| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
ENVIRONMENT, WELL-BEING, AND BEHAVIOR |
* Texas A&M University, Department of Poultry Science, College Station 77843-2472; Texas A&M University, Department of Animal Science, College Station 77843-2471; and USDA-ARS, Southern Plains Agricultural Research Center, Food and Feed Safety Research Unit, College Station, TX 77845
5 Corresponding author: sricke{at}uark.edu
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
 TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTS AND DISCUSIONSREFERENCES |
|---|
Key Words: behavior • alfalfa-layer ration • laying hen • molt
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTS AND DISCUSIONSREFERENCES |
|---|
Several different approaches have been developed to induce molt artificially in commercial laying hens. These include feed withdrawal for up to 10 d (Christmas et al., 1985), water withdrawal for 2 d (North and Bell, 1990), and reduction of the photoperiod (Hembree et al., 1980). The methods that involve feed and water withdrawal have become a matter of concern to animal advocates, and these practices have been banned in Europe (Appleby et al., 2004).
Changes in aggressive behavior during induced molts have been reported, but the results have been contradictory. Aggrey et al. (1990) found that negative interactions among laying hens increased during feed deprivation in open housing systems, but not in battery cages. Hembree et al. (1980) reported that the aggressive behavior of hens in colony cages during feed deprivation did not differ from those of hens not deprived of feed. Webster (1995) found no significant differences in aggression between caged hens on a 4-d fast and hens that were not deprived of feed, whereas Haskell et al. (2000) observed increased aggression in frustrated hens.
In light of the animal welfare controversies associated with feed withdrawal molting, and the additional problem of increased Salmonella Enteritidis infection, alternative means to induce a molt have been sought in the United States (Berry, 2003; Holt, 2003; Ricke, 2003; Park et al., 2004). These alternatives fall into 2 categories, namely, various methods of nutrient restriction that avoid long-term feed withdrawal, and the use of dietary additives (Webster, 2003). Although egg production parameters have been reported extensively in many of these alternative approaches, behavior of the hens has not been examined extensively while they are fed these diets. Some of these alternative molt induction methods have included feeding low-calcium diets (Breeding et al., 1992) and low-sodium, high dietary zinc diets (Berry and Brake, 1985).
Alfalfa and alfalfa-layer ration combinations have been shown to be effective for molt induction, reduction of Salmonella Enteritidis infection, and retention of optimal egg production in the second egg-laying cycle (Donalson et al., 2005; Landers et al., 2005a,b; McReynolds et al., 2005, 2006; Woodward et al., 2005; Dunkley et al., 2007). The objective of this trial was to evaluate the behavioral patterns of hens fed different combinations of alfalfa and layer ration and compare these behavioral patterns with that of feed withdrawal hens in a 9-d induced molt.
|
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTS AND DISCUSIONSREFERENCES |
|---|
The treatments consisted of 3 alfalfa rations described by Donalson et al. (2005): A90 consisted of 90% alfalfa meal and 10% layer ration, A80 consisted of 80% alfalfa meal and 20% layer ration, and A70 consisted of 70% alfalfa meal and 30% layer ration. Alfalfa typically contains 17 to 18% CP and 24 to 25% crude fiber and has a low ME (1,200 kcal/kg) when compared with a layer ration with 2,965 kcal/kg (NRC, 1994). Hens in the A90, A80, and A70 treatment groups were fed their respective combination of alfalfa meal and layer ration ad libitum for the 9-d trial. Hens in the fully fed (FF) treatment remained on the pretrial diet, and hens in the feed withdrawal (FW) treatment were not fed during the 9 d of the trial. One week before molt induction, the lighting schedule in each of the 3 rooms was changed from 16L:8D to 8L:16D as described previously (Holt, 1993).
Behavior Parameters
Data recordings of predetermined behavioral patterns were carried out by using a 10-camera Digital Video Recorder Multiplexer system (Kalatel DVMRe Triplex eZ Digital Video Multiplexer Recorder, GE Security Kalatel, Corvallis, OR). Two of the cameras were mounted approximately 1.2 m away and 30° above the cages of each treatment in each of the 3 experimental rooms. Two 10-min intervals were analyzed each day from d 0 to 9 of the trial. Recordings were initiated at 1200 h each day and terminated at 1400 h, with one 10-min interval taken at 1230 h and the second 10-min observation at 1330 h. The times were selected to provide the best comparison of the behavior of the control (FF) hens and the other treatments because most of the control hens would have finished their prelaying behavior and they would already have laid by 1200 h (Mills and Wood-Gush, 1985; Webster and Hurnik, 1990). Recordings were ended by 1400 h to avoid recording any increased feed intake by the control (FF) hens in anticipation of darkness (Savory, 1980).
