Incidence, Cause, and Prevention of Egg Shell Breakage in Commercial Production

K. W. WASHBURN

Department of Poultry Science, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602

(Received for publication January 11, 1982)

ABSTRACT Estimates for the incidence of broken eggs in commercial production range from 6
to 8% of all eggs produced. This breakage can be categorized into a number of stages, and the
incidence at these stages varies. Attempts to decrease the incidence of shell breakage should be
approached by studying the underlying factors that contribute to breakage under a specific situation.
The factors discussed include: 1) the physiology of the bird, with emphasis on the interval between
and time of oviposition, rate of shell deposition, uterine environment, and metabolism; 2) egg
characteristics, with emphasis on egg shape, color, membrane, and deformities of the shell; 3)
behavior, with emphasis on stance and flightiness; 4) housing equipment; 5) management; 6)
environment, with emphasis on environmental temperature; 7) nutrition, with emphasis on Ca,
phase feeding, and vitamin D; and 8) age and its relationship with increasing egg size and 9) genetic
variation.
(Key words: shell breakage, shell strength, Aves, chickens)
1982 Poultry Science 61:2005-2012

INTRODUCTION
Estimates for t h e incidence of b r o k e n eggs
range from 6 t o 8% of all eggs p r o d u c e d . This is
based on t h e 6.7% value for t h e United King-
d o m (Anderson and Carter, 1 9 7 6 ) , t h e 8% value
for G e r m a n y (Folkerts, 1 9 7 6 ) , and t h e 6.4%
value for t h e US ( R o l a n d , 1 9 7 7 ) . This estimate
p r o b a b l y u n d e r e s t i m a t e s t h e damage, because it
would be difficult t o d e t e c t all breakage at t h e
p o i n t of lay or cracks in t h e later stages of
processing and t r a n s p o r t i n g t o t h e consumer.
T h e occurrence of shell breakage can be
categorized into a n u m b e r of stages. O p p o r t u n i -
ties for breakage occur: 1) before lay, 2) at t h e
p o i n t of lay, 3) during collection, 4) during
processing, and 5) during shipping. T h e inci-
dence of breakage at these stages varies. It is
a p p r o x i m a t e l y 3.5 % at t h e p o i n t of lay (Eggleton
and Ross, 1 9 7 1 ) ; ranges from a low of .3 t o a
high of 8.2 during t h e collection stage (Eggleton
and Ross, 1 9 7 1 ; Bezpa et al, 1 9 7 2 ) ; is a p p r o x -
imately 3.7%, b u t ranges from 1 t o 1 1 % , during
processing (Hamilton et al, 1 9 7 9 ) ; a n d is
a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1% during shipping.
A n u m b e r of factors c o n t r i b u t e t o t h e
breakage a t t h e p o i n t of lay. T h e condition of
the shell at t h e t i m e it is laid can influence t h e
incidence of shell breakage. If t h e shell was
cracked while in t h e u t e r u s and t h e n repaired, it
would be weaker and t h e incidence of breakage
at t h e p o i n t of lay greater (Siegel et al., 1978).
O t h e r variables c o n t r i b u t i n g t o shell damage at
t h e p o i n t of lay include: 1) age of hen, 2)
stance of hen a t time of oviposition, 3) design
of t h e cage s y s t e m and floor, 4) n u m b e r of h e n s
per cage, and 5) frequency of gathering.
T h e degree of breakage during collection is
normally low b u t can be quite high, because
e q u i p m e n t m a i n t e n a n c e and m a n a g e m e n t has a
major influence at this stage. It has b e e n s h o w n
t h a t gathering intervals, belt speeds, and n u m b e r
of right angle t u r n s are c o n t r i b u t i n g factors t o
breakage during collection (Hamilton et al.,
1979).
Several studies have shown t h a t t h e e x t e n t
of breakage sustained during t h e p r o c e d u r e of
getting t h e eggs t o t h e processing p l a n t is
similar t o t h a t observed a t t h e processing p l a n t
( H a m i l t o n et al, 1 9 7 9 ) . This breakage is distrib-
u t e d t h r o u g h t h e loading, washing, packaging,
and packing process. T h e quality, installation,
m a i n t e n a n c e , and use of t h e m a n y pieces of
e q u i p m e n t in this a u t o m a t e d process can have a
large effect on shell breakage as well as such
factors as t y p e of material used in a n d design of
t h e filler flats a n d stacking of cases (See Strong
et al, 1 9 8 2 , for a description). Obvious factors
influencing breakage during t r a n s p o r t a t i o n are
m e t h o d s of loading and securing cases, t y p e of
vehicle, driver, and t y p e of roads.
