DOCSLIB.ORG

Feather Pecking and Monoamines a Behavioral and Neurobiological Approach

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Feather Pecking and Monoamines a Behavioral and Neurobiological Approach Feather pecking and monoamines A behavioral and neurobiological approach Marjolein Suzanne Kops Kops, M.S. Feather pecking and monoamines – a behavioral and neurobiological approach Thesis Utrecht University – with ref. – with summary in Dutch ISBN: 978-90-3936-128-3 Cover art by Chaïm Becker Cover design by Chaïm Becker and Ridderprint Printed by Ridderprint, Ridderkerk © Marjolein Kops, 2014, Utrecht, the Netherlands All rights reserved. No part of this thesis may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electric, mechanical (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval system) without prior written permission of the author or the copyright owner journal. Feather pecking and monoamines A behavioral and neurobiological approach Verenpikken en monoamines Een gedrags- en neurobiologische aanpak (met een samenvatting in het Nederlands) Proefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Universiteit Utrecht op gezag van de rector magnificus, prof.dr. G.J. van der Zwaan, ingevolge het besluit van het college voor promoties in het openbaar te verdedigen op woensdag 9 april 2014 des middags te 4.15 uur door Marjolein Suzanne Kops geboren op 27 maart 1981 te Heerlen Promotoren: Prof.dr. B. Olivier Prof.dr.dr. h.c. O. Güntürkün Co-promotoren: Dr. S.M. Korte Dr.ir. J.E. Bolhuis “Which way you ought to go depends on where you want to get to...” ― Lewis Carroll, Alice in Wonderland TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1 General introduction 9 Chapter 2 Effects of feather pecking phenotype (severe feather 21 peckers, victims and non-peckers) on serotonergic and dopaminergic activity in four brain areas of laying hens (Gallus gallus domesticus) Chapter 3 Selection for low mortality in laying hens affects 35 catecholamine levels in the arcopallium, a brain area involved in fear and motor regulation Chapter 4 Central monoamine levels and behavior in young and 51 adult hens hebs from two lines selected on high (HFP) and low (LFP) feather pecking Chapter 5 Successful microdialysis in freely moving adult chickens 73 (Gallus gallus domesticus) Chapter 6 Serotonin release in the caudal nidopallium of adult laying 95 hens genetically selected for high and low feather pecking behavior: an in vivo microdialysis study Chapter 7 General Discussion 111 References 125 Author affiliations 143 Samenvatting in het Nederlands 147 List of publications 157 Acknowledgements 161 About the author 169 Chapter 1 General introduction 99 9 Chapter 1 THE PROBLEM OF FEATHER PECKING IN LAYING HENS Feather pecking (FP) remains one of the major welfare issues in laying hens. In particular the pecking at and pulling out of feathers, called severe feather pecking (SFP), inflicts damage to the plumage and causes denuded areas on the body of the recipient (Hughes and Duncan, 1972; Savory, 1995). The created bald spots will attract others to peck at the skin, and therefore SFP can easily progress into cannibalism causing mortality (Savory and Mann, 1997). SFP can be discriminated from gentle feather pecking (GFP) and aggressive pecking (Savory, 1995). GFP is a mild form of feather pecking without damage to the feathers or skin (Keeling and Jensen, 1995; Kjaer and Vestergaard, 1999). The above mentioned pecking behaviors clearly differ in the target to which they are directed. GFP and SFP are mostly directed at the back, tail and wing feathers (Riedstra et al, submitted, Savory, 1995), whereas aggressive pecking is almost exclusively directed at the top of the head or the comb. Aggressive pecking serves to establish or maintain the hierarchy and usually forces the recipient to react (Wennrich, 1975). It has been suggested that GFP is a form of explorative social pecking (Riedstra and Groothuis, 2002), although GFP can also be observed in multiple bouts with a stereotypic character (Kjaer and Vestergaard, 1999; McAdie and Keeling, 2002). SFP is, without any doubt, detrimental behavior and can be interpreted as a behavioral disorder (van Hierden et al., 2002; van Hierden et al., 2004; van Zeeland et al., 2009; Bordnick et al., 1994). Beak trimming, i.e. the removal of the sharp tip of the beak, is an effective measure to reduce the damage inflicted by SFP. Nonetheless, this method may cause welfare problems in itself since the (removed) tip of the beak contains many nerve endings enabling the discrimination between pecked objects/food (Freire et al., 2011; Gentle, 1997). Behavioral studies indicate that beak-trimmed animals may chronically suffer from painful beak deformations and chronic neuroma formation (Gentle, 1986; Duncan et al., 1989). Considering this, the European legislation has regulated beak trimming and the Netherlands will prohibit beak trimming in 2018. Similar decisions are being prepared in Germany and the United Kingdom. Beak-trimming is already prohibited in Sweden, Finland, Norway and Switzerland. Birds with an intact beak, however, produce more feather damage and mortality. Without the possibility of beak trimming, other tools are needed to reduce the damage, preferably by reducing the behavior itself and not by just