Hostname: page-component-5d84bcc8dc-sptg4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-09-10T05:53:51.595Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Wood-based litter in poultry production: a review

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 January 2019

M.T. MUNIR Open the ORCID record for M.T. MUNIR [Opens in a new window] ,
C. BELLONCLE ,
M. IRLE  and
M. FEDERIGHI
M.T. MUNIR*
Affiliation:
LIMBHA, Groupe ESB - École Supérieure du Bois, 44300 Nantes, France
C. BELLONCLE
Affiliation:
LIMBHA, Groupe ESB - École Supérieure du Bois, 44300 Nantes, France
M. IRLE
Affiliation:
LIMBHA, Groupe ESB - École Supérieure du Bois, 44300 Nantes, France
M. FEDERIGHI
Affiliation:
SECALIM UMR 1014, ONIRIS, 44300 Nantes, France
*
Corresponding author: tanveer.munir@ecoledubois.fr
Get access

Abstract

Bedding material is an important requirement of floor-based poultry production systems to meet the health and welfare requirements. This substrate can be an organic material like wood or plant-based material or inorganic material like clay and sand and should generally be a good absorbant, easily available, comfortable and nontoxic to birds. Wood is an organic renewable resource having good humidity regulation and antimicrobial properties and its by-products are commonly used as poultry litter in many countries. For example, in France, wood-based bedding is used in 80% of turkey production. This litter has approximately 50% lower NH3 production compared to other materials like sand and hulls, and has multiple environment-friendly disposal options. Moreover, the birds grown on such litter show better health and welfare and they prefer to practice their natural behaviours on this material which is helpful for the amelioration of physiological status and reduction of locomotion injuries. Moreover, according to some studies, the birds show improvement in different performance parameters, for example, up to 5-7% improvement in daily weight gain, live body weight, feed conversion ratio (FCR) and survivability. These improvements may differ depending upon the production system and type of wood material used in experiments, still it can be concluded that wood-based bedding materials do not negatively affect the production potential of poultry. In addition, the antimicrobial potential of wood may help to counter the load of certain pathogens in environment of birds. This review describes the physiochemical properties of wood-based bedding materials and their role in production and welfare of poultry.

Keywords

wood shavingssawdustlitter substrateantimicrobialsanimal welfareaviculture

Information

Type
Review
Information
World's Poultry Science Journal , Volume 75 , Issue 1 , March 2019 , pp. 5 - 16
Copyright
Copyright © World's Poultry Science Association 2019 

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

ALMEIDA PAZ, I.C.L., GARCIA, R.G., BERNARDI, R., NÄÄS, I.A., CALDARA, F.R., FREITAS, L.W., SENO, L.O., FERREIRA, V., PEREIRA, D.F. and CAVICHIOLO, F. (2010) Selecting appropriate bedding to reduce locomotion problems in broilers. Brazilian Journal of Poultry Science 12: 189-195.Google Scholar
ANONYMOUS (2018) Poultry litter. Assessed at https://tunipellets.com/en/poultry-litter/ on 26/07/2018. Tunipellets SA.Google Scholar
AVIAT, F., GERHARDS, C., RODRIGUEZ-JEREZ, J., MICHEL, V., BAYON, I.L., ISMAIL, R. and FEDERIGHI, M. (2016) Microbial safety of wood in contact with food: a review. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety 15: 491-505.Google Scholar
BENABDELJELIL, K. and AYACHI, A. (1996) Evaluation of alternative litter materials for poultry. The Journal of Applied Poultry Research 5: 203-209.Google Scholar
BILGILI, S.F., HESS, J.B., BLAKE, J.P., MACKLIN, K.S., SAENMAHAYAK, B. and SIBLEY, J.L. (2009) Influence of bedding material on footpad dermatitis in broiler chickens. The Journal of Applied Poultry Research 18: 583-589.Google Scholar
BROUCEK, J. (2018) Nitrous Oxide release from poultry and pig housing. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies 27: 467-479.Google Scholar
CABRERA, M.L., KISSEL, D.E., HASSAN, S., REMA, J.A. and CASSITY-DUFFEY, K. (2018) Litter type and number of flocks affect sex hormones in broiler litter. Journal of Environmental Quality 47: 156-161.Google Scholar
CARPENTIER, B. (1997) Sanitary quality of meat chopping board surfaces: a bibliographical study. Food Microbiology 14: 31-37.Google Scholar
CARTER, T.A., ALLISON, R.C., MILLS, W.C. and WEST, J.R. (1979) Wood chips for poultry litter. Poultry Science 58: 994-997.Google Scholar
CIMIOTTI, W., GLUNDER, G. and HINZ, K.H. (1982) Survival of the bacterial turkey coryza agent. Veterinary Record 110: 304-306.Google Scholar
COHUO-COLLI, J.M., SALINAS-RUÍZ, J., HERNÁNDEZ-CÁZARES, A.S., HIDALGO-CONTRERAS, J.V., BRITO-DAMIÁN, V.H. and VELASCO-VELASCO, J. (2018) Effect of litter density and foot health program on ammonia emissions in broiler chickens. The Journal of Applied Poultry Research 27: 198-205.Google Scholar
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 1999/74/EC (1999) Laying down minimum standards for the protection of laying hens. Official Journal of the European Communities: L 203/53-57.Google Scholar
CRESSMAN, M.D., YU, Z., NELSON, M.C., MOELLER, S.J., LILBURN, M.S. and ZERBY, H.N. (2010) Interrelations between the microbiotas in the litter and in the intestines of commercial broiler chickens. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 76: 6572-6582.Google Scholar
DENNERY, G., DEZAT, E. and ROUSSET, N. (2012) Vers une gestion efficace des litières, de l'approvisionnement aux techniques d’élevage avicole (France, Itavi, Chambres regionale d'agriculture Bretagne et Pays de la Loire). 48 pp.Google Scholar
DOROTHY, N., TANUSHA, S., EDITH, R., PAYAL, D., ONNICAH, M., ROSLYNN, B. and JEEBHAY, M. (2018) Risk factors associated with allergic sensitization and asthma phenotypes among poultry farm workers. American Journal of Industrial Medicine 61: 515-523.Google Scholar
DUNLOP, M.W., MCAULEY, J., BLACKALL, P.J. and STUETZ, R.M. (2016) Water activity of poultry litter: Relationship to moisture content during a grow-out. Journal of Environmental Management 172: 201-206.Google Scholar
EKSTRAND, C., ALGERS, B. and SVEDBERG, J. (1997) Rearing conditions and foot-pad dermatitis in Swedish broiler chickens. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 31: 167-174.Google Scholar
EKSTRAND, C. and ALGERS, B. (1997) Rearing conditions and foot-pad dermatitis in Swedish turkey poults. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 38: 167-174.Google Scholar
FARHADI, D. (2014) Evaluation of the physical and chemical properties of some agricultural wastes as poultry litter material. Global Journal of Animal Scientific Research 2: 270-276.Google Scholar
FENGEL, D. and WEGENER, G. (1983) Wood: chemistry, ultrastructure, reactions (Walter de Gruyter). 633 pp.Google Scholar
FARGHLY, M.F., MAHROSE, K.M., COOPER, R.G., ULLAH, Z., REHMAN, Z. and DING, C. (2018) Sustainable floor type for managing turkey production in a hot climate. Poultry Science 97: 3884-3890.Google Scholar
GARCÊS, A., AFONSO, S.M.S., CHILUNDO, A. and JAIROCE, C.T.S. (2013) Evaluation of different litter materials for broiler production in a hot and humid environment: 1. Litter characteristics and quality. The Journal of Applied Poultry Research 22: 168-176.Google Scholar
GARCÊS, A.P.J.T., AFONSO, S.M.S., CHILUNDO, A. and JAIROCE, C.T.S. (2017) Evaluation of different litter materials for broiler production in a hot and humid environment: 2. Productive performance and carcass characteristics. Tropical Animal Health and Production 49: 369-374.Google Scholar
GARRIDO, M.N., SKJERVHEIM, M., OPPEGAARD, H. and SØRUM, H. (2004) Acidified litter benefits the intestinal flora balance of broiler chickens. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 70: 5208-5213.Google Scholar
GREENACRE, C.B. and MORISHITA, T.Y. (2014) Backyard poultry medicine and surgery: A guide for veterinary practitioners (John Wiley & Sons). 366 pp.Google Scholar
GRIMES, J.L., SMITHI, J. and WILLIAMS, C.M. (2002) Some alternative litter materials used for growing broilers and turkeys. World's Poultry Science Journal 58: 515-526.Google Scholar
HAFEEZ, A., SUHAIL, S.M., DURRANI, F.R., JAN, D., AHMAD, I., CHAND, N. and REHMAN, A. (2009) Effect of different types of locally available litter materials on the performance of broiler chicks. Sarhad Journal of Agriciculture 25: 581-586.Google Scholar
IQBAL, A., JAVED, M.T., UL HASSAN, M., KHAN, I.A. and MUNIR, M.T. (2015) Serobiochemical changes induced by various concentrations of ethanol through drinking water in broiler chicks. Veterinaria 3: 18-21.Google Scholar
IRFAN, M., MEHMOOD, S., HUSSAIN, J., SAIMA, , SHAHEEN, M.S., AHMAD, S. and ZIA, M.W. (2017) Effect of different bedding materials on growth performance, physiological response and economic efficiency in three commercial broiler strains. Indian Journal of Animal Research: DOI: 10.18805/ijar.B-795.Google Scholar
ISMAIL, R., AVIAT, F., GAY-PERRET, P., LE BAYON, I., FEDERIGHI, M. and MICHEL, V. (2017) An assessment of L. monocytogenes transfer from wooden ripening shelves to cheeses: Comparison with glass and plastic surfaces. Food Control 73: 273-280.Google Scholar
ISMAIL, R., AVIAT, F., MICHEL, V., LE BAYON, I., GAY-PERRET, P., KUTNIK, M. and FEDERIGHI, M. (2013) Methods for recovering microorganisms from solid surfaces used in the food industry: a review of the literature. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 10: 6169-6183.Google Scholar
KAMBA, N. (1994) Performance of wooden storage cases in regulation of relative humidity change. Studies in Conservation 39: 181-184.Google Scholar
KAUKONEN, E., NORRING, M. and VALROS, A. (2017) Evaluating the effects of bedding materials and elevated platforms on contact dermatitis and plumage cleanliness of commercial broilers and on litter condition in broiler houses. British Poultry Science 58: 480-489.Google Scholar
KHERAVII, S.K., SWICK, R.A., CHOCT, M. and WU, S.-B. (2017) Potential of pelleted wheat straw as an alternative bedding material for broilers. Poultry Science 96: 1641-1647.Google Scholar
LAIREITER, C.M., SCHNABEL, T., KÖCK, A., STALZER, P., PETUTSCHNIGG, A., OOSTINGH, G.J. and HELL, M. (2013) Active anti-microbial effects of larch and pine wood on four bacterial strains. BioResources 9: 273-281.Google Scholar
LEE, H.-W., LOUTON, H., SCHWARZER, A., RAUCH, E., PROBST, A., SHAO, S., SCHMIDT, P., ERHARD, M.H. and BERGMANN, S. (2016) Effects of multiple daily litter applications on the dust bathing behaviour of laying hens kept in an enriched cage system. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 178: 51-59.Google Scholar