A t t e m p t s t o decrease t h e incidence of shell
breakage should be approached b y studying t h e
underlying factors t h a t c o n t r i b u t e t o breakage
u n d e r a specific situation. These factors include:
1) t h e physiology of t h e bird, 2) specific egg
characteristics, 3) behavior of t h e bird, 4)

2005
2006 WASHBURN
equipment design, installation, operation, and
maintenance, 5) management practices, 6)
environment, 7) nutrition, 8) age of the bird,
and 9) genetic makeup of the bird.
PHYSIOLOGICAL BASIS
Interval Between Oviposition. The amount
of shell deposited is a linear function of time in
the shell gland after plumping (Burmester et al,
1939), the length of time in the shell gland can
influence the amount of shell deposited and,
consequently, the shell strength. Choi et al.
(1981) have shown that the longer the interval
between eggs the more shell is deposited on the
egg. This influence is more noticeable if manage-
ment, feeding, and lighting are disrupted and if
an egg is held in the uterus too long so that the
next egg in the clutch does not get sufficient
shell (Siegel et al, 1978).
Time of Oviposition. A number of studies
(Roland et al., 1973; Potts and Washburn,
1974; Choi et al., 1981) have shown that the
shell strength of eggs laid in the morning is not
as good as that of those laid in the afternoon.
This relationship was consistent for different
ages, strains, and methods of assessing shell
strength (Washburn and Potts, 1975). Eggs laid
in the afternoon have a higher shape index
(rounder) and are smaller than eggs laid in the
morning. However, the results of Roland
(1978) suggested that these differences in the
characteristics of the egg do not explain the
differences in shell strength due to time of
oviposition. Hens laying an egg in the afternoon
have more light hours in which to consume
dietary calcium (Ca) during shell formation,
which suggests an explanation for differences in
shell strength due to time of oviposition as well
as possible management approaches to improving
shell strength. However, tests of this hypothesis
have shown that feeding excess Ca did not
eliminate this variation in shell quality and
feeding Ca deficient diets did not increase this
variation in shell quality due to oviposition
time (Roland et al, 1978).
Rate of Shell Deposition. In addition to the
length of time in the shell gland, the rate of
shell deposition can influence shell strength.
Buss and Stout (1981) found that lines genet-
ically selected for thick shells had a greater
increase in shell weight and percent shell per
unit of time in the shell gland than did the thin
shelled lines, suggesting that the rate of shell
deposition was different. The time interval
between ovipositions did not differ between
these lines (Stout and Buss, 1980). Although
the interval can affect shell thickness, studies
have shown that it does not explain the differ-
ences in shell strength of eggs laid in the morning
and those laid in the afternoon (Roland, 1981).
Uterine Environment. The uterine environ-
ment is a contributing factor to egg shell
strength. Although research in this area is
limited, there have been studies of oviducal
fluid, oviducal weight, and uterin pH. Although
no differences were noted in carbonic anhydrase
activity of fluid taken from hens selected for
differences in egg shell thickness (Salevsky and
Leach, 1980), oviducal tissue from hens that
laid eggs with higher specific gravity have been
shown to have higher weights than lower
specific gravity groups (Cipera, 1980). There
has been at least one study (Brake, 1981,
personal communication) that related uterine
pH to shell strength.
Metabolism. The single most important
contributing factor to shell formation is the
metabolism of calcium. A brief summary of Ca
metabolism as it is related to findings concerned
with shell strength is presented. A more detailed
schematic representation and discussion is given
by Hurwitz (1978). After the Ca is ingested and
absorbed, it goes into the Ca pool either bound
to a phosphoprotein or as free Ca. The free Ca
is then utilized for shell formation, is stored in
the bone, or is excreted. The bound Ca may
become free Ca or it may be incorporated into
the yolk. Thus, there are three excretion
routes for Ca (feces, yolk, shell). In times of Ca
deficiency the medullary bone may provide Ca
for the free Ca pool, which then can be used for
shell formation. The regulation of Ca metabo-
lism involves a number of hormonal systems
including estrogen, parathyroid hormone, cal-
citonin, and 1,25-dihydroxycholecalciferol.
The regulation by the hen of her calcium
consumption is not clear. If given the oppor-
tunity, the laying hen will consume more Ca
than the nonlaying hen, and the percent Ca
absorption increases during egg shell formation.
