Poultry Science Journal

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Poultry Science Journal WORLD’S POULTRY SCIENCE JOURNAL Xth European Symposium on Poultry Welfare education organization 19 - 22 June 2017 research Ploufragan - France Book of Abstracts Xth European Symposium on Poultry Welfare Book of Abstracts Hosted by French Branch From the World's Poultry Science Association Disclainer This abstract book has been produced using author-supplied copy. Editing has been restricted to some corrections of spelling and styles where appropriate. No responsibility is assumed for any claims, instructions, methods or drug dosages contained in the abstracts: it is recommended that these are verified independently. Copyright All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any formor by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the written permission of the copyright holder. ©Wold’s Poultry Science Association. No responsability is assumed by the publisher for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products liability, negligence or otherwise, or from any use or operation of any methods, products, instructions or ideas contained in the material herein. Committees Scientific Committee Virginie MICHEL – ANSES Maryse GUINEBRETIERE – ANSES Daniel GUÉMENÉ – INRA Christine LETERRIER – INRA Valentina FERRANTE – Chairwoman of the Working Group n° 9 "Poultry Welfare and Management" Organizing Committee Virginie MICHEL – ANSES Maryse GUINEBRETIERE – ANSES Daniel GUÉMENÉ – INRA Yves NYS – WPSA Europe Laure BIGNON – ITAVI Christophe BOSTVIRONNOIS – WPSA France Christine LESSIRE – WPSA France Geneviève CLEMENT – ISPAIA ZOOPOLE Développement Emmanuelle GIRARD – ISPAIA ZOOPOLE Développement Organizer WELCOME IN BRITTANY ! Christophe BOSTVIRONNOIS President of French Branch of WPSA Dear Colleagues, On behalf of the French Branch of WPSA, the Organizing Committee, the Scientific Committee, and the Working Group no.9 “Poultry Welfare and Management” of the European Branch of the WPSA, I would like to extend to all of you a very warm welcome to the X European Symposium on Poultry Welfare in Ploufragan, Brittany, France. I would like this scientific symposium to achieve 3 responsibilities: Support, Benchmark and Simplicity. Support First. During this meeting, you will have the opportunity to discuss, to share and to debate the latest scientific findings, the researches and the areas of development in the field of poultry welfare. Your role is crucial to support the poultry industry to keep birds welfare at a higher level and in line with the requirement of the consumer demand AND within an acceptable level to maintain the production. Benchmark then. Of course, competitiveness of the production, costs of production is in the agenda of the poultry production globally. The interesting point is that Welfare topics used to be very European driven in the mid 90’ and early 2000’. Now the topic is well spread in the different continents and regions. It makes our responsibility, in Europe, even more important. The world is looking to us and what we are discovering, deciding is considered as a global benchmark by the international community. Make it Simple. Welfare is far more complicated that to have broilers outdoors on a green grass. It covers topics as production methods, behaviors, health, nutrition, genetics and of course interactions between all of them. It makes the topic complex to handle. This is passionate but at the same time, we have to have in mind that we need to put our decisions, conclusions into reality in an actionable way. To do this, we need to be pragmatic and simple. How can we transfer these very complex topics into something easy to handle and to transform? Once again, we are very pleased to welcome a very high number of participants coming from many countries and continents. Definitely this is the healthy signal of a growing production, researches