Providing ramps during lay has larger impacts on laying hens than ramps at rearing

Commercial laying hen housing is shifting from traditional cages to non-cage housing systems, such as the aviary, which has gained popularity due to potential for more species-typical behavior. However, birds housed in aviaries may have difficulties moving through the vertical tiers of the system leading to health problems such as keel bone fracture (KBF). One possible way to improve movement is to add ramps into an aviary system, allowing hens to walk between tiers rather than jump or fly. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of adding ramps to rearing and laying aviaries on bird health, production, and movement across vertical tiers of the aviary. Lohmann Selected Leghorn pullets were raised in 2 treatments: 4 pens (600 birds/pen) were raised with wire mesh ramps to aid movement between aviary tiers (RR) and 4 pens (600 birds/pen) were raised without ramps (RO). At 17 wk of age (WOA), birds were moved to the laying facility, in which 16 aviary pens with 225 birds/pen were populated. Half the pens (n = 8) were supplemented with wire mesh ramps (LR) and the other half were not (LO). Within each laying treatment group, 4 pens were populated with RR hens and 4 pens were populated with RO hens, creating 4 treatment combinations (RRLR, RRLO, ROLR, ROLO). From each pen, 15 focal hens were selected for radiographic imaging of their keel bones taken at 21, 36, 45, and 60 WOA and the images were subsequently scored for KBF severity. Focal hens were also scored for feather condition and footpad quality at 36 and 60 WOA using a standardized welfare assessment protocol. The number of downward transitions among aviary areas and falls were recorded at 19 to 20 and 30 to 31 WOA. Data were analyzed using (generalized) linear mixed models in R software. When ramps were available, they were used in most of the observed downward transitions (79% in ROLR and 86% in RRLR). Hens who received ramps in lay (i.e., RRLR and ROLR) showed more transitions immediately after lights on compared to midday or dusk phases (p < 0.001), performed more transitions from the first aviary tier compared to nest or top tier (p = 0.013) and had lower KBF severity than those who did not receive ramps in the laying aviaries (ROLO, RRLO; p < 0.001). At 60 WOA, hens in the RRLR treatment had greater feather coverage than those in ROLR and RRLO treatments (p < 0.001). Birds in the RRLR treatment had better foot health overall than those in treatments without ramps in lay (p = 0.018). Providing ramps to hens in aviaries appeared to be the preferred means of transitioning between aviary tiers though had positive effects on welfare parameters such as food health, feather coverage, and KBF severity, without negative impacts on production. Benefits were seen primarily when ramps were provided in lay, though their installation in rearing provided evidence of easier adaptation to the laying barn. Our study supports providing ramps throughout the lifetime of the bird to accommodate hens' preferred means of moving vertically in aviaries and deliver consequent benefits to health and welfare.

Providing elevated structures in the pullet rearing environment affects behavior during initial acclimation to a layer aviary

Spatial abilities of hens are particularly sensitive to development during early life. Experiences in pullet housing may have lasting consequences on adult hens' movements in cage-free environments. We tested whether opportunities to access elevated spaces during rearing improved hens' use of a multitiered aviary. Female Dekalb White pullets were reared in either floor pens (FL), single-tiered aviaries (ST), or 2-tiered aviaries (TT; n = 5 pens/environment) through 16 wk of age. Rearing structures were replaced with identical multitiered aviaries at 17 wk. The distribution of the flock within the aviary and the vertical transitions of 10 focal hens/pen across the aviary were determined from videos recorded during their first (D1) and seventh (D7) day of aviary access, as well as at 19, 23, and 27 wk of age. Prevalence of floor eggs was recorded weekly from 17 to 28 wk of age. On D1, more ST and TT hens utilized the aviary during the daytime (P = 0.0077), made more vertical transitions when searching for a roosting spot in the evening (P = 0.0021), and maintained a consistent distance traveled during transitions compared to FL hens (P = 0.02). These differences disappeared by D7, except that ST and TT hens continued to roost on the highest perches of the aviary more (P < 0.0001) than FL hens through 27 wk of age. FL hens laid more floor eggs than ST and TT hens for the first 2 wk of lay (P < 0.0001). The majority (97.9%) of vertical transitions was controlled. Uncontrolled transitions were highest at D1 and decreased by D7 (P = 0.0009) and were not affected by rearing (P = 0.33). The results suggest that hens reared with minimal height are hesitant to use the laying hen aviaries when they are first transferred. They acclimate within 1 to 2 wk, but continue to roost less in the highest accessible level.

Space use and navigation ability of hens at housing in the aviary for the laying phase: effect of enrichment with additional perches and genotype

The present study tested the hypothesis that increased availability of perches could favor the adaptation and navigation ability of pullets of different genotypes at housing in a new aviary system for the laying phase. To this purpose, 900 Lohmann White-LSL and 900 Hy-line Brown were randomly allocated at 17 wk of age in 8 pens of an experimental aviary, according to a bifactorial arrangement with 2 genotypes (Brown vs. White) × 2 types of pens (enriched or not enriched with additional perches besides those of the aviary). Data collected between 17 and 20 wk of age showed that the enrichment with additional perches decreased the use of the aviary perches while the rate of successful landings/take-offs was unaffected. As for the effect of genotype, during the night a lower rate of hens on the floor (0.15 vs. 6.63%) and a higher rate of hens on the additional perches (2.47 vs. 0.98%) was found in White compared to Brown hens (P < 0.001); the former hens also used the third tiers for sleeping on the aviary uppermost perches (P < 0.001). During the day, White hens used more the third tier (32.8 vs. 15.6%; P < 0.001) and the additional perches (3.88 vs. 0.91%; P < 0.01) compared to Brown hens, while they stood less on the floor (18.3 vs. 22.6%; P < 0.05). White hens performed a significantly higher number of landings (80.7 vs. 21.9; P < 0.001) and of take-offs (74.3 vs. 10.0; P < 0.001) per pen compared to Brown hens. The risk of unsuccessful landings was higher in Brown compared to White hens (odd ratio: 6.65; 95% confidence interval: 4.36-10.1; P < 0.001). In conclusion, the enrichment with additional perches played a major role in hen distribution and space use than in their navigation ability. At the same time, the significant differences between the 2 genotypes call for a careful evaluation of the aviary design and animal management to optimize welfare at housing and possibly productive results of laying hens.

Biomechanics of landing in injured and uninjured chickens and the role of meloxicam

Birds use their legs and wings when transitioning from aerial to ground locomotion during landing. To improve our understanding of the effects of footpad dermatitis (FPD) and keel bone fracture (KBF) upon landing biomechanics in laying hens, we measured ground-reaction forces generated by hens (n = 37) as they landed on force plates (Bertec Corporation, Columbus, OH) from a 30 cm drop or 170 cm jump in a single-blinded placebo-controlled trial using a cross-over design where birds received an anti-inflammatory (meloxicam, 5 mg/kg body mass) or placebo treatment beforehand. We used generalized linear mixed models to test for effects of health status, treatment and their interaction on landing velocity (m/s), maximum resultant force (N), and impulse (force integrated with respect to time [N s]). Birds with FPD and KBF tended to show divergent alterations to their landing biomechanics when landing from a 30 cm drop, with a higher landing velocity and maximum force in KBF compared to FPD birds, potentially indicative of efforts to either reduce the use of their wings or impacts on inflamed footpads. In contrast, at 170 cm jumps fewer differences between birds of different health statuses were observed likely due to laying hens being poor flyers already at their maximum power output. Our results indicate that orthopedic injuries, apart from being welfare issues on their own, may have subtle influences on bird mobility through altered landing biomechanics that should be considered.

Factors affecting space use by laying hens in a cage-free aviary system: effect of nest lighting at pullet housing and of curtain nest color during laying

At 17 wk of age, 1,800 Lohman brown hens were housed in 8 pens of an experimental aviary system, specifically set up for the purposes of the present study, and kept until 26 wk without or with nest lighting (lights inside the nest 1.5 h before the lighting of the installation) for training in the nest use. Then, at 27 wk, 4 combinations of nest curtains were adopted to evaluate the effects on hens' distribution, that is, nests with red (RR) or yellow (YY) curtains at all tiers; nests with red and yellow curtains at the first and second tier, respectively (RY); or nests with yellow and red curtains at the first and second tier, respectively (YR). The use of enlightened compared to dark nests at housing increased the oviposition rate (P < 0.001) and decreased the rate of broken (P < 0.001) and dirty eggs (P < 0.05) from 27 to 45 wk, while increasing the rate of eggs laid inside the nests (P < 0.001). The presence of yellow nest curtains increased the rate of hens on the floor in pens YY and YR compared to pens RR and RY (35.3 and 35.5% vs. 34.1 and 33.3%, respectively; P = 0.05) and the rate of floor eggs in pens YR (2.23% vs. 1.63 and 1.65% in pens RR and RY; P < 0.05). In pens RY, a higher rate of eggs was always found on the second tier compared to the first one with the most inhomogeneous distribution compared to pens RR, YY, and YR (+10.8 vs. +3.4, +1.9, and +4.6 percentage points of eggs laid on the second tier compared to the first one, respectively). In conclusion, nest lighting at housing trained hens to the use of nests while improving egg production in terms of quantity and quality. The use of yellow curtains on nests moved hens between the different levels of the aviary but this was not associated with an increased nest use for laying.

