Performance and welfare of laying hens in conventional and enriched cages
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Concerns regarding the welfare of laying hens raised in battery cages have led to the development of enriched cages that allow hens to perform natural behaviors including nesting, roosting, and scratching. This study was conducted to compare indices of production and welfare in birds housed in 2 different caging systems. Shaver White hens were housed from 21 to 61 wk in either conventional battery cages (n = 500; 10 cages; 5 hens/cage; floor space = 561.9 cm(2)/hen) or enriched cages (n = 480; 2 cages; 24 hens/cage; floor space = 642.6 cm(2)/hen) and were replicated 10 times. Enriched cages provided hens with a curtained nesting area, scratch pad, and perches. Production parameters and egg quality measures were recorded throughout the experiment. Plumage condition was evaluated at 37 and 61 wk. Bone quality traits and immunological response parameters were measured at 61 wk, and 59 and 61 wk, respectively. Hen-day egg production, feed consumption, egg weight, and percentage of cumulative mortality of laying hens were not affected by the cage designs. Specific gravity and the percentage of cracked and soft-shelled eggs were also similar between the 2 housing systems. The incidence of dirty eggs was, however, significantly higher (P < 0.0001) in enriched cages than in conventional cages. Feather scores were similar between birds except for the wing region, which was higher (P < 0.05) for hens housed in conventional cages. Bone quality measures tended to be higher for hens housed in enriched cages compared with hens in conventional cages. However, the increase was significant only for bone mineral density. Immunological response parameters did not reveal statistically significant differences. Overall, laying performance, exterior egg quality measures, plumage condition, and immunological response parameters appear to be similar for hens housed in the 2 cage systems tested. Enrichment of laying hen cages resulted in better bone quality, which could have resulted from increased activity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".