Impact of light-emitting diode and compact fluorescent light source type and cage tier on layers reared in an enriched cage system Part 1: Production performance and egg quality

This study’s aim was to investigate the effects of age, light source type (light-emitting diode (LED), and compact fluorescent(FLO)), and cage tier on production performance and egg quality traits of layers reared in the enriched cage system. A total of 800 NickChick White layers were used in the study. A total of 800 eggs were used for egg quality traits at 25 and 45 weeks of age. The enrichedcage tiers were coded as I, II, III, and IV from bottom to top. Layer age significantly affected egg mass, hen-day egg production rate,hen-house egg production rate, feed consumption, feed conversion ratio, damaged egg ratio (P < 0.05), egg weight, shape index, shellthickness, albumen weight, yolk weight, shell weight, yolk color index, albumen ratio, yolk ratio, and shell ratio (P < 0.001). The higheregg mass, egg weight, albumen weight, yolk weight, shell thickness (P < 0.001), dirty egg ratio (P < 0.01), and lower FCR, yolk colorindex (P < 0.01), shell ratio (P < 0.01) were found in the FLO group when compared to the LED group (P < 0.05). Highest body weightwas found in cage tier I at 45 weeks of age (P < 0.001). Level of cage tier significantly affected 50% egg production age, egg mass, hendayegg production rate, hen-house egg production rate, and dirty egg ratio (P < 0.01). Level of cage tier significantly affected 5% eggproduction age, FCR, and shape index (P < 0.05). It can be concluded that the hens in the FLO group were better than the LED groupin terms of some production and egg quality traits.

PDF

___

1. Borille R, Garcia RG, Royer AFB, Santana MR, Colet S et al. The use of light-emitting diodes (LED) in commercial layer production. Revista Brasileira de Ciência Avícola 2013; 15 (2): 135-140. doi: 10.1590/S1516-635X2013000200009
2. Long H, Zhao Y, Wang T, Ning Z, Xin H. Effect of lightemitting diode vs. fluorescent lighting on laying hens in aviary hen houses: Part 1 – operational characteristics of lights and production traits of hens. Poultry Science 2016a; 95 (1): 1-11. doi: 10.3382/ps/pev121
3. Long H, Zhao Y, Xin H, Hansen H, Ning Z et al. Effect of lightemitting diode (LED) vs. fluorescent (FL) lighting on laying hens in aviary hen houses: Part 2 – Egg quality, shelf-life and lipid composition. Poultry Science 2016b; 95 (1): 115-124. doi: 10.3382/ps/pev306
4. Bayraktar H, Altan A. Effects of light wavelength on broiler performance. Journal of Animal Production 2005; 46 (2): 22- 32 (in Turkish with an abstract in English).
5. Rubinoff I. A practical guide to poultry lighting. Hy-Line International®; 2016.
6. Gallegos K, Archer GS. Comparison of the effect of lightemitting diode (LED) versus compact fluorescent lamp (CFL) lighting on hen production, egg quality, fear, and stress. Poultry Science 2014; 93 (E-Suppl. 1): 95.
7. Kamanlı S, Durmuş I, Demir S, Tarım B. Effect of different light sources on performance and egg quality traits in laying hens. Archiv Fur Geflügelkunde 2015; 79:109-115. doi: 10.1399/ eps.2015.109
8. Liu K, Xin H, Sekhon J, Wang T. Effect of fluorescent vs. poultry-specific light-emitting diode lights on production performance and egg quality of W-36 laying hens. Poultry Science 2018; 97 (3): 834-844. doi: 10.3382/ps/pex371
9. Archer GS. Comparing the effect of different types of lighting on broiler production, fear, and stress. Poultry Science 2014; 93 (E-Suppl. 1): 95.
10. İpek A, Şahan Ü, Yılmaz B. The effect of cage position and stock density on the egg production and quality characteristics. Tavukçuluk Araştırma Dergisi 2002; 4 (1-2): 8-12. (in Turkish with an abstract in English).
11. Vits A, Weitzenburger D, Hamann H, Distl O. Influence of different tiers in furnished cages and small group system on production traits, mortality, egg quality, bone strength claw length and keel bone deformities. Archiv Fur Geflügelkunde 2006; 70 (4):145-154.
