4.4 Review

Assessment of fear response and welfare indicators in laying hens from barn systems

期刊

LIVESTOCK SCIENCE
卷 240, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.livsci.2020.104150

关键词

Barn system; Laying hen; Fear; Feather pecking; Welfare indicator; Tonic immobility

资金

  1. Portuguese Science and Technology Foundation (FCT) [UIDB/CVT/00772/2020, UID/MULTI/04621/2019-IST-ID]
  2. FEDER/COMPETE/POCI Operational Competitiveness and Internationalization Programme [POCI-01-0145-FEDER006958]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aims to evaluate the association of body weight (BW) and age on welfare indicators and fear response (tonic immobility (TI) duration and number of TI induction trials) and the relationships among welfare indicators. At 50 and 72 weeks of age, 100 laying hens (Novogen brown) from barn systems were weighed and tested for tonic immobility (TI). After that, a physical examination was carried out to evaluate health condition, hygiene status, feather damage and claw length. Most welfare problems detected at 50 weeks had increased by 72 weeks of age. A higher score for keel bone protrusion was observed in lighter (BW <= 1.9 kg, P = 0.014) and older hens (72 weeks, P = 0.004). Heavier hens (BW > 1.9 kg) showed longer TI durations (P = 0.022) and older hens required fewer TI inductions (P = 0.025), indicating that heavier and older hens were more fearful. Feather damage score on wings was positively correlated with feather damage scores on back, rump and tail (P < 0.001). Hens with higher feather damage scores on the head, back and tail showed a higher probability of having longer TI durations. Hens with skin injuries (W = 4.100, P = 0.043) were more likely to be induced into TI on the first attempt. Hens with higher feather damage scores on head, back and tail and increased skin injuries were considered more fearful. Additionally, high cumulative mortality rates (23-26%), keel bone deformations (57%) and keel bone protrusion (89%) should be considered relevant welfare indicators in laying hens from barn systems.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据