rudra Paul1
    H
    Himsikha Chakravarty1
    S
    Sunil Doley1
    1ICAR-Research Complex for NEH Region, Umiam-793 101, Meghalaya, India.

    ABSTRACT

    Background: Kadaknath is an indigenous chicken breed known for its unique meat quality and adaptability to diverse environments. This study assessed the nutrient composition and fatty acid profile of Kadaknath chicken meat reared in the eastern Himalayan ecosystem.

    Methods: Eighty Kadaknath chicks were reared under a deep litter system and at 32 weeks, eight birds were randomly selected for meat nutrient and fatty acid analysis.

    Result: The live weight, carcass weight and dressing percentage were 1.83±0.14 kg, 1.167±0.11 kg and 63.19±1.27 % respectively. The weight of liver, heart and gizzard was 21.64±1.16, 8.48±0.29 and 33.28±1.12 g individually, whereas the organ percentage of liver, heart and gizzard was 1.19±0.02, 0.47±0.02 and 1.84±0.08% respectively. The moisture, crude protein, ether extract and total ash of the meat were 72.46±0.43, 23.31±0.23, 1.11±0.06 and 0.50±0.09% respectively. Among saturated fatty acids, palmitic acid (32.120±0.18) was the major fatty acid, followed by stearic acid (7.605±0.12). Oleic Acid (43.661±0.29) and palmitoleic Acid (1.677±0.17) were the main monounsaturated fatty acids detected, while linoleic Acid (12.754±0.13) was the chief polyunsaturated fatty acid in Kadaknath meat.

    INTRODUCTION

    The growing demand for organic meat and eggs has boosted backyard poultry farming, with indigenous breeds preferred for their low input needs, disease resistance and higher market and cultural worth (Sokołowicz et al., 2016). Indigenous chickens, often termed slow-growing (Haunshi and Prince, 2021; Haunshi et al., 2022), are valued for their superior taste and nutrition (Fanatico et al., 2007). Their growth and feed conversion rates are comparable to male layer-type chickens (Petkov et al., 2013), supporting sustainable, high-quality meat production (Popova et al., 2023). In recent years, there has been an increase in demand for meat from indigenous and local birds as consumers perceive that birds reared under extensive system are low in antibiotic and toxic residues (Bai et al., 2022). Meat quality is strongly influenced by genetic factors like breed and strain (Jaturasitha et al., 2004; Shahin and Elazeem, 2005).
           
    Kadaknath is a dual-purpose indigenous breed from central India, mainly found in Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh (Attri and Tyagi, 2010). Traditionally reared by tribal communities (Parmar, 2003), it is known for its dark plumage, distinct blood color and meat valued for taste and nutritional benefits (Parmar, 2003; Thakur et al., 2006). The breed is highly profitable, fetching 2-3 times the price of regular chickens (Prakash et al., 2023) and shows superior disease resistance and lower fat content compared to exotic breeds (Rao and Thomas, 1984). Kadaknath meat had a higher antioxidant capacity than the meat of commercial broiler (Sehrawat et al., 2021). The growth performance and adaptability of Kadaknath chicken under the agroclimatic conditions of Meghalaya were satisfactory (Deori et al., 2024). Tribals in Meghalaya typically slaughter them at around 7-8 months of age, often during festivals, religious ceremonies, or weddings. Today, the rising demand for poultry products from extensive production systems presents an opportunity to enhance the role of native chicken breeds, which are especially well-suited for free-range and organic farming due to their strong adaptation to local conditions (Sokołowicz et al., 2016). The present investigation was conducted to assess the major nutrients composition and fatty acid fractions of the meat of Kadaknath chicken reared in a deep litter system under hilly region of Meghalaya.

    MATERIALS AND METHODS

    The study was conducted at the ICAR Research Complex for NEH Region, Umiam, Meghalaya, India in the Eastern Himalaya under standard housing system and managemental practices. The farm is located at 21.5°N to 29.5° N latitude and 85.5°E to 97.5°E longitude with an altitude of 1010/ m altitude, the site experiences 2500-3000 mm annual rainfall, with temperatures ranging from 5.50°C in winter to 29.30°C in summer. All experimental protocols were approved by the Institutional Animal Ethics Committee, ICAR Research Complex for NEH Region, Umiam, Meghalaya.
           
