Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5536/KJPS.2020.47.3.189

Comparison of Production Performance and Stress Response of White Leghorns Kept in Conventional Cages and Floor Pens  

Choi, Eun Sik (Department of Animal Science and Biotechnology, Gyeongnam National University of Science and Technology)
Cho, Eun Jung (Department of Animal Science and Biotechnology, Gyeongnam National University of Science and Technology)
Jeong, Hyeon Cheol (Department of Animal Science and Biotechnology, Gyeongnam National University of Science and Technology)
Kim, Bo Kyung (Department of Animal Science and Biotechnology, Gyeongnam National University of Science and Technology)
Sohn, Sea Hwan (Department of Animal Science and Biotechnology, Gyeongnam National University of Science and Technology)
Publication Information
Korean Journal of Poultry Science / v.47, no.3, 2020 , pp. 189-197 More about this Journal
Abstract
This study was conducted to compare the production performance and stress response of chickens kept in the conventional cages and floor pens. 491 female White Leghorns were used in this study, and their production characteristics and stress response indicators were analyzed from 34 to 43 weeks of age. The results showed that there was no significant difference in survival rate, hen-day egg production, and body weight between the chickens kept in the conventional cages and those kept in the floor pens. The chickens kept in the conventional cages had a significantly higher egg weight and egg quality compared with those kept in the floor pens (P<0.01). The amount of telomeric DNA in lymphocytes was significantly higher in the chickens kept in floor pens than in those kept in conventional cages (P<0.05). The heterophil-lymphocyte ratio, HSP-90β gene expression level, and DNA damage rate significantly increased in chickens kept in the conventional cages, as compared to the chickens kept in floor pens (P<0.01). In conclusion, there seems to be no difference in the production performance between chickens kept in conventional cages and those kept in floor pens. Furthermore, chickens kept in conventional cages had higher stress response values than those kept in floor pens for all stress response indicators. Therefore, conventional cage types are considered to be a more stressful environment for chickens than floor pens, regardless of the production performance of the chickens.
Keywords
White Leghorn; conventional cages; floor pens; production performance; stress response;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 7  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Anderson KE, Adams AW 1994 Effects of cage versus floor rearing environments and cage floor mesh size on bone strength, fearfulness, and production of single comb White Leghorn hens. Poult Sci 73(8):1233-1240.   DOI
2 Baxter MR 1994 The welfare problems of laying hens in battery cages. Vet Rec 134(24):614-619.   DOI
3 Beloor J, Kang HK, Kim YJ, Subramani VK, Jang IS, Sohn SH, Moon YS 2010 The effect of stocking density on stress related genes and telomeric broiler chickens. Asian-Aust J Anim Sci 23(4):437-443.   DOI
4 Campo JL, Prieto MT, Davila SG 2008 Effects of housing system and cold stress on heterophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, fluctuating asymmetry, and tonic immobility duration of chickens. Poult Sci 87(4):621-626.   DOI
5 Chen JH, Hales CN, Ozanne SE 2007 DNA damage, cellular senescence and organismal ageing: causal or correlative? Nucleic Acids Res 35(22):7417-7428.   DOI
6 Cho EJ, Choi ES, Sohn SH 2019 Effect of hatching and brooding season of chicks on their heat stress response and production performances. Korean J Poult Sci 46(2):77-86.   DOI
7 Cho EJ, Park JA, Choi ES, Sohn SH 2016 Comparison of stress response in diallel crossed Korean domestic chicken breeds. Korean J Poult Sci 43(2):77-88.   DOI
8 Cotter PF 2015 An examination of the utility of heterophil-lymphocyte ratios in assessing stress of caged hens. Poult Sci 94(3):512-517.   DOI
9 Council Directive 1999/74/EC 1999 Laying down minimum standards for the protection of laying hens. The council of the European Union. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A31999L0074. Accessed on May 25, 2020.
10 De Reu K, Grijspeerdt K, Heyndrickx M, Zoons J, De Baere K 2005 Bacterial eggshell contamination in conventional cages, furnished cages and aviary housing systems for laying hens. Br Poult Sci 46(2):149-155.   DOI
11 Ellen HH, Bottcher RW, Von Wachenfelt E, Takai H 2000 Dust levels and control methods in poultry houses. J Agric Saf Health 6(4):275-282.   DOI
12 Freire R, Wilkins LJ, Short F, Nicol CJ 2003 Behaviour and welfare of individual laying hens in a non-cage system. Br Poult Sci 44(1):22-29.   DOI
13 Gross WB 1989 Factors affecting chicken thrombocyte morphology and the relationship with heterophil:lymphocyte ratios. Br Poultry Sci 30(4):919-925.   DOI
14 Gross WB, Siegel HS 1983 Evaluation of the heterophil/lymphocyte ratio as a measure of stress in chickens. Avian Dis 27(4):972-979.   DOI
15 Harley CB, Vaziri H, Counter CM, Allsopp RC 1992 The telomere hypothesis of cellular aging. Exp Gerontol 27(4):375-382.   DOI