reducing the harmful consequences. Moreover, conventional battery cages in Europe have been prohibited from 2012 onwards (Rodenburg et al., 2012). Now most laying hens are housed in large groups in furnished cages or in barn or free-range systems (non-cage systems) that result in more SFP than before when birds were housed with only four cage-mates in a battery cage (Allen and Perry, 1975). Indeed, large outbreaks of SFP and cannibalism have been recorded in non-cage systems (Appleby and Hughes, 1991; Gunnarsson et al., 1999). Altogether, there is general consensus that due to the larger groups of laying hens and the sharper intact beaks, the risk of severe feather pecking and cannibalism 10 General introduction will increase substantially. In order to solve this problem, unraveling the causal mechanisms of SFP in laying hens has become more important than ever. PROJECT “PREVENTING FEATHER PECKING IN LAYING HENS: FROM PRINCIPLE TO PRACTICE” SFP is a multifactorial problem and there is no simple single solution to prevent it. Forty years of research have shown that both genes (nature) and environment (nurture) play an important role in the development of SFP (Hughes and Duncan, 1972; Leonard et al., 1995; Nicol et al., 2001; Huber-Eicher and Audige, 1999; Blokhuis, 1989; Nørgaard-Nielsen et al., 1993). SFP has been suggested to develop from either redirected food pecking (Wennrich, 1974); redirected ground pecking (Blokhuis, 1986); the inability to perform dust bathing (Vestergaard et al., 1993), or redirected social pecking (Riedstra and Groothuis, 2002). Furthermore, severe feather peckers seem to have increased levels of stress (Rodenburg et al., 2009; Rodenburg et al., 2009), fear (de Haas et al., 2012; Hocking et al., 2001; Jensen et al., 2005; Rodenburg et al., 2004; de Haas et al., 2013), sometimes show more aggression (Bessei et al., 2013; Cheng and Muir, 2007) and are more likely to display a proactive coping style (Korte et al., 1997; Koolhaas et al., 1999; Cockrem, 2007). Unfortunately, none of these characterizations of SFP or feather peckers completely explains the origin of this detrimental behavior. It is supposed that the better one understands the causal factors underlying SFP, the better it can be treated and possibly prevented. Four years ago, the universities of Utrecht, Wageningen, and Groningen started the project “Preventing feather pecking in laying hens: from principle to practice”. My research was part of this larger project. The main goal of the larger project was to find predictors and indicators of FP in both experimental and commercially housed chickens at different developmental phases. The impact of both external (e.g. housing conditions and management) and internal (e.g. maternal hormones and neurochemical brain characteristics) factors on the development of SFP behavior have been addressed by two PhD-students and one post-doctoral researcher, focusing on different steps in the production chain (i.e. parent stock, rearing phase, and laying phase), see Fig. 1.1. This thesis focuses on the neurobiology of feather pecking and especially the role of the central monoaminergic system; this will be explained below. THE NEUROBIOLOGY OF FEATHER PECKING BEHAVIOR Why does abnormal behavior such as SFP occur? This is not an easy question. In humans, behavioral disorders that resemble SFP have been observed, such as body- focused repetitive (constant and recurrent) disorders, for instance, the irresistible urges to pull out hair (Trichotillomania) or to pick at skin (Excoriation disorder) (American Psychiatric Association, 1994). These maladaptive behaviors are often 11 Chapter 1 interpreted by psychiatrists to reflect obsessive-compulsive disorders (OCD) or impulsive-like disorders. It has been hypothesized that central monoaminergic systems (serotonin and dopamine) are involved in SFP (birds) and other compulsive- like behaviors (mammals) (van Hierden et al., 2004; van Zeeland et al., 2009; Dufour et al., 2010). Serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine; 5-HT) plays a role in, amongst others, regulation of mood, reproduction and growth, impulsivity and aggressiveness (Angoa- Pérez et al., 2012; Dalley and Roiser, 2012; Stein et al., 1991; De Boer et al., 2009; Rabii et al., 1981) whereas dopamine (DA) is involved in motivational and reward- related behavior, motor control, and also higher cognitive functions (Kalenscher et al., 2006). Abnormal behaviors have been related to depletion of the serotonergic and dopaminergic systems. For instance, mice lacking the gene encoding for brain tryptophan hydroxylase 2 - resulting in 5-HT depletion - exhibit more compulsive behaviors, like excessive burying, aggressive and motor impulsive behaviors (Angoa- Pérez et al., 2012). Fig. 1.1 Schematic overview of the projects within project ‘Preventing feather pecking in laying hens: from principles to practice’. Figure shows the projects with the different phases in the laying hen production chain, the manipulations that will be applied, the indicators that will be studied in the different projects, and the implementation in practice. The topic of this thesis is depicted in pink.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • The Prevention and Control of Feather Pecking in Laying Hens: Identifying the Underlying Principles T.B
