[Ahmed A.M.H., Rodríguez-Navarro A.B., Vidal M.L., Gautron J., García-Ruiz J.M., Nys Y. (2005). Changes in eggshell mechanical properties, crystallographic texture and in matrix proteins induced by moult in hens. Brit. Poultry Sci., 46: 268–279.10.1080/00071660500065425]Search in Google Scholar
[Akter Y., Kasim A., Omar H., Sazili A.Q. (2014). Effect of storage time and temperature on the quality characteristics of chicken eggs. J. Food Agric. Environ., 12: 87–92.]Search in Google Scholar
[Anderle V., Lichovníková M., Przywarová A., Dračková E. (2014). Egg quality of gene reserve Czech Golden Spotted hens. Acta Fytotech. Zootech., 17: 84–86.10.15414/afz.2014.17.03.84-86]Search in Google Scholar
[Aygun A., Sert D. (2013 a). Effects of prestorage application of propolis and storage time on eggshell microbial activity, hatchability, and chick performance in Japanese quail (Coturnix coturnix japonica) eggs. Poultry Sci., 92: 3330–3337.10.3382/ps.2013-0329124235245]Search in Google Scholar
[Aygun A., Sert D. (2013 b). Effects of vacuum packing on eggshell microbial activity and egg quality in table eggs under different storage temperatures. J. Sci. Food Agric., 93: 1626–1632.10.1002/jsfa.593623124536]Search in Google Scholar
[Bain M.M., Dunn I.C., Wilson P.W., Joseph N., De Ketelaere B., De Baerdemaeker J., Waddington D. (2006). Probability of an egg cracking during packing can be predicted using a simple non-destructive acoustic test. Brit. Poultry Sci., 47: 462–469.10.1080/00071660600829233]Search in Google Scholar
[Batkowska J., Brodacki A. (2017). Selected quality traits of eggs and the productivity of newly created laying hen hybrids dedicated to an extensive rearing system. Arch. Anim., 60: 87–93.10.5194/aab-60-87-2017]Search in Google Scholar
[Brodacki A., Batkowska J., Drabik K., Chabroszewska P., Łuczkiewicz P. (2019). Selected quality traits of table eggs depending on storage time and temperature. Brit. Food J., 121: 2016–2026.10.1108/BFJ-10-2018-0688]Search in Google Scholar
[D’Alba L., Shawkey M.D. (2015). Mechanisms of antimicrobial defense in avian eggs. J. Ornithol., 156: 399–408.10.1007/s10336-015-1226-1]Search in Google Scholar
[De Reu K., Messens W., Heyndrickx M., Rodenburg T.B., Uyttendaele M., Herman L. (2008). Bacterial contamination of table eggs and the influence of housing systems. World. Poultry Sci. J., 64: 5–19.10.1017/S0043933907001687]Search in Google Scholar
[Dikmen B.Y., İpek A., Şahan Ü., Petek M., Sözcü A. (2016). Egg production and welfare of laying hens kept in different housing systems (conventional, enriched cage, and free range). Poultry Sci., 95: 1564–1572.10.3382/ps/pew082]Search in Google Scholar
[Elmi M. (2004). Food safety: current situation, unaddressed issues and the emerging priorities. East. Mediterr. Health J., 10: 794–800.10.26719/2004.10.6.794]Search in Google Scholar
[Englmaierová E., Tůmová E., Charvátová V., Skřivan M. (2014). Effects of laying hens housing system on laying performance, egg quality characteristics, and egg microbial contamination. Czech J. Anim. Sci., 59: 345–352.10.17221/7585-CJAS]Search in Google Scholar
[FAO (2003). Assuring food safety and quality: guidelines for strengthening national food control systems. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and World Health Organization Rome (Italy).]Search in Google Scholar
[FAO (2007). The state of world’s animal genetic resources for food and agriculture. Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture Food; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Rome (Italy).]Search in Google Scholar
[Farewell A., Neidhardt F.C. (1998). Effect of temperature on in vivo protein synthetic capacity in Escherichia coli. J. Bacteriol., 180: 4704–4710.10.1128/JB.180.17.4704-4710.1998]Search in Google Scholar
[Fisher K., Phillips C. (2009). The ecology, epidemiology and virulence of Enterococcus. Microbiology, 155: 1749–1757.10.1099/mic.0.026385-0]Search in Google Scholar
[Hanusová E., Hrnčár C., Hanus A., Oravcova M. (2015). Effect of breed on some parameters of egg quality in laying hens. Acta Fytotech. Zootech., 18: 20–24.10.15414/afz.2015.18.01.12-24]Search in Google Scholar
