1
|
Collet JM, Bonnefous C, Germain K, Ravon L, Calandreau L, Guesdon V, Collin A, Le Bihan-Duval E, Mignon-Grasteau S. High-throughput phenotyping to characterise range use behaviour in broiler chickens. Animal 2024; 18:101099. [PMID: 38377811 DOI: 10.1016/j.animal.2024.101099] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/24/2023] [Revised: 01/19/2024] [Accepted: 01/25/2024] [Indexed: 02/22/2024] Open
Abstract
A key characteristic of free-range chicken farming is to enable chickens to spend time outdoors. However, each chicken may use the available areas for roaming in variable ways. To check if, and how, broilers use their outdoor range at an individual level, we need to reliably characterise range use behaviour. Traditional methods relying on visual scans require significant time investment and only provide discontinuous information. Passive RFID (Radio Frequency Identification) systems enable tracking individually tagged chickens' when they go through pop-holes; hence, they only provide partial information on the movements of individual chickens. Here, we describe a new method to measure chickens' range use and test its reliability on three ranges each containing a different breed. We used an active RFID system to localise chickens in their barn, or in one of nine zones of their range, every 30 seconds and assessed range-use behaviour in 600 chickens belonging to three breeds of slow- or medium-growing broilers used for outdoor production (all <40 g daily weight gain). From those real-time locations, we determined five measures to describe daily range use: time spent in the barn, number of outdoor accesses, number of zones visited in a day, gregariousness (an index that increases when birds spend time in zones where other birds are), and numbers of zone changes. Principal Component Analyses (PCAs) were performed on those measures, in each production system, to create two synthetic indicators of chickens' range use behaviour. The first two PCA axes represented over 90% of the variance of the five measures and were both consistent over time and correlated with independent visual scans. Contributions of the five measures to the PCAs were similar among breeds, except for the correlation between the number of outdoor accesses and the four other measures. PC1 correlated with time spent inside the barn and zone changes frequency, whilst PC2 was explained by exploration of the range. Taken together, PC1 and PC2 indicators showed that range use increased with age, outdoor temperature (in spring), and did not differ between males and females. Importantly, daily scores for both indicators were repeatable among individuals - particularly in PC1 - showing inter-individual variability on range-use. The characterisation of broiler behaviour around their range with these reliable and repeatable indicators provides novel tools to help understand individual variations of range-use in free-range farming.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julie M Collet
- INRAE, Université de Tours, BOA, 37380 Nouzilly, France.
| | | | - Karine Germain
- INRAE, UE EASM, Le Magneraud, CS 40052, 17700 Surgères, France
| | - Laure Ravon
- INRAE, UE EASM, Le Magneraud, CS 40052, 17700 Surgères, France
| | | | - Vanessa Guesdon
- Junia, Comportement Animal et Systèmes d'Elevage, F-59000 Lille, France
| | - Anne Collin
- INRAE, Université de Tours, BOA, 37380 Nouzilly, France
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Alindekon S, Rodenburg TB, Langbein J, Puppe B, Wilmsmeier O, Louton H. Setting the stage to tag "n" track: a guideline for implementing, validating and reporting a radio frequency identification system for monitoring resource visit behavior in poultry. Poult Sci 2023; 102:102799. [PMID: 37315427 PMCID: PMC10404737 DOI: 10.1016/j.psj.2023.102799] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/11/2023] [Revised: 05/12/2023] [Accepted: 05/17/2023] [Indexed: 06/16/2023] Open
Abstract
