| Home | << 1 >> |
|
Nicol, C. J., Brown, S. N., Glen, E., Pope, S. J., Short, F. J., Warriss, P. D., et al. (2006). Effects of stocking density, flock size and management on the welfare of laying hens in single-tier aviaries. Br Poult Sci, 47(2), 135–146.
Abstract: Management practices, stocking rate and flock size may affect laying hen welfare but there have been few replicated studies in commercial non-cage systems that investigate this. This study used a broad range of physical and physiological indicators to assess the welfare of hens in 36 commercial flocks. Six laying period treatments were examined with each treatment replicated 6 times. It was not possible to randomly allocate treatments to houses, so treatment and house were largely confounded. Three stocking rates were compared: 7 birds/m(2) (n = 2450), 9 birds/m(2) (n = 3150) and 12 birds/m(2) in either small (n = 2450) or large (n = 4200) flocks. In addition, at 12 birds/m(2), in both small and large flocks, birds were subjected to either standard (SM) or modified (MM) management. MM flocks had nipple drinkers and no nest-box lights. Bone strength, fracture incidence, heterophil:lymphocyte (H:L) ratio, live weight, organ weights, serum creatine, serum osmolality, muscle pH and faecal corticosterone were measured on samples of birds at the end of the rearing period and at the end of lay. During the laying period, mortality, production and integument condition were recorded at regular intervals. Birds housed at 9 birds/m(2) had higher mortality than birds housed at 12 birds/m(2) by the end of lay, but not higher than birds housed at 7 birds/m(2). Birds housed at 7 and 9 birds/m(2) had lower percent liver weight, and worse plumage condition than most of the 12 bird/m(2) treatments. Modified management tended to improve plumage condition. There were no clear effects of flock size on the welfare indicators recorded. At the end of the rearing period fracture incidence was almost negligible and H:L ratio was within a normal range. By the end of lay fracture incidence was 60% and H:L ratio was high, with no treatment effect for either measure. This, together with information on faecal corticosterone, feather loss and mortality, suggests that the welfare of birds in all treatments was relatively poor by the end of lay.
|
|
Nicol, C. J., & Pope, S. J. (1999). The effects of demonstrator social status and prior foraging success on social learning in laying hens. Anim. Behav., 57(1), 163–171.
Abstract: Opportunities for social learning within a group of animals are likely to be influenced by the social dynamics of that group. Some individuals may be more influential demonstrators than others even when there are no differences in their skill level or performance. In this study of domestic hens,Gallus gallus domesticus, differences in demonstrator salience were examined. From 24 separate flocks we selected as demonstrators a dominant cockerel, a dominant hen, a mid-ranking hen or a subordinate hen. Demonstrators were pretrained to perform an operant discrimination task to obtain food. Six observers from each flock individually watched the demonstrator perform the task for four 5-min sessions held on consecutive days. On the fifth day observers were tested individually in the operant chamber. We analysed data from 19 flocks, where there were no quantitative differences in demonstrator performance. Observer hens of relatively high social status performed more correct operant pecks than observer hens of relatively low social status. Demonstrator category also had a significant effect on subsequent observer behaviour. Hens that had observed cockerels performed very few general pecks or operant pecks. Hens that had observed dominant hens performed more operant pecks, but hens that had observed sub-ordinate hens performed more general pecks in the chamber. The results suggested either that there was an interaction between dominance and gender in demonstrator salience or that dominant hens might have been influential because of some factor imperfectly associated with their dominance status. A possible candidate was the foraging ability of the dominant hens. In a second experiment using the same protocol, we manipulated the prior foraging success of dominant hens from four additional flocks but this had no significant effect on their subsequent influence as demonstrators.
|