Effect of Cage Densities on Northern Fowl Mite Populations in Commercial Caged-Layer Operations

Hall, Robert D.; Turner, E. C.; Gross, W. B.

doi:10.3382/ps.0570564

Cited by 10 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Earlier work exclusively with beak-trimmed, caged hens showed experimentally that more northern fowl mites were found on hens held singly in cages, as opposed to hens in denser groups (Hall et al, 1978;Arthur and Axtell, 1983;Mullens et al, 2000). This pattern was not statistically significant in the present studies, although there was a suggestion of it in beak-trimmed hens, particularly in house 1 (Figure 1), as evident in the density × beak interaction term (P < 0.09).…”

Section: Beak Condition and Cage Density Effects On Ectoparasitescontrasting

confidence: 77%

“…In contrast, the density effects in our study were obvious in numbers of lice on both beak-trimmed and beak-intact hens. The trend for lice, however, is opposite that seen in the literature for mites (Hall et al, 1978;Arthur and Axtell, 1983;Mullens et al, 2000). Far more lice (2-to 3-fold) were seen on hens held together in cages compared with lice on hens held singly.…”

Section: Beak Condition and Cage Density Effects On Ectoparasitescontrasting

confidence: 67%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Beak condition and cage density determine abundance and spatial distribution of northern fowl mites, Ornithonyssus sylviarum, and chicken body lice, Menacanthus stramineus, on caged laying hens

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Adult White Leghorn hens (Hy-Line strain W-36) were inoculated with either northern fowl mites or chicken body lice, and the ectoparasite populations were monitored over periods of 9 to 16 wk. Two beak conditions (beak trimmed or beak intact) and 2 housing densities (1 or 2 hens per 25 × 31 cm suspended wire cage) were tested. Populations of both ectoparasites were at least 10 times lower on beak-intact hens compared with populations on beak-trimmed hens. Cage density did not influence mite numbers, but higher numbers of lice (2 to 3 times) developed on hens held at the higher cage density. Louse distribution on the body and louse population age structure were also influenced by host beak condition. Beak-intact hens had a higher proportion of lice under the wings, whereas beak-trimmed hens had the majority of lice on the lower abdomen. Louse populations on beak-trimmed hens also comprised relatively more immature stages than populations found on beak-intact hens. The effects are likely related to decreased grooming efficiency by beak-trimmed hens and, in the case of lice, the higher host density. The high mite and louse populations on most commercial caged laying hens are probably a direct result of beak trimming. However, selection of more docile breeds that can be held without trimming may allow the hens themselves to reduce ectoparasites below economically damaging levels. This could benefit producers, animal welfare advocates, and human health by reducing 1) costs of beak trimming, 2) pesticide treatment costs (including human and bird chemical exposure concerns), and 3) objections to beak trimming from the animal welfare community.

show abstract

Section: Beak Condition and Cage Density Effects On Ectoparasitescontrasting

confidence: 77%

Section: Beak Condition and Cage Density Effects On Ectoparasitescontrasting

confidence: 67%

Beak condition and cage density determine abundance and spatial distribution of northern fowl mites, Ornithonyssus sylviarum, and chicken body lice, Menacanthus stramineus, on caged laying hens

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In low stress environments, increased corticosteroid levels have been shown to increase resistance of birds to bacteria but to decrease their resistance to viruses and mycoplasma (72,73). Birds with high levels of corticosteroid may have lower levels of northern fowl mites than do birds with low levels of corticosteroid (74,75). However, birds can be genetically selected for corticosteroid level (27).…”

Section: Stressmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecology and Management of Arthropod Pests of Poultry

Axtell

Arends²

1990

Annu. Rev. Entomol.