and education. Our responsibility is bigger than us. This is to feed the world in a safe, abundant, affordable and sustainable way. Introduction Valentina FERRANTE – Chairwoman of the Working Group n° 9 The WPSA European Federation Working Group 9 (WG9) on Poultry Welfare and Management, together with the WPSA French branch, organised this Xth European Symposium on Poultry Welfare held in Ploufragan, Brittany, France June 19-22th 2017. A memory stick (and a book on request) provide the main record of its proceedings. Agreement to form WG9 was taken during the WPSA European Poultry Conference in London in 1972. Its inaugural meeting held in Dortmund, Germany during 1973 was attended by 7 members, including me, from 6 countries (Lindgren, N.O. (1973). WPSJ 30 (2): 143- 145). Membership and geographical coverage have greatly increased during recent years so that WG9 currently has 33 members from 21 countries. The first event organised by WG9 was a symposium on bird welfare during the 1976 WPSA European Poultry Conference in Malta. The first European Symposium on Poultry Welfare organised by WG9 was held in Koge, Denmark in 1981. Quadrennial symposia have followed at different venues, the last one was the 9th Symposium in Uppsala, Sweeden. Apart from scientists, the participants to WG9 Symposia generally come from policy making authorities, funding bodies, the industry and welfare organizations. Hence, these symposia provide excellent opportunities to receive and discuss reports on the latest poultry behaviour, welfare and management research and practice, and for important informal exchanges of information as well as local professional poultry tours. Past symposia have been characterised by high quality scientific invited and submitted papers and posters. I am pleased to thank the scientific committee for the excellent program and several members of WG9 for their hard work in rigorous review of the presented abstracts to ensure that this Xth Symposium in Ploufragan was no exception. The number and standard of contributions was very high once more, making this event truly worthwhile! TABLE OF CONTENTS SESSION 1: Broiler breeders welfare and effect of early age experience on welfare Main lecture Learning from the experts: innovation within practice-led collaborative networks in the laying hen sector D.C.J. Main, C.A. Weeks, H.J. Buller, L.K. MacAllister and L. van Dijk 1 Oral Stereotypic behaviour in broiler breeders affected by alternative feeding strategies A Arrazola, E. Mosco, T. Widowski, M. Guerin and A.S. Torrey 9 The effect of perch lenght on perching, fertility, and health in broiler breeders S. G. Gebhardt-Henrich and M. J. Toscano 10 The transgenerational effects of reduced balanced protein diet on the stress susceptibility of broiler breeders C. Li, J. Lesuisse, S. Schallier, N. Everaert and J. Buyse 11 Maternal behaviour and changes of levels of neuropeptides in the brain of the broody domestic hen Y. Aleksandrova, J. Stirling, I. C. Dunn and S. L. Meddle 12 Effect of aviary rearing on welfare of hens in large furnished cages T. M. Widowski, T. M. Casey-Trott, M. Hunniford, L. Cooley and L. C. Caston 14 Access to litter during rearing and environmental enrichment during production reduce fearfulness in adult laying hens M. Brantsæter, F. M. Tahamtani, J. Nordgreen, E. Sandberg, T. B. Hansen, T. B. Rodenburg, R. Oppermann Moe and A. M. Janczak 15 Posters Fear related behavioural differences at an early age affect growth and later stress responses of commercial turkeys A.Güney and S. Özkan 17 Chick quality: from reproductive flock to slaughterhouse J. Puterflam, M. Guinebretiere, N. Rousset, R. Thomas, H. Bergoug, P. Galliot, V. Michel, R. Souillard and S. Lebouquin 18 C.A.S.H method for improvement in welfare of broilers during brooding period A. Ghibaudo and J. Marguerie 19 Susceptibility to pre-natal stress in different strains of layers: effects on early