Six hens in individual cages were subjects for the behavioral analysis in each treatment. Seven different behaviors, which were defined in an ethogram (Table 1
) adapted from Webster (2000), were used to assess the birds’ welfare during the trial. Aggressive behavior was reported as a one-zero sampling, in which the observer scored whether a behavior occurred (one) or not (zero) (Lehner, 1998). All other data were in the form of counts at 1-min intervals, which were then summarized as the daily mean percentage of observations in which the subject was performing a particular behavior.
|
All data were subjected to arcsine square root transformation, after which the average of each activity of the hens in each treatment over the 9-d period was analyzed by using a repeated measures design. The GLM procedure of SAS (SAS version 8.3, SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC) was used, with treatment, time, treatment x time interaction, and individual hens nested within treatment as the factors. Chicken nested within treatment was the error term used to test for treatment effects. When significant (P 
0.05) arcsine treatment x time interactions were found, means were compared by least squares means, and the untransformed percentage means are reported in the respective figures.
|
RESULTS AND DISCUSIONS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTS AND DISCUSIONSREFERENCES |
|---|
Egg production data were collected and the A80 hens stopped laying on d 5 of the trial, whereas the FW and A90 hens ceased production on d 6 (Figure 1). The A70 hens did not completely cease egg production through d 9 of the trial. Donalson et al. (2005) reported that A70 hens required an average of 6 d to cease egg production, whereas A90-fed hens and the FW hens stopped laying between 4 and 5 d after molt induction (they did not examine A80 hens). This response, however, was not significant (P > 0.05). These results could be due to an incomplete molt caused by the higher amount (30%) of high-calorie layer ration in the A70 feed.
|
Aggressive pecking at neighboring hens was minimal in this trial, with few differences between the FW hens and the non-FW hens. One incidence was observed between hens in groups A90 and A70 on d 1 of the trial. Aggressive behavior was also observed between hens in the FF and FW groups on d 3 of the trial (data not shown). The low incidence of aggression observed in our trial could be because the hens were housed in individual cages, thereby minimizing the bird-to-bird interaction usually seen in multihen or colony cages. Webster (2000) and Anderson et al. (2004) evaluated the behavior of caged laying hens in groups of 3 or 6 hens per cage. When they induced molt by feed withdrawal, they observed aggression during the first to third day after molt induction; this declined, however, after d 3 and was not different from the nonmolted hens. This reduction in aggressiveness was not observed by McCowan et al. (2006) when they induced molt either by feed deprivation or by incorporating a low-calorie-density layer diet. They did observe an increase in aggression throughout the 10-d induced molt.
Walking Activity
Overall treatment effects (P 0.05) were observed for the 9-d trial, but the treatment x day effect was not significant (P > 0.358). During the trial, the FW, A80, and A70 hens spent significantly more time walking than the A90 hens (Table 2). However, only the FW hens walked more than the FF hens, and only the FF hens walked more than the A90 hens. The walking behavior observed in this trial was not consistent with the observations by McCowan et al. (2006), who reported no significant differences among the treatments throughout the molt period. Hens that were feed deprived would be expected to reduce their activities in an effort to conserve energy (Murphy, 1996). Webster (2000) observed that hens undergoing feed withdrawal spent a high percentage (40%) of their time resting during an induced molt.
|
During the 9-d trial, significant differences (P 0.05) were observed among the treatment groups, but there was no treatment x day effect (P > 0.19). During this period, the FF and A70 hens spent less than half the time preening compared with hens in the other treatment groups (Table 2
). This increased preening could have been a result of follicular irritation caused by feather push-out. Through subjective observations, we noted an increase in feathers under the cages of the FW hens on d 8 and under the cages of the A80 and A90 hens on d 9 (data not shown). Shedding was not observed in the A70 hens until d 12 (2 d after the treatment diet ended and the hens were returned to their normal diet). Preening may be performed as a displacement action in situations of conflict or frustration (Duncan and Wood-Gush, 1972). However, Webster (2000) reported that the amount of time that was spent preening followed a quadratic trend that peaked toward the end of an induced molt. Webster postulated that rather than attributing the increased preening to frustration, it could be attributed to a response to feather push-out.