However, this regulation may be fairly crude in
that some laying birds may consume more and
others less Ca than actually needed (Griminger
and Lutz, 1964).
Despite its importance and numerous studies
showing an increase in total serum Ca in the
laying hen, it is difficult to associate variation
in shell quality with variation in Ca metabolism
if the system is functioning under normal
 SYMPOSIUM: EGG SHELL QUALITY
conditions of adequate nutrition and health.
Many of the studies concerning metabolism of
blood Ca have involved measuring total Ca.
Because the protein-bound portion of the total
Ca is not directly usable for egg shell formation,
the contribution of these studies is minimal.
Although there are few studies that have
measured the Ca* fraction, there appear to be
fundamental differences in regulation of Ca
homeostasis between lines selected for differ-
ences in ability to produce strong egg shells
(Combs et ah, 1979). Recent studies by Parsons
and Combs (1981) indicate that serum Ca* in
the laying hens is affected by the various stages
of the reproductive state as well as photoperiods
and patterns of food intake. Differences have
been observed in serum Ca and Ca-binding
proteins of lines differing in shell strength, but
no differences between lines were noted in
urinary Ca excretion, rate of transfer of Ca to
the shell, or in the effect of estradiol (Grunder
et ah, 1980a,b; Buss et ah, 1980).
The acid-base balance is also an important
factor influencing egg shell strength. Acidosis,
presumably arising from carbonate formation
by the shell gland, may not be completely
compensated for by hyperventilation or forma-
tion of acidic urine. Various additives, such as
sodium bicarbonate, can be used to reduce the
acidosis, but the results on shell strength have
not been consistent (Wolford and Tanaka,
1970). This inconsistency may be related to the
ratio of Na and K to Cl (Cohen and Hurwitz,
1974). Hamilton and Thompson (1980), how-
ever, reported that although the acid base
balance of the laying hen was influenced by the
Na and K to Cl ratio in the diet, there was no
correlation between blood pH or bicarbonate
level with shell strength.
EGG CHARACTERISTICS
A number of egg characteristics have a
relatively minor effect on shell strength. These
include egg shape, color, membrane, and shell
deformities. Egg curvature has been shown in a
number of studies to affect shell strength.
Richards and Swanson (1965) reported a
correlation of .22 to .33 between shape and
strength, Richards and Staley (1967) a correla-
tion of .37 to .51 between shape and strength,
and Mask et ah (1972) a correlation of —.88 to
—.55 between shape and deformation. The
study of Potts and Washburn (1974) suggests
that this relationship varies between strains and
methods of measuring shell strength.
2007
A small, but significant, positive association
between the intensity of the tint of brown shell
eggs and shell strength has been shown in a
number of studies (Godfrey, 1949; Godfrey
and Jaap, 1949; Carter, 1975; Grover et ah,
1980). Potts and Washburn (1974) found no
correlation of tint and strength in one commer-
cial strain of brown layers, and in another strain
the correlation varied depending on method of
measuring shell strength. This suggests that the
association of. tint to strength in the range of
variation in commercial layer populations is
minimal and that the association varies between
strains as well as the method of measuring shell
strength.
The importance of the shell membrane as a
building site for shell deformation is well
documented. The results of Britton (1977)
indicated that the amount of shell membrane is
related to shell strength and the age of the bird.
The amino acid content of the membranes did
not differ between old and young hens or
between low, medium, and high deformation
groups (Britton and Hale, 1977).
Broken eggs may not be normal. This has
been suggested by the genetic studies in broiler
hens by Jaap and Muir (1968) and by fine
structure studies such as those of Creger et ah
(1976). Siegel et ah (1978) reported a positive
correlation between the incidence of broken
eggs and incidence of defective eggs in several
White Rock populations. These studies suggest
that the tendency of a hen to produce defective
eggs may be related to shell strength of nonde-
fective eggs. However, studies using commercial
white egg strains are needed to substantiate the
importance of this relationship.
Both the absolute egg size as well as the rate
of increase in egg size should be considered.
Because the age of the hen and size of the egg
are so closely associated, the relationship of size
to strength will be discussed in the section
dealing with the effects of age on shell strength.
