Do laying hens eat and forage in excreta from other hens?

Impacts of coprophagic foraging behaviour on the avian gut microbiome

Avian gut microbial communities are complex and play a fundamental role in regulating biological functions within an individual. Although it is well established that diet can influence the structure and composition of the gut microbiota, foraging behaviour may also play a critical, yet unexplored role in shaping the composition, dynamics, and adaptive potential of avian gut microbiota. In this review, we examine the potential influence of coprophagic foraging behaviour on the establishment and adaptability of wild avian gut microbiomes. Coprophagy involves the ingestion of faeces, sourced from either self (autocoprophagy), conspecific animals (allocoprophagy), or heterospecific animals. Much like faecal transplant therapy, coprophagy may (i) support the establishment of the gut microbiota of young precocial species, (ii) directly and indirectly provide nutritional and energetic requirements, and (iii) represent a mechanism by which birds can rapidly adapt the microbiota to changing environments and diets. However, in certain contexts, coprophagy may also pose risks to wild birds, and their microbiomes, through increased exposure to chemical pollutants, pathogenic microbes, and antibiotic-resistant microbes, with deleterious effects on host health and performance. Given the potentially far-reaching consequences of coprophagy for avian microbiomes, and the dearth of literature directly investigating these links, we have developed a predictive framework for directing future research to understand better when and why wild birds engage in distinct types of coprophagy, and the consequences of this foraging behaviour. There is a need for comprehensive investigation into the influence of coprophagy on avian gut microbiotas and its effects on host health and performance throughout ontogeny and across a range of environmental perturbations. Future behavioural studies combined with metagenomic approaches are needed to provide insights into the function of this poorly understood behaviour.

Mathematical modeling of the infectious spread and outbreak dynamics of avian influenza with seasonality transmission for chicken farms

A compartmental model with a time-varying contact rate, the seasonality effect, and its corresponding nonautonomous model are investigated. The model is developed based on the six compartments: susceptible, latent, infected, asymptomatic, treated, and recovered individuals. We determine the effective reproduction number for this nonautonomous system, and analytic discussion shows that at least one positive periodic solution exists for R0>1. The model is simulated using the RK-45 numerical method, and the parameter values for the model are taken from the available literature. From the numerical results, we observe that the degree of seasonality and vaccine efficacy significantly impact the amplitude of the epidemic curve. The latent-infected phase plane shows that periodic solutions exhibit a period-doubling bifurcation as the amplitude of seasonality increases. Finally, the model outcome was compared with the actual field data and found to be consistent.

Efficacy of an automated laser for reducing wild bird visits to the free range area of a poultry farm

In the Netherlands, free-range layer farms as opposed to indoor layer farms, are at greater risk with regard to the introduction of avian influenza viruses (AIVs). Wild waterfowl are the natural reservoir hosts of AIVs, and play a major role in their transmission to poultry by contaminating free-range layer areas. The laser as a wild bird repellent has been in use since the 1970s, in particular around airfields to reduce bird-strike. The efficacy of laser for reducing wild bird numbers in and around free-range poultry areas has however not been investigated. During the autumn-winter, wild bird visits to the free-range area of a layer farm was surveilled by video-camera for a month without laser, followed by a month with laser. The automated laser (Class-III B qualification) was operated in two separate areas (i) within the poultry free-range area that directly bordered the poultry barn between 5:00 p.m. and 10:00 a.m. when poultry were absent (free-range study area, size 1.5 ha), and (ii) in surrounding grass pastures between 10:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. The overall (all bird species combined) efficacy of the laser for reducing the rate of wild birds visiting the free-range study area was 98.2%, and for the Orders Anseriformes and Passeriformes, respectively, was 99.7% and 96.1%. With the laser in operation, the overall exposure time of the free-range area to wild bird visits, but specifically to the Order Anseriformes, was massively reduced. It can be concluded that the Class-III B laser is highly proficient at keeping wild birds, in particular waterfowl, away from the free-range area of layer farms situated along a winter migration flyway.