Nonnutritive Pecking
Over the 9-d period, FW hens spent nearly twice (P 0.05) as much time engaged in nonnutritive pecking compared with the treatment groups receiving feed (Table 2), but there was no treatment x day effect (P > 0.09). The A70 and A90 groups exhibited the greatest activity, whereas the activity of the A80 group was similar to that of the FF hens. Nonnutritive pecking is thought to be redirected foraging behavior that is seen in birds in the wild (Petherick and Rutter 1990), and it has been reported that even when hens are provided with adequate food, they are still motivated to forage (Duncan and Hughes, 1972). Hens will act in a predictable manner in response to feed deprivation (Petherick and Rutter, 1990) by working harder for food the longer they have been without it. Other reports in studies in which hens were deprived noted that feed-restricted chickens usually exhibited more than a 3-fold increase in nonnutritive pecking (Savory and Fisher, 1992; Savory et al., 1992; Webster, 2000; McCowan et al., 2006).
Head Movement
A significant (P 0.05) treatment x day effect was observed for head movements (Figure 2). On d 1 of the trial, the A90 hens spent significantly less feeder time than hens in all other treatment groups, whereas the A80 hens exhibited the most head movements and the A90 hens the fewest head movements. On d 3 and 4, more head movements were observed in A90 hens than in FW hens, whereas on d 9, FF hens exhibited more head movements than A80 hens. However, most of the differentiation in head movements occurred at the beginning of the trial and no significant differences in head movement were observed on d 5, 6, 7, and 8 (Figure 2). Similar results were found by Webster (2000), who also noted that the highest frequency of head movement occurred during the first 3 d of feed withdrawal, with no differences between the FW and nonmolted hens during the last days of feed withdrawal. In the current study, hens fed the alfalfa-layer ration were no less attentive during the induced molt; they displayed overall means that were similar to those of the FF hens (data not shown). When McCowan et al. (2006) evaluated the behavior of fast-molted (feed-deprived) laying hens, low-calorie-molted laying hens, and nonmolted laying hens, they reported no significant differences among treatments in head movements.
|
A treatment x day effect (P 0.05) was observed in drinking activity (Figure 3). On d 1 of the trial, FF hens spent more time drinking than the A80, A70, and FW hens, whereas on d 5 and 6, FF hens spent more time drinking than hens in all other treatment groups. On d 8, FF hens spent significantly more time drinking than the A90, A70, and FW hens. Woodward et al. (2005) observed that FF hens drank nearly twice as much as 100% alfalfa meal-fed and FW hens. Webster (2000) found that drinking behavior declined in feed-deprived hens after the first few days of feed withdrawal. On the basis of our results and the results of other studies (Donalson et al., 2005; Woodward et al., 2005), it appears that because FW hens were not eating, they tended to drink less, whereas FF hens, when provided a dry ration, typically drank more water. The current study results are also consistent with those of Donalson et al. (2005), who reported that A90 hens consumed nearly 3-fold less water than FF hens, whereas A70 hens consumed almost 2-fold less.
|
Significant (P 0.05) treatment x day effects were observed in percentage of feeder activity (Figure 4). On d 1 of the trial, the A70 and A90 hens spent significantly more time at the feeder than hens in all the other treatments except FF hens. On d 3, the FF hens were at the feeder more often than the A80 and FW hens, whereas on d 4, the A80 hens were at the feeder only more than the FW hens. On d 6, 7, 8, and 9, the FW hens spent significantly less time at the feeder than hens in all the other treatments except for FF hens on d 8. Generally, hens provided with feed spent more time at the feeder than did the FW hens. Because we could not tell whether a bird was eating, we scored each time the bird visited the feeding troughs, and because of this, the FW hens were occasionally given a score for feeding. The initial reduction in feeder visits by alfalfa-fed hens followed by increased visits could represent a behavioral adjustment period for these hens to the change of diet. It has been noted previously that hens fed 100% alfalfa meal diets eat significantly less than hens fed layer ration (Woodward et al., 2005; Donalson et al., 2005). The reduced intake of the alfalfa diet early in the trial could also be due to the unpalatability of alfalfa because of the presence of saponins (Sen et al., 1998) or bulk fill satiety caused by the slow passage of the alfalfa through the gastrointestinal tract of the chicken (Sibbald, 1979, 1980). When Donalson et al. (2005) compared different ratios of alfalfa diets, they observed that the A70 hens ate almost twice as much as the A90 hens. We also observed what appeared to be a relationship between feeder activity and nonnutritive pecking because as nonnutritive pecking declined in frequency, feeder activity increased, indicating that the reduction in frequency of feeding was not entirely dependent on the specific dietary treatment. Webster (1995, 2000) reported a similar relationship when hens were molted by feed deprivation, stating that hens undergoing feed withdrawal spent progressively less time (8-fold) visiting the feeder as the molt period progressed.
|
Little behavioral work has been reported on the effects of alternative molt diets on laying hens. The general behavioral responses reported in the current study relate specifically to the commercial hybrid line Lohman (LSL) and indicate that using alfalfa-layer ration-based diets to induce molt in laying hens has potential to address some of the concerns regarding molt. The hens fed alfalfa-layer ration diets exhibited consistent head movement and walking activities throughout the trial. At the beginning of the trial, the hens fed alfalfa diets spent similar amounts of time performing nonnutritive pecking as the FW hens; however, this declined toward the end of the trial. In contrast, nonnutritive pecking behavior in the FW hens increased toward the end of the trial. The reduction in nonnutritive pecking behavior coincided with an increase in feeder-related activity, indicating that the hens required some time to become accustomed to the alfalfa diets.
|
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
|
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
2 Current address: University of California Los Angeles, Department of Cardiology, School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA 90025.
3 Current address: Albany State University, Department of Natural Sciences, Albany, GA 31705.
4 Current address: University of Arkansas, Center for Food Safety and Department of Food Science, 2650 N. Young Ave., Fayetteville AR 72704.
Received for publication November 15, 2006. Accepted for publication February 20, 2008.
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTS AND DISCUSIONSREFERENCES |
|---|
Anderson, K. E., G. S. Davis, P. K. Jenkins, and A. S. Carroll. 2004. Effects of bird age, density, and molt on behavioral profiles of two commercial layer strains in cages. Poult. Sci. 83:15–23.
Appleby, M. C., J. A. Mench, and B. O. Hughes. 2004. Poultry Behaviour and Welfare. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, Oxfordshire, UK.
Bell, D. D. 2003. Historical and current molting practices in the U.S. table egg industry. Poult. Sci. 82:965–970.
Berry, W. D. 2003. The physiology of induced molting. Poult. Sci. 82:971–980.
Berry, W. D., and J. Brake. 1985. Comparison of parameters associated with molt induced by fasting, zinc, and low dietary sodium in caged layers. Poult. Sci. 64:2027–2036.[Web of Science]
Breeding, S. W., J. Brake, J. D. Garlich, and A. L. Johnson. 1992. Molt induced by dietary zinc in a low-calcium diet. Poult. Sci. 71:168–180.[Web of Science][Medline]
Christmas, R. B., R. H. Harms, and O. M. Junqueira. 1985. Performance of Single Comb White Leghorn hens subjected to 4-or 10-day feed withdrawal force rest procedures. Poult. Sci. 64:2321–2324.[Web of Science]
Donalson, L. M., W. K. Kim, C. L. Woodward, P. Hererra, L. F. Kubena, D. J. Nisbet, and S. C. Ricke. 2005. Utilizing different ratios of alfalfa and layer ration for molt induction and performance in commercial laying hens. Poult. Sci. 84:362–369.
Duncan, I. J. H., and B. O. Hughes. 1972. Free and operant feeding in domestic fowls. Anim. Behav. 20:775–777.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Duncan, I. J. H., and D. G. M. Wood-Gush. 1972. An analysis of displacement preening in the domestic fowl. Anim. Behav. 20:68–71.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
Dunkley, K. D., J. L. McReynolds, M. E. Hume, C. S. Dunkley, T. R. Callaway, L. F. Kubena, D. J. Nisbet, and S. C. Ricke. 2007. Molting in Salmonella Enteritidis challenged laying hens fed alfalfa crumbles. I. Salmonella Enteritidis colonization and virulence gene hilA response. Poult. Sci. 86:1633–1639.
Haskell, M., N. C. A. Coerse, and B. Forkman. 2000. Frustration-induced aggression in the domestic hen: The effect of thwarting access to food and water on aggressive responses and subsequent approach tendencies. Behavior 137:531–546.[CrossRef]
Hembree, D. J., A. W. Adams, and J. B. Craig. 1980. Effects of force molting by conventional and experimental light restriction methods on performance and antagonistic behavior of hens. Poult. Sci. 59:215–223.[Web of Science]
Holt, P. S. 1993. Effect of induced molting on the susceptibility of White Leghorn hens to a Salmonella enteritidis infection. Avian Dis. 37:412–417.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Holt, P. S. 2003. Molting and Salmonella enterica serovar Enteritidis infection: The problem and some solutions. Poult. Sci. 82:1008–1010.
Landers, K. L., Z. R. Howard, C. L. Woodward, S. G. Birkhold, and S. C. Ricke. 2005a. Potential of alfalfa as an alternative molt induction diet for laying hens: Egg quality and consumer acceptability. Bioresour. Technol. 96:907–911.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Landers, K. L., C. L. Woodward, X. Li, L. F. Kubena, D. J. Nisbet, and S. C. Ricke. 2005b. Alfalfa as a single dietary source for molt induction in laying hens. Bioresour. Technol. 96:565–570.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Lehner, P. N. 1998. Data collection methods. Pages 183–232 in Handbook of Ethological Methods. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press, London, UK.
