Design of nest boxes for laying cages

1. ISA Brown hens were housed in groups of 4 in cages with different designs of nest boxes provided, to determine the effects of nest box design and management on their use and on the pre‐laying behaviour shown by the birds.

2. There were 5 treatments: control (C); a wire‐floored nest box attached to the back of the cage (W); a nest box containing a fibreglass rollaway hollow (N); two rollaway nest boxes (T); a rollaway nest box, protected by a partition from the main part of the cage (P).

3. The holes in the rollaway nests in treatment N, T and P were shut initially, but the proportion of eggs laid in these nests only reached 50%. This proportion rose to over 80% when wood shavings were added daily, but fell to below 30% when rollaway holes were opened. These rollaway hollows are apparently not suitable for use in laying cages.

4. Use of nest boxes in treatment W varied between 60 and 80%. However, when pre‐laying behaviour was recorded (in 19 hens) two birds which laid in the nest boxes nevertheless showed abnormal behaviour.

5. Individual hens had on average 29 to 60% of their pre‐laying behaviour overlapped by that of others in the cage. Nesting space for at least two birds is probably necessary in a cage for 4 birds. However, in treatment T pre‐laying behaviour was disturbed by hens moving between the two boxes. This would be avoided by provision of one box big enough for two hens.

6. Soiling of hollows resulted in dirty eggs and suggested that nest boxes for laying cages may have to be provided with doors to prevent hens from roosting in them.     

Effects of beak trimming and cage design on laying hen performance and egg quality

1. Conventional cages are to be replaced by furnished cages or aviary systems to improve the welfare of hens. We compared the performance and egg quality of hens reared in two designs of furnished cages and of two standard cages. We also explored the consequences of the absence of beak trimming when using these designs. 2. Hens (2028) were housed from 18 to 70 weeks of age in 108 standard cages at 6 per cage (60 cmx63.5 cm), in 96 cages at 5 per cage (59.5 cmx55.5 cm) or in two designs of furnished cage at 15 per cage (24 F15M cages and 36 F15P cages made by two manufacturers) which contained equipment varying in size and location (nests, dust baths and perches). Half of the hens were beak-trimmed in each design. 3. Mortality was low in beak-trimmed hens (<5%) but was unacceptably high in non-beak-trimmed hens due to cannibalism (>40%, 516 hens). Mortality was worse in standard cages than in furnished cages. Consequently, hen-housed egg production was significantly lowered in non-beak-trimmed hens. 4. Egg laying in beak-trimmed hens reared in furnished cages occurred mainly in the nest (80 and 84.8% in F15M and F15P) but also in the dust bath (13.3 and 9.4% in F15M and F15P) and in other parts of the cage (6.7 and 5.8% in F15M and F15P). 5. The total percentage of broken (visual observation) and hair-cracked eggs (candling) was high in the furnished cage designs (15.4 and 19.6% in F15M and F15P, respectively) compared with standard cage designs (8.1 and 12.2% in S6 and S5). This was mainly due to hair-cracked eggs, the highest percentages occurring in the nests, especially in the design with a narrow nest and no egg saver (11.1% in F15M compared to 17.6% in F15P) as a consequence of egg accumulation in the cradle and relatively low frequency of manual egg collection. 6. Eggshell quality (index and breaking strength) was only slightly influenced by cage effects so differences in egg breakage were attributable to impacts related to cage design. 7. It is concluded that beak trimming remains the most effective way to prevent cannibalism, although furnished cages with a large group of hens slightly reduced the incidence, and that further development and optimisation of furnished cages is needed to reach egg quality similar to standard cages.     

Effects of spatial allowance, group size and perches on the behavior of hens in cages with nests.

The behaviour of laying hens housed in 'welfare-improved' cages fitted with one nest per hen was investigated with manipulations of group size (two or four birds), spatial allowance excluding the nests (600 cm2 or 1200 cm2 per bird) and perch provision (presence or absence). More time was spent in the nests by birds housed at 600 cm2 than at 1200 cm2, and by birds housed in pairs than in four. Perch provision had no significant effect on time spent in the nest but resulted in reduced nest soiling by birds housed at 1200 cm2, and increased 'comfort' behaviour by some groups.     

Effects of group size on performance,health and birds’ use of facilities in furnished cages for laying hens

A total of 1584 Lohmann Selected Leghorn hens were kept in 144 modified cages furnished with—perch, nest and sandbath for 5, 6, 7 or 8 hens per cage or in 162 conventional cages for 4 hens. Cage floor area was 600 cm² per hen excluding nest and sandbath. Doors to nests and sandbaths were time monitored. Production, mortality, exterior egg quality, health, integument and the birds use of facilities were registered from 20 until 80 weeks. No effects of group size or keeping system on production or mortality were detected, but the furnished cage gave more cracked and less dirty eggs than the conventional cage. Hens in the furnished cage had better plumage condition, less toe pad hyperkeratosis, shorter claws, less rear body wounds and stronger humerus, but dirtier feet than hens in the conventional cage. Hens in the larger group sizes had the dirtiest feet. In the furnished cage, on average, 86% of all eggs were laid in the nests and 0.6% in the sandbaths. The rolling out efficiency from nests was best in the larger group sizes. During night less than 0.5% of the hens stayed in the sandbath and less than 2% stayed in the nest. Average use of perches was 28% during the day and 91% at night. Hens in the small group sizes used the sandbath most. Dust‐bathing behaviour also occurred on the wire floor.     

Nesting and dust bathing by hens in cages: Matching and mis‐matching between behaviour and environment

1. Medium hybrid hens were housed as groups of 4 at 18 weeks of age in cages of 4 different types: control battery cages allowing 675 cm2/bird; similar cages with a rear‐mounted dust bath, 290×345×240 mm, containing sand (D); cages with a rear‐mounted nest box of the same size, containing wood shavings (N); cages with both (DN). In half the experimental cages access to nests was restricted to the morning and access to baths was restricted to the afternoon, by automatic sliding doors.

2. During the first 24 weeks of lay about 95% of eggs were laid in nest boxes in treatments N and DN. Slightly fewer were laid in boxes where doors were present. Over 90% were laid in dust baths in D cages without doors and 67% with doors, which birds learned to open. Prelaying behaviour was least disturbed in nest boxes, most disturbed on the floor and intermediate in dust baths.

3. Fully developed dust bathing occurred in D and DN as bouts lasting 5 to 10 minutes; its incidence, surprisingly, was greater when doors were present and greater still when nest boxes were present, even though it was not performed in them. It was also performed by some hens in nest boxes in N (without doors). In N with doors and in control cages, dust bathing occurred on the bare floor in truncated form, as serial bouts each lasting only about 10 s. This truncated dust bathing was also occasionally observed in D and DN.

4. Plumage, foot and claw damage were less in hens from modified cages than from controls. Egg production was very good in all treatments but more eggs from control cages were downgraded because they were dirty or cracked.

5. When a choice was available birds generally partitioned their behaviour appropriately between nest box and dust bath. In N and DN virtually all prelaying and nesting behaviour took place in the nest boxes. Matching between dust bathing and the environment was less close; the reasons for its relatively low incidence and occurrence in truncated form outside dust baths remain to be established.     

The Edinburgh modified gage for laying hens

1. Behaviour, production and welfare of ISA Brown medium hybrids were assessed in 2 trials (each from 20 to 44 weeks of age) of a novel design of cage for laying hens: the Edinburgh Modified Cage (EMC).

2. The EMC was 600 mm wide, 450 mm deep and 450 mm high at the rear; it had a softwood perch and at one side a 250 mm wide nest box (containing litter or artificial turf) with a dust bath direcdy above. It housed 4 birds and provided 675 cm^2/bird in the main cage with an additional 281 cm² /bird in the nest box. The nest box and dust bath had automatically controlled doors which were closed at night. There were 18 EMC; in the first trial these were compared with 6 control cages with perch but without next box or dust bath.

3. Hens spent 32 to 37% of day time on the perch, 5 to 7% in the dust bath and 5 to 6% in the nest. At night 92 to 98% roosted on the perch.

4. Initially only 55 to 70% of eggs were laid in the nest box partly because some eggs were laid before dawn. Once the door was retimed to open 3h before lights‐on the proportion rose to 91 to 96%. Very few eggs were laid in the dust bath. Pre‐laying behaviour lasted longer in treatments with nest boxes (55 to 76min) than in control cages (48min); disturbance was slight in all treatments, but lowest in control cages.

5. Dust baths were well used, with on average 61% of hens dust bathing during a 3‐h afternoon observation period compared with only 17% in control cages. Two birds could use the dust bath simultaneously.

6. It was concluded that although a number of minor design features still required attention the EMC has potential to reduce the disadvantages of conventional cages for welfare while retaining their advantages and has possible commercial application.     

Egg shell colour is affected by laying cage design

1. When laying hens are stressed some retain their eggs in the shell gland beyond the normal time of laying and this can result in the deposition of extra-cuticular calcium which makes brown eggs appear paler. 2. Three different types of enriched modified cage were compared: the location where eggs were laid was recorded and shell colour was measured using a reflectometer. 3. In 2 types of cage with enclosed nest boxes more eggs (80%) were laid in the nests than in a design with nest hollows in the open part of the cage (41%). 4. The eggs from the cages with enclosed nests were darker (had less extraneous calcium) than those with open nest hollows. This implies that in the designs with nest boxes fewer eggs had been retained and the hens may have been less stressed. 5. The results support previous evidence that to reduce stress and improve welfare it is desirable to provide enclosed nest sites for caged laying hens.     

Relation between social order and use of resources in small and large furnished cages for laying hens

1. The objective was to determine the relation between social rank and use of resources in a small furnished cage with sufficient resources per hen (SF) and a commercial large one with less adequate allowance of facilities per hen (LF). 2. Ninety-two cross layers were used. At the age of 16 weeks, the hens were divided at random into two groups. There were 4 furnished cages with 5 birds per cage and 4 large furnished cages with 18 birds per cage. The dominance hierarchy was determined, in which highest, medium and lowest ranking hens in each cage were identified. Behaviour, use of facilities and physical conditions of these hens were measured (one in each rank category in SF, two in each in LF). 3. Dustbathing and litter scratching were more frequent in the high ranking hens than the medium and low ranked hens in LF, while no significant difference was found between them in SF. 4. No significant difference between SF and LF was found in use of nest boxes. However, pre-laying sitting tended to be less frequent in low ranking than medium and high ranking hens in LF (Social order x Cage design). In the nest box most of time was spent in pre-laying sitting by SF hens, LF high and medium ranked hens (average 94.9%). However, LF low ranking hens spent their time escaping (33.1%), pre-laying sitting (27.7%) standing (25.7%) and moving (13.5%) in the nest. 5. In the large furnished cages with less facilities per hen, high ranking hens may be expected to have priority using the dust bath. In contrast, low ranking hens rarely performed nesting behaviour fully, and spend more time using the nest box as a refuge than for laying.     

Perch Arrangements in Small-Group Furnished Cages for Laying Hens

In 2 trials, including 2,768 birds in total, 3 different perch arrangements were evaluated in furnished 8-hen cages for laying hens. The hybrids used were Lohmann Selected Leghorn and Lohmann Brown in trial 1 and Hy-Line White and Hy-Line Brown in trial 2. The furnished cages were identical in all other respects than the arrangement of perches. A perch was either fitted across the cage, providing 12 cm of perch per hen, or 2 perches were installed in a cross, implying 15 cm per hen. Although the perches arranged in a cross provided more perch per hen than the single perch fitted across the cage, perch use at night by the birds was similar or lower as compared with the single perch. Hence, the way perches are arranged in the cage may be as important as perch length itself to achieve a high use at night. Perch arrangement did not affect production, mortality, or egg quality. Compared with a conventional battery cage, also included in the trials, hygiene was inferior in the furnished cages, but there was no difference in proportions of dirty eggs. Differences in proportions of cracked eggs were found between furnished and conventional cages in 1 of the trials. However, on the whole, production, mortality, and egg quality were at similar levels in all cage models. Genotype differences were found in production traits, egg quality, hygiene, and in the use of perches and nests.     

Comparison of eggshell hygiene in two housing systems: standard and furnished cages

1. The hygienic properties of eggs produced in two designs of furnished cage were investigated and compared to two standard cage designs. 2. At 28, 37, 47 and 58 weeks of age, the proportion of dirty eggs was higher in one of the furnished cage designs while, in the other, it was similar to standard cages. 3. At 27, 33 and 60 weeks, the bacterial load on the eggshell (total aerobic bacteria and enterococci) was higher in furnished cage designs. A seasonal effect was observed with lower counts at 60 weeks (winter) than at 27 weeks (summer). 4. More dirty eggs and a higher bacterial load were observed in eggs laid outside the nests, which suggests egg hygiene in furnished cages could be similar to standard cages if the equipment in furnished cages was improved to enhance nest laying.     