    doi:10.1017/S0043933913000354 The prevention and control of feather pecking in laying hens: identifying the underlying principles T.B. RODENBURG1, 2*, M.M. VAN KRIMPEN3, I.C. DE JONG3, E.N. DE HAAS4, M.S. KOPS5, B.J. RIEDSTRA6, R.E. NORDQUIST7, J.P. WAGENAAR8, M. BESTMAN8 and C.J. NICOL9 1Animal Breeding and Genomics Centre, Wageningen University, PO Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands; 2Behavioural Ecology Group, Wageningen University, PO Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands; 3Livestock Research, Wageningen UR, PO Box 65, 8200 AB, Lelystad, The Netherlands; 4Adaptation Physiology Group, Wageningen University, PO Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands; 5Department of Psychopharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS) and Rudolf Magnus Institute of Neuroscience, Utrecht University, PO Box 80.082, 3508 TB Utrecht, The Netherlands; 6Behavioural Biology, University of Groningen, Nijenborgh 7, 9747 AG Groningen, The Netherlands; 7Emotion & Cognition Group, Department of Farm Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Rudolf Magnus Institute of Neuroscience, Utrecht University, Yalelaan 7, 3584 CL Utrecht, The Netherlands; 8Louis Bolk Institute, Hoofdstraat 24, 3972 LA Driebergen, The Netherlands; 9Animal Welfare & Behaviour, School of Veterinary Sciences, Bristol University, Langford House, Langford, Bristol, BS40 5DU, United Kingdom *Corresponding author: [email protected] Feather pecking (FP) in laying hens remains an important economic and welfare issue. This paper reviews the literature on causes of FP in laying hens. With the ban on conventional cages in the EU from 2012 and the expected future ban on beak trimming in many European countries, addressing this welfare issue has become more pressing than ever.
    [Show full text]
  • An Ethological Investigation of Feather Pecking
    AN ETHOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION OF FEATHER PECKING GEORGINA CUTHBERTSON, B.A.. Thesis presented for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. University of Edinburgh March 1978. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I should like to express my gratitude to Dr. T. C. Carter of. the A. R. C. Poultry Research Centre for the provision of laboratory facilities and the Agricultural Research Council for financial support. My sincere thanks are due to my supervisors, Dr. Aubrey Manning and Dr. David Wood-Gush for their help and encouragement throughout this study. I should also like to thank my colleagues at the Poultry Research Centre, especially Dr. Ian Duncan, for their help and stimulating discussions, Mrs. Gretta Brown for her untiring technical assistance and Mrs. J. Rhodes. who typed this thesi. Finally, I should like to thank my husband and small son for their constant support and interest in my 'Chicken Book". DECLARATION I declare that this thesis has been composed by me and that the work described here is my own. 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS. Page List of Figures iv List of Tables vi Abstract xii CHAPTER 1. General Introduction and 1 Literature Review. 3 CHAPTER 2. Materials and Methods Used in This Thesis. 25 CHAPTER 3. Do All Birds Feather Peck? A pilot study of the phenomenon. 33 Experiment 1. To determine whether 35 2. all birds are equally 43 tt 3. involved in feather pecking. 49 Experiment 4. To determine whether 53 fl 5. pecked birds and peckers 58 ff 6. can be reared as separate 62 types. • General Discussion 67 CHAPTER 4. The Relevance of Stimuli in the Feather Pecking Situation • Experiments 7 and 8.
    [Show full text]
  • For Egg Pr Oducers for Egg Pr Oducers
    BBEEAAKK TRTRIIMMMMIINNGG HHAANNDDBB OOOOKK FFOORR EEGGGG PPRR OODDUUCCEERRSS Best Practice for Minimising Cannibalism in Poultry PHIL GLATZ AND MICHAEL BOURKE BEAK TRIMMING HANDBOOK FORFOR EGGEGG PRODUCERSPRODUCERS Best Practice for Minimising Cannibalism in Poultry PHIL GLATZ AND MICHAEL BOURKE Beak Trimming 3pp.indd i 31/1/06 10:14:41 AM © Australian Poultry CRC 2006 All rights reserved. Except under the conditions described in the Australian Copyright Act 1968 and subsequent amendments, 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, duplicating or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. Contact CSIRO PUBLISHING for all permission requests. National Library of Australia Cataloguing-in-Publication entry Glatz, Philip C. (Philip Charles). Beak trimming handbook for egg producers : best practice for minimising cannibalism in poultry. ISBN 0 643 09256 0. 1. Poultry – Dubbing – Handbooks, manuals, etc. 2. Poultry – Handling – Handbooks, manuals, etc. 3. Poultry – Cannibalism. I. Bourke, Michael. II. Title. 636.51420994 Available from CSIRO PUBLISHING 150 Oxford Street (PO Box 1139) Collingwood VIC 3066 Australia Telephone: +61 3 9662 7666 Local call: 1300 788 000 (Australia only) Fax: +61 3 9662 7555 Email: [email protected] Web site: www.publish.csiro.au Set in Adobe Minion and Helvetica Neue Cover design by Rob Cowpe Design Typeset by Desktop Concepts Pty Ltd, Melbourne Printed in Australia by Metro Printing Disclaimer Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that the material in this book is true, correct, complete and appropriate at the time of writing.
    [Show full text]