    A total of 80 Kadaknath chicks were raised in the farm in four separate pens following deep litter system (20 in each room) with proper ventilation (Deori et al., 2024). Birds were fed age-appropriate rations ad libitum as per NRC (1994) standards (Table 1) and had access to clean water and 16 hours of light. Vaccination and deworming were done following standard farm protocols. At 32 weeks, eight birds were randomly selected, fasted overnight and slaughtered following Arumugam and Panda (1970). Meat samples (~150/ g) from breast, leg and wing (with skin) were pooled, packed and stored at -20°C. Liver, heart and gizzard were collected and weighed as a percentage of body weight.

    Table 1: Rations provided to Kadaknath chicken during the growth trial.


           
    Proximate analysis in triplicate was carried out within 24 hours of storage following the methods of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC, 2007). Parameters investigated on a dry matter basis included crude protein (CP) by Kjeldahl method; nitrogen × 6.25, ether extract (EE) by ether extraction method and total ash by burning at 500°C for 3 h. The fatty acid profile of Kadaknath meat was evaluated in triplicate as described by O’Fallon et al. (2007) with a slight modification and expressed as a percentage. Meat samples were thawed and ground at room temperature using a standard grinder. Approximately 1.0 g samples were placed into a 16 × 125 mm screw-cap PYREX culture tube and 1.0 mL of the C13:0 internal standard (0.5 mg of C13:0/mL of methanol), 0.7 mL of 10 N potassium hydroxide in water and 5.3 mL of methanol were added. The tube was incubated in a 55°C water bath for 1.5 h with vigorous hand shaking for 5 s every 20 min to permeate, dissolve and hydrolyze the sample properly. After cooling below room temperature in a cold tap water bath, 0.58 mL of 24 N sulfuric acid in water was added. The tube was mixed by inversion and, with precipitated potassium sulfate present, was incubated again in a 55°C water bath for 1.5 h with hand-shaking for 5 s every 20 min. Subsequently, allowing the content for fatty acid methyl ester (FAME) synthesis, the tube was cooled in a cold tap water bath, 3 mL of hexane was added and the tube was mixed for 5 min on a multitube vortex mixer. The tube was then centrifuged for 5 min in a tabletop centrifuge and the hexane layer, comprising the FAME, was placed into a GC vial. The fatty acid composition of the FAME was determined by a GC Model 2010 Plus from Shimadzu. The standard used was obtained from Sigma-Aldrich, Supelco 37 Component FAME Mix (Product Code: CRM47885 with Lot No: LRAC6213).
           
    Data obtained were statistically analyzed using SPSS version 23. The mean value, standard error and percentage attained were used to draw results and conclusions.

    RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

    The carcass yield and chemical compositions of the meat of Kadaknath chicken are given in Table 2. In the present study, Kadaknath chickens recorded a live weight of 1.83 ±0.14 kg, carcass weight of 1.167±0.11 kg and a dressing percentage of 63.19±1.27%, similar to the values reported by Bhardwaj et al., (2006) and Haunshi et al., (2013). Indigenous breeds like Kadaknath generally show lower dressing yields due to higher feather mass and a greater proportion of non-edible parts (head, shanks, feathers). Ekka et al., (2018) reported higher dressing yields (67.57% in males and 67.38% in females) at 20 weeks, while Haunshi et al., (2022) found 70.5% at 27 weeks. Variations in dressing percentage can be influenced by age, diet and rearing systems (Wattanachant et al., 2002; Od-Ton et al., 2004; Lawrie, 1991). Compared to commercial broilers, Kadaknath grows slower and has lower muscle mass. These values align with observations in other native breeds such as Aseel Peela and Ghagus (Arora et al., 2011; Rajkumar et al., 2016).

    Table 2: Carcass yield and meat chemical composition of kadaknath chicken.