BEHAVIOR
Two aspects of behavior, stance and flighti-
ness, have been shown to influence egg break-
age, but these might not necessarily be related
to shell strength. Carter (1971) showed that
variation in the stance of the hen would be
associated with the variation in cracked and
broken eggs in cage systems. In the study of
Siegel et ah (1978), however, there was little
correlation between shank length and egg
breakage. Flightiness can affect the extent of
2008 WASHBURN
shell breakage in at least two ways: 1) by
increasing the breakage of shells before laying,
resulting in a shell with a body check and,
consequently, weaker shell, 2) by affecting the
length of time the egg spends in the uterus and
consequently the thickness of the shell.
EQUIPMENT
The quality of installation, maintenance,
operation, and repair of equipment is a very
important contribution to egg breakage that
can overwhelm the best genetic potential, diet,
environment, and management. The equipment
can affect the extent of breakage at the point
of lay as well as during collection, washing,
grading, packing, and shipping of eggs (See
Hamilton et al, 1979, for review).
Management. Although factors such as
genetic potential, diet, temperature, and age of
flock may be fixed, management can be an
important variable factor contributing to the
extent of shell breakage. As the number of hens
in a cage is increased, the chance that the egg
will be damaged before it reaches the collection
belt is increased. Disruption in the laying
house can result in breakage of an egg shell in
the uterus that, when repaired, results in an egg
with a body check and weaker shell. Thus,
disruptive activities should be kept at a mini-
mum, particularly if the hens are flighty. If eggs
are gathered frequently, opportunity will be
less for shell breakage due to collisions with
other eggs.
A longer period of access to feed during shell
formation may be partly responsible for the
improvement in shell quality of eggs laid in the
afternoon (Roland et al., 1973). However, even
if feeding patterns are manipulated so that the
access to feed is not a contributing factor, eggs
laid in the afternoon still have stronger shells
(Nordstrom, 1980).
Providing a light-dark cycle greater than 24
hr may also improve shell strength, but it may
be at the expense of egg numbers. When an
ahemeral light cycle (28 hours) was used at a
time near the end of lay, it was found that shell
strength was substantially improved, but
production was not affected (Yannakopoulos
and Morris, 1979). The relatively simple pro-
cedure of oiling eggs has been shown to result
in significantly stronger shell and reduced shell
breakage (Ball et al, 1976).
ENVIRONMENT
The environmental temperature may ad-
versely affect shell strength by its direct effect
on the strength of the shell and by its effect on
the hen. Deaton et al. (1981) and many other
studies have shown that the egg shell strength
decreases when the laying hen is exposed to
temperatures in excess of 32C. If the increased
temperature is sudden, an even more dramatic
decrease in shell strength is observed. In addition
to the effect of absolute temperature, the
diurnal cycle of the temperature is also impor-
tant. Shell strength of layers exposed to cyclic
temperatures was shown to be superior to those
exposed to constant temperatures (Wilson et
al, 1972) and those exposed to a constant high
temperature had poorer shell strength than
those exposed to a temperature that cycled ±
6 from the mean of the high temperature
(Miller and Sunde, 1975). Deaton et al. (1981)
have shown that, under commercial conditions
during summer, if the house temperature at
night is decreased to that of the outside temper-
ature, shell strength will be improved. Several
studies have suggested that the shell strength
decreases linearly with increasing temperature
of the shell (Voisey et al, 1979). This may be
related to the moisture level of the air; Lott and
Reece (1981) reported that the increasing mois-
ture level of air resulted in a decreased break-
ing strength and that the ambient air tempera-
tures of 4.4 to 32 C had no significant ef-
fect on breaking strength if the moisture level
of the air was controlled.
NUTRITION
Calcium. Among the several dietary factors
affecting shell quality, calcium is certainly the
most important. A low dietary intake leads to a
reduction in the thickness of the shell. The
magnitude of this reduction is not proportional
to the reduced dietary level, resulting in use of
medullary bone Ca (Hurwitz, 1978). There are
numerous studies to show that increasing levels
of calcium up to a certain level may result in
improved shell strength. However, this increase
may not alter relative difference in shell strength
between individuals, strains, or groups. For
example, the addition of ad lib oyster shell
to hens receiving a diet containing 2.9% Ca
improved shell strength but did not alter
differences between lines or strains (Potts and
Washburn, 1977).
