Literature DB >> 19687261

The effect of feeder space allocation on productivity and physiology of Hy-Line W-36 hens housed in conventional cages.

C M Thogerson1, P Y Hester, J A Mench, R C Newberry, C M Okura, E A Pajor, P N Talaty, J P Garner.   

Abstract

Insufficient feeder space for laying hens could increase competition at the feed trough, leading to disrupted feeding, inadequate nutrient intake, stress, and reduced productivity. The effects of feeder space allocation (FSA) on physiology and productivity were evaluated in beak-trimmed Hy-Line W-36 hens (n=480). They were obtained at 16.5 wk of age and housed on 4 tiers of shallow conventional cages. Five pullets/cage were housed at a stocking density of 434 cm2/hen and a feeder space of 12.2 cm/hen. After 1.5 wk of acclimation, baseline measurements were taken for feed utilization, bone mineralization, and heterophil:lymphocyte ratios. At 20 wk of age, pullets were given 5.8, 7.1, 8.4, 9.7, 10.9, or 12.2 cm of feeder space/bird (16 cages/treatment). Physiological and production measures were calculated monthly or twice a month for 12 mo. The heart, spleen, and right adrenal gland were collected from each hen at the end of the study. Data were analyzed using a repeated measures GLM incorporating cage, tier, FSA, and hen age. There were no effects of FSA on total egg production, bone mineral density, bone mineral content, heterophil:lymphocyte ratios, or organ weights. Hens with reduced FSA utilized more feed (P<0.001), had poorer feed conversion (P<0.001), and laid eggs with slightly thicker and heavier shells (P<0.001). There were effects of FSA on total egg weight (P<0.001) and hen-day egg production (P<0.001), but they were of low magnitude and not linear (P>0.05). Because BW was similar among FSA treatments, the results suggest that reduced feeder space did not limit feed intake. In addition, reduced FSA did not lower bone mineralization or cause physiological stress in W-36 hens housed in shallow cages, suggesting that it did not impair hen welfare. However, it did result in poorer feed efficiency, possibly related to greater feed wastage, predictive of an adverse economic effect from reducing feeder space.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19687261     DOI: 10.3382/ps.2009-00011

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


  5 in total

1.  Effect of light intensity and stocking density on the performance, egg quality, and feather condition of laying hens reared in a battery cage system over the first laying period.

Authors:  Kadir Erensoy; Musa Sarıca; Moise Noubandiguim; Mete Dur; Resul Aslan
Journal:  Trop Anim Health Prod       Date:  2021-05-13       Impact factor: 1.559

2.  Bacillus subtilis Strain DSM 29784 Modulates the Cecal Microbiome, Concentration of Short-Chain Fatty Acids, and Apparent Retention of Dietary Components in Shaver White Chickens during Grower, Developer, and Laying Phases.

Authors:  Mohamed Neijat; Jemaneh Habtewold; Rob B Shirley; Alissa Welsher; James Barton; Pascal Thiery; Elijah Kiarie
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2019-07-01       Impact factor: 4.792

3.  The Relationship between Animal Welfare and Farm Profitability in Cage and Free-Range Housing Systems for Laying Hens in China.

Authors:  Shuai He; Jiao Lin; Qiongyu Jin; Xiaohan Ma; Zhongying Liu; Hui Chen; Ji Ma; Huancheng Zhang; Kris Descovich; Clive J C Phillips; Kate Hartcher; Zhonghong Wu
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2022-08-16       Impact factor: 3.231

4.  The effect of space allowance and cage size on laying hens housed in furnished cages, Part II: Behavior at the feeder.

Authors:  T M Widowski; L J Caston; T M Casey-Trott; M E Hunniford
Journal:  Poult Sci       Date:  2017-09-01       Impact factor: 3.352

5.  The effect of an enriched laying environment on welfare, performance, and egg quality parameters of laying hens kept in a cage system.

Authors:  Damian Konkol; Ewa Popiela; Mariusz Korczyński
Journal:  Poult Sci       Date:  2020-04-30       Impact factor: 3.352

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.