Passive radio frequency identification (RFID) can advance poultry behavior research by enabling automated, individualized, longitudinal, in situ, and noninvasive monitoring; these features can usefully extend traditional approaches to animal behavior monitoring. Furthermore, since the technology can provide insight into the visiting patterns of tagged animals at functional resources (e.g., feeders), it can be used to investigate individuals' welfare, social position, and decision-making. However, the lack of guidelines that would facilitate implementing an RFID system for such investigations, describing it, and establishing its validity undermines this technology's potential for advancing poultry science. This paper aims to fill this gap by 1) providing a nontechnical overview of how RFID functions; 2) providing an overview of the practical applications of RFID technology in poultry sciences; 3) suggesting a roadmap for implementing an RFID system in poultry behavior research; 4) reviewing how validation studies of RFID systems have been done in farm animal behavior research, with a focus on terminologies and procedures for quantifying reliability and validity; and 5) suggesting a way to report on an RFID system deployed for animal behavior monitoring. This guideline is aimed mainly at animal scientists, RFID component manufacturers, and system integrators who wish to deploy RFID system as an automated tool for monitoring poultry behavior for research purposes. For such a particular application, it can complement indications in classic general standards (e.g., ISO/IEC 18000-63) and provide ideas for setting up, testing, and validating an RFID system and a standard for reporting on its adequacy and technical aspects.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Serge Alindekon
- Animal Health and Animal Welfare, Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, University of Rostock, 18059 Rostock, Germany
| | - T Bas Rodenburg
- Animals in Science and Society, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, 3584 CM Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Jan Langbein
- Institute of Behavioral Physiology, Research Institute for Farm Animal Biology (FBN), 18196 Dummerstorf, Germany
| | - Birger Puppe
- Institute of Behavioral Physiology, Research Institute for Farm Animal Biology (FBN), 18196 Dummerstorf, Germany; Behavioral Sciences, Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, University of Rostock, 18059 Rostock, Germany
| | | | - Helen Louton
- Animal Health and Animal Welfare, Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, University of Rostock, 18059 Rostock, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Subedi S, Bist R, Yang X, Chai L. Tracking Floor Eggs with Machine Vision in Cage-free Hen Houses. Poult Sci 2023; 102:102637. [PMID: 37011469 PMCID: PMC10090712 DOI: 10.1016/j.psj.2023.102637] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/09/2023] [Revised: 02/28/2023] [Accepted: 03/02/2023] [Indexed: 03/11/2023] Open
Abstract
Some of the major restaurants and grocery chains in the United States have pledged to buy cage-free (CF) eggs only by 2025 or 2030. While CF house allows hens to perform more natural behaviors (e.g., dust bathing, perching, and foraging on the litter floor), a particular challenge is floor eggs (i.e., mislaid eggs on litter floor). Floor eggs have high chances of contamination. The manual collection of eggs is laborious and time-consuming. Therefore, precision poultry farming technology is necessary to detect floor eggs. In this study, 3 new deep learning models, that is, YOLOv5s-egg, YOLOv5x-egg, and YOLOv7-egg networks, were developed, trained, and compared in tracking floor eggs in 4 research cage-free laying hen facilities. Models were verified to detect eggs by using images collected in 2 different commercial houses. Results indicate that the YOLOv5s-egg model detected floor eggs with a precision of 87.9%, recall of 86.8%, and mean average precision (mAP) of 90.9%; the YOLOv5x-egg model detected the floor eggs with a precision of 90%, recall of 87.9%, and mAP of 92.1%; and the YOLOv7-egg model detected the eggs with a precision of 89.5%, recall of 85.4%, and mAP of 88%. All models performed with over 85% detection precision; however, model performance is affected by the stocking density, varying light intensity, and images occluded by equipment like drinking lines, perches, and feeders. The YOLOv5x-egg model detected floor eggs with higher accuracy, precision, mAP, and recall than YOLOv5s-egg and YOLOv7-egg. This study provides a reference for cage-free producers that floor eggs can be monitored automatically. Future studies are guaranteed to test the system in commercial houses.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sachin Subedi
- Department of Poultry Science, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA
| | - Ramesh Bist
- Department of Poultry Science, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA
| | - Xiao Yang
