DOCSLIB.ORG

Feather Pecking and Cannibalism in Birds

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Feather Pecking and Cannibalism in Birds Bulgarian Journal of Veterinary Medicine, 2020 ONLINE FIRST ISSN 1311-1477; DOI: 10.15547/bjvm.2020-0027 Review TYPES AND CLINICAL PRESENTATION OF DAMAGING BEHAVIOUR FEATHER PECKING AND CANNIBALISM IN BIRDS S. NIKOLOV & D. KANAKOV Department of Internal Non-Infectious Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine Summary Nikolov, S. & D. Kanakov, 2020. Types and clinical presentation of damaging behaviour feather pecking and cannibalism in birds. Bulg. J. Vet. Med. (online first). Behavioural disorders, including feather pecking and cannibalism, are a common problem in both domestic and wild birds. The consequences of this behaviour on welfare of birds incur serious eco- nomic losses. Pecking behaviour in birds is either normal or injurious. The type of normal pecking behaviour includes non-aggressive feather pecking – allopreening and autopreening. Aggressive feather pecking aimed at maintenance and establishment of hierarchy in the flock is not associated to feathering damage. Injurious pecking causes damage of individual feathers and of feathering as a whole. Two clinical presentations of feather pecking are known in birds. The gentle feather pecking causes minimum damage; it is further divided into normal and stereotyped with bouts; it could how- ever evolve into severe feather pecking manifested with severe pecking, pulling and removal, even consumption of feathers of the victim, which experiences pain. Severe feather pecking results in bleeding from feather follicle, deterioration of plumage and appearance of denuded areas on victim’s body. Prolonged feather pecking leads to tissue damage and consequently, cannibalism. The nume- rous clinical presentations of the latter include pecking of the back, abdomen, neck and wings. Vent pecking and abdominal pecking incur important losses especially during egg-laying. In young birds, pulling and pecking of toes of legs is encountered. All forms of cannibalistic pecking increase morta- lity rates in birds. Transition of various pecking types from one into another could be seen, while the difference between gentle, severe feather pecking and cannibalism is not always distinct. Key words: cannibalism, damaging behaviour, feather pecking, injurious pecking, vent pecking INTRODUCTION The onset of damaging behaviour, such as serious economic losses in many Euro- feather pecking and cannibalism while pean game farms raising wild birds in rearing many birds at a place is an impor- captivity for release and shooting tant problem compromising their welfare (Draycott et al., 2002; 2005). The re- (Rodenburg et al., 2008). This results in levance of the problem is also associated Types and clinical presentation of damaging behaviour feather pecking and cannibalism in birds with increased population of wild birds (Sedlackova et al., 2004; Rodenburg et reared commercially for game meat pro- al., 2013). In general, one bird from a duction (Kuzniacka & Adamski, 2010; flock dominates over another one (Glatz Kokoszynski et al., 2011; Hrabcakova et & Bourke, 2006). This behavioural cate- al., 2012). Despite the extensive research gory is associated to a different morpho- in the field, this bird welfare problem is logy and motivation, linked to hierarchy still actual (Rodenburg et al., 2013). establishment (Van Krimpen et al., 2005; The aim of this review is to provide Bozakova et al., 2017) and serves for set- detailed classification of normal and inju- tlement of competitive interactions (Bo- rious pecking behaviour in birds. It de- zakova et al., 2015; Daigle, 2017). scribes the different types of feather peck- Clinical signs. Aggressive pecking is ing with their definitions, clinical signs, directed at the head and the neck (Sedlac- and resulting damage (localisation) on kova et al., 2004; Rodenburg et al., plumage or tissues. 2013), but should not be confused with Feather pecking in birds is divided feather pecking behaviour (Rodenburg et into normal (physiological) pecking and al., 2008; Bozakova et al., 2012; Daigle, injurious (abnormal, non-physiological) 2017). Pecking at the head by dominating pecking. birds is directed to other flock members with lower hierarchical ranks. In severe cases, bruises of the areas above the eyes, NORMAL (PHYSIOLOGICAL) swollen wattles and ear lobes are observed PECKING (Glatz & Bourke, 2006). Aggressive at- It could be either non-aggressive or ag- tacks are fast energic hits with becks fol- gressive. lowed by escape of the victim or fight with the aggressor (Rodenburg et al., Non-aggressive feather pecking 2013). Facial areas (Kjaer & Hocking, Non-aggressive feather pecking is an ele- 2004), the head, comb, neck are most ment of cognitive and social behaviour. commonly affected. Hierarchical order Allopreening is a specific behaviour of could be changed when new birds are in- birds, representing cleaning of the skin troduced, or if the dominating bird is or feathers of another bird from the wounded or defeated in a fight (Glatz & flock (Sedlackova et al., 2004). Allo- Bourke, 2006; Bozakova et al., 2013). preening is harmless and often Feathers could be damaged, but aggres- performed in a non-aggressive social sive pecking is not the main cause for context (Kjaer & Hocking, 2004). feather loss (Kjaer & Hocking, 2004) and Аutopreening is a specific behaviour does not result in plumage damage of birds, involving cleaning/pecking (Sedlackova et al., 2004; Rodenburg et own feathers or skin (Kjaer & al., 2013). Hocking, 2004). Aggressive pecking INJURIOUS /ABNORMAL (NON-PHYSIOLOGICAL) PECKING Aggressive pecking is a separate form of allopecking, accompanied with menacing Injurious pecking is a general term de- behaviour, which is used to establish and noting forms of gentle and severe feather maintain hierarchical bonds among birds pecking, cannibalistic pecking and vent 2 BJVM, ××, No × S. Nikolov & D. Kanakov pecking (Lambton et al., 2013; Birkl et A typical feather pecking act is de- al., 2017). Injurious pecking could be scribed and illustrated by Wennrich damaging pecking, causing feather da- (1975). The bird performing a feather mage and plumage damage (Bright, 2009; pecking act approaches slowly the victim Drake et al., 2010; Nicol et al., 2013). from the back or from the side, aiming at its feathers. The victim initially ignores Plumage damage the act (Sedlackova et al., 2004; Kjaer & Injurious pecking is associated with plu- Hocking, 2004), but persistent pecking mage damage which may range from could induce an injury (Glatz & Bourke, breakdown of feather tips to removal of 2006) and depending on pecking severity, feathers and appearance of large defeath- the victim vocalises and moves away ered areas on the body (Lambton et al., (Sedlackova et al., 2004). Feather pecking 2013). Although plumage damage is not is directed at the body, mainly the poste- the most reliable sign pointing at injurious rior part, abdomen or tail feathers and pecking, it is usually easier to be detected shows a clear repetitive pattern of feather that the behaviour itself. Plumage damage pecking and plucking, e.g. is of compul- could occur due to feather wearing-off or sive rather than aggressive nature (Van aggression (Nicol et al., 2013). There is a Hierden et al., 2004a; Daigle, 2017). direct association between severe feather Behavioural categories pecking and the degree of plumage da- mage (Lambton et al., 2013). Feather In the bird flock, two main types of birds pecking of high intensity could lead to could be defined in terms of feather peck- rapid defeathering in most birds and that ing: attacking bird and feather pecking is why, additional feather pecking could victim. On the basis of individual experi- not be evaluated on the basis of plumage ence, birds are divided in four behavioural status (Nicol et al., 2013). categories (Daigle et al., 2015). Severe feather pecking is used as a model, as it is Feather pecking easier to be visualised. Birds may behave This is a form of abnormal behaviour as follows: (non-aggressive behavioural disorder), in feather peckers, performing severe which one bird uses its beck to peck the feather pecking, but never receiving it; feathers of another one (Sedlackova et al., victims, which only receive pecks but 2004; Daigle, 2017). Feathers could be never give them; pulled and often, eaten (Nicol et al., 2013; neutral birds, which never receive and Rodenburg et al., 2013; Lambton et al., never give pecks; and 2015). Plucking of feathers causes pain feather pecker-victim, that are peckers (Cloutier et al., 2000;), higher risk from and victims at the same time (Daigle, injuries and outbreak of cannibalism 2017). (Nicol et al., 2013). The extensive loss of feathers covering the body is accompanied GENTLE FEATHER PECKING with impaired flying ability and thermo- regulation, resulting in increased feed Gentle feather pecking is defined as light intake by 1030% from birds (Gilani et pecks on feather tips of another bird, al., 2013). without pulling or plucking of feathers (Parmentier et al., 2009; Lambton et al., BJVM, ××, No × 3 Types and clinical presentation of damaging behaviour feather pecking and cannibalism in birds 2013). It could be observed in young birds characterised with high repetition fre- under the a form of investigatory social quency of pecking at the same site from behaviour (Riedstra & Groothuis, 2002; one bird to another (Van Krimpen et al., Nicol, 2018) or could become a stereo- 2005; Newberry et al., 2007) and could typy. In both cases, feather damage is in- result in minimum feather damage (Glatz significant. Yet, the association between & Bourke, 2006; Nicol, 2018). Gentle gentle feather pecking in young birds and pecking is often ignored by the recipient severe feather pecking in adults is a prob- (Riedstra & Groothuis, 2002; Rodenburg lem (Newberry et al., 2007; Rodenburg et et al., 2008). al., 2008). Feather pinching. It represents Clinical signs. Gentle feather pecking approaching a bird from behind or could be characterised as gentle repeated from one side and gentle pinching of pecks on the feathers of the tail, wings, its feathers. This act usually causes back and neck of the bird (Daigle, 2017). minimum damage (Sedlackova et al., It is usually manifested as bouts, and tar- 2004).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Kansas 4-H Poultry Leader Notebook Level I Introduction for Leaders
    Kansas 4-H Poultry Leader Notebook Level I Introduction for Leaders ........................................................i Parts of a Chicken......................................................................................................3 Name That Bird.......................................................................................................11 Beginning to Set Goals in Your Poultry Project......................................................19 Common Poultry Terms for Different Species........................................................23 Poultry Breeds.........................................................................................................27 Breeds of Poultry for Project and Show..................................................................33 What Bird Will I Raise?..........................................................................................41 Nutritional Needs and Problems in Poultry.............................................................45 Is Your Bird Sick?...................................................................................................51 Catching and Handling Poultry...............................................................................55 Washing That Bird...................................................................................................59 Why Do We Raise Poultry?.....................................................................................63 K-State Research & Extension ■ Manhattan Leader Notes Parts of a Chicken Poultry,
    [Show full text]
  • Animal / Poultry Slaughtering
    Ḥalāl Poultry Throat-Slitting Guideline (Ref.: HT HPTS.G: 2018) Ḥalāl Poultry Throat-Slitting Guideline (2019) "Ḥalāl Poultry Throat-Slitting Guideline" st 1 Edition Published by: The MJC Halaal Trust (MJCHT) Copyright © MJC Halaal Trust (MJCHT), January 2020 / Jamād-ul-Thani 1441 Printed in Cape Town, SA by: ISBN: Cover Design: Shaykh Zaid Dante Typesetting & Layout: Dr Y. Toefy An Accolade The International Trade Centre (ITC), which is based in Geneva, Switzerland, is the joint Agency of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and United Nations (UN), has listed the MJC Halaal Trust (MJCHT) as the first and oldest Ḥalāl Regulatory Body in the world. In their 2015 “Ḥalāl Goes Global” publication, under the heading, “The Evolution of Ḥalāl Regulations”, the ITC states (p.32) :- 1945 - The Muslim Judicial Council Halaal Trust was formed in Cape Town, to ensure that Islamic dietary laws are adhered to for the Muslims in South Africa. We extend our gratitude, appreciation and respect to our honourable forefathers for their dedication and commitment towards ensuring that food consumed in South Africa is ḥalāl. Compiled & Written by: Achmat bin Yusuf Sedick-Carr (MJCHT Director) All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the copyright owner. Page 2 of 73 (3rd Revision: February 2019) [Copyright: MJCHT – Copying & Network Storage Prohibited] Ḥalāl Poultry
    [Show full text]
  • List of Scientific Literature on the Importance of Feather Pecking