Temporal Dynamics of Cloacal Microbiota in Adult Laying Chickens With and Without Access to an Outdoor Range

Associations between animal health and performance, and the host’s microbiota have been recently established. In poultry, changes in the intestinal microbiota have been linked to housing conditions and host development, but how the intestinal microbiota respond to environmental changes under farm conditions is less well understood. To gain insight into the microbial responses following a change in the host’s immediate environment, we monitored four indoor flocks of adult laying chickens three times over 16 weeks, during which two flocks were given access to an outdoor range, and two were kept indoors. To assess changes in the chickens’ microbiota over time, we collected cloacal swabs of 10 hens per flock and performed 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing. The poultry house (i.e., the stable in which flocks were housed) and sampling time explained 9.2 and 4.4% of the variation in the microbial community composition of the flocks, respectively. Remarkably, access to an outdoor range had no detectable effect on microbial community composition, the variability of microbiota among chickens of the same flock, or microbiota richness, but the microbiota of outdoor flocks became more even over time. Fluctuations in the composition of the microbiota over time within each poultry house were mainly driven by turnover in rare, rather than dominant, taxa and were unique for each flock. We identified 16 amplicon sequence variants that were differentially abundant over time between indoor and outdoor housed chickens, however none were consistently higher or lower across all chickens of one housing type over time. Our study shows that cloacal microbiota community composition in adult layers is stable following a sudden change in environment, and that temporal fluctuations are unique to each flock. By exploring microbiota of adult poultry flocks within commercial settings, our study sheds light on how the chickens’ immediate environment affects the microbiota composition.

Degree of Saturation and Free Fatty Acid Content of Fats Determine Dietary Preferences in Laying Hens

Simple Summary

Understanding fat sensing in chickens has the potential to improve least cost feed formulation relevant to poultry feeds. Acid oils (soybean acid oil and palm fatty acid distillate) are economical and sustainable feedstuffs with similar fatty acid composition to crude oils (soybean oil and palm oil) but richer in free fatty acids. However, potential issues relevant to the palatability of these oils have been raised. Four experimental diets were offered in a series of double-choice tests to study the effect of free fatty acid content and the unsaturated:saturated ratio on dietary preferences in hens. Hens showed a feed preference for palm oil added diets over soybean oil diets, with palm oil and palm fatty acid distillate being equally preferred. However, the hens demonstrated a preference for soybean oil when offered in choice with soybean acid oil. In conclusion, free fatty acid content and saturation degree affected feed preferences in hens. The use of oils with greater preference values may give rise to greater feed palatability, enhancing feed intake at critical stages.

Abstract

Behavioural and genetic evidence shows that the taste system is intimately related to the sensing of nutrients with consequences for poultry nutrition practices. A better understanding of how chickens may sense fat could provide the background for selecting feedstuffs used in poultry feeds. Acid oils have the potential to be economical and sustainable feedstuffs. These fat by-products from the edible oil refining industry possess a similar fatty acid composition to the crude oils but are richer in free fatty acids (FFA). An experiment was conducted to study the effect of FFA content and the unsaturated:saturated ratio (U:S) on dietary preferences in hens. Four fat sources were added to a basal diet at an inclusion rate of 6%, determining the experimental diets: soybean oil (SO; high U:S, 5% FFA); soybean acid oil (SA; high U:S, 50% FFA); palm oil (PO; low U:S, 5% FFA); and palm fatty acid distillate (PFAD; low U:S, 50% FFA). The experimental diets were offered in a series of double-choice tests to forty-eight Lohmann Brown laying hens housed individually in cages. Each hen was offered the ten potential binary combinations of the four diets including each diet compared to itself (referred to as four control double-choices). Feed intake was measured for two hours twice a day after one hour of fasting. Consumption was analysed as a standard preference index (% of test diet intake in comparison with the total intake). Preference values were compared to the random choice value of 50% using the Student’s t-test. None of the four control comparisons differ significantly from 50% (p > 0.05), indicating that the changes in preference values observed in the other binary comparisons were related to the dietary changes associated to fat ingredients. Hens showed a feed preference for palm oil added diets over soybean oil diets (p < 0.05), with PO and PFAD being equally preferred (p < 0.05). However, in this trial the hens demonstrated a preference for SO (low %FFA) when offered in choice with SA (high %FFA) (p < 0.05). These results suggest that the degree of saturation plays an important role in dietary fat preferences: hens prefer predominantly saturated oils even when these are rich in FFA. Furthermore, when presented with a choice between predominantly unsaturated oils, hens prefer feed with a low %FFA. In conclusion, %FFA and the U:S ratio affected feed preferences in hens. The use of oils with greater preference values may give rise to greater feed palatability, enhancing feed intake at critical stages.

