Effects of hatching on-farm on behaviour, first week performance, fear level and range use of organic broilers

Jessen, Camilla Toldevar; Foldager, Leslie; Riber, Anja B.

doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2021.105319

Cited by 12 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It likely reflects that growth rate, which is higher in males than in females, and gait score are positively correlated ( Kestin et al., 2001 ; Angel, 2007 ). We found no difference between treatments in the use of an outdoor area (reported in Jessen et al., 2021 ), which aligns well with the lack of treatment effect on gait score, as leg health is a major contributing factor in whether or not an outdoor area will be properly utilized by broilers ( Taylor et al., 2020 ).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 78%

“…There were 3 pop-holes (L × H: 3.5 m × 0.5 m, each) in each section, which were opened on D35, and each treatment flock had immediately thereafter access to a covered veranda (L × W: 22 m × 4 m) and a range (W × L: approximately 125 m × 325 m), each range being separated with a wire mesh fence (H: 1 m). For full details on animals and housing, see Jessen et al. (2021) .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two of the barns were used for 2 replicates each, and the other 2 for one replicate each. The replicates were placed consecutively with 14 d in between each replicate, with the exception that replicates 3 and 4 were separated by 28 d. For additional information on the treatments in the present study, see Jessen et al. (2021) .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, the effect of transport was examined on chick quality of the hatchery-hatched chicks, with the expectation that chick reflex would be poorer in transported chicks. The effect of hatching location on behavior, first week growth, fear level, and use of an outdoor range was also examined ( Jessen et al., 2021 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Effects of hatching on-farm on performance and welfare of organic broilers

2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As an alternative to traditional hatching in the hatchery, fertilized incubated eggs can be placed in the rearing barn on embryonic d 18 for hatching to occur on-farm, omitting several hatchery procedures, and transport of day-old chicks. In addition, this practice further allows newly hatched chicks access to feed and water immediately post-hatch. The aim of the present study was to examine welfare implications of hatching slower-growing organic broilers on-farm ( OF ) using the One2Born system (One2Born, Uden, the Netherlands). Hatchery-hatched chicks ( HC ) transported to the farm were used as control. Six flocks of both treatments, each comprising approximately 3,600 mixed-sex Hubbard JA57 ColorYield broilers, housed with veranda and outdoor access were included in the study. Compared to HC, the hatchability was higher in OF chicks (95.3% vs. 94.8%; P = 0.0097), whereas the number of second grade chicks was lower (11.6% vs. 16.1%; P < 0.0001). The chick quality was lower for OF than HC (odds ratio: 1.79; P = 0.0009), but this was not reflected in the first week mortality (OF: 0.41%, HC: 0.99%; P < 0.0001) or total mortality (OF: 1.51%, HC: 2.20%; P < 0.0001). No difference was found between treatments for the live body weight at slaughter age ( P = 0.73). Breast blisters were more common in HC males than in OF males and in females from both treatments ( P = 0.038), whereas OF males and females from the 2 treatments did not differ ( P = 0.91). There was no effect of treatment on litter quality, footpad dermatitis, gait, skin injuries, and rejection rates at slaughter ( P ≥ 0.35). In conclusion, OF hatching appears to be a viable concept, resulting in reduced mortality and increased hatchability, though knowledge on the topic is sparse. Therefore, more research should be addressed to the welfare implications of hatching OF, specifically to impacts on litter quality, footpad dermatitis, and how chick quality impacts other animal welfare indicators.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 78%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effects of hatching on-farm on performance and welfare of organic broilers

2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Alternatively, a place where chickens can access feed and water immediately after hatch, such as an on-farm hatching system, is increasingly being used ( 39 ). On-farm hatching can result in better performance, reduced first week or total mortality, and reduced footpad dermatitis ( 39 – 43 ), and it may also affect fear-related responses ( 42 , 44 ), although the latter could not be confirmed by ( 45 ). On-farm hatching may thus have long-term consequences for welfare, health, and production.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early life environment affects behavior, welfare, gut microbiome composition, and diversity in broiler chickens

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to identify whether early-life conditions in broiler chickens could affect their behavior and welfare, and whether or not this was associated with an altered gut microbiome composition or diversity. Broilers were tested in a 2 x 2 factorial design with hatching conditions [home pen (OH) or at the hatchery (HH)] and enrichment (dark brooder (EE) or no brooder (NE) until 14 days of age) as factors (N = 6 per treatment combination). Microbiota composition was measured in the jejunum on days (d) 7, 14, and 35 and in pooled fecal samples on day 14. A novel environment test (NET) was performed on days 1 and 11, and the behavior was observed on days 6, 13, and 33. On day 35, composite asymmetry was determined and footpad dermatitis and hock burn were scored. In their home pen, HH showed more locomotion than OH (P = 0.05), and NE were sitting more and showed more comfort behavior than EE at all ages (P <0.001 and P = 0.001, respectively). On days 6 and 13 NE showed more eating and litter pecking while sitting, but on day 33 the opposite was found (age*enrichment: P = 0.05 and P <0.01, respectively). On days 1 and 11, HH showed more social reinstatement in the NET than OH, and EE showed more social reinstatement than NE (P <0.05). Composite asymmetry scores were lower for EE than NE (P <0.05). EE also had less footpad dermatitis and hock burn than NE (P <0.001). Within OH, NE had a more diverse fecal and jejunal microbiome compared to EE on day 14 (feces: observed richness: P = 0.052; jejunum: observed richness and Shannon: P <0.05); the principal component analysis (PCA) showed differences between NE and EE within both HH and OH in fecal samples on day 14, as well as significant differences in bacterial genera such as Lactobacillus and Lachnospiraceae (P <0.05). On day 35, PCA in jejunal samples only showed a trend (P = 0.068) for differences between NE vs. EE within the OH. In conclusion, these results suggest that especially the dark brooder affected the behavior and had a positive effect on welfare as well as affected the composition and diversity of the microbiome. Whether or not the behavior was modulated by the microbiome or vice versa remains to be investigated.

show abstract