Market Possibilities and Yields of Muscovy Ducks

Dressed at Various Ages

E. S. SNYDER
Department of Poultry Science, Ontario Agricultural College, Guelph, Ontario

(Received for publication September 12, 1961)

/"XNTARIO farmers are showing in- shelter; the other confined in a 10' X 20'
^—* creased interest in the production of pen in a brooder house.
Muscovy ducks for market purposes. How- Commencing at six weeks of age both
ever, inquiry of growers concerning growth lots received a commercial pelleted duck
rate, feed efficiency, dressing percentages finisher containing 17 percent protein.
and meat yields, yielded little or no in- Heavy No. 3 C. W. oats were continued
formation. A search of available literature until 14 weeks of age, when finisher mash
proved equally fruitless; therefore, a study was discontinued and a grain mixture con-
of these factors as related to Muscovy taining equal parts by weight of oats and
ducks seemed justified. Because some wheat was substituted. At this time also
Muscovy ducks are now reared in confine- the confined group was moved to the range
ment, rather than on range as is the more because of deterioration in their condition
common practice, some comparison of these in spite of a daily supply of fresh lawn
two methods was also made. clippings.
In spite of a continuous supply of oats
PROCEDURE and lawn clippings, feather picking com-
The ducklings used in this study were menced in both lots at the age of three
started for one week in a battery, then weeks, just as soon as the sappy tail feath-
moved to the floor and brooded under heat ers and the slightly later wing feathers ap-
lamps. For the first three weeks all re- peared. Generous applications of pine tar
ceived the same treatment. Chick starter failed to discourage picking which became
was fed during the first week followed by so general and vicious that at seven weeks
a commercial niacin-fortified duck starter of age debeaking became necessary to save
containing 20 percent protein—both in the birds. An electrical debeaker was used
crumble form. Heavy oats were supplied to remove the upper mandible to a point
in a separate hanging feeder after the sec- posterior to the "bean." This treatment
ond week. In addition some freshly-cut proved effective. The confined lot required
lawn clippings were supplied daily. Water debeaking a few days sooner than those
and granite grit were constantly available. on range, where it became equally neces-
Wood shavings were used for litter. sary.
At three weeks of age the ducklings were Individual bird weights were taken at
randomized into two lots. Difficulty in se- one day of age and at 3, 6, 9, 10, 12, 14,
curing the desired number made necessary 17, and 18 weeks. Feed consumption also
the use of more males than females and was recorded at each weighing. Two or
also a few ducklings of a slightly greater more representative samples of both males
age. These were divided between the two and females were slaughtered, dressed and
lots. One lot was placed on a good ladino eviscerated at 10, 12, 17, and 18 weeks of
clover pasture with a colony house for age and weights recorded. The carcasses
813
814 E. S. SNYDER

