Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T14:07:48.126Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Early enrichment in free-range laying hens: effects on ranging behaviour, welfare and response to stressors

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 July 2017

D. L. M. Campbell ,
G. N. Hinch ,
J. A. Downing  and
C. Lee
D. L. M. Campbell*
Affiliation:
School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Agriculture and Food, Armidale, NSW 2350, Australia
G. N. Hinch
Affiliation:
School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia
J. A. Downing
Affiliation:
School of Life and Environmental Science, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
C. Lee
Affiliation:
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Agriculture and Food, Armidale, NSW 2350, Australia
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Free-range laying hen systems are increasing within Australia. The pullets for these systems are typically reared indoors before being provided first range access around 21 to 26 weeks of age. Thus, the rearing and laying environments are disparate and hens may not adapt well to free-range housing. In this study, we reared 290 Hy-Line® Brown day-old chicks divided into two rooms each with feed, water and litter. In the enriched room, multiple structural, manipulable, visual and auditory stimuli were also provided from 4 to 21 days, the non-enriched room had no additional objects or stimuli. Pullets were transferred to the laying facility at 12 weeks of age and divided into six pens (three enriched-reared, three non-enriched-reared) with identical indoor resources and outdoor range area. All birds were first provided range access at 21 weeks of age. Video observations of natural disturbance behaviours on the range at 22 to 23 and 33 to 34 weeks of age showed no differences in frequency of disturbance occurrences between treatment groups (P=0.09) but a decrease in disturbance occurrences over time (P<0.0001). Radio-frequency identification tracking of individually tagged birds from 21 to 37 weeks of age showed enriched birds on average, spent less time on the range each day (P<0.04) but with a higher number of range visits than non-enriched birds from 21 to 24 weeks of age (P=0.01). Enriched birds accessed the range on more days (P=0.03) but over time, most birds in both treatment groups accessed the range daily. Basic external health scoring showed minimal differences between treatment groups with most birds in visibly good condition. At 38 weeks of age all birds were locked inside for 2 days and from 40 to 42 weeks of age the outdoor range was reduced to 20% of its original size to simulate stressful events. The eggs from non-enriched birds had higher corticosterone concentrations following lock-in and 2 weeks following range reduction compared with the concentrations within eggs from enriched birds (P<0.0001). Correspondingly, the enriched hens showing a greater increase in the number of visits following range area reduction compared to non-enriched hens (P=0.02). Only one rearing room per treatment was used but these preliminary data indicate 3 weeks of early enrichment had some long-term effects on hen ranging behaviour and enhanced hen’s adaptability to environmental stressors.

