Editöre Mektup
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

The effect of chicken meat marketing with different cutting methods on enterprise income

Yıl 2007, , 211 - 214, 01.09.2007
https://doi.org/10.1501/Vetfak_0000000280

Öz

The aim of this study is to determine the effect of marketing chicken carcasses after different cutting methods, on the enterprise income, taking into account seasonal price changes. The study was carried out in the Meat and Fish Organization Sincan Slaughtering Plant Poult Unit (Ankara-Turkey) between March 2002-May 2002. The research material included total 850 pieces broiler carcasses, which were cut up with conventional methods using a knife. In the research, 2 different conventional cutting methods were used. In the 1st method, the carcasses were cut-up into 7 parts as drumsticks, thighs, fillet (breast meat without bone and skin), wings, for soup (back), neck and bone. In the 2nd method the carcasses were cut-up into 4 parts as wings, legs (hindquarter), whole breast (with breast meat, back, bone and skin) and neck. In the 1st method, it was determined that there was an average increase of 4.03 % in the enterprise income with summer term prices; and an increase of 0.91 % with winter term prices. In the 2nd method, it was determined that respectively 13.18 and 3.35 % increases would be obtained in the income. It was found out that the 2nd method, in which the work force efficiency was high and the shrinkage rate was less, provided more net income increase to the enterprise

Kaynakça

  • Acar N, Moran ET, Mulvaney DR (1993): Breast muscle development of commercial broilers from hatching to twelve weeks of age. Poult Sci, 72, 317-325.
  • Benoff FH, Hamm D, Hudspeth JP, Lyon CE (1984): Meat yield comparisons of hot cut-up, noneviscerated versus eviscerated immersion-chilled broilers. Poult Sci, 63, 507-509.
  • Bilgili SF, Moran ETJr, Acar N (1992): Strain cross response of heavy male broilers to dietary lysine in the finisher feed: live performance and further-processing yields. Poult Sci, 71, 850-858.
  • Cevger Y, Sariozkan S, Guler H (2003): Impact of manual and mechanical cut-up of broiler carcasses on the enterprise income. Veterinarni Medicina-Czech, 48, 248-253.
  • Cevger Y, Sariozkan S, Guler H (2004): The effect of the sale of whole or cut up chicken meat on enterprise income according to season. Turk J Vet Anim Sci, 28, 399-402.
  • Daniel WW (1987): Biostatistics: A Foundation for Analysis in the Health Sciences. Fifth edition. Courier Companies, Inc USA, pp. 115-120.
  • Giles T, Stansfield M (1995): The Farmer as Manager. Second edition. CAB International, pp. 136-138.
  • Merkley JW, Weinland BT, Malone GW, Chaloupka GW (1980): Evaluation of five commercial broiler crosses: 2. eviscerated yield and component parts. Poult Sci, 59, 1755-1760.
  • Renden JA, Bilgili SF, Kincaid SA (1992): Effect of photo schedule and strain-cross on broiler performance. Poult Sci, 71, 1417-1426. Geliş tarihi: 30.10.2006 / Kabul tarihi: 23.01.2007

Farklı parçalama metodları ile piliç eti pazarlamasının işletme geliri üzerine etkisi

Yıl 2007, , 211 - 214, 01.09.2007
https://doi.org/10.1501/Vetfak_0000000280

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, farklı parçalama metotları ile piliç eti pazarlamasının, işletme geliri üzerine olan etkisinin, mevsimsel fiyat değişiklikleri de göz önüne alınarak belirlenmesidir. Çalışma, Et ve Balık Kurumu Sincan kanatlı kesimhanesinde, Mart 2002-Mayıs 2002 tarihleri arasında gerçekleştirilmiştir. Araştırmanın materyalini, bıçak kullanılarak geleneksel yöntemlerle parçalanan toplam 850 adet broyler karkası oluşturmuştur. Araştırmada 2 farklı geleneksel parçalama metodu kullanılmıştır. Birinci metotta, karkaslar, but, baget, fileto (kemik ve deri hariç göğüs eti), kanat, çorbalık (kemikli sırt), boyun ve kemik olmak üzere 7 ayrı parçaya, ikinci metotta ise kanat, arka bacaklar, bütün göğüs (göğüs eti, sırt, kemik ve deri dahil) ve boyun olmak üzere 4 ayrı parçaya ayrılmıştır. Araştırma kapsamında incelenen 1. parçalama metodunda, işletme gelirinde yaz dönemi fiyatlarıyla ortalama % 4.03’lük, kış dönemi fiyatlarıyla ise % 0.91’lik bir artış olduğu saptanmıştır. 2. parçalama metodunda, işletme gelirinde elde edilen artış oranları, yaz ve kış dönemi fiyatlarıyla sırasıyla % 13.18 ve % 3.35 olarak belirlenmiştir. Kullanılan 2. metodta, işgücü verimliliğinin yüksek ve fire oranının düşük olmasının, işletmede daha büyük bir net gelir artışı sağlanmasında etkili bulunduğu ortaya konulmuştur