[Hanusová E., Hrnčár C., Hanus A., Ondruška Ľ. (2017). Characterization of native Slovak chicken and goose: a review. Slovak J. Anim. Sci., 50: 144–148.]Search in Google Scholar
[Hernandez J.M., Beardswort P.M., Weber G. (2005). Egg quality meeting consumer expectations. Int. Poultry Prod., 13: 20–23.]Search in Google Scholar
[Hincke M.T., Gautron J., Panheleux M., Garcia-Ruiz J., McKee M.D., Nys Y. (2000). Identification and localization of lysozyme as a component of eggshell membranes and eggshell matrix. Matrix Biol., 19: 443–453.10.1016/S0945-053X(00)00095-0]Search in Google Scholar
[Hy-Line (2021). Hy-Line Brown: The World’s Most Balanced Egg Layer. Management Guide. https://www.hyline.com/varieties/brown]Search in Google Scholar
[Iannotti L.L., Lutter C.K., Bunn D.A., Stewart C.P. (2014). Eggs: the uncracked potential for improving maternal and young child nutrition among the world’s poor. Nutr. Rev., 72: 355–368.10.1111/nure.12107]Search in Google Scholar
[Jones D.R., Anderson K.E., Davis G.S. (2001). The effects of genetic selection on production parameters of single comb White Leghorn hens. Poultry Sci., 80: 1139–1143.10.1093/ps/80.8.1139]Search in Google Scholar
[Jones D.R., Curtis P.A., Anderson K.E., Jones F.T. (2004). Microbial contamination in inoculated shell eggs: II. Effects of layer strain and egg storage. Poultry Sci., 83: 95–100.10.1093/ps/83.1.95]Search in Google Scholar
[Jones D.R., Cox N.A., Guard J., Fedorka-Cray P.J., Buhr R.J., Gast R.K., Abdo Z., Rigsby L.L., Plumblee J.R., Karcher D.M., Robison C.I., Blatchford R.A., Makagon M.M. (2015). Microbiological impact of three commercial laying hen housing systems. Poultry Sci., 94: 544–551.10.3382/ps/peu010]Search in Google Scholar
[Khatun H., Rashid M.A., Faruque S., Islam M.N., Ali M.Y. (2016). Study on egg quality characteristics of three commercial layer strains under different storage conditions. Int. J. Anim. Res., 1: 63–70.]Search in Google Scholar
[Kraus A., Zita L., Krunt O. (2019). The effect of different housing system on quality parameters of eggs in relationship to the age in brown egg-laying hens. Bulg. J. Agric. Sci., 25: 1246–1253.]Search in Google Scholar
[Kraus A., Zita L., Krunt O., Pokorná K. (2020). How genotype influences the egg quality in the second half of laying cycle? J. Cent. Eur. Agric., 21: 215–221.10.5513/JCEA01/21.2.2683]Search in Google Scholar
[Kraus A., Zita L., Krunt O., Härtlová H., Chmelíková E. (2021). Determination of selected biochemical parameters in blood serum and egg quality of Czech and Slovak native hens depending on the housing system and hen age. Poultry Sci., 100: 1142–1153.10.1016/j.psj.2020.10.039]Search in Google Scholar
[Krawczyk J. (2009). Quality of eggs from Polish native Greenleg Partridge chicken-hens maintained in organic vs. backyard production systems. Anim. Sci. Pap. Rep., 27: 227–235.]Search in Google Scholar
[Krawczyk J., Sokołowicz Z. (2015). Effect of chicken breed and storage conditions of eggs on their quality. Acta Sci. Pol. Zootech., 14: 109–118.]Search in Google Scholar
[Krawczyk J., Sokołowicz Z., Szymczyk B. (2011). Effect of housing system on cholesterol, vitamin and fatty acid content of yolk and physical characteristics of eggs from Polish native hens. Arch. Geflugelkd., 75: 151–157.]Search in Google Scholar
[Krunt O., Zita L., Kraus A., Okrouhlá M., Chodová D., Stupka R. (2021). Guinea fowl (Numida meleagris) eggs and free range housing: A convenient alternative to laying hens’ eggs in terms of food safety? Poultry Sci., 100: 101006.10.1016/j.psj.2021.01.029]Search in Google Scholar
[Kulshreshtha G., Rodriguez-Navarro A., Sanchez-Rodriguez E., Diep T., Hincke M.T. (2018). Cuticle and pore plug properties in the table egg. Poultry Sci., 97: 1382–1390.10.3382/ps/pex409]Search in Google Scholar
[Kusuda S., Iwasawa A., Doi O., Ohya Y., Yoshizaki N. (2011). Diversity of the cuticle layer of avian eggshells. J. Poultry Sci., 48: 119–124.10.2141/jpsa.010103]Search in Google Scholar
