Early training of hens: effects on the animal distribution in an aviary system

Abstract

Submitted 2020-07-23 | Accepted 2020-08-12 | Available 2020-12-01

https://doi.org/10.15414/afz.2020.23.mi-fpap.269-275

The study aimed at evaluating if the training of hens at their arrival in the production farm affected the distribution of animals in the aviary. Training consisted in raising by hand animals found on litter after turning off the light during the first two weeks. A total of 1,800 hens, aged 17 weeks, were allocated in 8 pens of the aviary and assigned to the trained or untrained groups. From 18 to 26 weeks of age, two operators recorded the number of animals on the different parts of the aviary at two observation hours (morning and afternoon). The training decreased the rate of hens on the floor (23.5% vs. 24.5%; P<0.05) and increased the rate of those on the third level (9.26% vs. 8.73%). The rate of animals on the floor (24.4% vs. 23.6%; P=0.05) and on the second tiers (36.9% vs. 33.2%; P<0.001) was significantly higher at morning hours compared to afternoon, whereas the rate of animals on the first tiers (29.6% to 33.7%; P<0.001) and on the perches of the third level (8.84% to 9.25%; P<0.05) was lower. As the age advanced, the rate of hens on the floor significantly increased (21% to 25% from week 18 to 26); animals at the first tiers decreased from week 18 (35.3%) to weeks 20-25 to reach the minimum value at week 26 (27.9%); differences in animals on the second tiers were erratic; rate of animals on the third level was the lowest (7.13%) at week 18 and the highest (11.7%) at week 26.

Keywords: aviary, laying hens, space use, nest lighting, observation hour

References

Ali, A. et al. (2016). Influence of genetic strain and access to litter on special distribution of 4 strains of laying hens in an aviary system. Poultry Science, 95, 2489–2502. DOI: 10.3382/ps/pew236

Ali, A. et al. (2019a). Daytime occupancy of resources and flooring types by 4 laying hen strains in a commercial-style aviary. Journal of Veterinary Behaviour, 31, 59–66. DOI: 10.1016/j.jveb.2019.03.010

Ali, A. et al. (2019b). Later exposure to perches and nests reduces individual hens’ occupancy of vertical space in an aviary and increases force of falls at night. Poultry Science, 98, 6251–6262. DOI: 10.3382/ps/pez506

Appleby, M.C. et al. (1984). The effect of light on the choice of nests by domestic hens. Applied Animal Ethology, 11, 249–254. DOI: 10.1016/0304-3762(84)90031-2

Brendler, C. and Shrader, L. (2016). Perch use by laying hens in aviary systems. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 182, 9–14. DOI: 10.1016/j.applanim.2016.06.002

Channing, C. et al. (2001). Spatial distribution and behaviour of laying hens housed in an alternative system. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 72, 335–345. DOI: 10.1016/S0168-1591(00)00206-9

Colson, S. et al. (2007). Motivation to dust-bathe of laying hens housed in cages and in aviaries. Animal, 1, 433–437. DOI: 10.1017/S1751731107705323

HY-LINE BROWN (2016). Alternative Systems, Management Guide. Hy-Line International, 49 p.

Hunniford, M.E. et al. (2014). Evidence of competition for nest sites by laying hens in large furnished cages, Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 161, 95–104. DOI: 10.1016/j.applanim.2014.08.005

Hunniford, M.E. and WidowskI, T.M. (2016). Rearing environment and laying location affect pre-laying behaviour in enriched cages. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 181, 205–213. DOI: 10.1016/j.applanim.2016.05.013

Hunniford, M.E. and Widowski, T.M. (2017). Nest alternatives: Adding a wire partition to the scratch area affects nest use and nesting behaviour of laying hens in furnished cages. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 186, 29–34. DOI: 10.1016/j.applanim.2016.10.018

Hunniford, M.E. et al. (2017). Nesting behavior of Hy-Line hens in modified enriched colony cages. Poultry Science, 96, 1515–1523. DOI: 10.3382/ps/pew436

Janczak, A.M. and Riber, A.B. (2015). Review of rearing-related factors affecting the welfare of laying hens. Poultry Science, 94,1454–1469. DOI: 10.3382/ps/pev123

Kjaer, J.B., and Vestergaar, K.S. (1999). Development of feather pecking in relation to light intensity. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 62, 243–254. DOI: 10.1016/S0168-1591(98)00217-2

Kruschwitz, A. et al. (2008). Prelaying behaviour of laying hens (Gallus gallus domesticus) in different free range settings. Archiv für Geflügelkunde72, 84–89.

Li, G. et al. (2018). Design and evaluation of a lighting preference test for laying hens. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 147, 118–125. DOI: 10.1016/j.compag.2018.01.024

Ma, H. et al. (2016). Assessment of lighting needs by W36 laying hens via preference test. Animal 10, 671–680. DOI: 10.1017/S1751731115002384

Maclachlan, S.S. et al. (2020). Influence of later exposure to perches and nests on flock level distribution of hens in an aviary system during lay. Poultry Science, 99, 30–38. DOI: /10.3382/ps/pez524

Mathews, W. and Sumner, D. (2014). Effects of housing system on the costs of commercial egg production. Poultry Science, 94, 552–557. DOI: 10.3382/ps/peu011

Odén, K. et al. (2002). Behaviour of laying hens in two types of aviary systems on 25 commercial farms in Sweden. British Poultry Science, 43, 169–181. DOI: 10.1080/00071660120121364

Oliveira, J.L. et al. (2019). Effects of litter floor access and inclusion of experienced hens in aviary housing on floor eggs, litter condition, air quality, and hen welfare. Poultry Science, 98, 1664–1677. DOI: 10.3382/ps/pey525

Sibanda, T.Z. et al. (2020). Flock use of the range is associated with the use of different components of a multi-tier aviary system in commercial free-range laying hens. British Poultry Science, 61, 97–106. DOI: 10.1080/00071668.2019.1686123

SAS (Statistical Analysis System Institute, Inc.), 2013. SAS/STAT(R) 9.2 User’s Guide, second ed. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA. Retrieved May 10, 2020 from http://support.sas.com/documentation/cdl/en/statug/63033/HTML/default/viewer.htm#glm_toc.htm

Stratmann, A. et al. (2015). Modification of aviary design reduces incidence of falls, collisions and keel bone damage in laying hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 165, 112–123. DOI: 10.1016/j.applanim.2015.01.012

Vestergaard, K. (1982). Dust-bathing in the domestic fowl—diurnal rhythm and dust deprivation. Applied Animal Ethology, 8, 487–495. DOI: 10.1016/0304-3762(82)90061-X

Yang, L. et al. (2018). Adaptability of pullets form cages to a large cage aviary unit system during the initial settling-in period. International Journal of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, 11, 70–76.

Tůmová, E. et al. (2017). Age related changes in laying pattern and egg weight of different laying hen genotypes. Animal Reproduction Science, 183, 21–26. DOI: 10.1016/j.anireprosci.2017.06.006