- Department of Poultry Science, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA
| | - Lilong Chai
- Department of Poultry Science, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Bonnefous C, Calandreau L, Le Bihan-Duval E, Ferreira VHB, Barbin A, Collin A, Reverchon M, Germain K, Ravon L, Kruger N, Mignon-Grasteau S, Guesdon V. Behavioural indicators of range use in four broiler strains. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2023. [DOI: 10.1016/j.applanim.2023.105870] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/17/2023]
|
5
|
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
|
6
|
A Comparison of the Plumage Condition of Three Egg-Laying Poultry Genotypes Housed in Non-Cage Systems. Animals (Basel) 2023; 13:ani13020185. [PMID: 36670725 PMCID: PMC9854643 DOI: 10.3390/ani13020185] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/08/2022] [Revised: 12/29/2022] [Accepted: 12/31/2022] [Indexed: 01/05/2023] Open
Abstract
The study covered a total of 810 hens in 3 groups (housing systems) of 270 hens each. The plumage condition of laying hens raised in various types of alternative housing systems, i.e., in deep litter (B), free-range (FR), and organic systems (O), was assessed at 20, 36, and 56 weeks of age. The indoor stocking density was 6 hens/m2. The study included hens of the native Green-legged Partridge breed (Z-11), Rhode Island Red (R-11) hens covered by a genetic resource protection program, and hybrids of Hy-Line Brown. The plumage of the head, neck, back, tail, and abdomen was assessed on a 5-point scale. The assessment of individual hens' plumage was calculated as the sum of the scores of the head, neck, back, tail and abdomen and could range from 0 (no cover) to 20 points (full plumage). The type of alternative housing system implemented and the age of the laying hens had an effect on the plumage status of all body parts assessed (p < 0.05), while the genotype had an effect on the condition of the neck, back, and tail plumage (p < 0.05). In both the FR and O systems, the plumage status was similar and superior to that in B (p < 0.05). As the age of the birds increased, the condition of the hens' plumage deteriorated. The better state of the plumage in FR and O than in B may indicate improved levels of welfare in housing systems with access to outside runs.
Collapse
|
7
|
Gómez Y, Berezowski J, Jorge YA, Gebhardt-Henrich SG, Vögeli S, Stratmann A, Toscano MJ, Voelkl B. Similarity in Temporal Movement Patterns in Laying Hens Increases with Time and Social Association. Animals (Basel) 2022; 12:555. [PMID: 35268125 PMCID: PMC8908832 DOI: 10.3390/ani12050555] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/16/2021] [Revised: 02/14/2022] [Accepted: 02/17/2022] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
We explored the relationship between social associations and individual activity patterns in domestic hens. Out of 1420 laying hens, 421 hens were equipped with RFID tags attached to RFID-specific leg bands (leg bands from Company Roxan, Selkirk, Scotland) to continuously track their change in location across four different areas (one indoor and three outdoor areas). Using a combination of social network analysis for quantifying social relationships and dynamic time warping for characterizing the movement patterns of hens, we found that hens were consistent in their individual variation in temporal activity and maintained stable social relationships in terms of preferred association partners. In addition to being consistent, social associations correlated with movement patterns and this correlation strengthened over the period of observation, suggesting that the animals aligned their activity patterns with those of their social affiliates. These results demonstrate the importance of social relationships when considering the expression of individual behaviour. Notably, differences in temporal patterns emerge despite rather homogeneous rearing conditions, same environment, and low genetic diversity. Thus, while variation in behavioural phenotypes can be observed across isolated individuals, this study shows that the social environment within a group can shape and enhance variation in general movement patterns of individual animals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yamenah Gómez
- Center for Proper Housing: Poultry and Rabbits (ZTHZ), Division of Animal Welfare, VPH Institute, University of Bern, Burgerweg 22, 3052 Zollikofen, Switzerland; (S.G.G.-H.); (S.V.); (A.S.); (M.J.T.)
