Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T07:31:31.037Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Furnished cages and aviaries: production and health

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2007

R. Tauson
R. Tauson
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Nutrition and Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Funbo-Lövsta Research Centre, 755 97 Uppsala, Sweden, e-mail: ragnar.tauson@huv.slu.se
Get access

Abstract

A review is presented of results from research and commercial production of two alternative keeping systems – furnished cages and aviary systems. These systems have gradually evolved through criticism of conventional cage keeping of layers, mainly in North Western Europe, due to the lack of possibilities for birds to perform natural behaviours and to restricted space. They provide birds with nests to lay eggs in, perches to rest on, and litter material to manipulate and dust-bathe in. Experience and development of the aviary are longer than that of furnished cages, the latter existing in wide spread commercial production only in Sweden as yet. However, according to a new EU-directive in 1999, conventional cages may not be used as a new investment from 2003 and not at all from 2012. Birds in both systems may produce well but the aviaries are less predictable due to irregular outbreaks of flock cannibalism, especially in non beak-trimmed medium heavy brown birds, despite offering the birds litter and plenty of space. The furnished cages try to combine advantages of small group size in cages and reduce disadvantages of poor air condition, and sometimes inferior hygiene, in floor-kept hens. They are still subjected to extensive improvements in details of design e.g. to enhance egg quality. Hence, results may vary considerably between models. In order to maintain a stable social order it is probably vital to retain a moderate group size in furnished cages.

Keywords

Furnished cagesaviariesKeeping systemsegg production and health
Type
Reviews
Information
World's Poultry Science Journal , Volume 58 , Issue 1 , March 2002 , pp. 49 - 63
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2002