LI, K., LEMONAKIS, L., GLOVER, B., MORITZ, J. and SHEN, C. (2017) Impact of built-up-litter and commercial antimicrobials on Salmonella and Campylobacter contamination of broiler carcasses processed at a pilot mobile poultry-processing unit. Frontiers in Veterinary Science 4: 88.Google Scholar
LOPES, M., ROLL, V.F.B., LEITE, F.L., DAI PRÁ, M.A., XAVIER, E.G., HERES, T. and VALENTE, B.S. (2013) Quicklime treatment and stirring of different poultry litter substrates for reducing pathogenic bacteria counts. Poultry Science 92: 638-644.Google Scholar
MACKLIN, K.S., HESS, J.B., BILGILI, S.F. and NORTON, R.A. (2005) Bacterial levels of pine shavings and sand used as poultry litter. The Journal of Applied Poultry Research 14: 238-245.Google Scholar
MAHMOUD, M.S.H., SOLIMAN, F.N.K., EL-DEEN, M.B. and SEBAI, A.A.E. (2014) Effect of different types of litter on broiler performance. Research Journal of Poultry Sciences 7: 1-6.Google Scholar
MALONE, G.W., RIDER, D., COLLIER, S. and JAMES, B. (2008) Management strategies for utilizing hardwood sawdust as poultry bedding (USA, Northeastern Area State and Private Forestry USDA Forest Service).Google Scholar
MARTRENCHAR, A., BOILLETOT, E., HUONNIC, D. and POL, F. (2002) Risk factors for foot-pad dermatitis in chicken and turkey broilers in France. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 52: 213-226.Google Scholar
MAYNE, R.K., ELSE, R.W. and HOCKING, D.P.M. (2007) High litter moisture alone is sufficient to cause footpad dermatitis in growing turkeys. British Poultry Science 48: 538-545.Google Scholar
MELUZZI, A., FABBRI, C., FOLEGATTI, E. and SIRRI, F. (2008) Effect of less intensive rearing conditions on litter characteristics, growth performance, carcass injuries and meat quality of broilers. British Poultry Science 49: 509-515.Google Scholar
MILES, D.M., ROWE, D.E. and CATHCART, T.C. (2011) Litter ammonia generation: Moisture content and organic versus inorganic bedding materials. Poultry Science 90: 1162-1169.Google Scholar
MILLING, A., KEHR, R., WULF, A. and SMALLA, K. (2005a) Survival of bacteria on wood and plastic particles. Holzforschung 59: 72-81.Google Scholar
MILLING, A., SMALLA, K., KEHR, R. and WULF, A. (2005b) The use of wood in practice - a hygienic risk? Holz als Roh- und Werkstoff 63: 463-472.Google Scholar
MOESTA, A., KNIERIM, U., BRIESE, A. and HARTUNG, J. (2008) The effect of litter condition and depth on the suitability of wood shavings for dustbathing behaviour. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 115: 160-170.Google Scholar
MONIRA, K.N., ISLAM, M.A., ALAM, M.J. and WAHID, M.A. (2003) Effect of litter materials on broiler performance and evaluation of manureal value of used litter in late autumn. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences 16: 555-557.Google Scholar
MUNIR, M.T., ARIF ZAFAR, M., MUKHTAR, N., YOUSAF, A., SAFDAR, M., UMAR, S. and ARIF, M. (2015) Intramedullary fixation approach to tibiotarsal fracture in ostrich (Struthio camelus): 2 Case Report. Veterinaria 3: 28-31.Google Scholar
MUNIR, M.T., BELLONCLE, C., PAILHORIES, H., AVIAT, F., FEDERIGHI, M. and EVEILLARD, M. (2017a) Microbial safety of wood as contact surface, in: Actes des 6èmes Journées Scientifiques du GDR 3544 Sciences du Bois. 21 November 2017, Nantes, France, pp. 131-132.Google Scholar
MUNIR, M.T., BELLONCLE, C., PAILHORIES, H., AVIAT, F., FEDERIGHI, M. and EVEILLARD, M. (2017b) Wood as a safe material for indoor surface construction of hygienically sensitive places. 7-9 July 2017, Northwestern Polytechnical University Xi'an, China, pp. 79-80.Google Scholar