| | - John Berezowski
- Veterinary Public Health Institute, University of Bern, 3012 Bern, Switzerland;
| | - Yandy Abreu Jorge
- National Centre for Animal and Plant Health, San José de las Lajas 32700, Cuba;
| | - Sabine G. Gebhardt-Henrich
- Center for Proper Housing: Poultry and Rabbits (ZTHZ), Division of Animal Welfare, VPH Institute, University of Bern, Burgerweg 22, 3052 Zollikofen, Switzerland; (S.G.G.-H.); (S.V.); (A.S.); (M.J.T.)
| | - Sabine Vögeli
- Center for Proper Housing: Poultry and Rabbits (ZTHZ), Division of Animal Welfare, VPH Institute, University of Bern, Burgerweg 22, 3052 Zollikofen, Switzerland; (S.G.G.-H.); (S.V.); (A.S.); (M.J.T.)
| | - Ariane Stratmann
- Center for Proper Housing: Poultry and Rabbits (ZTHZ), Division of Animal Welfare, VPH Institute, University of Bern, Burgerweg 22, 3052 Zollikofen, Switzerland; (S.G.G.-H.); (S.V.); (A.S.); (M.J.T.)
| | - Michael Jeffrey Toscano
- Center for Proper Housing: Poultry and Rabbits (ZTHZ), Division of Animal Welfare, VPH Institute, University of Bern, Burgerweg 22, 3052 Zollikofen, Switzerland; (S.G.G.-H.); (S.V.); (A.S.); (M.J.T.)
| | - Bernhard Voelkl
- Division of Animal Welfare, VPH Institute, University of Bern, 3012 Bern, Switzerland;
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Automated Tracking Systems for the Assessment of Farmed Poultry. Animals (Basel) 2022; 12:ani12030232. [PMID: 35158556 PMCID: PMC8833357 DOI: 10.3390/ani12030232] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/08/2021] [Revised: 01/16/2022] [Accepted: 01/18/2022] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary With the advent of artificial intelligence, the poultry sector is gearing up to adopt and embrace sensor technologies to enhance the production and the welfare of birds. Automated tracking and tracing of poultry birds has several advantages in poultry farms: overcoming the subjectivity of human measurements, enhancing the ability to provide quality care for the birds during their life on the farm, providing the ability to predict events and thereby enabling timely interventions, and many more. However, the technologies behind automated tracking systems are not ripe due to the lags in algorithms and practical implementation issues. This mini review provides a brief critical assessment of the current and recent advancements of automated tracking systems in the poultry industry and offers an outlook on future directions. Abstract The world’s growing population is highly dependent on animal agriculture. Animal products provide nutrient-packed meals that help to sustain individuals of all ages in communities across the globe. As the human demand for animal proteins grows, the agricultural industry must continue to advance its efficiency and quality of production. One of the most commonly farmed livestock is poultry and their significance is felt on a global scale. Current poultry farming practices result in the premature death and rejection of billions of chickens on an annual basis before they are processed for meat. This loss of life is concerning regarding animal welfare, agricultural efficiency, and economic impacts. The best way to prevent these losses is through the individualistic and/or group level assessment of animals on a continuous basis. On large-scale farms, such attention to detail was generally considered to be inaccurate and inefficient, but with the integration of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technology individualised, and per-herd assessments of livestock became possible and accurate. Various studies have shown that cameras linked with specialised systems of AI can properly analyse flocks for health concerns, thus improving the survival rate and product quality of farmed poultry. Building on recent advancements, this review explores the aspects of AI in the detection, counting, and tracking of poultry in commercial and research-based applications.
