Animal Sciences Unit, Institute for Agricultural and Fisheries Research (ILVO), Scheldeweg 68, B-9090 Melle, Belgium.
Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, B-9820 Merelbeke, Belgium.
Poult Sci. 2014 Jun;93(6):1327-36. doi: 10.3382/ps.2013-03720.
Animal-based measures of thirst are currently absent from animal welfare monitoring schemes due to the lack of a well-validated indicator applicable for on-farm use. In the present study, an on-farm test based on voluntary water consumption from an unfamiliar open drinker was validated in a (semi-)commercial setting. To investigate the effect of thirst on water consumption, we subjected 4 flocks of 1,500 broilers to either 0 or 12 h of water deprivation and subsequently measured the amount of water that small subgroups consumed after the deprivation period (first experiment). Broilers that were water deprived before the test drank more than control broilers (P < 0.001). In a second experiment, a similar test was performed using 20 commercial broiler flocks in Belgium and Brazil. After a pretreatment water consumption test, the birds were subjected to 0 or 6 h of water deprivation, and a posttreatment water consumption test was conducted. Only in Brazil, deprived birds drank significantly more than controls in the posttreatment water consumption test (P < 0.001). A tendency for a difference was found in Belgium (P = 0.083). Pre- and posttreatment water consumption was higher in Brazil than in Belgium (P < 0.001). Stocking density and temperature influenced, respectively, the pretreatment and the control's posttreatment water consumption in Brazil, but not in Belgium. These results indicate that the water consumption test is sufficiently sensitive to discriminate between control and 12 h deprived flocks, and in Brazil even between control and 6 h deprived birds. The location of the test within the house did not affect the amount of water consumed in either experiment, suggesting that this variable does not have to be standardized. However, the amount of water consumed by broilers able to drink freely for a long period depended on indoor climatic variables (in Brazil only) and possibly genotype. This suggests that these variables need to be considered when interpreting the test outcome in terms of the thirst level experienced by the broilers.
由于缺乏适用于农场使用的经过充分验证的指标,基于动物的口渴测量方法目前未被纳入动物福利监测计划中。在本研究中,我们在(半)商业环境中验证了一种基于从不熟悉的开放式饮水器中自愿饮水的农场测试。为了研究口渴对饮水的影响,我们将 4 群 1500 只肉鸡分别进行 0 或 12 小时的断水,然后在断水期后测量小亚群的饮水量(第一个实验)。与对照组相比,在测试前断水的肉鸡饮水量更多(P < 0.001)。在第二个实验中,我们在比利时和巴西使用 20 个商业肉鸡群进行了类似的测试。在预处理饮水测试后,将这些鸟进行 0 或 6 小时的断水,然后进行治疗后饮水测试。仅在巴西,断水组在治疗后饮水测试中饮水量明显多于对照组(P < 0.001)。在比利时,差异有趋势(P = 0.083)。巴西的预处理和治疗后饮水量均高于比利时(P < 0.001)。在巴西,饲养密度和温度分别影响预处理和对照组治疗后的饮水量,但在比利时则没有。这些结果表明,饮水测试对于区分对照组和 12 小时断水组,甚至在巴西可以区分对照组和 6 小时断水组,具有足够的敏感性。测试在鸡舍内的位置在两个实验中都不会影响鸡的饮水量,这表明该变量不需要标准化。然而,能够自由长时间饮水的肉鸡的饮水量取决于室内气候变量(仅在巴西)和可能的基因型。这表明在根据肉鸡的口渴程度解释测试结果时,需要考虑这些变量。