were then ice-water chilled, Cryovac pack- weeks, shown in Table 2, are lower than
aged, frozen at — 20°F. and stored at 0°F. those of Pekin ducks as reported by Hunter
for later meat yield tests. The intention and Scholes (1954). However, unlike Pekins,
had been to dress samples at 14 and 16 Muscovy males maintained rapid growth
weeks, but a heavy moult and extreme pin- up to at least 18 weeks, though the females
nyness at 14 weeks and an unexpected in- made relatively little gain after 12 to 14
terference with plans at 16 weeks resulted weeks. These variations in growth rate and
in the dressing intervals here reported. size of the two sexes at maturity are im-
The selected carcasses were defrosted portant factors in marketing Muscovies.
in cold running tap water, drained, and They are also a reason for the greatly de-
dried with clean cloths. Cooking was done creased feed/gain efficiency found after 14
in individual open pans in a double oven weeks of age.
electric stove with oven temperature regu- Dressing percentages are shown in Table
lators set at 32S°F. The carcasses were 3. There was no difference between males
loosely covered by a sheet of foil and and females; both showed a similar per-
cooked until a meat thermometer inserted in centage increase in eviscerated and carcass
a thigh recorded a temperature of 195°F. weights with greater maturity. Dressing
At this time the cooked carcasses were re- losses averaged 13.2 percent, quite similar
moved from the pans and the drippings to the average dressing loss of 13.3 per-
weighed. Removal of the foil about IS cent in 8 to 24 week old goslings reported
minutes before cooking was completed al- by Deskins and Winter (1956). The dress-
lowed the skin to brown nicely. ing percentage for males at 10, 12, 17 and
After sufficient cooling to allow han- 18 weeks was 86.8, 85.1, 87.3 and 87.9
dling, the skin and edible meat were care- percent respectively and for females 85.1,
fully separated from the carcass and 86.9, 88.3, and 87.0 percent. Clements and
weights of skin, edible meat, bone, and Winter (1956) reported an average dress-
any waste were recorded. All weights in ing loss in Pekin ducks of 11.8 percent
this test were taken in grams and trans- and Snyder (1959) a loss of 11.7 percent.
posed to pounds. Eviscerated yields of Muscovies at the
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
TABLE 1.—Feed efficiency of Muscovy ducks
The feed/gain results are shown in
Table 1. Up to 10 weeks, when sampling Age in No. of Feed Gain Feed/gain
weeks birds
for slaughter was started, the "range"
group had a feed/gain^ efficiency of 3.14 Combined
1-3 53 130.0 77.54 1.68
as compared with 3.59 for the confined Gr. 1. Confined
group. This advantage was maintained up 3-6 27 179.50 64.24 2.79
6-9 27 251.75 44.25 5.69
to 14 weeks despite heavy daily consump- 9-10 27 79.62 12.93 6.16
tion of lawn clippings by the confined 10-12 23 97.88 15.35 6.38
12-14 10 53.50 6.16 8.69
group. The range males and females ex- Gr. 2. On Range
ceeded the growth of their counterparts 3-6 26 152.50 55.40 2.75
6-9 26 221.75 52.0 4.26
in confinement and at a lower feed re- 9-10 26 66.87 15.43 4.33
quirement per pound of gain. Snyder and 10-12 22 98.13 24.17 4.06
12-14 10 78.50 12.49 6.29
Orr (1955) found the same to be true of Gr. 1 & 2. Combined
goslings. 14-17 20 160.00 5.42 29.52
17-18 8 92.75 1.97 47.08
The unweighted average weights to ten
 YIELDS AND MARKETING OF MUSCOVY DUCKS 815

TABLE 2.—Growth rate of Muscovy ducks—1960-61

Males Females Males and

Age in females
weeks No. of Aver. wt. No. of Aver. wt. unweighted
birds in lbs. birds in lbs. average
0 & & 9 .117 or 1.87 oz
3 32 1.79 21 1.32 1.55
6 32 4.47 21 2.92 3.53
9 32 6.69 21 4.16 5.42
10 32 7.38 21 4.43 5.90
12 28 8.58 17 4.76 6.67
17 12 9.87 8 5.22 7.54
18 4 10.90 4 5.36 8.13
Males Females
Age in Confined Range Confined Range
weeks
No. of Aver. wt. No. of Aver. wt. No. of Aver. wt. No. 3f Aver. wt.
birds in lbs. birds in lbs. birds in lbs. birds in lbs.
3 32 1.79* 21 1.32f
6 16 4.63 16 4.32 11 3.08 10 2.74
9 16 6.60 16 6.78 11 4.29 10 4.01
10 16 7.22 16 7.54 11 4.50 10 4.35
12 14 8.22 14 8.94 9 4.65 8 4.88

* Total males,
f Total females.