body weight and growth rate M. R. L. V. Peixoto, A. E. M. Newman, N. A. Karrow and T. M. Widowski 20 Qualitative and quantitative behavioural responses in reaction to various odours in new hatched chicks V. Noiro and J.F. Gabarrou 21 The effect of climate conditions on performance and foot pad lesions in broiler chickens from broiler breeders of two different ages I. Kempen, K. De Baere, S. Cardinaels, N. Sleeckx and J. Zoons 22 Nesting behaviour of broiler breeders A.C.M. van den Oever, T.B. Rodenburg, J.E. Bolhuis, L.J.F. van de Ven and B. Kemp 23 SESSION 2: Cognition: another way to investigate welfare? Main Lecture Harnessing the best of Europe to understand and solve Keel Bone Damage: An ongoing EU-COST Action Brinch-Riber, A., Sandilands, V., and M.J. Toscano 27 Oral Cognitive abilities and adaptation to changes: another way to investigate welfare V. Guesdon, F. Lormant, B. Peuteman, C. Leterrier and L. Calandreau 35 The speed and success of associative learning in hens depend on genotype and housing system P. Železnikar and M. Zupan 36 Five shades of grey: cognitive bias in poultry L. Kostal, M. Horvath, and K. Pichova 37 SESSION 3 (1st part) - Feather pecking origins and prevention Main Lecture The GroupHouseNet COST Action: exploiting European synergy to reduce feather pecking in laying hens T.B. Rodenburg, J. Berk, I. Dimitrov, J. Edgar, J.A.J. van der Eijk, I. Estevez, V. Ferrante, E.N. de Haas, L. Kostal, L. Liaubet, V. Michel, J. Nordgreen, S. Ozkan, D. Piette, K. Pichova, A.B. Riber, E. Sossidou, M. Toscano, A. Valros, M. Zupan and A.M. Janczak 41 Oral Genetic and phenotypic correlations of explorative behaviour and open-field activity in layer chicks with severe feather pecking as adults W. Bessei, V. Lutz, J.B. Kjaer, M.Grashorn, and J. Bennewitz 48 Effects of omitting beak-trimming on plumage, skin and keel bone conditions in barn layers A.B. Riber and L.K. Hinrichsen 49 Selection of beak shape to reduce the damage of feather pecking in layers D. Cavero, W. Icken, M. Schmutz, and R. Preisinger 50 Effects of litter provision during early rearing and environmental enrichment during the production phase on feather pecking and feather damage in laying hens F.
Recommended publications
  • Comparative Effects of Furnished Cages and Battery Cages on Behavioral Exhibitions in White Leghorn Chickens
    Research Note Furnished cage system and hen well-being: Comparative effects of furnished cages and battery cages on behavioral exhibitions in White Leghorn chickens K. Mile* and H.-W. Chengf' *Depai.tirient of Animal $renc:es. Purdue University. Wet Lafayette, IN 7907: (lad TLicstocJi Behacior Research Unit. USDA -Aqricuitwr'al Research Service. West Lafayette. IN 47907 ABSTRACT The battery cage system is being banned birds were housed per cage, providing a stocking den- ill European Union before or by 2012, and the fur- sity of 610 (-Ili 2 of floor space per bird. Behavioral ob- nished cage system will be the only cage system allowed servations were conducted using the Xoldus Observer after 2012. This stud y was conducted to exanune the software package. The birds were observed at 5-mm different effects of caging s ystems, furnished ('ages vs. intervals for the entire light period. The birds housed in battery cages, oil behaviors. One hundred ninety- battery cages had higher posture and behavioral transi- two 1 -d-old non-beak-trinuned I-Tv-Line \V-36 White tions and increased time spent walking and perform- chicks were reared using standard nianageinent ing exploratory behavior (P < 0.05. 0.01. respective- practices in raised wire cages. At 19 wk of age, the birds ly) which may indicate they were stressed. resulting were randomly assigned into battery cages or furnished iii restlessness. whereas the birds housed in furnished cages. The battery cages were commercial wire cages ('ages had higher levels of preening ( P < 0.05). Preen- containing 6 birds per cage.