16 Haugh RR 1937 The Haugh unit for measuring egg quality. US Egg Poult Mag 43:552-555, 572-573.
17 Lay DC Jr, Fulton RM, Hester PY, Karcher DM, Kjaer JB, Mench JA, Mullens BA, Newberry RC, Nicol CJ, O'Sullivan NP, Porter RE 2011 Hen welfare in different housing systems. Poult Sci 90(1):278-294.   DOI
18 Jeong HC, Choi ES, Kwon JH, Cho EJ, Sohn SH 2020 Effect of mixed rearing of male and female chickens on the stress response of Korean native chickens. Korean J Poult Sci 47(1):29-37.   DOI
19 Koelkebeck KW, Amoss Jr MS, Cain JR 1987 Production, physiological, and behavioral responses of laying hens in different management environments. Poult Sci 66(3):397-407.   DOI
20 Koelkebeck KW, Cain JR 1984 Performance, behavior, plasma corticosterone, and economic returns of laying hens in several management alternatives. Poult Sci 63(11):2123-2131.   DOI
21 Livak KJ, Schmittgen TD 2001 Analysis of relative gene expression data using real-time quantitative PCR and the 2(-Delta Delta C(T)) method. Methods 25(4):402-408.   DOI
22 McFarlane JM, Curtis SE 1989 Multiple concurrent stressors in chicks. 3. Effects on plasma corticosterone and the heterophil:lymphocyte ratio. Poult Sci 68(4):522-527.   DOI
23 Mench JA, van Tienhoven A, Marsh JA, McCormick CC, Cunningham DL, Baker RC 1986 Effects of cage and floor pen management on behavior, production, and physiological stress responses of laying hens. Poult Sci 65(6):1058-1069.   DOI
24 Meng X, Jerome V, Devin J, Baulieu EE, Catell MG 1993 Cloning of chicken hsp90 beta: The only vertebrate hsp90 insensitive to heat shock. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 190(2):630-636.   DOI
25 Nandhakumar S, Parasuraman S, Shanmugam MM, Rao KR, Chand P, Bhat BV 2011 Evaluation of DNA damage using single-cell gel electrophoresis (Comet Assay). J Pharmacol Pharmacother 2(2):107-111.   DOI
26 Lindquist S 1986. The heat-shock response. Annu Rev Biochem 55:1151-1191.   DOI
27 National Law Information Center 2019 Animal protection act. Act No.16075. Enforcement Date 25. Mar, 2019. http://www.law.go.kr/lsSc.do?tabMenuId=tab18§ion=&eventGubun=060101&query=%EB%8F%99%EB%AC%BC%EB%B3%B4%ED%98%B8%EB%B2%95#undefined. Accessed on May 25, 2020.
28 Pohle K, Cheng HW 2009 Comparative effects of furnished and battery cages on egg production and physiological parameters in White Leghorn hens. Poult Sci 88(10):2042-2051.   DOI
29 Richter C, Park JW, Ames BN 1988 Normal oxidative damage to mitochondrial and nuclear DNA is extensive. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 85(17):6465-6467.   DOI
30 Rodenburg TB, Tuyttens FA, Sonck B, De Reu K, Herman L, Zoons J 2005 Welfare, health, and hygiene of laying hens housed in furnished cages and in alternative housing systems. J Appl Anim Welf Sci 8(3):211-226.   DOI
31 Singh NP, McCoy MT, Tice RR, Schneider EL 1988 A simple technique for quantitation of low levels of DNA damage in individual cells. Exp Cell Res 175(1):184-191.   DOI
32 Schlesinger MJ 1986 Heat shock proteins: The search for functions. J Cell Biol 103(2):321-325.   DOI
33 Sherwin CM, Richards GJ, Nicol C 2010 Comparison of the welfare of layer hens in 4 housing systems in the UK. Br Poult Sci 51(4):488-499.   DOI
34 Shini S 2003 Physiologic responses of laying hens to the alternative housing systems. Int J Poult Sci 2(5):357-360.   DOI
35 Singh R, Cheng KM, Silversides FG 2009 Production performance and egg quality of four strains of laying hens kept in conventional cages and floor pens. Poult Sci 88(2):256-264.   DOI
36 Soleimani AF, Zulkifli I, Omar AR, Raha AR 2011 Physiological responses of 3 chicken breeds to acute heat stress. Poult Sci 90(7):1435-1440.   DOI
37 Sohn SH, Jang IS, Son BR 2011 Effect of housing systems of cage and floor on the production performance and stress response in layer. Korean J Poult Sci 38(4):305-313.   DOI
38 Sohn SH, Subramani VK 2014 Dynamics of telomere length in the chicken. World's Poult Sci J 70(4):721-735.   DOI
39 Sohn SH, Subramani VK, Moon YS, Jang IS 2012 Telomeric DNA quantity, DNA damage, and heat shock protein gene expression as physiological stress markers in chickens. Poult Sci 91(4):829-836.   DOI
40 Stanley VG, Nelson D, Daley MB 2013 Evaluation of two laying systems (floor vs. cage) on egg production, quality, and safety. Agrotechnol 2(1):109.
41 Tactacan GB, Guenter W, Lewis NJ, Rodriguez-Lecompte JC, House JD 2009 Performance and welfare of laying hens in conventional and enriched cages. Poult Sci 88(4):698-707.   DOI
42 Zulkifli I, Norma MTC, Israf DA, Omar AR 2002 The effect of early-age food restriction on heat shock protein 70 response in heat-stressed female broiler chickens. Br Poult Sci 43(1):141-145.   DOI
43 Zulkifli I, Che Norma MT, Chong CH, Loh TC 2000 Heterophil to lymphocyte ratio and tonic immobility reactions to preslaughter handling in broiler chickens treated with ascorbic acid. Poult Sci 79(3):402-406.   DOI