Space use and agonistic behaviour in relation to sex composition in large flocks of laying hens

Applied Animal Behaviour Science

Volumn 67, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 307-320

  Oden K ^a   Vestergaard, K S ^b   Algers, B ^a  

^a Dept of Anim Environ and Health   (Sweden)

^b UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Agonistic behaviour; Chickens; Sex composition; Spatial utilization

Indexed keywords

AGGRESSION; ANIMAL BEHAVIOR; HEN; HYBRID; ROOSTING;

EID: 0342369394     PISSN: 01681591     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0168-1591(99)00123-9     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Altman D.G. Practical Statistics for Medical Research. 1994;Chapman and Hall, London.
2. Appleby M.C., Hughes B.O., Hogarth G.S. Behaviour of laying hens in a deep litter house. British Poultry Science. 30:1989;545-553.
3. Appleby M.C., Jenner T.D. How animals perceive group size: aggression among hens in partitioned pens. Proceedings of the International Congress on Applied Ethology, Berlin:1993.
4. Bradshaw R.H. Conspecific discrimination and social preference in the laying hen. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 33:1992;69-75.
5. Bolter, U., 1987. Felduntersuchungen zum Sozialverhalten von Hühnern in der Auslauf-und Volierenhaltung. Eidg. Techn. Hochschule., Zürich/Justus-Liebig-Univ. Giessen, Dissertation.
6. Bshary R., Lamprecht J. Reduction of aggression among domestic hens (Gallus domesticus) in the presence of a dominant third party. Behaviour. 128(3-4):1994;311-324.
7. Collias N.E., Collias E.C. A field-study of the Red Junglefowl in North-Central India. The Condor. 69:1967;360-386.
8. Collias N.E., Collias E.C., Hunsaker D., Minning L. Locality fixation, mobility and social organization within an unconfined population of red jungle fowl. Animal Behaviour. 14:1966;550-559.
9. Craig J.V., Bhagwat A.L. Agonistic and mating behaviour of adult chickens modified by social and physical environments. Applied Animal Ethology. 1:1974;57-65.
10. Craig J.V., Guhl A.M. Territorial behaviour and social interactions of pullets kept in large flocks. Poultry Science. 48:1969;1622-1628.
11. Dawkins M.S. How do hens view other hens? The use of lateral and binocular visual fields in social recognition. Behaviour. 132:1995;591-606.
12. Dawkins M.S. Distance and social recognition in hens: Implications for the use of photographs as social stimuli. Behaviour. 133:1996;663-680.
13. D'Eath R.B., Stone R.J. Chickens use visual cues in social discrimination: an experiment with coloured lighting. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 62:1999;233-242.
14. Gibson, S.W., Dun, P., Hughes, B.O.,1986. The performance and behaviour of laying fowls in a covered straw-yard system 1983-1986. Scottish. Agr. Colleges Research and Development, Note. 35.
15. Grigor P.N., Hughes B.O., Appleby M.C. Social inhibition of movement in domestic hens. Animal Behaviour. 49:1995;1381-1388.
16. Guhl A.M. Social behaviour of the domestic fowl. Technical Bulletin of the Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station. 73:1953;1-48.
17. Hughes B.O. Selection of group size by individual laying hens. British Poultry Science. 18:1977;9-18.
18. Hughes B.O., Carmichael N.L., Walker A.W., Grigor P.N. Low incidence of aggression in large flocks of laying hens. Applied Animal Behaviours Science. 54:1997;215-234.
19. Hughes B.O., Wood-Gush D.G.M., Morley Jones R. Spatial organization in flocks of domestic fowls. Animal Behaviour. 22:1974;438-445.
20. Keeling L.J., Savenije B. Flocks of commercial laying hens: organised groups or collections of individuals. Proc. 29th International Congress of the International Society for Applied Ethology, Exeter, U.K. 1995;187.
21. Lindberg A.C., Nicol C.J. Space and density effects on group size prefences in laying hens. British Poultry Science. 37:1996;709-721.
22. Lindberg A.C., Nicol C.J. Effects of social and environmental familiarity on group preferences and spacing behaviour in laying hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 49:1996;109-123.
23. McBride G. Social discrimination and subflock structure in the fowl. Animal Behaviour. 12:1964;264-267.
24. McBride G., Foenander F. Territorial behaviour in flocks of domestic fowls. Nature. 194:1962;102.
25. McBride G., Parer J., Foenander F. The social organization and behaviour of the feral domestic fowl. Animal Behaviour Monograph. 2:1969;127-181.
26. McLean K.A., Baxter M.R., Michie W. A comparison of the welfare of laying hens in battery cages and in a perchery. Research and Development in Agriculture. 3(2):1986;93-98.
27. Odén K., Vestergaard K.S., Algers B.O. Agonistic behaviour and feather pecking in single-sexed and mixed flocks of laying hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 62:1999;219-231.
28. Pagel M., Dawkins M.S. Peck orders and group size in laying hens: "future contracts" for non-aggression. Behavioural Processes. 40:1997;13-25.
29. Vestergaard, K.S., 1994. Dustbathing and its relation to feather pecking in the foul: motivational and developmental aspects. Dissertation. The Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Copenhagen.
30. Widowski T.M., Duncan I.J.H. Do domestic fowl form groups when resources are unlimited? Proceedings of the 28th International Congress of the ISAE, 3-6 August 1994, in Foulum, Denmark. 1994;140.
31. Zayan R. Recognition between individuals indicated by aggression and dominance in pairs of domestic fowl. Zayan R., Duncan I.J.H. Cognitive Aspects of Social Behaviour in the Domestic Fowl. 1987;321-438 Elsevier, Amsterdam.
32. Zayan R. An analysis of dominance and subordination experiences in sequences of paired encounters between hens. Zayan R., Duncan I.J.H. Cognitive Aspects of Social Behaviour in the Domestic Fowl. 1987;182-320 Elsevier, Amsterdam.