4.0 Article

Effect of including whole oats into pellets on performance and plumage condition in laying hens housed in conventional and furnished cages

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS AS
DOI: 10.1080/09064700410010026

关键词

performance; plumage condition; whole oats in pellets

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In an experiment including 2400 layers, a diet with 40% whole oats incorporated into 3 mm pellets (experimental diet) was compared with a complete diet, also as 3 mm pellets, but containing no whole oats (control diet). These diets were examined in conventional 3-hens cages and two furnished cage systems with 8 or 16 birds per group including nest, perches and litter. The effects of diet, rearing condition and cage system on performance, plumage condition, comb lesions and rear body wounds were studied. Furthermore, the effect of feed structure on gizzard characteristics and interactions with access to litter during rearing and laying periods were examined. The hybrids LSL and Shaver 2000 were included in the experiment. Egg production was lower (P < 0.05) in furnished cages than in conventional cages. No difference in plumage condition was found between diets, but a significantly poorer plumage condition (P < 0.05) was observed with increasing group size. Also, the frequencies of rear body (P < 0.05) wounds increased as the group sizes increased, while no such effect was observed for comb lesions. Higher (P < 0.05) feed consumption was observed in furnished cages than in the conventional, causing a corresponding increase (P < 0.05) in feed conversion rate (FCR). Higher (P < 0.05) FCR was observed for birds fed pellets with whole oats than the control. Whole oats also increased (P < 0.05) the weight of gizzard and gizzard contents. For LSL, better (P < 0.05) plumage condition was found for birds reared on a deep litter floor compared to cage rearing. It was concluded that no beneficial effect of replacing high amounts of ground oats with whole oats was observed. Genotype and rearing method may interact with housing system.

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

4.0
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