           
    The moisture, crude protein, ether extract and total ash of the Kadaknath meat in the study were 72.46±0.43, 23.31±0.23, 1.11±0.06 and 0.50±0.09 % respectively. The moisture content of Kadaknath meat in the current work aligned with the moisture level in Kadaknath meat reported by other researchers. The protein and ether extract concentrations in the present study were comparable to the protein and ether extract % of Kadakanth meat reported by Haunshi et al., (2022) and Balakumar et al. (2024). On the other hand, Kumar et al., (2018) and Gnanaraj et al. (2020) found a lower protein concentration than the current study, whereas Singh and Pathak (2017) found a higher protein concentration (27.25%). The amount of total ash in Kadaknath meat in the current work could be associated with that of the total ash in Kadaknath meat reported by Singh and Pathak (2017) and Kumar et al., (2018), while other researchers reported a slightly higher total ash content in the meat of Kadaknath (Gnanaraj et al., 2020; Haunshi et al., 2022).
           
    The chemical composition of chicken meat is influenced by factors such as species, breed, age, muscle type and processing methods (Ding et al., 1999; Lombardi-Boccia et al., 2005; Wattanachant and Wattanachant, 2007). Slow-growing native chickens, like Thai indigenous birds, show higher protein and lower fat content than broilers (Wattanachant et al., 2004). Fanatico et al., (2007) and Zotte et al., (2020) also reported similar trends in slow-growing breeds. These findings suggest that both genotype and growth rate significantly impact the nutritional profile of chicken meat, with native breeds generally offering leaner, protein-rich meat.
           
    The organ weight and percent of organ weight are given in Table 2. The weight of liver, heart and gizzard were 21.64±1.16, 8.48±0.29 and 33.28±1.12 g respectively, while the percentage of liver, heart and gizzard of the live weight were 1.19±0.02, 0.47±0.02 and 1.84±0.08 % respectively. The organ findings in the present study could be associated with the organ weight of 20th and 27th week old Kadaknath chicken reported by Haunshi et al., (2013) and Haunshi et al., (2022), correspondingly. However, the liver and gizzard weight and their percentage of live weight of 10th week old Kadaknath reported by Haunshi et al., (2013) were superior to the current findings. The proportion of internal organs’ weight varies and is influenced by factors such as species, age, size and type of animal (Ressang, 1984). Auza et al., (2021) reported a similar percentage of liver and heart weight in 12-week-old native chickens (140 DOC), yet they found a superior percentage of gizzard weight.
           
    Native chickens, due to their slower growth and lower feed intake, typically have smaller internal organs involved in digestion and metabolism compared to fast-growing broilers. Liver size reflects its detoxification role and metabolic activity, including bile secretion and protein breakdown (Price and Wilson, 1985; Auza et al., 2021). Heart size is influenced by species, age and activity, adapting to physiological demands (Ressang, 1984). The gizzard, a muscular organ essential for feed grinding, increases in size with high-fiber diets (Amrullah, 2004). These organ variations are linked to genotype, diet and physiological needs of the bird.
           
    The individual fatty acid fractions of Kadaknath meat have been given in Table 3. Among the saturated fatty acids, palmitic (32.120±0.18) was the major saturated fatty acid, followed by stearic acid (7.605±0.12). The concentration of monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFA) was higher, especially oleic acid (43.661±0.29), whereas linoleic acid (12.754±0.13) was the chief polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA).

    Table 3: Fatty acid compositions of Kadaknath meat (pooled sample).


           
    Polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) like linoleic and á-linolenic acids cannot be synthesized by the body, making their tissue levels diet-dependent (Wood and Enser, 1997). In contrast, saturated and monounsaturated fatty acids are endogenously synthesized and remain stable. The present fatty acid profile of Kadaknath meat aligns with Gnanaraj et al., (2020) and varies among native breeds due to dietary differences (Cherian et al., 2002). Lean meats, including poultry, have low fat content and favorable P:S ratios, while meat from grazing ruminants naturally offers a beneficial n-6 to n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid balance (Wood and Enser, 1997). Poultry respond rapidly to dietary changes in PUFA levels, especially n-3 fatty acids, which inversely affect n-6 levels (Tougan et al., 2018).
           