Floor Substrate Preferences of Chickens: A Meta-Analysis

Environmental enrichment promotes sensory and motor stimulation for species-typical behaviors, which in turn enhance animal well-being. For farmed Galliformes, housing systems often limit enrichment to bedding and litter, that simultaneously act as material for dustbathing and foraging. Therefore, this meta-analysis sought to systematically review and synthesize the substrate preference test literature for Galliformes. Data based on the following four welfare-related behaviors were extracted for analysis: (1) dustbathing, (2) foraging, (3) pecking, and (4) time spent on a given substrate. Literature searches in CAB Direct, Web of Science, and Google Scholar yielded 239 articles, and hand searching yielded an additional five articles. Ten publications that used different chicken strains as test subjects, met the criteria to be included in the systematic review. The effects of bedding type, the number of days birds had access to tested substrates, enclosure area, and substrate area, on the examined behaviors were determined. We found that birds preferred dustbathing in sand and peat moss more than on any other substrates. The bedding type, size of the enclosure, and size of the substrate area affected the amount of time that birds spent on the tested substrates. When provided the choice between bedding materials, birds spent more time on sand or peat moss than on any other substrate or on no substrate. Notably, most studies did not report relevant physical or chemical characteristics of substrate that may influence birds' preferences, such as grain size, moisture content and the level of soiling. Focusing future studies on identifying substrate characteristics that influence preferences can lead to the discovery of new, practical, enriching beddings that can be easily implemented in housing systems for Galliformes.

Are Turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo) Motivated to Avoid Excreta-Soiled Substrate?

Simple Summary

Commercial turkeys are raised in large barns at stocking densities that cause excreta (or feces) to quickly accrue in the turkeys’ environment. Even though commercial turkeys spend most, if not all, of their time in contact with their excreta, we do not know how turkeys perceive this soiled environment. Therefore, our study used six pens of four turkeys, dividing each pen with a barrier that contained two one-way push-doors. This created two compartments: a “home” compartment containing soiled wood shavings, and a “treatment” (T) compartment containing fresh pine and spruce wood shavings (FP), soiled pine and spruce wood shavings (SP), ammonia reductant-treated soiled pine and spruce wood shavings (TSP), no substrate (NS), or a feed treatment. To establish the turkeys’ motivation to access these resources, we weighed the door to T with 0%, 20% or 40% of the turkeys’ body weight. The number of turkeys that pushed the maximum door weight was used as an indicator for their motivation. Additionally, time spent in T and the odds of visiting T were examined to determine how the turkeys responded to increasing challenge. We found that the turkeys preferred feed over all other resources and showed equal motivation for all floor substrate treatments.

Abstract

The soiling of bedding on modern turkey farms combined with turkeys’ reduced ability and opportunity to perch and roost at elevation, forces them to spend most, if not all, of their time in contact with their excreta. To determine turkeys’ perspective on these conditions and the value they place on unsoiled bedding vs. soiled litter (collectively, substrates), we used twenty-four eleven-week-old turkey hens divided into six two-compartment pens. In the “home” compartment (H), we placed soiled wood shavings, while the “treatment” compartment (T) contained no substrate (NS), fresh pine and spruce wood shavings (FP), soiled pine and spruce wood shavings (SP), ammonia reductant-treated soiled pine and spruce wood shavings (TSP), or a feed treatment. One-way push-doors separated the two compartments. The door leading to T weighed an additional 0%, 20% or 40% of the turkeys’ body weight while the door to H remained unweighted. All birds were exposed to each resource and door weight combination in a systematic order. We measured the turkeys’ motivation based on the number of birds that pushed the maximum weight to access each resource, the amount of time spent in T, and the number of visits to T. Our findings show that turkeys worked harder to access feed compared to all the floor substrate treatments. Additionally, they were equally motivated to access all the substrate treatments.

Broiler Chicks' Motivation for Different Wood Beddings and Amounts of Soiling

Simple Summary

Many animals move excreta—or feces—away from resting areas to avoid attracting predators and spreading disease. However, today’s farms raise broiler (meat) chickens in large barns with stocking densities that prevent the birds from segregating their excreta. Moreover, whether or not chickens would prefer to avoid their excreta is unknown. Understanding what litter conditions chickens prefer can help inform farming practices. Therefore, this experiment aimed to assess chicks’ motivation to access unsoiled bedding or soiled litter. We used six pens of six to seven broiler chicks—each pen divided into two compartments by a barrier containing two one-way push-doors. The ‘home’ compartment contained soiled wood shavings, while the ‘treatment’ (T) compartment contained either aspen wood shavings, pine and spruce wood shavings, soiled pine and spruce wood shavings, ammonia reductant treated soiled pine and spruce wood shavings, or a feed treatment as a gold standard. To determine the chicks’ motivation to access the resources, the door leading into T weighed 0% (lifted), 10%, 20%, or 30% of the chicks’ body weight. The combination of time spent in T, number of visits to T, and average maximum weight pushed to access T were used to measure motivation. Chicks showed equal motivation for all substrates and preferred feed over all substrates. However, future experiments must explore chicks’ preference and motivation over the long-term in commercial conditions.

Abstract

In the wild, excreta soiled surroundings can attract predators and spread disease. Yet, farmers rear broiler chicks in large barns with stocking densities that prevent excreta segregation. To measure chicks’ motivation to access unsoiled bedding or soiled litter (collectively, substrates) we used 40 16-day-old broiler chicks who were divided into six two-compartment pens. The ‘home’ compartment (H) contained soiled wood shavings, while the ‘treatment’ compartment (T) contained either aspen wood shavings, pine and spruce wood shavings, soiled pine and spruce wood shavings, ammonia reductant treated soiled pine and spruce wood shavings, or a feed treatment as a gold standard. The barrier separating the compartments had two one-way push-doors that chicks pushed to access a resource. The chicks’ motivation was measured by the average maximum weight pushed to access each resource. The door leading to T weighed 0% (raised), 10%, 20%, or 30% of the chicks’ body weight, and chicks could return to H via a raised (for 0%) or unweighted door. Our findings indicate that chicks worked hardest for feed, but paid a lower, equal price to access all substrates. With increasing door weight, chicks visited less and spent less time with the substrates. Therefore, as chicks themselves do not avoid litter that could have potential negative effects on their well-being, it is important that farmers diligently monitor litter conditions as their primary care-takers.

Seasonal risk of low pathogenic avian influenza virus introductions into free-range layer farms in the Netherlands

Poultry can become infected with avian influenza viruses (AIV) via (in) direct contact with infected wild birds. Free‐range chicken farms in the Netherlands were shown to have a higher risk for introduction of low pathogenic avian influenza (LPAI) virus than indoor chicken farms. Therefore, during outbreaks of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI), free‐range layers are confined indoors as a risk mitigation measure. In this study, we characterized the seasonal patterns of AIV introductions into free‐range layer farms, to determine the high‐risk period. Data from the LPAI serological surveillance programme for the period 2013–2016 were used to first estimate the time of virus introduction into affected farms and then assess seasonal patterns in the risk of introduction. Time of introduction was estimated by fitting a mathematical model to seroprevalence data collected longitudinally from infected farms. For the period 2015–2016, longitudinal follow‐up included monthly collections of eggs for serological testing from a cohort of 261 farms. Information on the time of introduction was then used to estimate the monthly incidence and seasonality by fitting harmonic and Poisson regression models. A significant yearly seasonal risk of introduction that lasted around 4 months (November to February) was identified with the highest risk observed in January. The risk for introduction of LPAI viruses in this period was on average four times significantly higher than the period of low risk around the summer months. Although the data for HPAI infections were limited in the period 2014–2018, a similar risk period for introduction of HPAI viruses was observed. The results of this study can be used to optimize risk‐based surveillance and inform decisions on timing and duration of indoor confinement when HPAI viruses are known to circulate in the wild bird population.

Limited changes in the fecal microbiome composition of laying hens after oral inoculation with wild duck feces

Interspecies transmission of fecal microbiota can serve as an indicator for (indirect) contact between domestic and wild animals to assess risks of pathogen transmission, e.g., avian influenza. Here, we investigated whether oral inoculation of laying hens with feces of wild ducks (mallards, Anas platyrhynchos) resulted in a hen fecal microbiome that was detectably altered on community parameters or relative abundances of individual genera. To distinguish between effects of the duck inoculum and effects of the inoculation procedure, we compared the fecal microbiomes of adult laying hens resulting from 3 treatments: inoculation with wild duck feces (duck), inoculation with chicken feces (auto), and a negative control group with no treatment. We collected cloacal swabs from 7 hens per treatment before (day 0), and 2 and 7 D after inoculation, and performed 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing. No distinguishable effect of inoculation with duck feces on microbiome community (alpha and beta diversity) was found compared to auto or control treatments. At the individual taxonomic level, the relative abundance of the genus Alistipes (phylum Bacteroidetes) was significantly higher in the inoculated treatments (auto and duck) compared to the control 2 D after inoculation. Seven days after inoculation, the relative abundance of Alistipes had increased in the control and no effect was found anymore across treatments. These effects might be explained by the perturbation of the hen's microbiome caused by the inoculation procedure itself, or by intrinsic temporal variation in the hen's microbiome. This experiment shows that a single inoculation of fecal microbiota from duck feces to laying hens did not cause a measurable alteration of the gut microbiome community. Furthermore, the temporary change in relative abundance forAlistipes could not be attributed to the duck feces inoculation. These outcomes suggest that the fecal microbiome of adult laying hens may not be a useful indicator for detection of single oral exposure to wild duck feces.

