Dustbathing in food particles does not remove feather lipids

Investigation of the Morphology of Adrenal Glands in Hens Kept in Two Different Housing Systems-A Pilot Study

It is difficult to objectively assess the chronic effects of housing systems on livestock and particularly on laying hens. However, this seems to be important in the context of animal welfare. Therefore, we conducted the present study in order to compare the effect of two different housing conditions, single cage (SC) and floor pen (FP), on the morphology of the adrenal gland. A higher amount of interrenal cells, which secrete stress hormones, can lead to a difference in the relation of adrenal and interrenal cells, which could be interpreted as an indication of chronic stress. For this purpose, adrenal glands were extracted, prepared, stained and examined by microscopy, and total area of the cut, total area of interrenal cells and total area of adrenal cells were measured. As a result, all laying hens had a higher percentage of interrenal cells than adrenal cells (FP: interrenal cells/adrenal cells = 78.37%/21.63%; SC: 80.00%/20.00%). The median of adrenal-interrenal ratio did not differ significantly (FP = 0.2503, SC = 0.2499), while the variation of the ratio between laying hens in FP and SC showed a slight tendency of a higher ratio in adrenal glands of FP (p < 0.0870). Body weight and adrenal-interrenal ratio were significantly negatively correlated in laying hens in FP (rS = -0.943, p < 0.0048) but not in SC (rS = -0.162, p = 0.7283). There was no significant correlation between body weight and total cell area for interrenal cells or adrenal cells. Body weight was significantly lower for laying hens kept in SC than for laying hens kept in FP (p < 0.0001). Due to the present results, it can be concluded that keeping laying hens in single cages can have a negative effect on body weight.

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.

Dust-bathing behavior of laying hens in enriched colony housing systems and an aviary system

The dust-bathing behavior of Lohmann Selected Leghorn hens was compared in 4 enriched colony housing systems and in an aviary system. The enriched colony housing systems differed especially in the alignment and division of the functional areas dust bath, nest, and perches. Forty-eight-hour video recordings were performed at 3 time-points during the laying period, and focal animal sampling and behavior sampling methods were used to analyze the dust-bathing behavior. Focal animal data included the relative fractions of dust-bathing hens overall, of hens bathing in the dust-bath area, and of those bathing on the wire floor throughout the day. Behavior data included the number of dust-bathing bouts within a predefined time range, the duration of 1 bout, the number of and reasons for interruptions, and the number of and reasons for the termination of dust-bathing bouts. Results showed that the average duration of dust bathing varied between the 4 enriched colony housing systems compared with the aviary system. The duration of dust-bathing bouts was shorter than reported under natural conditions. A positive correlation between dust-bathing activity and size of the dust-bath area was observed. Frequently, dust baths were interrupted and terminated by disturbing influences such as pecking by other hens. This was especially observed in the enriched colony housing systems. In none of the observed systems, neither in the enriched colony housing nor in the aviary system, were all of the observed dust baths terminated “normally.” Dust bathing behavior on the wire mesh rather than in the provided dust-bath area generally was observed at different frequencies in all enriched colony housing systems during all observation periods, but never in the aviary system. The size and design of the dust-bath area influenced the prevalence of dust-bathing behavior in that small and subdivided dust-bath areas reduced the number of dust-bathing bouts but increased the incidence of sham dust bathing on the wire mesh.