medigraphic.com

2002, Number 2

Next >>

Vet Mex 2002; 33 (2)

Effect of environmental enrichment on the behavior, production parameters and immune response in broilers

Tejeda PA, Galindo MF, Quintana LJA

Language: English/Spanish
References: 37
Page: 89-100
PDF size: 137.73 Kb.


ABSTRACT

The aim of this study was to assess the effect of 4 ways of environmental enrichment on the behavior, production and health of 220 broilers divided in to five treatments: Bath dusting box, toys and alfalfa, perches, a combination, and the control one. Individual and social behavior events were measured and related to production parameters such as live body weight, food efficiency and immune response to Newcastle´s disease vaccination. There were no differences between treatments with just one element nor with the combination of treatments. The frequency of head pecking was lower in the treatment with bath dusting box (P ‹ 0.05), and the highest levels were found in the treatment with the perches, as well as in the group with all the enriching devices (P ‹ 0.05). There were no differences between treatments regarding body weight and feed convertion. Immune response values were satisfactory in all treatments, but did not show differences between them. A negative correlation was found between toys and alfalfa pecking behavior, and body care behaviors (P ‹ 0.05). Further studies are needed in order to assess the effect of environmental enrichment and epidemiology in commercial flocks.


REFERENCES

  1. 1. Gao W, Feddes JJ, Robinson F, Cook I. Effect of stocking density on the incidence of usage of enrichment devices by White Leghorn hens. J Appl Poultry Res 1994;3:336-341.

  2. 2. Sherwin CM, Ryan C, German A. Spherical environmental objects for laying hens. Proceedings of the International Congress on Applied Ethology: 15-18 August 1993; Berlin, Germany. Berlin, Germany: International Society for Applied Ethology, 1993:474-476.

  3. 3. Reed HJ, Wilkins LJ, Austin SD, Gregory NG. The effect of environmental enrichment during rearing on fear reactions and depopulation trauma in adult caged hens. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1993;36:39-46.

  4. 4. Mench JA. The welfare of poultry in modern production systems. Poultry Sci 1992;4:107-128.

  5. 5. Fraser AF, Broom DM. Farm animal behaviour and welfare. London (UK): Bailliere and Tindall, 1990.

  6. 6. Appleby CM, Hughes BO, Elson HA. Poultry production systems. Wallingford (UK): CAB International, 1992.

  7. 7. Murphy LB. The practical problems of recognizing and measuring fear and exploration behaviour in the domestic fowl. Anim Behav 1978;26:422-431.

  8. 8. Wood-Gush DGM. The behaviour of the domestic fowl. London (UK): Heinemann Educational, 1971.

  9. 9. Burtt HE. The psychology of birds, an interpretation of bird behavior. New York: Macmillan, 1967.

  10. Van Liere DW. Dustbathing as related to proximal and distal feather lipids in laying hens. Behav Proc 1992;26:177-188.

  11. Van Liere DW. The significance of fowl’s bathing in dust. Anim Welf 1992;1:187-202.

  12. Broom DM. The stress concept and ways of assessing the effects of stress in farm animals. Appl Anim Ethol 1983;11:79-83.

  13. Estevez I, Newberry R, Arias de RL. Broiler chickens: a tolerant social system? Etologia 1997;5:19-29.

  14. Galindo MF. La importancia de la etología en la medicina veterinaria y zootecnia. Etología y bienestar animal. Serie Temas Actualidad. México (DF): Federación de Colegios y Asociaciones de Médicos Veterinarios Zootecnistas,1995;2:12-20.

  15. Gross WB, Colmano G. The effect of social isolation on resistance of some infectious diseases. Poultry Sci 1969;48:514-520.

  16. Gross WB, Siegel PB. Effects of early environmental stresses on chicken body weight, antibody response to RBC antigens, feed efficiency, and response to fasting. Avian Dis 1981;24:569-579.

