Adaptability of pullets from cages to a large cage aviary unit system during the initial settling-in period

Liu Yang, Qin Tong, Haipeng Shi, Gang Chen, Zhengxiang Shi, Weichao Zheng, Baoming Li

Abstract


Pullets often raised in cage system from week 1 to week 13 in China, when transferred to aviary system after, there will be a problem with adapt. A large cage aviary unit (LCAU) system was developed, which allocated with facilities such as ramps to help cage reared hens to adapt to the multi-tier space. To investigate hens’ adaptability to the new system, space use over time in the LCAU system during the first 10 days after hens transferred were recorded, instantaneous scan sampling and continuous focal sampling were used to assess the behavior difference of hens between the LCAU and conventional cage (CC) systems. On the first day of arrival, 10.03% of hens reached the second tier (S2) and the third tier (S3) of the aviary. During the observation period, an average of 2.42% of hens climbed and stayed at the upper tiers every day. Space allowance on floor of the first tier (S1) increased from 444.62 cm2/hen (91 d) to 586.32 cm2/hen (100 d), which was more than 540 cm2/hen in the CC system. Comfort behaviors in the LCAU system were significantly more than in the CC system (p<0.01) and hens performed more comfort behaviors with the increase of days after transferred. Hens ate and drank less in the LCAU system in the beginning, however, with the increasing use of upper space, hens ate and drank more and more in the LCAU system during the 10 days after transferred from CC system. Consequently, there were no difference of feed behavior between the CC and LCAU systems (p>0.05) on the last 5 days of the whole observing period. The results indicated that hens gradually learned to use the 3-dimensional space in the initial settling-in period and, gained a good welfare condition in LCAU system. Further studies are needed to investigate the three-dimensional preferences and behavior expression in difference period to bridge the gap in knowledge of space use capacity among adult laying hens.
Keywords: large cage aviary unit, laying hen, welfare, comfort behaviors, adaptability
DOI: 10.25165/j.ijabe.20181105.3216

Citation: Yang L, Tong Q, Shi H P, Chen G, Shi Z X, Zheng W C, et al. Adaptability of pullets from cages to a large cage aviary unit system during the initial settling-in period. Int J Agric & Biol Eng, 2018; 11(5): 70–76.

Keywords


large cage aviary unit, laying hen, welfare, comfort behaviors, adaptability

Full Text:

PDF

References


Lay D C, Fulton R M, Hester P Y, Karcher D M, Kjaer J B, Mench J A, et al. Hen welfare in different housing systems. Poultry Science, 2011; 90(1): 278–294.

Campbell D L M, Makagon M M, Swanson J C, Siegford J M. Perch use by laying hens in a commercial aviary. Poultry Science, 2016; 95(8): 1736–1742.

Leyendecker M, Hamann H, Hartung J, Kamphues J, Neumann U, Sürie C, et al. Keeping laying hens in furnished cages and an aviary housing system enhances their bone stability. British Poultry Science, 2005; 46(5): 536.

Blokhuis H J, Fiks V N T, Bessei W, Elson A, Guémené D, Kjaer J B, et al. The Laywel project: Welfare implications of changes in production systems for laying hens. Worlds Poultry Science Journal, 2007; 63(1): 101–114.

Zhao Y, Shepherd T A, Swanson J C, Mench J A, Karcher D M, Xin H. Comparative evaluation of three egg production systems: Housing characteristics and management practices. Poult Sci, 2015; 94(3): 475.

Karcher D M, Jones D R, Abdo Z, Zhao Y, Shepherd T A, Xin H . Impact of commercial housing systems and nutrient and energy intake on laying hen performance and egg quality parameters. Poult Sci, 2015; 94(3): 485–501.

Campbell D L, Makagon M M, Swanson J C, Siegford J M. Litter use by laying hens in a commercial aviary: Dust bathing and piling. Poult Sci, 2016; 95(1): 164–175.

Campbell D L M, Makagon M M, Swanson J C, Siegford J M. Laying hen movement in a commercial aviary: Enclosure to floor and back again. Poult Sci, 2016; 95(1): 176.

Blatchford R A, Fulton R M, Mench J A. The utilization of the Welfare Quality® assessment for determining laying hen condition across three housing systems. Poult Sci, 2016; 95(1): 154–163.

Zhao Y, Shepherd T A, Li H, Xin H. Environmental assessment of three egg production systems–Part I: Monitoring system and indoor air quality. Poult Sci, 2015; 94(3): 518–533.

Shepherd T A, Zhao Y, Li H, Stinn J P, Hayes M D, Xin H. Environmental assessment of three egg production systems — Part II: Ammonia, greenhouse gas, and particulate matter emissions. Poult Sci, 2015; 94(3): 534–543.

Jones D R, Cox N A, Guard J, Fedorka-Cray P J, Buhr R J, Gast R K, et al. Microbiological impact of three commercial laying hen housing systems. Poult Sci, 2015; 94(3): 544–551.

Matthews W A, Sumner D A. Effects of housing system on the costs of commercial egg production. Poult Sci, 2015; 94(3): 552.

Zheng H, Li B, Chen G, Wang C Y. Improving utilization of nests and decreasing mislaid eggs with narrow width of group nests. Inter J Agric & Biol Eng, 2018; 11(1): 83–87.

Yang L, Li B. Research progress of welfare-oriented breeding mode and technical equipments for laying hen. Transactions of the CSAE, 2015; 31(23): 214–221. (in Chinese)

Janczak A M, Riber A B. Review of rearing-related factors affecting the welfare of laying hens. Poult Sci, 2015; 94(7): 1454–1469.

Zheng W, Zhao Y, Xin H, Li B, Gates R S, Zhang Y, et al. Concentrations and size distributions of airborne particulate matter and bacteria in an experimental aviary laying-hen chamber. Transactions of the ASABE, 2013; 56(6): 1493–1501.

Dekker S E M, Aarnink A J A, Boer I J M D, GrootKoerkamp P W G. Emissions of ammonia, nitrous oxide, and methane from aviaries with organic laying hen husbandry. Biosystems Engineering, 2011; 110(2): 123–133.

Zhao Y, Xin H, Shepherd T A, Hayes M D, Stinn J P, Li H. Thermal environment, ammonia concentrations, and ammonia emissions of aviary houses with white laying hens. Transactions of the Asabe, 2013; 56(3): 1145–1156.

Dawkins M S. The role of behaviour in the assessment of poultry welfare. Worlds Poultry Science Journal, 1999; 55(55): 295–303.

Cj N. Behavioural needs, priorities and preferences of laying hens. Worlds Poultry Science Journal, 2015; 62(2): 296–307.

Tanaka T, Hurnik J F. Comparison of behavior and performance of laying hens housed in battery cages and an aviary. Poultry Science, 1992; 71(2): 235–243.

Appleby M C, Hughes B O. The Edinburgh modified cage for laying hens. British Poultry Science, 1995; 36(5): 707–718.

Nicol C J. Social influences on the comfort behaviour of laying hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 1989; 22(1): 75–81.

Hughes B O. Headshaking in fowls: The effect of environmental stimuli. Applied Animal Ethology, 1983; 11(1): 45–53.

Mollenhorst H, Rodenburg T B, Bokkers E A M, Koene P, Boer J M. On-farm assessment of laying hen welfare: a comparison of one environment-based and two animal-based methods. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2005; 90(3-4): 277–291.

IBM SPSS Institute Inc, 2013. IBM SPSS Statictics 22.0, User’s Guide, IBM SPSS Institute Inc.,

Kozak M, Tobalske B, Martins C, Bowleyc S, Wuerbeld H, Harlander-Matauscheka A. Use of space by domestic chicks housed in complex aviaries. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2016; 181: 115–121.

Kraft T S, Venkataraman V V, Dominy N J. A natural history of human tree climbing. Journal of Human Evolution, 2014; 71(2): 105–118.

Stewart F A, Pruetz J D, Hansell M H. Do chimpanzees build comfortable nests? American Journal of Primatology, 2007; 69(8): 930–939.

Drovetski S V. Influence of the trailing-edge notch on flight performance of galliforms. Auk, 1996; 113(4): 802–810.

Dial K P. Evolution of avian locomotion: Correlates of flight style, locomotor modules, nesting biology, body size, development, and the origin of flapping flight. Auk, 2003; 120(4): 941–952.

Directive E U. Council Directive 99/74/EC of 19 July 1999 laying down minimum standards for the protection of laying hens. Official Journal of the European Communities, 1999: 53–57. http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/media/links/p130/european-union.pdf. Accessed on [2017-01-06]

Cooper J J. Evaluation of the effects of cage height and stocking density on the behaviour of laying hens in furnished cages. British Poultry Science, 2007; 48(1): 1–11.

Nicol C J. Behavioural responses of laying hens following a period of spatial restriction. Animal Behaviour, 1987; 35(6): 1709–1719.

Taylor A A, Hurnik J F. The effect of long-term housing in an aviary and battery cages on the physical condition of laying hens: body weight, feather condition, claw length, foot lesions, and tibia strength. Poultry Science, 1994; 73(2): 268–273.

Freire R, Wilkins L J, Short F, Nicol C J. Behaviour and welfare of individual laying hens in a non-cage system. British Poultry Science, 2003; 44(1): 22–29.

Appleby M C, Hughes B O, Hogarth G S. Behaviour of laying hens in a deep litter house. British Poultry Science, 1989; 30(3): 545–53.

Odén K, Keeling L J, Algers B. Behaviour of laying hens in two types of aviary systems on 25 commercial farms in Sweden. British Poultry Science, 2002; 43(2): 169–181.

Mendl M. Performing under pressure: Stress and cognitive function. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 1999; 65(3): 221–244.

Amgarten M, Mettler A. Economical consequences of the introduction of alternative housing systems for laying hens in Switzerland// European Symposium on Poultry Welfare: Tours, France, 11- June, 1989 / Edited by Jean M. Faure and Andrew D. Mills. 1989.

Bestman M, Wagenaar J P. Health and welfare in Dutch organic laying hens. Animals An Open Access Journal from Mdpi, 2014; 4(2): 374–390.

Nørgaardnielsen G. Bone strength of laying hens kept in an alternative system, compared with hens in cages and on deep-litter. British Poultry Science, 1990; 31(1): 81–89.

Tanaka T, Hurnik J F. Research Note: The behavior of young layers during the first two weeks in aviary and battery cages. Poultry science, 1991; 70(2): 404.

Nicol C J. Effect of cage height and area on the behaviour of hens housed in battery cages. British Poultry Science, 1987; 28(2): 327–335.

Hughes B O, Wood-Gush D G. Agonistic behaviour in domestic hens: the influence of housing method and group size. Animal Behaviour, 1977; 25(4): 1056–1062.

Mclean K A, Baxter M R, Michie W. Comparison of the welfare of laying hens in battery cages and in a perchery. Research and Development in Agriculture, 1986; 3: 93–98.




Copyright (c) 2018



2023-2026 Copyright IJABE Editing and Publishing Office