several ages were 69.5, 70.9, 72.0 and 73.5 weight. That of eviscerated weight ranged
percent for the males and 69.2, 73.6, 71.8 from 80.1 to 84.7 percent and that of the
and 71.8 percent for the females, the aver- carcass, minus neck and giblets, from 69.5
age total shrink amounting to 28.5 percent. to 75.4 percent. Yields of goslings as re-
This compares favourably with the average ported by Snyder and Orr (1953) at simi-
shrink of 29.1 percent in Pekins reported lar ages were 1 to 5 percent lower. Com-
by Clements and Winter (1956) and with parison with eviscerated yields of broilers,
the 27 to 33 percent losses in 8 to 9 week roasters, capons and fowls of 79.7, 80.4,
old Pekins reported by other workers; also 82.6 and 74.3 percent respectively is also
the 28.5 percent shrink in goslings reported quite favourable (unpublished data). This
by Deskins and Winter (1956). is not true with turkeys, however, espe-
In Table 4 is presented the percentage cially adult turkeys, where Orr et al.
yields of the various parts based on dressed (1956) have reported eviscerated yields

TABLE 3.—Effect of age on dressing percentages of Muscovy ducks {based on live weig

Females Males

Age in Aver, No. of Dressed Evisc. Carcass Aver, No. of Dressed Evisc. Carcass
weeks live wt. birds wt.* wt.* wt.* live wt. birds wt.* wt.* wt.*
10 4.50 4 85.13 69.20 61.19 7.37 4 86.79 69.49 60.27
12 4.85 6 86.95 73.65 65.53 8.44 8 85.14 70.94 63.15
17 5.15 4 88.27 71.83 63.82 10.14 4 87.29 72.04 64.41
18 5.36 4 86.98 71.80 64.70 10.90 4 87.91 73.47 65.24

* Prior to chilling in ice-water.

816 E. S. SNYDER

TABLE 4.—Percentage of various parts of Muscovy ducks {based on dressed weight)

Age in No. of Necks Giblets Raining Total

Sex Feet Heads w
weeks birds carcass evisc. wt.
10 4 9 3.35 5.84 3.34 6.21 71.88* 81.29t 18.71
12 6 9 3.01 5.95 3.62 5.73 75.36 84.71 15.29
17 4 9 2.99 5.65 3.49 5.59 72.30 81.38 18.62
18 4 9 2.96 5.29 3.30 4.87 74.38 82.54 17.46
10 4 <? 3.68 5.33 4.03 5.97 69.45 80.07 19.93
12 8 & 3.43 5.48 3.93 5.21 71.18 83.32 16.68
17 4 c? 3.28 5.37 3.66 5.09 73.78 82.53 17.47
18 4 & 3.41 5.05 3.91 5.45 74.21 83.57 16.43

* Necks and giblets not included.

f Necks and giblets included.

based on dressed weight ranging from 86.6 Deskins and Winter (1956) reported a
to 88.8 percent. cooking loss of 35 percent in geese and
A full series of weights from live weight Clements and Winter (1956) a cooking
to that of edible cooked meat, drippings and loss in 7.5 week Pekin ducks, including
bones is listed in Table 5. fat in the drippings, of 38.6 to 51.8 per-
The yield of edible cooked meat at ages cent when pressure cooked. At the younger
10 to 18 weeks increased only slightly over ages, the males had a lower percentage of
2 percent in the females, but 4 to 5 per- skin and slightly more meat than the fe-
cent in the males. Decrease, with age, in males. The total cooked edible portion,
percentage of bone in the two sexes proved based on carcass weight, was 49.1, 46.5,
more uniform as shown in Table 6. 47.2, and 50.4 percent for the females at
Cooking shrink, based on uncooked car- the several ages and 46.1, 45.6, 49.6 and
cass weights of the two sexes at the several 50.0 percent for the males.
ages averaged 35.7 percent for the females The majority of females even at 10
and 34.6 percent for the males—quite weeks of age and especially so at 17 to
comparable with the cooking shrink of 18 weeks, carried Grade A finish and fleshr
goslings at similar ages, Snyder (1959). ing. The males did not reach this condition

