Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T16:25:23.008Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Battery Cages and the Deep Litter System for the Management of Domestic Laying Fowls: the Problem of Inconsistent Results

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2007

R. A. Mrode  and
J. O. Akinokun
R. A. Mrode
Affiliation:
*Department of Animal Science, University of Ife, Ile-Ife, Nigeria
J. O. Akinokun
Affiliation:
*Department of Animal Science, University of Ife, Ile-Ife, Nigeria
Get access

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Research Article
Information
World's Poultry Science Journal , Volume 41 , Issue 3 , October 1985 , pp. 188 - 197
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1985

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

Ahmedov, M., Manadalaka, K., Mironova, L. and Mandalaka, M. (1968). Experiments on re-equiping poultry farms for battery hens. Ptitsevodstvo 18: 32–33.Google Scholar
Al-Rawl, B. and Craig, J. V. (1975). Agonistic behaviour of caged chickens related to group size and area per bird. Applied Animal Ethology 2: 69–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailey, B. B., Quisenberry, J. H. and Taylor, J. (1959). A comparison of layers in cages versus floor housing. Poultry Science 38: 565–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhagwat, A. L. and Craig, J. V. (1975). Reproductive performance of 3 strains of chicken in colony cage and floor pen environment. Poultry Science 54: 228–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biswas, D. K. and Craig, J. V. (1970). Genotype-environment interactions in chickens selected for high and low social dominance. Poultry Science 49: 691–692.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blount, W. P. (1951). Hen batteries. Baillére, Tindal and Co., London.Google Scholar
Campos, E. J., Krueger, W. F. and Bradley, J. W. (1973). Performance of commercial broiler breeders in cages. Poultry Science 52: 200.Google Scholar
Card, L. E. and Nesheim, M. C. (1966). Poultry production, Lea and Lebiger Philadelphia, 10th edition, pp. 76.Google Scholar
Carew, L. B. Jr., Foo, D. C. and Bee, D. E. (1976). Effect of dietary energy concentration on performance of heavy egg-type hens at various densities in cages. Poultry Science 55: 1057–1066.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christmas, R. B., O'Steen, A. W., Douglas, C. R., Kalch, L. W. and Harms, R. H. (1972). A study of strain interaction of cage versus floor layers for 3 evaluation periods at the Florida Poultry Evaluation Centre. Poultry Science 51: 1794–1795.Google Scholar
Cole, H. H. (1966). Introduction to livestock production 2nd edition. W. H. Freeman and Compas. San Francisco and London, pp. 333.Google Scholar
Comstock, R. E. (1960). Dominance, genotype-environment interaction and homeostasis. In Biometrical genetics pp. 3–9. edited by Kempthorne, V., Oxford Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Craig, J. V. (1970). Interactions of genotype and housing environment in White Leghorn chickens selected for high and low social dominance. Proceedings 14th World's Poultry Congress, Madrid 2: 37–42.Google Scholar
Dickerson, G. E. (1962). Implications of genotype-environment interaction in animal breeding. Animal Production 4: 47–64.Google Scholar
Dickerson, G. E. and Matter, F. B. (1976). Evidence concerning genetic improvement in commercial stocks of layers Poultry Science 55: 2327–2342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Francis, D. W. (1957). A comparison of seven strains of purebreds and hybrids in cages. Poultry Science 36: 178–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Francis, D. W. and Roberts, R. H. (1963). Body characteristics of White Leghorn pullets housed in cages and floor pens. Poultry Science 42: 58–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fronning, E. W. and Funk, E. M. (1958). Seasonal variations in quality of eggs laid by cage layers and their sisters on the floor. Poultry Science 37: 215–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gowe, R. S. (1956). Environment and poultry breeding problems. 2. Comparison of the egg production of seven single comb White Leghorns strains housed in laying batteries and floor pens. Poultry Science 35: 430–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hale, R. W. (1961). Genotype-environment interactions in comparison of the cage and semi-intensive systems for laying hens. British Poultry Science 2: 145–151.Google Scholar
Hull, P. and Gowe, R. S. (1962). The importance of interactions detected between genotype and environment factors for characteristics of economic significant in poultry. Genetics, Princeton 4: 143–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, B. L. and Holleman, K. A. (1976). Efficiency of producing White Leghorn hatching eggs via artificial insemination and natural matings. Poultry Science 55: 2383–2388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, E. A. (1964). Seven years of floor and cage egg production at the California Random Sample test. Final report of the Fourteenth California Official Random Sample Egg Laying test 1962–63.Google Scholar
Keen, P. R. and Mowbray, R. M. (1969). Performance difference between caged and floor housed laying pullets. Rhodesia Agricultural Journal 66: 58–66.Google Scholar
Kolawole, A. F. (1980). Effect of cage and floor systems on the performance of two strains of commercial hybrids layers. B.Sc. Thesis, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Ife, Nigeria.Google Scholar
Kolstad, N., Kristiansen, F. and Hvidsten, H. (1969). Production and mortality in Norwegian White Leghorn and imported laying hybrids in cages and pens at different levels of feeding, Meld. Nerg. Lander Hogsk 48(4) pp. 28.Google Scholar
Kosin, I. L. (1962). The reproduction of poultry In: Reproduction in farm animals. 277–293, Ed. Hafez, Washington State University, Pullman, Washington, Lea and Fabiger.Google Scholar
Krosigk, Von C. M. and Pirchner, F. (1974). Genotype by type of housing interactions in populations of White Leghorn under reciprocal recurrent selection. British Poultry Science 15: 11–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, , Yen-Pal, and Craig, J. V. (1968). Evaluation of egg-laying strains of chickens in different housing environment: Role of genotype by environment interaction. Poultry Science 60: 1709–1781.Google Scholar
Logan, V. A. (1965). Influence of cage versus floor density and doubling on laying house performance. Poultry Science 44: 974–979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowry, D. C., Lerner, I. M. and Taylor, L. W. (1956). Intra-flock genetic merit under floor and cage management. Poultry Science 35: 1034–1043.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maff, (1979). Statistical Information—Egg Yield Survey 1978/9—Stats 28479 MAFF Govt. Buildings, Epsom Road, Guildford, Surrey.Google Scholar
Martin, G. A., West, J. R. and Morgan, G. W. (1976). Layer performance in cage versus non cage housing. Poultry Science 55: 2060–2061.Google Scholar
Miller, M. N. (1956). Factors affecting egg production, body weight and feed efficiency of selected strains of caged layers. Master of Science Thesis Texas A and M College Station, Texas.Google Scholar
Miller, M. N. and Quisenberry, J. H. (1959). Factors affecting egg production in selected strains of caged layers. Poultry Science 38: 757–766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, D. J., Bradley, J. W., and Ferguson, T. M. (1977). Radius breaking strength and egg characteristics of laying hens as affected by dietary supplements and housing. Poultry Science 56: 180–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nakazawa, M. and Furuta, K. (1965). Effect of cage versus floor rearing on performance of egg laying type pullets (ii) Influence during egg laying period. Japan Poultry Science 2: 174–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oluyemi, J. A., Fetuga, B. L. and Phillips, I. O. (1971). The comparison of the deep litter system of three structural patterns with cage management system for layers under tropical conditions. East Africa Agricultural and Forestry Journal 42: 342–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oluyemi, J. A. and Roberts, Y. O. (1975). The cage versus the deep litter system for the management of layers in the humid tropics. Poultry Science 54: 1982–1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Onishi, N. and Miyazono, Y. (1962). Studies on interaction between system of mating and types of housing for egg production in the fowl. Proceedings 12th World's Poultry Congress 23–24.Google Scholar
Querner, H. and Tuller, R. (1966). Rearing pullets and housing of layers in different cage system in comparison with floor rearing and housing. Archives fur Gelflugelkunde 30: 141–162.Google Scholar
Shupe, W. D. and Quisenberry, J. H. (1961). Effect of certain rearing and laying house environment on performance of incross egg production type pullets. Poultry Science 40: 1165–1171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sugandi, D., Bird, H. R. and Atmedilaga, D. (1975). The effect of different energy and protein levels on the performance of laying hens in floor pens and cages in the tropics. Poultry Science 54: 1107–1114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tolan, A., Robertson, J., Orton, C. R., Head, M. J., Christie, A. A. and Millburn, B. A. (1974). Studies on the composition of feed. 5. The chemical composition of eggs produced under battery, deep litter and free range conditions. British Journal of Nutrition 31: 185–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vorobjeva, C. N. (1968). Economic effectiveness of different system of intensive rearing of laying hens at the Alder poultry farm. Animal breeding Abstract 39: 373.Google Scholar