Literature DB >> 26240396

The utilization of the Welfare Quality® assessment for determining laying hen condition across three housing systems.

R A Blatchford1, R M Fulton2, J A Mench3.   

Abstract

The Welfare Quality(®) Assessment protocol for poultry ( WQA: ) provides animal-based measures allowing welfare comparisons across farms and housing systems. It was used to compare Lohmann LSL Classic White hens housed in an enriched colony ( EC: ), aviary ( AV: ), and conventional cage system ( CC: ) on a commercial farm over 2 flock cycles. Hens (n = 100/system) were scored on a variety of measures. A baseline measurement was made at placement at 19 wk of age for 1 flock, since AV hens had been reared in an aviary pullet facility ( AVP: while EC and CC hens were reared in a conventional pullet facility ( CCP: ). Hens in all systems were then assessed at 52 and 72 wk of age. Necropsies were performed on all mortalities 1 wk before and after the WQA sampling. WQAs were analyzed using Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis tests for prevalence and Fisher's exact tests for severity. There was an effect of rearing, with AVP having shorter claws (P = 0.01), dirtier feathers (P = 0.03), and more keel abnormalities (P < 0.0001) than CCP at placement. For the hens, there were several significant housing system effects across flocks and age periods (all P ≤ 0.05). AV and EC hens had more keel abnormalities than CC hens. They also had fewer foot abnormalities than CC hens, although those in AV hens were more severe. AV hens had consistently dirtier feathers than EC and CC hens. While AV hens had the best overall feather cover, feather loss patterns suggested that loss was due to head pecking for AV, whereas in EC and CC it was due to cage abrasion. The necropsy findings and the WQA results were similar, except that the WQA failed to find enteritis at 19 wk, although it was detected in the necropsies during this sampling period. These results show that the WQA is a useful tool for detecting hen condition differences across housing systems.
© 2015 Poultry Science Association Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  health; housing system; laying hen; welfare

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26240396     DOI: 10.3382/ps/pev227

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


  8 in total

1.  Parasitic mites alter chicken behaviour and negatively impact animal welfare.

Authors:  Amy C Murillo; Alireza Abdoli; Richard A Blatchford; Eamonn J Keogh; Alec C Gerry
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-05-19       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 2.  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

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.  Influence of commercial laying hen housing systems on the incidence and identification of Salmonella and Campylobacter.

Authors:  D R Jones; J Guard; R K Gast; R J Buhr; P J Fedorka-Cray; Z Abdo; J R Plumblee; D V Bourassa; N A Cox; L L Rigsby; C I Robison; P Regmi; D M Karcher
Journal:  Poult Sci       Date:  2016-03-14       Impact factor: 3.352

5.  Perch use by laying hens in a commercial aviary.

Authors:  D L M Campbell; M M Makagon; J C Swanson; J M Siegford
Journal:  Poult Sci       Date:  2016-03-18       Impact factor: 3.352

6.  Effect of space allowance and cage size on laying hens housed in furnished cages, Part I: Performance and well-being.

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

7.  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

8.  A risk assessment of health, production, and resource occupancy for 4 laying hen strains across the lay cycle in a commercial-style aviary system.

Authors:  Ahmed B A Ali; Dana L M Campbell; Janice M Siegford
Journal:  Poult Sci       Date:  2020-07-08       Impact factor: 3.352

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.