TABLE 5.—Effect of age on average weights of live, dressed, eviscerated, cooked carcass, edible portion,
drippings and bones in Muscovy ducks
(In pounds)

Age in No. of Uncooked Roasted Edible

weeks birds Sex Live Dressed* Evisc. f carcass f carcass portion Drippings Bones

10 4 9 4.50 3.83 3.11 2.75 1.79 1.35 .43 .35

12 6 9 4.85 4.28 3.57 3.18 1.94 1.48 .43 .39
17 4 9 5.15 4.55 3.70 3.29 2.06 1.55 .45 .38
18 4 9 5.36 4.66 3.85 3.47 2.30 1.75 .49 .36
10 4 &1 7.37 6.40 5.12 4.44 2.94 2.05 .38 .65
12 8 d 8.44 7.18 5.99 5.33 3.35 2.43 .45 .68
17 4 cT 10.14 8.85 7.30 6.53 4.36 3.24 .85 .82
18 4 & 10.90 9.58 8.01 7.11 4.69 3.55 .79 .80

* Prior to chilling in ice water,

t Necks and giblets included.
j Necks and giblets not included.
 YIELDS AND MARKETING OF MUSCOVY DUCKS 817

TABLE 6.—Edible cooked meat and bone in Muscovy ducks

Percentage ; meat of: Percentage bone of:

Age in weeks
Live wt. Dressed wt.* Evisc. wt.* Carcass wt. f Live wt. Evisc. wt."! Carcass wt.f
Females
10 30.01 35.26 43.37 49.05 7.74 11.18 12.64
12 30.49 35.06 41.39 46.52 8.04 10.92 12.27
17 30.12 34.13 41.94 47.20 7.42 10.32 11.62
18 32.61 37.49 45.42 50.40 6.70 9.33 10.35
Males
10 27.77 31.99 39.95 46.07 8.85 12.74 14.69
12 28.80 33.82 40.59 45.60 8.04 11.33 12.73
17 31.96 36.61 44.36 49.62 8.13 11.29 12.63
18 32.62 37.11 44.40 50.00 7.37 10.03 11.29

* Prior to chilling in ice water.

f Neck and giblets not included.

until 17 weeks of age, though it is possible dressed at 10, 12, 17 and 18 weeks was.
that sufficient finish would have been pres- 7.37, 8.44, 10.14 and 10.90 pounds re-
ent at 16 weeks. spectively and of females 4.50, 4.85, 5.15
and 5.36 pounds.
SUMMARY Dressing percentages were 86.8, 85.1,
White Muscovy ducklings randomized 87.3 and 87.9 percent for males at the
into two lots at 3 weeks of age required several ages and 85.1, 86.9, 88.3 and 87.0
3.59 pounds of grain per pound of gain percent for females.
up to 10 weeks for the confined lot as Eviscerated percentages based on live
compared with 3.14 pounds for the lot weight were 69.5, 70.9, 72.0 and 73.5 per-
on a ladino clover range. cent for males and 69.2, 73.6, 71.8 and
The unweighted average weight of males 71.8 percent for females. The overall live
and females at 3, 6, 9 and 10 weeks was to eviscerated loss was 28.5 percent, con-
1.55, 3.53, 5.42 and 5.90 pounds respec- sisting of 13.2 percent blood and feathers
tively and for 12, 17 and 18 weeks, 6.67, and a 15.3 percent loss during evisceration.
7.54 and 8.13 pounds. Cooking shrink averaged 34.6 percent
Average live weight of sample males for males and 35.7 percent for females.
(combined range and confined reared) The cooked edible portion, based on the

TABLE 7.—Percentage of various parts of cooked Muscovy ducks

(Based on uncooked carcass* weight)

