Comparison of selected indices of internal environment and condition of laying hens kept in furnished cages and in aviaries

Biochemical and hematological examination of blood and individual assessment of the birds were performed in Lohman Brown laying hens at 45 weeks of age housed in different systems. The biochemical examination revealed higher (p < .01) corticosterone levels, creatine kinase, and aspartate aminotransferase activity and lower (p < .01) levels of lactate, triglycerides, albumin, calcium, and phosphorus in aviary hens compared to hens housed in furnished cages. Hematological examination of hens housed in aviaries revealed higher (p < .05) hematocrit, leukocytes, heterophils, eosinophils, basophils, monocytes, and H/L ratio. Furthermore, hens housed in aviaries had lower (p < .01) body weight than hens in furnished cages, they were worse feathered (p < .001), had more damaged combs (p < .05), and poorer physical condition (p < .01). In contrast, caged hens showed worse (p < .01) feather condition of the wings due to abrasion and claws due to overgrowth. The results have shown that the housing system has a significant impact on the internal environment and condition of birds and that housing in aviaries without taking into account the specifics of such housing may lead to significant stress and disturbance to the welfare of laying hens.     

Assessment of furnished cages for laying hens--development for small aviaries

Observations on six farms keeping laying hens in furnished cages showed that hens accepted the installations of this new housing type. Behaviours indicating that the adaptations of hens were problematic have not been observed. Locomotion and dust bathing in some groups occured as not sufficient. Lighting was too low and affected expressions of behaviour patterns. For further developments are proposed more usable space per bird and a different placement of perches. Dust bathes should be utilized permanently and should contain sufficient amount of litter.     

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.     

Pecking behaviour of laying hens in single-tiered aviaries with and without outdoor area

1. The objective of the present study was to examine the behaviour of laying hens in single-tiered aviaries with and without outdoor areas with particular reference to the proportion of each behaviour and the ways it changed. 2. In all, 144 interbred cross layers (WL/RIR cross-breed) were used. At the age of 16 weeks, the hens were divided at random into two groups and moved to single-tiered aviary (SA) and free-range systems (FR, SA with in addition an outdoor range area covered with clover) with 18 hens per pen. Behavioural observations were conducted before, during and after access to the range. 3. All behaviours using the beak (eating, grazing, drinking, preening, aggressive pecking, feather pecking, litter pecking, object pecking and mate pecking) were recorded as pecking behaviour. 4. While most of the FR hens spent their time outside foraging, the proportion of hens eating, preening, litter pecking, object pecking, aggressive pecking and feather pecking was higher in SA than in FR hens. 5. The proportion of hens performing pecking behaviour of all types was very similar in SA (61.7 +/- 2.0%) and in FR (64.0 +/- 0.8%). The proportion of hens performing overall pecking behaviour increased as pre-laying sitting decreased. 6. The proportion of hens feather pecking decreased in FR during access to range and a similar tendency was found for aggressive pecking. 7. In conclusion, the total proportion of hens pecking was almost the same regardless of whether an outdoor area was provided or not, but the incidence of different types of pecking behaviour differed between SA and FR. The risk of feather pecking in FR may be lower when an outdoor grazing area is provided, although further testing on a larger scale would be essential.     

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.     

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.     

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 stocking density, flock size and management on the welfare of laying hens in single-tier aviaries