    Literature Featherpecking - Importance Bestman, M., et al. (2009). "Influence of farm factors on the occurrence of feather pecking in organic reared hens and their predictability for feather pecking in the laying period." Applied Animal Behaviour Science 121(2): 120-125. Feather pecking is one of the most obvious welfare problems in laying hens. It is seen in all types of housing systems. Although banned in some countries, beak trimming is generally used to reduce the damage caused by this behaviour. In organic farming, where beak trimming is prohibited, the animals are being kept in a less intensive way than in conventional farming in order to improve their welfare. However, feather pecking is also seen in organic laying hens. Generally, rearing circumstances play an important role in the development of this behaviour. Therefore, rearing flocks were monitored for feather pecking and the relations between rearing factors and feather pecking at a young and at an adult age were analysed. Also the correlation between feather pecking during the rearing period and feather pecking during adult life was studied. Twenty-eight commercial flocks of rearing hens were monitored. These flocks split into 51 flocks of laying hens. Flocks were scored for signs of feather damage during rearing at the ages of 7, 12, and 16 weeks and on the laying farms at 30 weeks. On the rearing as well as the laying farm, data were collected on the housing system. Logistic regression was used to analyse our data. Feather damage was seen in 13 out of 24 (54%) of rearing flocks. Logistic regression showed that a higher number of pullets being kept per square meter in the first 4 weeks of life were associated with feather damage during the rearing period (Chi square = 8.49, df = 1, p = 0.004).
    [Show full text]
  • Guidance for Assessing Animal Welfare on Organic Sheep Operations
    National Organic Standards Board Livestock Committee Proposed Discussion Document March 28, 2012 Guidance for Assessing Animal Welfare on Organic Poultry Operations The following is provided to aid in assessment of whether or not the requirements of § 205.238-241 are being met sufficiently to demonstrate adequate animal welfare conditions on organic poultry operations. In addition, this document provides further guidance to producers for improving poultry welfare. The internationally recognized “five freedoms” (freedom from hunger, thirst and malnutrition; freedom from fear and distress; freedom from physical and thermal discomfort; freedom from pain, injury and disease; and freedom to express normal patterns of behavior) promulgated by the Farm Animal Welfare Council are a useful framework for considering animal welfare. Nutritional requirements Poultry must be fed a wholesome diet that meets their nutritional needs and promotes optimal health. Feed should be formulated to meet or exceed the National Research Council’s Nutrient Requirements of Poultry, and adjusted with bird age and stage of production. Feed and water should be palatable and free from contaminants. Unless using a commercially prepared complete feed, laying hens must have access to a course calcium source, such as ground limestone. Water should be fresh, potable, and clean. Feed and water delivery systems should be checked daily and kept clean and in good working order. Birds must be provided with feed on a daily basis and water should be available continuously, with the rare exception of withholding for medical treatment under the advice of a veterinarian. There should be enough feed and water space to prevent competition between birds.
    [Show full text]
  • ISAE 2014.Pdf
    edited by: Inma Estevez, Xavier Manteca, Raul H. Marin and Xavier Averós Applied ethology 2014: Moving on ISAE2014 Proceedings of the 48th Congress of the International Society for Applied Ethology 29 July – 2 August 2014, Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain Moving on edited by: Inma Estevez Xavier Manteca Raul H. Marin Xavier Averós Wageningen Academic Publishers Buy a print copy of this book at: www.WageningenAcademic.com/ISAE2014 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned. Nothing from this publication may be translated, reproduced, stored in a computerised system or published in any form or in any manner, including electronic, mechanical, reprographic or photographic, without prior written permission from the publisher: Wageningen Academic Publishers P.O. Box 220 EAN: 9789086862450 6700 AE Wageningen e-EAN: 9789086867974 The Netherlands ISBN: 978-90-8686-245-0 www.WageningenAcademic.com e-ISBN: 978-90-8686-797-4 [email protected] DOI: 10.3920/978-90-8686-797-4 The individual contributions in this publication and any liabilities arising from them remain First published, 2014 the responsibility of the authors. The publisher is not responsible for possible © Wageningen Academic Publishers damages, which could be a result of content The Netherlands, 2014 derived from this publication. Welcome to the 48th Congress of the ISAE What makes science most exciting is not how much you know, but how much you can still learn, widening the possibilities of exploring new horizons. In this learning process diversity of experiences, exposure to new ideas, concepts or methodologies enrich and expand our capacity for innovation.
    [Show full text]
  • Chicken's Digestive System
    Poultry Leader Guide EM082E Level 2 4-H Poultry Leader Notebook Level II Identifying Poultry Feed Ingredients ........................................................3 How to Read Feed Tags ............................................................................7 Boney Birds ............................................................................................ 11 Chicken’s Digestive System ...................................................................17 Poultry Disease Prevention .....................................................................25 Poultry Parasites and Diseases ...............................................................27 Cracking Up—What’s in an Egg? ..........................................................31 Making and Using an Egg Candler ........................................................35 Constructing a Small Incubator ..............................................................39 Determining the Sex of Poultry ..............................................................45 Maternal Bonding and Imprinting (Follow the Leader) .........................49 Preventing Cannibalism ..........................................................................51 The Peck Order .......................................................................................55 Economics of Broiler Production ............................................................59 Poultry Furniture .....................................................................................65 Types of Poultry Housing .......................................................................69
    [Show full text]
  • Health and Welfare in Dutch Organic Laying Hens
    Animals 2014, 4, 374-390; doi:10.3390/ani4020374 OPEN ACCESS animals ISSN 2076-2615 www.mdpi.com/journal/animals Article Health and Welfare in Dutch Organic Laying Hens Monique Bestman* and Jan-Paul Wagenaar Louis Bolk Institute, Hoofdstraat 24, 3972 LA, Driebergen, The Netherlands; E-Mail: [email protected] * Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: [email protected]; Tel.: +31-343-523-860; Fax: +31-343-515-611. Received: 9 April 2014; in revised form: 3 June 2014 / Accepted: 4 June 2014 / Published: 20 June 2014 Simple Summary: Data on animal health and welfare and farm management during rearing and laying periods were collected from 49 flocks of organic laying hens in the Netherlands to establish how farms performed in terms of animal health and welfare and which factors affected health and welfare. Abstract: From 2007–2008, data on animal health and welfare and farm management during rearing and laying periods were collected from 49 flocks of organic laying hens in the Netherlands. Our aim was to investigate how organic egg farms performed in terms of animal health and welfare and which farm factors affected this performance. The flocks in our study were kept on farms with 34 to 25,000 hens (average 9,300 hens). Seventy-one percent of the flocks consisted of ‘silver hybrids’: white hens that lay brown eggs. Fifty-five percent of the flocks were kept in floor-based housing and 45% of the flocks in aviaries. No relation was found between the amount of time spent outdoors during the laying period and mortality at 60 weeks.
    [Show full text]
  • Cannibalism in Extensive Poultry Keeping: Interfacing Genetics and Welfare
    CANNIBALISM IN EXTENSIVE POULTRY KEEPING: INTERFACING GENETICS AND WELFARE PaulKoene Department of Animal Sciences, Ethology Group, Wageningen Agricultural University, Marijkeweg 40, P.O. box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, the Netherlands, [email protected], http://www.zod.wau.nl/~www-vh/etho SUMMARY Cannibalism frequently occurs in free-range poultry keeping. An inventory in the Netherlands showed the severity of the problem. Also in our neighbouring countries the problem of cannibalism is found. A short literature review showed that a wealth of factors - environmental, ontogenetical and genetical - may play a role in the development of cannibalism. The most promising way to reach a solution seems to be to adapt the animal to its - free-range - environment. Heritability estimates of feather pecking and cannibalism are reasonably high. Especially the molecular genetical analysis together with ethological analysis can show the genetic background (markers or even genes) that is responsible for the cannibalism. Selection against this vice must be feasible. Keywords: cannibalism, genetics, selection, welfare, Gallus domesticus INTRODUCTION The objective of this study is to determine the best way to diminish cannibalism in extensive poultry keeping (free-range hens) by adapting the bird to the free-range environment (Faure, 1980), where adapting the environment to the bird seems to have failed concerning animal welfare. Different breeding and selection strategies will be presented dependent on welfare criteria, rather than on production criteria. Extensive poultry keeping. The goal of free-range laying hen keeping is to provide the consumer with an animal-friendly egg from hens kept under animal-friendly conditions. During the last 40 years breeding programs were directed at intensive husbandry systems and changed markedly the genotypes of the animals involved.
