Effects of separation of resources on behaviour, physical condition and production of laying hens in furnished cages

Abstract

1. Based on our previous studies, we designed a medium-sized furnished cage with a dust bath and nest box on both sides of the cage (MFS) and evaluated its usefulness. 2. We used 180 White Leghorn layers. At the age of 17 weeks, the birds were distributed at random into one of the 4 cage designs: conventional cages (CC; 6 cages and 5 hens per cage), small (SF; 6 cages and 5 hens per cage) and medium furnished cages (MFL; 6 cages and 10 hens per cage) with a 'localised' dust bath and nest box on one side of the cage, and MFS (6 cages and 10 hens per cage). The total allocation of resources per bird was similar for all furnished cage designs. Behaviour, physical condition and production were measured in each cage. 3. Moving was more frequent in MFS and MFL than in CC and SF. The proportion of hens performing aggressive pecking and severe feather pecking was higher in MFL than CC and SF. These aggressive interactions occurred frequently in the dust bath area in MFL; however, these tendencies were not found in MFS. Egg production and egg mass were lower in MFL than in SF, while the production in MFS was similar to those in CC and SF. MFS hens laid eggs on the cage floor more often than in MFL. 4. In conclusion, these results demonstrate the possible usefulness of MFS. However, some inconsistent results and ways of improving MFS design were also identified.

The effects of furnished cages on the behaviour of laying hens in the post-stress adaptation period.

“…The difference between the results of the researches was probably due to cage design. Actually, resting activity was expected to be lower since birds housed in furnished cages may express many natural behaviours that cannot be expressed by birds housed in barren cage (Mench, 1998, Shimmura et al, 2009).…”

“…This report fit in the current study. Yet it must be taken into consideration that aggressive behaviours in furnished cages were related to cage size (Shimmura, et al, 2009), cage design (Li et al, 2016) or cage density (Appleby et al, 2002). The decrease of aggressive behaviours in birds housed in furnished cages was supposed to be due to two factors.…”

Development of furnished cages re‐using conventional cages for laying hens: Behaviour, physical condition and productivity

“…However, when the dust bath area has been visually divided from the rest of the cage, aggressive pecking and feather pecking have decreased, resulting in lower feather damage (Shimmura et al . , ). Therefore, visual separation between the main cage area and the integrated area by a plastic sheet might have been effective in decreasing the aggressive interactions in the present study.…”

Non-Specific Reactivity of Hens’ Organism Under the Influence of the Group Size Change

“…[31], хоча на практиці досягають 100 гол., тому потребують уточнення під час використання 12-ярусних кліткових батарей класичних конструкцій. Однак, вплив величини угрупування курей на їх організм, за кліткового утримання з однаковою забезпеченістю площею, вивчався в основному на невеликих групах птиці, розміром до 10 голів [23,24,43] або ж в дослідах використовували клітки різних конструкцій та виробників, що унеможливлює їх адекватне порівняння [44]. Таким чином, існує необхідність вивчення впливу величини угрупування на організм курей, за однакової щільності посадки несучок в клітках-аналогах за конструкцією.…”