Quantification of visits of wild fauna to a commercial free-range layer farm in the Netherlands located in an avian influenza hot-spot area assessed by video-camera monitoring

Free-range poultry farms have a high risk of introduction of avian influenza viruses (AIV), and it is presumed that wild (water) birds are the source of introduction. There is very scarce quantitative data on wild fauna visiting free-range poultry farms. We quantified visits of wild fauna to a free-range area of a layer farm, situated in an AIV hot-spot area, assessed by video-camera monitoring. A total of 5,016 hr (209 days) of video recordings, covering all 12 months of a year, were analysed. A total of 16 families of wild birds and five families of mammals visited the free-range area of the layer farm. Wild birds, except for the dabbling ducks, visited the free-range area almost exclusively in the period between sunrise and the moment the chickens entered the free-range area. Known carriers of AIV visited the outdoor facility regularly: species of gulls almost daily in the period January-August; dabbling ducks only in the night in the period November-May, with a distinct peak in the period December-February. Only a small fraction of visits of wild fauna had overlap with the presence of chickens at the same time in the free-range area. No direct contact between chickens and wild birds was observed. It is hypothesized that AIV transmission to poultry on free-range poultry farms will predominantly take place via indirect contact: taking up AIV by chickens via wild-bird-faeces-contaminated water or soil in the free-range area. The free-range poultry farmer has several possibilities to potentially lower the attractiveness of the free-range area for wild (bird) fauna: daily inspection of the free-range area and removal of carcasses and eggs; prevention of forming of water pools in the free-range facility. Furthermore, there are ways to scare-off wild birds, for example use of laser equipment or trained dogs.

The Role of Housing Environment and Dietary Protein Source on the Gut Microbiota of Chicken

Simple Summary

The gut microbiota—the community of microorganisms that colonize the gut—is now recognized as a key regulator of immune activity, metabolism, and welfare in all vertebrates, including poultry. The diet and environment can both influence the gut microbiota, but the extent of these changes is unclear in poultry, where diets and environments are important management tools. As the majority of U.S. egg production (>90%) has pledged to move to cage-free egg production by 2025, it is necessary to understand how much the diet and the rearing environment contribute to gut microbiota composition and function, and ultimately to health and production traits of chicken. We addressed this unknown by analyzing the gut microbiota community of laying hens with both the housing environment and diet as variables. We compared conventional cage systems against cage-free systems. In both environments, hens were fed a standard soy-based diet, versus an alternate soy-free diet. We found that cage-free environments generated higher gut microbiota diversity, and that the diet had a relatively lower effect on changing the gut microbiota. Our results highlight the difficulty of promoting consistent, beneficial gut microbiota across production systems or diet variations in commercial poultry conditions.

Abstract

The gut microbiota of chicken has received much attention due to its importance for bird health, food safety, and performance. In the United States, the impending transition to cage-free housing environments has raised many questions about its consequences for poultry health, productivity, and welfare. Therefore, we investigated how housing environments and feed composition affect the poultry gut microbiome. Such data is necessary to inform the design of production systems that promote health and food safety. In this study, we investigated the cecal microbiome of both caged and cage-free laying hens that were fed either an industry-standard soy-based versus a soy-free diet. Caged hens were housed in standard industry-style layer cages with one bird per cage, and cage-free hens were housed in a poultry barn with an outdoor enclosed yard with multiple hens per pen. Our study showed significant differences in the gut microbiota between cage-free and caged environments. Cage free housing generated higher diversity compared to caged housing. Furthermore, we observed a synergistic interaction of soy-based feed in cage-free housing, as the cage-free soy group showed the highest alpha diversity, whereas the caged-soy group showed the lowest diversity overall.