Evaluation of the effects of cage height and stocking density on the behaviour of laying hens in furnished cages

1. Limited information is available on how changes in horizontal and vertical space within enriched or furnished layer cages (as defined by Directive 1999/74/EC) influence hen behaviour. This study evaluated the effects of varying minimum cage heights and space allowances on the behaviour of laying hens housed in furnished cages. It was conducted on two flocks of medium brown hybrid hens housed in furnished cages with access to perches and nest boxes on a semi-commercial scale at ADAS Gleadthorpe. 2. Flock 1 consisted of two layer strains (ISA Brown and Babcock 380), housed at two minimum cage heights (38 and 45 cm) and 5 stocking densities between 609 and 870 cm2/bird, with 12 replicates of each of the 20 strain/cage height/stocking density treatment combinations. Stocking density was varied by varying the number of birds per cage from 10 to 7 in standard full-width cages or housing 7 hens in a narrower cage. As a consequence stocking density, group size and trough width per bird co-varied for 4 out of 5 stocking density treatments. 3. Behaviour of flock 1 was sampled at 33 to 36, 46 and 68 weeks of age. At each age one top-tier, one middle-tier and one bottom-tier cage was sampled for each treatment. 4. Few behavioural differences due to cage treatments were detected. Hens at 870 cm2 had shorter feeding bouts than hens at 609 and 762 cm2. Yawning was more common in the cages with greater cage height. 5. Video recordings of flock 1 examined cage height effects on hens' use of vertical space and provided additional data on stretching and self-maintenance activities. No differences in behaviour between 38 and 45 cm cages were found except that scratching head was more common in cages with greater cage height. 6. Flock 2 consisted of two layer strains (Shaver Brown and Hy-Line Brown), housed at 38 and 45 cm and 609, 762 and 1016 cm2/bird, with 18 replicates of each of the 12 strain/cage height/stocking density treatment combinations. Stocking density was varied by housing 10, 8 or 6 hens in standard full-width cages. Behaviour of flock 2 was sampled at 30, 48, 60 and 67 weeks from video recordings. Three cages per treatment from middle-tiers only were sampled at each age. 7. Hens housed at 609 cm2/hen had the longest mean feeding bout, greater than for hens at 762 cm2/hen but not hens at 1016 cm2/hen. More unsuccessful attempts to reach the feeder and sideways and backwards displacements from the feeder occurred at 762 and 609 cm2/hen than at 1016 cm2/hen. A maximum of 8 hens were observed feeding synchronously. 8. These results suggest that changes in horizontal and vertical space over the ranges we studied had little effect on behaviour other than feeding behaviour. Specifying a minimum useable trough space per hen, rather than calculating feeder space from total length of feeder per cage, irrespective of accessibility, might help avoid crowding at the feeder and associated disturbance of feeding bouts.     

Factors affecting the use of perches in cages by laying hens

1. Three experiments were carried out with ISA Brown laying hens housed in individual cages with softwood perches of rectangular cross section fitted across the width of each cage, to investigate factors affecting the tendency of hens to lay their eggs from the perches and to use perches at other times. These factors were perch width and angle and method of perch introduction. 2. In experiment 1 there were 4 treatments. Perches were 38 or 60 mm wide; half of each width were flat and half were fixed at 8 , parallel to the slope of the floor. In 2 similar trials (with 48 and 44 birds respectively, equally divided between treatments) birds were moved to experimental cages already fitted with perches. Birds with 38 mm, sloping perches laid less than one third of their eggs from the perch (31% and 9% in the two trials) while those with the other designs laid more than 80% from the perch. Narrow sloping perches were not otherwise aversive and there was no consistent variation between treatments in total time perching. 3. In experiment 2, 32 birds were allowed to start laying on the floor of the experimental cages then perches were introduced at 24 weeks with 8 birds on each of 4 treatments: 50 mm perches fixed flat and 38 mm perches fixed flat, and at 5 and 10 respectively. Only 27% of eggs were laid from the perches with no variation between treatments either in this behaviour or in total time perching. 4. Experiment 3 provided 24 of the birds from experiment 2 with double-length perches to determine whether they showed preferences for the design features under consideration. Either half the perch length was flat and half sloping at 10 or half was 38 and half 50 mm wide. Again a relatively low proportion of eggs was laid from the perches (18%) and birds showed no significant preference for different perch designs as indicated by either how much they perched or where they perched. 5. These results suggest that both perch design and the way pullets are introduced to perches influence the proportion of perch-laid eggs. They confirm that in some circumstances laying from perches can be a serious problem, but that in other circumstances incidence can be reduced to a manageable frequency. Perches may therefore be practical in commercial production without increasing the number of cracked eggs. The results are also likely to be applicable in cages with other facilities including nest boxes.     

Behavioral changes in laying hens after introduction to battery cages, furnished cages and an aviary

A variety of investigations into alternative systems and furnished cages for laying hens have been conducted, mainly in the European Union. However, comparative studies about the behavior of laying hens just after introduction to these housing systems are few. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the changes of location and behavior of laying hens just after introduction to three housing systems. In total, 181 White Leghorns were used. Thirty‐six birds were allocated to 12 battery cages with three birds per cage (613 cm²/bird); 36 birds were allocated to nine furnished cages with four birds per cage (1170 cm²/bird); and 109 birds were allocated to an aviary (1130 cm²/bird). Direct observations using scanning techniques were conducted over 2 weeks for 4 h/day from the day following the introduction. Scan samples of location and behavior were taken at 10 min intervals. The proportion of birds that stayed at each location in the furnished cages was stable during the observation period. In the aviary, 78% of birds were observed on the floor on the first day, and thereafter the proportion linearly decreased (P < 0.01). The proportions of birds eating in both the battery and furnished cages were stable, indicating that the caged birds would adjust to these environments within a short period. Display of aggression was lower in both the cages (both 0.3 ± 0.1%) than in the aviary (3.5 ± 1.0%, P < 0.001), which indicates the early establishment of social order in both cage systems. In the aviary, the birds were observed eating less frequently than in both the cages on the first day, and the proportion thereafter linearly increased (P < 0.01), and the use of tiered wire floors with feeders accompanied this (P < 0.01). Comfort behaviors, including dust bathing, were noted less in the aviary than in the furnished cages throughout the observation period (both P < 0.05). These results suggest that adjustment of aviary birds to their new environment had been delayed compared with caged birds because of the prerearing conditions and the environmental complexity of the aviary.     

Design of laying nests in furnished cages: influence of nesting material, nest box position and seclusion

(1) Preferences for three nesting materials and nest box positions were investigated simultaneously in two trials using a furnished cage: one with 18 individual laying hens and one with 18 groups of 5 hens. Following a habituation period in pre-test cages, every hen or group of hens was tested for 2 d: once without and once with plastic flaps at the entrance of the nest boxes. (2) Hens preferred peat and artificial turf to coated wire mesh for egg laying. (3) One nest box position was clearly preferred to both other nest boxes. The hens' choice of nest box position was influenced by the pre-test cage in which they had been habituated. (4) The presence of plastic flaps at the entrance of the nest boxes had no influence on the proportion of eggs laid on the different nesting materials or on the proportion of floor eggs. (5) Individual and group testing resulted in the same overall results despite the presence of a distinct group effect.     

Differences of behavior, use of resources and physical conditions between dominant and subordinate hens in furnished cages

The objective of the present study was to search for differences in the behavior, use of resources and the physical condition between dominant and subordinate birds in furnished cages. In total, 60 commercial White Leghorn layers were used. At the age of 54 weeks, these birds were divided into two groups. Each group consisted of six cages with four birds per cage and six cages with six birds per cage. The dominance hierarchy was measured, to identify the highest dominant bird and the lowest subordinate bird in the hierarchy of each furnished cage. Behavioral observations using scanning techniques at 10 min intervals were conducted on the birds at 57 and 67 weeks of age for 3 days, respectively. Their physical condition (bodyweight and claw length) was also measured. Dominant birds used the dust bath more (P < 0.1) and nest box less (P < 0.01) than subordinate birds did. The use of the nest box decreased for subordinate birds from 57 to 67 weeks of age (P < 0.05). The dominant birds performed aggression and exploring more frequently than the subordinate birds (P < 0.001 and P < 0.05, respectively). In the comfort behaviors, the dominant birds performed dust‐bathing, as well as the using the dust bath, more than subordinate birds did (P < 0.1). In their exploring behavior, including scratching and litter pecking, dominant birds performed both behaviors more frequently, as well as using the dust bath and dust‐bathing in it, than subordinate birds did (P < 0.1 and P < 0.05, respectively). Aggression decreased for dominant birds from 57 to 67 weeks of age. In contrast, eating (P < 0.1) as well as drinking (P < 0.1) and other comfort behaviors (P < 0.1) increased for subordinate birds from 57 to 67 weeks of age. There was no significant difference between dominant and subordinate birds in their physical conditions. In conclusion, dominant birds had priority to use the dust box compared with the subordinate birds in the furnished cages. Conversely, the subordinate birds stayed in the nest box more than the dominant birds did. In the furnished cages, equipping the nest box was important not only for the birds to perform nesting behavior, but also for the subordinate birds to use the facility as a refuge especially just after introduction to the cage.     

Nesting,dust bathing and perching by laying hens in cages: Effects of design on behaviour and welfare

1. Laying hens (192 ISA Brown medium hybrids) were housed from 18 to 72 weeks as groups of 4 in conventional or experimental cages. The main area of all cages provided 675 cmVhen. All experimental cages had perches, dust baths and nest boxes, which were of three types: litter (L), artificial turf (A) or plastic rollaway (P). These facilities provided an additional 375 to 480 cm²/hen. The nest boxes and dust baths occupied either high or low positions. Behaviour, physical condition and production of the birds were regularly recorded.

2. Mortality was low (1.6% overall) and egg production very good in all treatments. The proportion of cracked and dirty eggs was slightly (but not significantly) higher in the experimental cages. In the experimental cages 90% of eggs were laid overall in the nest boxes and 3% in the dust baths. The proportion laid in the nest boxes was lower early in the laying cycle and increased with time, reaching 99% in A.

3. The facilities were heavily used. Birds spent about 25% of day time on the perches and 10–15% in or near the nest box and dust bath. At night, the majority of birds (90 to 94%) roosted on perches, but most of the remainder were on the lips of the nest box or dust bath, fouling the interiors.

4. Pre‐laying behaviour was much more settled in the experimental cages (45 min spent in the eventual laying position) than in the conventional ones (20 min) and total duration varied from 68 min in A to 87 min in P. The number of nest entries varied from 3.0 (A and P) to 4.3 (L); disturbance to sitting birds was correspondingly greater in L.

5. Dust bathing in the experimental cages generally took place during the afternoon in a single bout of about 5 min duration, whereas in the conventional cages it was brief and fragmented (3 bouts of 10 s each). The dust bath was also used for foraging behaviour (pecking and scratching). The treatments with small dust baths (A and P) caused problems for the birds.

6. Feather, foot and claw damage all tended to be less in the experimental than in the conventional cages, though only in the last case was the difference significant. Keel bone depressions appeared to be associated with perches; they were present in 43% of hens in the experimental cages but only 4% in conventional cages. There were no significant differences in body weight or in tibial or humerus strength between birds in the various treatments.

7. This study confirms that experimental cages with nest boxes, dust baths and perches offer appreciable benefits for welfare, with few production problems. The most successful treatment (A) could, with relatively minor modifications, form the basis of a practical design for large-scale commercial production.     

Individual perching behavior of laying hens and its effects in cages.

1. ISA Brown hens were housed, from 18 to 71 weeks of age, as groups of 4 in cages with 675 cm2/bird. There were 7 treatments: control cages and 6 treatments with perches fitted across the rear of the cage. Five treatments had 450 mm wide cages, with perches made from hardwood, textured metal, smooth plastic, softwood and padded vinyl, and one treatment had a 600 mm wide cage, with a softwood perch. There were 4 cages in each of the first 6 treatments and 6 in the last. 2. Overall, birds spent about 25% of the day time on perches. Most time (28 to 41%) was spent perching on the 600 mm softwood perches. Among 450 mm perches, most time (25 to 30%) was spent on the softwood perch and least (13 to 23%) on the plastic; the results suggested that a slightly rough surface was preferred. Individual birds varied considerably in the proportion of day time they spent perching; this variation was relatively consistent over time. 3. Overall, the proportion of birds roosting on the perches at night was 85% in period 1; declined to 76% by period 6, probably because increased body size made it almost impossible for 4 birds to perch in the 450 mm cages. Birds roosting on the floor tended always to be the same individuals. 4. Damage to the soles of the feet was less in all treatments with perches than in control cages. It was least in 600 mm wide cages and showed a negative correlation with time spent perching, both within and between treatments. Long or twisted claws, in contrast, tended to be slightly worse in treatments where there was most perching. 5. Downgraded eggs tended to be slightly more frequent in cages with perches; the greatest proportion (cracked 1.4%, dirty 3.6%) was from the 600 mm wide cages, as a result of hens laying from the perch and a build-up of manure behind it. 6. Although problems remain the findings suggest that provision of perches is important for the welfare of hens; perch space should be sufficient to allow all birds to perch simultaneously.     

