Genetic Evaluation of Pekin, Nageswari and Pekin × Nageswari Crossbred Duck for Growth and Egg Production Traits Under Intensive Management Condition

Document Type : Original Paper


Department of Animal Breeding and Genetics, Bangladesh Agricultural University, Mymensingh, 2202, Bangladesh


Duck is an important genetic resource primarily used for egg and meat in Bangladesh. This study evaluated the growth performance and egg production potentials of Pekin (P) × Nageswari (N) crossbred ducks compared to its parental Pekin and Nageswari breeds. The growth performance data of 440 P×N crossbreds were collected from three generations (F1, F2, and F3), while the first two generations' data on productive and reproductive traits were considered. Besides, performances of parental Pekin and Nageswari ducks (100 from each breed) were included in the evaluation process. The growth performance significantly differed among the Pekin, Nageswari and P×N crossbreds from day old to the 12th week of age (P < 0.001). The average live weight of the Nageswari duck was 1367 ± 17.38 g at the 12th week of age and was 1703.02 ± 19.76, 1910.46 ± 18.81 and 1826.49 ± 20.63 g, respectively, in F1, F2 and F3 crossbreds that close to the parental Pekin duck (1908.26 ± 34.18 g). Growth performance was superior in all three crossbred generations up to the 12th week of age except day old. The positive heterosis varied from 3.86 to 15.64% at marketing age (12th week). The P×N crossbreds attained sexual maturity two weeks earlier than the Pekin duck. The hen day egg production (HDEP%) was significant (P < 0.01) among the genotypes up to the 40th week of age except the 28th week. The total number of eggs up to 280 days in Pekin, Nageswari and two P×N crossbred F1 and F2 generations were 90.54, 92.32, 86.61 and 94.08, respectively. The egg weight of parental pure breeds and P×N crossbreds differed significantly (P < 0.05) during the investigated periods from the 24th to the 40th week of age. This result reflects the significance of non-additive genetic effects on growth traits. In conclusion, the genetic evaluation involving three generations of data essentially helps to establish the performances of the developed P×N crossbred duck.


