11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Linear Space Requirements and Perch Use of Conventional Layer Hybrids and Dual-Purpose Hens in an Aviary System

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Roosting on elevated perches is a behavioral priority in laying hens, which is well-investigated in both experimental and commercial settings. However, little is known about perching behavior and perch requirements of alternative hybrids, such as dual-purpose hens. The aim of the present study was to gain basic knowledge on linear space requirements and perching patterns of dual-purpose hens (Lohmann Dual, LD) by comparing them to a conventional layer line (Lohmann Brown plus, LB+). About 3,700 hens per genetic strain were housed in two consecutive batches in four compartments of an aviary system with metal perches at different heights above a grid tier. As an indicator for required perching space, the body widths of a sample of individual hens was determined by image analyses. In addition, the use of five differently located perches and one cross-brace (structural element of the aviary system) was assessed by photo-based observations during the light and the dark phase. The LD hens measured an average body width of 15.95 ± 0.08 cm, and thus occupied about 7% more linear space than the LB+ hens (14.77 ± 0.08 cm body width; P < 0.05). Overall perch use was higher during the dark compared to the light phase, both in the LB+ (3.89 ± 0.08 vs. 0.79 ± 0.03 hens/m, P < 0.05) and the LD hens (2.88 ± 0.06 vs. 0.86 ± 0.03 hens/m, P < 0.05). With a maximum of 8.17 hens/m, the LB+ hens preferred to roost on the highest perches available at night. In contrast, the LD hens also rested on the lowest perches, and showed a more even use of all perches provided. During the day, the LD hens seemed to need lower perches for easy access to the feeders, whereas more LB+ hens used the higher perches, presumably to avoid threatening conspecifics. The present results show that preferences for certain perch locations differed between conventional layers and dual-purpose hens, whereas diurnal patterns of perch use were similar in both hybrids. Therefore, perches should be designed and located in an aviary system to meet the specific preferences and behavioral needs of the hybrid housed.

          Related collections

          Most cited references20

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Guidelines for the ethical use of animals in applied ethology studies

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Behavioural needs, priorities and preferences of laying hens

            We review the behavioural needs, priorities and preferences of laying hens for increased space, perching, nesting, foraging and dustbathing behaviour. Hens make full use of and may work to gain access to perches, however it is not yet known how perching ranks in comparison with otherbehaviours. Laying hens appearto have an instinctive need to perform pre-laying (nest-building) behaviour and have a strong preference for a discrete, enclosed nest site, for which they will work hard to gain access as oviposition approaches. Access to a nest site is a high-ranking priority for laying hens, preferred over food at this time. Foraging is a behavioural need, with peat, sand and wood shavings preferred substrates in choice experiments. There is no reduction in time spent foraging when a cost is imposed, nor when feed is freely available. Dustbathing is currently viewed as a behavioural need, as the extent to which hens value dustbathing is not known. Bird preferences for space are complex and confounded by interactions between group size and stocking density. There is some evidence that priority for space varies during the day and increases when the total space available to a group of birds is restricted, and that greater priority is given to space than to small group size. The presence of apparently purposeless behaviour, of high levels of aggression or redirected behaviours such as feather pecking and cannibalism are indicators that the housing system is not meeting the behavioural needs of the hens and hence is not satisfactory forbird welfare.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Group size and perching behaviour in young domestic fowl.

              To test the hypothesis that young domestic fowl perform less perch-related antipredator behaviour with increasing group size, White Leghorn pullets were reared in four replicate groups of 15, 30, 60 and 120 at a constant density of 5 birds/m(2). Each pen contained perches 20, 40 and 60cm above the ground. Perch space per bird per perch level was the same for all groups. It was predicted that, with increasing group size, domestic fowl would (1) spend less time on perches (i.e. more time down on the floor); (2) be less vigilant while perching; (3) spend relatively more time preening down on the floor. As predicted, the proportion of 3- to 18-week-old birds roosting on perches during scans throughout the photoperiod decreased with increasing group size, from 41+/-1.7% in groups of 15 birds to 33+/-1.6% in groups of 120 birds. This effect was due to reduced use of the lower perches; use of the highest perches was high at all group sizes. The proportion of birds vigilant on the highest perches of those present on that perch level decreased with increasing group size. The proportion of birds engaged in the vulnerable activity of preening down on the floor increased with group size. The frequency of transitions between floor and perches was not affected by group size but birds received more disturbances from other birds when on the top perch level in the larger groups. Thus, the decline in vigilance on the top perch level with increasing group size was not due to reduced disturbance from other birds. In conclusion, despite domestication and protection from non-human predators, changes in the use of perches by young domestic fowl with increasing group size were consistent with the antipredator hypothesis.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Vet Sci
                Front Vet Sci
                Front. Vet. Sci.
                Frontiers in Veterinary Science
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                2297-1769
                09 July 2019
                2019
                : 6
                : 231
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Institute for Animal Hygiene, Animal Welfare and Farm Animal Behaviour, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover , Hanover, Germany
                [2] 2Adaptation Physiology Group, Wageningen University and Research , Wageningen, Netherlands
                Author notes

                Edited by: Sabine G. Gebhardt-Henrich, University of Bern, Switzerland

                Reviewed by: Kai Liu, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong; Janice M. Siegford, Michigan State University, United States

                *Correspondence: Mona F. Giersberg mona.giersberg@ 123456wur.nl

                This article was submitted to Animal Behavior and Welfare, a section of the journal Frontiers in Veterinary Science

                Article
                10.3389/fvets.2019.00231
                6629764
                31338373
                8270931a-311c-4ac0-80bb-2d56f0085680
                Copyright © 2019 Giersberg, Spindler and Kemper.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 13 May 2019
                : 26 June 2019
                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 2, Equations: 0, References: 32, Pages: 9, Words: 7333
                Categories
                Veterinary Science
                Original Research

                laying hen,roosting,aviary,image analysis,space requirement,welfare

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content354

                Cited by11

                Most referenced authors411