Management practices, stocking rate and flock size may affect laying hen welfare but there have been few replicated studies in commercial non-cage systems that investigate this. This study used a broad range of physical and physiological indicators to assess the welfare of hens in 36 commercial flocks. Six laying period treatments were examined with each treatment replicated 6 times. It was not possible to randomly allocate treatments to houses, so treatment and house were largely confounded. Three stocking rates were compared: 7 birds/m(2) (n = 2450), 9 birds/m(2) (n = 3150) and 12 birds/m(2) in either small (n = 2450) or large (n = 4200) flocks. In addition, at 12 birds/m(2), in both small and large flocks, birds were subjected to either standard (SM) or modified (MM) management. MM flocks had nipple drinkers and no nest-box lights. Bone strength, fracture incidence, heterophil:lymphocyte (H:L) ratio, live weight, organ weights, serum creatine, serum osmolality, muscle pH and faecal corticosterone were measured on samples of birds at the end of the rearing period and at the end of lay. During the laying period, mortality, production and integument condition were recorded at regular intervals. Birds housed at 9 birds/m(2) had higher mortality than birds housed at 12 birds/m(2) by the end of lay, but not higher than birds housed at 7 birds/m(2). Birds housed at 7 and 9 birds/m(2) had lower percent liver weight, and worse plumage condition than most of the 12 bird/m(2) treatments. Modified management tended to improve plumage condition. There were no clear effects of flock size on the welfare indicators recorded. At the end of the rearing period fracture incidence was almost negligible and H:L ratio was within a normal range. By the end of lay fracture incidence was 60% and H:L ratio was high, with no treatment effect for either measure. This, together with information on faecal corticosterone, feather loss and mortality, suggests that the welfare of birds in all treatments was relatively poor by the end of lay.     

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.     

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.     

Effect of perches in laying cages on welfare and production of hens

1. ISA Brown hens were caged in groups of 4 from 20 to 72 weeks at 675 cm²/bird. A control treatment in conventional cages was compared with 4 treatments involving softwood perches. In deep cages they were located across the front, across the rear and across both; in wide, shallow cages there was one long perch across the front. For half of each treatment perches were circular in cross section, and for half they were rectangular.

2. Time spent overall in daytime perching was relatively consistent over the laying cycle, from 47% in period 1 to 41% in period 10. Perch arrangement had a major influence on perching time, which varied from 20% on the rear perch to 85% on the long perch. Predominant activities on front perches were feeding and drinking; on rear perches, preening and resting.

3. Perches were heavily used for roosting at night: the proportion varied from 60 to 72% on front or rear perches, through 72 to 78% on long perches, and 99% on two perches.

4. Physical condition was also affected by treatment. Foot damage was less in birds with rectangular perches than with circular perches; rear perches resulted in less damage than the control. Tibia breaking strength was greater in birds from cages with perches. There was some evidence of reduced feather damage, especially where there was sufficient perching space for all birds.

5. Egg production on a hen‐d basis across 12 laying periods was 83% in cages with perches compared to 85% in control cages, with no significant differences between treatments. Hens were seen to lay from perches; this probably accounted for the higher proportion of cracked eggs from cages with perches. This proportion varied from 4% with rear perches to 18% with two perches, compared to 2% in control cages.

6. Although not all effects of perches were beneficial, overall they made an appreciable contribution to bird welfare. They should be considered in combination with other potential modifications to cages.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Behavior, performance and physical condition of laying hens in conventional and small furnished cages

The aim of the present study was to compare the welfare level and performance of laying hens between conventional and small furnished cages. At the age of 54 weeks, 120 White Leghorn layers were divided into four groups: four (C4) or six hens/cage in conventional cages and four or six (F6) hens/cage in furnished cages. Their behavior, number of steps taken, performance and physical condition were measured. Sham dust‐bathing was greater in conventional cages than in furnished cages (P = 0.05) and dust‐bathing, litter scratching and litter pecking were also observed in furnished cages. Other comfort behavior, moving and number of steps taken were more frequent in the four‐hen cages than in the six‐hen cages (P < 0.01, P < 0.001, P < 0.001, respectively). Though egg production and egg mass in C4 and F6 were lower than in the other groups, no significant differences were found in the other production measurements. Bodyweight gain was larger in the four‐hen cages than the six‐hen cages (P < 0.01). In conclusion, behavior was not restricted in the furnished cages, but activity and bodyweight gain were affected by group size (density) rather than cage design. Hereafter, the studies on suitable density in each cage design, using young layers, are required.