Ahmad MT, Nandita D, Maruf TM, Pabitra MH, Mony SI, Ali MS, Ahmed MS & Bhuiyan MSA. 2021. Morphology, Morphometry, Growth Performance and Carcass Characteristics of Pekin, Nageswari and Their F1 Crossbred Ducks Under Intensive Management. Korean Journal of Poultry Science, 48(2): 59-67. DOI: 10.5536/KJPS.2021.48.2.59
Ansary E, Mahiuddin M, Howlider MAR & Hai MA. 2008. Meat production potential of different cross-bred ducklings. Bangladesh. Journal of Animal Science, 37(2): 82-88. DOI: 10.3329/bjas.v37i2.9885
Bharali D, Borah D, Dutta LJ & Barman KC. 2019. Performance of White Pekin duck reared in the intensive system in Udalguri district of Assam. The North-East Veterinarian, 18(4): 18-19.
Bhuiyan MSA, Mostary DS, Ali MS, Hussain MM & Ferdaus AJM. 2017. Performance of Nageswari duck of Bangladesh under intensive management condition. Bangladesh Journal of Animal Science, 46(3): 198-205. DOI: 10.3329/bjas.v46i3.36316
DLS (Department of Livestock Services). 2023. Annual report on livestock. Division of Livestock Statistics, Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock, Farmgate, Dhaka,               Bangladesh. 154 Pages.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 2020. FAOSTAT Statistical Database. FAO, Rome, Italy. 210 Pages.
Gorska A, Gorski J & Mroz E. 2014. Effect of Inter-Strain Crossbreeding in di-allele design    (4×4) on growth, weight of carcass and weight of basic groups of muscles in Pekin                duck crossbreds. European Poultry Science, 78: 1-16. DOI: 10.1399/eps.2014.7
Grosjean P, Ibanez F & Etienne M. 2018. Pastecs: Package for analysis of space-time ecological series. R Package version 1.3.21.
Islam MN, Khatun H, Ara Bhuyan A & Hasan MN. 2016. Performance of BLRI developed native duck under farmer’s condition with supplementary feeding. Bangladesh Journal of Livestock Research 19(1-2): 18. DOI: 10.3329/bjlr.v19i1-2.26423
Kavitha K, Manohar RG, Vairamuthu S & Ramamurthy N. 2017. Comparative study of egg quality traits in white pekin and indigenous ducks of Tamil Nadu. International Journal of Science, Environment and Technology, 6(6): 3520-3523.
Khatun H, lslam MN, Hossain MM & Faruque S. 2008. Performance study of crossbred duck (Beijing x Desi White Duck) in comparison with their parents. Journal of Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University, 2(2): 6-11.
Khalil MH, Debes AA & Shebl MK. 2018. Estimation of heterosis, combining ability and reciprocal effect for growth traits in chickens from a full diallel cross. International Journal of Research in Agricultural Science, 5: 2348-3997.
Kırmızıbayraka T, Kurua BB & Cengizb MM. 2018. Egg and hatchability traits in pekin ducks. International Poultry Science Congress of WPSA Turkish Branch. Nigde, Turkey. Pages, 439-441.
Lin RL, Chen HP, Rouvier & Poivey JP. 2014. Selection and crossbreeding in relation to plumage color inheritance in three Chinese egg type duck breeds (Anas Platyrhynchos). Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 27(8): 1069-1074. DOI: 10.5713/ajas.2013.13289
Makram A, Galal A & El-Attar AH. 2021. Effect of cross between Pekin and Sudani (Egyptian Muscovy) duck on the growth performance. Journal of Genetic and Environmental Resources Conservation, 9(1): 78-85.
Matitaputty PR, Wijaya CH, Bansi H, Laudadio V & Tufarell V. 2015. Influence of duck species and cross-breeding on sensory and quality characteristics of Alabio and Cihateup duck meat. CyTA-Journal of Food, 13(4): 522-526. DOI: 10.1080/19476337.2015.1011239
Mendiburu FD. 2021. Agricolae: statistical procedures for agricultural research, in: R package version 1.3-5.
Morduzzaman M, Bhuiyan AKFH, Rana M, Islam MR & Bhuiyan MSA. 2015. Phenotypic characterization and production potentials of Nageswari duck in Bangladesh. Bangladesh Journal of Animal Science, 44(2): 92-99. DOI: 10.3329/bjas.v44i2.26007
Padhi MK & Sahoo SK. 2012. Performance evaluation and crossbreeding effects for body weight and conformation traits in different breeds of ducks. Indian Journal of Animal Science, 82(11): 1372-1376.
Padhi MK. 2010. Production benefits of the crossbreeding of indigenous and non-indigenous ducks growing and laying period body weight and production performance. Tropical animal health and production, 42(7): 1395-1403. DOI: 10.1007/s11250-010-9597-z
Phookan A, Das B, Das A, Islam R, Sharma M, Bharali K & Basumatary K. 2018. Morphology, morphometry and certain egg quality traits of indigenous ducks of North Eastern region of India. International Journal of Chemical Studies, 6(2): 3131-3133.
Rahman MK, Haider MS, Debnath RC, Rahim A & Nandi R. 2020. Prospects of Pekin duck rearing in coastal region of Bangladesh. Journal of Agriculture, Food and environment, 1(4): 107-111. DOI: 10.47440/JAFE
Razuki WM & AL-Shaheen SA. 2011. Use of full diallel cross to estimate crossbreeding effects in laying chickens. International Journal of Poultry Science, 10(3): 197-204. DOI: 10.3923/IJPS.2011.197.204
Siwendu NA, Norris D, Ngambi JW, Shimelis HA & Benyi K. 2013. Heterosis and combining ability for body weight in a diallel cross of three chicken genotypes. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 45: 965-970. DOI: 10.1007/s11250-012-0317-8
Sharma SS, Zaman G, Goswami RN & Mahanta JD. 2003. Certain performance traits of Nageswari          ducks of Assam under range condition. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences, 73: 831-832.         
Wolf J & Knížetová H. 1994. Crossbreeding effects for body weight and carcass traits in Pekin duck. British Poultry Science, 35(1): 33-45. DOI: 10.1080/00071669408417668
Zaman G, Goswami RN, Aziz A, Nahardeka N, Roy TC & Mahanta JD. 2005. Farming system of Nageswari ducks in North Eastern India (Assam). World's Poultry Science Journal, 61: 687-693. DOI: 10.1079/WPS200579