Multi-factorial investigation of various housing systems for laying hens
Multi-factorial investigation of various housing systems for laying hens
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/00071660903421167
复制
发表时间：
2010-01-01
影响因子：
2
通讯作者：
Tanaka, T.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Shimmura, T.;Hirahara, S.;Tanaka, T.
1.比较了不同的蛋鸡饲养制度的优缺点，为在商品化条件下开展工作进行了初步研究。2.在16周龄时，284只母鸡被引入6种饲养系统中的一种：两种类型的常规笼子(小：SC；大：LC)、带家具的笼子(小：SF；大：LF)和非笼养系统(单层鸟舍：SA；自由放养：FR)。3.我们对在同一地点建造的这些住房系统中的鸟类的福利、产蛋量和免疫反应进行了为期18个月的评估。对于福利评估，我们检查了他们的行为学、生理学、解剖学、生产和身体状况。4.非笼养系统，尤其是FR，在避免疼痛、伤害和疾病以及其他缺点方面得分较低，如苍白的鸡蛋和增加生产所需的采食量。然而，在非笼养系统中，自由表达正常行为的得分很高，免疫反应良好。5.在有家具的笼子中，SF的行为比在LF中的行为更多样化，在SF中的免疫反应与非笼养系统相当。6.对于免于恐惧和痛苦，非笼养系统在TI持续时间、H/L比率和爪长等指标上得分较高，而攻击性啄食和羽毛啄食在群体规模较大的住房系统中较差。
1. The advantages and disadvantages of various housing systems for laying hens were compared as a pilot study for work in commercial conditions. 2. At 16 weeks of age, 284 hens were introduced into one of 6 housing systems: two types of conventional cages (small: SC; large: LC), furnished cages (small: SF; large: LF), and non-cage systems (single-tiered aviary: SA; free-range: FR). 3. We evaluated the welfare, egg production, and immune response of the birds in these housing systems, built in the same location, for 18 months. For welfare evaluation, we examined their ethology, physiology, anatomy, production, and physical condition. 4. The non-cage systems, especially FR, had a low score for freedom from pain, injury, and disease, together with other disadvantages, such as pale eggs and increased feed intake for production. However, the score for freedom to express normal behaviour was high and immune response was good in the non-cage systems. 5. In the furnished cages, behaviour was more diverse in SF than in LF, and in SF immune response was comparable with the non-cage systems. 6. For freedom from fear and distress, the non-cage systems had high scores for some indicators such as TI duration, H/L ratio and claw length, while aggressive pecking and feather pecking was worse in the housing systems with large group sizes.