| Literature DB >> 28848740 |
Sabine G Gebhardt-Henrich1, Andreas Pfulg1, Ernst K F Fröhlich1, Susanna Käppeli1, Dominik Guggisberg2, Annette Liesegang3, Michael H Stoffel4.
Abstract
Keel bone damage is a wide-spread welfare problem in laying hens. It is unclear so far whether bone quality relates to keel bone damage. The goal of the present study was to detect possible associations between keel bone damage and bone properties of intact and damaged keel bones and of tibias in end-of-lay hens raised in loose housing systems. Bones were palpated and examined by peripheral quantitative computer tomography (PQCT), a three-point bending test, and analyses of bone ash. Contrary to our expectations, PQCT revealed higher cortical and trabecular contents in fractured than in intact keel bones. This might be due to structural bone repair after fractures. Density measurements of cortical and trabecular tissues of keel bones did not differ between individuals with and without fractures. In the three-point bending test of the tibias, ultimate shear strength was significantly higher in birds with intact vs. fractured keel bones. Likewise, birds with intact or slightly deviated keel bones had higher mineral and calcium contents of the keel bone than birds with fractured keel bones. Calcium content in keel bones was correlated with calcium content in tibias. Although there were some associations between bone traits related to bone strength and keel bone damage, other factors such as stochastic events related to housing such as falls and collisions seem to be at least as important for the prevalence of keel bone damage.Entities:
Keywords: bone mineral content; computer tomography; keel bone; laying hen; three-point bending
Year: 2017 PMID: 28848740 PMCID: PMC5554496 DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2017.00128
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Vet Sci ISSN: 2297-1769
Characteristics of the ten flocks that were used.
| Flock | Housing | Perch | Hybrid | Range | Age | Mass | Fracture |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Floor | Metal | LB | Yes | 71 | 1,631 | 0.06 |
| 2 | Aviary | Metal | HN | Yes | 70 | 1,707 | 0.46 |
| 3 | Aviary | Metal | HN | Yes | 72 | 1,479 | 0.29 |
| 4 | Aviary | Metal/plastic | LSL | Yes | 70 | 1,527 | 0.29 |
| 5 | Aviary | Metal/wood | LB | No | 96 | 1,757 | 0.21 |
| 6 | Aviary | Plastic | Silver | Yes | 64 | 1,691 | 0.19 |
| 7 | Aviary | Plastic | Silver | Yes | 68 | 1,644 | 0.29 |
| 8 | Aviary | Plastic | Silver | Yes | 65 | 1,796 | 0.3 |
| 9 | Aviary | Plastic | LSL | Yes | 76 | 1,434 | 0.43 |
| 10 | Aviary | Wood | LB | No | 66 | 1,678 | 0.23 |
HN, H&N Nick Chick (.
Figure 1Points of measurement of the tibia (top) and the keel bone (bottom) for the peripheral quantitative computer tomography. Tibia: A: facies articularis inferior, B: eminentia intercondylaris, X: measured length of tibia. Keel bone: A: apex carinae, X: length of carina sterni.
Figure 2Body mass after slaughter was associated with the score of the keel bone. Score 4 indicates an intact keel bone, score 3 indicates a slightly deformed keel bone, and scores 2 and 1 (=worst) indicate fractured keel bones. The width of the box plots indicates the sample size, and the numbers of animals are beneath the bars.
Spearman’s correlations between the different PQCT measurements and body masses.
| Trait | Center with proximal KB | Center with proximal TB | Center with distal KB | Center with distal TB | Body mass with KB | Body mass with TB |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total bone MC | 0.39*** | 0.66*** | 0.21* | 0.59*** | 0.36*** | 0.44*** |
| Total bone MD | 0.73*** | 0.71*** | 0.74*** | 0.57*** | 0.20* | −0.09 |
| Trabecular bone MC | 0.38*** | 0.56*** | 0.32** | 0.29*** | 0.35*** | 0.0 |
| Trabecular bone MD | 0.62*** | 0.65*** | 0.58*** | 0.40*** | 0.17(*) | −0.18* |
| Cortical bone MC | 0.43*** | 0.71*** | 0.38*** | 0.60*** | 0.32** | 0.37*** |
| Cortical bone MD | 0.71*** | 0.71*** | 0.63*** | 0.66*** | 0.19* | 0.02 |
.
KB, keel bone; TB, tibia; MC, mineral content; MD, mineral density.
Proximal, distal, and central measuring points refer to 10, 50, and 90% of bone length.
Measurements of the total bone mineral content (mg/cm), total bone mineral density (mg/cm3), trabecular bone mineral content (mg/cm), trabecular bone mineral density (mg/cm3), cortical bone mineral content (mg/cm), and cortical bone mineral density (mg/cm3) by peripheral quantitative computer tomography (see Materials and Methods).
| Color | P = 4 | P = 3 | P = 2 | P = 1 | SE | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total bone mineral content | White | 9.1 | 14.1 | 16.8 | 25.3 | 3.32 |
| Brown | 14.4 | 21.6 | 25.6 | 23.0 | ||
| Silver | 14.3 | 17.6 | 22.8 | 26.2 | ||
| Total bone mineral density | White | 385.7 | 409.0 | 458.9 | 497.2 | 31.58 |
| Brown | 413.2 | 352.8 | 449.0 | 333.5 | ||
| Silver | 457.5 | 513.9 | 499.7 | 536.5 | ||
| Trabecular bone mineral content | White | 4.1 | 6.2 | 8.8 | 13.1 | 1.73 |
| Brown | 6.8 | 11.6 | 13.3 | 11.2 | ||
| Silver | 6.9 | 8.9 | 11.3 | 13.1 | ||
| Trabecular bone mineral density | White | 416.7 | 432.1 | 535.3 | 579.1 | 37.74 |
| Brown | 453.2 | 426.3 | 532.8 | 371.0 | ||
| Silver | 503.4 | 581.0 | 558.2 | 596.6 | ||
| Cortical bone mineral content | White | 7.4 | 12.8 | 15.2 | 23.1 | 3.30 |
| Brown | 12.6 | 20.8 | 22.5 | 20.9 | ||
| Silver | 12.4 | 15.9 | 20.7 | 23.7 | ||
| Cortical bone mineral density | White | 447.23 | 488.7 | 503.0 | 532.5 | 22.73 |
| Brown | 472.636 | 433.6 | 507.9 | 412.9 | ||
| Silver | 494.07 | 558.5 | 532.9 | 586.9 | ||
| Total bone mineral content | White | 28.6 | 28.7 | 28.3 | 28.0 | 0.48 |
| Brown | 34.5 | 31.9 | 34.6 | 34.7 | ||
| Silver | 31.0 | 31.2 | 33.5 | 33.5 | ||
| Total bone mineral density | White | 510.0 | 498.4 | 482.1 | 477.4 | 6.33 |
| Brown | 442.3 | 419.4 | 466.9 | 429.6 | ||
| Silver | 427.5 | 463.0 | 444.0 | 461.8 | ||
| Trabecular bone mineral content | White | 8.2 | 8.3 | 8.0 | 6.8 | 0.20 |
| Brown | 9.0 | 8.0 | 9.1 | 9.3 | ||
| Silver | 6.6 | 7.5 | 8.0 | 8.4 | ||
| Trabecular bone mineral density | White | 334.9 | 328.8 | 308.1 | 267.3 | 6.70 |
| Brown | 253.1 | 232.3 | 270.7 | 253.9 | ||
| Silver | 203.1 | 245.2 | 234.0 | 260.9 | ||
| Cortical bone mineral content | White | 25.9 | 26.1 | 25.6 | 24.1 | 0.46 |
| Brown | 30.9 | 29.0 | 30.9 | 32.5 | ||
| Silver | 26.8 | 27.0 | 28.8 | 28.4 | ||
| Cortical bone mineral density | White | 651.2 | 640.7 | 624.3 | 660.0 | 6.26 |
| Brown | 596.2 | 566.9 | 629.2 | 539.2 | ||
| Silver | 632.9 | 652.5 | 628.4 | 635.0 | ||
Only the measurement of the center of the keel bone was used. Mass denotes body mass. For the tibia, the means of the three measurements of this bone are shown in the table. Non-significant interactions are not shown.
Color, color of hybrid; P, palpation score.
Figure 3Histogram of the calcium content of keel bones (a) and tibia (b). White hens have white bars, brown hens have black bars, and silver hens have gray bars.
Figure 4Boxplot of the levels of percentage of calcium content in the keel bone and palpation score of the same bone. The horizontal line shows the median, and the diamonds show the mean. The levels of calcium content were classified as follows: level 1 <38%, level 2 38–40.36%, level 3 40.37–42%, level 4 >42%.