    Indigenous chickens are considered healthier due to lower fat, cholesterol and favorable fatty acid profiles (Jaturasitha et al., 2008). Fat and triacylglycerol composition in muscle significantly influence meat quality, affecting flavor and tenderness (Miller, 1994). Despite similar diets, differences in fatty acid composition may arise from breed-specific feeding behaviors (Hunton, 1995). Indigenous chickens often show higher saturated and lower polyunsaturated fatty acids than broilers (Wattanachant et al., 2004). In poultry, dietary fats are absorbed and deposited directly without modification (Wood and Enser, 1997). Fatty acid profiles are influenced by breed, anatomy and rearing practices (Zlender et al., 2000).

    CONCLUSION

    Kadaknath chicken meat from the Eastern Himalayan region showed high protein, low fat and favorable fatty acid composition. The hilly ecosystem did not adversely affect meat quality, as the nutrient and fatty acid profiles were comparable to those reported in other Indian regions. Further research on amino acid, mineral content and muscle fiber characteristics of breast and thigh meat can provide a complete nutritional profile of Kadaknath chicken.

    ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

    The authors gratefully acknowledge the All India Coordinated Research Project (AICRP) on Poultry Breeding for providing necessary support.

    CONFLICT OF INTEREST

    The authors also declare that they have no conflict of interest in this study.

    REFERENCES


    1. Amrullah, I.K.  (2004). Nutrisi Ayam Broiler, 2nd Ed (Bogor: Gunung Budi).

    2. AOAC. (2007). Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists International, 18th edn. Gaithersburg, MD, USA.

    3. Arora, G., Mishra, S. K., Nautiyal, B., Pratap, S.O., Gupta, A., Beura, C.K. and Singh, D.P. (2011). Genetics of hyperpigmentation associated with the fibromelanosis gene (Fm) and analysis of growth and meat quality traits in crosses of native Indian Kadaknath chickens and non-indigenous breeds. British Poultry Science. 52(6): 675-685.

    4. Arumugam, M.P. and Panda, B. (1970). Processing and Inspection of Poultry. Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Izatnagar, Uttar Pradesh.

    5. Attri, S.D. and Tyagi, A. (2010). Climate profile of India. Environment Monitoring and Research Center, India Meteorology Department: New Delhi, India.

    6. Auza, F.A., Purwanti, S., Syamsu, J.A. and Natsir, A. (2021). The relative weight of internal organs and digestive tract in native chickens age 12 weeks that are given various levels of BSF larvae meal (Hermetia illucens L.) in the ration. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 788(1): 012064.

    7. Bai, A., Ruban, W.S., Spandan, P.V., Barry, I.G.A., Kumar, N.S., Indresh, H.C. and Nagaraja, C.S. (2022). Carcass and meat quality characteristics of native chicken reared under backyard and farm setting in Karnataka. Asian Journal of Dairy and Food Research. 41(1): 111-115. doi: 10.18805/ajdfr.DR-1699.

    8. Balakumar, A., Pandian, C., Selvan, S.T. and Valavan, S.E. (2024). Effect of feeding different dietary protein levels on meat characteristics of kadaknath chicken. The Indian Veterinary Journal. 101(2): 22-26.

    9. Bhardwaj, R.K., Kumar, S., Pant, D., Kumar, A. and Sharma, R.K. (2006). Study of growth, reproductive and carcass traits in purebred and crossbred chicken. Indian Journal of Poultry Science. 41(3): 301-303.

    10. Cherian, G., Selvaraj, R.K., Goeger, M.P. and Stitt, P.A. (2002). Muscle fatty acid composition and thiobarbituric acid- reactive substances of broilers fed different cultivars of sorghum. Poultry Science. 81(9): 1415-1420.

    11. Deori, S., Doley, S., Abedin, S.N., Lalhriatpuii, M., Wankhar, J.B.M., Dutta, P.R. and Katiyar, R. (2024). Growth and reproductive performance of kadaknath chicken reared under deep litter system in the hill ecosystem of Meghalaya, India. Uttar Pradesh Journal of Zoology. 45(4): 34-39.

    12. Ding, H., Xu, R.J. and Chan, D.K.O. (1999). Identification of broiler chicken meat using a visible/near infrared spectroscopic technique. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture. 79(11): 1382-1388.

    13. Ekka, P., Singh, M., Mukherjee, K., Barwa, D.K., Jain, A. and Choudhary, M. (2018). Carcass characteristics of Kadaknath fowl reared under intensive system in Chhattisgarh. International Journal of Advanced Biological Research. 8(1): 106-109.

