Next Article in Journal
Prevalence of Cardiac Lesions in Cases of Bovine Blackleg in Tennessee (USA), 2004–2018
Previous Article in Journal
Zinc Status of Horses and Ponies: Relevance of Health, Horse Type, Sex, Age, and Test Material
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Veterinary Sciences
Volume 10
Issue 4
10.3390/vetsci10040296
vetsci-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Bibliographical Mapping of Research into the Relationship between In Ovo Injection Practice and Hatchability in Poultry

by
Gabriel da Silva Oliveira
1,
Concepta McManus
1,
Cristiane Batista Salgado
2 and
Vinícius Machado dos Santos
3,*
1
Faculty of Agronomy and Veterinary Medicine, University of Brasília, Brasília 70910-900, Brazil
2
Laboratory of Geosciences and Human Sciences, Federal Institute of Brasília—Campus Brasília, Brasília 70830-450, Brazil
3
Laboratory of Poultry Science, Federal Institute of Brasília—Campus Planaltina, Brasília 73380-900, Brazil
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Vet. Sci. 2023, 10(4), 296; https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci10040296
Submission received: 4 March 2023 / Revised: 4 April 2023 / Accepted: 11 April 2023 / Published: 17 April 2023
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

Poultry mortality in the embryonic stage makes it difficult to achieve one of the main objectives of the poultry sector, i.e., constant increase in productivity. If well executed with safe and efficient substances, the in ovo injection technique can be an intervention alternative to enhance the development of more resistant, healthy, quality birds, with substantial positive effects on poultry production. For the commercial implementation of any intervention, information from the vast literature must be compiled in order to understand its effects on production parameters. Thus, this review aims to assess how injecting different substances in ovo influences hatching results, including the reported effects on embryo and chick health parameters. Bibliographic mappings of co-authorship of citations, co-occurrence of keywords and bibliographic coupling were also performed for articles based on the in ovo injection technique and hatchability.

Abstract

Recent advances in poultry practice have produced new tools enabling the poultry industry to increase productivity. Aiming at increasing production quality, varying protocols of in ovo injection facilitate the introduction of exogenous substances into the egg to complement the nutrients that support embryonic development up to hatching, which are already available in the internal and external compartments. Due to embryonic sensitivity, adding any substance into the egg can be either advantageous or disadvantageous for embryonic survival and can influence hatch rates. Thus, understanding the relationship between poultry practices and production rates is the first step towards successful commercial application. This review aims to assess the influence on hatch rates of injecting different substances in ovo, including effects on embryo and chick health parameters where these are reported. Bibliographic mappings of co-authorship of citations, co-occurrence of keywords, and bibliographic coupling based on the in ovo injection technique and hatchability parameters were also performed. Using the Scopus database, 242 papers were retrieved, reviewed, and submitted for bibliographic mapping using the VOSviewer® software. This review provides a broad overview of just over 38 years’ research on the subject, revealing that studies have significantly increased and peaked in 2020, being produced primarily by US researchers and published primarily in the journal Poultry Science. It also reveals that despite negative reports relating to some substances in the embryo, in ovo delivery of substances may possibly change the poultry industry for the better in terms of production rates (hatchability) and/or poultry health.

1. Introduction

Farmers collaborate with poultry scientists to achieve maximum production capacity and quality. Health is one of the foundations for sustaining productivity in the poultry industry and ensuring human safety. The guarantee of health requires continuous work with broad, diversified, and flexible solutions. These solutions must be protective or enhancing in nature, limiting damage to health and welfare, and/or improving poultry’s physical and physiological qualities.
Hatchability designates the percentage of chicks hatched alive from a given sample of eggs. The hatchability rate is used worldwide by the poultry industry to monitor the productivity of each hatchery. The objective is to maintain this rate close to 100%. The greater the hatchability, the greater the guarantee that everything proceeded correctly throughout embryonic development. However, this is not a rule. Chicks that hatch with imperceptible or perceptible deformations can be counted in hatchability rates and are usually discarded before going to the farm, or may go to the farm but die shortly afterwards. Therefore, health and quality parameters must be analyzed along with hatchability to ensure high production and quality before and after hatching.
This parameter is decisive in the advance or decline of poultry production, with significant economic effects. With the hatchability value, the hatchery can predict not only its own economic return, but also that of the production unit, considering the expected mortality rate at the hatch–slaughter interface. In addition, hatchability can serve as a solid reference to monitor and evaluate experiments performed directly on eggs, which can influence embryonic survival and support the identification of product deficiencies and solutions to overcome these. According to Gonzalez et al. [1], an improvement in hatchability percentages can be obtained by altering factors inherent to the eggs. Examples of factors include the sanitization of hatching eggs [2,3,4] and the physical parameters of incubation [5]. Another factor is in ovo injection [6].
Avian health before and after hatching depends on their exposure to egg nutrients, which include vitamins, minerals, lipids, carbohydrates, and proteins [7,8]. The balance between the nutritional status of the egg and the short developmental window of the embryo is essential for the complex delivery of nutrients to the embryo in a limited time. Nutritional insufficiency during embryo formation, which may be associated with genetic factors, can disrupt the progression of healthy and viable development [9]. This is likely to harm the bird’s health and survival throughout its life. An insufficient nutritional load for the embryo imposes the need for nutritional complementation to supply all the embryonic demands until hatching. This is carried out through early or late injection of exogenous nutrients into the egg during embryonic development [8,10]. The main point of deposition or application of nutrients is the amnion (Figure 1) [8]. This process influences embryonic physiology, reflected in hatchability rates [11].
In ovo injection is a practical solution that is revolutionizing poultry production due to its immediate beneficial effects during embryogenesis or post-hatch. Nevertheless, some harmful effects have been seen. While Subramaniyan et al. [12] reported that in ovo injection of L-arginine (100 µg/µL/egg) benefits embryo survival rate, hatchability, and chick weight, Araújo et al. [13] observed that in ovo injection of a product containing canthaxanthin at different concentrations (0.35 to 0.65 mg/mL/egg) impaired hatchability and chicks’ physical quality.
In the present work, we reviewed published studies to determine whether the benefits in terms of hatchability outweigh the harm of injecting different substances in ovo, in relation to the influence of intrinsic or extrinsic factors. Bibliographic mappings of co-authorship of citations, co-occurrence of keywords, and bibliographic coupling relating to in ovo injection and hatchability parameters were also performed.

2. Bibliographic Mapping

2.1. Material and Methods

The process of obtaining bibliographic information related to the in ovo injection technique and its effects on hatchability was divided into several steps (Table 1).
Scopus was used as a source of access to bibliographic data, as it is a reliable global database that stores important scientific data, including data relating to poultry sciences. The search keywords were defined based on the research objective. The number of research papers retrieved from Scopus and eligible for bibliometric analysis comprised 242 documents, covering just over 38 years. Inclusion criteria were research papers written and published in English, while exclusion criteria were all documents that did not meet the inclusion criteria (reviews, conference papers, and research articles written and published in other languages). The database was extracted from Scopus in CSV Microsoft Excel format and processed with VOSviewer® software to generate connection/relationship networks between the authors, countries, and scientific journal sources of the published studies. VOSviewer® was used because it is a practical and easy-to-use software package with good graphic quality, which allows the analysis of metadata from different databases and has excellent integration and communication with the SCOPUS database [14].