Collapse
|
9
|
Ferreira VHB, Guesdon V, Calandreau L. How can the research on chicken cognition improve chicken welfare: a perspective review. WORLD POULTRY SCI J 2021. [DOI: 10.1080/00439339.2021.1924920] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- V. H. B. Ferreira
- JUNIA, Comportement Animal et Systèmes d’Elevage, Lille Cedex, France
| | - V. Guesdon
- JUNIA, Comportement Animal et Systèmes d’Elevage, Lille Cedex, France
| | - L. Calandreau
- CNRS, IFCE, INRAE, Université de Tours, PRC, Nouzilly, France
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Social Network Analysis in Farm Animals: Sensor-Based Approaches. Animals (Basel) 2021; 11:ani11020434. [PMID: 33567488 PMCID: PMC7914829 DOI: 10.3390/ani11020434] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2021] [Revised: 02/01/2021] [Accepted: 02/03/2021] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Social behaviour of farm animals significantly impacts management interventions in the livestock sector and, thereby, animal welfare. Evaluation and monitoring of social networks between farm animals help not only to understand the bonding and agonistic behaviours among individuals but also the interactions between the animals and the animal caretaker. The interrelationship between social and environmental conditions, and the subtle changes in the behaviours of farm animals can be understood and precisely measured only by using sensing technologies. This review aims to highlight the use of sensing technologies in the investigation of social network analysis of farm animals. Abstract Natural social systems within animal groups are an essential aspect of agricultural optimization and livestock management strategy. Assessing elements of animal behaviour under domesticated conditions in comparison to natural behaviours found in wild settings has the potential to address issues of animal welfare effectively, such as focusing on reproduction and production success. This review discusses and evaluates to what extent social network analysis (SNA) can be incorporated with sensor-based data collection methods, and what impact the results may have concerning welfare assessment and future farm management processes. The effectiveness and critical features of automated sensor-based technologies deployed in farms include tools for measuring animal social group interactions and the monitoring and recording of farm animal behaviour using SNA. Comparative analyses between the quality of sensor-collected data and traditional observational methods provide an enhanced understanding of the behavioural dynamics of farm animals. The effectiveness of sensor-based approaches in data collection for farm animal behaviour measurement offers unique opportunities for social network research. Sensor-enabled data in livestock SNA addresses the biological aspects of animal behaviour via remote real-time data collection, and the results both directly and indirectly influence welfare assessments, and farm management processes. Finally, we conclude with potential implications of SNA on modern animal farming for improvement of animal welfare.
Collapse
|
11
|
Campbell DLM, Bari MS, Rault JL. Free-range egg production: its implications for hen welfare. ANIMAL PRODUCTION SCIENCE 2021. [DOI: 10.1071/an19576] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
Free-range laying hen housing systems are prevalent in Australia and perceived by consumers to provide greater opportunities for the expression of natural behaviour resulting in higher hen welfare. However, all housing systems have both benefits and risks and scientific evidence is needed on the welfare outcomes of free-range systems. In this review, the scientific literature is summarised from the past 10 years, from research conducted within Australia or internationally with brown laying-hen strains kept in free-range systems. It compiles information on range use by laying hens, hen behaviour while on the range, factors that affect range use, and impacts of ranging on hen health and other aspects of welfare. Novel insights have come from the use of radio-frequency identification systems that allow tracking of individual hens and have shown that the majority of hens access the range with multiple visits across the day, but a small proportion of hens within most flocks choose to remain indoors. Hens also vary in which areas of the range they use, and provision of natural or man-made shelters can increase both range access and range distribution. Hens spend most of their time foraging while outdoors, but the types and frequencies of behaviours vary depending on the resources available and other factors. Range access can be linked to health benefits such as improved plumage condition and reduced footpad dermatitis but there are also health risks associated with free-range systems such as greater susceptibility to disease (e.g. spotty liver disease), heat stress, predation, and potentially parasites in comparison to loose or cage housing systems. Design of the range area, indoor shed, management practices and rearing environments can all influence how hens utilise free-range housing systems. Further research is crucially needed on the impact of ranging on hen welfare in variable Australian climatic conditions, encompassing intense heat and sunlight as well as cooler or wet environments.