    [Show full text]
  • Proceedings of the 38Th International Congress of the Isae
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 38TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF THE ISAE Laura Hänninen & Anna Valros (editors) Helsinki, Finland 2004 274p. Published by ISAE 2004 Printed in Finland Copyright © ISAE 2004 Reprinted from Hänninen, L & Valros, A.(eds), Proceedings of the 38th International Congress of the ISAE (2004). Col.University of Helsinki, University of Kuopio and MTT Agri-Food Research Finland, Finland. Reprinted from Hänninen, L & Valros, A.(eds), Proceedings of the 38th International Congress of the ISAE (2004). Col.University of Helsinki, University of Kuopio and MTT Agri-Food Research Finland, Finland. CONTENTS CREDITS 4 CONGRESS SPONSORS 7 LOCAL MAP 8 INFORMATION ABOUT POSTER SESSIONS 10 SCIENTIFIC PROGRAM 11 ABSTRACTS OF WOOD-GUSH MEMORIAL 28 AND PLENARIES ABSTRACTS OF ORAL PRESENTATIONS 38 ABSTRACTS OF POSTERS 145 INDEX 257 LIST OF PARTICIPANTS 265 3 Reprinted from Hänninen, L & Valros, A.(eds), Proceedings of the 38th International Congress of the ISAE (2004). Col.University of Helsinki, University of Kuopio and MTT Agri-Food Research Finland, Finland. CREDITS ORGANIZING INSTITUTES University of Helsinki University of Kuopio MTT, Agrifood Research Finland PROCEEDINGS SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE CHAIRPERSON Jaakko Mononen SECRETARY Anna Valros MEMBERS Hannu Saloniemi, Timo Nevalainen, Asko Mäki-Tanila, Teppo Rekilä, Hannu Korhonen, Risto Kauppinen, Eila Kaliste, Leena Ahola EDITORS Laura Hänninen & Anna Valros LAYOUT Liana Simonen LOGO AND COVER DESIGN Pate Pesonius 4 Reprinted from Hänninen, L & Valros, A.(eds), Proceedings of the 38th International Congress of the ISAE (2004). Col.University of Helsinki, University of Kuopio and MTT Agri-Food Research Finland, Finland. IN ADDITION TO THE SCIENTIFIC ORGANIZING COMMITTEE SEVERAL PERSONS HAVE BEEN REVIEWING ABTSRACTS.
    [Show full text]
  • Commercial Egg Tip
    The University of Georgia Cooperative Extension Service College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences / Athens, Georgia 30602-4356 NOVEMBER 2010 COMMERCIAL EGG TIP . A BRIEF LOOK AT DIFFERENT HOUSING SYSTEMS FOR COMMERCIAL LAYERS Concerns for laying hens’ welfare began in the 1960’s and led to an aversion to eggs produced by hens housed in conventional battery cages. As a result the European Union (EU) has banned the use of battery cages beginning in January 2012. This move has resulted in the development of alternative housing systems for laying hens. While the EU ban does not currently apply to the commercial egg producers in the United States, some states have made moves towards banning the use of battery cages for laying hens, the most recent being California. With the passing of Proposition 2 in California there has been a renewed effort to develop alternative housing systems to meet all the requirements of good hen welfare. A number of different systems are currently being used to house laying hens, but the majority of laying hens in the US are still housed in conventional cages. Each of the systems used have advantages and disadvantages that vary based on location, management, and genetic strain of the hens. Conventional Cage Housing System Conventional battery cages for laying hens were first developed in the US during the 1920s to 1930s. The system was developed to reduce the incidence of disease and parasites and also to reduce cannibalistic pecking. Cages makes management of the birds easier and requires less space than the other systems. No bedding material is used in this system as the cages are suspended above the floor allowing the bird droppings to fall through the mesh floors and collect below the cages.