Many phased feeding systems adjust protein
downward and Ca level upward during the
laying cycle. Egg shell quality may be improved
by dietary manipulations of Ca levels to low
during brooding and early laying, high during
 SYMPOSIUM: EGG SHELL QUALITY
later laying (Ousterhout, 1981), but this effect
may be temporary (Hamilton and Cipera,
1981). Ousterhout (1981) reported that when
protein was phased down by 1% while Ca was
phased up by 5% at 12-week intervals, the rate
of increase in egg weight with age was signifi-
cantly lower and the decline in shell quality
with increasing age was slower than if a diet
with the average protein (16.5%) and Ca (3.5%)
of the protein and Ca-phased diet was used.
Vitamin D. Because its effect on the effi-
ciency of absorption, vitamin D is important in
the regulation of Ca. High levels of vitamin D in
combination with oyster shell or limestone have
been shown to significantly improve shell
strength (McLoughlin and Soares, 1976).
However, Potts and Washburn (1977) reported
no improvement in shell strength by injections
of vitamin D in birds fed a 2.9% Ca diet.
AGE
The importance of change in shell strength
and breakage with age is obvious when any
comparison is made of shell strength and
breakage in the early and later phases of pro-
duction. Several reasons have been advanced to
explain this change in shell strength with age. It
has been proposed that the amount of Ca the
hen absorbs and retains and the skeletal Ca
available for shell calcification decrease with
age (Peterson, 1965). The studies of Roland et
al. (1975) and Roland (1980) suggest that the
decline in shell strength with age is not due to a
decline with age in the ability to absorb or
mobilize Ca. In these studies it was shown that
the amount of shell deposited does not decrease
but remains reasonably constant or slightly
increased with age. Egg weight increased at a
faster rate than shell weight, resulting in a
decrease in the amount of shell to cover the
egg. In addition, when stressed with inadequate
Ca, old hens were able to maintain shell strength
as well as young hens (Roland et al., 1978). The
shell quality at the end of the lay is directly
related to shell quality at the beginning of lay
(Roland, 1979). It is physiologically possible
for the hen to increase shell (maximum of
7.5%) deposition with sudden drastic changes in
egg size (Roland, 1980).
The increasing egg size with progressing age
without a concomitant increase in shell weight
is an important contributing factor to the
decreasing shell strength with age. A reduction
in the dietary protein level of aging hens can
result in a decreased egg size without materially
2009
affecting egg production. However, feeding
diets with inadequate protein to reduce egg size
in old hens does not result in an increased shell
strength (Ousterhout, 1981).
The relationship of egg size to decreasing
shell strength with age is not clear. When old
hens are molted, the shell strength of eggs when
they return to lay is stronger than the premolt
strength, but the egg size is just as large. The
results of Roland (1979) suggest that absolute
egg size does not influence shell strength, but
eggs that had the greater increase in size with
increasing age had the greater decline in shell
quality. In addition, genetic variation in egg size
was not related to genetic variation in shell
deformation (Potts and Washburn, 1981).
GENETIC VARIATION
Many people think that an important
contributing factor to the current problems
with shell breakage is the selection by commer-
cial breeders for egg numbers and size. A
comparison of the shell strength of commercial
entries in the random sample tests to that of
randombred controls for the last 20 years
indicates that this is not the case. However,
genetic variation in shell strength should be an
effective tool in improving shell strength. The
study of Potts and Washburn (1981) and other
studies (Garwood et al., 1979) indicate there is
ample genetic variation in commercial stocks to
select for improved shell strength. This is
particularly effective in maintaining shell
quality during the later months of age.
PREVENTION
In prevention of shell breakage it is important
to keep the following points in mind:
1. Any shell will break if enough force is
applied.
2. There is a limit to the amount of shell a
hen can produce.
3. As eggs increase in size with age, the
amount of shell cannot increase propor-
tionally, and shell strength will decrease.
4. It may not be economically feasible to at-
tain the absolute minimum shell breakage.
In the movement of the egg from the point
of lay to the consumer, it is important to know
how much breakage there actually is and how
much breakage is occurring at each segment of
the process. It will then be more effective to
2010 WASHBURN
d e t e r m i n e t h e cause of t h e breakage and
develop a program for decreasing it.
T h e genetic p o t e n t i a l for shell strength
provides t h e base t h a t places constraints on
h o w m u c h t h e breakage can be decreased u n d e r
commercial c o n d i t i o n s . However, it is impossible
t o genetically s t r u c t u r e a hen so t h a t t h e egg
will n o t b e b r o k e n regardless of t h e severity of
insults. Commercial breeders are placing a good
deal of selection pressure on shell strength. It
would be of particular benefit t o select for t h e
smallest rate of decline in shell strength with
increasing age, particularly in h o t weather, w i t h
some consideration of t h e m a g n i t u d e of increase
in egg size during t h e later phases of p r o -
d u c t i o n . T h u s , o n e might take a genetic ap-
proach, which includes shell strength of birds
during t h e last phases of lay, t i m e d so t h a t t h e
m e a s u r e m e n t is in t h e h o t w e a t h e r w i t h s o m e
emphasis on smaller egg size in the later phases
of t h e laying period.
