Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T04:11:18.148Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of level of straw bale provision on the behaviour and leg health of commercial broiler chickens

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 June 2014

C. L. Bailie  and
N. E. O’Connell
C. L. Bailie*
Affiliation:
Institute for Global Food Security, School of Biological Sciences, Queens University Belfast, Belfast BT9 7BL, UK
N. E. O’Connell
Affiliation:
Institute for Global Food Security, School of Biological Sciences, Queens University Belfast, Belfast BT9 7BL, UK
*
†E-mail: c.bailie@qub.ac.uk
Get access

Abstract

This study aimed to assess the effect of the number of straw bales (SBs) provided on the behaviour and leg health of commercial broiler chickens. Houses containing ~23 000 broiler chickens were assigned to one of two treatments: (1) access to 30 SBs per house, ‘30SB’ or (2) access to 45 SB per house, ‘45SB’. This equated to bale densities of 1 bale/44 m2 and 1 bale/29 m2 of floor space within houses, respectively. Treatments were applied in one of two houses on a commercial farm, and were replicated over six production cycles. Both houses had windows and were also artificially lit. Behaviour was observed in weeks 3 to5 of the cycle. This involved observations of general behaviour and activity, gait scores (0: perfect to 5: unable to walk) and latency to lie (measured in seconds from when a bird had been encouraged to stand). Production performance and environmental parameters were also measured. SB density had no significant effect on activity levels (P>0.05) or walking ability (P>0.05). However, the average latency to lie was greater in 30SB birds compared with 45SB birds (P<0.05). The incidence of hock burn and podo dermatitis, average BW at slaughter and levels of mortality and culling were unaffected by SB density (P>0.05). The results from this study suggest that increasing SB levels from 1 bale/44 m2 to 1 bale/29 m2 floor space does not lead to significant improvements in the welfare of commercial broiler chickens in windowed houses.

Keywords

behaviourbroiler chickenleg healthstraw balesenrichment
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 8 , Issue 10 , October 2014 , pp. 1715 - 1721
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aerni, V, El-Lethey, H and Wechsler, B 2000. Effect of foraging material and food form on feather pecking in laying hens. British Poultry Science 41, 16–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bailie, CL, Ball, MEE and O’Connell, NE 2013. Influence of the provision of natural light and straw bales on activity levels and leg health in commercial broiler chickens. Animal 7, 618–626.Google Scholar
Buijs, S, Keeling, L, Rettenbacher, S, Van Poucke, E and Tuyttens, FAM 2009. Stocking density effects on broiler welfare: identifying sensitive ranges for different indicators. Poultry Science 88, 1536–1543.Google Scholar
Collias, NE and Collias, EC 1967. A field study of the Red Jungle Fowl in north-central India. The Condor 69, 360–386.Google Scholar
Council Directive 2007/43/EC 2007. Laying down minimum rules for the protection of chickens kept for meat production. Retrieved September 1, 2013, from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/oj/2007/l_182/l_18220070712en00190028.pdf Google Scholar
Estévez, I, Newberry, R and Arias de Reyna, L 1997. Broiler chickens: a tolerant social system? Etología 5, 19–29.Google Scholar
Hall, AL 2001. The effect of stocking density on the welfare and behaviour of broiler chickens reared commercially. Animal Welfare 10, 23–40.Google Scholar
Julian, RJ 1998. Rapid growth problems: ascites and skeletal deformities in broilers. Poultry Science 12, 1773–1780.Google Scholar
Kells, A, Dawkins, MS and Borja, MC 2001. The effect of a ‘freedom food’ enrichment on the behaviour of broilers on commercial farms. Animal Welfare 10, 347–356.Google Scholar
Kestin, SC, Gorden, S, Su, G and Sorensen, P 2001. Relationships in broiler chickens between lameness, live weight, growth rate and age. Veterinary Record 148, 195–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kestin, SC, Knowles, TG, Tinch, AE and Gregory, NG 1992. Prevalence of leg weakness in broiler chickens and its relationship with genotype. Veterinary Record 131, 190– 194.Google Scholar
Knowles, TG, Kestin, SC, Haslam, SM, Brown, SN, Green, LE, Butterworth, A, Pope, SJ, Pfeiffer, D and Nicol, CJ 2008. Leg disorders in broiler chickens: prevalence, risk factors and prevention. PLoS One 3, e1545. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0001545Google Scholar
Maddocks, SA, Cuthill, IC, Goldsmith, AR and Sherwin, CM 2001. Behavioural and physiological effects of absence of ultraviolet wavelengths for domestic chicks. Animal Behaviour 62, 1013–1019.Google Scholar
Newberry, RC 1995. Environmental enrichment: increasing the biological relevance of captive environments. Applied Animal Behavioural Science 44, 229–243.Google Scholar
Newberry, RC and Shackleton, DM 1997. Use of cover by domestic fowl: a Venetian blind effect? Animal Behaviour 54, 387–395.Google Scholar
Newberry, RC, Hunt, JR and Gardiner, EE 1988. The influence of light intensity on behaviour and performance of broiler chickens. Poultry Science 67, 1020–1025.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
RSPCA Welfare Standards for Chickens 2011. RSPCA freedom food farm assurance and food labelling scheme. Retrieved September 1, 2013, fromhttp://www.rspca.org.uk/ImageLocator/LocateAsset?asset=document&assetId=1232725466971&mode=prd Google Scholar
Sherwin, CM, Lewis, PD and Perry, GC 1999. The effects of environmental enrichment and intermittent lighting on the behaviour and welfare of male domestic turkeys. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 62, 319–333.Google Scholar
Weeks, CA, Knowles, TG, Gordon, RG, Kerr, AE, Peyton, ST and Tillbrook, NT 2002. New method for objectively assessing lameness in broiler chickens. Veterinary Record 151, 762–764.Google Scholar
Woodgush, DGM, Duncan, IJH and Savory, CJ 1978. Observations on social-behavior of domestic-fowl in wild. Biology of Behaviour 3, 193–205.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Supplementary material

To view supplementary material for this article, please visit

Download Supplementary material(File)
File 33.8 KB
Supplementary material: File

Bailie and O’Connell Supplementary Material

Table S1

Download Bailie and O’Connell Supplementary Material(File)
File 15.8 KB