    [Show full text]
  • Beak Trimming Methods -Review
    1619 Beak Trimming Methods -Review - P. C. Glatz* Pig and Poultry Production Institute, South Australian Research and Development Institute Roseworthy, South Australia, 5371, Australia ABSTRACT : A review was undertaken to obtain information on the range of beak-trimming methods available or under development. Beak-trimming of commercial layer replacement pullets is a common yet critical management tool that can affect the performance for the life of the flock. The most obvious advantage of beak-trimming is a reduction in cannibalism although the extent of the reduction in cannibalism depends on the strain, season, and type of housing, flock health and other factors. Beak-trimming also improves feed conversion by reducing food wastage. A further advantage of beak-trimming is a reduction in the chronic stress associated with dominance interactions in the flock. Beak-trimming of birds at 7-10 days is favoured by Industry but research over last 10 years has shown that beak-trimming at day-old causes the least stress on birds and efforts are needed to encourage Industry to adopt the practice of beak-trimming birds at day-old. Proper beak-trimming can result in greatly improved layer performance but improper beak-trimming can ruin an other wise good flock of hens. Re-trimming is practiced in most flocks, although there are some flocks that only need one trimming. Given the continuing welfare scrutiny of using a hot blade to cut the beak, attempts have been made to develop more welfare friendly methods of beak-trimming. Despite the developments in design of hot blade beak-trimmers the process has remained largely unchanged.
    [Show full text]
  • Between Species: Choreographing Human And
    BETWEEN SPECIES: CHOREOGRAPHING HUMAN AND NONHUMAN BODIES JONATHAN OSBORN A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY GRADUATE PROGRAM IN DANCE STUDIES YORK UNIVERSITY TORONTO, ONTARIO MAY, 2019 ã Jonathan Osborn, 2019 Abstract BETWEEN SPECIES: CHOREOGRAPHING HUMAN AND NONHUMAN BODIES is a dissertation project informed by practice-led and practice-based modes of engagement, which approaches the space of the zoo as a multispecies, choreographic, affective assemblage. Drawing from critical scholarship in dance literature, zoo studies, human-animal studies, posthuman philosophy, and experiential/somatic field studies, this work utilizes choreographic engagement, with the topography and inhabitants of the Toronto Zoo and the Berlin Zoologischer Garten, to investigate the potential for kinaesthetic exchanges between human and nonhuman subjects. In tracing these exchanges, BETWEEN SPECIES documents the creation of the zoomorphic choreographic works ARK and ARCHE and creatively mediates on: more-than-human choreography; the curatorial paradigms, embodied practices, and forms of zoological gardens; the staging of human and nonhuman bodies and bodies of knowledge; the resonances and dissonances between ethological research and dance ethnography; and, the anthropocentric constitution of the field of dance studies. ii Dedication Dedicated to the glowing memory of my nana, Patricia Maltby, who, through her relentless love and fervent belief in my potential, elegantly willed me into another phase of life, while she passed, with dignity and calm, into another realm of existence. iii Acknowledgements I would like to thank my phenomenal supervisor Dr. Barbara Sellers-Young and my amazing committee members Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Performance of Laying Hens in a Cognitive Bias Task; the Effect of Time Since Change of Environment