Keywords

RFIDrange usecorticosteronehealthadaptabilityrearing
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 12 , Issue 3 , March 2018 , pp. 575 - 584
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Altan, Ö, Şeremet, Ç and Bayraktar, H 2013. The effects of early environmental enrichment on performance, fear and physiological responses to acute stress of broiler. Archiv für Geflügelkunde 77, 23–28.Google Scholar
Barrett, J, Rayner, AC, Gill, R, Willings, TH and Bright, A 2014. Smothering in UK free-range flocks. Part 1: incidence, location, timing and management. Veterinary Record 175, 19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brantsæter, M, Nordgreen, J, Rodenburg, TB, Tahamtani, FM, Popova, A and Janczak, AM 2016a. Exposure to increased environmental complexity during rearing reduces fearfulness and increases use of three-dimensional space in laying hens (Gallus gallus domesticus). Frontiers in Veterinary Science 3, 14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brantsæter, M, Tahamtani, FM, Moe, RO, Hansen, TB, Orritt, R, Nicol, C and Janczak, AM 2016b. Rearing laying hens in aviaries reduces fearfulness following transfer to furnished cages. Frontiers in Veterinary Science 3, 13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bray, HJ and Ankeny, RA 2017. Happy chickens lay tastier eggs: motivations for buying free-range eggs in Australia. Anthrozoös 30, 213–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, DLM, Hinch, GN, Downing, JA and Lee, C 2016. Fear and coping styles of outdoor-preferring, moderate-outdoor and indoor-preferring free-range laying hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 185, 73–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, DLM, Hinch, GN, Dyall, T, Warin, L, Little, B and Lee, C 2017. Outdoor stocking density in free-range laying hens: radio-frequency identification of impacts on range use. Animal 11, 121–130.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Downing, J 2012. Non-invasive assessment of stress in commercial housing systems. Final report US108A. Australian Egg Corporation Limited, North Sydney, NSW, Australia.Google Scholar
Downing, JA and Bryden, WL 2008. Determination of corticosterone concentrations in egg albumen: a non-invasive indicator of stress in laying hens. Physiology & Behavior 95, 381–387.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Elfwing, M, Nätt, D, Goerlich-Jansson, VC, Persson, M, Hjelm, J and Jensen, P 2015. Early stress causes sex-specific, long-life changes in behaviour, levels of gonadal hormones, and gene expression in chickens. PLoS One 10, e0125808.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freire, R and Cheng, HW 2004. Experience-dependent changes in the hippocampus of domestic chicks: a model for spatial memory. European Journal of Neuroscience 20, 1065–1068.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garner, JP, Mason, GJ and Smith, R 2003. Stereotypic route-tracing in experimentally caged songbirds correlates with general behavioural disinhibition. Animal Behaviour 66, 711–727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilani, A.-M, Knowles, TG and Nicol, CJ 2014. Factors affecting ranging behaviour in young and adult laying hens. British Poultry Science 55, 127–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grigor, PN, Hughes, BO and Appleby, MC 1995. Effects of regular handling and exposure to an outside area on subsequent fearfulness and dispersal in domestic hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 44, 47–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hy-Line® International 2014. Hy-Line® Brown management guide, commercial layers. Hy-Line® International, West Des Moines, IA, USA.Google Scholar
Janczak, AM and Riber, AB 2015. Review of rearing-related factors affecting the welfare of laying hens. Poultry Science 94, 1454–1469.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jones, RB and Waddington, D 1992. Modification of fear in domestic chicks, Gallus gallus domesticus, via regular handling and early environmental enrichment. Animal Behaviour 43, 1021–1033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kjaer, JB, Würbel, H and Schrader, L 2015. Perseveration in a guessing task by laying hens selected for high or low levels of feather pecking does not support classification of feather pecking as a stereotypy. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 168, 56–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knudsen, EI 2004. Sensitive periods in the development of the brain and behavior. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 18, 1412–1425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krause, ET, Naguib, M, Trillmich, F and Schrader, L 2006. The effects of short term enrichment on learning in chickens from a laying strain (Gallus gallus domesticus). Applied Animal Behaviour Science 101, 318–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, G, Burn, CC, Dallaire, JA, Kroshko, J, McDonald Kincaid, H and Jeschke, JM 2013. Plastic animals in cages: behavioural flexibility and responses to captivity. Animal Behaviour 85, 1113–1126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McHugh, ML 2012. Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic. Biochemia Medica 22, 276–282.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meehan, CL, Garner, JP and Mench, JA 2004. Environmental enrichment and development of cage stereotypy in orange-winged Amazon parrots (Amazona amazonica). Developmental Psychobiology 44, 209–218.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Primary Industries Standing Committee 2002. Model code of practice for the welfare of animals – domestic poultry, 4th edition. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, VIC, Australia.Google Scholar
Reed, HJ, Wilkins, LJ, Austin, SD and Gregory, NG 1993. The effect of environmental enrichment during rearing on fear reactions and depopulation trauma in adult caged hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 36, 39–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogers, LJ 1995. Brain development after hatching. In The development of brain and behaviour in the chicken, pp. 120–156. CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon, UK.Google Scholar
Richards, GJ, Wilkins, LJ, Knowles, TG, Booth, F, Toscano, MJ, Nicol, CJ and Brown, SN 2011. Continuous monitoring of pop hole usage by commercially housed free-range hens throughout the production cycle. Veterinary Record 169, 338.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Singh, M and Cowieson, AJ 2013. Range use and pasture consumption in free-range poultry production. Animal Production Science 53, 1202–1208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stadig, LM, Rodenburg, TB, Ampe, B, Reubens, B and Tuyttens, FAM 2017. Effects of shelter type, early environmental enrichment and weather conditions on free-range behaviour of slow-growing broiler chickens. Animal 11, 1046–1053.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Welfare Quality® 2009. Welfare Quality® assessment protocol for poultry (broilers, laying hens). Welfare Quality® Consortium, Lelystad, the Netherlands.Google Scholar