Effects of litter substrate and genotype on layers' use of litter, exterior appearance, and heterophil:lymphocyte ratios in furnished cages

Poultry Science

Volumn 87, Issue 12, 2008, Pages 2458-2465

  Wall, H ^a   Tauson, R ^a   Elwinger, K ^a  

^a SWEDISH UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Dust bath; Furnished cage; Laying hen; Litter bath

Indexed keywords

EID: 57049121317     PISSN: 00325791     EISSN: 15253171     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3382/ps.2008-00038     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Abrahamsson, P., O. Fossum, and R. Tauson. 1998. Health of laying hens in an aviary system over five batches of birds. Acta Agric. Scand. Sect. Anim. Sci. 39:367-379.
2. Abrahamsson, P., and R. Tauson. 1995. Aviary systems and conventional cages for laying hens. Acta Agric. Scand. Sect. Anim. Sci. 45:191-203.
3. Abrahamsson, P., and R. Tauson. 1997. Effects of group size on performance, health and birds' use of facilities in furnished cages for laying hens. Acta Agric. Scand. Sect. Anim. Sci. 47:254-260.
4. Abrahamsson, P., R. Tauson, and M. C. Appleby. 1996a. Behaviour, health and integument of four hybrids of laying hens in modified and conventional cages. Br. Poult. Sci. 37:521-540.
5. Abrahamsson, P., R. Tauson, and K. Elwinger. 1996b. Effects on production and egg quality of varying proportions of wheat and barley in diets for two hybrids of laying hens kept in different housing systems. Acta Agric. Scand. Sect. Anim. Sci. 6:173-182.
6. Aerni, V., H. El-Lethey, and B. Wechsler. 2000. Effect of foraging material and food form on feather pecking in laying hens. Br. Poult. Sci. 41:16-21.
7. Appleby, M. C., and B. O. Hughes. 1995. The Edinburgh modified cage for laying hens. Br. Poult. Sci. 36:707-718.
8. Baxter, M. R. 1994. The welfare problems of laying hens in battery cages. Vet. Rec. 134:614-619.
9. Blokhuis, H. J. 1986. Feather-pecking in poultry: Its relation with ground-pecking. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 16:63-67.
10. Brännäs, E., B. S. Wiklund, C. Burel, P. Ciszuk, L. E. Liljedahl, and A. Kiessling. 2001. Note on a method for individual recognition in feed pecking in free running groups of hens. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 70:239-243.
11. Bubier, N. E. 1996. The behavioural priorities of laying hens: The effect of cost/no cost multi-choice tests on time budgets. Behav. Processes 37:225-238.
12. Craig, J. V., and J. C. Swanson. 1994. Review: Welfare perspectives on hens kept for egg production. Poult. Sci. 73:921-938.
13. De Jong, I. C., M. Wolthuis-Fillerup, and C. G. van Reenen. 2007. Strength of preference for dustbathing and foraging substrates in laying hens. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 104:24-36.
14. European Commission. 1999. Council Directive 1999/74/EC of 19 July 1999 laying down minimum standards for the protection of laying hens. Off. J. L 203, 03/08/1999.
15. Faure, J. M. 1991. Rearing conditions and needs for space and litter in laying hens. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 31:111-117.
16. Gunnarsson, S., L. R. Matthews, T. M. Foster, and W. Temple. 2000. The demand for straw and feathers as litter substrates by laying hens. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 65:321-330.
17. Huber-Eicher, B., and B. Wechsler. 1997. Feather pecking in domestic chicks: Its relation to dustbathing and foraging. Anim. Behav. 54:757-768.
18. Johnsen, P. F., K. S. Vestergaard, and G. Nørgaard-Nielsen. 1998. Influence of early rearing conditions on the development of feather pecking and cannibalism in domestic fowl. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 60:25-41.
19. Lagadic, H., and J. M. Faure. 1987. Preferences of domestic hens for cage size and floor types as measured by operant conditioning. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 19:147-155.
20. Lillpers, K. 1991. Genetic variation in the time of oviposition in the laying hen. Br. Poult. Sci. 32:303-312.
21. Lindberg, A. C., and C. J. Nicol. 1997. Dustbathing in modified battery cages: Is sham dustbathing an adequate substitute? Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 55:113-128.
22. Maxwell, M. H. 1993. Avian blood cell leucocyte responses to stress. World's Poult. Sci. J. 49:34-43.