Collapse
|
12
|
Gray H, Davies R, Bright A, Rayner A, Asher L. Why Do Hens Pile? Hypothesizing the Causes and Consequences. Front Vet Sci 2020; 7:616836. [PMID: 33363246 PMCID: PMC7758342 DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2020.616836] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/13/2020] [Accepted: 11/16/2020] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Helen Gray
- Asher Behaviour Lab, School of Natural and Environmental Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom
| | - Rachel Davies
- Asher Behaviour Lab, School of Natural and Environmental Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom
| | - Ashleigh Bright
- FAI Farms Ltd., The Barn, Wytham, Oxfordshire, United Kingdom
| | - Ann Rayner
- FAI Farms Ltd., The Barn, Wytham, Oxfordshire, United Kingdom
| | - Lucy Asher
- Asher Behaviour Lab, School of Natural and Environmental Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Campbell DLM, Dyall TR, Downing JA, Cohen-Barnhouse AM, Lee C. Rearing Enrichments Affected Ranging Behavior in Free-Range Laying Hens. Front Vet Sci 2020; 7:446. [PMID: 32923462 PMCID: PMC7457029 DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2020.00446] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/26/2020] [Accepted: 06/19/2020] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Within Australia, free-range systems are prevalent, but pullets destined for range access are reared indoors. This mismatch between rearing and layer housing may hinder adaptation to the free-range environment. Rearing enrichments could enhance pullet development. A total of 1,386 Hy-Line Brown® chicks were reared inside an experimental facility across 16 weeks with 3 enrichment treatments including (1) a control group with standard floor-housing, (2) a novelty group providing novel objects that changed weekly (“novelty” hens), and (3) a structural group with custom-designed H-shaped structures including opaque sides (“structural” hens). At 16 weeks of age, all pullets were leg-banded with microchips and moved to an experimental free-range system with 9 identical pens (n = 3/rearing treatment). From 25 to 64 weeks, individual hen daily ranging behavior was tracked via radio-frequency identification technology and grouped into 6 age periods per rearing treatment. Video footage was used to count the number of hens at different distances on the range for the first 14 days of access, and eggs were assessed for albumen corticosterone concentrations 4 days prior to (n = 450) and 1 week after first range access (n = 450). Across most age periods, the structural hens spent the most time ranging (P ≤ 0.01), the novelty hens showed the fewest number of visits to the range (P < 0.0001), and both enriched hen groups had the longest maximum visit durations (P ≤ 0.02). Range use increased with age across all treatments with only 3% of hens never going outside. All hens were initially slow to use the range area with fewer novelty hens venturing farther onto the range (P ≤ 0.03). The structural hens had higher albumen corticosterone concentrations and variance (both P ≤ 0.004) prior to range access. All hens showed an increase in albumen corticosterone following the first week of range access resulting in no differences between rearing treatments in means (P = 0.92) and variance (P = 0.63). Different enrichments have differing impacts on ranging behavior, but further research is needed to understand the mechanisms of effects, with differences in brain lateralization a potential hypothesis to be tested.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dana L M Campbell
- Agriculture and Food, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Armidale, NSW, Australia
| | - Tim R Dyall
- Agriculture and Food, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Armidale, NSW, Australia
| | - Jeff A Downing
- School of Life and Environmental Science, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Andrew M Cohen-Barnhouse
- Agriculture and Food, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Armidale, NSW, Australia.,School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, Australia
| | - Caroline Lee
- Agriculture and Food, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Armidale, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Bari MS, Downing JA, Dyall TR, Lee C, Campbell DLM. Relationships Between Rearing Enrichments, Range Use, and an Environmental Stressor for Free-Range Laying Hen Welfare. Front Vet Sci 2020; 7:480. [PMID: 32923465 PMCID: PMC7457091 DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2020.00480] [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: 05/22/2020] [Accepted: 06/29/2020] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Enrichments during pullet rearing may improve adaptation and welfare of hens as they move from indoor rearing to a free-range system. Individual variation in outdoor ranging may also affect welfare. This study assessed the effects of rearing enrichments and an imposed environmental stressor on hen welfare and egg quality along with the association of welfare with ranging. Hy-Line Brown® chicks (n = 1,386) were reared indoors until 16 