At t h e present state of knowledge, m a n i p u -
lation of a diet t h a t has a d e q u a t e Ca, P, V i t a m i n
D, and manganese and is a d e q u a t e in o t h e r
nutrients does n o t appear t o be a fruitful
approach t o improving shell quality.
It is obviously n o t economically feasible t o
provide a continually cool e n v i r o n m e n t during
t h e h o t s u m m e r m o n t h s , b u t it should be
possible t o cycle t h e t e m p e r a t u r e t o a lower
level at night. It is also possible t o time flock
placements so t h a t one has a m i n i m u m n u m b e r
of old hens during t h e h o t s u m m e r m o n t h s .
Management suggestions t o minimize shell
breakage include 1) n o t crowding birds in cages,
2) n o t disrupting birds, 3) oiling eggs, 4) using
an ahemeral lighting cycle during later phases of
lay, and 5) increasing t i m e of access to feeding
during shell f o r m a t i o n .
REFERENCES
Anderson, C. B. and T. C. Carter, 1976. The hen's egg:
shell cracking at impact on a heavy, stiff body
and factors that affect it. Br. Poultry Sci.
17:613-626.
Ball, R. G., J. F. Hill, V. Logan and J. Lyman, 1976.
The effect of washing, oiling, holding and tem-
perature of eggs on shell strength. Poultry Sci.
55:335-340.
Bezpa, J., O. F. Johndrew, Jr., G. H. Thacker, R. M.
Gover, F. V. Muir, and C. A. Dupras, 1972. Field
studies on eggshell damage and bloodspot detec-
tion. Ext. Bull. 403, Rutgers Univ., New Bruns-
wick, NJ.
Britton, W. M., 1977. Shell membranes of eggs differing
in shell quality from young and old hens. Poultry
Sci. 56:647-653.
Britton, W. M. and K. K. Hale, Jr., 1977. Amino acid
analysis of shell membranes of eggs from young
and old hens varying in shell quality. Poultry Sci.
56:865-871.
Burmester, B. R., H. M. Scott and L. E. Card, 1939.
Rate of eggshell formation in the hen. Pages
9 9 - 1 0 1 in World's Poultry Congr. 7th ed.
Buss, E. G., P. Merkur and R. B. Guyer, 1980. Urinary
excretion of calcium in the presence or absence
of shell formation by chickens producing thick or
thin shells. Poultry Sci. 59:885-887.
Buss, E. G. and J. H. Stout, 1981. Shell deposition
rates in birds selected for thick and thin eggshell
production. Poultry Sci. 6 0 : 4 7 7 - 4 8 1 .
Carter, T. C , 1971. The hen's egg: shell cracking at
oviposition in battery cages and its inheritance.
Br. Poultry Sci. 12:259-278.
Carter, T. C , 1975. The hen's egg: Relationships of
seven characteristics of the strain of the hen to
the incidence of cracks and other shell defects.
Br. Poultry Sci. 16:289-296.
Choi, J. H., R. D. Miles, A. S. Arafa, and R. H. Harms,
1981. The influence of oviposition time on egg
weight, shell quality, and blood phosphorus.
Poultry Sci. 60:824-828.
Cipera, J. D., 1980. Comparison of oviducal tissues
isolated at various stages of shell formation from
hens producing high or low quality egg shells.
Poultry Sci. 59:2787-2792.
Cohen, I., and S. Hurwitz, 1974. The response of
blood ionic constituents and acid-base balance to
dietary sodium, potassium and chloride in laying
fowl. Poultry Sci. 53:378-383.
Combs, G. F., Jr., A. H. Parsons, and M. B. Ross,
1979. Calcium homeostasis in pullets of two lines
selected for differences in eggshell strength.
Poultry Sci. 58:1250-1256.
Creger, C. R., H. Phillips, and J. T. Scott, 1976.
Formation of an egg shell. Poultry Sci. 55:1717—
1723.
Deaton, J. W., F. N. Reece, J. L. McNaughton, and B.
O. Lott, 1981. Effect of differing temperature
cycles on egg shell quality and layer performance.
