The Edinburgh modified cage: Effects of group size and space allowance on brown laying hens

Journal of Applied Poultry Research

Volumn 7, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 152-161

  Appleby, Michael C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Behavior; Egg production; Group size; Laying cages; Space allowance; Welfare

Indexed keywords

ACARI; AVES;

EID: 0032377641     PISSN: 10566171     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/japr/7.2.152     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Appleby, M.C. and B.O. Hughes, 1991. Welfare of laying hens in cages and alternative systems: Environmental, physical, and behavioural aspects. World's Poultry Sci. J. 47:109-128.
2. Cunningham, D.L. and J.M. Mauldin, 1996. Cage housing, beak trimming, and induced molting of layers: A review of welfare and production issues. J. Appl. Poultry Res. 5:63-69.
3. Anonymous, 1997. Sweden: Egg production to survive after all. Poultry Intl. 36(2):6-8.
4. Appleby, M.C., 1993. Should cages for laying hens be banned or modified? Anim. Welfare 2:67-80.
5. Sherwin, C.M., 1994. Modified Cages for Laying Hens. Univ. Federation for Anim. Welfare, Potters Bar, UK.
6. Abrahamsson, P., R. Tauson, and M.C. Appleby, 1995. Performance of four hybrids of laying hens in modified and conventional cages. Acta Agric. Scand. 45:286-296.
7. Appleby, M.C. and B.O. Hughes, 1995. The Edinburgh Modified Cage for laying hens. Br. Poultry Sci. 36:707-718.
8. Appleby, M.C., 1995. Perch length in cages for medium hybrid laying hens. Br. Poultry Sci. 36:23-31.
9. Non-parametric statistics were used to test differences between treatments, using cage means or medians as appropriate. If there was significant overall variation by Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance, differences between pairs of treatment or between pairs of groups of treatment were then assessed by the Mann-Whitney test.
10. Farm Animal Welfare Council, 1997. Report on the Welfare of Laying Hens. Farm Anim. Welfare Council, Tolworth, UK.
11. Wood-Gush, D.G.M., 1971. The Behaviour of the Domestic Fowl. Heinemann, London, UK.
12. Appleby, M.C. and S.F. Smith, 1991. Design of nest boxes for laying cages. Br. Poultry Sci. 32:667-678.
13. Appleby, M.C., S.F. Smith, and B.O. Hughes, 1993. Nesting, dust bathing, and perching by laying hens in cages: Effects of design on behaviour and welfare. Br. Poultry Sci. 34:835-847.
14. Vestergaard, K., 1982. The significance of dust bathing for the well being of the domestic hen. Tierhaltung 13:109-118.
15. Tauson, R. and L. Jansson, 1990. Two alternative systems for egg laying hens in comparison with furnished cages. Pages 676-679 in: Proc. 8th European Poultry Conf., Barcelona, Spain.
16. Duncan, E.T., M.C. Appleby, and B.O. Hughes, 1992. Effect of perches in laying cages on welfare and production of hens. Br. Poultry Sci. 33:25-35.
17. Appleby, M.C., B.O. Hughes, and H.A. Elson, 1992. Poultry Production Systems: Behaviour, Management, and Welfare. CAB International, Oxfordshire, UK.
18. Elson. H.A., 1985. The economics of poultry welfare. Pages 244-253 in: Proc. 2nd European Symp. on Poultry Welfare, Celle, Germany.