Changes in Substrate Access Did Not Affect Early Feather-Pecking Behavior in Two Strains of Laying Hen Chicks

Dixon, Laura; Duncan, Ian

doi:10.1080/10888700903369248

Cited by 12 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, the authors concluded that a suitable feed substrate promotes foraging behaviour and SFP reduction or even delay. Similar results were obtained by Dixon & Duncan, , who also observed that sand‐bath substrates, when provided as the only manipulable material in the husbandry environment, are not able to reduce SFP. In this comparison, chicks were kept on wired floors or on solid floors covered with peat moss.…”

Section: Effects Of Littersupporting

confidence: 87%

Effects of litter and additional enrichment elements on the occurrence of feather pecking in pullets and laying hens – A focused review

Schreiter¹,

Damme

Borell

et al. 2019

Veterinary Medicine & Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Severe feather pecking (SFP) is a serious problem in the egg production industry with regard to animal welfare and performance. The multifactorial causes of SFP are discussed in the areas of genetics, feeding, husbandry, stable climate and management. Several studies on the influence of manipulable material on the incidence of SFP in different environments and housing systems have been performed. This review presents current knowledge on the effects of litter and additional enrichment elements on the occurrence of SFP in pullets and laying hens. Because SFP is associated with foraging and feed intake behaviour, the provision of manipulable material in the husbandry environment is an approach that is intended to reduce the occurrence of SFP by adequate exercise of these behaviours. As shown in the literature, the positive effect of enrichment and litter substrate on SFP in a low‐complexity cage environment is evident. On the other hand, consistent results have not been reported on the influence of additional enrichment material in housing systems with litter substrate, which represent the most common type of husbandry in Northwestern Europe. Thus, further research is recommended.

show abstract

Section: Effects Of Littersupporting

confidence: 87%

Effects of litter and additional enrichment elements on the occurrence of feather pecking in pullets and laying hens – A focused review

Schreiter¹,

Damme

Borell

et al. 2019

Veterinary Medicine & Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In line with his observations, Huber-Eicher and Wechsler (1997) found that access to straw, a foraging substrate, did decrease FP, but access to sand, a dustbathing substrate, did not or only to a limited extent. This is supported by a study showing that peat in early rearing (that is preferred for dustbathing but not for foraging) did not reduce early FP behaviour (Dixon and Duncan, 2010). In a study by Johnsen et al(1998), pullets were raised on sand, straw, or wire between 0-4 weeks of age.…”

Section: Causes Of Feather Pecking and The Importance Of Littermentioning

confidence: 86%

The prevention and control of feather pecking in laying hens: identifying the underlying principles

Rodenburg

Krimpen

Jong

et al. 2013

World's Poultry Science Journal

204

203

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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. The aim of this review paper is to provide a detailed overview of underlying principles of FP. FP is affected by many different factors and any approach to prevent or reduce FP in commercial flocks should acknowledge that fact and use a multifactorial approach to address this issue. Two forms of FP can be distinguished: gentle FP and severe FP. Severe FP causes the most welfare issues in commercial flocks. Severe FP is clearly related to feeding and foraging behaviour and its development seems to be enhanced in conditions where birds have difficulty in coping with environmental stressors. Stimulating feeding and foraging behaviour by providing high-fibre diets and suitable litter from an early age onwards, and controlling fear and stress levels

show abstract

“…현재 피트모스에 대한 국내 연구로는 농업과 원예분야에 서 토양의 활용방안에 대한 연구가 대부분이고 (Park et al, 2013;Kim et al, 2011;Na et al, 2013), 국외에서는 축산업에 관련된 연구는 아주 제한적이다 (Dixon and Duncan, 2010;Meng et al, 2015). 최근에는 항염증제로서 피트모스 추출물 의 효과에 대한 연구 결과가 발표되었다 (Choi et al, 2014 (Feddes et al, 2002;Ghazi et al, 2014 본 연구에서는 사료첨가제로서 피트모스 추출물이 육계 의 생산성에 미치는 영향을 조사하였다.…”

unclassified

“…지금까지 피트모스 는 식물의 성장촉진제 또는 비료 대체제로 많이 이용되고 있 고 (Hu et al, 2009;MacCarthy, 1976), 국내에서는 농업과 원 예분야에서 토양의 활용방안에 대한 연구가 대부분일 뿐 (Park et al, 2013;Mihyang et al, 2011;Na et al, 2013), 축산분야 에서 이용된 적은 없었다. 국외 축산 연구에서는 소수의 연 구자들이 바닥재로서 피트모스의 가능성에 대하여 연구하였 을 뿐이다 (Dixon and Duncan, 2010;Meng et al, 2015). 여 러 가지 바닥재의 재료들 중 피트모스의 비율을 적절히 조 정한다면, 사육환경의 질을 높이는 효과를 볼 수 있다.…”

unclassified

“…피트 모스의 사용은 축사의 환경에 영향을 미칠 뿐만 아니라, 동 물의 행동에도 영향을 미쳤다. 바닥재로서 피트모스를 2주 동안 사용한 결과, 1∼2주령의 암탉이 깃털을 쪼는 행동의 빈도수가 대조구보다 낮아졌고, 땅을 쪼거나 긁는 행동의 빈도수는 대조구보다 증가하였다 (Dixon and Duncan, 2010 (Trampel et al, 2005)과 사료 내 색소 의 함량에 따라서 영향을 받는 것으로 알려져 있다 (Loetscher et al, 2013). 사료 내 피트모스 함량이 0.8% 이상의 처리구 는 사료섭취량이 감소한 반면, 사료 내 색소의 함량이 증가하 여 간의 명도와 노란 정도가 증가한 것으로 사료된다.…”

unclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of Dietary Peat Moss on Performance in Broilers

Kim¹,

Kang²,

Yang³

et al. 2015

Korean Journal of Poultry Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Peat moss has been found to be useful as a plant growth substance, fertilizer, and soil solution. It is not known, however, whether dietary peat moss affects performance in broilers. In the present study, we investigated the effects of dietary peat moss as a feed ingredient in broilers. Experimental diets were prepared by mixing basal feed with PM at 0.0, 0.2, 0.4, 0.8, and 1.6%. In experiment 1, 150 14-day-old Ross broiler chicks were housed for 2 weeks in 15 pens that were randomly assigned into five groups (0.0%, 0.2%, 0.4%, 0.8% and 1.6% PM). Dietary peat moss at 0.2% and 0.4% significantly increased the water intake, body weight, weight gain and feed efficiency compared with the control (0.0% PM, P<0.05) but did not affect feed intake. Higher levels of PM (0.8 and 1.6%) significantly decreased feed intake, body weight and weight gain. In experiment 2, 198 7-day-old Ross chicks were housed for 3 weeks in nine pens that were randomly assigned into three groups (0.0%, 0.2% and 0.4% PM). When the broilers were fed with dietary peat moss for 3 weeks, the peat moss effects disappeared. The results of the current study show that low amounts of dietary peat moss may exert beneficial effects on performance in broilers.

show abstract

Changes in Substrate Access Did Not Affect Early Feather-Pecking Behavior in Two Strains of Laying Hen Chicks

Cited by 12 publications

References 31 publications

Effects of litter and additional enrichment elements on the occurrence of feather pecking in pullets and laying hens – A focused review

Effects of litter and additional enrichment elements on the occurrence of feather pecking in pullets and laying hens – A focused review

The prevention and control of feather pecking in laying hens: identifying the underlying principles

Effects of Dietary Peat Moss on Performance in Broilers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About