Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wg55d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-01T03:02:27.877Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Lameness is consistently better at predicting broiler chicken performance in mobility tests than other broiler characteristics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

G Caplen ,
B Hothersall ,
CJ Nicol ,
RMA Parker ,
AE Waterman-Pearson ,
CA Weeks  and
JC Murrell
G Caplen*
Affiliation:
School of Veterinary Science, University of Bristol, Langford House, Langford BS40 5DU, UK
B Hothersall
Affiliation:
School of Veterinary Science, University of Bristol, Langford House, Langford BS40 5DU, UK
CJ Nicol
Affiliation:
School of Veterinary Science, University of Bristol, Langford House, Langford BS40 5DU, UK
RMA Parker
Affiliation:
School of Veterinary Science, University of Bristol, Langford House, Langford BS40 5DU, UK
AE Waterman-Pearson
Affiliation:
School of Veterinary Science, University of Bristol, Langford House, Langford BS40 5DU, UK
CA Weeks
Affiliation:
School of Veterinary Science, University of Bristol, Langford House, Langford BS40 5DU, UK
JC Murrell
Affiliation:
School of Veterinary Science, University of Bristol, Langford House, Langford BS40 5DU, UK
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints: gina.caplen@bristol.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

To determine whether lame broilers are in pain it is necessary to compare measures of lameness and mobility before and after analgesic treatment. Such measures should not be unduly affected by other bird characteristics. This study assessed the performance of lame (gait score, GS 3-4) and non-lame (GS 0-1) broilers using two mobility tests: (i) a novel test to assess broiler ability to access resources when housed in groups (Group Obstacle test); and (ii) a Latency-to-Lie (LTL) test. Outcome test measures included number of obstacle crossings, latency to cross an obstacle, and time taken to sit in shallow water. Associations between outcome test measures and other bird characteristics (established lameness risk-factors), including strain, sex, age, mass, contact dermatitis and pathology, were also investigated. The performance of high-GS and low-GS broilers differed in both mobility tests and no other bird characteristics were as consistent a predictor as lameness. This demonstrates that mobility impairments are closely related to lameness assessed using GS, and that there is a component of lameness that cannot be explained by other bird characteristics (eg being male and heavy). This component may represent pain or discomfort. Both mobility tests are suitable for further application with analgesic testing to classify lameness-associated pain in broilers.