  17. Broom DM, Johnson KG. Stress and animal welfare. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1993.

  18. Newberry RC. Environmental enrichment: increasing the biological relevance of captive environments. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1995;44:229-243.

  19. Gvaryahu G, Cunningham DL. Filial imprinting, environmental enrichment, and music application effects on behavior and performance of meat strain chicks. Poultry Sci 1989;68:211-217.

  20. Nicol CJ. Effects of environmental enrichment and gentle handling on behavior and fear responses of transported broilers. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1992;33:367-380.

  21. Weeks CA, Nicol CM, Sherwin AD, Kestin SC. Comparison of the behaviour of broiler chickens in indoor and free-range environments. Anim Welf 1994;3:179-192.

  22. Hughes BO, Elson HA. The use of perches by broilers in floor pens. Br Poultry Sci 1977;18:715-722.

  23. Weeks CA, Davies HC. Periodicity of behaviour of broilers at 4 and 6 weeks of age. Br Poultry Sci 1995;35:876-877.

  24. Beard CW. Serologic procedures. In: Graham P, Lawrence HA, Charles HD, James EP, editors. A laboratory manual for the isolation and identification of avian pathogens. The American Association of Avian Pathologists. 3rd ed. Ames (Io): Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co., 1989:192-193.

  25. Alexander DJ. Newcastle disease. In: Graham P, Lawrence HA, Charles HD, James EP, editors. A laboratory manual for the isolation and identification of avian pathogens. The American Association of Avian Pathologists. 3rd ed. Ames (Io): Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co., 1989:120-144.

  26. Newberry RC, Shackleton DM. Use of visual cover by domestic fowl: a Venetian blind effect? Anim Behav 1997;54:387-395.

  27. Cornetto T, Estevez I. Utilizing artificial cover to improve use of pen center by domestic fowl. Proceedings of the 33rd International Society for Applied Ethology; 17-21 August 1999; Lillehammer, Norway. Oslo, Norway; International Society of Applied Ethology, 1999:57.

  28. Cassaigne GI. Efecto del enriquecimiento ambiental sobre la incidencia de interacciones agresivas en un grupo de tigres (Panthera tigris) en confinamiento (tesis de licenciatura). México (DF) México: Facultad de Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia. UNAM, 1999.

  29. Chamove AS. Environmental enrichment: a review. Anim Tech 1989;40:155-178.

  30. Rushen J. The peck orders of chickens: how do they develop and why are they linear? Anim Behav 1982;30:1129-1137.

  31. López CC. Síndrome ascítico. En: Castro MI, Estudillo LJ, editores. Examen general de calidad profesional. Material de estudio. Área: aves. México (DF): Sistema de Universidad Abierta, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Centro Nacional de Evaluación para la Educación Superior (CENEVAL), 1996:343-347.

  32. Tejeda PA, Téllez IG, Galindo MF. Técnicas de medición de estrés en aves. Vet Méx 1997;28:345-351.

  33. Hargis BM, Téllez G. La influencia del estrés sobre la inmunidad de las aves y su resistencia a las enfermedades. Memorias del Curso sobre Avances en Inmunología Aviar; 15 marzo 1996; México (DF). México (DF): Asociación de Especialistas en Ciencias Avícolas, 1996:1-7.

  34. Klein F, Lemarie V, Sandi C, Vitiello S, Van der LJ, Laurent PE et al. Prolonged increase of corticosterone secretion by chronic social stress does not necessarily impair immune functions. Life Sci 1992;50:723-731.

  35. Siegel PB. Poultry, stress, immunity interactions are analysed. Poultry Dig 1990;s/v:38-42.

  36. Zanella AJ, Mendl M, Broom DM. An investigation of the relationship between adrenal activity, social rank and immunocompetence in pregnant sows kept in different housing conditions. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1991;30:175-176.

  37. Newberry RC, Estevez IA. Dynamic approach to the study of environmental enrichment and animal welfare. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1997;54:53-57.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com