    14. Fanatico, A.C., Pillai, P.B., Emmert, J.L. and Owens, C.M. (2007). Meat quality of slow-and fast-growing chicken genotypes fed low-nutrient or standard diets and raised indoors or with outdoor access. Poultry Science. 86(10): 2245-2255.

    15. Gnanaraj, P.T., Sundaram, A.S., Rajkumar, K. and Babu, R.N. (2020). Proximate composition and meat quality of three indian native chicken breeds. Indian Journal of Animal Research. 54(12): 1584-1589. doi: 10.18805/ijar.B-3905.

    16. Haunshi, S. and Prince, L.L.L. (2021). Kadaknath: A popular native chicken breed of India with unique black colour characteristics. World’s Poultry Science Journal. 77(2): 427-440.

    17. Haunshi, S., Sunitha, R., Shanmugam, M., Padhi, M.K. and Niranjan, M. (2013). Carcass characteristics and chemical composition of breast and thigh muscles of native chicken breeds. Indian Journal of Poultry Science. 48(2): 219-222.

    18. Haunshi, S., Ullengala, R., Prince, L.L., Ramasamy, K., Gurunathan, K., Devatkal, S. and Chatterjee, R.N. (2022). Genetic parameters of growth traits, trend of production and reproduction traits and meat quality status of Ghagus, an indigenous chicken of India. Tropical Animal Health and Production. 54(3): 170.

    19. Hunton, P. (1995). Poultry Product. Elsevier Science, B.V. Amsterdam, 600p.

    20. Jaturasitha, S., Khiaosaard, R., Pongpaew, A., Leowtharakul, A., Saitong, S., Apichatsarangkul, T., Leaungwunta, V. and Langani, N. (2004). The Effects of Strain, Sex, Weight and Muscle on Fat Quality of Thai Native and Crossbred Chickens (Kai Baan Thai), In: Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Conference. Kasetsart University, Bangkok, Thailand. pp.137-146.

    21. Jaturasitha, S., Srikanchai, T., Kreuzer, M. and Wicke, M. (2008). Differences in carcass and meat characteristics between chicken indigenous to northern Thailand (Black-boned and Thai native) and imported extensive breeds (Bresse and Rhode Island Red). Poultry Science. 87(1): 160-169.

    22. Kumar, R., Malapure, C.D., Sharma, J., Singh, R. and Singh, B.P. (2018). Studies on organoleptic and nutritional properties of Kadaknath birds in different agro-climatic zones. International Journal of Farm Sciences. 8(2): 79-84.

    23. Lawrie, R.A. (1991). Meat Science. Pergamon Press, Oxford, 293p.

    24. Lombardi-Boccia, G., Lanzi, S. and Aguzzi, A. (2005). Aspects of meat quality: trace elements and B vitamins in raw and cooked meats. Journal of food Composition and Analysis. 18(1): 39-46.

    25. Miller, R.K. (1994). Quality Characteristics. In Muscle Foods: Meat Poultry and Seafood Technology. Boston, MA: Springer US. pp. 296-332

    26. NRC. (1994). Nutrient Requirements of Poultry. Natl. Acad. Press, Washington, DC.

    27. O’Fallon, J.V., Busboom, J.R., Nelson, M.L. and Gaskins, C.T. (2007). A direct method for fatty acid methyl ester synthesis: application to wet meat tissues, oils and feedstuffs. Journal of Animal Science. 85: 1511-1521.

    28. Od-Ton, V., Wattanachant, C. and Wattanasit, S. (2004). Phenotypic characteristics and carcass quality of naked-neck chicken reared under backyard production systems. Thaksin. J. 7(1): 58-67.

    29. Parmar, S.N.S. (2003). Characterization of Kadaknath Breed of Poultry (Famous Black Bird of Jhabua). Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vidyalaya, Jabalpur (M. P.) Technical Bulletin DRS/ 2003/01. pp. 1-21.

    30. Petkov, E., Popova, T., Todorova, M. and Ignatova, M. (2013). Quality traits of breast and thigh muscles in three chicken genotypes. World’s Poultry Sci. J. pp. 69.