Age in No. of Carcass Cooked Cooking Drip- Total

weeks birds weight carcass shrink pings Skin Meat edible Bones Waste

Females
10 4 2.75 65.17 34.83 12.76 9.42 39.63 49.05 12.64 .72
12 6 3.18 62.97 37.03 13.46 7.74 38.79 46.52 12.27 .67
17 4 3.29 62.59 37.41 13.83 6.48 40.72 47.20 11.62 .60
18 4 3.47 66.35 33.65 14.26 5.27 45.13 50.40 10.35 1.11
Males
10 4 4.44 66.09 33.91 8.60 6.79 39.27 46.07 14.69 .76
12 8 5.33 62.94 37.06 8.50 5.52 40.08 45.60 12.73 .88
17 4 6.53 66.84 33.16 13.07 6.13 43.12 49.62 12.63 1.10
18 4 7.11 65.91 34.09 11.08 5.24 44.76 50.00 11.29 .86

* Neck and giblets not included.

818 E. S. SNYDER

uncooked carcass weight (minus necks and ing Company, Inc., Cayuga, N.Y.
giblets), was 46.1, 45.6, 49.6 and SO.O Orr, H. L., E. C. Hunt, and E. S. Snyder, 1956.
A comparison of dressing percentages and yields
percent respectively for the males and 49.1, of edible cooked meat in five strains of turkeys
46.5, 47.2 and 50.4 percent for the females. as broilers and as mature stock, 1956. Poultry
Sci. 35: 333-338.
REFERENCES
Snyder, E. S., W. F. Pepper, S. J. Slinger, and
Clements, P., and A. R. Winter, 1956. Duck H. L. Orr, 1955. The value of pasture for the
shrinkage from farm to table and cooked production of goose broilers. Poultry Sci. 34:
edible meat of parts. Am. Egg Poultry Rev. 35-38.
18: 44. Snyder, E. S., and H. L. Orr, 1953. Market possi-
Deskins, B., and A. R. Winter, 1956. Cooked bilities and yields of goslings dressed at various
edible meat in parts of poultry, II. geese. J. ages. Poultry Sci. 32: 181-182.
Am. Dietet. A. 32: 211-213. Snyder, E. S., 1959. Duck and goose raising. On-
Hunter, J. M., and J. C. Scholes, 1953. Profitable tario Department of Agriculture, Bull. 532: 53.
Duck Management (9th edition). Beacon Mill-

Bacterial Counts Associated with the Chilling of

Fryer Chickens
ANTHONY W. KOTULA, JAMES E. THOMSON AND JACK A. KINNER
Field Crops and Animal Products Branch, Market Quality Research Division, Agricultural Marketing
Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Beltsville, Maryland

(Received for publication September 15, 1961)

T N ORDER to obtain market poultry of and B) located in Delaware. In each plant,

-*• good quality and long shelf-life, the both standard chill tanks and a commercial
bacterial population on the birds after continuous chiller were tested.
processing should be as low as possible In the standard tank chilling used in
(Ayres et al., 1950). Good sanitary prac- both plants, a layer of slush ice was
tices in commercial processing plants have placed in the bottom of the tanks; the
accomplished much toward maintaining tanks were then filled with birds, and
high quality during storage. Each step in the enough water and ice was added to com-
dressing and eviscerating operation has pletely cover the birds. The carcasses re-
been evaluated to determine its effect on mained in these tanks for six hours without
the bacterial load (Walker and Ayres, agitation.
1956; Drewniak et al., 1954; Gunderson In plant A, an oscillating-vat type of
etal., 1954; and May, 1961). continuous chiller was in use.1 This chiller
With the advent of new processing tech- does not cause the birds to be splashed
niques, bacterial levels may be affected. about vigorously. Tap water at about 57°
The objective of this work was to deter- F. was introduced into the prechill unit
mine the effect of several chilling proce- and overflowed into a floor drain. Because
dures on the numbers of bacteria on chilled the rate of flow varied, the amount of tap
poultry. water added to the prechill unit was not
PROCEDURE measured. In the chill unit portion of the
The experiments were carried out in two 1
A more extensive description of the chilling
poultry processing plants (designated A systems used is presented by Kotula et al. (1960).