Improving the Accuracy and Precision of Egg Volume Measurement and Comparing Hoyt’s Equation and Troscianko’s Egg Volume Estimation for Gallinaceous Bird Species

Document Type : Original Paper

Authors

1 University of Sopron, Faculty of Forestry, Institute of Wildlife Management and Vertebrate Zoology, H-9400 Sopron, Bajcsy-Zs. str. 4, Hungary

2 Sapientia Hungarian University of Transylvania, Faculty of Technical and Human Sciences, Tîrgu-Mureș, 540485 Tîrgu-Mureş, Corunca, Calea Sighișoarei nr. 2., Jud. Mureș, Romania

3 Ingvesting Team Ltd, Spectrometry Laboratory, H-9400 Sopron, Hungary

Abstract

The recognition that egg volume variation has widespread implications in avian biology led us to test the accuracy and precision of the most commonly used egg volume determination methods. As a benchmark for the tests, we used real egg volume values determined by water submersion. We identified some evident limitations of this approach and attempted to improve the method by using distilled water and accurate temperature correction. Starting from the assumption that our methodological proposals can effectively improve the accuracy of egg volume measurements, we compared the outcomes with two widely used volume estimation methods based on Hoyt’s equation and Troscianko software estimate for five gallinaceous bird species (forty eggs from each species). We found that Hoyt’s and Troscianko’s egg volume estimation methods strongly correlate with our volume measurements. Despite the highly significant and relatively high values of coefficients of determination, further analyses reveal some important differences among the methods.

Keywords

References

Alberico JAR. 1995. Floating eggs to estimate incubation stage does not affect hatchability. Wildlife Society Bulletin,  23(2): 212–216.
Amat JA, Fraga RM & Arroyo GM. 2001. Intraclutch egg-size variation and offspring survival in the Kentish Plover Charadrius alexandrinus. Ibis, 143: 17–23. DOI: 10.1111/j.1474-919X.2001.tb04165.x
Boersma PD & Rebstock GA. 2010. Calculating egg volume when shape differs: when are equations appropiate? Journal of Field Ornithology, 81: 442–448. DOI: 10.1111/j.1557-9263.2010.00300.x
Bridge ES, Boughton RK, Aldredge RA, Harrison TJE, Bowman R & Schoech SJ. 2007. Measuring egg size using digital photography: Testing Hoyt’s method using Florida Scrub-Jay eggs. Journal of Field Ornithology, 78: 109–116. DOI: 10.1111/j.1557-9263.2006.00092.x
Dolenec Z. 2016. Is there a trade-off between clutch size and egg volume in Magpie Pica pica in Northwestern Croatia? Larus, 51: 33–37. DOI: 10.21857/yq32ohq339
Fernández GJ & Reboreda JC. 2008. Between and within clutch variation of egg size in Greater Rheas. The Wilson Journal of Ornithology, 120: 674–682. DOI: 10.1676/07-176.1
Hailes HC. 2007. Reaction solvent selection: The potential of water as a solvent for organic transformations. Organic Process Research and Development, 11: 114–120. DOI: 10.1021/op060157x
Hoyt DF. 1979. Practical Methods of Estimating Volume and Fresh Weight of Bird Eggs. The Auk, 96: 73–77. DOI: 10.1093/auk/96.1.73
Hoyt DF. 1976. The effect of shape on the surface-volume relationships of birds’ eggs. The Condor, 78: 343–349. DOI: 10.2307/1367694
Kern MD & Cowie RJ. 1996. The size and shape of eggs from a welsh population of pied flycatchers : Testing Hoyt’s use of egg dimensions to ascertain egg volume. Journal of Field Ornithology, 67: 72–81.
Lide DR. 2006. Standard density of water. In: Lide DR (ed) CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 86th Ed. Taylor and Francis Group LLC, Boca Raton. FL, USA. 882 Pages.
Mänd R, Nigul A & Sein E. 1986. Oomorphology: A New Method. The Auk, 103: 613–617. DOI: 10.1093/auk/103.3.613
Mohammadabadi MR., Nikbakhti M, Mirzaee HR, Shandi MA, Saghi DA, Romanov MN & Moiseyeva IG. 2010. Genetic variability in three native Iranian chicken populations of the Khorasan province based on microsatellite markers. Russian Journal of Genetics, 46: 572–576. DOI: 10.1134/S1022795410040198
Mohammadifar A, Faghih ISA, Mohammadabadi MR & Soflaei M. 2013. The effect of TGF3 gene on phenotypic and breeding values of body weight traits in Fars native fowls. Journal of Agricultural Biotechnology, 5: 125-136. DOI: 10.22103/JAB.2014.1226
Mohammadifar A & Mohammadabadi MR. 2017. The Effect of Uncoupling Protein Polymorphisms on Growth, Breeding Value of Growth and Reproductive Traits in the Fars Indigenous Chicken. Iranian Journal of Applied Animal Science, 7 (4): 679-685.
Mónus F & Barta Z. 2005. Repeatability analysis of egg shape in a wild Tree Sparrow (Passer montanus) population: A sensitive method for egg shape description. Acta Zoologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, 51: 151–162.
Narushin VG, Romanov MN & Bogatyr VP. 2002. Relationship between pre-incubation egg parameters and chick weight after hatching in layer breeds. Biosystems Engineering, 83: 373–381. DOI: 10.1006/bioe.2002.0122
Preston FW. 1968. The shapes of birds’ eggs: mathematical aspects. The Auk, 85: 454–463. DOI: 10.2307/4083294
Rahn H & Ar A. 1974. The avian egg: incubation time and water loss. The Condor, 76: 147–152. DOI: 10.2307/1366724
Reid WV & Boersma PD. 1990. Parental quality and selection on egg size in the Magellanic Penguin. Evolution, 44: 1780–1786. DOI: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.1990.tb05248.x
Ruiz X, Petriz J & Jover L. 1992. Estimating internal egg volumes from linear dimensions: Isomorphy in eggs belonging to the family ardeidae. Miscel•lània Zoològica, 16: 254–257.
Rush SA, Maddox T, Fisk AT, Woodrey MS & Cooper RJ. 2009. A precise water displacement method for estimating egg volume. Journal of Field Ornithology, 80: 193–197. DOI: 10.1111/j.1557-9263.2009.00222.x
Severa L, Nedomová Š, Buchar J & Cupera J. 2013. Novel approaches in mathematical description of hen egg geometry. International Journal of Food Properties, 16 :1472–1482. DOI: 10.1080/10942912.2011.595028
Sheldon RA. 2005. Green solvents for sustainable organic synthesis: state of the art. Green Chemistry, 7: 267. DOI: 10.1039/B418069K
Székely T, Kozma J & Piti A. 1994. The volume of Snowy-Plower eggs. Journal of Field Ornithology, 65: 60–64.
Troscianko J. 2014. A simple tool for calculating egg shape, volume and surface area from digital images. Ibis, 156: 874–878. DOI: 10.1111/ibi.12177
Wilk R. 2006. Bottled water. Journal of Consumer Culture, 6: 303–325. DOI: 10.1177/1469540506068681
Williams TD. 2001. Experimental manipulation of female reproduction reveals an intraspecific egg size clutch size trade-off. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 268: 423–428. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2000.1374
Williams TD. 1994. Intraspecific variation in egg size and egg composition in birds: effects on offspring fitness. Biological Reviews, 69: 35–59. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-185X.1994.tb01485.x
Poultry Science Journal
Volume 11, Issue 1
January 2023
Pages 95-101

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics