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.     

Increase in bone strength of spent laying hens housed in modified cages with perches

The strength of the tibia was compared in 72-week-old ISA brown hens housed as groups of four for 52 weeks either in conventional cages or in cages with a 450 mm long perch, positioned either at the front or the back of the cage. The breaking strength of the bone was measured by subjecting it to a gradually increasing force on a three-point rig until it broke. The median strength of the tibia was greater in birds from cages with either front (160 Newtons [N]) or rear perches (152 N) than from conventional cages (135 N). Increased between-bird variation in the cages with perches suggests that there is scope for a further increase in bone strength by the provision of perches long enough to accommodate all the birds simultaneously. These results show that the strength of the tibia can be increased almost as much by using new designs of cage as by housing hens on the floor.     

Pop hole passages and welfare in furnished cages for laying hens

1. This study included two designs of furnished cages for 16 hens; H-cages divided into two apartments by a partition with pop holes in the middle of the cage, and fully open O-cages, without a partition. The hypothesis was that in this rather large group of birds the pop hole partition would benefit the birds by allowing them to avoid or escape from potential cannibals, feather-peckers or aggressive hens. All cages had two nests, two perches and one litter box. 2. A total of 10 cages (5 H and 5 O) were stocked with Lohmann Selected Leghorn (LSL) and 8 cages (4 H and 4 O) with Hy-Line W36. No birds were beak-trimmed. 3. Heterophil/lymphocyte (H/L) ratios, duration of tonic immobility (TI) and exterior appearance (scoring of plumage condition and wounds at comb or around cloaca) were used as indicators of well-being. Total mortality and deaths due to cannibalism were also recorded. 4. Visits to nests and passages through partition pop holes were studied in samples of 35 and 21 birds, respectively, using a technique based on passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags. 5. Cage design (H- vs O-cage) had no effect on the welfare traits chosen. 6. Hy-Line birds showed higher H/L ratios, longer duration of TI and better plumage condition than LSL birds. These differences are discussed in terms of stress thresholds and copying strategies. 7. On days when a hen made visits to nests, the visiting frequency was 1.4 and the total time in the nest was 41 min on average. Hens made use of the pop hole passages between 1 and 8 times per hen and day. 8. Overall low levels of aggression, lack of injuries or deaths due to cannibalism, and plumage condition indicating moderate feather pecking, together imply a low need to escape. The pop holes were used frequently and birds distributed well between compartments showing that the system worked well. However, at this group size there was no evidence in the measured traits that H-cages provided a better housing environment.     

Development of furnished cages for laying hens

1. A 3-year trial was carried out of cages for laying hens, occupying a full laying house. The main cage designs used were 5000 cm2 in area, 50 cm high at the rear and furnished with nests and perches. F cages had a front rollaway nest at the side, lined with artificial turf. FD cages also had a dust bath containing sand over the nest. H cages had two nest hollows at the side, one in front of the other. They were compared with conventional cages 2500 cm2 in area and 38 cm high at the rear. 2. Cages were stocked with from 4 to 8 ISA Brown hens per cage, resulting in varied allowances of area, feeder and perch per bird. No birds were beak trimmed. In F and FD cages two further treatments were applied: nests and dust baths were sometimes fitted with gates to exclude birds from dust baths in the morning and from both at night; elevated food troughs, with a lip 33 cm above the cage floor, were compared with standard troughs. 3. Management of the house was generally highly successful, with temperature control achieved by ventilation. Egg production was above breeders' standards and not significantly affected by cage design. More eggs per bird were collected when there were fewer birds per cage but food consumption also then tended to be higher. 4. The number of downgraded eggs was variable, with some tendency for more in furnished cages. Eggs laid in dust baths were often downgraded. Those laid at the back of the cage were frequently dirty because of accumulation of droppings. H nests were unsuccessful, with less than 50% of eggs laid in the nest hollows. However, up to 93% of eggs were laid in front rollaways, and few of these were downgraded. 5. Feather and foot damage were generally less in furnished than in conventional cages, greater where there were more birds per cage. With an elevated food trough there was less feather damage but more overgrowth of claws. In year 2, mortality was greater in cages with more birds. 6. Pre-laying behaviour was mostly settled in front rollaway nests. Dust baths were used more for pecking and scratching than for dust bathing. Comfort behaviour was more frequent in furnished cages than conventional, although still not frequent. Locomotion was strongly affected by number of birds per cage or by space per bird, being reduced by crowding. Most birds perched at night except in one treatment providing only 10.7 cm perch per bird. 7. Behaviour was more unrestricted and varied, and physical condition was better, in furnished than in conventional cages. However, egg production will cost more in furnished cages, partly because more eggs are downgraded. Dust baths must be fitted with gates that the birds cannot open from outside, but gates for nest boxes were found unnecessary. If a low perch is fitted it must be far enough from the back of the cage for birds to walk there. 8. Where there was less space per bird (more birds per cage) than the requirements in the 1999 European Commission Directive on laying hens, there were: fewer eggs per hen, but still above the breeders' target; lower food consumption; more feather and foot damage, but less than in conventional cages; higher mortality in one trial out of three; less freedom of movement. However, the results were still very good even with 8 birds per cage, and support the principle that furnished cages provide an acceptable way of protecting the welfare of laying hens.     

