Impact of light-emitting diode and compact fluorescent lighting type and cage tier on layers reared in an enriched cage system, part 2: some welfare traits

The aim of this study was to determine the effects of lighting type [light-emitting diode (LED) and compact fluorescent (FLO)light] and cage tier on welfare traits such as feather score, body and comb wounds, bumble foot and footpad dermatitis, beak damage,keel bone deformity, finger damage, aggressive pecking behavior, and the avoidance distance test (ADT) in laying hens reared in anenriched cage system. A total of 400 layers were used to determine these traits at 25 and 45 weeks of age. A total of 80 layers were usedto determine tonic immobility (TI) duration and induction number. The dust accumulation rate (DAR I and DAR II) was recordedto determine the activity of layers under different lighting sources at 25, 35, and 45 weeks of age. The highest DAR I and DAR II weredetermined in the FLO group at 35 and 45 weeks of age (P < 0.05). The worst comb wound and highest ADT were found in the FLOgroup at 25 weeks of age (P < 0.05). In the FLO group the mean feather score, comb wound, and finger damage were worse than in theLED group (P < 0.01). In addition, aggressive pecking behavior (P < 0.01) was observed more in the FLO group at 45 weeks of age (P

PDF

___

1. 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).
2. Rozenboim I, Zilberman E, Gvaryahu G. New monochromatic light source for laying hens. Poultry Science 1998; 77 (11): 1695-1698. doi: 10.1093/ps/77.11.1695
3. 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
4. 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.
5. Kristensen HH. The effects of light intensity, gradual changes between light and dark and definition of darkness for the behaviour and welfare of broiler chickens, laying hens, pullets and turkeys. Scientific Report for the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety 2008; (June): 1-44.
6. Moinard C, Statham P, Haskell MJ, McCorquodale C, Jones RB et al. Accuracy of laying hens in jumping upwards and downwards between perches in different light environments. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 2004; 85 (1-2): 77-92. doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2003.08.008
7. Harlander-Matauschek A, Rodenburg TB, Sandilands V, Tobalske BW, Toscano MJ. Causes of keel bone damage and their solutions in laying hens. World’s Poultry Science Journal 2015; 71(3): 461-472. doi: 10.1017/S0043933915002135
8. Sultana S, Hassan MDR, Choe HS, Ryu KS. The effect of monochromatic and mixed LED light colour on the behaviour and fear responses of broiler chicken. Avian Biology Research 2013; 6 (3): 207-214. doi: 10.3184/175815513X13739879772128
9. 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.
10. Nielsen BL, Litherland M, Nøddegaard F. Effects of qualitative and quantitative feed restriction on the activity of broiler chickens. Applied Animal Behavior Science 2003; 83 (4): 309- 323. doi: 0.1016/S0168-1591(03)00137-0
11. Al Homidan A, Robertson JF, Petchey AM. Review of the effect of ammonia and dust concentrations on broiler performance. World’s Poultry Science Journal 2003; 59 (3): 340-349. doi: 10.1079/WPS20030021
12. Calvet S, Van den Weghe H, Kosch R, Estellés F. The influence of the lighting program on broiler activity and dust production. Poultry Science 2009; 88 (12): 2504-2511. doi: 10.3382/ ps.2009-00255
13. 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).
14. 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
15. 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
16. Tünaydın G, Yılmaz Dikmen B. 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. Turkish Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences 2019; 43: 615-626.
17. Tauson R, Kjaer J, Maria GA, Cepero R, Holm KE. Applied scoring of integument and health in laying hens. Animal Science Papers and Reports 2005; 23 (Suppl. 1): 153-159.
18. Ekstrand C, Carpenter TE, Andersson I, Algers B. Prevalence and control of foot-pad dermatitis in broilers in Sweden. British Poultry Science 1998; 39 (3): 318-324. doi: 10.1080/00071669888845
19. Welfare Quality. Welfare quality assessment protocol for poultry (broiler, laying hens). Welfare Quality Consortium, Lelystad, Netherlands; 2009. pp. 110.
20. Ghareeb K, Awad WA, Sid-Ahmed OE, Böhm J. Insights on the host stress fear and growth responses to the deoxynivalenol feed contaminant in broiler chickens. Plos One 2014; 9 (1): e87727. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0087727
21. SAS. A User’s Guide to SAS V9.4.M6. SAS Institute, Inc., 2019.
22. Minitab. Statistical Software 17.1.0., Minitab Inc. 2013.
23. De Haas EN, Bolhuis JE, De Jong IC, Kemp B, Janczak AM et al. Predicting feather damage in laying hens during the laying period. Is it the past or is it the present? Applied Animal Behaviour Science 2014; 160: 75-85. doi: 10.1016/j. applanim.2014.08.009
24. Rodenburg TB, Van Krimpen MM, De Jong IC, De Haas EN, Kops MS et al. The prevention and control of feather pecking in laying hens: identifying the underlying principles. World’s Poultry Science Journal 2013; 69 (2): 361-373. doi: 10.1017/ S0043933913000354
25. Ruis MAW, Reuvekamp BF, Gunnink H, Binnendijk GP. The effect of optimized lighting conditions on feather pecking and production of laying hens. Wageningen UR Livestock Research, Lelystad, Report 335, April 2010, p. 38.
26. Bilcik B, Keeling LJ. Changes in feather condition in relation to feather pecking and aggressive behaviour in laying hens. British Poultry Science 1999; 40 (3): 444-451. doi: 10.1080/00071669987188
27. Mohammed H, Ibrahim M, Saleem AS. Effect of different light intensities on performance, welfare and behavior of turkey poults. Journal of Advanced Veterinary and Animal Research 2016; 3 (1): 18-23.
28. Lay DC Jr, Fulton RM, Hester PY, Karcher DM, Kjaer JB et al. Hen welfare in different housing systems. Poultry Science 2011; 90 (1): 278-294. doi: 10.3382/ps.2010-00962
29. FAWC. Opinion on Osteoporosis and Bone Fractures in Laying Hens. Farm Animal Welfare Council, London; 2010. p. 12.
30. 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 Für Geflügelkunde 2006; 70 (4):145-154.
31. Yalçın S, Özkan S, Çabuk M, Siegel PB. Criteria for evaluating husbandry practices to alleviate heat stress in broilers. Journal of Applied Poultry Research 2003; 12(3): 382-388. doi: 10.1093/ japr/12.3.382
32. Huth JC, Archer GS. Effects of LED lighting during incubation on layer and broiler hatchability, chick quality, stress susceptibility and post-hatch growth. Poultry Science 2015; 94 (12): 3052-3058. doi: 10.3382/ps/pev298
33. 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: dx.doi.org/10.4314/ sajas.v44i3.11