Social network analysis is increasingly used by behavioral ecologists and primatologists to describe the patterns and quality of interactions among individuals. We provide an overview of this methodology, with examples illustrating how it can be used to study social behavior in applied contexts. Like most kinds of social interaction analyses, social network analysis provides information about direct relationships (e.g. dominant–subordinate relationships). However, it also generates a more global model of social organization that determines how individual patterns of social interaction relate to individual and group characteristics. A particular strength of this approach is that it provides standardized mathematical methods for calculating metrics of sociality across levels of social organization, from the population and group levels to the individual level. At the group level these metrics can be used to track changes in social network structures over time, evaluate the effect of the environment on social network structure, or compare social structures across groups, populations or species. At the individual level, the metrics allow quantification of the heterogeneity of social experience within groups and identification of individuals who may play especially important roles in maintaining social stability or information flow throughout the network.

Currently, no animal-based protocol for on-farm welfare assessment of commercial turkeys is available. The birds’ size and flighty nature make obtaining a representative sample using traditional methods difficult. The transect walks (TW) approach provides a potential alternative for on-farm assessments of turkey welfare. We compared the TW approach with a traditional method, and data collected as the birds were moved out of the house during the load out process (L). Ten commercial 19- to 20-week-old Hybrid turkey flocks were evaluated (1 flock/house/farm). Half of the flocks were housed on farms deemed as “faring well” by the company, the other half were on “suboptimal” farms. Each house was subdivided longitudinally into 4 transects. Two observers walked the transects in random order, recording the total number of birds per transect that were immobile; lame; aggressive towards a mate; interacting with humans; with visible head, vent, or back wounds; engaging in mounting behaviors; small; featherless; dirty; sick; terminal; or dead. Flocks were re-evaluated on the same day using the individual sampling method (S), where randomly selected birds were scored as they took 10 steps. Flocks were re-assessed within 48 h of the transect evaluation, as birds were funneled out of the house during load out. Using ANOVAs we determined the effects of observers, method, management, and their interactions on proportions of turkeys per house within each category. Outcome parameters were not affected by management (P > 0.05 for all) or observer (P > 0.05 for most), but an assessment method effect was detected (P < 0.05). S differed from the 2 other methods (P < 0.05) for most parameters except aggression towards a mate, back wounds, dirty, sick, and vent wounds. Differences were not detected between data collected using TW and during L, except for dead (P = 0.0007) and immobile (P = 0.007). Results suggest that the TW method is a promising tool for on-farm turkey welfare assessment as it produced results similar to those obtained at L when all birds could be scored individually.

No abstract

The laying hen industry, including in the United States, is responding to social concerns about hen welfare by implementing alternative housing systems such as the aviary, to provide more space and resources to large groups of hens. Data detailing the behavior of hens in commercial aviaries is needed to determine hens' use of the resources in order to understand their impact on hen welfare. The open litter area of aviaries provides additional space for hens during the day. Litter is also a substrate for dust bathing which is a strongly motivated natural behavior. Hens are often synchronous in their performance of dust bathing, which may lead to overcrowding in the litter area. Additionally, the open litter area can facilitate expression of unusual behavior such as flock piling (defined as the occurrence of densely grouped clusters of hens, resulting from no obvious cause and occurring randomly throughout the day and flock cycle) which may be a welfare concern. Therefore, we conducted observations of hen occupancy of the open litter area and the performance of dust bathing and flock piling across 3 production points (peak lay, mid lay and end of lay) for two flocks of Lohmann White laying hens housed in a commercial aviary. All areas of the open litter area were occupied to the same degree. Hens performed dust bathing throughout the day but showed peak dust bathing activity in the afternoon for Flock 1 (all P < 0.001) and in the late morning for Flock 2 (all P < 0.001). Overall, 174 incidents of piling behavior were observed between the 2 flocks, with piles varying in size, duration, and time of occurrence; however, no smothering was detected. Crowding on the open litter area sometimes occurred during peak periods of synchronous dust bathing and when hens piled. Further research is needed to understand the welfare implications of individual hen use of the open litter area and the causes and welfare implications of hen piling.

Commercial poultry production management practices have been under increased public scrutiny driven by concerns for food safety and animal welfare. Within the United States, wood shavings and raised plastic floors are common flooring systems used in duck production. It is intuitive that each flooring type would present different management challenges influencing physical characteristics of growing ducks. This study evaluated the relationship between flooring type and duck condition during the winter. Random samples of 20 ducks from 5 predetermined areas (n = 100) were examined in commercial duck houses (n = 9, litter; n = 11, raised plastic slats). Ducks were assessed at 7, 21, and 32 d of age for eye, nostril, and feather cleanliness, feather and foot pad quality, and gait. The data were analyzed to determine the proportion of ducks with a given score. In both housing types, the proportion of 0 scores for foot pad quality improved during the production cycle (P < 0.0001). Feather hygiene declined with age in ducks reared on litter flooring, whereas ducks reared on slatted flooring had cleaner feathers at d 32 (P < 0.011). With the exception of foot pad scores, the majority of ducks had no detectable problems for any single trait. The only main effect due to flooring pertained to feather quality with the proportion of ducks having a 0 or 1 score greater in litter flooring systems than slats (P < 0.05). Overall, the condition of ducks reared, regardless of flooring system, was considered to be good.