Influence of Increased Freedom of Movement on Welfare and Egg Laying Pattern of Hens Kept in Aviaries

This work investigates the effects of structural modifications on the welfare level and laying patterns of hens in a three-tier commercial aviary system. Four experimental groups were used: C (control, housed in a traditional aviary); LM (longitudinal movement, in which internal partitions were removed); VM (vertical movement, in which ramps were installed); and FM (freedom of movement, both LM and VM modifications). Hens showed worse body condition scores (p < 0.05) in all the modified aviaries, while plumage condition was improved in FM but worsened in VM (p < 0.05). No significant effect was observed on egg deposition patterns, egg quality or keel bone damage. When ramps were available (VM and FM groups), hens reduced the number of flights and increased the number of walks from 0.52 to 7.7% of the displacements on average (p < 0.05). Apart from some feather pecking concerns in VM (likely due to overcrowding in some favourite aviary areas), LM and FM seemed to facilitate animal movement and promote species−specific behaviour. It is concluded that hen welfare in aviary systems can be improved by means of tailored structural modifications. Producers may therefore adopt some of these modifications (providing ramps and/or removing vertical barriers) to enhance the welfare of hens.

Effects of rearing systems on the eggshell quality, bone parameters and expression of genes related to bone remodeling in aged laying hens

Public concerns regarding animal welfare are changing the selection of rearing systems in laying hens. This study investigated the effects of rearing systems on eggshell quality, bone parameters and relative expression levels of genes related to bone remodeling in aged laying hens. A total of 2,952 55-day-old Jing Tint Six pullets were randomly assigned to place in the conventional caging system (CCS) or aviary system (AVS) and kept until 95 weeks of age. The AVS group delayed the decrease of eggshell quality and alleviated the symptoms of osteoporosis in the humerus rather than in the femur. Eggshell breaking strength, thickness, weight, weight ratio, stiffness and fracture toughness were decreased linearly with age (from 55 to 95 weeks of age, p &lt; 0.05). The AVS group had higher eggshell breaking strength, stiffness and fracture toughness than the CCS group (p &lt; 0.05). Higher total calcium and phosphorus per egg were presented in the AVS group at 95 weeks of age (p &lt; 0.05). At 95 weeks of age, the AVS group had a humerus with higher weight, volume, length, midpoint perimeter, cortical index, fat-free dry weight, ash content, total calcium per bone, total phosphorus per bone, average bone mineral density, strength, stiffness and work to fracture compared to the CCS group (p &lt; 0.05). Such differences did not appear in the femur. The relative expression levels of alkaline phosphatase (ALP) and osteocalcin (OCN) genes in the femur and hormone receptors (vitamin D receptor (VDR), estrogen receptor alpha (ERα) and fibroblast growth factor 23 (FGF23)) genes in the humerus were significantly upregulated (p &lt; 0.05) in the AVS group. The level of tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase (TRAP) transcripts was also increased (p &lt; 0.05) in the femur of the AVS group. Overall, compared with the CCS, the AVS alleviated the deterioration of eggshell and bone qualities of aged laying hens, which may be related to the changes in the expression of genes associated with bone remodeling.

Developing a novel welfare assessment tool for loose-housed laying hens - the Aviary Transect method

This study compared welfare assessment results in aviary flocks using 3 approaches: 1) A novel Aviary Transect method, 2) AssureWel, and 3) the Norwegian farm advisors' NorWel method. The Aviary Transect time requirement, interobserver reliability, and within- and across-house sensitivity to detect welfare indicators were also evaluated. The study was conducted on 6 randomly chosen commercial white-strain layer flocks of similar age and flock size, kept in multitiered aviaries. The Aviary Transect method comprised standardized walks along each aisle while screening the whole flock for 12 welfare indicators: feather loss (FL) on head, back, breast, and tail, wounds on head, back, tail, and feet, dirty birds, enlarged crop, sick birds, and dead birds. AssureWel involved scoring FL on head and back, and dirtiness of 50 random birds, and flock-level evaluation of beak trimming, antagonistic behavior, flightiness, birds needing further care, and mortality. NorWel involved scoring 8 welfare indicators on 50 random birds: FL on head, back, breast, and tail, dirtiness, and wounds on head, back, and tail. The AssureWel detected flock differences in both minor and major FL on the back (P < 0.01) as well as somewhat dirty birds (P < 0.01). The NorWel method detected flock differences in both minor and major FL on the head (P < 0.01), back (P < 0.001), breast (P < 0.001), and tail (P < 0.001) and somewhat (score 1) dirty birds (P < 0.05). The Aviary Transect method detected flock differences in FL on head, back, breast, and tail (all P < 0.001), dirty birds (P < 0.05) and enlarged crop (P < 0.001). More birds with FL on breast, and more dirty birds, were found in wall vs. central transects (P < 0.05). There was good interobserver agreement, except for dirty birds (P < 0.01), and positive correlations (P < 0.05) were identified between the Aviary Transect method and the other sampling methods for FL on head and back, and dirtiness. The three methods took similar time to complete (about 20 min/flock). In conclusion, all 3 methods detected significant differences in welfare indicator prevalence between flocks. The new Aviary Transect method provides egg producers with an efficient and sensitive whole-flock assessment of hen welfare status in multitiered aviaries.

The Welfare Status of Hens in Different Housing Systems – A Review

The currently used poultry farming methods, which aim to maximise economic profit, are based on ever new technological solutions that improve flock management and increase bird performance. However, they do not always meet the natural needs of birds. Every housing method and technological solution currently in use is faced with some issues, such as social stress, adverse temperature/ humidity conditions, risk of zoonoses, and behavioural pathologies, which determine poultry performance and welfare. Disregard for animal welfare involves not only ethical but also practical aspects, because well-being and housing comfort translate into better weight gains, health and productivity of the birds. The studies reported here suggest that every production system, despite the many welfare-improving aspects, causes numerous behavioural, productivity and health abnormalities in laying hens. Therefore, further research is needed to identify various risk factors for the purpose of improving housing systems and increasing the welfare of hens.

Effect of different rearing system on eggs production, hatchability, and offspring quality in layer breeders

This study analyzed the influence of an aviary system, in comparison with battery cages, on rearing and reproduction of parent-stock (PS) laying-type chickens. ISA Brown PS chicks were reared for 16 wk in battery cages or in an aviary system. Chickens reared in cages were kept there throughout the rearing period, whereas those reared in the aviary were released after 7 wk. The remaining housing conditions were similar in cages and the aviary. Body weight (BW, g), feed intake (FI, g/birds/d), and mortality (%) of birds were monitored during rearing. After the rearing period, the chickens were transferred to 4 litter poultry houses: flock C (in cages) to poultry houses C1 and C2 (total: 2,076 cockerels and 20,450 pullets); flock A (in aviary) to poultry houses A1 and A2 (total: 1,542 cockerels and 16,962 pullets). During the period of reproduction (48 wk), egg production (%), hatching egg production (%), waste egg (%) and litter egg production (%), feed conversion ratio (FCR, g) and water intake (mL) per laid egg, hatching egg, and hatched chick, mortality (week/%), and BW at 17 wk and after reaching 50% laying performance were monitored. Furthermore, during incubation, fertilization rate (%), hatchability (%), and chick quality were recorded. The results showed that aviary rearing was associated with lower FI and higher mortality of chicks up to 16 wk of age. The following effects were also observed for aviary rearing during reproduction: the average egg and hatching egg production were higher, while waste and litter egg production were lower; FCR per laid egg, hatching egg, and the number of hatched chicks were poorer; and water intake for the production of 1 hatching egg and 1 hatched chick was lower. In the case of flocks A, higher mortality and BW at 17 wk of age were recorded for both sexes. They were characterized by higher relative egg fertilization, but lower hatchability due to the higher share of unhatched eggs. No influence of PS flock rearing system on chick quality was observed. The obtained results indicate that the aviary rearing system can be recommended for PS laying-type flocks. However, future research should consider the impact of a different diet having higher energy concentration on PS flocks reared in aviaries and develop methods for counteracting higher mortality in these systems. This is particularly significant for roosters because too few roosters in flock may contribute to lower egg fertilization and higher embryonic mortality.

Welfare implications for barn (and aviary) egg production systems

Barn production systems in Australia are either an indoor-housing floor system or an aviary system with multilevel structures, equipped with nesting boxes, perches and feeding and watering systems. These systems offer hens the freedom of movement and an opportunity to display a repertoire of favourable behaviours as well as interact with complex housing elements as compared with caged systems. However, the system can create prospects for the hens to express detrimental behaviours such as feather pecking and cannibalism. Other aspects of welfare that may be compromised when compared with cage systems include incidence of fractures and injuries during navigation of hens among elements of housing that may result in collision or falls. Barn production systems may have an advantage over free-range production systems in relation to the protection they offer from predators and predator stress, and diseases and parasites that can be contracted from range areas. Barn systems also offer better biosecurity due to lack of direct access to wild birds and their faeces. The aim of the present review is to assess the welfare status of birds housed in barn (and aviary) production systems, while considering husbandry factors that affect welfare outcomes, the health and disease implications and sustainability. To maintain a high welfare outcome in barn production systems, it is important to keep the enclosed environmental conditions optimum by managing air quality, ventilation and lighting within sheds. Sustainability of these production systems depends on consumer preference, cost of production, environmental footprint and suitable genetics of hens.

Why Do Hens Pile? Hypothesizing the Causes and Consequences

Piling is a behavior in laying hens whereby individuals aggregate in larger densities than would be normally expected. When piling behavior leads to mortalities it is known as smothering and its frequent but unpredictable occurrence is a major concern for many egg producers. There are generally considered to be three types of piling: panic, nest box and recurring piling. Whilst nest box and panic piling have apparent triggers, recurring piling does not, making it an enigmatic and ethologically intriguing behavior. The repetitive nature of recurring piling may result in a higher incidence of smothering and could have unconsidered, sub-lethal consequences. Here, we consider the possible causes of recurring piling from an ethological perspective and outline the potential welfare and production consequences. Drawing on a wide range of literature, we consider different timescales of causes from immediate triggers to ontogeny and domestication processes, and finally consider the evolution of collective behavior. By considering different timescales of influence, we built four hypotheses relevant to the causes of piling, which state that the behavior: (i) is caused by hens moving toward or away from an attractant/repellent; (ii) is socially influenced; (iii) is influenced by early life experiences and; (iv) can be described as a maladaptive collective behavior. We further propose that the following could be welfare consequences of piling behavior: Heat stress, physical injury (such as keel bone damage), and behavioral and physiological stress effects. Production consequences include direct and indirect mortality (smothering and knock-on effects of piling, respectively), potential negative impacts on egg quality and on worker welfare. In future studies the causes of piling and smothering should be considered according to the different timescales on which causes might occur. Here, both epidemiological and modeling approaches could support further study of piling behavior, where empirical studies can be challenging.