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

Abrahamsson, P. and Tauson, R. (1993) Effects of perches at different positions in conventional cages for laying hens of two different strains. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica. Section A, Animal Science 43: 228–235.Google Scholar
Abrahamsson, P. and Tauson, R. (1995) Aviary systems and conventional cages for laying hens – Effects on production, egg quality, health and bird location in three hybrids. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica. Section A, Animal Science 45: 191–203.Google Scholar
Abrahamsson, P. and Tauson, R. (1997) Effects of group size on performance, health and behavior in furnished cages for laying hens. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica. Section A, Animal Science 47: 254–260.Google Scholar
Abrahamsson, P. and Tauson, R. (1998) Performance and egg quality of laying hens in an aviary system. Journal of Applied Poultry Research 7: 225–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abrahamsson, P., Fossum, O. and Tauson, R. (1998) Health of laying hens in an aviary system over five batches of birds. Acta veterinaria Scandinavica 39: 367–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abrahamsson, P., Tauson, R. and Appleby, M.C. (1995) Performance of four hybrids of laying hens in modified and conventional cages. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica. Section A, Animal Science 45: 286–296.Google Scholar
Abrahamsson, P., Tauson, R. and Appleby, M.C. (1996) Behaviour, health and integument of four hybrids of laying hens in modified and conventional cages. British Poultry Science 37: 521–540.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Appleby, M. and Hughes, B.O. (1995) The Edinburgh Modified Cage for laying hens. British Poultry Science 36: 707–718.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Appleby, M., Smith, S.F. and Hughes, B.O. (1993) Nesting, dust bathing and perching by laying hens in cages: Effects of design on behaviour and welfare. British Poultry Science 34: 835–847.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bareham, J.R. (1976) A comparison of the behaviour and production of laying hens in experimental and conventional battery cages. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 2: 291–203.Google Scholar
Barnett, J.L., Glatz, P.C., Newman, E.A., and Cronin, G.M. (1997) Effects of modifying layer cages with solid sides on stress physiology, plumage, pecking, and bone strength of hens. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 37: 11–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blokhuis, H.J. and Metz, J.H.M. (1995) Aviary housing for laying hens. Report from ID-DLO – IMAG-DLO, Lelystad, theNetherlands. pp. 43–100.Google Scholar
Bosch, J.G.M.J. and Van Niekerk, T.G.C.M. (1995) Health. In: Aviary housing for laying hens. Ed. Blokhuis, H.J. and Metz, J.H.M.Report from ID-DLO–IMAG-DLO, Lelystad, theNetherlands. pp. 59–71.Google Scholar
CEC (1999) Council directive for laying down minimum standards for the protection of laying hens kept in various systems of rearing. CEC Directive, 1999/74/EG.Google Scholar
Craig, J.V. and Swanson, J.C. (1994) Review. Welfare perspectives on hens kept for egg production. Poultry Science 73: 921–938.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Christenssen, J.B. (1999) 3. Effektivitetskontrol, konsumaeg. In Beretning 1999. Danish Poultry Council. Trommesalen 5, 1614 Copenhagen V, Denmark. pp. 69–80.Google Scholar
Duncan, I.J.H. and Fraser, D. (1997) Understanding animal welfare. In Animal Welfare. Ed. Appleby, M.C. and Hughes, B.O.University Press, Cambridge, U.K.Google Scholar
Elwinger, K. and Tauson, R. (1999) Välj rätt hönor vid golvinhysning. Fakta jordbruk 1999 (1). SLU Publikationstjänst, Box 7075, 750 07 UPPSALA, Sweden.Google Scholar
Elson, H.A. (1976) New ideas on laying cage design – the “Get-away” cage. Proc. of WPSA 5th European Poultry ConferenceMalta, pp. 1030–1041.Google Scholar
Engström, B. and Schaller, G. (1993) Experimental studies of the health of laying hens in relation to housing system. In Proc. Fourth European Symposium on Poultry WelfareEdinburgh. Ed. Savory, C.J. and Hughes, B.O. pp. 87–96.Google Scholar
Ekstrand, C., Odén, K., Gunnarsson, S., Algers, B., Onila, M. and Svedberg, J. (1996) Utvärdering av inhysningssystemet Oli-Voletage för frigäende värphöns. Svensk Veterinärtidning 48(6): 287–294.Google Scholar
Ekstrand, C., Algers, B., Geismar, J., Gunnarsson, S., Odén, K., Onila, M. and Svedberg, J. (1997) Utvärdering av Vencomatic inhysningssystem för värphöns. Specialarbete 4. SLU, Dept. of Environment and Health, SKARA, Sweden.Google Scholar
FAWC (1997) Report on the welfare of laying hens. Farm Animal Welfare Council, Government Buildings, Surrey KTF 7NF, Great Britain.Google Scholar
Hansen, I. (1993) Ethological studies of laying hens in aviaries and cages. Thesis 1993:14. Dept. Anim. Sci. Agricultural University of Norway, N-1432 AAS.Google Scholar
Meierhans, D., Amgarten, M., Guler, H.-P. and Strasser, M. (1992) The economical consequences of the introduction of alternative housing systems for laying hens in Switzerland. Poster session in Proc. XIX World's Poultry CongressAmsterdam. No. 560.Google Scholar
Moinard, C., Morisse, J.P. and Faure, J. (1998) Effect of cage area, cage height, and perches on feather condition, bone breakage and mortality of laying hens. British Poultry Science 39: 198–202.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morgenstern, R. and Lobsiger, C. (1993) Health of laying hens in alternative systems in practice. In Proc. Fourth European Symposium on Poultry WelfareEdinburgh. Ed. Savory, C.J. and Hughes, B.O.. pp. 81–86.Google Scholar