weeks with 3 enrichment treatments including a "control" group with standard floor litter, a "novelty" group that received novel objects that were changed weekly, and a "structural" group with H-shaped perching structures. Pullets were then moved to a free-range system with three replicates of each rearing treatment. Daily ranging was individually tracked from 25 to 64 weeks via radiofrequency identification technology. Individual hen welfare assessments were performed at 25, 33, 43, 56, and 64 weeks and correlated with ranging time prior to these dates. At 44 weeks, the range area was reduced by 80% for 11 days to induce stress. Changes in ranging behavior, albumen corticosterone concentrations and egg quality were evaluated. GLMMs showed significant interactions between hen age and rearing treatment for live weight, number of comb wounds, plumage coverage, and toenail length (all P ≤ 0.003), with the enriched hens showing more consistent live weight at the later ages, fewer comb wounds at 33 weeks, and better plumage coverage at the later ages, whereas the structural hens had shorter toenails as age increased. Plumage coverage showed a positive relationship with range use across most age points (P < 0.0001). Hens reduced ranging time following the imposed stressor but increased their number of visits with the lowest increase by the structural hens (P = 0.03). Significant interactions between rearing treatment and stressor for albumen corticosterone concentrations showed the structural hens decreased concentrations immediately post-stress, but the control and novelty groups increased (P < 0.006). The stressor increased or decreased values of most egg quality parameters across all rearing groups (all P ≤ 0.02). Overall, provision of rearing enrichments and greater range use may have positive impacts on hen welfare.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Md Saiful Bari
- School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, Australia
- Agriculture and Food, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Armidale, NSW, Australia
- Department of Dairy and Poultry Science, Chattogram Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Chattogram, Bangladesh
| | - Jeff A. Downing
- Faculty of Veterinary Science, School of Life and Environmental Science, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Tim R. Dyall
- Agriculture and Food, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Armidale, NSW, Australia
| | - Caroline Lee
- Agriculture and Food, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Armidale, NSW, Australia
| | - Dana L. M. Campbell
- Agriculture and Food, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Armidale, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Bari MS, Laurenson YCSM, Cohen-Barnhouse AM, Walkden-Brown SW, Campbell DLM. Effects of outdoor ranging on external and internal health parameters for hens from different rearing enrichments. PeerJ 2020; 8:e8720. [PMID: 32185113 PMCID: PMC7061908 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.8720] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/19/2019] [Accepted: 02/10/2020] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
In Australia, free-range layer pullets are typically reared indoors, but adult layers go outdoors, and this mismatch might reduce adaptation in laying environments. Enrichments during rearing may optimise pullet development and subsequent welfare as adult free-range hens. In the outdoor environment, hens may have greater opportunities for exercise and natural behaviours which might contribute to improved health and welfare. However, the outdoor environment may also result in potential exposure to parasites and pathogens. Individual variation in range use may thus dictate individual health and welfare. This study was conducted to evaluate whether adult hens varied in their external and internal health due to rearing enrichments and following variation in range use. A total of 1386 Hy-Line Brown® chicks were reared indoors across 16 weeks with three enrichment treatments including a control group with standard housing conditions, a novelty group providing novel objects that changed weekly, and a structural group with custom-designed structures to increase spatial navigation and perching. At 16 weeks of age the pullets were moved to a free-range system and housed in nine identical pens within their rearing treatments. All hens were leg-banded with microchips and daily ranging was assessed from 25 to 64 weeks via radio-frequency identification technology. At 64–65 weeks of age, 307 hens were selected based on their range use patterns across 54 days up to 64 weeks: indoor (no ranging), low outdoor (1.4 h or less daily), and high outdoor (5.2–9 h daily). The external and internal health and welfare parameters were evaluated via external assessment of body weight, plumage, toenails, pecking wounds, illness, and post-mortem assessment of internal organs and keel bones including whole-body CT scanning for body composition. The control hens had the lowest feather coverage (p < 0.0001) and a higher number of comb wounds (P = 0.03) than the novelty hens. The high outdoor rangers had