HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Fahey, A. G. Articles by Cheng, H. W. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Fahey, A. G. Articles by Cheng, H. W.

Relationship Between Body Weight and Beak Characteristics in One-Day-Old White Leghorn Chicks: Its Implications for Beak Trimming

A. G. Fahey^*,, R. M. Marchant-Forde^* and H. W. Cheng^*,1

^* Livestock Behavioral Research Unit, Agricultural Research Service, USDA, West Lafayette, IN 47907; and Department of Animal Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47906

¹ Corresponding author: hwcheng{at}purdue.edu

Beak trimming is a routine practice used in laying hens to prevent feather pecking and cannibalism. The effect of beak trimming on bird well-being depends on multiple factors, including the amount of beak that is trimmed and the quality of the procedure. The aim of this work was to determine if a relationship existed between BW and beak characteristics in 1-d-old chicks, with a future aim to develop an automated system for standardizing beak trimming. Three hundred forty-four 1-d-old chicks (Hy-Line W-36) were sorted into 3 categories based on their BW (heavy, intermediate, and light), and their beaks were photographed. Dimensional measures of beaks, including the lengths of the culmen, gonys, maxillary tomia, mandibular tomia, and the width of the upper mandible and lower mandible measured at 2, 3, and 4 mm from the tip of the upper and lower beaks, were calculated using imaging software. Correlations between BW and beak measures were evaluated using Pearson product-moment, Spearman rank-order, Kendall’s tau, and Hoeffding’s dependency tests. Results showed there were no significant correlations between beak dimensions and BW in the light BW group. In contrast, correlations were present between BW and the width of the upper mandible measured at 4 mm from the tip of the upper beak (P < 0.05) and the width of the lower mandible measured 2 to 4 mm from the tip of the lower beak (P < 0.05) in the intermediate BW group. In the heavy BW group, BW was positively correlated with mandibular tomia, gonys, and the width of the lower mandible measured at 2 mm from the tip of the lower beak (P < 0.05). However, in general, these correlations were too low (all below 0.23) to have any practical use for predicting beak size. Overall, the data indicated that BW cannot be used as a reliable predicator of beak size in 1-d-old Hy-Line W-36 chicks.

Key Words: body weight • beak • beak trimming • chick