    Performance of laying hens in a cognitive bias task; the effect of time since change of environment Kognitiv förskjutning hos värphönor; effekten av förfluten tid sedan miljöbyte Lena Lindström Etologi och djurskyddsprogrammet ______________________________________________________________________________ Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet Skara 2010 Studentarbete 189 Institutionen för husdjurens miljö och hälsa Etologi och djurskyddsprogrammet Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Student report 189 Department of Animal Environment and Health Ethology and Animal Welfare programme ISSN 1652-280X Performance of laying hens in a cognitive bias task; the effect of time since change of environment Kognitiv förskjutning hos värphönor; effekten av förfluten tid sedan miljöbyte Lena Lindström Studentarbete 189, Skara 2010 Grund C, 15 hp, Etologi och djurskyddsprogrammet, självständigt arbete i biologi, kurskod EX0293 Handledare: Jenny Loberg, institutionen för husdjurens miljö och hälsa, SLU Biträdande handledare: Anette Wichman, Köpenhamns universitet Examinator: Maria Andersson, institutionen för husdjurens miljö och hälsa, SLU Nyckelord: cognitive bias; laying hen; gallus gallus; animal behaviour; animal welfare Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet Fakulteten för veterinärmedicin och husdjursvetenskap Institutionen för husdjurens miljö och hälsa Avdelningen för etologi och djurskydd Box 234, 532 23 SKARA E-post: [email protected], Hemsida: www.hmh.slu.se I denna serie publiceras olika typer av studentarbeten, bl.a. examensarbeten, vanligtvis omfattande
    [Show full text]
  • Alternation Article Template
    ALTERNATION Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of the Arts and Humanities in Southern Africa Vol 16, No 2, 2009 ISSN 1023-1757 * Alternation is an international journal which publishes interdisciplinary contri- butions in the fields of the Arts and Humanities in Southern Africa. * Prior to publication, each publication in Alternation is refereed by at least two independent peer referees. * Alternation is indexed in The Index to South African Periodicals (ISAP) and reviewed in The African Book Publishing Record (ABPR). * Alternation is published every semester. * Alternation was accredited in 1996. EDITOR ASSOCIATE EDITOR Johannes A Smit (UKZN) Judith Lütge Coullie (UKZN) Editorial Assistant: Beverly Vencatsamy EDITORIAL COMMITTEE Catherine Addison (UZ); Mandy Goedhals (UKZN); Rembrandt Klopper (UKZN); Stephen Leech (UKZN); Jabulani Mkhize (UFort Hare); Shane Moran (UKZN); Priya Narismulu (UKZN); Thengani Ngwenya (DUT); Mpilo Pearl Sithole (HSRC); Graham Stewart (DUT); Jean-Philippe Wade (UKZN). EDITORIAL BOARD Richard Bailey (UKZN); Marianne de Jong (Unisa); Betty Govinden (UKZN); Dorian Haarhoff (Namibia); Sabry Hafez (SOAS); Dan Izebaye (Ibadan); RK Jain (Jawaharlal Nehru); Robbie Kriger (NRF); Isaac Mathumba (Unisa); Godfrey Meintjes (Rhodes); Fatima Mendonca (Eduardo Mondlane); Sikhumbuzo Mngadi (Rhodes); Louis Molamu (Botswana); Katwiwa Mule (Pennsylvania); Isidore Okpewho (Binghamton); Andries Oliphant (Unisa); Julie Pridmore (Unisa); Rory Ryan (UJoh); Michael Samuel (UKZN); Maje Serudu (Unisa); Marilet Sienaert (UCT); Ayub Sheik (Edwin Mellon Post- doctoral Fellow); Liz Thompson (UZ); Cleopas Thosago (UNIN); Helize van Vuuren (NMMU); Hildegard van Zweel (Unisa). NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL ADVISORY BOARD Carole Boyce-Davies (Florida Int.); Denis Brutus (Pittsburgh); Ampie Coetzee (UWC); Simon During (Melbourne); Elmar Lehmann (Essen); Douglas Killam (Guelph); Andre Lefevere (Austin); David Lewis-Williams (Wits); Bernth Lindfors (Austin); G.C.
    [Show full text]