Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4hhp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-03T09:10:44.350Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Welfare of broiler chickens reared under two different types of housing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

ECO Sans ,
FAM Tuyttens ,
CA Taconeli ,
PM Rueda ,
JR Ciocca  and
CFM Molento
ECO Sans*
Affiliation:
Animal Welfare Laboratory, Federal University of Paraná, Rua dos Funcionários, 1540, 80035-050, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil
FAM Tuyttens
Affiliation:
Animal Sciences Unit, Institute for Agricultural and Fisheries Research (ILVO), Scheldeweg 68, B-9090 Melle, Belgium Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, B-9820 Merelbeke, Belgium
CA Taconeli
Affiliation:
Department of Statistics, Federal University of Paraná, Polytechnic Center, Rua Evaristo F Ferreira da Costa, 408, 81531-990, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil
PM Rueda
Affiliation:
World Animal Protection, Avenida Paulista, 453, 01311-000, São Paulo, Brazil
JR Ciocca
Affiliation:
World Animal Protection, Avenida Paulista, 453, 01311-000, São Paulo, Brazil
CFM Molento
Affiliation:
Animal Welfare Laboratory, Federal University of Paraná, Rua dos Funcionários, 1540, 80035-050, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil
*
* Contact for correspondence: elainesans@gmail.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

We compared closed- and open-sided industrial houses with respect to the welfare of broiler chickens in southern Brazil. Ten flocks from each design were evaluated and measures divided into the following categories: i) bird health: contact dermatitis on the breast and abdominal areas, bird soiling, foot-pad dermatitis, hock burn, lameness, fractures, bruising, scratches, dead on arrival, diseases; ii) environmental measurements: relative humidity, temperature, air velocity, ammonia (NH3), carbon dioxide (CO2), light intensity, litter moisture; iii) behaviour: bird behaviour, touch test; and iv) affective states: qualitative behaviour assessment. Closed-sided houses showed worse contact dermatitis on the breast and abdominal areas, lower exploratory behaviour prevalence, higher NH3 (11.2 [± 6.8] vs 7.5 [± 3.9] ppm) and CO2 (1,124.9 [± 561.5] vs 841.0 [± 158.0] ppm), lower light intensity (6.9 [± 6.3] vs 274.2 [± 241.9] lux), while open-sided houses had a higher prevalence for scratches and panting behaviour, and lower air velocity (2.1 [± 0.7] vs 1.1 [± 1.0] m s−1). Stocking densities of 13.9 (± 0.4) and 12.0 (± 0.3) per m2 for closed- and open-sided houses, respectively, likely influenced some results. All values shown are means (± SD). Even though open-sided houses presented fewer animal welfare restrictions (according to five indicators as opposed to three for closed-sided houses), both revealed important welfare problems, evidenced by poor environmental indicators, behavioural restrictions and injuries.

