Space and density effects on group size preferences in laying hens

British Poultry Science

Volumn 37, Issue 4, 1996, Pages 709-721

  Lindberg, A C ^a   Nicol, C J ^a  

^a Langford House ^*  (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ANIMAL; ANIMAL BEHAVIOR; ANIMAL HOUSING; ARTICLE; BODY WEIGHT; CHICKEN; DECISION MAKING; EGG LAYING; FEMALE; PHYSIOLOGY;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ANIMALS; BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL; BODY WEIGHT; CHICKENS; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; FEMALE; HOUSING, ANIMAL; OVIPOSITION;

EID: 0030229671     PISSN: 00071668     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00071669608417901     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. ADAMS, A.W., CRAIG, J.V. & BHAGWAT, A.L. (1978) Effects of flock size, age at housing and mating experience on two strains of egg-type chickens in colony cages. Poultry Science, 57: 48-53.
2. ALLEN, J. & PERRY, G.C. (1975) Feather pecking and cannibalism in a caged layer flock. British Poultry Science, 16: 441-451.
3. AL-RAWI, B. & CRAIG, J.V. (1975) Agonistic behaviour of caged chickens related to group size and area per bird. Applied Animal Ethology, 2: 69-80.
4. AL-RAWI, B., CRAIG, J.V. & ADAMS, A.W. (1976) Agonistic behaviour and egg production of caged layers: genetic strain and group size effects. Poultry Science, 55: 796-807.
5. ANTHONY, N.B., KATANBAF, M.N. & SIEGEL, P.B. (1988) Responses to social disruption in two lines of White Leghorn chickens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 21: 243-250.
6. APPLEBY, M.C. & JENNER, T.D. (1993) How animals perceive group size: Aggression among hens in partitioned pens, in: NICHELMANN, M., WIERENGA, H.K. & BRAUN, S. (Eds) Proceedings of the International Congress on Applied Ethology, pp. 243-244 (Berlin, Humboldt University).
7. BANKS, E.M & ALLEE, W.C. (1957) Some relations between flock size and agonistic behaviour in domestic hens. Physiological Zoology, 30: 255-268.
8. BEILHARZ, R.G. & ZEEB, K. (1982) Social dominance in dairy cattle. Applied Animal Ethology, 8: 79-97.
9. BRADSHAW, R.H. (1992) Conspecific discrimination and social preference in the laying hen. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 33: 69-75.
10. BRADSHAW, R.H. & DAWKINS, M.S. (1993) Slides of conspecifics as representatives of real animals in laying hens (Gallus domesticus). Behavioural Processes, 28: 165-172.
11. CANDLAND, D.K., TAYLOR, D.B., DRESDALE, L., LEIPHART, J.M. & SOLOW, S.P. (1969) Heart rate, aggression and dominance in the domestic chicken. Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology, 67: 70-76.
12. COLLIAS, N.E., COLLIAS, E.C., HUNSAKER, D. & MINNING, L. (1966) Locality fixation, mobility and social organisation within a unconfined population of Red Jungle Fowl. Animal Behaviour, 14: 550-559.
13. CRAIG, J.V., BISWAS, D.K. & GUHL, A.M. (1969) Agonistic behaviour influenced by strangeness, crowding and heredity in female domestic fowl (Gallus gallus). Animal Behaviour, 17: 498-506.
14. CRAIG, J.V. & ADAMS, A.W. (1984) Behaviour and well being of hens (Callus domesticus) in alternative housing environments. World's Poultry Science Journal, 40: 221-240.
15. CUNNINGHAM, D.L. & VAN TIENHOVEN, A. (1983) Relationship between production factors and dominance in White Leghorn hens in a study on social rank and cage design. Applied Animal Ethology, 11: 33-44.
16. DAWKINS, M.S. (1976) Towards an objective method of assessing welfare in domestic fowl. Applied Animal Ethology, 2: 245-254.
17. DAWKINS, M.S. (1980) Animal Suffering: the science of animal welfare (London, Chapman & Hall).
18. DAWKINS, M.S. (1981) Priorities in the cage size and flooring preferences of domestic hens. British Poultry Science, 22: 255-263.
19. DAWKINS, M.S. (1982) Elusive concept of preferred group size in domestic hens. Applied Animal Ethology, 8: 365-375.
20. DAWKINS, M.S. (1983) Cage size and flooring preferences in litter-reared and cage-reared hens. British Poultry Science, 24: 177-182.
21. DAWKINS, M.S. (1988) Behavioural deprivation: a central problem in animal welfare. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 20: 209-225.
22. FAURE, J.M. (1994) Choice tests for space in groups of laying hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 39: 89-94.
23. GROSS, W.B. & SIEGEL, H.S. (1983) Evaluation of the heterophil/lymphocyte ratio as a measure of stress in chickens. Avian Diseases, 27: 972-979.
24. GUHL, A.M. & ALLEE, W.C. (1944) Some measurable effects of social organisation in flocks of hens. Physiological Zoology, 17: 320-347.
25. HUGHES, B.O. (1975) Spatial preference in the domestic hen. British Veterinary Journal, 131: 560-564.
26. HUGHES, B.O. (1977) Selection of group size by individual laying hens. British Poultry Science, 18: 9-18.
27. HUGHES, B.O. & DUNCAN, I.J.H. (1972). The influence of strain and environmental factors upon feather pecking and cannibalism in fowls. British Poultry Science, 13: 525-547.
28. HUGHES, B.O. &WOOD-GUSH, D.G.M. (1977) Agonistic behaviour in domestic hens: The influence of housing method and group size. Animal Behavwur, 25: 1056-1062.
29. JONES, R.B. (1982) Effects of early environmental enrichment upon open-field behaviour and timidity in the domestic chick. Developmental Psychobiology, 15: 105-111.
30. JONES, R.B. & FAURE, J.M. (1982) Tonic immobility in the domestic fowl as a function of social rank. Biology of Behaviour, 7: 27-32.
31. KIRKWOOD, B.R. (1988) Essentials of Medical Statistics (Oxford, Blackwell Scientific Publications).
32. LINDBERG, A.C. & NICOL, C.J. (1994) An evaluation of the effect of operant feeders on welfare of hens maintained on litter. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 41: 211-227.
33. MCBRIDE, G., PARER, I.P. & FOENANDER, F. (1969) The social organisation and behaviour of the feral domestic fowl. Animal Behaviour Monographs, 2: 127-181.
34. NICOL, C.J. (1986) Non-exclusive spatial preference in the laying hen. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 15: 337-350.
35. RYAN, C.M.E. (1982) Concept formation and individual recognition in the domestic chicken (Gallus gallus). Behaviour Analysis Letters, 2: 213-220.
36. SCHJELDERUP-EBBE, T. (1922) Beiträge zur Sozial-psychologie des Haushühns. Zeitschrift fur Psychologie, 88: 224-252.