Spatial Cognition and Range Use in Free-Range Laying Hens

Abstract

Simple SummaryIndividual free-range laying hens vary in their use of the outdoor range. The outdoor environment is typically more complex and variable than indoor housing and thus range use may be related to differences in spatial abilities. Individual adult hens that never went outside were slower to learn a T-maze task—which requires birds to repeatedly find a food reward in one arm of the maze, compared to outdoor-preferring hens. Pullets that were faster to learn the maze also showed more visits to the range in their first month of range access but only in one of two tested groups. Early enrichment improved learning of the maze but only when the birds were tested before onset of lay. Fear may play a role in inhibiting bird’s spatial learning and their range use. More studies of different enriched rearing treatments and their impacts on fear and learning would be needed to confirm these findings. Overall, these results contribute to our understanding of why some birds choose to never access the outdoor range area.AbstractRadio-frequency identification tracking shows individual free-range laying hens vary in range use, with some never going outdoors. The range is typically more environmentally complex, requiring navigation to return to the indoor resources. Outdoor-preferring hens may have improved spatial abilities compared to indoor-preferring hens. Experiment 1 tested 32 adult ISA Brown hens in a T-maze learning task that showed exclusively-indoor birds were slowest to reach the learning success criterion (p < 0.05). Experiment 2 tested 117 pullets from enriched or non-enriched early rearing treatments (1 pen replicate per treatment) in the same maze at 15–16 or 17–18 weeks. Enriched birds reached learning success criterion faster at 15–16 weeks (p < 0.05) but not at 17–18 weeks (p > 0.05), the age that coincided with the onset of lay. Enriched birds that were faster to learn the maze task showed more range visits in the first 4 weeks of range access. Enriched and non-enriched birds showed no differences in telencephalon or hippocampal volume (p > 0.05). Fear may reduce spatial abilities but further testing with more pen replicates per early rearing treatments would improve our understanding of the relationship between spatial cognitive abilities and range use.

Uninhibited chickens: ranging behaviour impacts motor self-regulation in free-range broiler chickens ( Gallus gallus domesticus )

“…In this study, we tested whether and how differences in the ranging behaviour of free-range chickens affect motor self-regulation performance during a cylinder task. The recent literature on free-range chickens and junglefowl has confirmed the influences of animal personality on cognition [18,19]. We recently showed that differences in ranging behaviour in free-range chickens were stable across time (indicative of a personality trait) and influenced spatial memory performances, with less exploratory chickens showing better spatial memory when compared to high exploratory ones [20].…”

Peer Review #1 of "Application of open field, tonic immobility, and attention bias tests to hens with different ranging patterns (v0.1)"

“…The typical motionless response of laying hens in novel environments highlights a confound with individual behavioural assessments that requires movement to execute the test. Previous measurements of cognitive and learning abilities that require bird training have excluded hens that do not make training criterion due to lack of movement (Campbell et al, 2018;Krause et al, 2006;Nordquist et al, 2011). Similarly, previous tests of judgement bias have shown fearful hens were less flexible during task learning than non-fearful hens (fearfulness was assessed in an open field test; de Haas et al, 2017).…”

Review: Automated techniques for monitoring the behaviour and welfare of broilers and laying hens: towards the goal of precision livestock farming

“…In addition, an RFID system based on ultra-wideband technology was developed for monitoring 42 individual chickens' locations in the 100 m × 100 m experimental field, which could calculate the position with 0.29 m of the median error and 68% of the registration rate (Stadig et al, 2018a). Monitoring of outdoor range use at the individual level allows for correlation between ranging and welfare indicators such as tonic immobility test, plumage damage, foot health and spatial cognition (Campbell et al, 2016(Campbell et al, , 2018a(Campbell et al, and 2018bHartcher et al, 2016;Larsen et al, 2018;Taylor et al, 2018).…”