Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-gs9qr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-30T10:58:46.584Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Resonant frequencies of broiler chickens

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

J. M. Randall ,
M. T. Cove  and
R. P. White
J. M. Randall
Affiliation:
Silsoe Research Institute, Wrest Park, Silsoe, Bedford MK45 4HS
M. T. Cove
Affiliation:
Silsoe Research Institute, Wrest Park, Silsoe, Bedford MK45 4HS
R. P. White
Affiliation:
Silsoe Research Institute, Wrest Park, Silsoe, Bedford MK45 4HS
Get access

Abstract

Motion is one of the many stressors experienced by broiler chickens during transport. If the resonant frequency of the viscera or whole body corresponds to that of the transporter, the welfare of the birds is likely to be compromised. A vibrating beam technique was used to measure the resonant frequencies of 22 birds which increased in weight from 0·75 to 4·5 kg over 32 days. For a 2-kg bird, the frequencies of 14·6 (s.e. 0·6) Hz when sitting and 3·7 (s.e. 0·8) Hz when standing lie close to the measured resonances of transporters making it likely that bird welfare is compromised due to vibration and motion during transport.

Keywords

animal welfarepoultryresonancetransportvibration

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 62 , Issue 2 , April 1996 , pp. 369 - 374
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1996

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Alami, M. A. 1993. Aversion of broiler chickens to horizontal vibration using the passive avoidance technique. Paper presented to the United Kingdom informal group meeting on human response to vibration at Army Personnel Research Establishment, Farnborough, 20 to 22 September 1993.Google Scholar
Christ, W. and Dupuis, H. 1966. Uber die Beanspruchung der Wirbelsäule unter dem Einfluss sinusförmiger und stochastischer Schwingungen. International Zeitschrift angewandte Physiologie einschlieslich Arbeitsphysiologie 22: 258–278.Google Scholar
Duggan, J. A. 1993. Indicators for the assessment of broiler welfare in response to whole-body vertical vibration. Paper presented to the United Kingdom informal group meeting on human response to vibration at Army Personnel Research Establishment, Farnborough, 20 to 22 September 1993.Google Scholar
Duggan, J. A. and Randall, J. M. 1994. Aversion of broiler chickens to aspects of whole-body vertical vibration. Paper presented at the United Kingdom informal group meeting on human response to vibration held at the Institute of Naval Medicine, Alverstoke, Gosport, 19 to 21 September 1994.Google Scholar
Dupuis, H. and Zerlett, G. 1986. The effects of whole-body vibration, pp. 162. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fairley, T. E. and Griffin, M. J. 1989. The apparent mass of the seated human body: vertical vibration. Journal of Biomechanics 22: 81–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Herterich, J. and Schnauber, H. 1992. The effects of vertical mechanical vibration on standing man. Journal of Low Frequency Noise and Vibration 11: 52–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinz, B. and Seidel, H. 1987. The non-linearity of the human body's dynamic response during sinusoidal wholebody vibration. Industrial Health 25:169–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ji, T., Ellis, B. R. and Beak, M. 1993. Indirect measurement of human whole-body frequencies. Paper presented to the United Kingdom informal group meeting on human response to vibration at Army Personnel Research Establishment, Farnborough, 20 to 22 September 1993.Google Scholar
Nickerson, J. L. and Paradijeff, A. 1964. Body tissue changes in dogs resulting from sinusoidal oscillation stress. Technical document report no. AMRL-TDR-64-58. United States Air Forces Aerospace Medical Research Laboratories, Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.Google Scholar
Randall, J. M. 1992. Human subjective response to lorry vibration: implications for farm animal transport. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 52: 295–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Randall, J. M. and Peng, C. 1996. Vibrating beam technique for measuring animal natural frequency. Journal of Low Frequency Noise and Vibration In press.Google Scholar
Randall, J. M., Streader, W. V. and Meehan, A. M. 1993. Vibration on poultry transporters. British Poultry Science 34: 635–642.Google Scholar
Rutter, S. M. and Randall, J. M. 1993. Aversion of domestic fowl to whole-body vibratory motion. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 37: 69–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaefer, V. H., Link, H. J., Farrar, J. U. and Weins, D. 1959. Lethality in rats as a function of frequency in constant-displacement vibration. United States Army Medical Research Laboratory, Fort Knox, Kentucky, report no. 390.Google Scholar
Scott, G. B. 1994. Effects of short-term whole-body vibration on animals with particular reference to poultry. World's Poultry Science journal 50: 25–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warriss, P. D., Bevis, E. A. and Brown, S. N. 1990. Time spent by broiler chickens in transit to processing plants. Veterinary Record 127: 617–619.Google ScholarPubMed