341

177

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The worldwide spread of modern, high-density confined poultry production systems under the direction of integrators has intensified the importance of a select number of arthropod ectoparasites and habitat pests. This concentrated production of poultry provides artificial ecosystems that are sometimes ideal for the development of large populations of arthropod pests. At the same time the systems are amenable to integrated pest management involving a multipest and multimethod approach to reducing or eliminating arthropod pests. Since rodents are major pests, they should be included in an integrated pest management program to make the program most cost-effective and attractive to the integrators and producers (5). Quantitative data are scarce on economic effects, and the concept of economic thresholds is difficult to apply either to ectoparasites or to habitat pests. The risk of transporting ectoparasites among flocks is difficult to evaluate and necessitates treatment after early detection of the arthropods. Flies and litter beetles present a threat of disease transmission and the potential for lawsuits from neighbors or public health agencies that are factors not subject to easy cost estimates. The monetary losses of a flock devastated by disease or a farm forced to close are so great that the risks are unacceptable. Production losses from lowered feed conversion ratios and insulation damage are likely to be detected by the sophisticated record-keeping of the integrators. Minimal use of pesticides and other chemicals on poultry and in poultry housing is an objective of the integrators and, consequently, an integrated pest management (IPM) approach that reduces the need for pesticides is attractive. The key to further development of effective arthropod management programs for poultry is the implementation of pest and disease monitoring programs for the complete system. Improvements in arthropod sampling methods and more attention to monitoring the biosecurity systems to minimize ectoparasite dispersal are needed. The integrators have servicemen who regularly visit the production facilities and can be trained to perform monitoring functions and to instigate and supervise integrated pest management measures. With the increasing use of computers by the integrators, the prospects for utilizing the monitoring data in predictive computer simulation models for pest management decision-making justify more efforts to develop such tools (64, 102, 168). Future poultry pest management programs must be based on sound data, which presently is too limited, and must be flexible enough to adjust rapidly to evolving pest problems in rapidly changing production systems.

show abstract

“…Hens in both cage and cage-free settings were equally capable of supporting high ectoparasite loads when untreated with dustboxes (Figs 3 and 4). Using only caged hens, Hall et al (1978), Arthur & Axtell (1983) and Mullens et al (2000) observed fewer mites under more crowded cage conditions. In the present study, mite populations on cage-free hens occasionally tended to be higher early in infestation than those on hens in cages, but large or consistent 'density' effects on mites were not seen.…”

Section: Housingmentioning

confidence: 88%

Housing and dustbathing effects on northern fowl mites (Ornithonyssus sylviarum) and chicken body lice (Menacanthus stramineus) on hens

Martin

Mullens

2012

Medical Vet Entomology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hen housing (cage or cage-free) did not impact overall abundances of northern fowl mites, Ornithonyssus sylviarum (Canestrini & Fanzago) (Acari: Macronyssidae), or chicken body lice, Menacanthus stramineus (Nitzsch) (Phthiraptera: Menoponidae). Cage-free hens received a dustbox with sand plus diatomaceous earth (DE), kaolin clay or sulphur. Weekly use varied from none to 100% of hens; 73% of hens used the dustbox at least once. Ectoparasite populations on dustbathing hens (users) were compared with those on non-user cage-free and caged hens. All materials reduced ectoparasites on user hens by 80-100% after 1 week of dustbox use. Diatomaceous earth and kaolin failed to reduce ectoparasites on non-user hens, and ectoparasites on user hens recovered after dustbox removal. A sulphur dustbox eliminated mites from all hens (including non-users) within 2-4 weeks. Residual sulphur controlled mites until the end of the experiment (up to 9 weeks), even after the dustbox was removed. Louse populations on hens using the sulphur dustbox were reduced in 1-2 weeks. Residual sulphur effects were less evident in lice, but the use of a sulphur dustbox by a higher proportion of hens extended louse control to all hens. This is the first experimental study to show that bird dustbathing in naturally and widely available dust materials (particularly kaolin) can suppress ectoparasites and thus the behaviour is probably adaptive.

show abstract

Effect of Cage Densities on Northern Fowl Mite Populations in Commercial Caged-Layer Operations

Cited by 10 publications

References 6 publications

Beak condition and cage density determine abundance and spatial distribution of northern fowl mites, Ornithonyssus sylviarum, and chicken body lice, Menacanthus stramineus, on caged laying hens

Beak condition and cage density determine abundance and spatial distribution of northern fowl mites, Ornithonyssus sylviarum, and chicken body lice, Menacanthus stramineus, on caged laying hens

Ecology and Management of Arthropod Pests of Poultry

Housing and dustbathing effects on northern fowl mites (Ornithonyssus sylviarum) and chicken body lice (Menacanthus stramineus) on hens

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About