    31. Popova, T., Petkov, E., Ignatova, M., Vlahova-Vangelova, D., Balev, D., Dragoev, S. and Dimov, K. (2023). Meat quality of male layer-type chickens slaughtered at different ages.  Agriculture. 13(3): 624.

    32. Prakash, A., Singh, Y., Chatli, M., Sharma, A., Acharya, P. and Singh, M. (2023). Review of the black meat chicken breeds: Kadaknath, silkie and ayam cemani. World’s Poultry Science Journal. 79(4): 879-891.

    33. Price, S. A. and Wilson, L. (1985). Pathophysiology of Clinical Concepts of Disease Processes 1st Ed Dharma A (Jakarta:  EGC Medical Book Publisher). 

    34. Rajkumar, U., Muthukumar, M., Haunshi, S., Niranjan, M., Raju, M.V.L.N., Rama Rao, S.V. and Chatterjee, R.N. (2016). Comparative evaluation of carcass traits and meat quality in native aseel chickens and commercial broilers. British Poultry Science. 57(3): 339-347.

    35. Rao, G.V. and Thomas, P.C. (1984). The Breed Characteristics of kadaknath breed of indigenous (Desi) chicken. Avian Research. 68(1-2): 55-57.

    36. Ressang, A. (1984). Veterinary Specific Pathology 2nd Ed (Denpasar: Bali Printing). 

    37. Sehrawat, R., Sharma, R., Ahlawat, S., Sharma, V., Thakur., S.M., Kaur, M. and Tantia, S.M. (2021). First report on better functional property of black chicken meat from India. Indian Journal of Animal Research. 55(6): 727-733. doi: 10.18805/IJAR.B-4014.

    38. Shahin, K.A. and Elazeem, F.A. (2005). Effects of breed, sex and diet and their interactions on carcass composition and tissue weight distribution of broiler chickens. Arch. Tierz Dummerstorf. 48: 612-26.

    39. Singh, V. P. and Pathak, V. (2017). Physico-chemical, colour and textural characteristics of Cobb-400, vanajara, aseel and kadaknath meat. International J. Livest. Res. 7(11): 98-106.

    40. Sokołowicz, Z., Krawczyk, J. and Świątkiewicz, S. (2016). Quality of poultry meat from native chicken breeds-A review.

    41. Thakur, M.S., Parmar, S.N.S. and Pillai, P.V.A. (2006). Studies on growth performance in Kadaknath breed of poultry. Livestock Research for Rural Development. 18(8): 116.

    42. Tougan, U.P., Youssao, I.A., Yayi, E.L., Kpodekon, M.T., Heuskin, S., Beckers, Y. and Thewis, A. (2018). Fatty acids composition of meat of five native chicken (Gallus gallus)- ecotypes of benin reared under organic or conventional system. Journal of Experimental Food Chemistry. 4(2).

    43. Wattanachant, C., Suwanapugdee, A., Suksathit, S. and Mongkol, M. (2002). Growth performance of naked-neck chicken under village production systems. Thaksin University Journal. 5: 53-61.

    44. Wattanachant, S. and Wattanachant, C. (2007). Chemical composition, properties and microstructure of Thai indigenous chicken muscles as influenced by age and rearing systems. [Research report], Prince of Songkla University. Songkhla, Thailand, 77p.

    45. Wattanachant, S., Benjakul, S. and Ledward, D.A. (2004). Composition, color and texture of Thai indigenous and broiler chicken muscles. Poultry Science. 83(1): 123-128.

    46. Wood, J. D. and Enser, M. (1997). Factors influencing fatty acids in meat and the role of antioxidants in improving meat quality. British Journal of Nutrition. 78(1): S49-S60.

    47. Zlender, B., Holcman, A., Stibilj, V. and Polak, T. (2000). Fatty acid composition of poultry meat from free range rearing. Poljoprivreda Osijek. 6(53): 4.

    48. Zotte, A. D., Gleeson, E., Franco, D., Cullere, M. and Lorenzo, J. M. (2020). Proximate composition, amino acid profile and oxidative stability of slow-growing indigenous chickens compared with commercial broiler chickens. Foods. 9(5): 546.
    In this Article
      Contact us
      Follow us
      Published In
      Asian Journal of Dairy and Food Research

      Editorial Board

      View all (0)