Observations on the laying behaviour of hens in battery cages

Observations were made on the laying behaviour of hens from each of two commercial strains kept in a Thornber battery cage system. Attention was paid to the following behavioural components of oviposition: the position of the hen in the cage; the stance of the hen; the height through which the egg fell; the orientation of the egg; the time taken to oviposit; the time taken for the egg to roll out of the cage and the incidence of pecking at the egg.

Less detailed observations were made on the pre‐laying behaviour of the hens.     

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.     

Behaviour of laying hens in cages with nest sites

1. Behavior of ISA Brown hens was compared in cages with and without nest sites provided, to determine the characteristics necessary for such nest sites and whether part of the existing cage area could be modified to form an acceptable nest file. 2. There were 5 treatments: control (C); a wooden surround in one rear corner of the cage (S); a fiberglass rollaway hollow in one rear corner of the cage (H); a hollow and a surround (H/S); a nest box attached to the back of the cage, containing a hollow (N). 3. Use of rollaway hollows was limited, unless they were blocked and wood shavings were added, when 55 to 60% of eggs were laid in them. There were also problems with soiling of hollows. 4. When hollows were blocked, most hens used them in treatments H/S and N, suggesting that substrate and surroundings both contributed to acceptability of nest sites. 5. Pre-laying behaviour in sites within the cage was disturbed and sometimes abnormal. In addition, these sites were not used for other activities, thus limiting the space available. 6. For pre-laying behaviour to be expressed satisfactorily in cages, an additional nesting area, such as a nest box or boxes, is probably necessary.     

Perch length in cages for medium hybrid laying hens

1. ISA Brown hens were housed as groups of 4 from 18 to 72 weeks in 24 cages 450 mm deep, each with a softwood perch of rectangular cross‐section fitted across the rear. There were 4 treatments, each with 6 cages: cage widths and perch lengths were 480, 520, 560 or 600 mm.

2. Daytime perching did not differ significantly between the treatments. At night, over the whole year, 81% of birds in the 480 mm cages and 86% in the 520 mm cages roosted on the perch. This figure reached about 95% in the 560 and 600 mm cages, significantly more at most ages than in the 480 mm cages.

3. Feather damage was slightly less, but claw problems slightly more, in the 2 wider treatments than in the 2 narrower treatments. Birds in the wider cages were calmer when approached or handled by humans than those in the narrower cages. This may have been associated with variation in space allowance between the treatments.

4. There was a trend for lower production in the 480 mm cages than in the other treatments which may have been associated with the reduced feeding space in this treatment. There were few other treatment differences in production traits.

5. The balance of the evidence from this study is that when perches are provided in laying cages for medium weight hybrids, 140 mm of perch space per hen is adequate. For the amelioration of a number of the welfare problems of conventional cages, provision of perches should be combined with other modifications.     

Effects of dietary protein on egg production of laying hens housed in furnished or conventional cages

Abstract

In the present experiment the effects of dietary protein content on egg production of hens kept either in conventional cages (CCs) or furnished cages (FCs) were studied. A total of 1088 LSL (Lohmann LSL-Classic Layer) hens were housed in either FCs or CCs and offered high or low protein diets with a protein/energy ratio of 17 or 13, respectively, during three consecutive feeding phases of 20, 16 and 16 weeks, respectively. There was no interaction between the effects of cage design and of dietary treatment on laying performance. Hens kept in FCs consumed less feed than hens in CCs (p<0.05). After the first feeding phase, hens housed in FCs produced fewer eggs (p<0.01) than hens in CCs. No differences in the feed conversion ratio were found between the housing systems. Hens on the low protein diet laid smaller eggs than hens on the high protein diet (p<0.001). No effect of dietary protein on laying rate was found. It can be concluded that dietary protein affects egg production irrespective of the cage type.     

合生素对蛋鸡生产性能及蛋品质的影响

在我国传统养殖生产中,抗生素一直被用作饲料添加剂来控制畜禽疾病和提高生产性能。但随着抗生素的大量使用,其带来的负面影响日趋严重。药物残留和耐药菌株的产生及畜禽产品质量的下降,已对畜牧业可持续发展和人类健康带来严重的影响。研制开发无公害和无残留的饲料添加剂替代     

酶解羽毛粉对蛋鸡生产性能的影响

选用192只23周龄产蛋良好的海兰褐商品蛋鸡,探讨日粮中添加不同比例的酶解羽毛粉对蛋鸡生产性能的影响,设3个处理,每个处理4个重复,每个重复16只鸡,三层阶梯式笼养,自由采食和饮水,进行饲养试验。试验期为30d。对各处理组的蛋鸡日只耗料量、产蛋率、日只产蛋量、平均蛋重、料蛋比的记录数据进行统计分析,研究用羽毛粉代替部分植物蛋白饲料（豆粕）的可行性。结果表明,日粮中添加2．5％和5％酶解羽毛粉对蛋鸡日只耗料量、产蛋率、日只产蛋量、平均蛋重、料蛋比5项指标均无显著影响（P〉0．05）。因此,在蛋鸡日粮中用羽毛粉代替部分植物蛋白饲料原料是经济可行的。大力开发利用羽毛粉,对解决我国目前蛋白资源紧缺的状况具有重要的理论和现实意义。     