Keywords

animal welfarebehaviourdark-housesemi-climatisedslaughtersummer/autumn
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 30 , Issue 3 , August 2021 , pp. 341 - 353
Copyright
© 2021 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

ABPA (Associação Brasileira de Proteína Animal) 2021 Annual Report 2021. http://abpa-br.org/mercados/#relatoriosGoogle Scholar
Abreu, VMN and Abreu, PG 2011 The challenges of animal envi-ronment on the poultry systems in Brazil. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 40: 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-35982011000600027Google Scholar
Allain, V, Mirabito, L, Arnould, C, Colas, M, Le Bouquin, S, Lupo, C and Michel, V 2009 Skin lesions in broiler chickens meas-ured at the slaughterhouse: relationships between lesions and between their prevalence and rearing factors. British Poultry Science 50(4): 407–417. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071660903110901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anonymous 2012 EFSA recommends use of animal-based meas-ures when assessing welfare. Veterinary Record 170: 112. https://doi.org/10.1136/vr.e776CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailie, CL, Ball, MEE and O’Connell, NE 2013 Influence of the provision of natural light and straw bales on activity levels and leg health in commercial broiler chickens. Animal 7: 618–626. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731112002108CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bailie, CL, Ijichi, C and O’Connell, NE 2018 Effects of stocking density and string provision on welfare-related measures in com-mercial broiler chickens in windowed houses. Poultry Science 97: 1503–1510. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps/pey026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baracho, MS, Cassiano, JA, Nääs, IA, Tonon, GS, Garcia, RG, Royer, AFB, Moura, DJ and Santana, MR 2013 Inside environ-ment in broiler housing with new and built-up litter Revista Agrarian 6(22): 473–478Google Scholar
Baracho, MS, Nääs, IA, Betin, PS and Moura, DJ 2018 Factors that influence the production, environment, and welfare of broiler chicken: a systematic review. Brazilian Journal of Poultry Science 20(3): 617–624. https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9061-2018-0688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bassler, AW, Arnould, C, Butterworth, A, Colin, L, De Jong, IC, Ferrante, V, Ferrari, P, Haslam, S, Wemelsfelder, F and Blokhuis, HJ 2013 Potential risk factors associated with contact dermatitis, lameness, negative emotional state, and fear of humans in broiler chicken flocks. Poultry Science 92: 2811–2826. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2013-03208CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Broom, DM 2001 Assessing the welfare of hens and broilers. Proceedings of Australian Poultry Science Symposium 13: 61–70Google Scholar
Buijs, S, Keeling, L, Rettenbacher, S, Van Poucke, E and Tuyttens, FAM 2009 Stocking density effects on broiler welfare: identifying sensitive ranges for different indicators. Poultry Science 88: 1536–1543. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2009-00007CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Butterworth, A 2018 Welfare assessment of poultry farm. In: Mench, JA (ed) Advances in Poultry Welfare pp 113–130. Woodhead Publishing: Cambridge, UK. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-100915-4.00006-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carvalho, RH, Moura, DJ, Souza, ZM, Souza, GS and Bueno, LGF 2011 Litter and air quality in different broiler housing con-ditions. Pesquisa Agropecuaria Brasileira 46(4): 351–361. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-204X2011000400003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carvalho, RH, Soares, AL, Grespan, M, Spurio, RS, Coró, FAG, Oba, A and Shimokomaki, M 2015 The effects of the dark house system on growth, performance and meat quality of broiler chicken. Animal Science Journal 86: 189–193. https://doi.org/10.1111/asj.12262CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cobb 2018 Broiler Management Guide. https://wp.ufpel.edu.br/avi-cultura/files/2012/04/Cobb-Manual-Frango-Corte-BR.pdfGoogle Scholar
Deep, A, Schwean-Lardner, K, Crowe, TG, Fancher, BI and Classen, HL 2010 Effect of light intensity on broiler production, processing characteristics, and welfare. Poultry Science 89: 2326–2333. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2010-00964CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Defra 2018 Code of practice for the welfare of meat chickens and meat breeding chickens. Department for Environment Food & Rural Affairs: London, UKGoogle Scholar