[Lee M.H., Cho E.J., Choi E.S., Sohn S.H. (2016). The effect of storage period and temperature on egg quality in commercial eggs. Korean J. Poultry Sci., 43: 31–38.10.5536/KJPS.2016.43.1.31]Search in Google Scholar
[Lewko L., Gornowicz E. (2009). Egg albumen quality as affected by bird origin. J. Cent. Eur. Agric., 10: 455–463.]Search in Google Scholar
[Messens W., Grijspeerdt K., Herman L. (2005). Eggshell penetration by Salmonella: a review. World. Poultry Sci. J., 61: 71–86.10.1079/WPS200443]Search in Google Scholar
[Moyle T., Drake K., Gole V., Chousalkar K., Hazel S. (2016). Bacterial contamination of eggs and behaviour of poultry flocks in the free range environment. Comp. Immunol. Microbiol. Infect. Dis., 49: 88–94.10.1016/j.cimid.2016.10.005]Search in Google Scholar
[Park Y.S., Yoo I.J., Jeon K.H., KimChang E.J., Oh H.I. (2003). Effects of various eggshell treatments on the egg quality during storage. Asian-Australas. J. Anim. Sci., 16: 1224–1229.10.5713/ajas.2003.1224]Search in Google Scholar
[Pohle K., Cheng H.W. (2009). Comparative effects of furnished and battery cages on egg production and physiological parameters in White Leghorn hens. Poultry Sci., 88: 2042–2051.10.3382/ps.2009-00171]Search in Google Scholar
[Roberts J.R. (2004). Factors affecting egg internal quality and egg shell quality in laying hens. J. Poultry Sci., 41: 161–177.10.2141/jpsa.41.161]Search in Google Scholar
[Rodríguez-Navarro A.B., Domínguez-Gasca N., Muñoz A., Ortega-Huertas M. (2013). Change in the chicken eggshell cuticle with hen age and freshness. Poultry Sci., 92: 3026–3035.10.3382/ps.2013-03230]Search in Google Scholar
[Samli H.E., Agma A., Senkoylu N. (2005). Effects of storage time and temperature on egg quality in old laying hens. J. Appl. Poultry Res., 14: 548–553.10.1093/japr/14.3.548]Search in Google Scholar
[Sert D., Aygun A., Demir M.K. (2011). Effects of ultrasonic treatment and storage temperature on egg quality. Poultry Sci., 90: 869–875.10.3382/ps.2010-00799]Search in Google Scholar
[Stepien-Pysniak D. (2010). Occurrence of Gram-negative bacteria in hens’ eggs depending on their source and storage conditions. Pol. J. Vet. Sci., 13: 507–513.]Search in Google Scholar
[Svobodová J., Tůmová E. (2014). Factors affecting microbial contamination of market eggs: a review. Sci. Agric. Bohem., 45: 226–237.10.1515/sab-2015-0003]Search in Google Scholar
[Theron H., Venter P., Lues J.F.R. (2003). Bacterial growth on chicken eggs in various storage environments. Food Res. Int., 36: 969–975.10.1016/S0963-9969(03)00117-0]Search in Google Scholar
[Vlčková J., Tůmová E., Ketta M., Englmaierová M., Chodová D. (2018). Effect of housing system and age of laying hens on eggshell quality, microbial contamination, and penetration of microorganisms into eggs. Czech J. Anim. Sci., 63: 51–60.10.17221/77/2017-CJAS]Search in Google Scholar
[Vlčková J., Tůmová E., Míková K., Englmaierová M., Okrouhlá M., Chodová D. (2019). Changes in the quality of eggs during storage depending on the housing system and the age of hens. Poultry Sci., 98: 6187–6193.10.3382/ps/pez401]Search in Google Scholar
[Yamak U.S., Boz M.A., Ucar A., Sarcia M., Onder H. (2016). The effect of eggshell thickness on the hatchability of guinea fowl and pheasants. Rev. Bras. Cienc. Avic., 18: 49–53.10.1590/1806-9061-2015-0214]Search in Google Scholar
[You S.J., Udenigwe C.C., Aluko R.E., Wu J. (2010). Multifunctional peptides from egg white lysozyme. Food Res. Int., 43: 848–855.10.1016/j.foodres.2009.12.004]Search in Google Scholar
[Zaheer K. (2015). An updated review on chicken eggs: production, consumption, management aspects and nutritional benefits to human health. Food Nutr. Sci., 6: 1208–1220.10.4236/fns.2015.613127]Search in Google Scholar
[Zita L., Tůmová E., Štolc L. (2009). Effects of genotype, age and their interaction on egg quality in brown-egg laying hens. Acta Vet. Brno, 78: 85–91.10.2754/avb200978010085]Search in Google Scholar
[Zita L., Jeníková M., Härtlová H. (2018). Effect of housing system on egg quality and the concentration of cholesterol in egg yolk and blood of hens native resources of the Czech Republic and Slovakia. J. Appl. Poultry Res., 3: 380–388.10.3382/japr/pfy009]Search in Google Scholar