Behaviour,health and integument of four hybrids of laying hens in modified and conventional cages

1. In 2 trials the health and behaviour of a total of 3552 caged laying hens of 4 hybrids, Dekalb XL, Lohmann Selected Leghorn (LSL) and Shaver 288 in trial 1 and ISA Brown and LSL in trial 2, were studied. The cage designs were Get‐away cages (GA) with 15 hens per cage, a special version of the ‘Edinburgh modified cage’ called ‘Modified and enriched cage’ (ME) with 4 ISA or 5 Leghorn hens per cage, conventional metal cages with 4 hens per cage without (CO) and with a perch (PC) and conventional plastic cages (PL) with three hens per cage. GA and ME included nests, perches and sandbaths.

2. In the first trial two nest models were used, artificial turf and welded wire floor. In the second trial both nest models were used in GA, while all nests in ME were equipped with artificial turf. In the second trial there were 4 sandbath treatments in ME; no sandbath, sandbath (25×50 cm) first opened at 16 weeks of age, sandbath first opened at 26 weeks and double size sandbath (50 × 50 cm) first opened at 16 weeks. Hens in GA were allowed access to the sandbaths from 26 weeks.

3. At 35 and 55 weeks the best plumage condition (feather cover) was found in PL and GA but plumage condition in ME was not significantly inferior than in GA. Hens in GA had the dirtiest plumage and most bumble foot but no toe pad hyperkeratosis. Some toe pad hyperkeratosis occurred in the other systems. Most keel bone lesions were found in systems with perches. The highest mortality was registered in GA. Hens in systems with perches, sandbaths and nests had increased strength of humerus at slaughter.

4. More eggs were laid in nests with artificial turf than in welded wire floor nests. LSL hens laid larger proportions of eggs in the nests (94% and 92% in the two trials) than the other hybrids. Less than 1% of the eggs in ME and 2% in GA were laid in the sandbaths.

5. The use of perches in ME and PC was approximately 30% in the day time. At night the use was 93% in ME and 89% in PC in trial 1 and 96% in ME and 81% in PC in trial 2.

6. Hens in ME with the double sized sandbath both visited the sandbath and performed dust bathing behaviour most, followed by hens in GA, hens in ME with access to the bath from 16 weeks and last, hens in ME with access to the bath from 26 weeks.

7. It is concluded that enrichments of laying cages are used by the hens to a large     

Limb bone strength and movement in laying hens from different housing systems

Walking and bouts of wing movement performed by 61-week-old ISA brown laying hens which had been taken from one batch of eggs and then kept in three different housing systems which allowed a gradation in spatial freedom, were recorded. After slaughter the breaking strengths of the humerus and tibia of birds from each system were measured. Birds from battery cages exhibited the fewest limb movements and had the weakest bones, their humeri having only 54 per cent of the strength of those of birds from a perchery. Birds from the Elson terrace system were heavier and had a stronger tibia than cage birds. Compared with perchery birds, terrace birds had weaker humeri and also performed fewer wing movements. The results indicate that the amount of movement possible for laying hens in battery cages was insufficient to avoid levels of osteopenia and consequent bone fragility much greater than in birds kept in the perchery and Elson terrace systems.     

Development of furnished cages re‐using conventional cages for laying hens: Behaviour,physical condition and productivity

Furnished cages for laying hens have advantages in allowing normal behaviors and maintaining productivity. As the cost of introduction is a barrier for farms, we developed furnished cages that re‐use conventional cages. To determine the minimum and functional cage design, we compared six designs, combinations of two floor designs (artificial turf or wire cage floor) and three screening designs in the integrated area (no screening, one entrance side or four sides). In total, 144 hens were used, and we measured behavior, physical condition and productivity. Comparing the floors, the percentages of hens performing dust‐bathing and laying eggs in the integrated area were higher in cages with turf than wire floor (P < 0.05 for both). Comparing the screening, dust‐bathing, litter‐exploring and active behavior tended to be more frequent in cages with the integrated area screened on one side than four sides. Feather damage was lower in cages with the integrated area screened on one side than with no screening (P < 0.05). These results suggest that the cage design with an integrated area with artificial turf floor, screened on one side, was effective for furnished cages that re‐use conventional cages.