De Jong, IC, Gunnink, H and van Harn, J 2014 Wet litter not only induces footpad dermatitis but also reduces overall welfare, technical performance, and carcass yield in broiler chickens. Applied Poultry Research 23: 51–58. https://doi.org/10.3382/japr.2013-00803CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elfadil, AA, Vaillancourt, JP and Meek, AH 1996 Impact of stocking density, breed, and feathering on the prevalence of abdominal skin scratches in broiler chickens. Avian Disease 40: 546–552. https://doi.org/10.2307/1592262CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) 2010 Scientific opinion on the influence of genetic parameters on the welfare and the resistance to stress of commercial broilers. EFSA Journal 8(7): 1666. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2010.1666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) 2012a Scientific report updating the EFSA opinions on the welfare of broilers and broiler breeders. Supporting Publications 2012: EN-295 pp 116. https://www.efsa.europa.eu/publicationsGoogle Scholar
European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) 2012b Scientific opinion on the use of animal-based measures to assess welfare of broiler. EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW). EFSA Journal 10(7): 2774. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2774Google Scholar
European Union (EU) 2007 Council Directive 2007/43/EC of 28 June 2007 Laying down minimum rules for the protection of chickens kept for meat production. Official Journal of the European Union. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/PT/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32007L0043Google Scholar
European Union (EU) 2015 Attitudes of Europeans towards Animal Welfare. Special Eurobarometer 442 November-December 2015. http://ec.europa.eu/COMMFrontOffice/PublicOpinionGoogle Scholar
European Union (EU) 2017 Study on the application of the broiler Directive (DIR 2007/43/EC) and development of welfare indicators – Final report. EU: Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
Federici, JF, Vanderhalsset, R, Sans, ECO, Tuyttens, FAM, Souza, APO and Molento, CFM 2016 Assessment of broiler chicken welfare in Southern Brazil. Brazilian Journal of Poultry Science 18(1): 133–140. https://doi.org/10.1590/18069061-2015-0022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franklin, SB, Gibson, DJ, Robertson, PA, Pohlmann, JT and Fralish, JS 1995 Parallel analysis: a method for determining signif-icant principal components. Journal of Vegetation Science 6(1): 99–106. https://doi.org/10.2307/3236261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furlan, RL and Macari, M 2002 Termorregulação. In: Macari, M, Furlan, RL and Gonzales, E (eds) Fisiologia Aviária Aplicada a Frangos de Corte pp 209–230. FUNEP/UNESP: Jaboticabal, BrazilGoogle Scholar
House, GM, Sobotik, EB, Nelson, JR and Archer, GS 2020 Effect of the addition of ultraviolet light on broiler growth, fear, and stress response. Journal of Applied Poultry Research 29: 402–409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.japr.2020.01.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Humane Farm Animal Care (HFAC) 2014 Padrões de cuida-dos com os animais: frangos de corte. http://certifiedhumane.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Std14-Frangos-de-Corte-Chickens-2L.pdf. [Title translation: Animal care standards: chickens]Google Scholar
IBGE Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística 2021 Abate de suínos e produção de ovos e leite atingem recordes em 2019. https://www.ibge.gov.br/estatisticas/economicas/agricultura-e-pecuaria/9203-pesquisas-trimestrais-do-abate-de-animais.html?=&t=resultados. [Title translation: Brazilian institute of geography and statistics]Google Scholar
Johnson, RA and Wichern, DW 2007 Multivariate Analysis. Encyclopedia of Statistical Sciences, Sixth Edition. Prentice Hall: NJ, USA. https://doi.org/10.1002/0471667196.ess6094Google Scholar
Jones, TA, Donnelly, CA and Dawkins, MS 2005 Environmental and management factors affecting the welfare of chickens on com-mercial farms in the United Kingdom and Denmark stocked at five densities. Poultry Science 84: 1155–1165. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/84.8.1155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lima, KOA, Nääs, IA, Moura, DL, Garcia, RG and Mendes, AS 2020 Applying multi-criteria analysis to select the most appropriated broiler rearing environment. Information Processing in Agriculture. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inpa.2020.04.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lima, VA and Silva, IJO 2019 A Avicultura de corte e de postura no Brasil vence seus desafios com tecnologia e de forma susten-tável. In: Hartung, J, Paranhos da Costa, M and Perez, C (eds) O bem-estar animal no Brasil e na Alemanha: responsabilidade e sustentabili-dade pp 116–123. GRAFTEC Gráfica e Editora Ltda: Sao Paulo, Brazil. [Title translation: Brazilian poultry meat and laying hens overcome its challenges with technology and sustainability]Google Scholar