12. Bowmaker JK, Heath LA, Wilkie SE, Hunt DM. Visual pigments and oil droplets from six classes of photoreceptor in the retinas of birds. Vision Research 1997; 37 (16): 2183-2194. doi: 10.1016/S0042-6989(97)00026-6
13. Lewis PD, Morris TR. Poultry and coloured light. World’s Poultry Science Journal 2000; 56 (3): 189-207.
14. Prescott NB, Wathes CM. Spectral sensitivity of the domestic fowl (Gallus g. domesticus). British Poultry Science 1999; 40 (3): 332-339.
15. Jarvis JR, Taylor NR, Prescott NB, Meeks I, Wathes CM. Measuring and modelling the photopic flicker sensitivity of the chicken (Gallus g. domesticus). Vision Research 2002; 42 (1): 99-106.
16. Barbur JL, Prescott NB, Douglas RH, Jarvis JR, Wathes CM. A comparative study of stimulus-specific pupil responses in the domestic fowl (Gallus gallus domesticus) and the human. Vision Research 2002; 42 (2): 249-255.
17. Prescot NB, Wathes CM, Jarvis JR. Light, vision and the welfare of poultry. Animal welfare 2003; 12(2): 269-288.
18. Yıldırım İ, Parlat SS, Aygün A, Yetişir R. The effects of hanging type lighting systems in apartment type cages on performance, egg quality traits and stress level in commercial brown layers. Selçuk Tarım ve Gıda Bilimleri Dergisi 2008; 22 (44): 7-11 (in Turkish with an abstract in English).
19. Yılmaz Dikmen B, İpek A, Şahan Ü, Sözcü A, Baycan SC. Impact of different housing systems and age of layers on egg quality characteristics. Turkish Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences 2017; 41: 77-84. doi:10.3906/vet-1604-71
20. SAS. A User’s Guide to SAS V9.4.M6. SAS Institute, Inc. 2019.
21. Durmuş İ, Kamanlı S. Determination of effects of cage tiers on some production characteristics and interrelated relationships of production characteristics. Akademik Ziraat Dergisi 2012; 1 (2): 77-82 (in Turkish with an abstract in English).
22. Borille R, Garcia RG, Nääs, IA, Caldara FR, Santana MR. Monochromatic light-emitting diode (LED) source in layers hens during the second production cycle. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola e Ambiental 2015; 19(9): 877-881. doi: 10.1590/1807-1929/agriambi.v19n9p877-881
23. Baxter M, Joseph N, Osborne VR, Bedecarrats GY. Red light is necessary to activate the reproductive axis in chickens independently of the retina of the eye. Poultry Science 2014; 93(5): 1289-1297. doi:10.3382/ps.2013-03799
24. Şekeroğlu A, Duman M, Tahtalı Y, Yıldırım A, Eleroğlu H. Effect of cage tier and age on performance, egg quality and stress parameters of laying hens. South African Journal of Animal Science 2014; 44 (3): 288-297. doi: 10.4314/sajas. v44i3.11
25. Kjaer JB, Vestergaard KS. Development of feather pecking in relation to light intensity. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 1999; 62 (2-3): 243-254. doi: 10.1016/S0168-1591(98)00217-2
26. Cook NJ, Schaefer AL, Korver DR, Haley DB, Feddes JJR et al. Minimally-Invasive Assessments of the Behavioural and Physiological Effects of Enriched Colony Cages on Laying Hens. The Open Agriculture Journal 2011; 5: 10-18. doi: 10.2174/1874331501105010010
27. Elson HA, Tauson R. Furnished cages for laying hens. In: Sandilands V, Hocking PM (editors). Alternative systems for poultry-health, welfare and productivity. Wallingford, Oxon, UK: CABI Publishing; 2012. pp. 190-209.
