The relative preferences for feathers, straw, wood-shavings and sand for dustbathing, pecking and scratching in domestic chicks

Sanotra, G. S.; Vestergaard, K.; Agger, Jens Frederik; Lawson, Lartey Godwin

doi:10.1016/0168-1591(95)00562-7

Cited by 78 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…On the other hand, this material may not be adequate or stimulating for dust bathing because it maybe too abrasive. The present results cannot be compared with other studies, such as that of Sanotra et al (1995) because they did not use rice hulls as substrate; however, they found that scratching was very frequent in straw, and that scratching and pecking preferences were different from those for dust bathing. Gunnarsson et al (2000) also reported that straw was preferred for pecking and scratching, but not for dust bathing, but did not test rice hulls either.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 96%

“…This preference for sand was previously reported by Shields et al (2004) and Sanotra et al (1995), and it is quite clear that if the birds have the possibility, they perform these baths on sand. In addition, it was observed that wood shavings were more frequently chosen than rice hulls or straw to perform dust bathing.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

“…In poultry production, attempts have been made to use and test several types of material for litter: refined gypsum (Wyatt & Goodman, 1992;Grimes et al, 2006), recycled paper chips from waste newspapers (Lien et al, 1992), pelletized newspaper (Frame et al, 2002;Grimes et al, 2006), tree core-like kenaf core (Malone et al, 1990;Brake et al, 1993), particleboard residues (Hester et al, 1997), leaves (Willis et al, 1997), sand (Bilgili et al, 1999;Arnould et al, 2004), cotton waste (Grimes et al, 2006), hazelnut husks or wheat stalks (Sarica & Cam, 2000), wood shavings (Shields et al, 2005;Macklin et al, 2005), rice hulls (Swain & Sundaram, 2000;Shields et al, 2004), rice hull ashes (Chamblee et al, 2003), coffee husk (Ortiz et al, 2003;Ortiz et al, 2006), saw dust (Mendes et al, 2011), coir dust (Swain & Sundaram, 2000), straw (Al Homidan & Robertson,2003), feathers (Sanotra et al, 1995;Gunnarson et al, 2000), sugarcane bagasse or peat (Petherick & Duncan, 1989). The use of any of these substrates most often depends on the availability in each area and at each moment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this sense, distinct mixtures of different materials have been proposed as bedding for poultry (e.g. Sanotra et al, 1995;Willis et al, 1997;Al Homidan & Robertson, 2003). The addition of other products to improve bird performance and litter characteristics is also being investigated (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several of the cited studies have been carried out through preference or choice tests (Shields et al, 2004;Sanotra et al,1995). These two terms are not the same, according to Kirkden and Pajor (2006): preference denotes a difference between the strength of motivation to obtain or avoid something, while choice describes characteristics of an animal (e.g., an animal prefers bananas to oranges).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Behavior of broiler chickens in four different substrates: a choice test

Villagrá¹,

Olivas²,

Althaus³

et al. 2014

Rev. Bras. Cienc. Avic.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to determine the selection of bedding material by broiler chickens during the rearing period and whether the choice was determinant to their performing a specific behavior. To achieve this objective, a choice test was designed. A choice pen was constructed where birds could move freely around the four selected materials (straw, wood shavings, rice hulls and sand). Chickens were introduced in this pen in four groups of eight birds, three days a week for one hour per day and group, for four weeks. The location and the activity performed by each broiler were recorded every five minutes. Results showed a preference for sand compared with the other three substrates. However, differences between the behaviors performed in each bedding material were shown mainly for resting (preferably performed on wood shavings and straw), dust bathing (on sand), pecking and scratching (on rice hulls). Other factors, such as the time of day, were also found to have effects on fighting and drinking, and changes in behavioral patterns (resting, preening, eating, standing and pecking) were also detected as broilers grew older.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 96%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Behavior of broiler chickens in four different substrates: a choice test

Villagrá¹,

Olivas²,

Althaus³

et al. 2014

Rev. Bras. Cienc. Avic.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Development of dustbathing behavior sequences in the domestic fowl: The significance of functional experience

Larsen¹,

Vestergaard²,

Hogan

2000

Dev. Psychobiol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The development of the sequential structure of dustbathing bouts was studied in domestic egg‐layer chicks from hatching until 23 days of age using a first order Markov chain model analysis. Chicks were reared either with access to sand (“sand chicks”) or on a wire floor (“wire chicks”). All chicks in both groups developed a basic structure of the elements pecking, bill raking, ground scratching, vertical wingshaking, head rubbing, and side rubbing. Nonetheless, there was more cohesion in the bouts of sand chicks than in those of wire chicks: wire chicks had more pauses in their bouts and performed more elements while standing; also, allopecking (feather‐pecking) and preening were incorporated into their bouts. We conclude that the basic structure of dustbathing bouts develops even in the absence of functional experience with feedback from sand. However, absence of normal feedback can lead to problems consisting of interruptions and feather‐directed behavior. © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Dev Psychobiol 37: 5–12, 2000

show abstract

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

The relative preferences for feathers, straw, wood-shavings and sand for dustbathing, pecking and scratching in domestic chicks

Cited by 78 publications

References 11 publications

Behavior of broiler chickens in four different substrates: a choice test

Behavior of broiler chickens in four different substrates: a choice test

Development of dustbathing behavior sequences in the domestic fowl: The significance of functional experience

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About