Poultry Sci. 60:733-737.
Eggleton, L. Z., and W. J. Ross, 1971. Observed egg
shell damage in a mechanical gathering system.
Poultry Sci. 50:1008-1013.
Folkerts, J., 1976. Influence of feeding and husbandry
on egg shell quality. Page 580 in 5th Europ.
Poultry Conf. Vol. 1.
Garwood, V. A., P. C. Lowe, and C. G. Haugh, 1979.
Method for improving egg shell strength by
selection Br. Poultry Sci. 20:289-295.
Godfrey, G. F., 1949. Shell color as a measure of egg
shell quality. Poultry Sci. 2 8 : 1 5 0 - 1 5 1 .
Godfrey, F. G., and R. G. Jaap, 1949. The relationship
of specific gravity, 14-day incubation weight loss
and egg shell color to hatchability and egg shell
quality. Poultry Sci. 28:874-889.
Griminger, P., and H. Lutz, 1964. Observations on the
voluntary intake of calcium supplements by the
laying hen. Poultry Sci. 43:710-716.
Grover, R. M., D. L. Anderson, and R. A. Damon, Jr.,
1980. The correlation between egg shell color
and specific gravity as a measure of shell strength.
Poultry Sci. 59:1335-1336.
Grander, A. A., R. B. Guyer, E. G. Buss, and C. O.
 SYMPOSIUM: EGG SHELL QUALITY
Clagett, 1980a. Calcium-binding proteins in
serum. Quantitative differences between thick
and thin shell lines of chickens. Poultry Sci.
59:880-884.
Grunder, A. A., R. B. Guyer, E. G. Buss, and C. O.
Clagett, 1980b. Effect of estradiol on calcium
and calcium binding in serum of thick and
thin-shelled lines of chickens. Poultry Sci.
59:2776-2781.
Hamilton, R.M.G., K. G. Hollands, P. W. Voisey, and
A. A. Grunder, 1979. Relationship between egg
shell quality and shell breakage and factors that
affect shell breakage in the field. A review.
World's Poultry Sci. J. 35:177-190.
Hamilton, R.M.G., and J. D. Cipera, 1981. Effects of
dietary calcium levels during the brooding,
rearing, and early laying period on feed intake,
egg production, and shell quality of White
Leghorn hens. Poultry Sci. 60:349-357.
Hamilton, R.M.G., and B. K. Thompson, 1980. Effects
of sodium plus potassium to chloride ratio in
practical-type diets on blood gas levels in three
strains of White Leghorn hens and the relationship
between acid-base balance and egg shell strength.
Poultry Sci. 59:1294-1303.
Hamilton, R.M.G., and B. K. Thompson, 1981. The
effects of storage duration on nondestructive
deformation, quasi-static compression strength,
impact fracture strength, and specific gravity of
eggs from White Leghorn hens. Poultry Sci.
60:517-522.
Hurwitz, S., 1978. Calcium metabolism in birds.
Chemical Zoology. Pages 2 7 3 - 3 0 6 in Vol. X:
Aves.
Jaap, R. G., and F. V. Muir, 1968. Erratic oviposition
and egg defects in broiler-type pullets. Poultry
Sci. 47:417-423.
Lott, B. D., and F. N. Reece, 1981. The effect of
ambient air moisture and temperature on egg
shell breaking strength. Poultry Sci. 60:142—144.
Mask, B., Zigic Ljubica, L. Srajber, and V. Marinkovic,
1972. Correlations between shape index and shell
deformation of hen's eggs over a laying year. Br.
Poultry Sci. 13:185-189.
McLoughlin, C. P., and J. H. Soares, Jr., 1976. A study
of the effects of 25-hydroxycholecalciferol and
calcium source on egg shell quality. Poultry Sci.
55:1400-1410.
Miller, P. C , and M. L. Sunde, 1975. The effects of
precise constant and cyclic environments on shell
quality and other lay performance factors with
Leghorn pullets. Poultry Sci. 54:36—46.
Nordstrom, J. O., 1980. Limited access to feed during
egg formation and the shell quality of eggs laid in
the afternoon. Poultry Sci. 59:2749-2753.
Ousterhout, L. E., 1981. The effects of phased feeding
protein and calcium on egg weight and shell
quality with four strains of White Leghorn hens.
Poultry Sci. 60:1036-1042.
Parsons, A. H., and G. F. Combs, Jr., 1981. Blood
ionized calcium cycles in the chicken. Poultry
Sci. 60:1520-1524.