Keywords

animal welfarebroilerlamenesslatency-to-lieobstacle testpain
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 23 , Issue 2 , May 2014 , pp. 179 - 187
Copyright
© 2014 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Berg, C 2004 Pododermatitis and hock burn in broiler chickens. In: Weeks, CA and Butterworth, A (eds) Measuring and Auditing Broiler Welfare p 37. CABI Publishing: Wallingford, UK. http://dx.doi.org/10.1079/978085 1998053.0037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berg, C and Sanotra, GS 2003 Can a modified latency-to-lie test be used to validate gait-scoring results in commercial broiler flocks? Animal Welfare 12: 655–659Google Scholar
Bokkers, EAM and Koene, P 2002 Sex and type of feed effects motivation and ability to walk for a food reward in fast growing broilers. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 79: 247–261. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(02)00151-XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bokkers, EAM and Koene, P 2004 Motivation and ability to walk for a food reward in fast- and slow-growing broilers to 12 weeks of age. Behavioural Processes 67: 121–130. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2004.03.015Google ScholarPubMed
Bradshaw, RH, Kirkden, RD and Broom, DM 2002 A review of the aetiology and pathology of leg weakness in broilers in relation to welfare. Avian and Poultry Biology Reviews 13(2): 45–103. http://dx.doi.org/10.3 184/147020602783698421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caplen, G, Colborne, GR, Hothersall, B, Nicol, CJ, Waterman-Pearson, AE, Weeks, CA and Murrell, JC 2013 Lame broiler chickens respond to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs with objective changes in gait function: a controlled clinical trial. The Veterinary Journal 196: 477–482. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tvjl.2012.12.007Google ScholarPubMed
Caplen, G, Hothersall, B, Murrell, JC, Nicol, CJ, Waterman-Pearson, AE, Weeks, CA and Colborne, GR 2012 Kinematic analysis quantifies gait abnormalities associated with lameness in broiler chickens and identifies evolutionary gait differences. PLoS ONE 7(7): e40800. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0040800Google ScholarPubMed
Clayton, DA 1978 Socially facilitated behaviour. The Quarterly Review of Biology 53: 373–392. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/410789CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danbury, TC, Weeks, CA, Waterman-Pearson, AE, Kestin, SC and Chambers, JP 2000 Self-selection of the analgesic drug carprofen by lame broiler chickens. Veterinary Record 146: 307–311. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/vr.146.11.307CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fernandes, BCDS, Martins, MRFB, Mendes, AA, Paz, ICDLA, Komiyama, CM, Milbradt, EL and Martins, BB 2012 Locomotion problems of broiler chickens and its relationship with the gait score. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 41: 1951–1955. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1516-35982012000800021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gentle, MJ 2001 Attentional shifts alter pain-perception in the chicken. Animal Welfare 10: s187–s194Google Scholar
Gentle, MJ 2011 Pain issues in poultry. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 135(3): 252–258. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applan-im.2011.10.023CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hothersall, B, Caplen, G, Parker, RMA, Nicol, CJ, Waterman-Pearson, AE, Weeks, CA and Murrel, JC 2013 Effects of lameness on measures of mobility and nociceptive threshold in commercially reared broiler chickens. World's Poultry Science Journal. 9th European Symposium on Poultry Welfare p 152. 17-20 June 2013, Uppsala, SwedenGoogle Scholar
Julian, RJ 1997 Rapid growth problems: ascites and skeletal deformities in broilers. Poultry Science 77: 1773–1780. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ps/77.12.1773CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kestin, SC, Knowles, TG, Tinch, AE and Gregory, NG 1992 Prevalence of leg weakness in broiler chickens and its relationship with genotype. Veterinary Record 131: 190–194. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/vr.131.9.190CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kestin, SC, Gordon, S, Su, G and SØrensen, P 2001 Relationships in broiler chickens between lameness, liveweight, growth rate and age. Veterinary Record 148: 195–197. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/vr.148.7.195CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Knowles, TG, Kestin, SC, Haslam, SM, Brown, SN, Green, LE, Butterworth, A, Pope, SJ, Pfeiffer, D and Nicol, CJ 2008 Leg disorders in broiler chickens: prevalence, risk factors and prevention. PLoS One 3(2): E1545. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0001545Google ScholarPubMed
Livingston, A 1994 Physiological basis for pain perception in animals. Journal of Veterinary Anaesthesia 21: 73–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-2995.1994.tb00490.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGeown, D, Danbury, TC, Waterman-Pearson, AE and Kestin, SC 1999 Effect of carprofen on lameness in broiler chickens. Veterinary Record 144: 668–671. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/vr.144.24.668Google ScholarPubMed
McNamee, PT, McCullagh, JJ, Thorp, BH, Ball, HJ, Graham, D, McCullough, SJ, McConaghy, D and Smyth, JA 1998 Study of leg weakness in two commercial broiler flocks. Veterinary Record 143: 131–135. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/vr.143.5.131CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rasbash, J, Charlton, C, Browne, WJ, Healy, M and Cameron, B 2012 MLwiN Version 2.25. Centre for Multilevel Modelling: University of Bristol, UKGoogle Scholar
Sandilands, V, Brocklehurst, S, Sparks, N, Baker, L, McGovern, R, Thorp, B and Pearson, D 2011 Assessing leg health in chickens using a force plate and gait scoring: how many birds is enough? Veterinary Record 168(3): 77–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/vr.c5978CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanotra, GS, Lund, JD, Ersboll, AK, Peterson, JS and Vestergaard, KS 2001 Monitoring leg problems in broilers: a survey of commercial broiler production in Denmark. World's Poultry Science Journal 57: 55–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1079/WPS20010006Google Scholar
Siegel, PB, Gustin, SJ and Katanbaf, MN 2011 Motor ability and self-selection of an analgesic drug by fast-growing chickens. Journal of Applied Poultry Research 20(3): 249–252. http://dx.doi.org/10.3382/japr.2009-00118Google Scholar
Vestergaard, KS and Sanotra, GS 1999 Relationships between leg disorders and changes in behaviour of broiler chickens. Veterinary Record 144: 205–209. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/vr.144.8.205Google ScholarPubMed
Weeks, CA, Danbury, TD, Davies, HC, Hunt, P and Kestin, SC 2000 The behaviour of broiler chickens and its modification by lameness. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 67: 111–125. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(99)00102-1Google ScholarPubMed
Weeks, CA, Knowles, TG, Gordon, RG, Kerr, AE, Peyton, ST and Tilbrook, NT 2002 New method for objectively assessing lameness in broiler chickens. Veterinary Record 151: 762–764Google ScholarPubMed
Welfare Quality® 2009 Welfare Quality® assessment protocol for poultry (broilers, laying hens). Welfare Quality® Consortium: Lelystad, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar