Suppr超能文献

冬季巴西南部两种不同工业类型鸡舍中肉鸡的福利。

Welfare of broiler chickens reared in two different industrial house types during the winter season in Southern Brazil.

机构信息

Animal Welfare Laboratory, Department of Animal Science, Federal University of Paraná, Curitiba, Brazil.

Animal Sciences Unit, Institute for Agricultural and Fisheries Research (ILVO), Melle, Belgium.

出版信息

Br Poult Sci. 2021 Oct;62(5):621-631. doi: 10.1080/00071668.2021.1908519. Epub 2021 Apr 30.

Abstract
  1. The following trial compared broiler chicken welfare in closed-sided (CS) open-sided (OS) industrial house types during the winter season in the South of Brazil.2. Ten flocks in each house type were evaluated as follows: a) bird health: contact dermatitis on the breast and abdominal areas (CDE), bird soiling (BSO), footpad dermatitis (FPD), hock burn (HBU), lameness (LAM), fractures (FRA), bruising (BRU), scratches (SCR), dead on arrival (DOA), and diseases (DIS); b) house environmental measurements: relative humidity (RHU), temperature (TEM), air velocity (AVE), illuminance (ILL), ammonia concentration (NH), and carbon dioxide concentration (CO), and c) bird behaviour and affective states: bird behaviour (BBE), touch test (TTE), and qualitative behaviour assessment (QBA).3. Statistical analyses were based on regression models for CDE, BSO, FPD, HBU, LAM and generalised linear models for DOA, FRA, BRU, SCR, and DIS. The Mann-Whitney test was used for RHU, TEM, AVE, ILL, NH, CO, and the t-test for TTE and LMO, with a specific regression model for BBE data and Principal Component Analysis for QBA.4. According to odds ratio for worse scores for CS relative to OS, birds were less likely to have severe scores for CDE (P = 0.040 and P = 0.007), BSO (P = 0.031, P = 0.016, and P = 0.038), and HBU (P = 0.017), and had higher median values for AVE (2.3, 0.0-7.8 m s . 0.0, 0.0-4.3 m s), lower NH concentration (9.0, 0.0-64.0 ppm . 12.0, 0.0-60.0 ppm) and TTE scores (98, 96-100 . 67, 25-100). Worse results were observed in CS houses for higher stocking density (13.8 ± 0.2 birds/m . 12.0 ± 0.2 birds/m), RHU (74.5, 50.7-99.9% 72.3, 47.4-99.9%), and TEM (23.9, 14.6-29.2°C . 21.7, 12.9-30.1°C), lower ILL (16.0, 1.0-60.0 lx . 161.0, 8.0-2380.0 lx), less drinking (P = 0.007), more inactive behaviour (P < 0.001) and lower positive emotions, according to QBA (P = 0.028).5. In the studied region and season, CS houses seemed to offer fewer welfare problems in terms of the health indicators; however, OS houses showed fewer behavioural restrictions and higher positive emotional states.
摘要
  1. 本试验比较了巴西南部冬季封闭式(CS)和开放式(OS)工业鸡舍中肉鸡的福利情况。

  2. 每种鸡舍类型评估了 10 个鸡群,如下所示:a)禽健康:胸部和腹部接触性皮炎(CDE)、禽污染(BSO)、脚垫皮炎(FPD)、跗关节烧伤(HBU)、跛行(LAM)、骨折(FRA)、瘀伤(BRU)、划痕(SCR)、到达时死亡(DOA)和疾病(DIS);b)房屋环境测量:相对湿度(RHU)、温度(TEM)、空气速度(AVE)、光照度(ILL)、氨浓度(NH)和二氧化碳浓度(CO),c)禽行为和情感状态:禽行为(BBE)、触摸测试(TTE)和定性行为评估(QBA)。

  3. 对 CDE、BSO、FPD、HBU、LAM 采用回归模型进行统计分析,对 DOA、FRA、BRU、SCR 和 DIS 采用广义线性模型进行统计分析。采用 Mann-Whitney 检验法分析 RHU、TEM、AVE、ILL、NH、CO,采用 t 检验法分析 TTE 和 LMO,采用特定回归模型分析 BBE 数据,采用主成分分析法分析 QBA。

  4. 根据 CS 相对于 OS 的较差评分的优势比,CS 鸡舍中 CDE(P=0.040 和 P=0.007)、BSO(P=0.031、P=0.016 和 P=0.038)和 HBU(P=0.017)的严重评分较低,且 AVE 的中位数较高(2.3,0.0-7.8 m s. 0.0,0.0-4.3 m s),NH 浓度较低(9.0,0.0-64.0 ppm. 12.0,0.0-60.0 ppm),TTE 评分较高(98,96-100. 67,25-100)。CS 鸡舍的高密度(13.8±0.2 只/m. 12.0±0.2 只/m)、RHU(74.5,50.7-99.9% 72.3,47.4-99.9%)和 TEM(23.9,14.6-29.2°C. 21.7,12.9-30.1°C)较高、ILL(16.0,1.0-60.0 lx. 161.0,8.0-2380.0 lx)较低、饮水量较少(P=0.007)、不活动行为较多(P<0.001)、积极情绪较低(根据 QBA,P=0.028),表明这些鸡舍的福利问题更严重。

  5. 在研究区域和季节,CS 鸡舍似乎在健康指标方面提供了较少的福利问题;然而,OS 鸡舍的行为限制较少,积极情绪状态较高。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验