2.2. Results

The 242 papers on the in ovo injection technique and its effects on hatchability, selected and analyzed from 1 January 1985 to 14 January 2023, are shown in Figure 2, highlighting the annual numbers of publications. The oldest paper was written by Gildersleeve et al. [15] on the effects of injecting diethylstilbestrol in ovo, and was published in Teratology. Comparing the decades 1991–2001 (5.31% of total publications), 2002–2012 (18.37%), and 2013–2023 (74.69%; to 14 January 2023), it can be observed that from the first decade to the second, the numbers of published articles increased 3.5 times, from the first decade to the third 14.1 times, and from the second to the third the numbers increased 4.1 times. The number of publications on the topic increased from 10 in 2011, reaching a peak (n = 33 publications) in 2020. These findings show that the field of research has started to gain more recognition in recent years and that the quantity of research prior to 2010 was highly limited.
A paper with many citations is positive feedback for the group of researchers that developed it, demonstrating that it represents high-quality, relevant, and impactful work within the research area. It should be noted that it is not a rule that older studies are more frequently cited than more recent ones. Based on data obtained from Scopus, 167 publications had at least three citations. The authors of the respective publications are listed in Figure 3A. Gore and Qureshi [16], Ohta et al. [17], and Bhanja and Mandal [18] have the most cited papers, comprising the top three internationally (Table 2). Those papers focus their analysis mainly on the impact of administration of substances in ovo on embryonic development, hatchability, immune health of birds, their digestive system, and post-hatch performance, proving to have a high level of influence on subsequent published research. Gore and Qureshi [16] studied the beneficial relationship of in ovo exposure to vitamin E and the immune system of turkeys and broilers. Ohta et al. [17] explored amino acid supplementation in ovo and its relationship with embryonic growth, hatchability, and chick weight. In one of their conclusions, the authors reported that amino acids injected into the yolk sac may be an effective means of increasing chick size without decreasing hatchability. Bhanja and Mandal [18] aimed to standardize the in ovo injection of amino acids and evaluate their effects on pre- and post-hatching performance, immune response, and development of digestive organs. Some of their findings showed that amino acids did not influence hatchability and digestive organ weights at 21 days, and that amino acids can act as immunomodulators. Figure 3B is a representation of the most frequently cited documents over the study period. The most recent study among the 10 most cited, ranking seventh with 57 citations, aimed to design synbiotics in vitro and validate them in broilers after in ovo delivery [19]. This confirms our statement above, showing that more recent studies may have a more significant contribution to the field than older ones, although they may not yet have been cited.
Bibliographic coupling connects two papers that have another paper in common [26]. This review carried out bibliographic coupling between documents with at least three citations, resulting in 167 documents forming 11 clusters (Figure 4A,B). Based on total link strength, the papers by Moghaddam et al. [27], Moghaddam et al. [28], and Zhai et al. [29] were found to have the highest bibliographic coupling forces (total link strength of 48.00, 47.00, and 37.00, respectively). Clusters were formed by studies with very similar objectives. Our findings also show that the most frequently cited papers (Table 2) are not always those with the greatest bibliographic coupling strength.
References with at least three citations were selected for co-citation analysis. In the analysis, seven clusters were formed (Figure 5) and the most frequently cited reference (present in the blue cluster) was “In ovo feeding improves the energy status of late-term chicken embryos” by Uni et al. [30] published in Poultry Science, with 14 co-citations and a total link strength of 94. In that paper, researchers measured the effects of in ovo feeding with highly digestible carbohydrates and β-hydroxy-β-methylbutyrate.
Of 914 authors, 182 had at least two documents, but only 57 with links. The authors were grouped (represented by the colors of lines and circles) into nine clusters (Figure 6A). Researchers Peebles (20 publications), Zhai (12 publications), and Bhanja (10 publications) were the authors with the most publications, showing intense connectivity and collaboration with other researchers within the circuits where they are present. However, there was no connectivity from Peebles and Zhai to Bhanja. Clusters were formed among authors who had strong bonds. At least one author from each group contributed to another group. Zhai is the oldest contributor in the field, compared with Peebles and Bhanja (Figure 6B). Korean (e.g., Goel), Nigerian (e.g., Odutayo), and US (e.g., Fatemi) researchers are among the most recent contributing researchers (Figure 6B).
A total of 914 authors were identified. By limiting the numbers to four citations and four documents per author, 28 authors were included in the citation network (Figure 7A). Highest ranked were Peebles (415 citations, 19 links), Zhai (352 citations, 21 links), and Kidd (230 citations; 21 links). It was observed that the author with the most publications did not always have the highest number of citations, as was the case for Bhanja [more publications (10) and fewer citations (208)] and Kidd (four publications and 230 citations). Considering the entirety of the time when the research was developed (1985–2023), Peebles can be considered the most influential researcher in the field, and his number of citations reflects the quality and relevance of his research. He was most cited around the year 2016 (Figure 7B), when the number of publications began to increase before reaching a peak (Figure 2).
Authors who had at least 20 citations from 242 publications underwent co-citation analysis. Based on the results of the analysis, the authors were grouped into seven clusters (Figure 8); the most frequently co-cited are Uni (573 citations), Ferket (376 citations), and Peebles (260 citations). These are not independent researchers. Comparing the clusters, despite these three authors collaborating with each other, it can be seen that Peebles (green cluster nucleus) is part of a different network of researchers than Uni and Ferket (blue cluster nucleus). Peebles, Zhai, and Gerard are the researchers with the highest bibliographic coupling strength (total link strength 8166, 5944, 4925, respectively). This can be justified by the fact that these researchers published several studies together; the network of authors shows these authors strongly connected (Figure 8), which means they each have a highly similar number of references.
All keywords with at least three occurrences were selected. Of a total of 558 keywords co-occurrence, 70 meet the threshold, 46 with links. Keywords used in the search have been removed. Keywords with the same meaning were merged. Broiler (36 occurrences), performance and growth performance (18 and 17 occurrences, in this sequence = 35 occurrences), and immunity (14 occurrences) were the most prominent terms, showing strong correlation. They present the largest circles and are close together (Figure 9A). These data show that broiler breeder eggs were the main materials used in studies in this area, and that the in ovo injection technique is one of the current trends to improve broiler performance, as well as hatchability and the immunity of the poultry. In general, the nine groupings formed involve the products tested in the in ovo application, their effects, and possible targets in the physiology of the birds. Figure 9B demonstrates the evolutionary process of the keywords by the color gradient from blue to yellow. The keyword co-occurrence network that included the most prominent keywords began to gain more importance only after 2018, showing that the use of the in ovo injection technique in broiler breeder eggs remains recent.
The 242 reviewed papers were published in 96 different journals. Journals with a minimum of three citations and three publications were viewed in VOSviewer® to identify which journals globally publish and disseminate the most research on the in ovo injection technique with an emphasis on hatchability. Only 16 met this condition, as shown in Figure 10. Subsequently, the 10 journals that published the most studies were included in Table 3. In addition to receiving the most papers for publication, Poultry Science (impact factor 4.014) is the most cited journal and has the greatest bibliographic coupling strength (based on total link strength = 372.07) (Figure 10). This journal is the most internationally relevant (based on impact factor) dedicated to the publishing of poultry research. Other world-renowned journals that published large numbers of papers or had many citations in the area of in ovo injection are the Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition (impact factor 2.718), which publishes papers in areas such as animal physiology, animal nutrition, and feeding technology, Animals (impact factor 3.231), which publishes papers in any field of study involving animals, and Animal (impact factor 3.73), which publishes cutting-edge papers related to animals (farmed or managed). Animals was the journal that published the most articles on the subject and has recently been the most cited (Figure 10).
Journals with at least 23 citations were included in the co-citation analysis. Of the 3560 total citations, 34 journals met this criterion. Two large groups were formed (Figure 11), and the ranking is led by Poultry Science (2045 citations). Once again it demonstrated its capacity for contributing, sharing, and disseminating high quality work. In this regard, it appears that Poultry Science, as a specific and relevant poultry journal, is of most interest to researchers in this field.
The publications were prepared by researchers from 33 countries (Figure 12). To analyze the number of publications per country, a limit of at least five documents per country was established, totaling a network of 19 countries (Figure 13). Authors’ countries were grouped into four clusters. USA appears as the most productive (57 documents), followed by Iran (48 documents) and China (32 documents). As the leading countries, USA is partnered primarily with Iran and China. These three countries published more than half (56.61%) of the total number of publications on the subject, demonstrating mastery, productivity, activeness, and dedication to the development of this new area of research. However, the US mainly contributed to the research field around 2010, while Iran did so over 6 years later (around 2016) and China over 8 years later (around 2018) (Figure 13). Korea, Nigeria, and Iraq are the countries that have recently contributed the most to the field (Figure 13). USA and Iran are the countries that collaborate most with others (15 links). The citation ranking leaders, considering a minimum of five citations per country, are composed of the same countries supported by the largest nodes in the country network (Figure 13), in the following order: USA (1384 citations), China (415 citations), and Iran (353 citations). According to the bibliographic coupling analysis (Figure 13), these countries also had the highest bibliographic coupling strength (total link strength of 903.51, 681.96, and 826.17, respectively).

3. Effects of In Ovo Injection Practice on Hatchability

To evaluate the effects of in ovo injection on hatchability, studies were selected (n = 86) from the past two decades (2002–2022) that included hatchability (keyword used as a filter to aid in the selection of papers) as an evaluative parameter of substances applied in ovo (Table 4). Improving hatchability is important for maintaining the quality of the poultry chain. Under improved hatchability conditions, embryonic formation, growth, health, and immunity should be minimally affected. Positive effects were reported in 17.44% of the reviewed studies (Table 4). Among the substances tested in these studies were L-arginine, coenzyme Q10, and honey. In contrast, protocols for the in ovo application of harmful substances to poultry were reported in 13.95% of published articles (Table 4). Among the substances tested in those studies were basil seeds, nano zinc oxide, and creatine monohydrate. In addition to high productivity, poultry must be physically and physiologically healthy. Therefore, neutral effects on hatchability are favorable for the poultry industry only if accompanied by improvements in the development and health of the poultry. Various injected substances including creatine pyruvate, betaine hydrochloride, and silver nanoparticles had no effect on hatchability, as demonstrated by 44.19% of the reviewed studies. Results combining positive, negative, or non-existent effects on hatchability for the same substances injected in ovo (e.g., threonine, royal jelly, and zinc) were reported in 32.56% of the studies. The results of hatchability after injection of substances in ovo can be explained or accompanied by hypothetical or observed effects on embryos and poultry in the early stages after hatching (Table 5).
Based on the studies reviewed (Table 4), solution concentration and volume during in ovo injection practice are perhaps the most important factors influencing hatchability, regardless of the substance used. Up to slaughter, poultry goes through a period of morphological, physiological, and nutritional transition, being able to undergo manipulations in the external-to-internal direction while still in the embryonic stage. These manipulations include injecting substances into the egg, aiming to provide poultry with an improved viable life cycle in terms of development, hatching, growth, and resistance to adverse events [8]. However, depending on factors such as concentration and volume of solution, the expected benefits of in ovo injection can be converted into harm (e.g., interruption of the poultry’s life before hatching), or in some situations may have no effect (Table 4 and Table 5).
The concentration and volume determine the effects of the injected substance on avian survival, directly influencing the hatchability rate. Thus, these are important factors for determining conflicting hatch rates. Gao et al. [50] demonstrated that eggs injected with 2% L-arginine at 17.5 days of incubation hatched significantly less than eggs injected with the same substance at 0.5 and 1%, those injected with 0.75% physiological saline solution, and those not injected. They explained this by reporting that the highest concentration tested (2%) is probably toxic to the embryo and can unbalance the internal content of amino acids. Nʼnanle et al. [52] reported that eggs injected with 0.5 μg/mL of Moringa oleifera leaf extract at 18 days of incubation hatched significantly more than eggs injected with the same extract at 5 or 50 μg/mL or not injected. Higher hatchability at the lowest extract concentration was associated with adequate feed transit and nutritional absorption, which increased lipid metabolism, resulting in greater energy production for hatching. Mahjar and Al-Salhie [108] reported that eggs injected with 150 μL of alcoholic garlic extract (5 g/50 mL) on day zero of incubation hatched similarly to eggs injected with 50 or 100 μL of the same extract and significantly more than eggs injected with 100 μL distilled water or not injected. Their analysis indicated that 50 or 100 μL of extract had no significant effect on hatchability. According to these authors, better hatchability at the extract highest volume may be associated with the antimicrobial and antioxidant qualities of garlic constituents, with effects limited to newborn chicks.
Researchers need to redesign protocols for injecting substances in ovo that have adverse side effects due to the concentration and volume of the solution. Prior knowledge of the substance’s toxicity is necessary to achieve the optimal concentration and volume more quickly, or to discard the substance immediately if it is toxic at the minimum effective concentration. This review shows that the practice of in ovo injection performed in either the prenatal or perinatal stages of embryonic development, using safe and efficient products, can improve hatchability. However, in most cases, despite improving the health parameters of the poultry, the products were not efficient enough to influence hatchability. In a minority of cases, worsening of hatchability was reported. These results are largely dependent on the intrinsic factors of the practice. Because the products are injected directly into the embryonic environment, the health parameters of poultry appear always to undergo positive or negative changes, even if these are minimal or not significant. The positive effects stand out and many are similar between the different products tested, suggesting that they act on deficient targets common in avian organisms.

4. Conclusions

This review provides a broad overview of just over 38 years’ research on the subject, revealing that studies significantly increased and peaked in 2020, were produced primarily by US researchers, and were published primarily in the renowned journal Poultry Science. It can be seen that in the last 12 years, research on the subject has taken a great step forward due to the interest that the poultry sector has in practices that can strengthen and leverage its production systems. It is hoped that this review will help researchers pave the way for establishing and validating protocols that are feasible for official inclusion in commercial poultry practices. The difficulty in standardizing between studies the stages of the in ovo application protocol (regardless of the substance applied) is a barrier that can be overcome with the development of field research supervised by a collaborative network involving different countries, researchers, research centers, and the poultry sector.
This review also reveals that despite some negative reports relating to substances in the embryo, in ovo delivery of substances has the potential to change the poultry industry for the better in terms of production rates (hatchability) and/or poultry health. To make this technology applicable to the poultry industry there is a demand for active, efficient, safe, reliable, and cheap substances. These need to be tested at laboratory and industrial levels. Future studies must focus on elucidating the main embryonic physiological targets of substances delivered in ovo that are most likely to improve hatchability.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, G.d.S.O. and V.M.d.S.; writing—original draft preparation, G.d.S.O.; writing—review and editing, G.d.S.O., C.M., C.B.S. and V.M.d.S.; visualization, G.d.S.O., C.M., C.B.S. and V.M.d.S.; supervision, C.M. and V.M.d.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES) grant number 001. The APC was funded by Fundação de Apoio à Pesquisa do Distrito Federal (FAPDF).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES) for the granted scholarship and the Fundação de Apoio à Pesquisa do Distrito Federal (FAPDF) for the financial support for the publication of the paper.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Gonzalez, A.; Satterlee, D.G.; Moharer, F.; Cadd, G.G. Factors Affecting Ostrich Egg Hatchability. Poult. Sci. 1999, 78, 1257–1262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Oliveira, G.D.S.; Nascimento, S.T.; dos Santos, V.M.; Silva, M.G. Clove Essential Oil in the Sanitation of Fertile Eggs. Poult. Sci. 2020, 99, 5509–5516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Oliveira, G.D.S.; dos Santos, V.M.; Nascimento, S.T. Essential Oils as Sanitisers for Hatching Eggs. Worlds Poult. Sci. J. 2021, 77, 605–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Oliveira, G.D.S.; McManus, C.; Salgado, C.B.; dos Santos, V.M. Effects of Sanitizers on Microbiological Control of Hatching Eggshells and Poultry Health during Embryogenesis and Early Stages after Hatching in the Last Decade. Animals 2022, 12, 2826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Abd El-Hack, M.E.; Hurtado, C.B.; Toro, D.M.; Alagawany, M.; Abdelfattah, E.M.; Elnesr, S.S. Fertility and Hatchability in Duck Eggs. Worlds Poult. Sci. J. 2019, 75, 599–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Kalantar, M.; Hosseini, S.M.; Hosseini, M.R.; Kalantar, M.H.; Farmanullah; Yang, L.G. Effects of In Ovo Injection of Coenzyme Q10 on Hatchability, Subsequent Performance, and Immunity of Broiler Chickens. Biomed. Res. Int. 2019, 2019, 7167525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Uni, Z.; Yadgary, L.; Yair, R. Nutritional Limitations during Poultry Embryonic Development. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 2012, 21, 175–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Saeed, M.; Babazadeh, D.; Naveed, M.; Alagawany, M.; Abd El-Hack, M.E.; Arain, M.A.; Tiwari, R.; Sachan, S.; Karthik, K.; Dhama, K.; et al. In Ovo Delivery of Various Biological Supplements, Vaccines and Drugs in Poultry: Current Knowledge. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2019, 99, 3727–3739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Wilson, H.R. Effects of Maternal Nutrition on Hatchability. Poult. Sci. 1997, 76, 134–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Jha, R.; Singh, A.K.; Yadav, S.; Berrocoso, J.F.D.; Mishra, B. Early Nutrition Programming (in Ovo and Post-Hatch Feeding) as a Strategy to Modulate Gut Health of Poultry. Front. Vet. Sci. 2019, 6, 82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Kucharska-Gaca, J.; Kowalska, E.; Dbowska, M. In Ovo Feeding—Technology of the Future—A Review. Ann. Anim. Sci. 2017, 17, 979–992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Subramaniyan, S.A.; Kang, D.R.; Park, J.R.; Siddiqui, S.H.; Ravichandiran, P.; Yoo, D.J.; Na, C.S.; Shim, K.S. Effect of in Ovo Injection of L-Arginine in Different Chicken Embryonic Development Stages on Post-Hatchability, Immune Response, and Myo-d and Myogenin Proteins. Animals 2019, 9, 357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Araújo, I.C.S.; Café, M.B.; Mesquita, M.A.; Caiado, B.N.; Faria, A.M.; Mello, H.H.C.; Stringhini, J.H.; Leandro, N.S.M. Effect of a Commercial Product Containing Canthaxanthin for in Ovo Feeding to Broiler Embryos on Hatchability, Chick Quality, Oxidation Status, and Performance. Poult. Sci. 2020, 99, 5598–5606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Arruda, H.; Silva, E.R.; Lessa, M.; Proença, D., Jr.; Bartholo, R. VOSviewer and Bibliometrix. J. Med. Libr. Assoc. 2022, 110, 392–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Gildersleeve, R.P.; Tilson, H.A.; Mitchell, C.L. Injection of Diethylstilbestrol on the First Day of Incubation Affects Morphology of Sex Glands and Reproductive Behavior of Japanese Quail. Teratology 1985, 31, 101–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Gore, A.B.; Qureshi, M.A. Enhancement of Humoral and Cellular Immunity by Vitamin E after Embryonic Exposure. Poult. Sci. 1997, 76, 984–991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Ohta, Y.; Tsushima, N.; Koide, K.; Kidd, M.T.; Ishibashi, T. Effect of Amino Acid Injection in Broiler Breeder Eggs on Embryonic Growth and Hatchability of Chicks. Poult. Sci. 1999, 78, 1493–1498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Bhanja, S.K.; Mandal, A.B. Effect of in Ovo Injection of Critical Amino Acids on Pre- and Post-Hatch Growth, Immunocompetence and Development of Digestive Organs in Broiler Chickens. Asian-Australas J. Anim. Sci. 2005, 18, 524–531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Dunislawska, A.; Slawinska, A.; Stadnicka, K.; Bednarczyk, M.; Gulewicz, P.; Jozefiak, D.; Siwek, M. Synbiotics for Broiler Chickens—In Vitro Design and Evaluation of the Influence on Host and Selected Microbiota Populations Following in Ovo Delivery. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0168587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Zhai, W.; Rowe, D.E.; Peebles, E.D. Effects of Commercial in Ovo Injection of Carbohydrates on Broiler Embryogenesis. Poult. Sci. 2011, 90, 1295–1301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Ohta, Y.; Kidd, M.T. Optimum Site for in Ovo Amino Acid Injection in Broiler Breeder Eggs. Poult. Sci. 2001, 80, 1425–1429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Bednarczyk, M.; Stadnicka, K.; Kozłowska, I.; Abiuso, C.; Tavaniello, S.; Dankowiakowska, A.; Sławińska, A.; Maiorano, G. Influence of Different Prebiotics and Mode of Their Administration on Broiler Chicken Performance. Animal 2016, 10, 1271–1279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Kocamis, H.; Kirkpatrick-Keller, D.C.; Klandorf, H.; Killefer, J. In Ovo Administration of Recombinant Human Insulin-Like Growth Factor-I Alters Postnatal Growth and Development of the Broiler Chicken. Poult. Sci. 1998, 77, 1913–1919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Li, S.; Zhi, L.; Liu, Y.; Shen, J.; Liu, L.; Yao, J.; Yang, X. Effect of in Ovo Feeding of Folic Acid on the Folate Metabolism, Immune Function and Epigenetic Modification of Immune Effector Molecules of Broiler. Br. J. Nutr. 2016, 115, 411–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Gagic, M.; Hill, C.A.S.; Sharma, J.M. In Ovo Vaccination of Specific-Pathogen-Free Chickens with Vaccines Containing Multiple Agents. Avian Dis. 1999, 43, 293–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R. Co-citation, bibliographic coupling and a characterization of lattice citation networks. Scientometrics 2002, 55, 349–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Moghaddam, A.A.; Borji, M.; Komazani, D. Hatchability Rate and Embryonic Growth of Broiler Chicks Following in Ovo Injection Royal Jelly. Br. Poult. Sci. 2014, 55, 391–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Moghaddam, A.; Karimi, I.; Borji, M.; Bahadori, S.; Abdolmohammadi, A. Effect of Royal Jelly in Ovo Injection on Embryonic Growth, Hatchability, and Gonadotropin Levels of Pullet Breeder Chicks. Theriogenology 2013, 80, 193–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Zhai, W.; Gerard, P.D.; Pulikanti, R.; Peebles, E.D. Effects of in Ovo Injection of Carbohydrates on Embryonic Metabolism, Hatchability, and Subsequent Somatic Characteristics of Broiler Hatchlings. Poult. Sci. 2011, 90, 2134–2143. [Google Scholar]
  30. Uni, Z.; Ferket, P.R.; Tako, E.; Kedar, O. In Ovo Feeding Improves Energy Status of Late-Term Chicken Embryos. Poult. Sci. 2005, 84, 764–770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Ohta, Y.; Yoshida, T.; Tsushima, N.; Kidd, M.T. The Needle Bore Diameter for In Ovo Amino Acid Injection Has No Effect on Hatching Performance in Broiler Breeder Eggs. J. Poult. Sci. 2002, 39, 194–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Ipek, A.; Sahan, U.; Yilmaz, B. The Effect of in Ovo Ascorbic Acid and Glucose Injection in Broiler Breeder Eggs on Hatchability and Chick Weight. Archiv. Fur Geflugelkd. 2004, 68, 132–135. [Google Scholar]
  33. Zhai, W.; Neuman, S.; Latour, M.A.; Hester, P.Y. The Effect of in Ovo Injection of L-Carnitine on Hatchability of White Leghorns. Poult. Sci. 2008, 87, 569–572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Bottje, W.; Wolfenden, A.; Ding, L.; Wolfenden, R.; Morgan, M.; Pumford, N.; Lassiter, K.; Duncan, G.; Smith, T.; Slagle, T.; et al. Improved Hatchability and Posthatch Performance in Turkey Poults Receiving a Dextrin-Iodinated Casein Solution in Ovo. Poult. Sci. 2010, 89, 2646–2650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Keralapurath, M.M.; Corzo, A.; Pulikanti, R.; Zhai, W.; Peebles, E.D. Effects of in Ovo Injection of L-Carnitine on Hatchability and Subsequent Broiler Performance and Slaughter Yield. Poult. Sci. 2010, 89, 1497–1501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Nouboukpo, K.E.; Tona, K.; Kamers, B.; Everaert, N.; Willemsen, H.; Onagbesan, O.M.; Gbeassor, M.; Decuypere, E. Effects of in Ovo Administration of L-Carnitine on Hatching Events and Juvenile Performance of Layer-Type Chick. Int. J. Poult. Sci. 2010, 9, 980–983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. McGruder, B.M.; Zhai, W.; Keralapurath, M.M.; Gerard, P.D.; Peebles, E.D. Effects of in Ovo Injection of Theophylline and Electrolyte Solutions on Hatchability and Growth of Broilers from Day 0 to Day 10 Post-Hatch. Int. J. Poult. Sci. 2011, 10, 927–932. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Dooley, M.; Peebles, E.D.; Zhai, W.; Mejia, L.; Zumwalt, C.D.; Corzo, A. Effects of L-Carnitine via in Ovo Injection with or without L-Carnitine Feed Supplementation on Broiler Hatchability and Posthatch Performance. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 2011, 20, 491–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Ebrahimi, M.R.; Jafari Ahangari, Y.; Zamiri, M.J.; Akhlaghi, A.; Atashi, H. Does Preincubational in Ovo Injection of Buffers or Antioxidants Improve the Quality and Hatchability in Long-Term Stored Eggs? Poult. Sci. 2012, 91, 2970–2976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Nowaczewski, S.; Kontecka, H.; Krystianiak, S. Effect of in Ovo Injection of Vitamin C during Incubation on Hatchability of Chickens and Ducks. Folia Biol. 2012, 60, 93–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Salmanzadeh, M.; Ebrahimnezhad, Y.; Shahryar, H.A. Effects of in Ovo Administration of L-Carnitine on Hatchability, Subsequent Performance, Carcass Traits and Blood Cholesterol of Turkey Poults. Rev. Med. Vet. 2012, 163, 448–453. [Google Scholar]
  42. Bello, A.; Zhai, W.; Gerard, P.D.; Peebles, E.D. Effects of the Commercial in Ovo Injection of 25-Hydroxycholecalciferol on the Hatchability and Hatching Chick Quality of Broilers. Poult. Sci. 2013, 92, 2551–2559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Akhlaghi, A.; Jafari Ahangari, Y.; Hashemi, S.R.; Navidshad, B.; Ansari Pirsaraei, Z.; Deldar, H.; Ebrahimi, M.R.; Dadpasand, M.; Atashi, H.; Liang, J.B. Prestorage in Ovo Injection of Biological Buffers: An Approach to Improve Hatchability in Long-Term Stored Eggs. Poult. Sci. 2013, 92, 874–881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Lotfi, A.; Shahryar, H.A.; Kaiya, H. Effect of in Ovo Ghrelin Administration on Hatching Results and Post-Hatching Performance of Broiler Chickens. Livest. Sci. 2013, 154, 158–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Shafey, T.M.; Mahmoud, A.H.; Alsobayel, A.A.; Abouheif, M.A. Effects of in Ovo Administration of Amino Acids on Hatchability and Performance of Meat Chickens. South Afric. J. Anim. Sci. 2014, 44, 123–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Rabie, M.H.; Ismail, F.S.A.; Ahmed, A.A.S. Effect of in Ovo Injection of L-Carnitine at Different Incubational Ages on Egg Hatchability in Broiler Breeders and Post-Hatch Performance. Asian J. Anim. Vet. Adv. 2015, 10, 875–884. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Sgavioli, S.; Matos Júnior, J.B.; Borges, L.L.; Praes, M.F.F.M.; Morita, V.S.; Zanirato, G.L.; Garcia, R.G.; Boleli, I.C. Effects of Ascorbic Acid Injection in Incubated Eggs Submitted to Heat Stress on Incubation Parameters and Chick Quality. Rev. Bras. Cienc. Avic. 2015, 17, 181–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Patric Joshua, P.; Valli, C.; Balakrishnan, V. Effect of in Ovo Supplementation of Nano Forms of Zinc, Copper, and Selenium on Post-Hatch Performance of Broiler Chicken. Vet. World 2016, 9, 287–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Kermanshahi, H.; Golian, A.; Emami, N.K.; Daneshmand, A.; Tabari, D.G.; Ibrahim, S.A. Effects of in Ovo Injection of Threonine on Hatchability, Intestinal Morphology, and Somatic Attributes in Japanese Quail (Coturnix Japonica). J. Appl. Anim. Res. 2017, 45, 437–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Gao, T.; Zhao, M.; Zhang, L.; Li, J.; Yu, L.; Lv, P.; Gao, F.; Zhou, G. Effect of in Ovo Feeding of L-Arginine on the Hatchability, Growth Performance, Gastrointestinal Hormones, and Jejunal Digestive and Absorptive Capacity of Posthatch Broilers. J. Anim. Sci. 2017, 95, 3079–3092. [Google Scholar]
  51. Zhao, M.M.; Gao, T.; Zhang, L.; Li, J.L.; Lv, P.A.; Yu, L.L.; Gao, F.; Zhou, G.H. Effects of in Ovo Feeding of Creatine Pyruvate on the Hatchability, Growth Performance and Energy Status in Embryos and Broiler Chickens. Animal 2017, 11, 1689–1697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Nʼnanle, O.; Tété-Bénissan, A.; Tona, K.; Teteh, A.; Voemesse, K.; Decuypere, E.; Gbeassor, M. Effect of in Ovo Inoculation of Moringa Oleifera Leaves Extract on Hatchability and Chicken Growth Performance. Eur. Poult. Sci. 2017, 81, 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  53. Watanabe, Y.; Grommen, S.V.H.; de Groef, B. Effect of in Ovo Injection of Corticotropin-Releasing Hormone on the Timing of Hatching in Broiler Chickens. Poult. Sci. 2017, 96, 3452–3456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Zhang, X.Y.; Wan, X.P.; Miao, L.P.; Zou, X.T.; Dong, X.Y. Effects of in Ovo Feeding of L-Arginine on Hatchability, Hatching Time, Early Posthatch Development, and Carcass Traits in Domestic Pigeons (Columba Livia). J. Anim. Sci. 2017, 95, 4462–4471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Nayak, N.; Rajini, R.A.; Ezhilvalavan, S.; Sahu, A.R.; Kirubaharan, J.J. Comparative Effect of Arginine and/or Tryptophan in Ovo Feeding on Hatchability Percentage, Growth Performance and Economic Importance of Commercial Broiler. Indian J. Anim. Sci. 2017, 87, 153–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Sokale, A.O.; Zhai, W.; Pote, L.M.; Williams, C.J.; Peebles, E.D. Immunology, Health, and Disease: Effects of Coccidiosis Vaccination Administered by in Ovo Injection on the Hatchability and Hatching Chick Quality of Broilers. Poult. Sci. 2017, 96, 541–547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Khaligh, F.; Hassanabadi, A.; Nassiri-Moghaddam, H.; Golian, A.; Kalidari, G.-A. Effects of in Ovo Injection of Chrysin, Quercetin and Ascorbic Acid on Hatchability, Somatic Attributes, Hepatic Oxidative Status and Early Post-Hatch Performance of Broiler Chicks. J. Anim. Physiol. Anim. Nutr. 2018, 102, e413–e420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Coskun, I.; Akkan, A.; Erener, G. Effects of in Ovo Injection of Lysine and Methionine into Fertile Broiler (Parent Stock) Eggs on Hatchability, Growth Performance, Caecum Microbiota, and Ileum Histomorphology. Rev. Bras. Zootec. 2018, 47, e20170220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Zhang, H.; Elliott, K.E.C.; Durojaye, O.A.; Fatemi, S.A.; Peebles, E.D. Effects of in Ovo Administration of L-Ascorbic Acid on Broiler Hatchability and Its Influence on the Effects of Pre-Placement Holding Time on Broiler Quality Characteristics. Poult. Sci. 2018, 97, 1941–1947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Rahardja, D.P.; Hakim, A.R.; Lestari, V.S. Application of in Ovo Injection of L-Glutamine for Improving Productivity of Indonesian Native Chicken: Hatchability and Hatching Time. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2018, 157, 012071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Sun, X.-M.; Liao, X.-D.; Lu, L.; Zhang, L.-Y.; Ma, Q.-G.; Xi, L.; Luo, X.-G. Effect of in Ovo Zinc Injection on the Embryonic Development, Tissue Zinc Contents, Antioxidation, and Related Gene Expressions of Broiler Breeder Eggs. J. Integr. Agric. 2018, 17, 648–656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Soleimani Roudi, P.; Golian, A.; Bassami, M.R.; Haghparast, A.R.; Majidzadeh Heravi, R. Effect of In Ovo Injection of VG/GA Vaccine, an Apathogenic Enteric Strain of Newcastle Disease Vaccine and Aluminum Hydroxide as an Adjuvant on Hatchability and Immune Response of Commercial Pullets. Poult. Sci. J. 2018, 6, 11–18. [Google Scholar]
  63. Jose, N.; Elangovan, A.V.; Awachat, V.B.; Shet, D.; Ghosh, J.; David, C.G. Response of in Ovo Administration of Zinc on Egg Hatchability and Immune Response of Commercial Broiler Chicken. J. Anim. Physiol. Anim. Nutr. 2018, 102, 591–595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Zhang, X.Y.; Li, L.L.; Miao, L.P.; Zhang, N.N.; Zou, X.T. Effects of in Ovo Feeding of Cationic Amino Acids on Hatchability, Hatch Weights, and Organ Developments in Domestic Pigeon Squabs (Columba Livia). Poult. Sci. 2018, 97, 110–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Bhattacharyya, A.; Majumdar, S.; Bhanja, S.K.; Mandal, A.B.; Kadam, M. Effect of Maternal Dietary Manipulation and in Ovo Injection of Nutrients on the Hatchability Indices, Post-Hatch Growth, Feed Consumption, Feed Conversion Ratio and Immunocompetence Traits of Turkey Poults. J. Appl. Anim. Res. 2018, 46, 287–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Taha, A.E.; Abdallah, O.A.; Attia, K.M.; El-karim, R.E.A.; El-hack, M.E.A.; El-edel, M.A.; Saadeldin, I.M.; Hussein, E.O.S.; Swelum, A.A. Does in Ovo Injection of Two Chicken Strains with Royal Jelly Impact Hatchability, Post-Hatch Growth Performance and Haematological and Immunological Parameters in Hatched Chicks? Animals 2019, 9, 486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Genc, M.; Kandemir, F.M.; Coban, O. Effects of In-Ovo Rutin Injection to Fertile Japanese Quail (Coturnix Coturnix Japonica) Egg on Hatchability, Embryonic Death, Hatchling Weight, and Hatchling Liver Oxidative and Nitrosative Stress. Rev. Bras. Cienc. Avic. 2019, 21, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. El-Kholy, M.S.; Ibrahim, Z.A.E.-G.; El-Mekkawy, M.M.; Alagawany, M. Influence of in Ovo Administration of Some Water-Soluble Vitamins on Hatchability Traits, Growth, Carcass Traits and Blood Chemistry of Japanese Quails. Ann. Anim. Sci. 2019, 19, 97–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Soltani, T.; Salarmoini, M.; Afsharmanesh, M.; Tasharrofi, S. The Effects of in Ovo Injection of Ascorbic Acid on Hatchability, Growth Performance, Intestinal Morphology, and Tibia Breaking Strength in 36h Post Hatch Fasted Broiler Chickens. Poult. Sci. J. 2019, 7, 43–49. [Google Scholar]
  70. Beck, C.N.; McDaniel, C.D.; Wamsley, K.G.S.; Kiess, A.S. The Potential for Inoculating Lactobacillus Animalis and Enterococcus Faecium Alone or in Combination Using Commercial in Ovo Technology without Negatively Impacting Hatch and Post-Hatch Performance. Poult. Sci. 2019, 98, 7050–7062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Xu, Q.Q.; Zhang, X.Y.; Zou, X.T.; Dong, X.Y. Effects of in Ovo Injection of L-Histidine on Hatch Performance and Post-Hatch Development in Domestic Pigeons (Columba Livia). Poult. Sci. 2019, 98, 3194–3203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Kanagaraju, P.; Rathnapraba, S. Effect of In-Ovo Injection of Glucose and Egg White Protein on the Production Performance and Gut Histomorphometry of Broiler Chicken. Indian J. Anim. Res. 2019, 53, 675–679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Zhu, M.K.; Zhang, X.Y.; Dong, X.Y.; Zou, X.T. Effects of in Ovo Feeding of L-Lysine on Hatchability, Hatching Time, and Early Post-Hatch Development in Domestic Pigeons (Columba Livia). Poult. Sci. 2019, 98, 5533–5540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Rufino, J.P.F.; Cruz, F.G.G.; Costa, V.D.R.; Silva, A.F.; Filho, P.A.O.; Melo, L.D.; Bezerra, N.S. Effect of in Ovo Feeding of L-Glutamine + ISP to Chick Embryos | L-Glutamina Consorciada Com Pis Na Alimentação in Ovo de Embriões Avícolas. Med. Vet. 2019, 13, 591–596. [Google Scholar]
  75. Rufino, J.P.F.; Cruz, F.G.G.; Costa, V.R.; Silva, A.F.; Melo, L.D.; Bezerra, N.S. Effect of in Ovo Feeding of L-Glutamine to Chick Embryos. Rev. Bras. Cienc. Avic. 2019, 21, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. El-Deep, M.H.; Amber, K.A.; Elgendy, S.; Dawood, M.A.O.; Zidan, A. In Ovo Injection of Nano-Selenium Spheres Mitigates the Hatchability, Histopathology Image and Immune Response of Hatched Chicks. J. Anim. Physiol. Anim. Nutr. 2020, 104, 1392–1400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Al-Asadi, K.J.; Ibrahim, B.M. Effect of the Use of Immersion and Injection Methods for Egg Hatching of Broiler Breeders in the Aquatic Extracts of Some Plant Seeds as Early Feeding. Plant. Arch. 2020, 20, 2187–2195. [Google Scholar]
  78. Neves, D.G.D.; Retes, P.L.; Alves, V.V.; Pereira, R.S.G.; Bueno, Y.D.C.; Alvarenga, R.R.; Zangeronimo, M.G. In Ovo Injection with Glycerol and Insulin-like Growth Factor (IGF-I): Hatchability, Intestinal Morphometry, Performance, and Carcass Characteristics of Broilers. Arch. Anim. Nutr. 2020, 74, 325–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Biria, A.; Navidshad, B.; Mirzaei Aghjehgheshlag, F.; Nikbin, S. The Effect of in Ovo Supplementation of Nano Zinc Oxide Particles on Hatchability and Post-Hatch Immune System of Broiler Chicken. Iran J. Appl. Anim. Sci. 2020, 10, 547–553. [Google Scholar]
  80. Abdel-Halim, A.A.; Mohamed, F.R.; El-menawey, M.A.-R.; Gharib, H.B. Impact of In-Ovo Injection of Folic Acid and Glucose on Hatchability, and Post-Hatching Performance of Broiler Chicken. World’s Vet. J. 2020, 10, 481–491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Mohammed, R.J.; Al-Hassani, D.H. Comparison of in ovo injection at 18 days of incubation and feeding in the hatchery and their interaction in influencing on some of hatching and productive traits in broiler chickens. Biochem. Cell. Arch. 2020, 20, 6617–6621. [Google Scholar]
  82. El-Moneim, A.E.-M.E.A.; El-Wardany, I.; Abu-Taleb, A.M.; Wakwak, M.M.; Ebeid, T.A.; Saleh, A.A. Assessment of In Ovo Administration of Bifidobacterium Bifidum and Bifidobacterium Longum on Performance, Ileal Histomorphometry, Blood Hematological, and Biochemical Parameters of Broilers. Probiotics Antimicrob. Proteins 2020, 12, 439–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Jasim, M.S.; Mohammed, A.A. Effect of in Ovo Injection of Branched Chain Amino Acids on Hatching Traits and Production Performance of Broiler Chickens. Biochem. Cell. Arch. 2020, 20, 755–761. [Google Scholar]
  84. Tanimowo, D.A.; Longe, O.G. Effects of in Ovo Betaine-Hydrochloride Feeding and Genotype on Organ Weight, Energy Status and Weight Loss in Broiler Chicks. Eur. Poult. Sci. 2020, 84, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Karamik, S.; Kop-Bozbay, C. Response of Broiler Chicks to L-Glutamine Feeding in the immediate Pre- and Post-Hatch Periods. South Afric. J. Anim. Sci. 2020, 50, 786–792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Oke, O.E.; Oyelola, O.B.; Iyasere, O.S.; Njoku, C.P.; Oso, A.O.; Oso, O.M.; Fatoki, S.T.; Bankole, K.O.; Jimoh, I.O.; Sybill, N.I.; et al. In Ovo Injection of Black Cumin (Nigella Sativa) Extract on Hatching and Post Hatch Performance of Thermally Challenged Broiler Chickens during Incubation. Poult. Sci. 2021, 100, 100831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Saleh, A.A.; Alhotan, R.A.; Alharthi, A.S.; Nassef, E.; Kassab, M.A.; Farrag, F.A.; Hendam, B.M.; Abumnadour, M.M.A.; Shukry, M. Insight View on the Role of in Ovo Feeding of Clenbuterol on Hatched Chicks: Hatchability, Growth Efficiency, Serum Metabolic Profile, Muscle, and Lipid-Related Markers. Animals 2021, 11, 2429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Ghane, F.; Qotbi, A.-A.-A.; Slozhenkina, M.; Mosolov, A.A.; Gorlov, I.; Seidavi, A.; Colonna, M.A.; Laudadio, V.; Tufarelli, V. Effects of in Ovo Feeding of Vitamin E or Vitamin C on Egg Hatchability, Performance, Carcass Traits and Immunity in Broiler Chickens. Anim. Biotechnol. 2021, 34, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Hajati, H.; Zaghari, M.; Noori, O.; Negarandeh, R.; de Oliveira, H.C. Effects of in Ovo Injection of Microalgae on Hatchability, Antioxidant and Immunity-Related Genes Expression, and Post-Hatch Performance in Broilers and Japanese Quails. Ital. J. Anim. Sci. 2021, 20, 985–994. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Palouj, J.; Kazemi-Fard, M.; Rezaei, M.; Ansari-Piresaraei, Z. Effects of in Ovo Injection of Nano Zinc Oxide on the Hatchability Immunity and Antioxidant Responses, and Relative Gene Expressions of Interleukin 2 and 12 in Broiler Chickens. Iran J. Appl. Anim. Sci. 2021, 11, 595–603. [Google Scholar]