28. Karcher DM, Jones DR, Abdo Z, Zhao Y, Shepherd TA et al. Impact of commercial housing systems and nutrient and energy intake on laying hen performance and egg quality parameters. Poultry Science 2015; 94(3): 485-501. doi: 10.3382/ps/peu078
29. Rodenburg TB, Tuyttens FAM, de Reu K, Herman L, Zoons J, Sonck B. Welfare assessment of laying hens in furnished cages and non-cage systems: An on-farm comparison. Animal Welfare 2008; 17(4): 363-373
30. Sherwin CM, Richards GJ, Nicol CJ. Comparison of the welfare of layer hens in 4 housing systems in the UK. British Poultry Science 2010; 51(4): 488-499. doi: 10.1080/00071668.2010.502518
31. Yılmaz Dikmen B, İpek A, Şahan Ü, Petek M, Sözcü A. Egg production and welfare of laying hens kept in different housing systems (conventional, enriched cage, and free range). Poultry Science 2016; 95(7): 1564-1572. doi: 10.3382/ps/pew082
32. Archer GS. Effect of type of light source and location of light source on layer production, stress and fear during the start of lay. International Journal of Poultry Science 2018; 17(2): 92-99. doi: 10.3923/ijps.2018.92.99
33. Karaman S, Şekeroğlu A, Duman M. Physical characteristics and performance of laying hens caged in different tiers and environmental parameters of each tier. Transactions of the ASABE. 2013; 56 (1): 321-328. doi: 10.13031/2013.42588
34. Long H, Zhao Y, Wang T, Xin H, Ning Z. Comparative evaluation of light-emitting diode (LED) vs. fluorescent (FL) lighting in commercial aviary hen houses. In: Proceedings of the ASABE and CSBE/SCGAB Annual International Meeting, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; 2014. pp. 1-15.
35. Liu K, Xin H, Settar P. Effects of light-emitting diode light v. fluorescent light on growing performance, activity levels and well-being of non-beak-trimmed W-36 pullets. Animal 2018; 12(1): 106-115. doi: 10.1017/S1751731117001240
36. Holt PS, Davies RH, Dewulf J, Gast RK, Huwe JK et al. The impact of different housing systems on egg safety and quality. Poultry Science 2011; 90 (1): 251-262. doi: 10.3382/ ps.2010-00794
37. Charles F, Strong JR. Research note: Relationship between several measures of shell quality and egg-breakage in a commercial processing plant. Poultry Science 1989; 68(12): 1730-1733.
38. Altan Ö. Yumurta kusurları ve anormal yumurtalar: Yumurta, oluşumu, kalitesi ve biyoaktif komponenetleri. Bornova, İzmir, Turkey: Ege Üniversitesi Basımevi; 2015. pp. 157-174 (in Turkish).
39. Boshouwers FMG, Nicaise E. Artificial light sources and their influence on physical activity and energy expenditure of laying hens. British Poultry Science 1993; 34(1): 11-19. doi: 10.1080/00071669308417558
40. Akkuş B. Effects of Age and Cage Floor on Egg Internal and External Quality Parameters in White and Brown commercial layers. MSc, Selçuk University, Konya, Turkey, 2016.
41. Lewis PD, Gous RM. Responses of poultry to ultraviolet radiation. World’s Poultry Science Journal 2009; 65: 499-510. doi:10.1017/S0043933909000361
42. Zita L, Tůmová E, Štolc L. Effects of genotype, age and their interaction on egg quality in brown-egg laying hens. Acta Veterinaria Brno 2009; 78 (1): 85-91. doi: 10.2754/ avb200978010085
43. Sarıca M, Yamak US, Boz MA. Changes in egg quality parameters due to age in laying hens from two commercial and three local layer genotypes. Journal of Poultry Research 2010; 9 (1): 11-17 (in Turkish with an abstract in English).
44. Yıldız A, Laçin E, Hayırlı A, Macit M. Effects of cage location and tier level with respect to light intensity in semiconfined housing on egg production and quality during the late laying period. The Journal of Applied Poultry Research 2006; 15 (3): 355-361. doi: 10.1093/japr/15.3.355
45. Sinha B, Mandal KG, Kumari R. Effect of egg weight on egg quality traits of laying hens. International Journal of Pure and Applied Bioscience 2017; 5(3): 293-300. doi: 10.18782/2320- 7051.2639
46. Roberts JR. Factors effecting egg internal quality and egg shell quality in laying hens. Journal of Poultry Science 2004; 41(3): 161-177. doi:10.2141/jpsa.41.161
47. Galobart J, Sala R, Rinc´on-Carruyo X, Manzanilla EG, Vila B et al. Egg yolk color as affected by saponification of different natural pigmenting sources. Journal of Applied Poultry Research 2004; 13(2): 328-334. doi: 10.1093/japr/13.2.328
48. Mohammed HH, Grashorn MA, Bessei W. The effects of lighting conditions on the behaviour of laying hens. Archiv Fur Geflügelkunde 2010; 74 (3): 197-202.