Non-cage housing systems, such as the aviary, are being implemented by the laying hen industry, including in North America, in an attempt to improve the welfare of hens. Perches are a resource that is consistently included in aviaries. Hens are strongly motivated to perch, and perching can improve leg bone strength. However, hens may prefer elevated perches, particularly at night, and thus simply providing perches is not enough to improve welfare; they must be provided in a way that allows all hens to access them. Observations of laying hens using perches and ledges (flat, solid metal shelves to assist hens’ movement between tiers) in a commercial aviary revealed variation in where hens roosted within the tiered aviary enclosure across the flock cycle (peak, mid and end of lay; P < 0.001 for all age points). Hens most often preferred roosting in the highest enclosure levels, leading to crowding on upper perches and ledges while perch space remained available on lower levels. Restricted access to preferable perches may cause frustration in hens, leading to welfare issues. Hens roosted more on perches at peak lay than mid and end lay (P < 0.001) but roosted less on ledges at peak lay than mid and end lay (P < 0.001). Additionally, more hens roosted on both perches and ledges in the ‘dark’ observation period compared with the number of hens roosting during the ‘light’ observation period (P < 0.001). Further research should look at all structural elements within the system that are used by hens for roosting, such as edges of tiers and upper wire floors, to evaluate how changes in perching preferences across the lay cycle may correlate with system design and bird-based parameters.

Hen housing for commercial egg production continues to be a societal and regulatory concern. Controlled studies have examined various aspects of egg safety, but a comprehensive assessment of commercial hen housing systems in the US has not been conducted. The current study is part of a holistic, multidisciplinary comparison of the diverse aspects of commercial conventional cage, enriched colony cage, and cage-free aviary housing systems and focuses on environmental and egg microbiology. Environmental swabs and eggshell pools were collected from all housing systems during 4 production periods. Total aerobes and coliforms were enumerated, and the prevalence of Salmonella and Campylobacter spp. was determined. Environmental aerobic and coliform counts were highest for aviary drag swabs (7.5 and 4.0 log cfu/mL, respectively) and enriched colony cage scratch pad swabs (6.8 and 3.8 log cfu/mL, respectively). Aviary floor and system wire shell pools had the greatest levels of aerobic contamination for all eggshell pools (4.9 and 4.1 log cfu/mL, respectively). Hens from all housing systems were shedding Salmonella spp. (89–100% of manure belt scraper blade swabs). The dry belt litter removal processes for all housing systems appear to affect Campylobacter spp. detection (0–41% of manure belt scraper blade swabs) considering detection of Campylobacter spp. was much higher for other environmental samples. Aviary forage area drag swabs were 100% contaminated with Campylobacter spp., whereas enriched colony cage scratch pads had a 93% positive rate. There were no differences in pathogen detection in the shell pools from the 3 housing systems. Results indicate egg safety is enhanced when hens in alternative housing systems use nest boxes. Additionally, current outcomes indicate the use of scratch pads in hen housing systems needs to be more thoroughly investigated for effects on hen health and egg safety.

The management and well-being of commercial Pekin ducks has been studied in the European Union where straw is the predominant litter source. In the United States, however, the most prevalent litter is wood shavings, with a recent trend toward using plastic slatted flooring. A previous study in the United States evaluated the relationship between flooring type (litter, slats) and duck condition during winter months and found very few differences between the 2 in terms of overall duck condition. The purpose of the current study was to reevaluate the 2 flooring systems during the summer months to determine if seasonal differences would interact with flooring type to have an impact on duck condition. Eighteen commercial barns that produce Pekin ducks for Maple Leaf Farms Inc. (Leesburg, IN), located in northern Indiana and southern Wisconsin (n = 9 litter; n = 9 raised slatted floor), were used for this study. Twenty ducks were randomly selected from 5 predetermined areas within each house (n = 100 total) and scored for eye condition, nostril and feather cleanliness, and feather and foot pad quality at 7, 21, and 32 d of age. Environmental data, including carbon monoxide, ammonia, RH, and temperature, were also obtained at each collection day. The only statistical differences in body condition occurred at 7 d; there were more ducks with clear eyes and eye rings on the litter flooring, whereas average nostril scores were better on the plastic slatted floors. Live weight, weight gain per day, flock mortality, and condemnations at the plant were collected, and the only statistical difference was a higher gain per day for ducks reared on slatted floors compared with litter (P < 0.05). There were no differences between flooring systems in the environmental parameters measured within the barns. In summary, there were very few differences between the litter and slatted flooring systems, indicating that there may not be clear advantages for one particular flooring system over the other from the point of view of duck well-being and production.