Lucas, A. M., and P. R. Stettenheim. 1972. Avian Anatomy Integument, Part 1. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
McCowan, B., J. Schrader, A. M. DiLorenzo, C. Cardona, and D. Klingborg. 2006. Effects of induced molting on well-being of egg-laying hens. J. Appl. Anim. Welf. Sci. 9:9–23.[CrossRef][Medline]
McReynolds, J., L. Kubena, J. Byrd, R. Anderson, S. Ricke, and D. Nisbet. 2005. Evaluation of Salmonella enteritidis in molting hens after administration of an experimental chlorate product (for nine days) in the drinking water and feeding an alfalfa molt diet. Poult. Sci. 84:1186–1190.
McReynolds, J. L., R. W. Moore, L. F. Kubena, J. A. Byrd, C. L. Woodward, D. J. Nisbet, and S. C. Ricke. 2006. Effect of various combinations of alfalfa and standard layer diet on susceptibility of laying hens to Salmonella Enteritidis during forced molt. Poult. Sci. 85:1123–1128.
Mills, A. D., and D. G. M. Wood-Gush. 1985. Pre-laying behavior in battery cages. Br. Poult. Sci. 26:247–252.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Murphy, M. E. 1996. Energetics and nutrition of molt. Page 171 in Avian Energetics and Nutritional Ecology. C. Carey, ed. Chapman and Hall, New York, NY.
NRC. 1994. Nutrient Requirements of Poultry. 9th rev. ed. Natl. Acad. Press, Washington DC.
North, M. O., and D. D. Bell. 1990. Flock recycling. Pages 433–452 in Commercial Chicken Production Manual. 4th ed. Chapman and Hall, New York, NY.
Park, S. Y., W. K. Kim, S. G. Birkhold, L. F. Kubena, D. J. Nisbet, and S. C. Ricke. 2004. Induced moulting issues and alternative dietary strategies for the egg industry in the United States. Worlds Poult. Sci. J. 60:196–209.[Web of Science]
Petherick, J. C., and S. M. Rutter. 1990. Quantifying motivation using a computer-controlled push-door. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 27:159–167.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
Ricke, S. C. 2003. The gastrointestinal tract ecology of Salmonella Enteritidis colonization in molting hens. Poult. Sci. 82:1003–1007.
Savory, C. J. 1980. Diurnal feeding patterns in domestic fowls: A review. Appl. Anim. Ethol. 6:71–82.[CrossRef]
Savory, C. J., and R. D. A. Fisher. 1992. Influence of a period of ‘freeze-feeding’ on behaviour of growing layer pullets. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 35:55–66.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
Savory, C. J., E. Seawright, and A. Watson. 1992. Stereotyped behaviour in broiler breeders in relation to husbandry and opioid receptor blockade. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 32:349–360.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
Sen, S., H. P. S. Makkar, and K. Becker. 1998. Alfalfa saponins and their implication in animal nutrition. J. Agric. Food Chem. 46:131–140.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Sibbald, I. R. 1979. Passage of feed through the adult rooster. Poult. Sci. 58:446–459.[Web of Science][Medline]
Sibbald, I. R. 1980. Gut clearance and true metabolizable energy value of dehydrated alfalfa supplemented with sodium chloride. Poult. Sci. 59:939–940.[Web of Science][Medline]
Swanson, M. H., and D. D. Bell. 1975. Force molting of chickens—IV. Egg quality. Leaflet 2810. University of California, Davis.
Webster, A. B. 1995. Immediate and subsequent effects of a short fast on the behavior of laying hens. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 45:255–266.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
Webster, A. B. 2000. Behavior of White Leghorn laying hens after withdrawal of feed. Poult. Sci. 79:192–200.
Webster, A. B. 2003. Physiology and behavior of the hen during the induced molt. Poult. Sci. 82:992–1002.
Webster, A. B., and J. F. Hurnik. 1990. An ethogram of White Leghorn-type hens in battery cages. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 70:751–760.
Woodward, C. L., Y. M. Kwon, L. F. Kubena, J. A. Byrd, R. W. Moore, D. J. Nisbet, and S. C. Ricke. 2005. Reduction of Salmonella enterica serovar Enteritidis colonization and invasion by an alfalfa diet during molt in Leghorn hens. Poult. Sci. 84:185–193.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
