Literature DB >> 18648038

Comparative effects of infrared and one-third hot-blade trimming on beak topography, behavior, and growth.

R M Marchant-Forde1, A G Fahey, H W Cheng.   

Abstract

This research examined the effects of infrared beak treatment on layer chicks. Seventy-two layer chicks were assigned to hot-blade trimming (HB), infrared treatment (IR), or a control treatment. Day-old chicks were pair-housed by treatment. Beak photographs, behavior, and production indices were obtained at intervals for 9 wk posttreatment. All beaks were normally shaped at the onset of the study, and no perceptible treatment-related differences in shape occurred over time (P > 0.05). Posttreatment, HB birds had shorter beaks relative to the other 2 groups (P < 0.05). Control and IR beaks remained comparable in length until tissue eroded in IR beaks at 1 to 2 wk posttreatment. Thereafter, beak length increased in all treatments over time (P < 0.01). Two weeks posttreatment, beaks were longest in control birds, intermediate in HB birds (P < 0.001), and shortest in IR birds (P < 0.001). The HB birds had abnormal deviations from a normal upper-to-lower mandible length ratio than the IR or control birds (P < 0.05). Notable effects of treatment on production emerged by +2 d and persisted for 5 wk. Growth and feed intake were lower in HB and IR birds compared with control birds (P < 0.05), with IR birds performing least well until the fourth week of the study (P < 0.05). Thereafter, they performed similarly to the HB group. Feed waste was lowest in the IR group and was generally greatest in the control group (P < 0.05). There was an overall effect of trimming, irrespective of method, on behavior, particularly eating and drinking behaviors (P < 0.05). Specifically, IR birds were less active (P < 0.01) and spent less time eating (P < 0.01) and drinking (P < 0.05) than did control birds. Behavior in HB birds often ranked intermediate in duration and incidence, but was not significantly different compared with behavior measured in the control and IR groups. Effects of treatment on behavior were not present after 1 wk posttrimming. Results indicate that acute pain occurred with both trimming methods. Although the impact of trimming appeared to be greatest in the IR birds initially, these differences disappeared relatively quickly, and subsequent performance was similar in both trimmed groups.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18648038     DOI: 10.3382/ps.2006-00360

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Poult Sci        ISSN: 0032-5791            Impact factor:   3.352


  10 in total

Review 1.  Review of rearing-related factors affecting the welfare of laying hens.

Authors:  Andrew M Janczak; Anja B Riber
Journal:  Poult Sci       Date:  2015-05-25       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  An analysis of beak shape variation in two ages of domestic turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo) using landmark-based geometric morphometrics.

Authors:  Hillary A Dalton; Benjamin J Wood; Tina M Widowski; Michele T Guerin; Stephanie Torrey
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-09-21       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Welfare Consequences of Omitting Beak Trimming in Barn Layers.

Authors:  Anja B Riber; Lena K Hinrichsen
Journal:  Front Vet Sci       Date:  2017-12-18

4.  Laying hen mortality in different indoor housing systems: a meta-analysis of data from commercial farms in 16 countries.

Authors:  Cynthia Schuck-Paim; Elsa Negro-Calduch; Wladimir J Alonso
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-02-04       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 5.  The Impact of Probiotic Bacillus subtilis on Injurious Behavior in Laying Hens.

Authors:  Sha Jiang; Jia-Ying Hu; Heng-Wei Cheng
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-30       Impact factor: 2.752

6.  Understanding How Infrared Beak Treatment Affects the Beak Tissue and the Healing Response of Brown and White Feathered Layer Pullets.

Authors:  Sarah Struthers; Ashish Gupta; Susantha Gomis; Eugenia Herwig; Karen Schwean-Lardner
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2019-09-07       Impact factor: 2.752

7.  Importance of Basic Research on the Causes of Feather Pecking in Relation to Welfare.

Authors:  Lisa B Fijn; F Josef van der Staay; Vivian C Goerlich-Jansson; Saskia S Arndt
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2020-01-28       Impact factor: 2.752

8.  Effects of plastic antipecking devices on the production performance, beak length, and behavior in Chinese Wannan chickens.

Authors:  Junying Li; Xinxin He; Zhicheng Wang; Jiangxian Wang; Hong Chen; Hu Su; Xing Guo; Runshen Jiang
Journal:  Poult Sci       Date:  2020-09-18       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 9.  Prenatal and Early Postnatal Behavioural Programming in Laying Hens, With Possible Implications for the Development of Injurious Pecking.

Authors:  Elske N De Haas; Ruth C Newberry; Joanne Edgar; Anja B Riber; Inma Estevez; Valentina Ferrante; Carlos E Hernandez; Joergen B Kjaer; Sezen Ozkan; Ivan Dimitrov; T Bas Rodenburg; Andrew M Janczak
Journal:  Front Vet Sci       Date:  2021-07-16

10.  The Effect of Hard Pecking Enrichment during Rear on Feather Cover, Feather Pecking Behaviour and Beak Length in Beak-Trimmed and Intact-Beak Laying Hen Pullets.

Authors:  Paula Elizabeth Baker; Christine Janet Nicol; Claire Alexandra Weeks
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-08       Impact factor: 2.752

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.