Pullet Rearing Affects Collisions and Perch Use in Enriched Colony Cage Layer Housing

Simple Summary

Early-life experiences for laying hens occur in the pullet rearing environment. Hens reared in aviaries use vertical space more than hens reared in non-enriched cages, but this effect has only been studied up to 23 weeks of age. Additionally, hens reared in aviaries sustain fewer keel bone fractures than those reared in non-enriched cages through the age of 73 weeks. Fractures are associated with hens having collisions with structures in their environment, but the long-term effect of rearing on collisions is not known. Lohmann LSL-Lite hens were reared in either aviaries or non-enriched cages until 19 weeks of age, then moved into enriched colony cages. Video recordings at 21, 35, and 49 weeks of age were used to identify behaviors associated with acceleration events for hens fitted with tri-axial accelerometers, as well as the proportion of birds utilizing elevated perches at two different heights. Our results indicate that hens reared in non-enriched cages experience more collisions than aviary-reared hens. Aviary-reared hens also prefer to utilize a higher perch than the cage-reared hens. These results suggest that rearing has long-term effects on space use and the ease with which hens transition among vertical spaces.

Abstract

Hens reared in aviaries (AVI) as pullets have improved spatial abilities compared to hens reared in non-enriched cages (CON). However, this effect on behavior has been shown only to 23 weeks of age. Lohmann LSL-Lite hens were reared in either CON or AVI until 19 weeks of age and then moved into enriched colony cages (ECC) containing two elevated perches of different heights (n = 6 ECC/treatment). Focal hens (3 per ECC) were fitted with tri-axial accelerometers to record acceleration events at 21, 35, and 49 weeks of age. Video recordings from each age were used to identify behaviors associated with acceleration events as well as the proportion of hens utilizing perches. CON hens experienced more acceleration events (p = 0.008) and more collisions (p = 0.04) than AVI hens during the day at 21 and 35 weeks of age. The total proportion of hens perching at night was similar between treatments across most time points, but fewer CON hens used the high perch compared to AVI hens throughout the study (p = < 0.001). Rearing in aviaries influences hen behavior out to peak lay for collisions and out to mid-lay for perch height preference in ECC.

Health of Commercial Egg Laying Chickens in Different Housing Systems

To determine which type of egg-laying hen housing was best for the chickens, the workers in those housing systems, the environment, and society based on food safety and affordability, a combined research project involving egg suppliers, food manufacturers, food service representatives, and food retailers, as well as research institutions and nongovernmental organizations, was performed. This study reports the hen health and welfare portion based upon veterinary health inspections and compared mortality rates, skeletal abnormalities, causes of death determined by necropsy, and titers to infectious bronchitis and Newcastle disease viruses. Birds were housed on a preexisting Midwest layer complex, which consisted of conventional cages (CC). New houses were built adjacent to the CC house where enriched colony cages (EC) and an aviary system (AV) were installed. Two flock cycles from housing to 78 wk of age were followed. Total mortality was greatest for AV, while CC and EC birds were similar. Keel bone fractures were greatest for AV, next greatest for EC, and least for CC birds. Other skeletal abnormalities were greatest for AV birds. Birds dying from being caught in the structure, pick out, and persecution was most frequent for AV and next most frequent for EC, but nonexistent with CC birds. Infectious pododermatitis (bumblefoot) was most frequent for AV, next most frequent for EC, and essentially nonexistent for CC birds. There was little to no effect on antibody titers based upon housing type. Based upon these findings, it appears that EC housing is better for the health and welfare of egg-laying chickens than CC or AV housing.

