PERFORMANCE OF 4 HYBRIDS OF LAYING HENS IN MODIFIED AND CONVENTIONAL CAGES
PERFORMANCE OF 4 HYBRIDS OF LAYING HENS IN MODIFIED AND CONVENTIONAL CAGES
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/09064709509413088
复制
发表时间：
1995-11-01
影响因子：
0.9
通讯作者：
APPLEBY, MC
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
ABRAHAMSSON, P;TAUSON, R;APPLEBY, MC
在两项试验中，对四种杂交种（试验 1 中的 Dekalb XL、Lohmann Selected Leghorn (LSL) 和 Shaver 288 以及试验 2 中的 ISA Brown 和 LSL）总共 2877 只笼养蛋鸡的生产、饲料消耗、死亡率、鸡蛋质量和禽类活重进行了完整生产周期的研究。笼子设计为每笼 15 只母鸡的逃走笼 (GA)、称为“改良和浓缩笼”(ME) 的“爱丁堡改良笼”的特殊版本（ME），每笼 4 只 ISA 或 5 只来航母鸡、传统金属笼 (CO)，每笼 4 只母鸡，传统塑料笼 (PL)，每笼 3 只母鸡。 GA 和 ME 包括巢穴、栖息处和沙浴。 LSL 的产量明显优于其他杂交种。 Shaver 的活重显着低于 Dekalb 和 LSL，而 ISA 显着重于 LSL。 ME 中的产量与传统笼中的产量相似，并且在试验 2 中？ ME、CO 和 PL 的鸡只产量明显好于 GA 的鸡只。 GA 的死亡率最高，试验 2 中的死亡率显着高于 ME。与 ME 和 FL 相比，GA 产生的破裂蛋比例明显更高，而 CO 产生的破裂蛋比例明显更低。在这两项试验中，ME Save 的脏蛋比例明显低于 GA，并且在试验 2 中是最低的。系统之间在鸡蛋内部质量方面几乎没有差异。结论是 ME 更适合生产。死亡率和管理水平高于 GA，但与传统笼养相似。
In two trials, production, feed consumption, mortality, egg quality and birds live weight of a total of 2877 caged laying hens of four hybrids, Dekalb XL, Lohmann Selected Leghorn (LSL) and Shaver 288 in Trial 1 and ISA Brown and LSL in Trial 2, were studied during full production cycles. The cage designs were Get-away cages (GA) with 15 hens per cage, a special version of the ''Edinburgh modified cage'' called ''Modified and enriched cage'' (ME) with 4 ISA or 5 Leghorn hens per cage, conventional cages of metal (CO) with 4 hens per cage and conventional cages of plastic (PL) with 3 hens per cage. GA and ME included nests, perches and sandbaths. LSL produced significantly better than the other hybrids. Shaver had a significantly lower live weight than Dekalb and LSL, while ISA was significantly heavier than LSL. Production in ME was similar to that in conventional cages and, in Trial 2? birds in ME, CO and PL produced significantly better than those in GA. The highest mortality was registered in GA, where in Trial 2 it was significantly higher than in ME. GA gave a significantly higher and CO a lower proportion of cracked eggs than ME and FL. In both trials ME Save significantly lower proportions of dirty eggs than GA and in Trial 2, the lowest. Few differences between the systems were registered regarding interior egg quality. It was concluded that ME is better for production. mortality and management than GA but similar to conventional cages.