MUNIR, M.T., MUNIR, A.R., UL HASAN, M. and ABUBAKAR, M. (2014) Epidemiology and management strategies of Johne's disease in endemic situations. Research Journal for Veterinary Practitioners 2: 84-90.Google Scholar
MUSA, W.I., SA`IDU, L., KALTUNGO, B.Y., ABUBAKAR, U.B. and WAKAWA, A.M. (2012) Poultry litter selection, management and utilization in Nigeria. Asian Journal of Poultry Science 6: 44-55.Google Scholar
MUSHTAQ, M., KASUR, H., KHAN, R.A., KHALID, A. and IQBAL, M.K. (2018) Effect of Salmonella on decomposition of poultry litter. Journal of Scientific Research 10: 51-60.Google Scholar
NOWACZEWSKI, S., ROSIŃSKI, A., MARKIEWICZ, M. and KONTECKA, H. (2011) Performance, foot-pad dermatitis and haemoglobin saturation in broiler chickens kept on different types of litter. Archiv fur Geflügelkunde 75: 132-139.Google Scholar
PAILHORIÈS, H., MUNIR, M.T., AVIAT, F., FEDERIGHI, M., BELLONCLE, C. and EVEILLARD, M. (2017) Oak in Hospitals, the worst enemy of Staphylococcus aureus? Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology 38: 382-384.Google Scholar
PEARSON, E.G., LEAVENGOOD, S. and REEB, J.E. (1999) Comparison of the absorptive capacity of the animal bedding materials: western juniper, western red cedar, and Douglas-fir (Oregon State University, 233 Magrude r Hull, Corvallis, OR 97331).Google Scholar
RAMADAN, S.G.A., MAHBOUB, H.D.H., HELAL, M.A. and GAAFAR, K.M. (2013) Behaviour, welfare and performance of broiler chicks reared on different litter materials. Assiut Veterinary Medical Journal 59: 9-18.Google Scholar
REGMI, P., ROBISON, C.I., JONES, D.R., GAST, R.K., TEMPELMAN, R.J. and KARCHER, D.M. (2018) Effects of different litter substrates and induced molt on production performance and welfare quality parameters of white Leghorn hens housed in multi-tiered aviary system. Poultry Science 97: 3397-3404.Google Scholar
SAHOO, S.P., KAUR, D., SETHI, A.P.S., SHARMA, A., CHANDRA, M. and CHANDRAHAS, (2017) Effect of chemically amended litter on litter quality and broiler performance in winter. Journal of Applied Animal Research 45: 533-537.Google Scholar
SCHOLZ, B., URSELMANS, S., KJAER, J.B. and SCHRADER, L. (2010) Food, wood, or plastic as substrates for dustbathing and foraging in laying hens: A preference test. Poultry Science 89: 1584-1589.Google Scholar
SHAO, D., HE, J., LU, J., WANG, Q., CHANG, L., SHI, S.R. and BING, T.H. (2015) Effects of sawdust thickness on the growth performance, environmental condition, and welfare quality of yellow broilers. Poultry Science 94: 1-6.Google Scholar
SHEFFIELD, C.L., CRIPPEN, T.L. and BEIER, R.C. (2018) Multi-microbial compounds eliminate or reduce Salmonella Typhimurium from one-third of poultry liter samples within 8 days. Research Journal of Poultry Sciences 11: 5-8.Google Scholar
SHEPHERD, E.M. and FAIRCHILD, B.D. (2010) Footpad dermatitis in poultry. Poultry Science 89: 2043-2051.Google Scholar
SHEPHERD, E.M., FAIRCHILD, B.D. and RITZ, C.W. (2017) Alternative bedding materials and litter depth impact litter moisture and footpad dermatitis. The Journal of Applied Poultry Research 26: 518-528.Google Scholar
SHIELDS, S.J., GARNER, J.P. and MENCH, J.A. (2005) Effect of sand and wood-shavings bedding on the behavior of broiler chickens. Poultry Science 84: 1816-1824.Google Scholar
SIGROHA, R., BIDHAN, D.S., YADAV, D.C., SIHAG, S.S. and MALIK, A.K. (2017) Effect of different litter materials on the performance of broiler chicken. Journal of Animal Research 7: 665.Google Scholar
SKÅNSENG, B., SVIHUS, B., RUDI, K., TROSVIK, P. and MOEN, B. (2013) Effect of different feed structures and bedding on the horizontal spread of Campylobacter jejuni within broiler flocks. Agriculture 3: 741-760.Google Scholar
SOGUNLE, O.M., OGUNJIMI, B.A. and FANIMO, A.O. (2006) Effect of litter depth on the performance of three strains of broiler chickens. Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances 5: 1155-1157.Google Scholar
TAHERPARVAR, G., SEIDAVI, A., ASADPOUR, L., PAYAN-CARREIRA, R., LAUDADIO, V. and TUFARELLI, V. (2016) Effect of litter treatment on growth performance, intestinal development, and selected cecum microbiota in broiler chickens. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 45: 257-264.Google Scholar
TEIXEIRA, A.S., DE OLIVEIRA, M.C., MENEZES, J.F., GOUVEA, B.M., TEIXEIRA, S.R. and GOMES, A.R. (2015) Poultry litter of wood shavings and/or sugarcane bagasse: animal performance and bed quality. Revista Colombiana de Ciencias Pecuarias 28: 238-246.Google Scholar
TERČIČ, D., ŽOLGER, M. and PESTOTNIK, M. (2015) Effect of different litter materials on foot pad dermatitis, hock burn and feather coverage in broiler chickens. Acta Agriculturae Slovenica 106: 97-101.Google Scholar
TIWARI, A., PATNAYAK, D.P., CHANDER, Y., PARSAD, M. and GOYAL, S.M. (2006) Survival of two avian respiratory viruses on porous and nonporous surfaces. Avian diseases 50: 284-287.Google Scholar
TOGHYANI, M., GHEISARI, A., MODARESI, M., TABEIDIAN, S.A. and TOGHYANI, M. (2010) Effect of different litter material on performance and behavior of broiler chickens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 122: 48-52.Google Scholar
TOROK, V.A., HUGHES, R.J., OPHEL-KELLER, K., ALI, M. and MACALPINE, R. (2009) Influence of different litter materials on cecal microbiota colonization in broiler chickens. Poultry Science 88: 2474-2481.Google Scholar
UMAR, S., MUNIR, M.T., SHAH, M.A., SHAHZAD, M., KHAN, R.A., SOHOO, M.-R., KHAN, A.U., AMEEN, K., MUNIR, A.R. and SALEEM, F. (2015a) Outbreak of aflatoxicosis on a local cattle farm in Pakistan. Veterinaria 3: 13-17.Google Scholar
UMAR, S., NAWAZ, S., SHAHZAD, M., MUNIR, M.T. and ALI ABDULLAH SHAH, M. (2015b) Emerging issue of gangrenous dermatitis in broilers. Journal of Avian Research 1: 17-19.Google Scholar
VAINIO-KAILA, T., ZHANG, X., HÄNNINEN, T., KYYHKYNEN, A., JOHANSSON, L.-S., WILLFÖR, S., ÖSTERBERG, M., SIITONEN, A. and RAUTKARI, L. (2017) Antibacterial effects of wood structural components and extractives from Pinus sylvestris and Picea abies on Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli O157:H7. BioResources 12: 7601-7614.Google Scholar
VIEGAS, C., CAROLINO, E., MALTA-VACAS, J., SABINO, R., VIEGAS, S. and VERÍSSIMO, C. (2012) Fungal contamination of poultry litter: a public health problem. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health. Part A 75: 1341-1350.Google Scholar
VILLAGRÁ, A., OLIVAS, I., ALTHAUS, R.L., GÓMEZ, E.A., LAINEZ, M. and TORRES, A.G. (2014) Behavior of broiler chickens in four different substrates: a choice test. Revista Brasileira de Ciência Avícola 16: 67-75.Google Scholar
VÖLKEL, I., SCHMITZ, C., MOORS, E., GAULY, M. and CZERNY, C.-P. (2011) Frequency of Salmonella detection in a broiler flock depending on different litter materials--a field study. Berliner Und Munchener Tierarztliche Wochenschrift 124: 71-77.Google Scholar
WILLIAMS, Z. and MACKLIN, K. (2013) Reduction of Salmonella and ammonia emissions in broiler litter using sulfuric acid and aluminum sulfate. International Journal of Poultry Science 12: 328-334.Google Scholar