Abstract
Simple SummaryFeather damage is a continuous welfare challenge in the management of egg-laying hens. Canada is currently transitioning from conventional cages to alternative housing systems, where the risk of feather damage may increase due to larger group sizes. This change increases the need for continued and reliable assessment of flock feather condition, for which Canada does not have a standard method. Within this study, a feather damage scoring system and visual scoring guide were developed, with the ultimate goal of streamlining and increasing plumage assessment of laying flocks by farmers on Canadian commercial farms. Two differing feather scoring systems (LayWel and AssureWel) were compared based on user-friendliness and reliability. The AssureWel scoring system was easiest to use and achieved the most consistent outcomes among scorers for the back area of the body. This informed the design of a modified version with scoring levels from 0 to 2 for a sample of 50 birds per flock, along with an informational, visual guide for farmers. Training of farmers to use this simplified scoring system under commercial conditions can provide a benchmarking tool for feather damage levels, as well as a way to measure the success of management strategies to prevent and control feather damage.Feather damage (FD) due to feather pecking behavior is an ongoing welfare concern among commercial egg-laying hens. Canada’s current transition from conventional cage housing to alternative housing systems, where FD can spread easily within large flocks, underlines the need for frequent and accurate assessment of plumage condition. A standardized methodology for assessing FD in Canada does not yet exist. To improve FD assessment on commercial farms, a FD scoring system and visual scoring guide for farmers were developed. Two existing plumage scoring systems, LayWel and AssureWel, which differ in level of detail and bird handling, were assessed for ease of use, and intra- and inter-observer reliability. Practical application of the AssureWel scoring system was greatest, with strong intra- and inter-observer reliability for the back region of the body (weighted kappa = 0.88 for both measures) in small-scale flocks. This informed the creation of a modified version of the AssureWel system, which included three scoring levels and the visual assessment of 50 birds per flock. An accompanying guide was developed including sampling instructions and depictions of the scoring scheme, both written and visual. This simplified scoring system can serve as a benchmarking tool for FD prevalence, and can allow for future effectiveness assessments of management strategies to prevent and control FD; however, farmers should be trained to apply this system under commercial conditions.
Highlights
Feather pecking (FP) is a serious and learned behavioral problem in laying hen flocks [1], which leads to feather damage (FD), including feather loss, and, in more severe cases, to cannibalism and great economic loss to the farmer [2]
Reliability testing of FD scoring systems was conducted on laying hens involved in current
The second limitation relates to the small-scale housing setting in which reliability testing was performed. These small-scale settings are not typical for commercial use; reliability estimates may vary among housing systems and differ in practice from the results found here
Summary
Feather pecking (FP) is a serious and learned behavioral problem in laying hen flocks [1], which leads to feather damage (FD), including feather loss, and, in more severe cases, to cannibalism and great economic loss to the farmer [2]. An intact feather cover serves many functions, of which the most noticeable is enabling a bird to move, fly, and navigate its environment [3], which is especially important in non-cage housing systems [4]. The problem farmers face is being aware of, and determining the extent of, FD in commercial flocks of laying hens to identify and treat feather cover issues early on. It is, important to assess and monitor the presence and severity of FD as a proxy for FP, as direct observation of FP behavior can be difficult and time-consuming to observe in commercial settings. Continuous FD assessment assumes an easy to handle and accurate scoring tool available to farmers
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