Peterson, C. F., 1965. Factors influencing egg shell
quality. World's Poultry Sci. J. 21:110-138.
Potts, P. L., and K. W. Washburn, 1974. Shell evalua-
tion of white and brown egg strains by deforma-
tion, breaking strength, shell thickness and
2011
specific gravity. I. Relationship to egg character-
istics. Poultry Sci. 53:1123-1128.
Potts, P. L., and K. W. Washburn, 1977. The effect of
supplemental calcium and vitamin D 3 on line and
strain differences in egg shell strength. Poultry
Sci. 56:1067-1072.
Potts, P. L., and K. W. Washburn, 1981. Genetic
variation in shell strength and its relationship to
egg size. Poultry Sci. (In press).
Richards, J. F., and L. M. Staley, 1967. The relation-
ship between crushing strength, deformation and
other physical measurements of the hen's egg.
Poultry Sci. 46:430-437.
Richards, J. F., and M. H. Swanson, 1965. The rela-
tionship between crushing strength, deformation
and other physical measurements of the hen's
egg. Poultry Sci. 44:1555-1558.
Roland, D. A., Sr., 1977. The extent of uncollected
eggs due to inadequate shell. Poultry Sci.
56:1517-1521.
Roland, D. A., Sr., 1978. Relation of interval between
and time of oviposition to egg shell quality.
Poultry Sci. 57:1184. (Abstr.)
Roland, D. A., Sr., 1979. Factors influencing shell
quality of aging hens. Poultry Sci. 58:774-777.
Roland, D. A., Sr., 1980. The ability of young and old
hens to change shell deposition with sudden
natural drastic changes in egg size. Poultry Sci.
59:924-926.
Roland, D. A., Sr., 1981. Relationship of interval
between eggs and time of oviposition to eggshell
quality. Poultry Sci. 60:1066-1070.
Roland, D. A., Sr., C. E. Putman, and R. L. Hilburn,
1978. The relationship of age on ability of hens
to maintain egg shell calcification when stressed
with inadequate dietary calcium. Poultry Sci.
57:1616-1621.
Roland, D. A., Sr., D. R. Sloan, and R. H. Harms,
1973. Calcium metabolism in the laying hen. 6.
Shell quality in relation to time of oviposition.
Poultry Sci. 52:506-510.
Roland, D. A., Sr., D. R. Sloan, and R. H. Harms,
1975. The ability of hens to maintain calcium
deposition in the egg shell and egg yolk as the
hen ages. Poultry Sci. 54:1720-1723.
Salevsky, E., Jr., and R. M. Leach, Jr., 1980. Studies
on the organic components of shell gland fluid
and hen's egg shell. Poultry Sci. 59:438—443.
Siegel, P. B., J. H. Van Middelkoop, and P.R.K.
Reddy, 1978. Comparisons of frequencies and
egg shell characteristics of broken and intact eggs
within diverse populations of chickens. Br.
Poultry Sci. 19:411-416.
Stout, J. T., and E. G. Buss, 1980. Influence of the
interval of shell deposition on eggshell quality.
Poultry Sci. 5 9 : 1 6 8 - 1 7 1 .
Strong, C. R., Jr., R. D. Reynnells, and F. H. Benoff,
1982. Egg Trek—An educational film about table
egg processing. Poultry Sci. (In press).
Voisey, P. W., R.M.G. Hamilton, and B. K. Thompson,
1979. Laboratory measurements of eggshell
strength. 2. The quasi-static compression, punc-
ture, non-destructive deformation, and specific
gravity methods applied to the same egg. Poultry
Sci. 58:288-294.
Washburn, K. W., and P. L. Potts, 1975. Effect of
strain and age on the relationship of oviposition
2012 WASHBURN

time to shell strength. Br. Poultry Sci. 1 6 : 5 9 9 -
606.
Wilson, W. O., S. Itoh, and T. D. Siopes, 1972. Pro-
duction traits of Leghorn pullets in controlled
temperatures. Poultry Sci. 51:1014-1023.
Wolford, J. H., and K. Tanaka, 1970. Factors influenc-
ing egg shell quality. A review. World's Poultry
Sci. J. 26:763-780.
Yannakopoulos, A. L., and T. R. Morris, 1979. Effect
of light, vitamin D and dietary phosphorus on
egg-shell quality late in the pullet laying year. Br.
Poultry Sci. 20:337-342.