Influence of later exposure to perches and nests on flock level distribution of hens in an aviary system during lay

Aviaries provide hens with many resources, but birds must develop motor and cognitive skills to use them properly. Introducing birds to aviaries at older ages has been reported to result in less use of perches, nests, and vertical space, which can reduce productivity and hen welfare. The objectives of this study were to examine (1) how enrichment influenced distribution of hens in the aviary during the day and (2) how enrichment influenced the distribution and roosting substrate of birds at night. Hy-Line W36 pullets were raised in floor pens before moving to laying aviaries (100 hens/aviary unit × 4 units/treatments). Control (CON) pullets were placed into aviaries at 17 wk of age (WOA). Floor (FLR) and enriched (ENR) pullets remained in floor pens until 25 WOA, and ENR birds were provided with perches and nests at 17 WOA. Birds were counted in tiers and litter areas of the aviary at morning, midday and evening at 36 and 54 WOA. Data were analyzed using generalized linear mixed models in R statistical software. At 36 WOA, ENR and CON birds occupied aviary areas at similar rates but differently from FLR birds. For example, in the morning 34% of CON hens and 30% of ENR hens occupied the highest tier compared to 15% of FLR hens (P < 0.01). At midday, 57% of CON and 57% of ENR birds were counted in litter compared with 77% of FLR birds (P < 0.01). In the evening, CON and ENR hens moved to the top tier of the aviary in greater numbers than FLR hens (22 and 17%, respectively, vs. 7%, P < 0.01). At 54 WOA, differences between FLR hens and CON/ENR hens were less pronounced, suggesting FLR hens were adapting to the aviary. Overall, we conclude that birds exposed to aviaries at 25 WOA can adapt to aviary systems, but take more time to do so than birds exposed to aviaries or vertical enrichment at 17 WOA.

Flock use of the range is associated with the use of different components of a multi-tier aviary system in commercial free-range laying hens

1. The objective of this study was to investigate the association of using a multi-tier aviary system and access to range on flock uniformity in free-range laying hens, and to determine whether the extent of range use or flock uniformity can be predicted from the use of different levels of the aviary system.2. A total of 13,716 Lohmann Brown hens from five commercial free-range flocks housed in identical houses on the same farm were individually weighed at 16 weeks of age and allocated to five replicate areas within each house. Hen movement in the multi-tier aviary system and on the range was individually monitored using radio frequency identification (RFID). All hens had access to the range from 18 to 22 weeks of age and were exposed to the same management conditions.3. Whilst only one flock significantly changed its flock uniformity with time, they differed from each other in uniformity and body weight (P = 0.001).4. Hens spent most of their available time on the lower aviary tier (7.29 ± 0.029 h/hen/day) and on the upper aviary tier (4.29 ± 0.024 h/hen/day) while the least amount of time was spent on the range and in the nest boxes (0.93 ± 0.005 h/hen/day and 1.48 ± 0.007 h, respectively, P = 0.001).5. Range use was negatively correlated (r = -0.30) to the time spent on the upper aviary tier and positively correlated (r = 0.46) to the time spent on the lower aviary tier (P = 0.001). Bivariate analysis revealed that range and upper aviary resp. lower aviary tier usage had a significant curvilinear association.6. In conclusion, the study showed that range use was associated to the time hens spent on the different tiers of the aviary system. Flock uniformity varied between flocks but was not associated with either range and aviary system usage.

Effects of litter floor access and inclusion of experienced hens in aviary housing on floor eggs, litter condition, air quality, and hen welfare

With different cage-free (CF) housing styles and management schemes, retailers have developed their own CF criteria. One highly debated aspect is if hens may be kept inside the system for part of the day-during the first few hours after lights-on. Research is lacking regarding the impacts of such a practice on hen welfare, incidence of eggs laid on the litter floor, litter condition, and air quality. This 14-mo field study was conducted to help assess such impacts. Hens (Dekalb White) in an aviary house (50,000-hen nominal capacity) were allowed to have full litter access (FLA) vs. part-time litter access (PLA) from 10:50 am to 9:00 pm, coupled with the absence or presence of experienced hens (1.5% of the population), hence a 2 × 2 factorial arrangement. The measured variables included a) incidence of floor eggs, b) percentage of birds remaining on litter floor at night, c) mortality, d) body weight (BW) and BW uniformity, e) litter condition (depth, moisture content, texture, amount removed, and bacteria concentration), f) environmental conditions, and g) welfare conditions (10 variables). Compared to FLA, PLA had a significantly lower incidence of floor eggs (1.4 ± 0.1 vs. 12.6 ± 1.1 eggs per hen housed as of 76 weeks of age (WOA), i.e., approximately 89% reduction), less manure deposition on the floor (0.53 ± 0.02 vs. 1.05 ± 0.04 kg/100 hens/d, dry basis, i.e., approximately 50% reduction), and lower ammonia concentrations due to drier litter (averaging 22% lower). Inclusion of 1.5% experienced hens in the young flock did not show benefit of reducing the incidence of floor eggs (P = 0.48). The percentage of hens remaining on the floor at night was low (< 0.01%) in all cases from 24 WOA onward. No differences were detected between FLA and PLA in hen welfare conditions, mortality, BW, BW uniformity, bacteria concentration in the litter, air temperature, or relative humidity.