MÅrtensson, L. (1996) Concentrations of dust, endotoxin and organic acids in confined animal buildings. Thesis. Report 103. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Dept. Agricultural Biosystems and Technology, P.O. Box 945, 220 09 LUND, Sweden.Google Scholar
Oester, H. (1994) Sitzstangenformen und ihr Einfluss auf die Entstehung von Fussballengeschwüren bei legehennen. Archiv für Geflügelkunde 58: 231–238Google Scholar
Peguri, A. and Coon, C. (1993) Effects of feather coverage and temperature on layer performance. Poultry Science 72: 1318–1329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SFS (1998) Animal Welfare Act. SFS 1998:5, Swedish Board of Agriculture, 551 82 JÖNKÖPING.Google Scholar
Scholtyssek, S., Geschwindt-Ensinger, B. and Bessei, W. (1984) Der Einfluss der Zucht in unterschiedlichen Haltungssystemen auf Leistung, Verhaltens- und physiologische Parameter von Legehennen (2. Mitteilung: Vergleich der Kreuzungseffekte). Archiv für Geflügelkunde 48: 80–88.Google Scholar
Siegwart, N. (1991) Ursache und Pathogenese von Fussballengeschwüren bei Legehennen. Dissertation. University of Bern, 143 pp.Google Scholar
Stewart, G.D. (1999) Welfare aspects of commercial poultry housing in Australia. Thesis submitted to the University of Queensland, Brisbane.Google Scholar
SVC (1996) Report on the welfare of laying hens. European Commission, Directorate-General for Agriculture, VI/BII.2, Brussels.Google Scholar
Tanaka, F. and Hurnik, J.F. (1992) Comparison of behavior and performance of laying hens housed in battery cages and an aviary. Poultry Science 71: 235–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, A.A. and Hurnik, J.F. (1994) The effect of long-term housing in an aviary and battery cages on the physical condition of laying hens: Body weight, feather condition, claw length, foot lesions and tibia strength. Poultry Science 73: 268–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tauson, R. (1986) Technical environments for caged layers. Thesis. Report no. 154. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Dept. Animal Husbandry and Management, Funbo-Lövsta Research Centre, 755 97 UPPSALA, Sweden.Google Scholar
Tauson, R. (1999) The state of development and experiences of new furnished cages for laying hens. Archiv für Geflügelkunde 63(5): 189–193.Google Scholar
Tauson, R. (2000) Produccion, salud y manejo en jaulas equipadas. Proceedings of Congresso Internacional de Producción y Sanidad Animal. 7–10 noviembreBarcelona, pp. 32–45.Google Scholar
Tauson, R. and Abrahamsson, P. (1994) Foot- and skeletal disorders in laying hens. Effects of perch design, hybrid, housing system and stocking density. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica. Section A, Animal Science 44: 110–119.Google Scholar
Tauson, R. and Holm, K.E. (1998) Evaluation of the Marielund keeping system. Report 244. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Dept. Animal Husbandry and Management, Funbo-Lövsta Research Centre, 755 97 UPPSALA, Sweden.Google Scholar
Tauson, R. and Holm, K.E. (2001) First furnished small group cages for laying hens in evaluation program on commercial farms in Sweden. In Proceedings of the 6:th European Symposium on Poultry WelfareZollikofenSwitzerland, 1–4/9 2001. In press.Google Scholar
Tauson, R., Wall, H. and Elwinger, K. (1999) Preliminary report on a study of Big Dutchman furnished cage. Report to the Swedish Board of Agriculture. (In Swedish with tables in English).Google Scholar
Van Den Top, A., Migchels, M., Van Der Schilden, H.H.E. and Vrielink, O. (1995) Labor organization and ergonomics. In: Aviary housing for laying hens. Ed. Blokhuis, H.J. and Metz, J.H.M. Report from ID-DLO – IMAG-DLO, Lelystad, theNetherlands. pp. 73–102.Google Scholar
Van Horne, P.L.M. (1997) Production and economic results of commercial flocks with white layers in aviary systems and battery cages. British Poultry Science 37: 255–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Niekerk, T. (1999 a) Legehennen in groβen Gruppenkäfigen. Heutiges System nicht praxisreif. DGS, 1999 (26): 18–22.Google Scholar
Van Niekerk, T. (1999 b) Anreicherung von Legehennenkäfigen. Kaum Auswirkung auf die Produktionskennzahlen. DGS, 1999(26): 12–17.Google Scholar
Van Niekerk, T.G.C.M. and Ehlhardt, D.A. (1995) Zootechnics. In: Aviary housing for laying hens. Ed. Blokhuis, H.J. and Metz, J.H.M.Report from ID-DLO – IMAG-DLO, Lelystad, theNetherlands. pp. 43–57.Google Scholar
Wall, H. and Tauson, R. (1999) Preliminary data from Trial 60197 at Funbo-Lövsta Research Center.Google Scholar
Wall, H. and Tauson, R. (2000) Exterior egg quality and use of nests in furnished cages. In Proceedings XXI World's Poultry Congress, Montreal. Poster session abstract. (CD-rom, www.wpsa.com).Google Scholar
Walker, A.W., Tucker, S.A. and Elson, H.A. (1998) An economic analysis of a modified, enriched cage egg production system. British Poultry Science 39: 14–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wang, G., Ekstrand, C. and Svedberg, J. (1998) Wet litter and perches as risk factors for the development of footpad dermatitis in floor housed hens. British Poultry Science 39: 191–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wathes, C.M. (1999) Strive for clean air in your poultry house. World Poultry 15(3): 17–18.Google Scholar