23. Olsson, I. A. S., and K. J. Keeling. 2002. No effect of social competition on sham dustbathing in furnished cages for laying hens. Acta Agric. Scand. Sect. Anim. Sci. 52:253-256.
24. Peguri, A., and C. Coon. 1993. Effect of feather coverage and temperature on layer performance. Poult. Sci. 72:1318-1329.
25. Prentice, E. F., T. A. Flagg, and C. S. McCutcheon. 1990. Feasibility of using implantable passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags in salmonids. Am. Fish. Soc. Symp. 7:317-322.
26. Roll, V. F. B., G. A. Maria, and R. Cepero. 2005. Ethological parameters and performance of Hy Line White and ISA Brown hens when housed in furnished cages. Anim. Sci. Pap. Rep. 23(Suppl. 1):77-84.
27. Sandilands, V., C. S. Savory, and K. Powell. 2001. Effects of age and floor substrate on preen gland size and function in laying hens. Br. Poult. Sci. 42:75-76.
28. Shimmura, T., Y. Eguchi, K. Uetake, and T. Tanaka. 2007. Differences of behavior, use of resources and physical conditions between dominant and subordinate hens in furnished cages. Anim. Sci. J. 78:307-313.
29. Snedecor, G. W., and W. G. Cochran. 1989. Arc sine transformation for proportions. Pages 289-290 in Statistical Methods. 8th ed. Iowa State University Press, Ames.
30. Tauson, R., and K. E. Holm. 2002. Evaluation of Victorsson furnished cage for 8 laying hens according to the 7§ of the Swedish Animal Welfare Ordinance and according to the New-Technique Evaluation Program at the Swedish Board of Agriculture (in Swedish with English tables, figures and summary). Report 251, Department of Animal Nutrition and Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala.
31. Tauson, R., and K. E. Holm. 2003. Evaluation of "Aviplus" - Big Dutchman furnished cage for 10 laying hens according to the 7§ of the Swedish Animal Welfare Ordinance and according to the New-Technique Evaluation Program at the Swedish Board of Agriculture (in Swedish with English tables, figures and summary). Report 256. Department of Animal Nutrition and Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala.
32. Tauson, R., J. Kjaer, G. A. Maria, R. Cepero, and K.-E. Holm. 2005. Applied scoring of integument and health in laying hens. Anim. Sci. Pap. Rep. 23(Suppl. 1):153-159.
33. Tauson, R., and S. A. Svensson. 1980. Influence of plumage Condition on the Hen's Feed Requirement. Swed. J. Agric. Res. 10:35-39.
34. Van Liere, D. W. 1992. The significance of fowls' bathing in dust. Anim. Welf. 1:187-202.
35. Van Liere, D. W., and S. Bokma. 1987. Short-term feather maintenance as a function of dust-bathing in laying hens. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 18:197-204.
36. van Niekerk, T. G. C. M., and B. F. J. Ruevekamp. 2000. Hens make good use of litter in enriched cages. World's Poult. Sci. J. 16:34-37.
37. Vestergaard, K. 1982. Dust-bathing in the domestic-diurnal rhythm and dust deprivation. Appl. Anim. Ethol. 8:487-495.
38. Vestergaard, K. S. 1994. Dustbathing and its relation to feather pecking in the fowl: Motivational and developmental aspects. PhD Diss. Dept. Anim. Sci. and Anim. Health. The Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Copenhagen, Denmark.
39. Wahlström, A., R. Tauson, and K. Elwinger. 1998. Effects on plumage condition, health and mortality of dietary oats/wheat ratios to three hybrids of laying hens in different housing systems. Acta Agric. Scand. Sect. Anim. Sci. 48:250-259.
40. Wall, H., and R. Tauson. 2007. Perch arrangements in small-group furnished cages for laying hens. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 16:322-330.
41. Wall, H., R. Tauson, and K. Elwinger. 2002. Effect of nest design, passages, and hybrid on use of nest and production performance of layers in furnished cages. Poult. Sci. 81:333-339.
42. Wall, H., R. Tauson, and K. Elwinger. 2004. Pop hole passages and welfare in furnished cages for laying hens. Br. Poult. Sci. 45:20-27.
43. Wall, H., R. Tauson, and S. Sørgjerd. 2008. Bacterial contamination of egg shells in furnished and conventional cages. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 17:11-16.
44. Widowski, T. M., and I. J. H. Duncan. 2000. Working for a dustbath: Are hens increasing pleasure rather than reducing suffering? Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 68:39-53.