Using Radio-Frequency Identification Technology to Measure Synchronised Ranging of Free-Range Laying Hens

Simple Summary

Free-range laying hens can choose to be indoors or outdoors. Individual hens vary in their ranging choice and this behaviour could also be affected by their flock mates. Radio-frequency identification tracking of individual hens in experimental free-range pens with group sizes of 46–50 hens was used to study flock ranging patterns. Across the day, hens moved through the range pop-holes in the same direction as other hens above levels expected by random chance, termed ‘pop-hole-following’. Hens were also simultaneously indoors or outdoors with other specific hens more often than expected by random chance, termed ‘hen-pair association’. Chicks that were provided variable stimulatory and structural enrichments from 4 to 21 days showed higher pop-hole-following and hen-pair association than non-enriched birds. The individual birds within these small hen groups were behaving primarily as a cohesive flock which has implications for understanding the group-level behaviour of hens. Further research would analyse if similar social movement patterns were present in larger commercial free-range flocks and how early rearing environments may affect adult social behaviour.

Abstract

Free-range laying hen systems provide individuals a choice between indoor and outdoor areas where range use may be socially influenced. This study used radio-frequency identification technology to track the ranging of individually-tagged hens housed in six experimental free-range pens from 28 to 38 weeks of age (46–50 hens/pen). All daily visits to the range were used to study group behaviour. Results showed that 67.6% (SD = 5.0%) of all hen movements through the pop-holes outdoors or indoors were following the movement of another hen (‘pop-hole-following’) compared to only 50.5% of movements in simulated random data. The percentage overlap in time that all combinations of hen pairs within each pen spent simultaneously outdoors or indoors showed a median value of overlap greater than the 90th percentile of random data. Pens housing hens that had been provided variable enrichments from 4 to 21 days (n = 3 pens) showed higher ‘pop-hole-following’ behaviour and a higher percentage of hen-pair association compared to hens reared in non-enriched conditions (n = 3 pens). These results show that birds in each free-range pen were primarily a cohesive flock and early enrichment improved this social cohesiveness. These results have implications for understanding free-range flock-level behaviour.

Laying hens in aviaries with different litter substrates: Behavior across the flock cycle and feather lipid content

The tiered aviary for laying hens includes a floor litter area to promote foraging and dust bathing. Data are needed on hens' use of different litter substrates and effectiveness of substrates in removing excess feather lipids to ensure a suitable litter area. Bovans White hens were housed in commercial-style aviaries with access to one of 3 litter substrates (wood shavings, straw, or plastic turf mats-AstroTurf®, n = 4 aviary pens per substrate, 144 cage-reared hens populated per pen). Litter areas were videoed across 2 d each at 4 ages: immediately following first aviary opening (25 wk), then at 28, 50, and 68 weeks. Observations of hens throughout the d included percentages of all hens in each pen on the litter area, foraging and transitioning between the tiered enclosure and litter area. Percentages of hens dust bathing were observed from 11:00 to 15:00. Breast and back feather samples from 7 birds per pen at 28, 50, and 68 wk were analyzed for lipid content. Overall, fewer hens simultaneously accessed the AstroTurf® (P < 0.0001), but flocks showed relatively balanced transitions between the tiered enclosure and the litter area throughout the d, regardless of substrate. On average, less than 5% of all hens were observed dust bathing (peaks up to 15% of hens) with no differences among litter substrates or ages (P ≥ 0.18). On average, less than 2% of hens were observed foraging (peaks up to 4% of hens) with fewer hens foraging on AstroTurf® (P < 0.0001). Feather lipid differences among litter substrates (P < 0.0001) were inconsistent across sampling periods, possibly due to different birds sampled across time. At all ages, lipid levels were higher on the back over breast feathers (P < 0.0001) for hens housed with AstroTurf®. AstroTurf® may be suitable for nest boxes, but straw and shavings are more ideal litter substrates. Further study should investigate alternative substrates or regular substrate addition to encourage more foraging and dust bathing.

Internal roosting location is associated with differential use of the outdoor range by free-range laying hens

1. In commercial free-range systems for laying hens, popholes to the outdoor range are often installed on one side of the house only. In multi-tier systems, it is possible that some individuals fail to access the range due to internal barriers to movement. 2. Five commercial multi-tier flocks from different units were studied. For each flock, two different colour markers were used to distinguish 200 birds roosting near the popholes (NP-Roost) and 200 birds roosting far from the popholes (FP-Roost) at night. The following day, counts of marked birds on the range and inside the house were performed. 3. Significantly more NP-Roost birds were observed in all areas of the outdoor range than FP-Roost birds the next day. Distance of FP area from the popholes was very strongly positively correlated with effect size in the adjacent range area. 4. Additionally, in the indoor area far from the popholes (FP) more FP-Roost birds were observed the next day than NP-Roost birds. In the indoor area near to the popholes (NP) more NP-Roost birds were observed the next day than FP-Roost birds. 5. These results suggest that roosting location is associated with differential range use when popholes are only available on one side of the shed as birds that roosted far from the popholes used the range less.