fewer comb wounds than the indoor hens (P = 0.04), the shortest toenails (p < 0.0001) and the most feather coverage (p < 0.0001), but lower body weight (p < 0.0001) than the indoor hens. High outdoor ranging decreased both body fat and muscle (both p < 0.0001). The novelty group had lower spleen weights than the control hens (P = 0.01) but neither group differed from the structural hens. The high outdoor hens showed the highest spleen (P = 0.01) and empty gizzard weights (P = 0.04). Both the rearing enrichments and ranging had no effect on keel bone damage (all P ≥ 0.19). There were no significant interactions between rearing treatments and ranging patterns for any of the health and welfare parameters measured in this study (P ≥ 0.07). Overall, rearing enrichments had some effects on hen health and welfare at the later stages of the production cycle but subsequent range use patterns had the greatest impact.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Md Saiful Bari
- Agriculture and Food, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Armidale, New South Wales, Australia.,School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Yan C S M Laurenson
- School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Andrew M Cohen-Barnhouse
- Agriculture and Food, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Armidale, New South Wales, Australia.,School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Stephen W Walkden-Brown
- School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Dana L M Campbell
- Agriculture and Food, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Armidale, New South Wales, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Campbell DLM, Taylor PS, Hernandez CE, Stewart M, Belson S, Lee C. An attention bias test to assess anxiety states in laying hens. PeerJ 2019; 7:e7303. [PMID: 31333910 PMCID: PMC6626526 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7303] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/30/2019] [Accepted: 06/17/2019] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Fear is a response to a known threat, anxiety is a response to a perceived threat. Both of these affective states can be detrimental to animal welfare in modern housing environments. In comparison to the well-validated tests for assessing fear in laying hens, tests for measuring anxiety are less developed. Perception of a threat can result in an attention bias that may indicate anxious affective states in individual hens following playback of an alarm call. In Experiment 1, an attention bias test was applied to hens that differed in their range access to show that hens that never ranged were more vigilant (stretching of the neck and looking around: P < 0.001) and slower to feed following the second alarm call playback (P = 0.01) compared with hens that ranged daily. All hens showed a reduction in comb temperature following the first alarm call (P < 0.001). In Experiment 2, an open field test was used to determine an effective dose of 2 mg/kg for the anxiogenic drug meta-Chlorophenylpiperazine (m-CPP) in adult laying hens. Hens dosed with 2 mg/kg showed reduced locomotion compared with a saline solution (P < 0.05). In Experiment 3, 2 mg/kg m-CPP or saline was administered to adult hens previously habituated to the open field arena to pharmacologically validate an attention bias test as a measure of anxiety. Hens dosed with m-CPP were slower to feed (P = 0.02) and faster to vocalize following a second alarm call playback (P = 0.03) but these hens did not exhibit the same vigilance behavior as documented in Experiment 1. The m-CPP hens also spent more time stepping and vocalizing (both P < 0.001) than the saline hens. An attention bias test could be used to assess anxiety. However, behavioral responses of hens may vary depending on their age or test environment familiarity, thus further refinement of the test is required. In these tests, 2 mg/kg of m-CPP resulted in motionless behavior when the environment was novel, but more movement and vocalizing when the environment was familiar. The extreme behavioral phenotypes exhibited by individually-tested birds may both be indicators of negative states.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dana L M Campbell
- Agriculture and Food, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Armidale, NSW, Australia.,School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, Australia
| | - Peta S Taylor
- School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, Australia
| | - Carlos E Hernandez
- Agriculture and Food, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Armidale, NSW, Australia.,School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, Australia.,Department of Animal Nutrition and Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden
| | - Mairi Stewart
- AgResearch, Ruakura Research Centre, Hamilton, New Zealand
| | - Sue Belson
- Agriculture and Food, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Armidale, NSW, Australia
| | - Caroline Lee
- Agriculture and Food, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Armidale, NSW, Australia.,School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|