Ludtke, CB, Ciocca, JRP, Dandin, T, Barbalho, PC and Vilela, JA 2010 Humane slaughter of broilers. WSPA: Rio de Janeiro, BrazilGoogle Scholar
Lundmark, F, Berg, C and Röcklinsberg, H 2018 Private animal welfare standards – opportunities and risks. Animals 8(4): 2–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani8010004CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lundmark, F, Berg, C, Schmid, O, Behdadi, D and Röcklinsberg, H 2014 Intentions and values in animal welfare legislation and standards. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 27: 991–1017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-014-9512-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, P and Bateson, P 1993 Measuring Behaviour: An Introductory Guide, Second Edition. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139168342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miele, M and Evans, AB 2006 Negotiating signs of pleasure and pain: Towards a democratic deliberative model of animal welfare monitoring. In: Kaiser, M and Lien, M (eds) Ethics and the Politics of Food pp 190–196. Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Nääs, IA, Garcia, RG, Baracho, MS and Bichara, T 2014 Ambiência para frangos de corte. In: M, Macari, Mendes, AA, Menten, JF and Nããs, IA (eds) Produção de Frangos de Corte pp 111–132. Campinas: Sao Paulo, Brazil. [Title translation: Environmental conditions for broiler chickens]Google Scholar
Nääs, IA, Miragliotta, MY, Baracho, MS and Moura, DJ 2007 Aerial environment in broiler housing: dust and gases. Engenharia Agrícola 27(2): 326–334. https://doi.org/10.1590/S010069162007000300001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newberry, RC 1999 Exploratory behaviour of young domestic fowl. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 63: 311–321. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(99)00016-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olanrewaju, HA, Purswell, JL, Collier, SD and Branton, SL 2010 Effect of ambient temperature and light intensity on physio-logical reactions of heavy broiler chickens. Poultry Science 89: 2668–2677. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2010-00806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paranhos da Costa, MJR, Lima, VA and Sant’Anna, AC 2017 Comportamento e bem-estar animal. In: Macari, M and Maiorka, A (eds) Fisiologia das Aves Comerciais pp 607–619. Funep: Jaboticabal, Brazil. [Title translation: Animal welfare and behaviour]Google Scholar
Pereira, DF, Nääs, IA, Romanini, CEB, Salgado, DD and Pereira, GOT 2005 Welfare pointers in function of behavior reactions of broiler breeders. Engenharia Agrícola 25(2): 308–314. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-69162005000200003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pilecco, M, Paz, ICLA, Tabaldi, LA, Nääs, IA, Garcia, RG, Caldara, FR, Alves, MCF and Cavichiolo, F 2011a Management to reduce dorsal scratches in broilers. Revista Agrarian 4: 359–366Google Scholar
Pilecco, M, Paz, ICLA, Tabaldi, LA, Nääs, IA, Garcia, RG, Caldara, FR, Alves, MCF and Cavichiolo, F 2011b Influence of strain, environmental and management factors to reduce dorsal scratches in broilers. Revista Agrarian 4: 352–358Google Scholar
Prescott, NB, Whates, CM and Jarvis, JR 2003 Light, vision and the welfare of poultry. Animal Welfare 12: 269–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rault, J-L, Clark, K, Groves, PJ and Cronin, GM 2017 Light inten-sity of 5 or 20 lux on broiler behavior, welfare and productivity. Poultry Science 96: 779–787. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps/pew423CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
R Core Team 2019 R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/Google Scholar
Rioja-Lang, FC, Connor, M, Bacon, HJ, Lawrence, AB and Dwyer, CM 2020 Prioritization of farm animal welfare issues using expert consensus. Frontiers in Veterinary Science 6: 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2019.00495CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ross 2014 Broiler Management Handbook. http://goldenpoultry.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Ross-Broiler-Handbook-2014i-EN.pdfGoogle Scholar