Abatement of particulate matter emission from experimental aviary housings for laying hens by spraying rapeseed oil

In alternative systems for laying hens, concentrations and emission rates of particulate matter (PM) give reason for concern with regard to working conditions, bird health and productivity, and health of residents living near farms. Previously, we found that spraying a film of rapeseed oil onto the litter of broilers could substantially reduce PM concentrations and emissions. The objective of this study was to establish dose-response effects of oil spraying in aviaries on concentrations and emission rates of PM with aerodynamic diameters less than 10 μm (PM₁₀) and 2.5 μm (PM_2.5), on stockmen's exposure to PM₁₀, on egg production, exterior quality and behavior of the hens, and on the litter. An experiment was carried out with 4 treatments: 0 (control), 15, 30, and 45 mL/m² per d (oil treatments). Each treatment was applied in 2 rooms with different aviary systems (8 rooms in total). The experiment was repeated during a second period, both lasting 35 days. From d 11 to d 35, oil was applied daily using a spraying gun. Applying 15, 30, or 45 mL/m² per d significantly reduced emission rates of PM₁₀ by 27, 62, and 82%, and emission rates of PM_2.5 by 71, 83, and 94%, respectively. No significant effects of oil spraying were found on mortality, egg production, dust bathing behavior, scratching behavior, plumage soiling, DM content of the litter, or friability of the litter. A significant worsening of the plumage condition was found only for the body spot back/wings/tail (not for: throat/neck, chest/breast, or legs) in the 45 mL/m² per d treatment. Egg quality shifted significantly towards more second-class eggs in the oil treatments (1.9% versus 1.4%; P = 0.004). Remarkably, foot soiling decreased with increasing oil application. In conclusion, PM concentrations and emission rates in aviaries can be effectively reduced by spraying 15 to 30 mL/m² per d with minor side effects within a 25 d application period.

Influence of genetic strain and access to litter on spatial distribution of 4 strains of laying hens in an aviary system

Many laying hen producers are transitioning from conventional cages to new housing systems including multi-tier aviaries. Aviary resources, such as litter areas, are intended to encourage hens’ expression of natural behaviors to improve their welfare. Little research has examined the influence of laying hen strain on distribution and behavior inside aviaries, yet differences could influence a strain's suitability for an aviary design. This research examined how laying hens of 4 strains (Hy-Line Brown [HB], Bovans Brown [BB], DeKalb White [DW], and Hy-Line W36) distributed themselves among 3 enclosed aviary tiers and 2 litter areas at peak lay (25 to 28 wk of age) and after gaining access to litter on the floor (26 wk). Observations of hens’ spatial distribution were conducted immediately before and after, and 3 wk after hens gained access to litter. More HB and BB hens were in upper tiers in morning compared to DW and W36 (all P ≤ 0.05). However, DW and W36 hens roosted in upper tiers in larger numbers than HB and BB during evening (all P ≤ 0.05). More DW and W36 hens were on litter compared to BB and HB, particularly when litter was first accessible (all P ≤ 0.05). The number of hens on litter increased over time for all strains (P ≤ 0.06). White hens on litter occupied open areas in higher numbers (P ≤ 0.05), while more brown hens occupied litter under the aviary after acclimation (P ≤ 0.05). In the dark period, W36 and DW hens were present in higher numbers in upper tiers than HB and BB, while HB and BB showed higher tier-to-tier movement than DW and W36 (P ≤ 0.05). In general, more white hens roosted higher at night and explored litter sooner, while more brown hens were near or in nests in the morning and moved at night. Distinct strain differences indicate that attention should be paid to the match between configuration of the aviary design and strain of laying hen.

Influence of commercial laying hen housing systems on the incidence and identification of Salmonella and Campylobacter

The housing of laying hens is important for social, industrial, and regulatory aspects. Many studies have compared hen housing systems on the research farm, but few have fully examined commercial housing systems and management strategies. The current study compared hens housed in commercial cage-free aviary, conventional cage, and enriched colony cage systems. Environmental and eggshell pool samples were collected from selected cages/segments of the housing systems throughout the production cycle and monitored for Salmonella and Campylobacter prevalence. At 77 wk of age, 120 hens per housing system were examined for Salmonella and Campylobacter colonization in the: adrenal glands, spleen, ceca, follicles, and upper reproductive tract. All isolates detected from environmental swabs, eggshell pools, and tissues were identified for serotype. Two predominant Salmonella were detected in all samples: S. Braenderup and S. Kentucky. Campylobacter coli and C. jejuni were the only Campylobacter detected in the flocks. Across all housing systems, approximately 7% of hens were colonized with Salmonella, whereas > 90% were colonized with Campylobacter. Salmonella Braenderup was the isolate most frequently detected in environmental swabs (P < 0.0001) and housing system impacted Salmonella spp. shedding (P < 0.0001). Campylobacter jejuni was the isolate most frequently found in environmental swabs (P < 0.01), while housing system impacted the prevalence of C. coli and jejuni in ceca (P < 0.0001). The results of this study provide a greater understanding of the impact of hen housing systems on hen health and product safety. Additionally, producers and academia can utilize the findings to make informed decisions on hen housing and management strategies to enhance hen health and food safety.