    [Show full text]
  • Alternatives to the Barren Battery Cage for the Housing of Laying Hens in the European Union
    ALTERNATIVES TO THE BARREN BATTERY CAGE FOR THE HOUSING OF LAYING HENS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION A report by Compassion in World Farming 3 2007 © Dale Arey (CIWF) ALTERNATIVES TO THE BARREN BATTERY CAGE FOR THE HOUSING OF LAYING HENS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION A report by Compassion in World Farming Written by Heather Pickett BSc (Hons) MSc 2007 © Compassion in World Farming, 007 ISBN 900 56 407 Compassion in World Farming nd Floor, River Court, Mill Lane, Godalming, Surrey GU7 EZ, UK Tel: +44(0)483 5950 Fax: +44(0)483 86639 Email: [email protected] Website: www.ciwf.org.uk Registered Charity Number 095050; a Company limited by Guarantee, registered number 4590804. 3 Contents Executive Summary 5 1. Introduction 8 2. Alternatives to the barren battery cage for the housing of laying hens in the European Union 8 2. ‘Enriched’ cages 8 2. Non-cage systems 9 3. The ability of ‘enriched’ cages and non-cage systems to meet the behavioural needs of hens 10 3. The natural behaviour and cognitive abilities of hens 10 3. Nesting 10 3.3 Foraging and dustbathing 13 3.4 Perching 15 3.5 Space requirements and social group size 16 4. Addressing key welfare concerns in ‘enriched’ cages and non-cage systems 19 4. Feather pecking and cannibalism 19 4. Bone strength and fractures 23 4.3 Mortality 24 5. Overall comparison of welfare in ‘enriched’ cages and non-cage systems 25 6. Economics of changing to non-cage systems 27 6. Production costs in non-cage systems 27 6.
    [Show full text]
  • Animal Sciences 52.Indb
    Annals of Warsaw University of Life Sciences – SGGW Animal Science No 52 Warsaw 2013 Contents BRZOZOWSKI M., STRZEMECKI P. GŁOGOWSKI R., DZIERŻANOWSKA- Estimation the effectiveness of probiot- -GÓRYŃ D., RAK K. The effect of di- ics as a factor infl uencing the results of etary fat source on feed digestibility in fattening rabbits 7 chinchillas (Chinchilla lanigera) 23 DAMAZIAK K., RIEDEL J., MICHAL- GRODZIK M. Changes in glioblastoma CZUK M., KUREK A. Comparison of multiforme ultrastructure after diamond the laying and egg weight of laying hens nanoparticles treatment. Experimental in two types of cages 13 model in ovo 29 JARMUŁ-PIETRASZCZYK J., GÓR- ŁOJEK J., ŁOJEK A., SOBORSKA J. SKA K., KAMIONEK M., ZAWIT- Effect of classic massage therapy on the KOWSKI J. The occurrence of ento- heart rate of horses working in hippo- mopathogenic fungi in the Chojnowski therapy. Case study 105 Landscape Park in Poland 37 ŁUKASIEWICZ M., MROCZEK- KAMASZEWSKI M., OSTASZEW- -SOSNOWSKA N., WNUK A., KAMA- SKA T. The effect of feeding on ami- SZEWSKI M., ADAMEK D., TARASE- nopeptidase and non-specifi c esterase WICZ L., ŽUFFA P., NIEMIEC J. Histo- activity in the digestive system of pike- logical profi le of breast and leg muscles -perch (Sander lucioperca L.) 49 of Silkies chickens and of slow-growing KNIŻEWSKA W., REKIEL A. Changes Hubbard JA 957 broilers 113 in the size of population of the European MADRAS-MAJEWSKA B., OCHNIO L., wild boar Sus scrofa L. in the selected OCHNIO M., ŚCIEGOSZ J. Comparison voivodeships in Poland during the years of components and number of Nosema sp.