Rovaris, E, Corrêa, GSS, Corrêa, AB, Caramori Junior, JG, Luna, UV and Assis, SD 2014 Performance of broiler chickens created in aviaries dark house versus conventional. PUBVET 8(18). https://doi.org/10.22256/pubvet.v8n18.1777Google Scholar
Rowe, E, Dawkins, MS and Gebhardt-Henrich, SG 2019 A systematic review of precision livestock farming in the poultry sector: is technology focused on improving bird welfare? Animals 9: 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9090614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) 2017 RSPCA welfare standards for meat chickens. https://sci-ence.rspca.org.uk/sciencegroup/farmanimals/standards/chickensGoogle Scholar
Souza, APO and Molento, CFM 2015a Good agricultural prac-tices in broiler chicken production in the state of Paraná: Focus on animal welfare. Ciência Rural 45(12): 2239–2244. https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-8478cr20141877CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Souza, APO, Sans, ECO, Müller, BR and Molento, CFM 2015b Broiler chicken welfare assessment in GLOBALGAP® certified and no-certified farms in Brazil. Animal Welfare 24: 45–54. https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.24.1.045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Souza, APO, Soriano, VS, Schnaider, and Molento, CFM 2018b Development and refinement of three animal-based broiler chicken welfare indicators. Animal Welfare 27: 263–274. https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.27.3.263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Souza, APO, Taconeli, CA, Plugge, NF and Molento, CFM 2018a Broiler chicken meat inspection data in Brazil: a first glimpse into an animal welfare approach. Brazilian Journal of Poultry Science 20(3): 547–554. https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9061-2017-0706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Souza, APO, Wemelsfelder, F, Taconeli, CA and Molento, CFM 2021 Development of a list of terms in Brazilian Portuguese for the Qualitative Behaviour Assessment of broiler chickens. Animal Welfare 30: 49–59. https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.30.1.049CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taira, K, Nagai, T, Obi, T and Takase, K 2014 Effect of litter moisture on the development of footpad dermatitis in broiler chicken. The Journal of Veterinary Medical Science 76(4): 583–586. https://doi.org/10.1292/jvms.13-0321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tedesco, MJ, Gianello, C, Bissani, CA, Bohnen, H and Volkweiss, SJ 1995 Análise do solo plantas e outros materiais, Second Edition p 174. Departamento de Solos da Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, BrazilGoogle Scholar
Tuyttens, FAM, Federici, JF, Vanderhasselt, RF, Goethals, K, Duchateau, L, Sans, ECO and Molento, CFM 2015 Assessment of welfare of Brazilian and Belgian broiler flocks using the Welfare Quality® protocol. Poultry Science 94: 1758–1766. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps/pev167CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vanhonacker, F, Verbeke, W, Poucke, EV, Buijs, S and Tuyttens, FAM 2009 Societal concern related to stocking densi-ty, pen size and group size in farm animal production. Livestock Science 123: 16–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2008.09.023CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vasdal, G, Moe, RO, de Jong, IC and Granquist, EG 2017 The relationship between measures of fear of humans and lameness in broiler chicken flocks. Animal 1-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weary, DM 2014 What is suffering in animals? In: Appleby, MC, Weary, DM and Sandøe, P (eds) Dilemmas of Animal Welfare pp 188–202. CABI International: Wallingford, UK. https://doi.org/10.1079/9781780642161.0188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(99)00102-1CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Welfare Quality® 2009 Welfare Quality® assessment protocol for poultry (broilers, laying hens). Welfare Quality® Consortium: Lelystad, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) 2019a Terrestrial Animal Health Code: Introduction to the Recommendations for Animal Welfare. Section 7, Chapter 7.1. https://www.oie.int/en/standard-set-ting/terrestrial-code/access-online/Google Scholar
World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) 2019b Terrestrial Animal Health Code: Animal Welfare and broiler chicken pro-duction systems. Section 7, Chapter 7.10. https://www.oie.int/en/stan-dard-setting/terrestrial-code/access-online/Google Scholar