Kaynakça

  • Acar N, Moran ET, Mulvaney DR (1993): Breast muscle development of commercial broilers from hatching to twelve weeks of age. Poult Sci, 72, 317-325.
  • Benoff FH, Hamm D, Hudspeth JP, Lyon CE (1984): Meat yield comparisons of hot cut-up, noneviscerated versus eviscerated immersion-chilled broilers. Poult Sci, 63, 507-509.
  • Bilgili SF, Moran ETJr, Acar N (1992): Strain cross response of heavy male broilers to dietary lysine in the finisher feed: live performance and further-processing yields. Poult Sci, 71, 850-858.
  • Cevger Y, Sariozkan S, Guler H (2003): Impact of manual and mechanical cut-up of broiler carcasses on the enterprise income. Veterinarni Medicina-Czech, 48, 248-253.
  • Cevger Y, Sariozkan S, Guler H (2004): The effect of the sale of whole or cut up chicken meat on enterprise income according to season. Turk J Vet Anim Sci, 28, 399-402.
  • Daniel WW (1987): Biostatistics: A Foundation for Analysis in the Health Sciences. Fifth edition. Courier Companies, Inc USA, pp. 115-120.
  • Giles T, Stansfield M (1995): The Farmer as Manager. Second edition. CAB International, pp. 136-138.
  • Merkley JW, Weinland BT, Malone GW, Chaloupka GW (1980): Evaluation of five commercial broiler crosses: 2. eviscerated yield and component parts. Poult Sci, 59, 1755-1760.
  • Renden JA, Bilgili SF, Kincaid SA (1992): Effect of photo schedule and strain-cross on broiler performance. Poult Sci, 71, 1417-1426. Geliş tarihi: 30.10.2006 / Kabul tarihi: 23.01.2007
Toplam 9 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Konular Veteriner Cerrahi
Bölüm Araştırma Makalesi
Yazarlar

Yavuz Cevger

Savaş Sarıözkan

Yılmaz Aral

Yayımlanma Tarihi 1 Eylül 2007
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2007

Kaynak Göster

APA Cevger, Y., Sarıözkan, S., & Aral, Y. (2007). The effect of chicken meat marketing with different cutting methods on enterprise income. Ankara Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi, 54(3), 211-214. https://doi.org/10.1501/Vetfak_0000000280
AMA Cevger Y, Sarıözkan S, Aral Y. The effect of chicken meat marketing with different cutting methods on enterprise income. Ankara Univ Vet Fak Derg. Eylül 2007;54(3):211-214. doi:10.1501/Vetfak_0000000280
Chicago Cevger, Yavuz, Savaş Sarıözkan, ve Yılmaz Aral. “The Effect of Chicken Meat Marketing With Different Cutting Methods on Enterprise Income”. Ankara Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi 54, sy. 3 (Eylül 2007): 211-14. https://doi.org/10.1501/Vetfak_0000000280.
EndNote Cevger Y, Sarıözkan S, Aral Y (01 Eylül 2007) The effect of chicken meat marketing with different cutting methods on enterprise income. Ankara Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi 54 3 211–214.
IEEE Y. Cevger, S. Sarıözkan, ve Y. Aral, “The effect of chicken meat marketing with different cutting methods on enterprise income”, Ankara Univ Vet Fak Derg, c. 54, sy. 3, ss. 211–214, 2007, doi: 10.1501/Vetfak_0000000280.
ISNAD Cevger, Yavuz vd. “The Effect of Chicken Meat Marketing With Different Cutting Methods on Enterprise Income”. Ankara Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi 54/3 (Eylül 2007), 211-214. https://doi.org/10.1501/Vetfak_0000000280.
JAMA Cevger Y, Sarıözkan S, Aral Y. The effect of chicken meat marketing with different cutting methods on enterprise income. Ankara Univ Vet Fak Derg. 2007;54:211–214.
MLA Cevger, Yavuz vd. “The Effect of Chicken Meat Marketing With Different Cutting Methods on Enterprise Income”. Ankara Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi, c. 54, sy. 3, 2007, ss. 211-4, doi:10.1501/Vetfak_0000000280.
Vancouver Cevger Y, Sarıözkan S, Aral Y. The effect of chicken meat marketing with different cutting methods on enterprise income. Ankara Univ Vet Fak Derg. 2007;54(3):211-4.