    [Show full text]
  • April 2014 Volume 93, Number 4
    93 April 2014 Volume 93, Number 4 S R Y C T I E L N U C O E P A 11908908 S N S O O C I AT I ISSN 0032-5791 Official Journal of the Poultry Science Association Inc. EDITOR-IN-CHIEF ® T. E. Porter (2016) POULTRY SCIENCE SECTION EDITORS ASSOCIATE EDITORS (2013–2014) Environment, Well-Being, ǯȱȱǻŘŖŗśǼ I. Hanning (2016) M. Pines (2014) Ȳȱ ǯȱȱǻŘŖŗśǼ ǯȱ ěȱǻŘŖŗŚǼ T. Poole (2016) I. Estevez (2014) H. Ahmadi (2013) R. M. Hulet (2014) ǯȱȱǻŘŖŗśǼ M. M. Beck (2016) W. Alali (2016) ǯȱ ȱǻŘŖŗśǼ A. Pradhan (2014) ǯȱ ǯȱȱǻŘŖŗśǼ A. Jackson-Davis (2016) ǯȬ ǯȱȱǻŘŖŗśǼ Genetics C. Ashwell (2016) D. Jackwood (2014) ǯȱȱǻŘŖŗŚǼ J. Dodgson (2016) ǯȱȱǻŘŖŗśǼ P. A. Johnson (2016) ǯȱȱǻŘŖŗśǼ ¢ǰȱ ǰ ǯȱȱǻŘŖŗŜǼ C. Jones (2016) K. Reed (2016) Ȳȱ M. R. Bakst (2014) P. Kaiser (2014) T. B. Rodenburg (2014) R. L. Taylor Jr. (2016) R. Beckstead (2016) ǯȱ ȱǻŘŖŗśǼ G. J. M. Rosa (2016) B. R. Behrends (2016) N. Kansaku (2016) W. B. Roush (2013) ȱȱ L. Berghman (2014) E. Kebreab (2013) I. Rozenboim (2014) G. Cherian (2014) W. Berry (2014) E. J. Kim (2016) C. Ruiz-Feria (2013) M. Rodehutscord (2016) D. Biswas (2014) W. Kim (2016) ǯȱǯȱȱǻŘŖŗśǼ E. Esteve-Garcia (2014) J. Brake (2013) ǯȱ ȱǻŘŖŗśǼ ǯȱȱǻŘŖŗśǼ K. Bregendahl (2014) K. W. Koelkebeck (2013) C. Schmidt (2016) ǰȱǰ B. Brehm-Stecher (2016) M. H. Kogut (2014) P. Selle (2013) ȱȱȱ¢ J. Buyse (2014) A. Kollanoor-Johny (2016) ǯȱ ǯȱȱǻŘŖŗśǼ G. Bedecarrats (2016) D. Caldwell (2014) B.-W. Kong (2013) D. H. Shah (2016) ¢¢ǰȱ¢ǰȱ F.
    [Show full text]
  • Perch Arrangements in Small-Group Furnished Cages for Laying Hens
    ©2007 Poultry Science Association, Inc. Perch Arrangements in Small-Group Furnished Cages for Laying Hens H. Wall1 and R. Tauson Department of Animal Nutrition and Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, S-753 23 Uppsala, Sweden Primary Audience: Advisors, Researchers, Quality Assurance Personnel, Plant Managers SUMMARY In 2 trials, including 2,768 birds in total, 3 different perch arrangements were evaluated in furnished 8-hen cages for laying hens. The hybrids used were Lohmann Selected Leghorn and Lohmann Brown in trial 1 and Hy-Line White and Hy-Line Brown in trial 2. The furnished cages were identical in all other respects than the arrangement of perches. A perch was either fitted across the cage, providing 12 cm of perch per hen, or 2 perches were installed in a cross, implying 15 cm per hen. Although the perches arranged in a cross provided more perch per hen than the single perch fitted across the cage, perch use at night by the birds was similar or lower as compared with the single perch. Hence, the way perches are arranged in the cage may be as important as perch length itself to achieve a high use at night. Perch arrangement did not affect production, mortality, or egg quality. Compared with a conventional battery cage, also included in the trials, hygiene was inferior in the furnished cages, but there was no difference in proportions of dirty eggs. Differences in proportions of cracked eggs were found between furnished and conventional cages in 1 of the trials. However, on the whole, production, mortality, and egg quality were at similar levels in all cage models.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Report
    Final Report Project code: 18– 429 Prepared by: Peta Taylor, Huw Nolan and Lauren Hemsworth Date: 20/06/2019 The role of education and attitudes towards hen welfare: a case study of furnished cages Milestone #5 (final): Project completion 18– 429 © 2019 Poultry Hub Australia All rights reserved. The role of education and attitudes towards hen welfare: a case study of furnished cages The information contained in this publication is intended for general use to assist public knowledge and discussion and to help improve the development of sustainable industries. The information should not be relied upon for the purpose of a particular matter. Specialist and/or appropriate legal advice should be obtained before any action or decision is taken on the basis of any material in this document. Poultry Hub Australia, the authors or contributors do not assume liability of any kind whatsoever resulting from any person's use or reliance upon the content of this document. This publication is copyright. However, Poultry Hub Australia encourages wide dissemination of its research, providing the Hub is clearly acknowledged. For any other enquiries concerning reproduction, contact the Poultry Hub Office on 02 6773 1855. Researcher Contact Details Name Dr Peta Taylor Organisation University of New England Phone 02 6773 1808 Email [email protected] Website https://www.une.edu.au/staff– profiles/ers/peta– taylor Poultry Hub Australia Contact Details Poultry Hub Australia CJ Hawkins Homestead, Ring Road University of New England Armidale NSW 2350 02 6773 1855 [email protected] www.poultryhub.org 2 | Page 18– 429 Project Summary Project Title The role of education and attitudes towards hen welfare: a case study of furnished cages Project No.
    [Show full text]
  • Effects on Bone Health and Keel Bone Damage in Laying Hens
    Opportunities for Exercise during Pullet Rearing: Effects on Bone Health and Keel Bone Damage in Laying Hens by Teresa Casey-Trott A Thesis Presented to The University of Guelph In partial fulfilment of requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Animal Biosciences Guelph, Ontario, Canada © Teresa Marie Casey-Trott, September, 2016 ABSTRACT OPPORTUNITIES FOR EXERCISE DURING PULLET REARING: EFFECTS ON BONE HEALTH AND KEEL BONE DAMAGE IN LAYING HENS Teresa Casey-Trott Advisor: University of Guelph, 2016 Professor T. M. Widowski This thesis is an investigation of the effect of providing opportunities for exercise on long term bone health of laying hens, with an emphasis on keel bone damage. Osteoporosis in laying hens is a welfare concern as it increases the risk of bone fractures. The keel bone is especially susceptible to fracture during the laying period. Providing opportunities for exercise during pullet rearing, a period of substantial musculoskeletal growth, offers a proactive approach to reducing osteoporosis by stimulating osteogenesis. The main objective was to determine whether rearing environments that offer different opportunities for exercise have long term effects on bone health and keel bone damage of laying hens. A secondary objective was to determine whether adult housing systems that offer different opportunities for exercise have an effect on bone health and keel bone damage of laying hens. Additionally, behavioural differences between hens with or without keel bone fractures were assessed, and an accelerometer to measure inactivity in laying hens was validated. Aviary-reared pullets had greater values for bone cross-sectional area, bone mineral density, bone mineral content, and bone breaking strength in wing and leg bones compared to bones of conventionally-reared pullets.
    [Show full text]
  • Keeping Laying Hens in Furnished Cages and an Aviary Housing System Enhances Their Bone Stability M
    British Poultry Science Volume 46, Number 5 (October 2005), pp. 536–544 Keeping laying hens in furnished cages and an aviary housing system enhances their bone stability M. LEYENDECKER, H. HAMANN, J. HARTUNG1, J. KAMPHUES2, 3 4 1 U. NEUMANN ,C.SU¨RIE AND O. DISTL Institute of Animal Breeding and Genetics, 1Institute of Animal Hygiene and Animal Welfare, 2Institute of Animal Nutrition, 3Clinic for Poultry and 4Farm for Education and Research in Ruthe, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Hannover, Germany Abstract 1. Tibia and humerus breaking strength of Lohmann Silver hybrids kept in conventional cages, furnished cages and an aviary with outdoor run were examined in two production cycles. Each trial lasted a full laying period; feeding, management and healthcare were identical for all hens. In both trials bone strength was investigated at the end of laying months 6, 9 and 14. 2. The objective was to determine if bone strength increases when hens are kept in alternative housing systems, especially in furnished cages, and whether hen age affects bone stability. 3. The results indicated that housing system influenced bone breaking strength, which was consistently higher for hens in the aviary compared to hens in conventional and furnished cages. Furthermore, humerus breaking strength was higher for hens in furnished cages compared to conventional cages. No significant difference regarding tibia breaking strength was found between conventional and furnished cages. 4. Our results showed that lack of exercise contributed to the problem of weak bones more than did calcium depletion from eggshell formation. 5. Tibia breaking strength increased during the last third of the production cycle, whereas humerus breaking strength remained unaffected by hen age.
