Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Institute of Animal Welfare and Animal Husbandry, 29223 Celle, Germany.
Poult Sci. 2010 Aug;89(8):1584-9. doi: 10.3382/ps.2009-00598.
The provision for dustbathing material will be a legal requirement in cage-housing systems for laying hens within the European Union beginning in 2012. At present, food particles are widely used and typically offered in small amounts on Astroturf mats one or more times per day to facilitate dustbathing, pecking, and scratching. In the present study, we compared layers' preference for food and 3 other (nonnutritive) substrates for foraging and dustbathing. In each of 2 identical trials, 72 hens of 2 genotypes (Lohmann Selected Leghorn and Lohmann Brown) were kept in 12 compartments (6 hens each). Compartments were equipped with a plastic grid floor and additionally contained 4 different dustbathing trays (each 1,000 cm(2)/hen) holding either wood shavings (WS), lignocellulose (LN, soft wood fiber, pelleted), Astroturf mat without substrate (AT), or food particles (FP). Hens were housed from 18 wk of age and video recordings were done at wk 21, 24, and 27. Time spent and frequency of dustbathing, duration of a single dustbath (DB), frequency of foraging behavior, and relative frequency and duration of behavioral patterns within a single DB were recorded during the light period over 2 d in each observation week. The FP treatment was preferred for foraging over WS, LN, and AT. Time spent dustbathing and number of DB were higher in LN compared with WS, FP, and AT, whereas average duration of a single DB was longer in FP compared with LN and WS. More vertical wing shakes and scratching bouts within a single DB were observed in LN compared with AT. Bill raking occurred more frequently in WS and LN in comparison to FP and AT. No differences in the relative durations of behavioral patterns within a single DB were found. In conclusion, FP were preferred for foraging but not for dustbathing, indicating that FP may not be an optimal dustbathing substrate for laying hens.
自 2012 年起,在欧盟的笼养蛋鸡系统中,为鸡提供沙浴材料将成为一项法律要求。目前,广泛使用食物颗粒,并通常每天在 AstroTurf 垫上提供少量食物颗粒,以促进沙浴、啄食和抓挠。在本研究中,我们比较了鸡对食物和 3 种其他(非营养性)基质的觅食和沙浴偏好。在 2 个相同的试验中,将 72 只 2 个基因型(洛曼选育来航鸡和洛曼褐鸡)的母鸡饲养在 12 个隔室中(每个隔室 6 只母鸡)。隔室配备有塑料网格地板,并另外包含 4 种不同的沙浴盘(每个沙浴盘 1000cm²/只母鸡),分别盛放刨花(WS)、木质纤维素(LN,软木纤维,颗粒状)、无基质的 AstroTurf 垫(AT)或食物颗粒(FP)。母鸡从 18 周龄开始饲养,并在第 21、24 和 27 周进行视频记录。在每个观察周的光照期间,记录 2 天内的沙浴时间和频率、单次沙浴持续时间(DB)、觅食行为的频率以及单次 DB 内行为模式的相对频率和持续时间。FP 处理比 WS、LN 和 AT 更适合觅食。与 WS、FP 和 AT 相比,LN 组的沙浴时间和 DB 次数更高,而 FP 组的单次 DB 持续时间比 LN 和 WS 组更长。与 AT 相比,LN 组单次 DB 内的垂直振翅和搔抓次数更多。与 FP 和 AT 相比,WS 和 LN 组中出现更多的喙耙行为。在 WS 和 LN 中比在 FP 和 AT 中观察到更多的喙耙行为。在单次 DB 内的行为模式的相对持续时间没有差异。总之,FP 更适合觅食,但不适合沙浴,这表明 FP 可能不是笼养蛋鸡的理想沙浴基质。