Broilers have been bred for fast growth which has led to welfare problems such as high mortality, lameness and skin lesions. Slower growing breeds are thought to have better welfare but are not as efficient in production. This study investigated welfare, behaviour, production and meat quality of faster growing broilers from three main commercial broiler companies (breeds FA, FB and FC) with a commercially available slower growing breed (Hubbard JA757, S). Four hundred birds of each breed (total 1600 birds) were reared in pens of 50 birds, 8 per breed (total 32 pens). Home pen behaviour was recorded once a week in hourly scan samples to get behavioural time budgets. Welfare Assessments (WA) were done when the average bird weight per breed was 2.2 and 2.5kg. Birds and feed supplied were regularly weighed by pen and Feed Conversion Ratio (FCR) and Average Daily Gain (ADG) were calculated at 2.2kg. Birds were then slaughtered and meat quality measures were taken. S and FC had lower mortality and culls due to lameness (P<0.05 for both). Breeds FA, FB and FC grew faster, ate less feed and had better FCR and ADG (P<0.05 for all). S had scores indicating higher welfare for the majority of WA measures and spent more time active and less time sitting, feeding and drinking than the other breeds (P<0.05 for all). Faster growing breeds had more breast meat and S had more leg meat; although S had better meat quality scores (P<0.05). Overall, S birds have improved welfare in terms of activity and welfare measure scores compared to the other breeds but take longer to reach slaughter weight and are not as efficient in production measures. However if lower mortality and improved meat quality are taken into account, as well as the premium price paid for these birds, slower growing broilers may be a viable commercial option.
Like many captive animals, hens, Gallus gallus, used for agricultural production perform abnormal behaviours. They are particularly prone to feather pecking, the severest form of which involves the pecking at and removal of feathers, which can cause bleeding and even stimulate cannibalism. The two main hypothesized explanations for feather pecking concern frustrated motivations to forage or, alternatively, to dustbathe, leading to redirected behaviour in the form of pecks at plumage. Previous work on pigeons has shown that the detailed morphology of pecks involved in drinking and feeding, or in working for food or water, involves motivationally distinct 'fixed action patterns'. We therefore used methods similar to these fixed action pattern studies to quantify the motor patterns involved in foraging and in dustbathing pecks, for comparison to feather pecking. We videoed 60 chickens pecking at a variety of forages and dustbaths, along with novel objects, water and bird models that could be feather pecked. We recorded the durations of the head fixation before the peck, between the head fixation to beak contact with each stimulus and of the whole peck sequence. We used mixed models to assess whether the motivation underlying a peck affected its morphology and whether severe feather pecks resembled or differed from either dustbath or foraging pecks (or even novel-object pecking or drinking). The motor patterns involved in pecks at forages, dustbaths, novel objects and water all varied significantly; importantly, the motor patterns involved in pecking during dustbathing and foraging differed (P < 0.0001 for all measures). Severe feather pecks proved similar to foraging pecks (NSD: power > 0.95) but different from all other pecks, including dustbathing (P < 0.0001 for all measures). These results indicate that severe feather pecking derives from frustrated motivations to forage, not to dustbathe. More broadly, they suggest that finely analysing fixed action pattern morphology can help elucidate the motivational bases of puzzling abnormal behaviours in captive animals.
There is a need for novel mechanical devices for dispatching poultry on farm following the introduction of EU Regulation (EC) no. 1099/2009 On the Protection of Animals at the Time of Killing. We examined three novel mechanical killing devices: Modified Armadillo, Modified Rabbit Zinger, a novel mechanical cervical dislocation device; and traditional manual cervical dislocation. The four killing methods were tested on 230 chickens across four batches. We measured behavioural, electroencephalogram and post-mortem outcomes in anesthetized laying hens and broilers at two life stages (juveniles and adults/slaughter age). Graeco Latin-Square designs systematically randomized killing treatment, bird type, age and kill order. All birds were lightly anaesthetized immediately prior to the killing treatment with inhalation of Sevoflurane. The novel mechanical cervical dislocation method had the highest kill success rate (single application attempt only, with no signs of recovery) of a mechanical method (96%). The Modified Armadillo was the least reliable with 49% kill success. Spectral analysis of electroencephalogram signals at 2 s intervals for successfully killed birds only revealed progressive decreases in median frequency alongside increases in total power. Later, total power decreased as the birds exhibited isoelectric electroencephalogram signal. Latencies to pre-defined spectral ranges associated with unconsciousness showed that birds subjected to manual and novel mechanical cervical dislocation achieved these states sooner than birds subjected to the modified Armadillo. Nevertheless all methods exhibited short latencies (<4 s). The Modified Rabbit Zinger had the shortest duration of reflex persistence for nictitating membrane, pupillary and rhythmic breathing post method application. Of the methods tested, the novel mechanical cervical dislocation device is the most promising mechanical method for killing poultry on-farm based on a range of behavioural, electroencephalogram and anatomical parameters. This device has the potential to fulfil the current need for a mechanical alternative to manual cervical dislocation.
Early life experiences can be important in determining offspring phenotypes and may influence interaction with the environment and hence health, welfare, and productivity. The prenatal environment of poultry can be divided into the pre-lay environment and the egg storage/incubation environment, both of which can affect offspring outcomes. The ability to separate maternal and egg/incubation effects makes birds well suited to this type of research. There are many factors, including feeding and nutrition, environmental conditions, husbandry practices, housing system, social environment, infectious environment, and maternal health status, that can influence both the health and performance and behavior and cognition of the offspring. There are some aspects of the environments that can be changed to produce beneficial effects in the offspring, like addition of certain additives to feed or short changes in incubation temperatures, while other aspects should be avoided to reduce negative effects, such as unpredictable feeding and lighting regimens. Measures of offspring characteristics may prove to be a useful method of assessing parent stock welfare if known stressors result in predictable offspring outcomes. This has the advantage of assessing the parent environment without interfering with the animals and possibly affecting their responses and could lead to improved welfare for the animals.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.