Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T10:57:49.852Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Welfare of organic laying hens kept at different indoor stocking densities in a multi-tier aviary system. II: live weight, health measures and perching

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 May 2015

S. Steenfeldt  and
B. L. Nielsen
S. Steenfeldt*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Aarhus University, DK-8830 Tjele, Denmark
B. L. Nielsen
Affiliation:
INRA, UR1197 NeuroBiologie de l’Olfaction, F-78352 Jouy-en-Josas, France
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Multi-tier aviary systems, where conveyor belts below the tiers remove the manure at regular intervals, are becoming more common in organic egg production. The area on the tiers can be included in the net area available to the hens (also referred to as usable area) when calculating maximum indoor stocking densities in organic systems within the EU. In this article, results on live weight, health measures and perching are reported for organic laying hens housed in a multi-tier system with permanent access to a veranda and kept at stocking densities (D) of 6, 9 and 12 hens/m2 available floor area, with concomitant increases in the number of hens per trough, drinker, perch and nest space. In a fourth treatment, access to the top tier was blocked reducing vertical, trough, and perch access at the lowest stocking density (D6x). In all other aspects than stocking density, the experiment followed the EU regulations on the keeping of organic laying hens. Hen live weight, mortality and foot health were not affected by the stocking densities used in the present study. Other variables (plumage condition, presence of breast redness and blisters, pecked tail feathers, and perch use) were indirectly affected by the increase in stocking density through the simultaneous reduction in access to other resources, mainly perches and troughs. The welfare of the hens was mostly affected by these associated constraints, despite all of them being within the allowed minimum requirements for organic production in the EU. Although the welfare consequences reported here were assessed to be moderate to minor, it is important to take into account concurrent constraints on access to other resources when higher stocking densities are used in organic production.

Keywords

organic layersindoor stocking densitygroup sizemulti-tier aviaryresource accessibility
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 9 , Issue 9 , September 2015 , pp. 1518 - 1528
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2015 

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

Abrahamsson, P, Fossum, O and Tauson, R 1998. Health of laying hens in an aviary system over five batches of birds. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 39, 367–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Association of Official Analytical Chemists 2000. Official methods of analysis, 17th edition. AOAC, Arlington, VA, USA.Google Scholar
Appleby, MC, Hughes, BO and Hogarth, GS 1989. Behaviour of laying hens in a deep litter house. British Poultry Science 30, 545–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonnet, S, Geraert, PA, Lessire, M, Carre, B and Guillaumin, S 1997. Effect of high ambient temperature on feed digestibility in broilers. Poultry Science 76, 857–863.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carmichael, NL, Walker, AW and Hughes, BO 1999. Laying hens in large flocks in a perchery system: influence of stocking density on location, use of resources and behaviour. British Poultry Science 40, 165–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Channing, CE, Hughes, BO and Walker, AW 2001. Spatial distribution and behaviour of laying hens housed in an alternative system. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 72, 335–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colson, S, Arnould, C and Michel, V 2008. Influence of rearing conditions of pullets on space use and performance of hens placed in aviaries at the beginning of the laying period. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 111, 286–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
EC 74/1999 1999. Council Directive 1999/74/EC of 19 July 1999 laying down minimum standards for the protection of laying hens. Official Journal of the European Union, L203, 53–57.Google Scholar
EC 889/2008 2008. Commission Regulation (EC) No 889/2008 of 5 September 2008 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 on organic production and labelling of organic products with regard to organic production, labelling and control. Official Journal of the European Union, L250, 1–84.Google Scholar
EC 152/2009 2009. Commission Regulation (EC) No 152/2009 of 27 January 2009 laying down the methods of sampling and analysis for the official control of feed. Annex III Methods of analysis to control the composition of feed materials and compound feed. Official Journal of the European Union, L54, 1–130.Google Scholar
EGTOP 2012. Report on poultry. Expert Group for Technical Advice on Organic Production, European Commission, Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, Directorate H. Sustainability and Quality of Agriculture and Rural Development, H.3. Organic farming, Brussels, Belgium, 39pp.Google Scholar
E-kontrollen 2013. Data from the Danish poultry production efficiency control 2013. Det Danske Fjerkraeraad. Retrieved July 5, 2014, from http://e-kontrol.danskfjerkrae.dk:8080/poultry/EKontrol.html Google Scholar
Ekstrand, C, Algers, B and Svedberg, J 1997. Rearing conditions and foot pad dermatitis in Swedish broiler chickens. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 31, 167–174.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fossum, O, Jansson, DS, Etterlin, PE and Vågsholm, I 2009. Causes of mortality in laying hens in different housing systems in 2001 to 2004. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 51, 3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gunnarsson, S, Yngvesson, J, Keeling, LJ and Forkman, B 2000. Rearing without early access to perches impairs the spatial skills of laying hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 67, 217–228.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hansen, B 1989. Determination of nitrogen as elementary-N, an alternative to Kjeldahl. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica 39, 113–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, SA 1963. Fowl fecal facts. World’s Poultry Science Journal 19, 262–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knudsen, KEB 1997. Carbohydrate and lignin contents of plant materials used in animal feeding. Animal Feed Science and Technology 67, 319–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lay, DC Jr, Fulton, RM, Hester, PY, Karcher, DM, Kjaer, JB, Mench, JA, Mullens, BA, Newberry, RC, Nicol, CJ, O’Sullivan, NP and Porter, RE 2011. Hen welfare in different housing systems. Poultry Science 90, 278–294.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCarthy, JF, Aherne, FX and Okai, DB 1974. Use of HCl insoluble ash as an index material for determining apparent digestibility with pigs. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 54, 107–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michel, V and Huonnic, D 2004. A comparison of welfare, health and production performance of laying hens reared in cages or aviaries. British Poultry Science 44, 775–776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moesta, A, Briese, A, Knierim, U and Hartung, J 2008a. Behaviour of laying hens in aviaries – review Part 1: Social and resting behaviour of hens. Deutsche Tierarztliche Wochenschrift 114, 444–453.Google Scholar
Moesta, A, Briese, A, Knierim, U and Hartung, J 2008b. Behaviour of laying hens in aviaries – review Part 2: Feeding behaviour, reproductive and dust bathing behaviour. Deutsche Tierarztliche Wochenschrift 115, 4–14.Google ScholarPubMed
Nicol, CJ, Gregory, NG, Knowles, TG, Parkman, ID and Wilkins, LJ 1999. Differential effects of increased stocking density, mediated by increased flock size, on feather pecking and aggression in laying hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 65, 137–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicol, CJ, Brown, SN, Glen, E, Pope, SJ, Short, FJ, Warriss, PD, Zimmerman, PH and Wilkins, LJ 2006. Effects of stocking density, flock size and management on the welfare of laying hens in single-tier aviaries. British Poultry Science 47, 135–146.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nørgaard-Nielsen, G 1990. Bone strength of laying hens kept in an alternative system, compared with hens in cages and on deep-litter. British Poultry Science 31, 81–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Odén, K, Keeling, LJ and Algers, B 2002. Behaviour of laying hens in two types of aviary systems on 25 commercial farms in Sweden. British Poultry Science 43, 169–181.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Olsson, IA and Keeling, LJ 2000. Night-time roosting in laying hens and the effect of thwarting access to perches. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 68, 243–256.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Riber, AB and Forkman, B 2007. A note on the behaviour of the chicken that receives feather pecks. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 108, 337–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodenburg, TB, Tuyttens, FAM and Sonck, B 2005. Welfare, health, and hygiene of laying hens housed in furnished cages and in alternative housing systems. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science 8, 211–226.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shimmura, T, Suzuki, T, Hirahara, S, Eguchi, Y, Uetake, K and Tanaka, T 2008. Pecking behaviour of laying hens in single-tiered aviaries with and without outdoor area. British Poultry Science 49, 396–401.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Steenfeldt, S and Nielsen, BL 2015. Welfare of organic laying hens kept at different indoor stocking densities in a multi-tier aviary system. I. Egg laying, and use of veranda and outdoor area. Animal, doi:10.1017/S1751731115000713.Google Scholar
Steenfeldt, S, Kjaer, JB and Engberg, RM 2007. Effect of feeding silages or carrots as supplements to laying hens on production performance, nutrient digestibility, gut structure, gut microflora and feather pecking behavior. British Poultry Science 48, 454–468.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stuffins, CB 1967. The determination of phosphate and calcium in feeding stuffs. The Analyst 92, 107–111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van de Weerd, HA, Keatinge, R, Roderick, S 2009. A review of key health-related welfare issues in organic poultry production. World’s Poultry Science Journal 65, 649–684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimmerman, PH, Lindberg, AC, Pope, SJ, Glen, E, Bolhuis, JE and Nicol, CJ 2006. The effect of stocking density, flock size and modified management on laying hen behaviour and welfare in a non-cage system. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 101, 111–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Steenfeldt and Nielsen supplementary material

Figure S1

Download Steenfeldt and Nielsen supplementary material(File)
File 184.9 KB