Housing systems and their impact on egg quality andhatchability in Rhode Island red hens

ABHAY  KUMAR; RAVI RANJAN KUMAR  SINHA; SHRI PRASAD  SAHU; ABHISHEK KUMAR  SINGH; KAUSHLENDRA  KUMAR; ALOK  BHARTI

doi:10.56093/ijans.v96i1.170665

Authors

ABHAY KUMAR Bihar Animal Sciences University, Patna Bihar 800 014 India
RAVI RANJAN KUMAR SINHA Bihar Animal Sciences University, Patna Bihar 800 014 India
SHRI PRASAD SAHU Bihar Animal Sciences University, Patna Bihar 800 014 India
ABHISHEK KUMAR SINGH FVASRGSC, Banaras Hindu university, Mirzapur, UP-231 001, India
KAUSHLENDRA KUMAR Bihar Animal Sciences University, Patna Bihar 800 014 India
ALOK BHARTI Bihar Animal Sciences University, Patna Bihar 800 014 India

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijans.v96i1.170665

Keywords:

Egg production, Egg quality, Embryonic mortality, Fertility, Hatchability, Housing system, Poultry, Rhode Island Red hens

Abstract

The present study compared the impact of three housing systems-individual cage, colony cage, and deep litteron the performance and welfare of Rhode Island Red hens under tropical Indian conditions. The objective was to compare growth, egg production, egg quality, and reproductive traits, highlighting trade-offs between productivity and welfare. Results revealed that housing significantly influenced the outcomes. Hens in individual cages had superior body weight, egg production, and internal egg quality traits such as shell integrity and albumen characteristics. Yolk color was stronger in deep litter, reflecting carotenoid intake from foraging. External traits like egg size and shape were largely unaffected. Reproductive performance varied: individual cage achieved higher fertility and hatchability, while deep litter reduced embryonic mortality and supported natural behaviors. Colony cage showed intermediate results. The findings suggested that cages maximize productivity, but deep litter provided welfare and reproductive dvantages, making it a sustainable alternative for dual-purpose poultry under tropical conditions. Integrating welfare with production is essential for resilient and ethical poultry systems.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ahmad S, Mahmud A, Hussain J and Javed K. 2019. Productive performance, egg characteristics and hatching traits of three chicken genotypes under free-range, semi-intensive, and intensive housing systems. Brazilian Journal of Poultry Science 21(2) doi.org/10.1590/1806-9061-2018-0935.

Ahmad S, Mahmud A, Hussain J, Javed K, Usman M, Waqas M and Zaid M. 2021. Behavioural assessment of three chicken genotypes under free-range, semi-intensive, and intensive housing systems. Ankara Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi 68(4): 365–372.

Bist RB, Bist K, Poudel S, Subedi D, Yang X, Paneru B, Mani S, Wang D and Chai L. 2024. Sustainable poultry farming practices: A critical review of current strategies and future prospects. Poultry Science 103(12): 104295.

Campbell DLM, Lee C, Hinch GN and Roberts JR. 2017. Egg production and egg quality in free-range laying hens housed at different outdoor stocking densities. Poultry Science 96(9): 3128–3137.

Damaziak K, Musielak M, Musielak C, Riedel J, Gozdowski D and Grzybek W. 2021. Effect of different rearing system on eggs production, hatchability, and offspring quality in layer breeders. Poultry Science 100(6): 101101.

El-Deek A and El-Sabrout K. 2019. Behaviour and meat quality of chicken under different housing systems. World's Poultry Science Journal 75(1): 105–114.

He S, Lin J, Jin Q, Ma X, Liu Z, Chen H, Ma J, Zhang H, Descovich K, Phillips CJC, Hartcher K and Wu Z. 2022. The relationship between animal welfare and farm profitability in cage and free-range housing systems for laying hens in China. Animals 12(16): 2090.

Islam A, Rahman MZ, Hassan MM, Epstein JH and Klaassen M. 2024. Farm biosecurity practices affecting avian influenza virus circulation in commercial chicken farms in Bangladesh. One Health 18: 100681.

Javed A, Imran M, Saad Hashmi M, Javaid U, Estella Odoh U and Amjad R. 2025. Chicken egg: a comprehensive overview regarding feed sources and human health aspects. World's Poultry Science Journal 81(1): 169–204.

Jeon H, Shin H, Lee J, Kim J, Biswas S, Lee J and Yun J. 2025. Welfare characteristics of laying hens in aviary and cage systems. Poultry Science 104(5): 104987.

Kakar AH, Mehmood S, Ahmad S and Javid A. 2025. Impact of various housing systems on productive performance, egg quality, and hatching traits in normal feather, partial feather, and naked neck chicken genotypes. The Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences (3): 798–808.

Kaleri R, Kaleri HA, Moryani AA, Mangrio ZA, Bhuptani DK, Janyaro H, Khoso ZA, Ahmed I, Khusk FA, Ishaq S, Laghari SA, Jamali Z and Arif M. 2024. Influence of different housing systems on the quality characteristics of table egg produced by plymouth rock chicken. Pakistan Journal of Biotechnology 21(1): 57–60.

Kumar A, Das K, Bharti A, Kumar R and Singh AK. 2013. Embryonic mortality pattern in Black Rock, Gramapriya and Vanaraja breeds of chicken. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences 83(1): 98–100.

Manzoor S, Mehmood SM, Saima D and Kakar AH. 2025. Performance assessment of naked neck chickens under different production systems. Insights in Animal Science 2(1): 23–32.

Nemati Z, Alirezalu, K., Besharati M, Amirdahri, S, Franco, D. and Lorenzo JM. 2020. Improving the quality characteristics and shelf life of meat and growth performance in goose fed diets supplemented with vitamin E. Foods 9(6): 798.

Pires PGDS, Bavaresco C, Prato BS, Wirth ML and Moraes PDO. 2021. The relationship between egg quality and hen housing systems - A systematic review. Livestock Science 250:104597.

Rakonjac S, Bogosavljević-Bošković S, Pavlovski Z, Škrbić Z, Dosković V, Petrović MD and Petričević V. 2014. Laying hen rearing systems: a review of chemical composition and hygienic conditions of eggs. World's Poultry Science Journal 70(1): 151–164.

Shoji G, Tochinai R, Sekizawa S and Kuwahara M. 2025. Evaluation of physiological functions and production performance in laying hens in three different housing systems. Poultry Science 104(8): 105256.

Sokołowicz Z, Krawczyk J and Dykiel M. 2018. Effect of alternative housing system and hen genotype on egg quality characteristics. Emirates Journal of Food and Agriculture 30(8): 695–703.

Wan Y, Yang H, Zhang H, Ma R, Qi R, Li J, Liu W, Li Y and Zhan K. 2021. Effects of different non-cage housing systems on the production performance, serum parameters and intestinal morphology of laying hens. Animals 11(6): 1673.

Weeks CA, Lambton SL and Williams AG. 2016. Implications for welfare, productivity and sustainability of the variation in reported levels of mortality for laying hen flocks kept in different housing systems: a meta-analysis of ten studies. PLoS ONE 11(1):e0146394.

Yilmaz Dikmen B, İpek A, Şahan Ü, Sözcü A and Baycan SC. 2017. Impact of different housing systems and age of layers on egg quality characteristics. Turkish Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences 41:77–84.