Wurtz Kaitlin, Rasmussen Sigga, Riber Anja
Livestock Behavior Research Unit, USDA-ARS, 270 S. Russel St., West Lafayette, IN 47907.
Department of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, Aarhus University, Blichers Allé 20, P.O. Box 50, DK-8830 Tjele, Denmark.
Poult Sci. 2025 Jan;104(1):104577. doi: 10.1016/j.psj.2024.104577. Epub 2024 Nov 23.
The latency-to-lie (LTL) test is an objective method for assessing walking ability of broiler chickens which has traditionally consisted of placing a bird into a tub of shallow water and measuring how long it takes the standing bird to sit, with duration being negatively associated with gait score. Unfortunately, this method is impractical for use on commercial farms. Thus, the aim of this study was to assess the performance of LTL tests without the addition of water, making them more practical for use on farm. In total, 159 Ross 308 and 186 Rustic Gold broilers were assessed. Following receiving a gait score (Bristol scale), birds were placed individually into a litter lined clear plastic storage box and the LTL was conducted with a maximum test duration of 300 s. Following a 120 s period of rest, the bird was then placed on the litter near a group of flockmates, and the LTL test was repeated. This allowed for the assessment of whether containment of the bird was necessary. Latencies to lie were negatively correlated with gait score (With box: ρ=-0.44 , P < 0.001; Without box: ρ=-0.46 , P < 0.001). The latencies to lie (mean ± SD) when using a box were 129.0 ± 82.0, 114.0 ± 78.8, 71.9 ± 54.9, 45.8 ± 35.8, and 7.9 ± 14.0 s and without a box were 104.0 ± 97.2, 52.2 ± 53.8, 27.9 ± 29.9, 22.8 ± 27.0, and 14.0 ± 19.4 s for gait scores 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. There was no effect of hybrid on the performance of either of the tests. Results suggest that the LTL tests without water could serve as an objective and valid measure of walking ability on farm, with the LTL test with a box showing better ability at distinguishing between specific gait scores compared to the LTL test without a box, though possible impacts of fatigue due to study design should be considered.
躺卧潜伏期(LTL)测试是一种评估肉鸡行走能力的客观方法,传统上是将一只鸡放入一桶浅水中,测量站立的鸡坐下所需的时间,持续时间与步态评分呈负相关。不幸的是,这种方法在商业农场中不实用。因此,本研究的目的是评估不加水的LTL测试的性能,使其在农场使用时更具实用性。总共评估了159只罗斯308肉鸡和186只质朴金肉鸡。在获得步态评分(布里斯托尔量表)后,将鸡单独放入铺有垫料的透明塑料储物箱中进行LTL测试,最大测试持续时间为300秒。经过120秒的休息期后,将鸡放在一群同伴附近的垫料上,然后重复LTL测试。这使得可以评估是否有必要将鸡圈起来。躺卧潜伏期与步态评分呈负相关(使用箱子:ρ=-0.44,P<0.001;不使用箱子:ρ=-0.46,P<0.001)。对于步态评分0、1、2、3和4,使用箱子时躺卧潜伏期(平均值±标准差)分别为129.0±82.0、114.0±78.8、71.9±54.9、45.8±35.8和7.9±14.0秒,不使用箱子时分别为104.0±97.2、52.2±53.8、27.9±29.9、22.8±27.0和14.0±19.4秒。杂交对两种测试的性能均无影响。结果表明,不加水的LTL测试可以作为农场中行走能力的一种客观有效的测量方法,与不使用箱子的LTL测试相比,使用箱子的LTL测试在区分特定步态评分方面表现出更好的能力,不过应考虑研究设计导致的疲劳可能产生的影响。