Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T17:26:34.919Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dichotomy in Choice of Nest Characteristics by Caged Laying Hens

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

C M Sherwin  and
C J Nicol
C M Sherwin*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Husbandry, School of Veterinary Science, University of Bristol, Langford House, Langford, Bristol BS18 7DU, UK
C J Nicol
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Husbandry, School of Veterinary Science, University of Bristol, Langford House, Langford, Bristol BS18 7DU, UK
*
† Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Soiling of nests in modified cages for laying hens might be reduced by using a wire mesh floor for the nest. However, use of such a material might be contrary to the preferences of the hens and compromise their welfare. Twenty-four laying hens were housed singly in modified cages which incorporated two nests. One nest had the standard perforated plastic floor whilst the other had one of two types of metal mesh floor. To determine whether hens preferred any one of the floor types for oviposition, the positions of the nest floors were swapped three times during 110 days. The hens showed a dichotomy in their behaviour after the nestfloors were swapped: the majority (12 of those making a consistent choice) continued to lay in the same nest location (ie location conservative) whereas 6-9 hens changed the nest in which they laid (ie floor type conservative). Only one of the floor type conservative hens preferred to lay on metal mesh. These results show that although the majority of hens showed no apparent aversion to laying in nests with metal mesh floors, 57-68 per cent preferred plastic floors and changed location to lay on this substrate.

Keywords

animal welfarehenslaying behaviourmodified cagesnests
Type
Short Communication
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 3 , Issue 4 , November 1994 , pp. 313 - 320
Copyright
© 1994 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Appleby, M C 1990 Behaviour of laying hens in cages with nest sites. British Poultry Science 31: 71–80CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Appleby, M C and McRae, H E 1986 The individual nest box as a super-stimulus for domestic hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 15: 169–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Appleby, M C, McRae, H E, Duncan, I J H and Bisazza, A 1984a Choice of social conditions by laying hens. British Poultry Science 25: 111–117Google Scholar
Appleby, M C, McRae, H E and Peitz, B E 1984b The effect of light on the choice of nests by domestic hens. Applied Animal Ethology 11: 249–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Appleby, M C and Smith, S F 1991 Design of nest boxes for laying cages. British Poultry Science 32: 667–678Google Scholar
Barcham, J R 1976 A comparison of the behaviour and production of laying hens in experimental and conventional battery cages. Applied Animal Ethology 2: 291–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawkins, M 1990 From an animal’s point of view: motivation, fitness, and animal welfare. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13: 1–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, I J H and Kite, V G 1987 Some investigations into motivation in the domestic fowl. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 18: 387–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, I J H, Savory, C J and Wood-Gush, DGM 1978 Observations on the reproductive behaviour of domestic fowl in the wild. Applied Animal Ethology 4: 29–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, I J H and Wood-Gush, DGM 1972 An analysis of displacement preening in the domestic fowl. Animal Behaviour 20: 68–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huber, H V, Folsch, D W and Stahli, U 1985 Influence of various nesting materials on nestsite selection of the domestic hen. British Poultry Science 26: 367–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes B 0 1993 Choice between artificial turf and wire floor as nest sites in individually caged laying hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 36: 327–335Google Scholar
Hughes, B O, Duncan, I J H and Brown, M F 1989 The performance of nest building by domestic hens: is it more important than the construction of a nest? Animal Behaviour 37: 210–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kite, V G 1985 Does a hen require a nest? Proceedings of the 2nd European Symposium on Poultry Welfare, Celle, West Germany, 10-13 June 1985 pp 118–135. German Branch of WPS A: CelleGoogle Scholar
Mcijsser F M and Hughes B 0 1989 Comparative analysis of pre-laying behaviour in battery cages and in three alternative systems. British Poultry Science 30: 747–760CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reed, H J and Nicol, C J 1992 The effects of nest linings, pecking strips and partitioning on nest use and behaviour in modified battery cages. British Poultry Science 33: 719–727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rietveld-Piepers, B, Blokhuis, H J and Wiepkema, P R 1985 Egg-laying behaviour and nestsite selection of domestic hens kept in small floor-pens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 14: 75–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, E S, Appleby, M C, Hogarth, G S and Hughes, B O 1989 Modified cages for laying hens: a pilot trial. Research and Development in Agriculture 6: 107–114Google Scholar
Sherwin, C M and Nicol, C J 1992 The behaviour and production of laying hens in three prototypes of cages incorporating nests. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 35: 41–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherwin, C M and Nicol, C J 1993a A descriptive account of the pre-laying behaviour of hens housed individually in modified cages with nests. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 38: 49–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherwin, C M and Nicol, C J 1993b Factors influencing floor-laying by hens in modified cages. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 36: 211–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, S F, Appleby, M C and Hughes, B O 1990 Problem solving by domestic hens: opening doors to reach nest sites. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 28: 287–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sokal, R R and Rohlf, F J 1981 Biometry. W H Freeman and Company: New YorkGoogle Scholar
Wood-Gush, DGM 1963 The control of the nesting behaviour of the domestic hen. I: The role of the oviduct. Animal Behaviour 11: 293–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood-Gush, DGM 1972 Strain differences in response to sub-optimal stimuli in the fowl. Animal Behaviour 20: 72–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood-Gush, DGM and Gilbert, A B 1969 Observations on the laying behaviour of hens in battery cages. British Poultry Science 10: 29–36CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed