Welfare and performance of commercial laying hens in conventional California cages at different stocking densities

PINKY ROY; M M KADAM; S K BHANJA; N V KURKURE; D B BHAISARE; J J ROKADE; K K KHOSE

doi:10.56093/ijans.v90i9.109494

Authors

PINKY ROY Department of Poultry Science, MAFSU, Nagpur
M M KADAM Nagpur Veterinary College, MAFSU, Nagpur 440 013
S K BHANJA ICAR-CARI, Izatnagar, Bareilly
N V KURKURE Nagpur Veterinary College, MAFSU, Nagpur 440 013
D B BHAISARE Nagpur Veterinary College, MAFSU, Nagpur 440 013
J J ROKADE ICAR-CARI, Izatnagar, Bareilly
K K KHOSE COVAS, Parbhani, Maharashtra

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijans.v90i9.109494

Keywords:

California cages, Egg production, Layer, Stocking density, Welfare

Abstract

The present experiment was conducted to investigate the effect of different stocking densities on performance and welfare of commercial white leghorn hens (BV 300 strain) reared in conventional California cages. A total of 270 hens were divided into four stocking density groups, viz. 60 sq. inch/387 cm2 (T1); 75 sq. inch/484 cm² (T2); 85 sq. inch/ 548 cm² (T3) and 100 sq. inch/645 cm² (T4) per bird with 18 replicates in each treatment. The experiment was conducted for a 20 week period under uniform standard management practices with birds fed on commercial layer diet. It was observed T3 and T4 group birds had highly significant (P<0.001) percentage of hen day egg production, higher egg weight, better feed conversion ratio, minimum cost of production per egg compared to T2 and T1 at the end of 20 week experimental period. Welfare indicatorsâ€”Feather score was significantly best in T4 group birds when compared to T1 group, whereas gait score and immunity parameters was non-significant among all the birds reared at different stocking densities. Considering well-being and production performance, the present study confirms that commercial laying hens reared in conventional California cages provided with 85 sq. inch/548 cm2 space per bird gives better quality egg production without compromising birds welfare.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abrahamsson P. 1996. Furnished cages and aviaries for laying hens. Effects on production, health and use of facilities. Dissertation. Report 234, submitted to Department of Animal Nutrition and Management, SLU, 75007 UPPSALA, SWEDEN

Adams A W and Craig J V. 1985. Effect of crowding and cage shape on productivity and profitability of caged layers: a survey. Poultry Science 64(2): 238–42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.0640238

Anderson K E, Davis G S, Jenkias P K and Corroll A S. 2004. Effect of bird age, density and molt on behavioural profiles of two commercial layer strains in cages. Poultry Science 83: 1– 23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/83.1.15

Appleby M C, Walker A W, Nicol C J, Lindberg A C, Freire R, Hughes B O and Elson H A. 2002. Development of furnished cages for laying hens. British Poultry Science 43: 489–500. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0007166022000004390

Benyi K, Norris D and Tsatsinyane P M. 2006. Effect of stocking density and group size on the performance of white and brown Hyline layers in semi-arid conditions. Tropical Animal Health Production 38: 619–24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-006-4417-1

Chatterjee R N and Haunshi S. 2015. Welfare Concerns in Poultry Production. Lead papers presented in 32nd Annual conference of IPSA held at College of Avian Sciences and Management, Palakkad, Kerala from 19–21 Nov 2015, pp 89–94 (in Souvenir) DADF, GOI, 204, Livestock Censes (www.dahd.nic.in)

Craig J V, Craig J A and Vargas J V. 1986. Corticosteroids and Other Indicators of Hens well-being in four laying-house environment. Poultry Science 65: 856–63 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.0650856

Heckert R A, Estevez I, Russek-Cohen E and Pettit-Riley R. 2002. Effects of density and perch availability on the immune status of broilers. Poultry Science 81: 451–57. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/81.4.451

Jalal M A, Scheideler S E and Marx D. 2006. Effect of bird cage space and dietary metabolizable energy level on production parameters in laying hens. Poultry Science 85: 306–11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/85.2.306

Lee K and Moss C V. 1995. Effect of population density on layer performance. Poultry Science 74: 1754–60. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.0741754

Li X, Chen D, Li J and Bao J. 2015. Effects of furnished cage type on behavior and welfare of laying hens. Asian- Australasian Journal of Animal Science 29(6): 887–94. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.15.0576

Mangnale G A, Desai D N, Ranade A S and Avari P E. 2019. Study of production performance of layers in different types of cages with different stocking densities. International Journal of Livestock Research 9(2): 190–96 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5455/ijlr.20180819051250

Nicol C J, Brown, S N, Glen E, Pope S J, Short F J, Warriss P D, Zimmerman P H and Wilkins L J. 2006. Effects of stocking density flock size and management on the welfare of laying hens in single-tier aviaries. British Poultry Science 47: 135– 46. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00071660600610609

Onbasilar E E and Aksoy F T. 2005. Stress parameters and immune response of layers under different cage floor and density conditions. Livestock Production Science 95: 255–63. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livprodsci.2005.01.006

Patterson P H and Siegel H S. 1998. Impact of cage density on pullet performance and blood parameters of stress. Poultry Science 77: 32–40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/77.1.32

Rajendran K, Edwin S. C, Amutha R, Moorthy M and Shamsudeen P. 2013. Influence of cage stocking density on egg production and egg weight in commercial White leghorn Layers. Indian Veterinary Journal 90(8): 57–58.

Sarica M, Boga S and Yamak U S. 2008. The effect of space allowance on egg yield, egg quality and plumage condition of laying hens in battery cages. Czech Journal of Animal Science 53(8): 346–53. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17221/349-CJAS

Snedecor G W and Cochran W G. 1989. Statistical Methods. 8th Edn. Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa, Reprinted in 1994. East-West Press Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi.

Tauson R, Wahlstromand A and Abrahamsson P. 1999. Effects of two floor housing systems and cages on health, production and fear response in layers. Applied Poultry Research 8: 152– 59. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/japr/8.2.152