Effect of cage area,cage height and perches on feather condition,bone breakage and mortality of laying hens

1. The health of 2 flocks of 896 ISA Brown laying hens were studied successively over the years 1995 and 1996 under different caging conditions. Hens were kept in groups of 4 in a total of 224 cages. The treatments (7 different types of cages) differed in area per hen (450, 600 or 800 cm2) and height (40 or 60 cm). In the large (800 cm2/hen) and high (60 cm cage) treatment, half of the cages were equipped with perches (20 cm/hen). Each study lasted 48 weeks. 2. Feather condition was found to be independent of cage type. 3. No differences were apparent between the 7 treatments in tibia breaking strength (using the 3-point breakage technique). A significant increase in humerus breaking strength was observed in the high cages. The frequency of broken wings recorded after slaughter was lower in high cages (23%) than in low ones (36%). 4. Mortality was different between treatments. This was explained by a higher proportion of birds killed by 'body cannibalism' in the 60 cm high cages, and by a higher proportion of birds killed by 'vent cannibalism' in the cages with perches.     

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.     

Bacterial eggshell contamination in conventional cages, furnished cages and aviary housing systems for laying hens

The influence of housing system on the initial bacterial contamination of the eggshell was studied. Two long-term experiments were performed. Bacterial eggshell contamination, as expressed by total count of aerobic and Gram-negative bacteria, was periodically analysed for eggs from a conventional cage, a furnished cage with nest boxes containing artificial turf or grids as nest-floor material and an aviary housing system. Results were log-transformed prior to statistical analyses. For both experiments no systematic differences were found between the conventional cage and furnished cage. The type of nest-floor material in the nest boxes of the furnished cages also did not systematically influence the bacterial contamination. A possible seasonal influence on contamination with a decrease in the winter period (up to > 0.5 log cfu/eggshell) of total count of aerobic and Gram-negative bacteria was observed in the first experiment. The contamination with total aerobic flora was higher (more than 1.0 log) on eggs from the aviary housing system compared to the conventional and the furnished cage systems. For Gram-negative bacteria this was not the case. During the entire period of both experiments, independent of housing system, shell contamination was not influenced by age of hens or period since placing the birds in the houses. For the total count of aerobic bacteria a restricted positive correlation (r2 = 0.66) was found between the concentration of total bacteria in the air of the poultry houses and initial shell contamination.     

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.     

Bone strength of laying hens kept in an alternative system, compared with hens in cages and on deep-litter

1. Observations of vigorous wing movements and measurements of bone strength were compared in two experiments with birds in three different housing systems: a semi-intensive alternative system under development, a battery cage system and a deep-litter system. 2. A significant effect of housing system on the frequency of vigorous wing movements was found. The highest frequency was seen in the deep-litter system, about half this number in the alternative system, while in the battery cages they were never observed. 3. Corresponding to this a reduction in humerus strength of 9% was found in hens from the alternative system and of 45% in hens from cages, compared with deep-litter. A reduction in tibial breaking strength was also found in caged hens, when compared to deep-litter hens. 4. Keeping hens in cages thus restricts their movements, especially wing movements, to the degree that bone strength is greatly reduced. 5. This has welfare implications, for hens with low bone breaking strength risk a possibility of breakage, especially when handled and transported. When alternative systems are designed opportunities for movement in the three dimensions should be considered.     

Behaviour and welfare of individual laying hens in a non-cage system

1. A leg band containing a transponder was fitted to 80 birds in a perchery containing 1,000 birds. 2. The transponder emitted a unique identification number when a bird walked on one of 8 flat antennae on the floor. The recording apparatus was used to measure the amount of time that each of the tagged birds spent on the slatted and littered areas in a 6-week period. 3. Some birds spent long periods of time on the slats, possibly as a means of avoiding repeated attacks. Duration on the slats was greatest in birds with the worst (as opposed to better) feather scores of the head, back and tail regions. 4. Birds that spent long periods on the slats were lighter than other birds at both 39 weeks of age and 72 weeks of age and had greater back, head and tail feather damage, consistent with these birds being victims of pecking. 5. Tagged birds received a social avoidance test outside the perchery at 39 weeks of age, which suggested that birds retreated to the slats in response to pecks rather than just to close proximity to other birds. 6. The failure to find that duration on the slats was related to anatomical indicators of stress (liver, spleen and bursa of Fabricius) suggests that retreating to the slats following pecking attenuates physiological stress responses. 7. We conclude that the provision of areas where birds in a large group can avoid pecking may improve the welfare of a minority of victimised birds.