    [Show full text]
  • Animal Welfare Is Essential to the Sustainability of the Poultry Industry
    //////////// extension.umd.edu ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// FS—1136 | September 2020 //////////// Animal Welfare is Essential to the Sustainability of the Poultry Industry Sustainability is “the ability to be maintained at a certain rate or Animal Welfare Assessments Assure level.” In other words, systems must operate to meet the Consumers that Production Systems Follow current population’s needs without compromising the ability of Industry Standards future generations to meet their needs. In the past, sustainable Animal welfare can be defined as “the quality of life as systems were those that minimized the depletion of resources perceived by the animal” (Bracke and Hopster, 2006). Animal or contaminant emissions that were harmful to the welfare assessments provide the public with assurance that the environment. Today sustainability has a much broader food products they consume come from production systems application and systems are unsustainable if the public finds where the animals are monitored and evaluated according to a any effect of the system on the environment, human health, or producer organization’s published standards. On-farm animal animal welfare to be unacceptable (Broom, 2019). welfare assessments are centered on maintaining compliance Which factors the public considers more important than others, with standards for raising animals (Weimer et al., 2018) by and the order of their importance, varies over time (Broom, evaluating the impacts of resource and animal management 2019). Farm animal welfare is one factor that remains practices on the health and emotions of the animals. For important to the public and the animal agriculture industry. poultry, animal welfare guidelines are published by the Some actions that improve animal welfare also have positive National Chicken Council (NCC), National Turkey Federation impacts on the environment and human health, but not always.
    [Show full text]
  • Beak Trimming
    POULTRY WELFARE STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES – BEAK TRIMMING SUPPORTING PAPER PUBLIC CONSULTATION VERSION Prepared by the Poultry Standards and Guidelines Drafting Group, Oct 2016 ISSUE Should beak trimming be carried out on poultry and what are acceptable procedures. RATIONALE Feather pecking, peck injury and peck mortality (cannibalism) in poultry occurs at variable rates and may unpredictably become severe and cause high rates of distress, injury and death in a flock (American Veterinary Medical Association, 2010). It occurs in all production systems. Advantages of beak trimming may include ‘reduced pecking, reduced feather pulling, reduced cannibalism, better feather condition, less fearfulness, less nervousness, less chronic stress and decreased mortality. Welfare disadvantages may include reduced ability to feed following beak trimming/treatment, short-term pain, perhaps chronic pain, and acute stress’ (United Egg Producers, 2014). RECOMMENDATIONS The drafting group considered current scientific knowledge and practice and agreed that standards were required to underpin poultry welfare for beak trimming. ANIMAL HEALTH AND WELFARE CONSIDERATIONS Birds may experience acute pain during the procedures of beak trimming due to the presence of nociceptors (pain receptors) in the tip of the beak. Neuroma formation in the beak as a result of beak trimming may also be associated with chronic pain. Beak trimming younger birds (less than one week of age) appears to avoid the long-term chronic pain that can occur in the stump of the beak when older birds are trimmed (Lunam et al., 1996). There are currently two routine beak trimming procedures, either infrared beak trimming of chicks at the hatchery, or hot blade trimming at 10 days old or younger.
    [Show full text]