An Investigation of Associations Between Management and Feather Damage in Canadian Laying Hens Housed in Furnished Cages

Feather pecking is a continuous welfare challenge in the housing of egg-laying hens. Canada is currently making the transition from conventional cages to alternative housing systems. However, feather damage (FD) among laying hens due to feather pecking remains a welfare concern. An explorative approach was taken to assess bird, housing, and management associations with FD in Canadian laying hens housed in alternative systems. A questionnaire focused on housing and management practices was administered to 122 laying farms across Canada in autumn of 2017 (response rate of 52.5%), yielding information on a subset of 26 flocks housed in furnished cages. Additionally, a three-point feather cover scoring system was developed to estimate the prevalence of FD. Farmers assessed FD by sampling 50 birds per flock. Linear regression modeling was applied to explain FD as a function of 6 variables (out of an available 54). Of the 6 modeled variables, "increased age", "brown feather colour", "midnight feeding", and "no scratch area" were associated with higher levels of FD at farm level (R² = 0.77). The results indicated that FD resulting from feather pecking is a multifactorial problem, and supported existing evidence that FD increases as birds age. These results also suggested that "feather colour", "midnight feeding", and "access to (or lack of) a scratch area or additional substrate" play a role in FD prevalence in furnished cages.

Housing and Management Practices on 33 Pullet Farms in Canada

Although Canada is one of the first to provide guidelines on pullet rearing in a new Code of Practice which came into effect in March 2017, little information is available about the housing and management of pullets on Canadian farms. We surveyed 99 pullet farmers and received useable responses from 33 pullet farmers (33.3% response rate) who took part in the Start Clean-Stay Clean™ program through their provincial egg boards across Canada during October⁻December 2017 as part of a larger study. Most flocks were housed in conventional cage systems (42.4%), followed by single-tier (33.3%) and multi-tier systems (24.2%). Flocks ranged from 1⁻19 weeks of age (average: 10.5 weeks of age) and were white- (58.1%) or brown-feathered (41.9%). In general, non-cage farmers met the new requirements set out in the Code of Practice for space, perches and litter provision during pullet rearing during this transitional period. Conventional caged flocks did not have opportunities for perching and foraging, but developing new methods to provide pullets with opportunities to perch and forage will become more important as the laying hen housing system transition from conventional cages to furnished cage and non-cage housing systems in Canada progresses. Additionally, clear litter management recommendations for farmers to ensure good litter quality are needed for non-cage housing systems.

A Description of Laying Hen Husbandry and Management Practices in Canada

Simple Summary

Furnished cage and non-cage (single-tier or multi-tier) housing systems are increasingly used worldwide in efforts to improve laying hen welfare. Canadian laying hen farms are undergoing a similar transition, however, little is known about the housing and management of laying hens in these housing systems in Canada. Data collected through farmer questionnaires from 65 laying hen flocks across Canada revealed commonly used management practices in furnished cage (26), single-tier (17) and multi-tier systems (22). Non-cage systems should allow hens to perform natural behavior (e.g., foraging/dustbathing). However, a proportion of non-cage systems either did not provide litter or considered manure as a litter substrate, which could have implications for consumer perspectives on these systems. Daily flock inspections and vaccination schemes were the main practices used to maintain flock health, whereas veterinarian involvement on-farm and in the development and implementation of a flock health plan was less common. Further research is needed to make clear recommendations and to investigate how to facilitate management changes by farmers currently transitioning to furnished cage and non-cage housing systems.

Abstract

Canadian laying hen farms are transitioning from conventional cage housing to furnished cage and non-cage housing systems to improve laying hen welfare. However, little is known about the current housing and management systems in Canada. This study addresses this knowledge gap by describing different housing and management practices used on farms where laying hens were housed in furnished cages or non-cage housing systems. A questionnaire covering farm and housing conditions, litter management, nutrition and feeding, environmental control, flock characteristics, rearing and placement, health, egg production and performance were distributed through provincial egg boards to 122 producers across Canada. Data were collected from 65 laying hen flocks (52.5% response rate) in 26 furnished cage, 17 single-tier and 22 multi-tier systems. Flocks were on average 45.1 ± 14.59 weeks old (range: 19–69 weeks). Frequencies of different management practices were calculated according to housing system. Most flocks were reared in the same housing system as they were housed in during lay, with the exception of furnished cage layers which were reared in conventional cage systems. Results indicated that a large proportion of non-cage systems were either fully slatted or had manure as a litter substrate, which could have implications for consumer perspectives on these systems. Further research is needed to develop clear recommendations on proper litter management for farmers. In general, flock health was managed through daily inspections and vaccination schemes, whereas veterinarian involvement on-farm was less common. Vaccination, hygiene, and effective biosecurity should be maintained to ensure good health in laying hens in furnished cage and non-cage systems during the transition to these systems.