Effect of pullet rearing environment, strain and perch shape on perching behaviour, perching biomechanics, and keel bone damage in enriched-housed laying hens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Housing, including pullet rearing environment and enrichments, impacts the welfare of laying hens throughout their life. As the egg industry shifts towards alternative housing systems (furnished cages, aviary, free-run, and free range), an increase in keel bone damage has raised welfare and economic concerns. Keel bone damage leads to reduced egg production, reduced egg quality and pain in laying hens. Our study aimed to determine within enriched caged layers, which strains experience stable perching biomechanics, bone strength, and keel health depending on perch design and pullet rearing system used. A 2 ×2 ×2 randomized complete block design with repeated measures was used. Lohmann White or Lohmann Brown pullets were placed in either pullet cages or floor pens at hatch with access to either mushroom or round perches (n=9 replicates/treatments) and then transferred to an enriched battery at lay. Perching kinematics, body weights, and keel scores were evaluated every two months (2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14 and 16 months of age). Dual x-ray absorptiometry and bone breaking strength tests were used to assess femur and keel bone mineral content and density; keel bone damage severity was assessed via digital imaging post-mortem. Behaviour observations were conducted every two weeks from seven until 69 weeks of age. Lohmann Brown spent more time perching from two to six months of age, when the keel is more susceptible to damage. There was a positive correlation between severity of deviation present and forward and backward keel motion (r 0.24; P<0.001). All bone parameters were affected by strain. Keel and femur content (Femur 3.50 g; Keel 2.08 g; P<0.001), and density (Femur 0.23 g/cm2; Keel 0.10 g/cm2; P<0.001) were higher in Lohmann Brown in comparison to Lohmann White (Femur 0.18 g/cm2 and 2.60 g ±0.069; Keel 0.07 g/cm2 and 1.19 g). Measured bone parameters were not protective against severe KBD as Lohmann Brown had more severe deviations (P<0.01) and more fractures (P<0.01) than Lohmann White. Pullet rearing environment did not have any effect on keel bone damage scores (P>0.10). Round perches led to more severe KBD in comparison to mushroom perches (P<0.05). In conclusion, mushroom perches are preferable to round perches for laying hens housed in furnished cages due to reduced KBD and increased stability while perching. Lower incidences of KBD despite lower bone mineralization indicate Lohmann White birds are more readily suited to furnished cages in comparison to Lohmann Brown birds.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".