1
|
Nielsen SS, Alvarez J, Bicout DJ, Calistri P, Canali E, Drewe JA, Garin‐Bastuji B, Gonzales Rojas JL, Schmidt CG, Herskin MS, Miranda Chueca MÁ, Padalino B, Pasquali P, Roberts HC, Spoolder H, Stahl K, Velarde A, Viltrop A, Winckler C, Tiemann I, de Jong I, Gebhardt‐Henrich SG, Keeling L, Riber AB, Ashe S, Candiani D, García Matas R, Hempen M, Mosbach‐Schulz O, Rojo Gimeno C, Van der Stede Y, Vitali M, Bailly‐Caumette E, Michel V. Welfare of broilers on farm. EFSA J 2023; 21:e07788. [PMID: 36824680 PMCID: PMC9941850 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2023.7788] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/23/2023] Open
Abstract
This Scientific Opinion considers the welfare of domestic fowl (Gallus gallus) related to the production of meat (broilers) and includes the keeping of day-old chicks, broiler breeders, and broiler chickens. Currently used husbandry systems in the EU are described. Overall, 19 highly relevant welfare consequences (WCs) were identified based on severity, duration and frequency of occurrence: 'bone lesions', 'cold stress', 'gastro-enteric disorders', 'group stress', 'handling stress', 'heat stress', 'isolation stress', 'inability to perform comfort behaviour', 'inability to perform exploratory or foraging behaviour', 'inability to avoid unwanted sexual behaviour', 'locomotory disorders', 'prolonged hunger', 'prolonged thirst', 'predation stress', 'restriction of movement', 'resting problems', 'sensory under- and overstimulation', 'soft tissue and integument damage' and 'umbilical disorders'. These WCs and their animal-based measures (ABMs) that can identify them are described in detail. A variety of hazards related to the different husbandry systems were identified as well as ABMs for assessing the different WCs. Measures to prevent or correct the hazards and/or mitigate each of the WCs are listed. Recommendations are provided on quantitative or qualitative criteria to answer specific questions on the welfare of broilers and related to genetic selection, temperature, feed and water restriction, use of cages, light, air quality and mutilations in breeders such as beak trimming, de-toeing and comb dubbing. In addition, minimal requirements (e.g. stocking density, group size, nests, provision of litter, perches and platforms, drinkers and feeders, of covered veranda and outdoor range) for an enclosure for keeping broiler chickens (fast-growing, slower-growing and broiler breeders) are recommended. Finally, 'total mortality', 'wounds', 'carcass condemnation' and 'footpad dermatitis' are proposed as indicators for monitoring at slaughter the welfare of broilers on-farm.
Collapse
|
2
|
Wang P, Sun Y, Fan J, Zong Y, Li Y, Shi L, Isa AM, Wang Y, Ni A, Ge P, Jiang L, Bian S, Ma H, Jiang R, Liu X, Chen J. Effects of monochromatic green light stimulation during embryogenesis on hatching and posthatch performance of four strains of layer breeder. Poult Sci 2020; 99:5501-5508. [PMID: 33142468 PMCID: PMC7647709 DOI: 10.1016/j.psj.2020.06.074] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/28/2020] [Revised: 05/19/2020] [Accepted: 06/08/2020] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Providing green light during incubation has been shown to accelerate the embryo development and shorten the hatching time in broilers. Few studies have concentrated on the exact effects on layer breeders in the aspects of hatching and posthatch performance. In this study, 4 strains of layer breeder eggs, namely White Leghorn, Rhode Island Red, Columbia Rock, and Barred Rock were used to assess the effects of monochromatic green light during embryogenesis on hatching performance, chick quality, and pubertal growth. Each strain of 600 eggs was incubated under photoperiods of either 12 h of light and 12 h of darkness (12L:12D, light group) or 0 h of light and 24 h of darkness (0L:24D, dark group) for 18 D, with 2 replicates for each treatment. The results showed hatch time, time reaching 90% hatch, and average hatch time were significantly shorter among the 4 strains in the light group (P < 0.01). In addition, hatch window and peak hatching period were not extended by the green light stimulation (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference in hatchability of fertile eggs, chick weight/egg weight, or chick quality among the 4-strain eggs between the light group and dark group (P > 0.05). There was no difference (P > 0.05) in posthatch BW between different light treatments of the 3 strains (White Leghorn, Columbia Rock, and Barred Rock), whereas the BW of Rhode Island Red was higher in light group than that of the dark group at 8 to 12 wk of age (P < 0.05) and the difference disappeared from week 14. The results demonstrate that 12L:12D monochromatic green light stimulation during embryogenesis shortens the hatching time with no negative effects on hatching and posthatch performance. These effects were consistent among the 4 layer strains.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Panlin Wang
- Key Laboratory of Animal (Poultry) Genetics Breeding and Reproduction, Ministry of Agriculture, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China; College of Animal Science and Technology, Northwest A&F University, Yangling 712100, China
| | - Yanyan Sun
- Key Laboratory of Animal (Poultry) Genetics Breeding and Reproduction, Ministry of Agriculture, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China
| | - Jing Fan
- Key Laboratory of Animal (Poultry) Genetics Breeding and Reproduction, Ministry of Agriculture, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China
| | - Yunhe Zong
- Key Laboratory of Animal (Poultry) Genetics Breeding and Reproduction, Ministry of Agriculture, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China
| | - Yunlei Li
- Key Laboratory of Animal (Poultry) Genetics Breeding and Reproduction, Ministry of Agriculture, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China
| | - Lei Shi
- Key Laboratory of Animal (Poultry) Genetics Breeding and Reproduction, Ministry of Agriculture, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China
| | - Adamu Mani Isa
- Key Laboratory of Animal (Poultry) Genetics Breeding and Reproduction, Ministry of Agriculture, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China
| | - Yuanmei Wang
- Key Laboratory of Animal (Poultry) Genetics Breeding and Reproduction, Ministry of Agriculture, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China
| | - Aixin Ni
- Key Laboratory of Animal (Poultry) Genetics Breeding and Reproduction, Ministry of Agriculture, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China
| | - Pingzhuang Ge
- Key Laboratory of Animal (Poultry) Genetics Breeding and Reproduction, Ministry of Agriculture, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China
| | - Linlin Jiang
- Key Laboratory of Animal (Poultry) Genetics Breeding and Reproduction, Ministry of Agriculture, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China
| | - Shixiong Bian
- Key Laboratory of Animal (Poultry) Genetics Breeding and Reproduction, Ministry of Agriculture, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China
| | - Hui Ma
- Key Laboratory of Animal (Poultry) Genetics Breeding and Reproduction, Ministry of Agriculture, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China
| | - Runshen Jiang
- College of Animal Science and Technology, Anhui Agricultural University, Hefei 230036, China
| | - Xiaolin Liu
- College of Animal Science and Technology, Northwest A&F University, Yangling 712100, China.
| | - Jilan Chen
- Key Laboratory of Animal (Poultry) Genetics Breeding and Reproduction, Ministry of Agriculture, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Evaluation of the Relationship between Adipose Metabolism Patterns and Secretion of Appetite-Related Endocrines on Chicken. Animals (Basel) 2020; 10:ani10081282. [PMID: 32727133 PMCID: PMC7460314 DOI: 10.3390/ani10081282] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/10/2020] [Revised: 07/23/2020] [Accepted: 07/24/2020] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary The weight of an animal conforms to a certain growth pattern. Among others, feed, environment, and body composition, in addition to genetics, affect the animal’s feed consumption and body weight. Under normal circumstances, the body weight of an animal is mainly affected by feed intake, and body composition may significantly influence feed intake. Therefore, this report sets out the effects of fat accumulation on lipid metabolism and appetite, and finally introduces the effects of feeding patterns on animal feed intake. Abstract In addition to the influence of genes, the quality of poultry products is mainly controlled by the rearing environment or feed composition during rearing, and has to meet human use and economical needs. As the only source of energy for poultry, feed considerably affects the metabolic pattern of poultry and further affects the regulation of appetite-related endocrine secretion in poultry. Under normal circumstances, the accumulation of lipid in adipose reduces feed intake in poultry and increases the rate of adipose metabolism. When the adipose content in cells decreases, endocrines that promote food intake are secreted and increase nutrient concentrations in serum and cells. By regulating the balance between appetite and adipose metabolism, the poultry’s growth and posture can maintain a balanced state. In addition, increasing fiber composition in feed can effectively increase poultry welfare, body weight, lean composition and antioxidant levels in poultry. According to this, the concept that proper fiber content should be added to feed should be considered for better economic benefits, poultry welfare and meat productivity.
Collapse
|
5
|
BenSassi N, Vas J, Vasdal G, Averós X, Estévez I, Newberry RC. On-farm broiler chicken welfare assessment using transect sampling reflects environmental inputs and production outcomes. PLoS One 2019; 14:e0214070. [PMID: 30995219 PMCID: PMC6469842 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0214070] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/20/2018] [Accepted: 03/06/2019] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
To evaluate the utility of transect sampling for assessing animal welfare in large chicken flocks, we quantified relationships between environmental inputs, welfare problems detected using transect sampling, and production outcomes. We hypothesised that environmental inputs including environmental complexity (i.e. number of environmental enrichment types provided), space allowance, underfloor heating (presence or absence), and photoperiod regimen (18 h continuous vs 16 h intermittent) would correspond to variations in welfare assessment findings, which would predict production outcomes. We conducted on-farm welfare assessment of Norwegian broiler flocks at approximately 28 days of age. We sampled four transects (rows between feeder and drinker lines) per flock to determine litter quality and the proportions of chickens with compromised welfare as indicated by visual signs of walking difficulties, illness, skin wounds and small bird size. Production outcome measures included mortality, reasons for carcass rejection at slaughter, footpad dermatitis, growth rate, feed conversion and an integrated production index. Greater environmental complexity was associated with a reduction in skin wounds and total welfare problems on the farm, lower mortality, fewer rejections due to wounds and underweight birds, and fewer rejections overall. Higher space allowances within levels of environmental complexity were associated with fewer walking difficulties and welfare problems overall, a reduction in rejections due to wounds, and a higher growth rate and production index. Underfloor heating was associated with a reduction in rejections due to leg deformity, and intermittent light was associated with lower illness and skin wound rates on the farm, and lower mortality. Furthermore, fewer welfare problems and better litter quality on the farm were associated with fewer carcass rejections at slaughter. Thus, data from transect sampling varied with environmental inputs and production outcomes, supporting the validity of transect sampling for practical, animal-based on-farm welfare assessment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Neila BenSassi
- Department of Animal Production, Neiker-Tecnalia, Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain
| | - Judit Vas
- Department of Animal and Aquacultural Sciences, Faculty of Biosciences, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Ås, Norway
| | - Guro Vasdal
- Norwegian Meat and Poultry Research Centre, Oslo, Norway
| | - Xavier Averós
- Department of Animal Production, Neiker-Tecnalia, Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain
| | - Inma Estévez
- Department of Animal Production, Neiker-Tecnalia, Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain
- Ikerbasque, Basque Foundation for Science, Bilbao, Spain
| | - Ruth C. Newberry
- Department of Animal and Aquacultural Sciences, Faculty of Biosciences, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Ås, Norway
- * E-mail:
| |
Collapse
|