  91. Alabi, J.O.; Bhanja, S.K.; Fafiolu, A.O.; Oluwatosin, O.O.; Onagbesan, O.M.; Mehra, M.; Goel, A. Influence of in Ovo Threonine on Growth Performance, Immunocompetence and Carcass Characteristics in Broiler Chickens. Indian J. Anim. Sci. 2021, 90, 1628–1637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Abdulateef, S.M.; Majid, A.A.; Al-Bayer, M.A.; Shawkat, S.S.; Tatar, A.; Mohammed, T.T.; Abdulateef, F.M.; Al-Ani, M.Q. Effect of Aromatase Inhibitors on Sex Differentiation and Embryonic Development in Chicks. Vet. Med. Sci. 2021, 7, 2362–2373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Yang, S.-B.; Qin, Y.-J.; Ma, X.; Luan, W.-M.; Sun, P.; Ju, A.-Q.; Duan, A.-Y.; Zhang, Y.-N.; Zhao, D.-H. Effects of in Ovo Injection of Astragalus Polysaccharide on the Intestinal Development and Mucosal Immunity in Broiler Chickens. Front. Vet. Sci. 2021, 8, 738816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Sulaiman, K.M.; Tayeb, I.T. Response Of Broiler Chicken To Inovo Administration Of Different Levels Of Rosemary Oil (Rosmarinus Officinalis). Iraqi J. Agric. Sci. 2021, 52, 896–903. [Google Scholar]
  95. Ncho, C.M.; Goel, A.; Jeong, C.-M.; Youssouf, M.; Choi, Y.-H. In Ovo Injection of Gaba Can Help Body Weight Gain at Hatch, Increase Chick Weight to Egg Weight Ratio, and Improve Broiler Heat Resistance. Animals 2021, 11, 1364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Gouda, A.; Tolba, S.A.; El-Moniary, M.M. Impact of in Ovo Injection of Certain Vitamins to Improve the Physiological Conditions of Hatching Chicks. Pak. J. Biol. Sci. 2021, 24, 268–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Memon, S.S.; Kamboh, A.A.; Khand, F.M.; Malhi, K.K.; Leghari, A.; Lakho, S.A.; Arain, M.B. Effect of in Ovo Honey Administration on Fertility and Post Hatch Performance of Broiler Chickens. J. Anim. Health Prod. 2021, 9, 236–242. [Google Scholar]
  98. Oladokun, S.; Macisaac, J.; Rathgeber, B.; Adewole, D. Essential Oil Delivery Route: Effect on Broiler Chicken’s Growth Performance, Blood Biochemistry, Intestinal Morphology, Immune, and Antioxidant Status. Animals 2021, 11, 3386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Bhanja, S.K.; Rath, P.K.; Goel, A.; Mehra, M.; Dhara, S.K.; Paswan, V.K.; Attia, Y.A.; Alqhtani, A.H.; Ali, A.B.A.; Shehata, A.M. In Ovo Nano-Silver and Nutrient Supplementation Improves Immunity and Resistance against Newcastle Disease Virus Challenge in Broiler Chickens. Front. Vet. Sci. 2022, 9, 948069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Ajayi, O.I.; Smith, O.F.; Oso, A.O.; Oke, O.E. Evaluation of in Ovo Feeding of Low or High Mixtures of Cysteine and Lysine on Performance, Intestinal Morphology and Physiological Responses of Thermal-Challenged Broiler Embryos. Front. Physiol. 2022, 13, 972041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Lu, P.; Morawong, T.; Molee, A.; Molee, W. Influences of L-Arginine In Ovo Feeding on the Hatchability, Growth Performance, Antioxidant Capacity, and Meat Quality of Slow-Growing Chickens. Animals 2022, 12, 392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  102. Melo, L.D.; Cruz, F.G.G.; Rufino, J.P.F.; Melo, R.D.; Feijó, J.D.C.; Andrade, P.G.C.D.; Silva, F.M.F.; Oliveira Filho, P.A.D. In Ovo Feeding of Creatine Monohydrate Increases Performances of Hatching and Development in Breeder Chicks. Anim. Biotechnol. 2022, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  103. Gouda, A.; Tolba, S.A.; Mahrose, K.M. Influences of Vitamin A, L-Carnitine, and Folic Acid in Ovo Feeding on Embryo and Hatchling Characteristics and General Health Status in Ducks. Anim. Biotechnol. 2022, 33, 150–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  104. Eisa, G.E.; Abdelfatah, S.H.; Abdellatif, H.A.; Mohamed, F.F. Effect of In Ovo Injection of L-Threonine on Hatchability Followed by Post-Hatch Extra Level of Dietary Threonine on the Performance of Broilers. J. Adv. Vet. Res. 2022, 12, 605–612. [Google Scholar]
  105. Agarwal, N.; Shukla, V.; Kolba, N.; Jackson, C.; Cheng, J.; Padilla-Zakour, O.I.; Tako, E. Comparing the Effects of Concord Grape (Vitis Labrusca L.) Puree, Juice, and Pomace on Intestinal Morphology, Functionality, and Bacterial Populations In Vivo (Gallus Gallus). Nutrients 2022, 14, 3539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  106. Alqhtani, A.H.; Fatemi, S.A.; Elliott, K.E.C.; Branton, S.L.; Evans, J.D.; Leigh, S.A.; Gerard, P.D.; Peebles, E.D. Effects of the In Ovo Vaccination of the Ts-11 Strain of Mycoplasma Gallisepticum in Layer Embryos and Posthatch Chicks. Animals 2022, 12, 1120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Mousstaaid, A.; Fatemi, S.A.; Elliott, K.E.C.; Alqhtani, A.H.; Peebles, E.D. Effects of the In Ovo Injection of L-Ascorbic Acid on Broiler Hatching Performance. Animals 2022, 12, 1020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Mahjar, N.T.; Al-Salhie, K.C.K. The Effects of In Ovo Injection of Garlic (Allium Sativum L.) Extract on Hatchability, Liver Enzymes and Antioxidant Status of Broiler Chickens. Basrah J. Agric. Sci. 2022, 35, 61–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Geng, Y.; Sun, X.; Lu, L.; Lin, X.; Liao, X.; Zhang, L.; Wang, R.; Luo, X. Effect of in Ovo Manganese Injection on the Embryonic Development, Antioxidation, Hatchability, and Performances of Offspring Broilers under Normal and High Temperatures. Poult. Sci. 2022, 101, 101936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Karageçili, M.R.; Babacanoğlu, E. Influence of In-Ovo Vitamin E and Ascorbic Acid Injections on Chick Development, Hatching Performance and Antioxidant Content in Different Tissues of Newly-Hatched Quail Chicks. Br. Poult. Sci. 2022, 63, 840–846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Nabi, F.; Arain, M.A.; Bhutto, Z.A.; Shah, Q.A.; Bangulzai, N.; Ujjan, N.A.; Fazlani, S.A. Effect of Early Feeding of L-Arginine and L-Threonine on Hatchability and Post-Hatch Performance of Broiler Chicken. Trop. Anim. Health Prod. 2022, 54, 380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Vetsci 10 00296 g001 550
Figure 1. Delivery of substances into the amniotic fluid during embryonic development.
Figure 1. Delivery of substances into the amniotic fluid during embryonic development.
Vetsci 10 00296 g001
Vetsci 10 00296 g002 550
Figure 2. Number of publications from 1985–2023 related to the in ovo injection technique with a focus on hatchability.
Figure 2. Number of publications from 1985–2023 related to the in ovo injection technique with a focus on hatchability.
Vetsci 10 00296 g002
Vetsci 10 00296 g003 550
Figure 3. Citation-based document network.
Figure 3. Citation-based document network.
Vetsci 10 00296 g003
Vetsci 10 00296 g004 550
Figure 4. Bibliographic coupling of documents.
Figure 4. Bibliographic coupling of documents.
Vetsci 10 00296 g004
Vetsci 10 00296 g005 550
Figure 5. Reference co-citation network.
Figure 5. Reference co-citation network.
Vetsci 10 00296 g005
Vetsci 10 00296 g006 550
Figure 6. Authors network based on number of documents.
Figure 6. Authors network based on number of documents.
Vetsci 10 00296 g006
Vetsci 10 00296 g007 550
Figure 7. Network of authors based on numbers of citations.
Figure 7. Network of authors based on numbers of citations.
Vetsci 10 00296 g007
Vetsci 10 00296 g008 550
Figure 8. Network of co-citation and bibliographic coupling of authors.
Figure 8. Network of co-citation and bibliographic coupling of authors.
Vetsci 10 00296 g008
Vetsci 10 00296 g009 550
Figure 9. Co-occurrence network of authors’ keywords.
Figure 9. Co-occurrence network of authors’ keywords.
Vetsci 10 00296 g009
Vetsci 10 00296 g010 550
Figure 10. Network of journals based on numbers of documents, citations, and bibliographic coupling.
Figure 10. Network of journals based on numbers of documents, citations, and bibliographic coupling.
Vetsci 10 00296 g010
Vetsci 10 00296 g011 550
Figure 11. Journal co-citation network.
Figure 11. Journal co-citation network.
Vetsci 10 00296 g011
Vetsci 10 00296 g012 550
Figure 12. Heat map for numbers of papers by country.
Figure 12. Heat map for numbers of papers by country.
Vetsci 10 00296 g012
Vetsci 10 00296 g013 550
Figure 13. Network of countries based on numbers of documents, citations, and bibliographic coupling.
Figure 13. Network of countries based on numbers of documents, citations, and bibliographic coupling.
Vetsci 10 00296 g013
Table
Table 1. Bibliographic information search protocol.
Table 1. Bibliographic information search protocol.
Data BaseScopus
Research selection pointsTitle, abstract, keywords
Keywords Hatchability, in ovo injection, in ovo feeding, in ovo nutrition, and in ovo delivery
Search mode(TITLE-ABS-KEY (hatchability) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY (in AND ovo AND injection) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (in AND ovo AND feeding) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (in AND ovo AND nutrition) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (in AND ovo AND delivery)) AND (LIMIT-TO (PUBSTAGE, “final”)) AND (LIMIT-TO (DOCTYPE, “ar”)) AND (LIMIT-TO (LANGUAGE, “English”))
Publication coverage periodUntil 14 January 2023
Data extracted from the databaseTitle and abstract of the documents, year of publication, name(s) of the author(s), country and institutional affiliation of each author, keywords, number of documents and their respective citations, and journal names.
Extraction formatCSV Microsoft Excel
Data processingVOSviewer® software (version 1.6.18)
Table
Table 2. The 10 most cited studies between 1985 to 2023.
Table 2. The 10 most cited studies between 1985 to 2023.
AuthorsStudyJournalTotal Citations
[16]Enhancement of humoral and cellular immunity by vitamin E after embryonic exposure.Poultry Science125
[17]Effects of amino acid injection in broiler breeder eggs on embryonic growth and hatchability of chicks.Poultry Science124
[18]Effects of in ovo injection of critical amino acids on pre- and post-hatch growth, immunocompetence, and development of digestive organs in broiler chickens.Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences77
[20]Effects of commercial in ovo injection of carbohydrates on broiler embryogenesis.Poultry Science69
[21]Optimum site for in ovo amino acid injection in broiler breeder eggs.Poultry Science63
[22]Influence of different prebiotics and mode of their administration on broiler chicken performance.Animal60
[19]Synbiotics for broiler chickens—in vitro design and evaluation of the influence on host and selected microbiota populations following in ovo delivery.PLoS One57
[23]In ovo administration of recombinant human insulin-like growth factor-I alters postnatal growth and development of the broiler chicken.Poultry Science53
[24]Effect of in ovo feeding of folic acid on the folate metabolism, immune function, and epigenetic modification of immune effector molecules of broiler.British Journal of Nutrition51
[25]In ovo vaccination of specific-pathogen-free chickens with vaccines containing multiple agents.Avian Diseases51
Table
Table 3. The 10 journals that published the most articles between 1985 and 2023.
Table 3. The 10 journals that published the most articles between 1985 and 2023.
RankingJournalPapersCitationsTotal Link StrengthImpact Factor
1Poultry Science4612131444.014
2Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition15106452.718
3Animals1046293.231
4Indian Journal of Animal Sciences984130.331
5Iranian Journal of Applied Animal Science712140.849
6Brazilian Journal of Poultry Science552321.019
7Animal5111143.73
8British Poultry Science599261.892
9Journal of Applied Poultry Research497142.162
10Frontiers in Veterinary Science411103.471
Table
Table 4. Studies reviewed and respective products evaluated.
Table 4. Studies reviewed and respective products evaluated.
StudyProductEffect on Hatchability *
PositiveNegativeNon-Existent
[31]Amino acids x
[32]Ascorbic acidx x
Glucose x
[33]L-carnitine x
[34]Iodinated casein + dextrin x
[35]L-carnitine x
[36]L-carnitine x
[37]Carbohydrate/electrolyte + potassium chloride + Theophylline x
Tripotassium citrate + potassium chloride + Theophylline
Creatine + potassium chloride + Theophylline
[38]L-carnitine x
[39]Bicarbonate x
Phosphate
L-carnitine
Vitamin E
Vitamin C
[40]Vitamin Cx x
[41]L-carnitine x
[42]25-hydroxycholecalciferol xx
[43]HEPES [N-(2-hydroxyethyl)-piperazine-N′-ethanesulfonic acid]x
Bicine [N,N′-Bis(2-hydroxyethyl)-glycine]x x
Tris [Tris(hydroxymethyl)-aminomethane] x
Bis-Tris-propane {1,3-Bis [Tris(hydroxymethyl)-methylamino] propane}x x
[44]Ghrelin x
[28]Royal jelly xx
[45]Lysine + glutamine + glycine + proline x
Arginine + glutamine + glycine + proline
Arginine + lysine + glutamine + glycine + proline
[46]L-Carnitine x
[47]Ascorbic acid x
[48]Nano form of zinc x
Nano form of copper
Nano form of selenium
[22]DiNovo (Extract of beta-glucans) xx
Bi2tos (Trans-galactooligosaccharides) x
[49]Threonine xx
[50]L-arginine xx
[51]Creatine pyruvate x
[52]Moringa oleifera leavesx x
[53]Corticotropin-releasing hormone x
[54]L-argininex
[55]Arginine x
Tryptophan
[56]Coccidiosis vaccination x
[57]Chrysin x
Quercetin
Ascorbic acid
[58]Lysinex
Methionine x
[59]L-ascorbic acid x
[60]L-Glutaminex x
[61]Zinc xx
[62]VG/GA vaccine xx
[63]Zinc xx
[64]L-arginine x
L-lysine
L-histidine
[65]Essential amino acids x
Linolenic acid
Linoleic acid
Retinol
DL-alpha-tocopherol
[6]Coenzyme Q10x
[66]Royal jellyx x
[67]Rutin xx
[68]Vitamin C x
Vitamin B6
Vitamin B12
[69]L-ascorbic acidx x
[70]Lactobacillus animalis x
Enterococcus faecium
[71]L-histidinex
[72]Glucosex
Egg-white protein
[73]L-lysine x
[12]L-Argininexxx
[74]L-glutamine + isolated soy proteinxxx
[75]L-Glutaminexx
[76]Nano-seleniumx
[13]Canthaxanthin xx
[77]Fenugreek seeds x
Oat seeds
Basil seeds x
[78]Glycerol x
Insulin-like growth factor
[79]Zinc oxide nanoparticles x
[80]Folic acid x
Glucose
[81]Ascorbic acidx
Arginine
[82]Bifidobacterium bifidumxx
Bifidobacterium longum
[83]Leucine x
Valine
Iso-leucine
[84]Betaine hydrochloride x
[85]L-Glutamine x
[86]Black cuminx x
[87]Clenbuterolx
[88]Vitamin Cx x
Vitamin E
[89]Microalgaex x
[90]Nano zinc oxide x
[91]Threonine xx
[92]Garlic extractx
Tomato extract
[93]Astragalus polysaccharide x
[94]Rosemary oilxx
[95]Gaba x
[96]Vitamin Ax
Vitamin E
Vitamin D3
Folic acid
[97]Honeyx
[98]Essential oils (commercial blend containing star anise, cinnamon, rosemary, and thyme oil) x
[99]Silver nanoparticles x
[100]Cysteinex
Lysine x
[101]L-Arginine x
[102]Creatine monohydrate x
[103]Vitamin Ax
L-carnitine
Folic acid
[104]L-threonine x
[105]Grape puree x
Grape pomace
Grape juice
[106]Mycoplasma gallisepticum x
[107]L-ascorbic acid x
[108]Garlicx x
[109]Manganese xx
[110]Vitamin E and ascorbic acid x
[111]L-argininex
L-threonine
* Effect compared with eggs that were not subjected to any treatment; when this treatment was absent, it was compared with another control treatment.
Table
Table 5. Effects of substances delivered in ovo on developing poultry including the early stages after hatching.
Table 5. Effects of substances delivered in ovo on developing poultry including the early stages after hatching.
StudyProductHypothetical or Observed Effects of Substances Delivered In Ovo
[35]L-carnitineStimulated embryonic metabolism and increased utilization of yolk fat and internal water content of the egg.
[42]25-hydroxycholecalciferolCaused a hypercalcemic condition due to an excessive influx of calcium into the circulation and tissues of the embryos.
[51]Creatine pyruvateIncreased liver glucose, glycogen, creatine, and phosphocreatine in breast muscle and hatch weight.
[58]LysineTendency to increase relative weight.
[68]Vitamins C, B6 and B12Improved the immune system.
[6]Coenzyme Q10Improved the antioxidant status of eggs or protected against oxidative damage.
[72]Glucose and egg white proteinIncreased hatch weight.
[73]L-lysineDisrupted the amnion’s amino acid balance, decreased utilization of other amino acids, blocked protein synthesis, and impaired intestinal morphology.
[78]Glycerol and insulin-like growth factorStimulated tissue growth, increased energy availability, amino acid supply, and intestinal villi.
[79]Zinc oxide nanoparticlesReduced early embryonic mortality.
[85]L-GlutamineDecreased yolk sac weight and increased weight of the gastrointestinal tract and pectoralis major muscle.
[76]Nano-seleniumImproved immune response.
[90]Nano zinc oxideIncreased early and late mortality.
[92]Garlic and tomato extractIncreased weight and length and improved quality.
[107]L-ascorbic acidIncreased antioxidant capacity, decreased inflammation, promoted embryonic livability, and did not impair hatching quality.
[101]L-ArginineScavenged free radicals produced by physiological metabolic activities in embryonic development.
[102]Creatine monohydrateIncreased intermediate embryonic mortality and hatch weight, stimulated the development of the heart and the total length of the gastrointestinal tract, especially important organs for digestion of nutrients (yolk sac, pro-ventricle, and gizzard), and regions for nutrient absorption (jejunum + ileum and colon + rectum).
[110]Vitamin E and ascorbic acidIncreased yolk sac absorption.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Oliveira, G.d.S.; McManus, C.; Salgado, C.B.; dos Santos, V.M. Bibliographical Mapping of Research into the Relationship between In Ovo Injection Practice and Hatchability in Poultry. Vet. Sci. 2023, 10, 296. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci10040296

AMA Style

Oliveira GdS, McManus C, Salgado CB, dos Santos VM. Bibliographical Mapping of Research into the Relationship between In Ovo Injection Practice and Hatchability in Poultry. Veterinary Sciences. 2023; 10(4):296. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci10040296

Chicago/Turabian Style

Oliveira, Gabriel da Silva, Concepta McManus, Cristiane Batista Salgado, and Vinícius Machado dos Santos. 2023. "Bibliographical Mapping of Research into the Relationship between In Ovo Injection Practice and Hatchability in Poultry" Veterinary Sciences 10, no. 4: 296. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci10040296

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop