Reference_ID;Title;Authors;Year;Paper_type;Source;Page_numbers;DOI;Abstract
R1;Effect of rubber mats and perforation in the lying area on claw and limb lesions of fattening pigs;"Falke, A.; Friedli, K.; Gygax, L.; Wechsler, B.; Sidler, X.; Weber, R.";2018;Article;Animal ;2130-2137;10.1017/S175173111700341X;Claw and leg lesions are frequently observed in finishing pigs andare likely to compromise theirwelfare. Providing softer than the usualconcrete flooring may reduce boththe frequency andseverity ofthese lesions. Therefore, this study evaluatedthe influence ofrubber mats andfloorperforation in the lying area on claw andleg healthoffinishingpigs. Atotalof240Swiss Large White finishing pigs from on average 24.9kg until 102.3kgwere usedin four batches, with sixgroups of10animalsper batch. The six experimentalpens initially measured1.85×3.55mandwere enlargedafter 6weeks to 1.85×5.25m. In allpens, one thirdofthe floor space was built as a defecating area consisting ofa concrete floor with15%perforation. The remaining two thirds ofthepen were designedas a lying area whose floorquality differedbetween the pens. It either consistedofconcrete elements or was coveredwithrubber mats, andperforation ofbothfloor types was either 0%, 5%or 10%. Allindividuals were scored for claw and leg lesions at the beginning, in the middle andat the endofthe 12-weekfatteningperiod. Lesionswere summarised in scores basedon the results ofaprincipalcomponentanalysis. The influence on lesion scores offloor material, amount ofperforation in the lying area, assessment time, andsexwas examinedusing mixed-models. The total claw lesion score andthe totallimb lesion score aswellas the claw angle increased from the beginning to the endofthe fatteningperiod. The values for bothscores were slightly lower for animals kept on rubber mats comparedwithanimals kepton concrete floor. Therewas no effect ofthe percentage ofperforation on the examinedoutcome variables. In conclusion, our results indicate that rubber mats in the lying area bring about improvements in some aspects ofclaw andleg health in fattening pigs, whereas there is no effect offloor perforation.
R4;Animal welfare aspects of outdoor runs for laying hens: a review;Knierim, U.;2006;Review;NJAS: Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences;133–145;10.1016/S1573-5214(06)80017-5;This review discusses animal welfare effects ofproviding an outdoor run to laying hens. Compared with barn systems, the provision of an outdoor run leads to higher space allowances, a higher number and diversity ofbehavioural and physiological stimuli, and freedom to change between different environments with for instance different climatic conditions. Evidence is presented that these factors may have posi- tive welfare effects for the hens, although, due to the complex interaction with other factors, this is not necessarily always the case. Outdoor runs may, at the same time, impose increased welfare risks associated with an increased contact with infectious agents, greater difficulties to maintain good hygienic standards, possibly imbalanced diets and predation threats. Measures to limit these welfare risks and to take full advantage ofthe potentials of outdoor runs include restriction ofgroup size, keeping cockerels with the hens, hygienic measures including rotation ofruns, providing well-dispersed covers, as well as appropriate pullet rearing and breeding strategies. Fully mobile housing systems provide a promising integrated approach to concurrently implement a number of effective measures. However, it is concluded that too little research and not enough resources went into solving the problems presently besetting free-range systems and that it, therefore, would be premature to make a final judgement now on welfare effects ofoutdoor systems in comparison with pure indoor systems.
R5;Effect of group size on feeding behaviour, social behaviour, and performance of growing pigs using single-space feeders;"Nielsen, B.L.; Lawrence, A.B.; Whittemore, C.T.";1995;Article;Livestock Production Science;73-85;10.1016/0301-6226(95)00060-X;"Use of computerized feed intake recording (CFJR) equipment allows automatic recording of individual feed intake of animals kept in groups. However, current CFIR systems have only one feeding space per social group which may lead to increased competition for access to the feeder. The present experiment examined the effect of increased competition around a single-space feeder on individual performance and behaviour by manipulating the number of pigs per feeder. 150 male crossbred pigs were penned at 34 & 0.3 kg (mean + SE) in groups of 5, 10, 15, or 20 for 29 days with one single-space computerized feeder per pen and 1.06 m2/pig. Pigs kept in groups of 20 made fewer but longer visits to the feeder and ate more and faster than pigs kept in the smaller groups (7.1 vs. 14.3 visits/day, P<O.Ol; 6.91 vs. 4.64 min/visit, IWO.05; 214 vs. 119 g/visit, P<O.O5; 31.6 vs. 25.9 g/min, P < 0.05; means of group size 20 vs. means of group size 5, 10, and 15, respectively). No differences were found between group sizes in daily feed intake, daily live-weight gain and feed conversion ratio (overall means: 1490 g/day, 725 g/ day and 2.09 g/g, respectively). Mean number of aggressive interactions initiated and won were significantly lower for the two largest group sizes on the day of grouping. A rank index based on pairwise aggressive interactions was not correlated to any of the production or feeding behaviour variables. No significant effect of group size was found on mean number of attempts to displace other pigs from the feeder. The change in feeding pattern in the largest groups appears to represent an adaptation to the constraint placed on their feeding behaviour and they succeed in adjusting to the lack of feeding space as there were no significant differences between groups in production variables. A correlation between performance and social behaviour may have been disguised by environmental factors such as space allowance and straw provision or, alternatively, aggression and growth may be independent characteristics."
R6;The effect of varying lengths of straw bedding on the behaviour of growing pigs;"Day, J.E.L.; van de Weerd, H.A.; Edwards, S.A.";2008;Article;Applied Animal Behaviour Science;249-260;10.1016/j.applanim.2007.02.006;"Straw provided as a substrate allows pigs to use it as a recreational substrate, as a nutritional substrate and as a bedding material and, because of this, has been reported to improve the welfare of pigs. The aim of this study was to investigate whether different lengths of chopped straw bedding would achieve similar enhancements in pig welfare as those achieved by unchopped, full-length straw. This would offer the possibility that small quantities of chopped straw could be provided in partly and fully slatted systems to serve as environmental enrichment, without blocking the liquid slurry handling facilities. Twenty-four groups of growing pigs were exposed to one of four treatments (no straw bedding, full-length straw, half chopped straw, and fully chopped straw). Both pen-mate- and strawdirected behaviours were recorded using ad libitum sampling. Overall levels of measured behavioural activity differed between the treatments; therefore the data were expressed both in absolute terms and relative to the activity levels (proportional frequencies). It was found that the length of straw affected both the quantity and quality of straw-directed behaviours. The provision of straw of any length reduced the occurrence of behaviours such as nosing other pigs, aggression and tail-biting compared with when straw was absent. Chopped straw increased the prevalence of behaviours such as licking and decreased the prevalence of behaviours such as picking, suggesting that pigs were not able to manipulate the chopped straw in the same way as full-length or half chopped straw. In addition, levels of tail-biting were higher in groups that were provided with chopped straw than in groups with full-length or half chopped straw. It is concluded that the use of chopped straw in growing/finishing housing systems, whilst better than no enrichment, is inadvisable because of the possibility that levels of adverse penmate directed behaviours will increase."
R7;The behaviour of housed dairy cattle with and without pasture access: A review;"Charlton, G.L.; Rutter S.M.";2017;Review;Applied Animal Behaviour Science;2–9;10.1016/j.applanim.2017.05.015;With more dairy cows being housed indoors, for at least part of the year, it is important to understand how housing impacts on ‘normal behaviour’ and the implications for cow welfare. For cows on pasture, nutritional requirements and climatic conditions are the major concerns, whilst indoor housing systems can restrict natural behaviours and reduce health as incidences of lameness and mastitis increase. When given a choice to be at pasture or in cubicle housing, studies have shown that time of day, season, and where feed is provided can influence preference. Previous experience also had a big effect on pasture preference: the longer calves/heifers/cows were reared without experience of pasture the stronger their preference for housing. The ontogeny of grazing also requires pasture experience i.e. the instinctive foraging behaviour of calves is to suckle and they have to learn through experience how to graze. These results raise the question: if cattle are to be housed for part of the year, would it be better to house them continuously? Other results would suggest not, as there are clear production, health and welfare benefits to pasture access. Cows at pasture had lower levels of lameness and mastitis, and cows with free access to pasture and indoor housing also produced more milk than those continuously housed. Approximately half of this extra milk was attributed to grass intake, and increased lying, improved comfort and/or lower stress probably accounted for the rest. Although incorporating free access between housing and pasture is difficult on many farms, it is postulated that developments in precision livestock farming offer the potential to provide a technological solution to this problem. These research findings could be used as the basis to design novel, adaptive housing that responds to cow behaviour. The aim would be to incorporate the best aspects of pasture with the best aspects of housing to provide an environment that meets the needs of the cows all year around.
R9;Alternative farrowing systems: design criteria for farrowing systems based on the biological needs of sows and piglets;"Baxter, E.M.; Lawrence, A.B.; Edwards, S.A.";2011;Article;Animal;580-600;10.1017/S1751731110002272;"The construction ofa suitable farrowing environment is a continuing dilemma: the piglet’s needs mustbe matchedwiththose ofthe sowandthe farmer during the mainphases that constitute farrowing: nest building, parturition andlactation. Difficulties exist in resolving the various conflicts ofinterest between andwithin these three parties (e.g. sow v. farmer: space neededfor
nest building v. space neededto maximise the amount offarrowing accommodation, or sow v. sow: ensuring the survivalofthe
current litter v. maintaining condition for future litters). Thus, the challenge is to resolve these conflicts anddesign a system that maximises sowandpiglet welfare while maintaining an economically efficientandsustainable enterprise. In order to successfully design a farrowing andlactation environment, it is necessary to consider the biological needs ofboththe sowandher litter. The naturalbehaviour ofthe sow has been welldocumentedandvery little variation exists between reports ofperi-parturient behaviour observed in extensively keptdomestic sows andtheir wildcounterparts. The failure for domestication to significantly alter these behaviouralpatternsprovides evidence that they are biologically significantandthat the commercial farrowing environment shouldattempt to accommodate this behaviouralrepertoire. In addition, the behaviouralneeds ofthe piglets, as wellas thephysiological needs ofbothsows andtheir offspring shouldbe considered. This article aims to review the considerable body ofliterature detailing the behavioural repertoire ofsows andtheir offspring during the differentphases of farrowing, andthe accompanying physiologicalprocesses. The focus is on identifying biological needs ofthe animals involved in order to synthesise the appropriate design criteria for farrowing andlactation systems, whichshouldoptimise bothwelfare andanimalproduction."
R10;Animal health and welfare aspects of different housing and husbandry systems for adult breeding boars, pregnant, farrowing sows and unweaned piglets;EFSA;2007;Report;EFSA Journal ;8-114;10.2903/j.efsa.2007.572;NA
R14;Preference testing of substrates by growing pigs;"Beattielt, V.E.; Walkeri, N.; Sneddon, I.A.";1997;Article;Animal Welfare ;27-34;10.1017/S0962728600020236 Add to Citavi project by DOI;"The preferences of growing pigs for substrates were investigated by giving small groups ofpigs
a choice between two substrates in each test. The seven substrates examined were concrete,
mushroom compost (spent), peat, sand, sawdust, straw and woodbark. Thirteen comparisons of pairs of substrates were tested with four replicates of each comparison. Eleven-week-old pigs (in groups of six) were placed in specially designed choice pens where they had access to two different substrates. The pigs were allowed to habituate to the pen for 1week and at the end of
week 2 the substrates were swapped. In weeks 2 and 3 the time spent by the pigs in each substrate
was recorded. Peat, mushroom compost and sawdust were preferred most, with sand next and
woodbark and straw being preferred only to concrete. It is suggested that growing pigs may be attracted to substrates which are similar in texture to earth."
R16;The effect of bedding on the behaviour and welfare of pigs ;Arey, D.S.;1993;Article;Animal Welfare;235-246;10.1017/S096272860001589X ;Straw bedding provides a number offunctions which affect the behaviour and welfare of pigs including comfort, recreation and diet. It has been suggested that the importance of these different functions will vary depending on the life /production stage of the pig. The avaiklble literature indicates that all of the above functions are relevant to all the different stages except newry born piglets. The occupational value of straw appears to be highry important The actual mechanisms by which straw affects the pig's motivation systems are still poorry understood. It is therefore uncertain whether suitable alternatives to bedding exist or even if straw bedding in itself is completely satisfactory. Until satisfactory alternatives are available straw bedding should continue to be recommended in terms ofpig behaviour and welfare.
R17;Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Animal Health and Welfare on a request from the Commission related to animal health and welfare in fattening pigs in relation to housing and husbandry;EFSA;2007;Report;EFSA Journal ;1-126;10.2903/j.efsa.2007.564;
R19;Effects of Environmental Enrichment on Pig Welfare-A Review;"Godyń, D.; Nowicki, J.; Herbut, P.";2019;Review;Animals ;1-17;10.3390/ani9060383;"Good husbandry conditions on farms is of key importance for assuring animal welfare. One of the most important legal documents regulating the rules of maintaining pigs is the Directive 2008/120/EC, which states that group-housed pigs should have access to litter or other materials that provide exploration and occupation. Released in 2016, the Commission Recommendation (EU) 2016/336 on the application of the Council Directive 2008/120/EC characterizes the various categories of materials that may be used to improve animal welfare. According to the document, straw is considered as an optimal material for pig housing, however, materials categorized as suboptimal (e.g., wood bark) and materials of marginal interest (e.g., plastic toys) are often used in practice and scientific research. As such, the aim of this paper is to review and systematize the current state of knowledge on the topic of the impact of environmental enrichment on pig welfare. This article raises mainly issues, such as the effectiveness of the use of various enrichment on the reduction of undesirable behavior—tail biting; aggression; and stereotypies at the pre-weaning, post-weaning, and fattening stage of pig production."
R21;Review: Quantifying animal feeding behaviour with a focus on pigs;"Maselyne, J.; Saeys, W.; van Nuffel, A.";2015;Review;Physiology & Behavior;37-51;10.1016/j.physbeh.2014.09.012;The study ofanimal feeding behaviour is ofinterest to understand feeding, to investigate the effect of treatments and conditions or to predict illness. This paper reviews the different steps to undertake when studying animal feeding behaviour, with illustrations for group-housed pigs. First, onemust be aware ofthemechanismsthat control feeding and the various influences that can change feeding behaviour. Satiety is shown to largely influence free feeding (ad libitum and without an operant condition) in animals, but ‘free’ feeding seems a very fragile process, given the many factors that can influence feeding behaviour. Second, a measurement method must be chosen that is compatible with the goal of the research. Several measurement methods exist, which lead to different experimental set-ups and measurement data. Sensors are available for lab conditions, for research on group-housed pigs and also for on-farm use. Most of these methods result in a record of feeding visits. However, these feeding visits are often found to be clustered into meals. Thus, the third step is to choosewhich unit offeeding behaviour to use for analysis. Depending on the situation, either meals, feeding visits, other raw data, or a combination thereof can be suitable. Meals are more appropriate for analysing short-term feeding behaviour, but this may not be true for disease detection. Further research is therefore needed. To cluster visits into meals, an appropriate analysis method has to be selected. The last part of this paper provides a review and discussion of the existing methods for meal determination. A variety of methods exist, with the most recent methods based on the influence ofsatiety on feeding. More thorough validation ofthe recent methods, including validation from a behavioural point of view and uniformity in the applied methods is therefore necessary.
R23;Scientific Opinion on welfare aspects of the use of perches for laying hens;EFSA;2015;Report;EFSA Journal ;1-70;10.2903/j.efsa.2015.4131;This opinion investigated the use of perches for laying hens in cage and non-cage systems. It is based on various activities reviewing the effects of perch height and design on hen health and welfare. Systematic and extensive literature reviews were conducted to assess the scientific evidence about hen motivation to grasp and seek elevation, and the appropriate height of perches as well as other features (position, material, colour, temperature, shape, width and length). In addition, an expert knowledge elicitation (EKE) exercise was run with technical hearing experts to discuss and prioritise the various design aspects of perches. Overall, the body of literature on perches is limited. Relevant features of perches are often confounded with others. In the literature, the most commonly used animal-based measures to assess perch adequacy are keel bone damages, foot pad lesions and perch use by hens. Overall, hens seek elevation during the day as well as during the night, when they select a site for roosting. Elevated perches allow hens to monitor the environment, to escape from other hens, avoid disturbances and improve thermoregulation. For night-time roosting hens show a preference for perches higher than 60cm compared with lower perches. However, elevated perches can have negative consequences with increased prevalence of keel deformities and fractures. The risk of injury increases when hens have to jump a distance of more than 80cm vertically, horizontally or diagonally to reach or leave a perch, or jump an angle between 45 and 90° (measured at the horizontal plane). Material, shape, length and width of the perch also influence perch preference by hens. The EKE exercise suggests that an adequate perch is elevated, accessible and functional (providing sufficient overview). The opinion concludes that for the design of an adequate perch, different features of perches need to be further investigated and integrated.
R24;Scientific report on the effects of farming systems on dairy cow welfare and disease;EFSA;2009;Report;EFSA Journal ;1-284;10.2903/j.efsa.2009.1143r;This report categorises European dairy farming according to internationally used classifications of farming systems. Human and exogenous institutional factors are also important as they are superimposed on the farming system and affect the impact of the technical conditions of the system on the welfare, especially the health of the cows. The animals considered in this report are dairy cows, while lactating or not lactating, and calves and heifers that will become dairy cows. The welfare of dairy bulls is an important subject that is not covered in this report and it could be a subject of another report. The welfare of calves is covered in EFSA‘s scientific opinion on intensively kept calves (EFSA, 2005) whereas many reports from EFSA and previous EU scientific committees concern cattle diseases.
R25;A multiple free choice model for pigs;"Mwanjali, S.; Smidt, D.; Ellendorff, F.";1982;Article;Applied Animal Ethology;263-271;10.1016/0304-3762(83)90006-8;Multiple free choice systems may provide one way of evaluating the relative preference of animals for different housing systems. This paper proposes a possible model that attempts to take into consideration previous criticism on multiple free choice systems. A hexagonal housing system was constructed with 6 identical cubicles, which allowed elimination of all variables except the one to be investigated. Barriers could be introduced at the entrance to each cubicle to prevent easy access to the cubicle of preference. To test the usefulness of this system, several different types of flooring were used. In each cubicle, we introduced either sawdust, straw, concrete, concrete slats, perforated material, rubber or plywood. The results clearly indicate that preferences for a particular type of flooring may be investigated by this model.
R27;Effect of stocking density and use of environmental enrichment materials on the welfare and the performance of pigs in the growth and finishing phases;"Caldas, E.D.; Michelon, A.; Foppa, L.; Simonelli, S.M.; Pierozan, C.R.; Dario, J.G.N.; Duarte, J.V.S.; Silva, C.C.R.; Silva, C.A.";2020;Article;Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research;45200;10.5424/sjar/2020184-15946;"Aim of study: To evaluate the effects of stocking density and the use of environmental enrichment (EE) objects on the welfare and the performance of pigs in the growing and finishing phases.
Area of study: The southern region of Brazil.
Material and methods: A total of 240 pigs, 120 immunocastrated males and 120 females, with an initial weight of 22.38 ± 2.38 kg and mean age of 65 days, were submitted to two stocking densities conditions (0.85 and 1.28 m²pig) with and without EE for 117 days. The experimental design was a 2×2×2 factorial (two categories, two densities, and two EE conditions), with six replicates. Performance variables and behavior were evaluated.
Main Results: For stocking density, there was a significant difference in the finishing phase from 148 to 161 days of age for the final weight (FW), average daily weight gain (ADWG), and feed conversion rate (FCR). For the EE factor, there was no difference in any of the phases or in the overall period. In the overall period, the higher availability of space improved the results of FW (140.56 kg vs 136.63 kg), ADWG (1.005 kg vs 0.974 kg), and FCR (2.05 vs 2.10). There was no effect of EE, stocking densities, or their interaction on the frequency of different behaviors of the pigs in the growth and finishing phases.
Research highlights: There was no effect of interactions between enriched environments, stocking densities, and sex for animal performance and behavioral frequencies; however, differences between the factors were observed separately. The higher availability of space improved the results of FW, ADWG, and FCR."
R29;Stocking density: Can we judge how much space poultry need?;Dawkins, M.S.;2017;Book chapter;Advances in poultry welfare;227-242;10.1016/B978-0-08-100915-4.00011-7;The difficulties of defining the space needs of poultry are only partly due to methodological discrepancies between studies and therefore only partly rectifiable by more research along previous lines. “Space” for poultry is far more complex than can be summed up in one single number and too much reliance on stocking density without considering what space contains is unlikely to improve welfare. Space needs are considered in relation to effects of varying amounts of space on bird physical health, their social responses, and their responses to enrichments. Space needs have been measured in various ways including the animals’ own preferences, spatial distribution, area covered, and behavior linked with positive and negative affect. A possible way forward is to be more specific about the space needs that poultry have for performing specific behavior patterns that either have an effect on their health or can be demonstrated to be important to the birds themselves
R30;Influence of Different Light Spectrums on Behaviour and Welfare in Laying Hens;"Wichman, A.; Groot, R. de; Håstad, O.; Wall, H.; Rubene, D.";2021;Article;Animals ;1-15;10.3390/ani11040924;Artificial commercial lighting used in animal production facilities can have negative influences on visual abilities, behaviour and welfare of domestic fowl. This study examined the effects of natural-derived light spectrums on behaviour, production and welfare of laying hens reared from hatching into adulthood. Comparisons were made of frequency of a range of behaviours associated with activity, aggression and comfort in birds kept in control light (commercial standard), daylight (full spectrum, including ultraviolet (UV) wavelengths and forest light (forest understorey, including UV). In addition, bird preferences for different lights, feather damage and egg production were monitored. The results showed that the behavioural repertoire of birds changed with age, while the effects of light treatment were subtle. Some evidence was found that birds preferred either daylight or forest light to control light, suggesting that inclusion of UV contributed to the preference. Daylight and forest light were associated with more active behaviours, and daylight with better plumage and later start of lay. Thus natural-like light may have beneficial effects on domestic fowl, but the differences between broad-spectrum light sources are rather small.
R31;Air Quality in Alternative Housing Systems may have an Impact on Laying Hen Welfare. Part II-Ammonia;"David, B.; Mejdell, C.; Michel, V.; Lund, V.; Oppermann Moe, R.; ";2015;Article;Animals ;886-896;10.3390/ani5030389;The EU ban on conventional barren cages for laying hens from 2012 has improved many aspects of laying hen welfare. The new housing systems allow for the expression of highly-motivated behaviors. However, the systems available for intensive large-scale egg production (e.g., aviaries, floor housing systems, furnished cages) may cause other welfare challenges. We have reviewed the literature regarding the health, behavior, production characteristics, and welfare of laying hens when exposed to ammonia in their housing environment. Concentrations of ammonia gas are commonly high in aviaries and floor housing systems in which manure is not regularly removed, whereas they are usually lower in furnished cages. High levels are found during the cold season when ventilation flow is often reduced. Ammonia is a pungent gas, and behavioral studies indicate chickens are averse to the gas. High concentrations of gaseous ammonia can have adverse health effects and, when very high, even influence production performance. The most profound effects seen are the occurrence of lesions in the respiratory tract and keratoconjunctivitis. There is also evidence that high ammonia concentrations predispose poultry to respiratory disease and secondary infections. We conclude that there are animal welfare challenges related to high ammonia levels, and that immediate actions are needed. Development of improved systems and management routines for manure removal and ventilation will be important for the reduction of ammonia levels and hence will contribute to safeguarding hen welfare.
R34;Effects of animal/feeding-place ratio on the behaviour and performance of fattening pigs fed via sensor-controlled liquid feeding;"Rasmussen, D.K.; Weber, R.; Wechsler, B.";2006;Article;Applied Animal Behaviour Science;;10.1016/j.applanim.2005.08.008;Sensor feeding is a liquid feeding system for fattening pigs that is run with a restricted animal/ feeding-place ratio (AFR). Feeding occurs at specific periods, so that the trough is left empty inbetween. Therefore, it must be regarded as an ad libitum feeding system. The aim of the present study was to quantify the effect of three different AFRs (4:1, 7:1 and 13:1) with nine, six and three feeding places per group, respectively, on the behaviour and performance of fattening pigs (25–100 kg) housed in groups of 40 individuals. Each AFR was tested with seven groups (21 groups in total). With each group, four pigs were selected from each weight class (lightweight, middleweight and heavyweight) as focal animals. The behaviour in the feeding area was observed by means of 24 h-video-recording for the 12 focal pigs at an age of 14 and 17 weeks. Daily weight gain was calculated for all animals. As the AFR increased, feeding bout duration at the trough declined significantly ( p < 0.001), whilst the duration of waiting increased ( p < 0.001). The AFR had no significant effect on the frequency of aggressive displacements at the feeding trough. On the other hand, the fatteners were more frequently pushed away from the trough without aggressive interactions as the AFR increased ( p < 0.001). Besides the AFR, the age and weight class of the focal pigs had a significant effect on behaviour. Lightweight animals waited longer for access to the trough and were more often displaced from the trough as a consequence of aggressive interactions. Weight gain was lower as AFR increased ( p < 0.001), an effect that was more pronounced in lightweight focal animals ( p < 0.001). In conclusion, the AFR has a decisive influence on the behaviour and performance of fattening pigs fed by sensor feeding. Lightweight pigs, most likely the subordinate group members, are more affected by an increased AFR, and hence most at risk of impaired welfare. An AFR of 13:1 has marked negative effects on the pigs’ performance and behaviour and is inadvisable to be used for this feeding system.
R35;Review: Feeding behaviour of dairy cattle: Meaures and applications;"von Keyserlingk, M A.G.; Weary, D M.";2010;Review;Canadian Journal of Animal Science;303–309;10.4141/CJAS09127;There is growing scientific interest in feeding behaviour of dairy cattle, in part because dairy nutritionists are now becoming interested in how changes in feed intake are mediated by changes in behaviour and, in part, because changes in feeding behaviour are increasingly recognized as useful indicator of cow health. In this review we describe key methodological approaches to the study of feeding behaviour in dairy cattle. We also review empirical work addressing how changes in management and housing can affect this behaviour. We show how cows divide their daily intake into several discrete feeding events made up of a number of visits or ‘‘meals’’ that are separated by longer periods with little feeding activity. Feeding behaviour can be described using several measures, including the number and duration of meals, as well as intake and feeding rate. Feeding behaviour within a group of intensively managed cows is often highly synchronized, similar to that seen in extensively housed cattle, with delivery of fresh feed appearing to be the primary factor stimulating feeding by housed dairy cows. Competition at the feed bunk can affect feeding behaviour, increasing the feeding rate and reducing intake, especially for subordinate animals. We also review empirical work showing that feed intake, feeding times, and feeding rate are altered when cows are ill. Feeding behaviour changes in the days before calving, and these changes are greatest among cows at greatest risk of succumbing to disease in the early post partum period. These results suggest that monitoring changes in feeding behaviour may be useful in early detection and prevention of disease in transition cows
R36;Effect of feeding space on the inter-cow distance, aggression, and feeding behavior of free-stall housed lactating dairy cows;"DeVries, T. J.; von Keyserlingk, M. A. G. ; Weary, D. M.";2004;Article;Journal of dairy science;1432–1438;10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(04)73293-2;The objectives of this study were to determine whether doubling the amount of feeding space from 0.5 to 1.0 m per cow leads to increased spacing between cows at the feeder, fewer aggressive social interactions among cows, and ultimately increased feeding activity. Twenty-four lactating Holstein cows were provided with 0.5 and 1.0 m of feeding space per cow in a 2 × 2 crossover design replicated over time. Time-lapse video was used to quantify the inter-cow distance and incidence of aggressive displacements at the feed alley. An electronic feed alley monitoring system was used to monitor the feeding behavior ofthe cows. Whenanimals had access to 1.0 m per cow, there was at least 60% more space between animals and 57% fewer aggressive interactions while feeding than with access to 0.5 m of feeding space. These changes in spacing and aggressive behavior in turn allowed cows to increase feeding activity throughout the day, especially during the 90 min after providing fresh feed (an increase of 24%). This increase in feeding activity was particularly evident for subordinate cows. These results indicate that increasing space allowance at the feeder increases feeding activity and reduces competition among lactating dairy cows
R38;Health and welfare in organic livestock production systems—a systematic mapping of current knowledge;"Åkerfeldt, M.P.; Gunnarsson, S.; Bernes, G.; Blanco-Penedo, I.";2021;Review;Organic Agriculture;105-132;10.1007/s13165-020-00334-y;"This review aimed to systematically map and summarize the status of animal health and welfare in organic production. The prevalence of diseases and behavioural effects in organic dairy cow, beef cattle, sheep, pig, laying hen and broiler chicken were discussed in the context of the organic values and current knowledge on animal health and welfare. In total 166 peer-reviewed scientific publications between 2008 and 2020 were included. No strong evidence for neither inferior nor distinctly higher animal welfare in organic compared with conventional production could be supported. The welfare status of organic livestock is in general good in relation to the OIE definition of animal health and welfare. However, organic systems are still facing several challenges related to animal health and the arising of goal conflicts due to management and practical implications. Greater possibilities to perform species-specific behaviours in organic production systems, however, indicate that the organic standards offer a good framework for high animal welfare management. For organic dairy farmers, the main health problems are similar to those of non-organic farms; especially mastitis and lameness need improvement. Parasites, together with mastitis and lamb mortality, are important welfare issues in organic sheep production. Piglet mortality, leg problems, parasite load and increasing respiratory problems are of major relevance in organic pig production. For organic laying hens, major health challenges relate to feather pecking and cannibalism, parasites and possibilities to express species-specific behaviours. For organic broilers, dermatitis of footpads, hocks and breast are reported as main health issues."
R39;Effects of stocking density, flock size and management on the welfare of laying hens in single-tier aviaries;"Nicol, C. J.; Brown, S. N.; Glen, E.; Pope, S. J.; Short, F. J.; Warriss, P. D.; Zimmerman, P. H.; Wilkins, L. J.";2006;Article;British Poultry Science;135-146;10.1080/00071660600610609 ;Management practices, stocking rate and flock size may affect laying hen welfare but there have been few replicated studies in commercial non-cage systems that investigate this. This study used a broad range of physical and physiological indicators to assess the welfare of hens in 36 commercial flocks. Six laying period treatments were examined with each treatment replicated 6 times. It was not possible to randomly allocate treatments to houses, so treatment and house were largely confounded. Three stocking rates were compared: 7 birds/m(2) (n = 2450), 9 birds/m(2) (n = 3150) and 12 birds/m(2) in either small (n = 2450) or large (n = 4200) flocks. In addition, at 12 birds/m(2), in both small and large flocks, birds were subjected to either standard (SM) or modified (MM) management. MM flocks had nipple drinkers and no nest-box lights. Bone strength, fracture incidence, heterophil:lymphocyte (H:L) ratio, live weight, organ weights, serum creatine, serum osmolality, muscle pH and faecal corticosterone were measured on samples of birds at the end of the rearing period and at the end of lay. During the laying period, mortality, production and integument condition were recorded at regular intervals. Birds housed at 9 birds/m(2) had higher mortality than birds housed at 12 birds/m(2) by the end of lay, but not higher than birds housed at 7 birds/m(2). Birds housed at 7 and 9 birds/m(2) had lower percent liver weight, and worse plumage condition than most of the 12 bird/m(2) treatments. Modified management tended to improve plumage condition. There were no clear effects of flock size on the welfare indicators recorded. At the end of the rearing period fracture incidence was almost negligible and H:L ratio was within a normal range. By the end of lay fracture incidence was 60% and H:L ratio was high, with no treatment effect for either measure. This, together with information on faecal corticosterone, feather loss and mortality, suggests that the welfare of birds in all treatments was relatively poor by the end of lay.
R40;Nest preference of laying hens (Gallus gallus domesticus) and their motivation to exert themselves to gain nest access;"Kruschwitz, A.; Zupan, M.; Buchwalder, T.; Huber-Eicher, B.";2008;Article;Applied Animal Behaviour Science ;321–330;10.1016/j.applanim.2007.08.005;In connection with the development of a test method for the attractiveness and appropriateness of nests for laying hens, we carried out an investigation by using a preference test and motivation measuring with the help of push doors. Hens were offered two different nest sites either consisting of a tray filled with wood shavings (litter tray) or a wooden nest box plus wood shavings (nest box). Hens were individually housed in pens (2.0 m  2.0 m) and had free access to the nest sites until they laid their 15th egg. From that day the hens had to overcome a push door to reach the nest sites. Resistance for entrance was also increased stepwise at the door leading to the hens’ nest. The experiment ended when a hen stopped to lay in her usual nest site for four consecutive days (postexperimental period). The behaviour during the last hour before oviposition was video taped at a level of resistance of 3.5, 6.0, 7.5 and 10.0 N. The hens were categorized into nest and litter layers depending on nest choice. All but one hen pushed maximum resistances between 11.5 and 18.0 N with no differences between nest and litter layers. Behaviour did not significantly change with increasing levels of resistance, but there were significant differences between nest and litter layers. Nest layers spent more time nesting than litter layers while the latter showed a strong tendency to more exploring behaviour. For litter layers, more entries through the push door leading to their nest site and more unsuccessful pushes were detected than for nest layers. According to our results, two types of layers could be distinguished whereas the two were equally motivated to access their nest site.
R41;A meta-analysis on the effect of environmental enrichment on feather pecking and feather damage in laying hens;"van Staaveren, N.; Ellis, J.; Baes, C. F.; Harlander-Matauschek, A.";2001;Review;Poultry science;397-411;10.1016/j.psj.2020.11.006;Feather pecking (FP) is a significant issue in laying hens, which impacts societal acceptance of poultry farming, farm productivity, and bird welfare. Environmental enrichment-modifications of the environment to stimulate biological functioning and psychological well-being of animals-is one management strategy farmers can use to mitigate FP. However, inconsistent results of environmental enrichment are reported across studies questioning its value. A meta-analysis was used to determine the effect of environmental enrichment on FP and feather damage (FD) in laying hens. A systematic review of published literature from 4 databases resulted in 23 publications that met inclusion criteria. Feather pecking and FD outcomes were standardized between studies using different scoring systems. Driving variables included the presence of enrichment, production period when the enrichment started, housing type, beak trimming, bird strain, and age of the birds when FP and FD was measured. Considering the experiment as a random effect, linear mixed model analysis was used in a 2-step approach, whereby variables with a P < 0.30 in univariate analysis were included within the subsequent multivariate analysis. Variables with P < 0.05 in the multivariate analysis were retained in the final models. Model selection and evaluation were based on corrected Akaike information criteria, the root mean square prediction errors, and concordance correlation coefficients. A higher frequency of FP was observed in flocks lacking enrichment (P < 0.001), with increased age (P = 0.001), and in cage housing systems (P = 0.002). Similarly, FD increased in flocks lacking enrichment (P = 0.018), with 
R42;The effects of four types of enrichment on feather-pecking behaviour in laying hens housed in barren environments;"Dixon, L. M.; Duncan, I. J.H.; Mason, G. J.";2010;Article;Animal Welfare ;429-435;10.1017/S0962728600001913;"Severe feather pecking, a potentially stereotypic behaviour in chickens (Gallus gallus), can be reduced by providing enrichment. However, there is little comparative information available on the effectiveness of different types of enrichment. Providing forages to birds is likely to decrease feather-pecking behaviour the most, as it is generally thought that feather pecking stems from re-directed foraging motivation. Yet, other types of enrichment, such as dustbaths and novel objects, have also been shown to reduce feather pecking. In order to develop a practical and effective enrichment, these different possibilities must be examined. Using a Latin Square Design, 14-week old birds were given each of four treatments: i) forages; ii) novel objects; iii) dustbaths; or iv) no enrichment. The amount of feather-pecking behaviour and the number of pecks to the enrichments were recorded. Results showed feather pecking to be highest when no enrichment was present and lowest when the forages were present, with the other two enrichments intermediate. This was despite the fact that the numbers of pecks birds gave to the forages and dustbaths were not significantly different, suggesting that they were similarly used. Thus, we suggest here that forage enrichments are most effective at alleviating feather pecking at least in the short term and attempts should be made to develop poultry housing that allows for natural foraging behaviour. Following this, providing any kind of enrichment will increase bird welfare and is therefore still beneficial."
R43;Behaviour and welfare concepts in laying hens and their association with housing systems;"Bhanja, S. K.; Bhadauria, Pragya";2018;Review;Indian Journal of Poultry Science;1-10;10.5958/0974-8180.2018.00009.0;The majority of commercial layers in the world is kept in confined cage housing systems where the birds are unable to exhibit their normal behaviours like dust athing, perching, foraging and nesting etc. The space requirement in battery cage system is much less than the aviary and free range system. Though cage-free systems provide better welfare, there are issues of cannibalism, fracture, spread of diseases, air quality, egg quality and health of the birds. Worldwide there is diffusion in the welfare regulations for both layers and broilers. There is increasing awareness among consumers regarding the origin of their poultry products and simultaneous need to improve the current level of bird welfare by the egg industry. Thus, welfare concepts not only emphasize five freedoms but also have biological, cultural, economic, social, philosophical, emotional, legal, and political dimensions. The degree of free choices  made by well informed and educated consumers may play an important role in implementing welfare measures. There is also a need for additional research on economic implications of welfare under different agro climatic conditions. This review will mostly highlight productivity, behavioural restrictions and welfare issues of laying chickens under different farming systems. 
R44;Feeder space affects access to the feeder, aggression, and feed conversion in laying hens in an aviary system;"Sirovnik, J.; Würbel, H.; Toscano, M.J.";2018;Article;Applied Animal Behaviour Science;75-82;10.1016/j.applanim.2017.09.017;"In laying hens, minimal requirements for feeder space (cm per bird) are based primarily on data from small groups of hens (n < 10) housed in battery cages. The aim of the present study was to determine the effects of feeder space on agonistic behaviour, access to the feeder, and production in laying hens housed in an aviary system. The experiment was conducted in a quasi-commercial barn that contained 20 pens with 200 Lohmann Selected Leghorn hens housed in each. Five levels of feeder space (3.8, 6.0, 8.0, 9.0, and 10.0 cm/hen) were systematically allocated to four pens each from 21 weeks of age onwards. Behavioural assessments from video recordings at 21, 32, 39, and 45 weeks of age included: aggression, jostling followed by either feeding or other behaviour, duration of feeding bouts, and the number of hens feeding from the perch above the feeder as well as simultaneously from the platform at the feeder. Production parameters were measured daily and included: egg production, floor eggs, feed disappearance, and feed conversion ratio. Our results show that more feeder space was associated with less aggression (z-value =−4.06, p < 0.001) and less jostling (followed by feeding: zvalue =−3.74, p < 0.001; followed by other behaviour: z-value = 4.24, p < 0.001), as well as more simultaneous feeding from the platform at the feeder (z-value =−5.36, p < 0.001) and longer feeding bouts (zvalue = 4.68, p < 0.001). Feed disappearance (t-value = 3.08, df= 18, p = 0.006) increased and feed conversion decreased with feeder space (t-value = 2.245, df= 18, p = 0.038). The results indicate positive effects of increased feeder space on laying hen behaviour at the cost of relatively minor production losses. Thus, competition at the feeder decreased with increasing feeder space, allowing more birds to feed simultaneously, while feed conversion decreased only slightly. By combining measures of behaviour and production, our results can facilitate decisions on feeder space for laying hens in view of optimal trade-offs between agonistic behaviour, access to the feeder, and feed conversion."
R46;Behaviour of laying hens in two types of aviary systems on 25 commercial farms in Sweden;"Odén, K.; Keeling, L. J.; Algers, B.";2002;Article;British poultry science;169-181;10.1080/00071660120121364;1. Fifty-one flocks of laying hens in two high-density loose-housing systems were studied on 25 commercial farms in Sweden as part of a government test programme for evaluating new systems for laying hens. Six different hybrids were used in group sizes ranging from 250 to 5 000 birds. Stocking-densities varied from 10.2 to 19.1 birds per m2 floor area. No birds were beak trimmed. 2. The distribution of birds in the system, the frequency and location of aggressive pecks and feather pecks, the dust bathing activity and the birds' fear reaction to the keeper and to a novel object were measured. Direct behaviour observations were carried out twice per flock, at weeks 35 and 55. 3. The proportion of birds at the different locations was relatively constant across the 8-h observation period in the tiered system, but changed over time in the perch system, which may reflect a difference in access to resources between the systems. At night the top perches/tiers were preferred although when stocking-density increased, other sites were also used. 4. Aggression occurred mainly on the litter or in the nest areas. It did not differ between hybrids, but increased with age in the tiered system. Feather pecks occurred mainly on the litter. Brown hybrids feather pecked more than white ones, while white hybrids reacted more both to the keeper and to a novel object than did the brown hybrids. 5. It was concluded that access to nests was insufficient in both systems, as was litter space. Feed space was insufficient in the tiered system if food requirements increased. Design of the top perches, in the perch system, should be improved to allow birds to perch high up in the system without blocking access to feed etc. for others.
R47;The demand for straw and feathers as litter substrates by laying hens;"Gunnarsson, S.; Matthews, L.R; Foster, T.M; Temple, W.";2000;Article;Applied Animal Behaviour Science;321-330;10.1016/S0168-1591(99)00065-9;"Consumer demand theory has been applied to investigate behavioural demands and environmental requirements of farm animals. Recent research with laying hens has shown that the demand for various floor litters peat, sand, wood-shavings is inelastic. Other types of litter e.g., straw and feathers. are available to laying hens in some housing systems. This study aimed to determine the importance of straw and feathers to laying hens by measuring demand functions for these items. In 1 h sessions individual birds ns6 were given the opportunity every second day to  work on fixed ratio FR schedules FR5 to FR200 for access to either straw or feathers. The Ž. Ž . number of responses made and reinforcers delivered was recorded. All birds worked to gain access to straw but only three worked for feathers. None of the hens dustbathed consistently in either litter. The mean elasticities of the demand were significantly different from zero and were y0.48 s.e. 0.04; p-0.001 for straw and y0.45 s.e. 0.05; p-0.001 for feathers. The results imply that even if a substrate does not stimulate dustbathing, caged laying hens have a high demand for a litter substrate."
R48;Welfare issues in poultry housing and management: laying hens (Chapter 12);Sandilands, V.;2020;Book chapter;Understanding the behaviour and improving the welfare of chickens;374-400;10.19103/AS.2020.0078;NA
R49;Nutrition, feeding, and laying hen welfare;"Bryden, W. L.; Li, X.; Ruhnke, I.; Zhang, D.; Shini, S.";2021;Review;Animal Production Science;893-914;10.1071/AN20396;The relationship between nutrition and welfare is usually considered to be a direct result ofsupplying the hen with adequate quantities of feed and water. This simple notion of freedom from hunger and thirst belies the fact that nutrients play a pivotal role in the body’s response to challenges whether they relate to ambient temperature, gastrointestinal health, pathogen exposure, metabolic disorders, or social and mental stress. In all instances, maintaining homeostasis and allowing for physiologic response is dependent on an adequate and balanced nutrient supply. It is accepted that most laying hens are fed a complete diet, formulated commercially to provide the required nutrients for optimal health, egg production and welfare. In other words, the laying hen, irrespective of her housing, does not experience hunger or thirst. However, despite adequate nutrient and water supply, certain senarios can significantly affect and alter the nutrient requirements of the hen. Furthermore, the chemical composition and also the physical form of feed can significantly contribute to prevent or treat welfare and health conditions and is, therefore, a highly relevant tool to ensure and maintain an adequate welfare status. Therefore, this review takes a broader perspective of nutritional welfare and considers the nutrition of hens managed in different production systems in relation to nutritional physiology, gut microbiota, stress, metabolic disorders and feeding management
R50;Invited review: Environmental enrichment of dairy cows and calves in indoor housing;"Mandel, R.; Whay, H. R.; Klement E.; Nicol C. J.";2016;Review;Journal of dairy science;1695–1715;10.3168/jds.2015-9875;In recent years, an increasing number of farmers are choosing to keep their cows indoors throughout the year. Indoor housing of cows allows farmers to provide high-yielding individuals with a nutritionally balanced diet fit for their needs, and it has important welfare benefits for both cows and their calves, such as protection from predators, parasites, and exposure to extreme weather conditions. However, it also confronts cows and calves with a wide range of environmental challenges. These include abiotic environmental sources of stress (e.g., exposure to loud and aversive sound) and confinement-specific stressors (e.g., restricted movement and maintenance in abnormal social groups). Cows and calves that live indoors are also faced with the challenge of occupying long periods with a limited range of possible behavioral patterns. Environmental enrichment can improve biological functioning (measured as increased lifetime reproductive success, increased inclusive fitness, or a correlate of these such as improved health), help animals to cope with stressors in their surroundings, reduce frustration, increase the fulfillment of behavioral needs, and promote more positive affective states. Here, we review recent findings on the effect of social, occupational, physical, sensory, and nutritional enrichment on dairy cows and calves, and we assess the appropriateness and practicality of implementing different enrichment practices on commercial dairy farms. Some of the enrichment methods reviewed here may also be applied to those more extensive cattle-raising systems, where similar challenges occur.
R51;The role of perches in chicken welfare (Chapter 13);"Schrader, L.; Malchow, J.";2020;Book chapter;Understanding the behaviour and improving the welfare of chickens;400-416;10.19103/AS.2020.0078;NA
R52;Cows are highly motivated to access a grooming substrate;"McConnachie, E.; Smid, A.M.C.; Thompson, A. J.; Weary, D. M.; Gaworski, M. A.; von Keyserlingk, M. A. G. ";2018;Article;Biology letters;1-4;10.1098/rsbl.2018.0303;"In natural environments, cattle use trees and other abrasive surfaces to scratch and groom themselves. Modern indoor dairy cattle housing systems often lack appropriate grooming substrates, restricting the animals’ ability to groom. We assessed the motivation of dairy cows to access an automated mechanical brush, a grooming resource that can be implemented in indoor cattle housing systems. Cows were trained to push a weighted gate to access either fresh feed (positive control), a mechanical brush or the same space without a brush (negative control). Weight on the gate was gradually increased until all cows failed to open it. The weight each cow was willing to push to access each resource was assessed using the Kaplan–Meier survival analysis. Despite differences in methodology used to obtain data on motivation to access feed and the brush, the outcomes were very similar; cows worked as hard for access to fresh feed and the brush (p ¼ 0.94) and less hard for access to the empty space (compared with fresh feed: p , 0.01; brush: p , 0.02). These results indicate that cows are highly motivated to access a mechanical brush and that it is an important resource for cows."
R53;Welfare of dairy cows;EFSA;2023;Report;EFSA Journal ;1-177;10.2903/j.efsa.2023.7993;This Scientific Opinion addresses a European Commission’s mandate on the welfare of dairy cows as part of the Farm to Fork strategy. It includes three assessments carried out based on literature reviews and complemented by expert opinion. Assessment 1 describes the most prevalent housing systems for dairy cows in Europe: tie-stalls, cubicle housing, open-bedded systems and systems with access to an outdoor area. Per each system, the scientific opinion describes the distribution in the EU and assesses the main strengths, weaknesses and hazards potentially reducing the welfare of dairy cows. Assessment 2 addresses five welfare consequences as requested in the mandate: locomotory disorders (including lameness), mastitis, restriction of movement and resting problems, inability to perform comfort behaviour and metabolic disorders. Per each welfare consequence, a set of animal-based measures is suggested, a detailed analysis of the prevalence in different housing systems is provided, and subsequently, a comparison of the housing systems is given. Common and specific system-related hazards as well as management-related hazards and respective preventive measures are investigated. Assessment 3 includes an analysis of farm characteristics (e.g. milk yield, herd size) that could be used to classify the level of on-farm welfare. From the available scientific literature, it was not possible to derive relevant associations between available farm data and cow welfare. Therefore, an approach based on expert knowledge elicitation (EKE) was developed. The EKE resulted in the identification of five farm characteristics (more than one cow per cubicle at maximum stocking density, limited space for cows, inappropriate cubicle size, high on-farm mortality and farms with less than 2 months access to pasture). If one or more of these farm characteristics are present, it is recommended to conduct an assessment of cow welfare on the farm in question using animal-based measures for specified welfare consequences.
R54;Litter use by laying hens in a commercial aviary: dust bathing and piling;"Campbell, D. L. M.; Makagon, M. M.; Swanson, J. C.; Siegford, J. M.";2016;Article;Poultry science;164-175;10.3382/ps/pev183;"The laying hen industry, including in the United States, is responding to social concerns about hen welfare by implementing alternative housing systems such as the aviary, to provide more space and resources to large groups of hens. Data detailing the behavior of hens in commercial aviaries is needed to determine hens' use of the resources in order to understand their impact on hen welfare. The open litter area of aviaries provides additional space for hens during the day. Litter is also a substrate for dust bathing which is a strongly motivated natural behavior. Hens are often synchronous in their performance of dust bathing, which may lead to overcrowding in the litter area. Additionally, the open litter area can facilitate expression of unusual behavior such as flock piling (defined as the occurrence of densely grouped clusters of hens, resulting from no obvious cause and occurring randomly throughout the day and flock cycle) which may be a welfare concern. Therefore, we conducted observations of hen occupancy of the open litter area and the performance of dust bathing and flock piling across 3 production points (peak lay, mid lay and end of lay) for two flocks of Lohmann White laying hens housed in a commercial aviary. All areas of the open litter area were occupied to the same degree. Hens performed dust bathing throughout the day but showed peak dust bathing activity in the afternoon for Flock 1 (all P < 0.001) and in the late morning for Flock 2 (all P < 0.001). Overall, 174 incidents of piling behavior were observed between the 2 flocks, with piles varying in size, duration, and time of occurrence; however, no smothering was detected. Crowding on the open litter area sometimes occurred during peak periods of synchronous dust bathing and when hens piled. Further research is needed to understand the welfare implications of individual hen use of the open litter area and the causes and welfare implications of hen piling."
R55;Effects of litter and additional enrichment elements on the occurrence of feather pecking in pullets and laying hens - A focused review;"Schreiter, R.; Damme, K.; Borell, E. von; Vogt, I.; Klunker, M.; Freick, M.";2019;Review;Veterinary Medicine and Science;500-507;10.1002/vms3.184;Severe feather pecking (SFP) is a serious problem in the egg production industry with regard to animal welfare and performance. The multifactorial causes of SFP are discussed in the areas of genetics, feeding, husbandry, stable climate and management. Several studies on the influence of manipulable material on the incidence of SFP in different environments and housing systems have been performed. This review presents current knowledge on the effects of litter and additional enrichment elements on the occurrence of SFP in pullets and laying hens. Because SFP is associated with foraging and feed intake behaviour, the provision of manipulable material in the husbandry environment is an approach that is intended to reduce the occurrence of SFP by adequate exercise of these behaviours. As shown in the literature, the positive effect of enrichment and litter substrate on SFP in a low-complexity cage environment is evident. On the other hand, consistent results have not been reported on the influence of additional enrichment material in housing systems with litter substrate, which represent the most common type of husbandry in Northwestern Europe. Thus, further research is recommended.
R56;The impact of group size on damaging behaviours, aggression, fear and stress in farm animals;"Rodenburg, T.B.; Koene, P.";2007;Review;Applied Animal Behaviour Science;205-214;10.1016/j.applanim.2006.05.024;The aim of this review is to discuss the impact of group size on damaging behaviours, aggression, fear and stress in farm animals and to identify housing- and management options that can help to reduce problems caused by suboptimal group sizes. Increasing group size was found to increase the risk of damaging behaviour, such as feather pecking in laying hens and vulva biting in sows. Aggression does not appear to be a problem in large groups, because dominance relationships in these groups are not based on individual recognition, but based on other signals such as body size, avoiding costly fights. There is evidence for increased fear and stress levels in large groups compared with small groups, but fearfulness is also strongly affected by type of housing. To minimise problems in large groups, is seems helpful to offer separate functional areas and to provide cover, reducing disturbance between animals. To minimise the risk of damaging behaviour, such as feather pecking in laying hens and tail biting in pigs, stimulating foraging, exploration and manipulation behaviour by providing sufficient substrate (straw, wood shavings and sand) offers perspective. Rearing the animals in a system which allows the development of all these behaviours is very important. Other solutions can be found in optimising the diet and offering extra foraging opportunities. Furthermore, genetic selection against damaging behaviour seems promising. In conclusion, group size mainly has an effect on damaging behaviour and fear and stress in pigs and poultry. The effect on aggressive behaviour is limited. To reduce damaging behaviour, fear and stress, it is important to provide a complex environment with ample behavioural opportunities and separate functional areas.
R56;The impact of group size on damaging behaviours, aggression, fear and stress in farm animals;"Rodenburg, T.B.; Koene, P.";2007;Review;Applied Animal Behaviour Science;205-214;10.1016/j.applanim.2006.05.024;The aim of this review is to discuss the impact of group size on damaging behaviours, aggression, fear and stress in farm animals and to identify housing- and management options that can help to reduce problems caused by suboptimal group sizes. Increasing group size was found to increase the risk of damaging behaviour, such as feather pecking in laying hens and vulva biting in sows. Aggression does not appear to be a problem in large groups, because dominance relationships in these groups are not based on individual recognition, but based on other signals such as body size, avoiding costly fights. There is evidence for increased fear and stress levels in large groups compared with small groups, but fearfulness is also strongly affected by type of housing. To minimise problems in large groups, is seems helpful to offer separate functional areas and to provide cover, reducing disturbance between animals. To minimise the risk of damaging behaviour, such as feather pecking in laying hens and tail biting in pigs, stimulating foraging, exploration and manipulation behaviour by providing sufficient substrate (straw, wood shavings and sand) offers perspective. Rearing the animals in a system which allows the development of all these behaviours is very important. Other solutions can be found in optimising the diet and offering extra foraging opportunities. Furthermore, genetic selection against damaging behaviour seems promising. In conclusion, group size mainly has an effect on damaging behaviour and fear and stress in pigs and poultry. The effect on aggressive behaviour is limited. To reduce damaging behaviour, fear and stress, it is important to provide a complex environment with ample behavioural opportunities and separate functional areas.
R57;A cross-sectional study of the prevalence of vent pecking in laying hens in alternative systems and its associations with feather pecking, management and disease;"Pötzsch, C. J.; Lewis, K.; Nicol, C.J.: Green, L.E.";2001;Article;Applied Animal Behaviour Science;259-272;10.1016/S0168-1591(01)00167-8.;The aim of this cross-sectional study was to investigate associations between vent pecking (VP) and management in laying hens in alternative systems and to compare the results with those from the feather pecking (FP) analysis using data collected in the same study [Vet. Rec. 147 (2000) 233]. The data were derived from a postal questionnaire carried out on commercial flocks in Great Britain in 1998. A total of 637 questionnaires were sent out to farmers and producer groups and, after two reminders, the final response rate was 51.5%. Of 198 respondents, 36.9% of the farmers reported that vent pecking had occurred in the last depopulated flock and 33.3% had both vent pecking and feather pecking. The outcome variable, vent pecking after point of lay, was compared with exposures significant at P=0.05 in univariate statistics in a backward elimination logistic regression model. The final model contained four factors that increased the risk of vent pecking: dim light to encourage the use of nest boxes, diet changed three or more times during the laying period, the use of hanging bell drinkers and onset of lay before 20 weeks of age. The first three factors in this model were also significant factors that increased the risk of feather pecking in a logistic regression model developed by Green et al. [Vet. Rec. 147 (2000) 233]. The results indicate that vent pecking and feather pecking may share common environmental risk factors in commercial flocks.
R58;Effects of stock density on the laying performance, blood parameter, corticosterone, litter quality, gas emission and bone mineral density of laying hens in floor pens;"Kang, H. K.; Park, S. B.; Kim, S. H.; Kim, C. H.";2016;Article;Poultry science;2764-2770;10.3382/ps/pew264;The effects of stocking density on the performance, egg quality, leukocyte concentration, blood biochemistry, corticosterone levels, bone mineral density, and noxious gas emission of laying hens were investigated. Eight hundred 34-week-old Hy-Line Brown laying hens (Gallus gallus domesticus) were randomly assigned to one of 4 treatments, each of which was replicated 4 times. Four stocking densities, including 5, 6, 7, and 10 birds/m2, were compared. A commercial-type basal diet was formulated to meet or exceed nutrient recommendations for laying hens from the National Research Council. The diet was fed to the hens ad libitum for 8 wk. Results indicated that hen-day egg production, egg mass, and feed intake were less for (P < 0.01) 10 birds/m2 stock density than other stock densities. Production rate of floor and broken eggs and eggshell strength were greater (P < 0.01) for 10 birds/m2 stock density than other stock densities. There were no significant differences in the level of leukocytes among densities. However, heterophils and the H/L ratio were greater (P < 0.01) for 10 birds/m2 than in stock density of 6 or 7 birds/m2 Serum corticosterone was greater (P < 0.01) 10 birds/m2 than stock density than other stock densities. Litter moisture and gas emission (CO2 and NH3) were greater (P < 0.01) for 10 birds/m2 than stock density than 6 and 7 birds/m2 stock density. Bone mineral content was not influenced by increasing stock density. However, bone mineral density was less (P < 0.05) for 10 m2 stock density than other stock densities. These results indicate that increasing the density beyond 5 birds/m2 elicits some negative effects on laying performance of Hy-Line brown laying hens.
R59;Factors affecting ranging behaviour in commercial free-range hens ;"Pettersson, I.; Freire, R.; Nicol, C. J.";2016;Review;World's Poultry Science Journal;137-150;10.1017/S0043933915002664;Many studies have assessed use of the outdoor ‘range’ area on free-range laying farms, and have revealed that percentage range use at any one time rarely exceeds 50% of the flock, and is sometimes below 10%. What constitutes a ‘good’ range use is difficult to determine without better knowledge of ranging bout lengths under ideal conditions. Well documented factors that affect percentage range use include prevailing weather, flock size and shelter on the range. Other factors such as pophole design, internal and external stocking density and system design appear to play a role although their effects are not as clear and more research would be valuable to truly understand their relevance. Factors affecting bird distribution on the range are also reviewed.
R60;Commercial Free-Range Laying Hens’ Preferences for Shelters with Different Sunlight Filtering Percentages;"Rana, M.S.; Lee, C.; Lea, J.M.; Campbell, D.L.M";2022;Article;Animals ;1-18;10.3390/ani12030344;Extreme sunlight might be aversive to free-range laying hens, discouraging them from going outside. Range enrichment with artificial shelters may protect hens from sunlight and increase range use. The preferences of 34–40-week-old Hy-Line Brown laying hens for artificial shelters were assessed by counting the number of hens under three densities of individual shelters (three replicates/density) from video recordings for 14 to 17 days for two flocks. The artificial shelters used shade cloth marketed as blocking 50%, 70%, and 90% of ultraviolet light, although other sunlight wavelengths were also reduced. Different sunlight spectral irradiances (ultraviolet radiation (UVAB) (288–432 nm), photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) (400–700 nm), and total solar radiation (TSR) (285 nm–3000 nm), ambient temperature, and relative humidity were recorded with an on-site weather station. There was a significant interaction between sunlight-filtering shelter and time of day (both Flocks, p < 0.0001), i.e., hens preferred shelters with the highest amount of sunlight-filtering at most time points. Regression models showed that the most variance in shelter use throughout the day resulted from the ambient temperature in both flocks, while sunlight parameters had different degrees of effect depending on the shelter type and flock. However, fewer hens under the shelters during the midday period suggest that during periods of intense sunlight, hens prefer to remain indoors, and artificial structures might not be sufficient to attract more hens outside.
R61;Environmental Enrichments in Laying Hen Production Systems with Emphasis on Welfare and Egg Quality;"Tainika, B.; Şekeroğlu, A.";2021;Review;Turkish Journal of Agriculture: Food Sciences and Technology;1398-1406;10.24925/turjaf.v9i8.1398-1406.4240;"To improve hen welfare, several studies have investigated various environmental enrichments that suit different laying hen production systems. The positive results of these studies can enable such environmental enrichments to be utilized in commercial laying hen production. This paper reviewed the effects of environmental enrichments in different laying hen production systems on hen welfare and egg quality. The successfully proven environmental enrichments in free-range production system include forage, shelterbelt, and artificial shade in outdoor area and novel objects and Hshaped perching structures in indoor. These are associated with increased range use that positively affects hen welfare. In aviary system, perches, and litter materials (e.g., straw, sand) as environmental enrichments are linked to improved behavioral expression, reduced stress, and enhanced immune system. Under the litter system, environmental enrichment with substrates (e.g., pecking stones, alfalfa blocks, silage, straw, barley) has been found to increase the foraging behavior of laying hens. This reduces severe feather pecking thus, improving the plumage condition of hens. Although the effects of environmental enrichments on hen welfare have been assessed and scientifically proven in the reviewed studies, significant progress of their impact on egg quality traits has not been reported. The studies have shown that environmental enrichments have no significant effect on egg quality traits. Also, appropriate pasture or plant species as environmental enrichments in free-range production system in relation to hen welfare and egg quality have not been identified. Therefore, it is important to continue studies on environmental enrichments while emphasizing their influence on egg quality since it is a major performance trait in the egg industry. In addition, there is a need for studies to identify ideal pasture or plant species for free-range production system that positively affects hen welfare and egg quality.
"
R62;Factors involved in the improvement of the use of hen runs;"Zeltner, E.; Hirt, H.";2008;Article;Applied Animal Behaviour Science;395-408;10.1016/j.applanim.2008.04.007;Free-range systems improve the welfare of laying hens. However, hen runs are often used only close to the poultry house and only a small proportion of hens are outside. Several studies indicate that structuring elements in the hen run improve the frequency and distribution of hens in the run. In our experiments we studied the characteristics of structures which have effects on the use of the free-range area. In two choice experiments we investigated whether hens prefer a greater amount of covered area or a greater diversity of structuring elements. Following this, we investigated whether hens have a better distribution in the range area when they first have to go through a corridor before reaching the grass-covered part of the run. In the final experiment in this series we tried to optimise hen runs, using the results from the previous experiments, on several farms to validate these results under practical conditions. During the choice experiment investigating the number of structures, hens showed no preference for being on the part with 5% of area covered with structures, compared to only 1%. However, more hens preferred the part containing different structures, compared to the part containing only one kind of structuring element. The hens were better distributed in the hen run when they had direct access to the run, rather than having to go through a corridor. During the on-farm experiment, more hens were outside in the optimised hen runs and were found more frequently in the part farther away from the poultry house. The hens preferred to stay close to structures providing shelter and shade. However, diverse structures attracted the hens more for foraging.
R63;Cross-sectional study of the prevalence of feather pecking in laying hens in alternative systems and its associations with management and disease;"Green, L.E.; Lewis, K.; Kimpton, A.; Nicol, C.J.";2000;Article;Veterinary record;233-238;10.1136/vr.147.9.233;"A cross-sectional study of risk factors for feather pecking in layings hens in alternative systems was carried out in July 1998. A total of 637 questionnaires were sent out to farmers and producer groups and, after two reminders, the final response rate was 51.5 per cent. The outcome variable was feather pecking after point of lay. Over 55 per cent of the farmers reported that feather pecking had occurred in the last depopulated flock. This outcome was compared with the management procedures reported by flock managers by using univariate statistics. Factors associated with feather pecking with a significance ≤0.05 were then tested in two logistic regression models. In the first model the following factors were associated with an increased risk of feather pecking: less than 50 per cent of the flock using the outdoor area on a fine and sunny day, the occurrence of egg peritonitis and the occurrence of infectious bronchitis. The direction of the association between feather pecking and these infectious diseases was unclear, so in the second model only factors which were consistent throughout the laying period were tested. The following factors were associated with an increased risk of feather pecking: less than 50 per cent of the flock using the outdoor area on a fine and sunny day; three or more changes of diet during lay; the inspection of the flock by one person; an absence of loose litter at the end of lay; a temperature in the hen house of less than 20°C; turning the lights up when the flock was inspected; and the use of bell-drinkers. It is concluded that some of these factors could inhibit foraging and dust-bathing behaviour and others may increase competition or frustration, both of these changes having been shown experimentally to initiate feather pecking behaviour."
R64;Dairy cows value access to pasture as highly as fresh feed;"von Keyserlingk, M.A. G.; Amorim Cestari, A.; Franks, B.; Fregonesi, J. A.; Weary, D.M.";2017;Article;Scientific reports;1-4;10.1038/srep44953;Many dairy cows in the developed world are now housed exclusively indoors with fewer than 5% of the 10 million lactating cows in the United States having access to pasture during the grazing season. Indoor housing systems are designed to meet biological needs for food, water, hygiene, and shelter, but surveys of public and farmer opinion suggest that people think that pasture access is also important for the well-being of dairy cows. To determine if pasture access is important to the cows themselves, we investigated to what extent cows will work to access pasture (by pushing on a weighted gate), and compared it to the motivation to access fresh feed. Cows worked at least as hard to access pasture as they did to access the fresh feed and worked hardest for outdoor access in the evening hours. Echoing public views on what allows for a good life for cattle, these results show that cows are highly motivated for outdoor access.
R65;Dairy Cow Preferences for Soft or Hard Flooring when Standing or Walking;"Telezhenko, E.; Lidfors, L.; Bergsten, C.";2007;Article;Journal of dairy science;3716–3724;10.3168/jds.2006-876;Concrete is the most commonly used alley flooring in confined dairy herds because ofits qualities ofconstruction and ease of cleaning. Nevertheless, the hardness, abrasiveness, and slipperiness of concrete floors have adverse effects on animal well-being and health, and yielding rubber flooring is becoming popular as a way of improving the flooring conditions on walkways. The aim ofthis study was to investigate preferences ofdairy cows for rubber compared with concrete flooring under the conditions of a commercial dairy farm. The study was conducted in an organic dairy herd with free-stall housing. Floor preference was tested on groups ofstanding cows in a 120-m2 holding pen before milking, and yr later on a 12- × 3-m walkway. The holding pen and the walkway were divided lengthwise into 2 identical sections. Two types of solid rubber mats (soft and extra soft) were tested against solid concrete in the holding pen. Slatted and solid rubber mats were tested against slatted concrete in the walkway. Each floor type was tested over 4 d on the left side and4don the right side of the holding pen and the walkway, respectively. Concrete flooring on both sides of the sections was tested as a control before the testing ofdifferent section materials. All observations of the distribution of cows in the sections were made from video recordings captured in association with the afternoon milking. The number of cows on each section was recorded approximately every 7 min in the holding pen, and continuously on the walkway. A significantly higher proportion of cows stood on the side with the soft and extra soft rubber mats (65.1 ± 2.7 and 69.3 ± 2.6%, respectively, mean ± SEM) compared with the control distribution when only the solid concrete was available (50.9 ± 3.9%). A significantly higher proportion ofnonlame cows walked exclusively on the side with the slatted (64.5 ± 5.4%, d 4) or solid rubber mats (68.2 ± 5.1%, d 4) compared with controls (28.9 ± 4.3%). Lame cows within a group of walking cows did not show a higher preference for soft flooring as distinct as nonlame cows (52.7 ± 6.9 and 59.4 ± 6.2% for the solid and slatted rubber mats, respectively, at d 4 vs. 40.3 ± 6.2% for control), presumably because of competition with other, higher ranked cows. It was concluded that the majority of cows preferred to walk and stand on soft rubber rather than on concrete flooring.
R66;Welfare of laying hens on farm;EFSA;2023;Report;EFSA Journal ;1-88;10.2903/j.efsa.2023.7789;This scientific opinion focuses on the welfare of laying hens, pullets and layer breeders on farm. The most relevant husbandry systems used in Europe are described. For each system, highly relevant welfare consequences were identified, as well as related animal-based measures (ABMs), and hazards leading to the welfare consequences. Moreover, measures to prevent or correct the hazards and/or mitigate the welfare consequences are recommended. The highly relevant welfare consequences based on severity, duration and frequency of occurrence are bone lesions, group stress, inability to avoid unwanted sexual behaviour, inability to perform comfort behaviour, inability to perform exploratory or foraging behaviour, isolation stress, predation stress, resting problems, restriction of movement, skin disorders and soft tissue lesions and integument damage. The welfare consequences of non-cage compared to cage systems for laying hens are described and minimum enclosure characteristics are described for laying hens, pullets and layer breeders. Beak trimming, which causes negative welfare consequences and is conducted to reduce the prevalence and severity of pecking, is described as well as the risks associated with rearing of non-beak-trimmed flocks. Alternatives to reduce sharpness of the beak without trimming are suggested. Finally, total mortality, plumage damage, wounds, keel bone fractures and carcass condemnations are the most promising ABMs for collection at slaughterhouses to monitor the level of laying hen welfare on farm. Main recommendations include housing all birds in non-cage systems with easily accessible, elevated platforms and provision of dry and friable litter and access to a covered veranda. It is further recommended to implement protocols to define welfare trait information to encourage progress in genetic selection, implement measures to prevent injurious pecking, rear pullets with dark brooders and reduce male aggression in layer breeders.
R67;Research trends in outdoor pig production - A review;"Park, H.; Min, B.; Oh, S.";2017;Review;Asian-Australas J Anim Sci;1207–1214;10.5713/ajas.17.0330;Since the industrialization of swine production in the late 1900s, swine farms in the United States, as well as in Europe, have largely become consolidated. Pig farms became larger in size but fewer in number, with 91% of market pigs being produced by large operations with 5,000 or more pigs on-site in the US, and only 3% of the total utilized agricultural land represent­ing organic farming. Such change in the market made it difficult for small farmers to stay competitive, forcing them to find alternative ways to reduce the cost of production and increase profit using the outdoor production system. In contrast to the indoor confinement system, outdoor production system uses pasture-based units and/or deep-bedded hoop structures that promote animal welfare and environmental sustainability with a lower capital investment. In accord with the growing concern for animal and environmental welfare and food safety by the consumers, small farmers practicing an outdoor production system are seeing increased opportunities for marketing their products in the pork niche market. Unlike the general belief that the reproductive and growth performance measures of the outdoor sows and piglets are poorer in comparison with the animals reared indoors, studies showed that there was no significant difference in the performance measures, and some traits were even better in outdoor animals. Improved reproductive and production traits can increase the sustainability of outdoor farming. Present study reviewed the recent studies comparing the performance measures, meat quality and health of indoor and outdoor animals, as well as the efforts to improve the outdoor production system through changes in management such as hut types and breed of animals.
R68;Dustbathing behaviour of laying hens as related to quality of dustbathing material;"van Liere, D.W.; Kooijman, J.: Wiepkema, P.R.";1990;Article;Applied Animal Behaviour Science;127-141;10.1016/0168-1591(90)90093-S;NA
R69;Strength of preference for dustbathing and foraging substrates in laying hens;"Jong, I. C. de; Wolthuis-Fillerup, M.; van Reenen, C. G.";2007;Article;Applied Animal Behaviour Science;24-36;10.1016/j.applanim.2006.04.027;NA
R70;The Influence of Different Types of Outdoor Access on Dairy Cattle Behavior;"Smid A-M. C.; Weary D. M; von Keyserlingk M.A. G";2020;Article;Frontiers in Veterinary Science;1-11;10.3389/fvets.2020.00257;Pasture access for dairy cows is highly valued both by cows and the public at large. When pasture access is not feasible, farmers can provide cows with alternative forms of outdoor access, such as an outdoor bedded pack, that may be easier to implement on When pasture access is not feasible, farmers can provide cows with alternative forms of outdoor access, such as an outdoor bedded pack, that may be easier to implement on some farms. We reviewed the literature on how lying, standing, walking, feeding, social, and estrus behaviors are influenced by pasture and other types of outdoor areas. Pasture allows the expression of grazing and can facilitate the expression of lying, standing, walking, and estrus behaviors. In addition, pasture can decrease the number of negative social interactions between cows, likely because more space per cow is provided than what is normally available indoors. The provision of soft flooring and an open space in outdoor bedded packs appears to provide some benefits for lying, standing, and walking behavior and may also have positive effects on social behavior, especially with larger space allowances. The effects of an outdoor bedded pack on estrus behavior are less well-documented, but the provision of a standing surface that provides better footing than typically available indoors may promote estrus behavior. Alternative outdoor areas assessed to date appear to be less attractive for cows than pasture, perhaps because these areas do not provide the opportunity to graze. We encourage future research to investigate the importance of grazing for dairy cows. The motivation of dairy cows to access alternative outdoor areas should also be investigated. As cow preference for the outdoors depends on many factors, providing cows a choice may be of particular importance.
R71;What happens with cow behavior when replacing concrete slatted floor by rubber coating: a case study;"Platz, S.; Ahrens, F.; Bendel, J.; Meyer, H. H. D.; Erhard";2000;Article;Journal of dairy science;999–1004;10.3168/jds.2007-0584;"An enhanced productive life cycle and improved animal welfare are aims pursued in dairy husbandry. This study assesses experimental observations on floor-associated behavior during the stepwise replacement of concrete slatted flooring by rubber mats. For this purpose, estrus (mounting) and hygiene behavior (licking while standing on 3 legs and caudal licking) within a herd of 50 loose-housed Brown Swiss dairy cows were analyzed by video observation before and after floor reconstruction. Still photographs and pedometers were used to asses step length and number of steps, representing walking behavior. Compared with the concrete floor surface, rubber coating led to an increase in step length (58 +/- 1 vs. 70 +/- 1 cm; n = 35) and in steps per day (4,226 +/- 450 vs. 5,611 +/- 495; mean +/- SEM; n = 9). Mounting was higher on the flooring covered with rubber mats (23 vs. 112). Collapsing or slipping during mounting only occurred on concrete slatted flooring (in 19 out of 23 mounting actions). Licking while standing on 3 legs and caudal licking increased up to 4-fold (105 vs. 511 observations). In conclusion, improvements were found in behavior when rubber-coated slatted floor surfaces were used in dairy cattle housing in transition from concrete flooring. Disorders in estrus and hygiene behavior were associated with the flooring of the barn and were relatively easy to investigate within the framework of farm welfare assessments."
R73;Comparison of claw health and milk yield in dairy cows on elastic or concrete flooring;"Kremer, P. V.; Nueske, S.; Scholz, A. M.; Foerster, M.";2007;Article;Journal of dairy science;4603–4611;10.3168/jds.2006-549;This article reports on the effects of elastic (rubber) flooring compared with concrete flooring on claw health and milk yield in dairy cows. Milk yield and activity data of 53 complete lactations from 49 cows were recorded by an automatic milking system in the University ofMunich Livestock Center dairy herd. Cows were kept in a loose housing system on concrete-slatted or rubber-matted slatted flooring. Claws were trimmed and measured linearly in combination with claw lesion diagnosis 3 times during one lactation period (including the transition phase). An automatic milking system recorded milk yield and activity. The net horn growth of the claws increased on elastic flooring. Therefore, correct and frequent claw trimming is at least as important for claw health in dairy herds kept on rubber flooring as for those on concrete-slatted flooring. Cows housed on rubber had an increased incidence of sole ulcers. Sole hemorrhages (except for hemorrhages associated with sole ulcers) occurred less frequently on rubber than on concrete. Results concerning digital dermatitis were difficult to assess, because manual manure scraping on rubber required sprinkling the flooring twice daily, which additionally moistened the digital skin of the cows. This might explain the greater incidence of digital dermatitis on elastic flooring. The incidence of clinically lame cows did not differ between flooring types. Cows showed greater activity on rubber, most likely caused by the more comfortable walking surface compared with the concrete-slatted flooring. The greater activity may indicate better overall health of high-yielding dairy cows on rubber flooring. Milk yield, however, did not differ between flooring types
R74;COWEL database ;"Ursinus, W. W.; Schepers, F.; Mol, R. M. de; Bracke, M.B.M.; Metz, J.H.M.; Groot ";2009;Article;Animal welfare ;545-552;10.1017/S096272860000097X;Animals have various behavioural and physiological needs that are important for welfare. Fulfilment of these needs depends on the quality of housing, management and animal characteristics. The objective of this study was to develop a model to assign welfare scores to husbandry systems for dairy cattle, based on scientific results, and thereby supporting the design of new, welfare-friendly systems. COWEL is a computer-based decision support system that contains attributes regarding housing and management conditions. These attributes are technical specifications that contain various technical units called levels. These levels are ranked from best-to-worst regarding welfare, based on scientific information about animal-based parameters. This information, inserted in the model as statements, was weighted depending on the impact it has on welfare by using weighting categories. Thereafter, a weighting factor was calculated for each attribute which determines how important an attribute is for welfare. The COWEL model contains 2,343 statements on dairy cattle welfare from 476 sources found during a literature survey. The model was applied to four husbandry systems, namely a tie-stall, cubicle housing, a straw yard and a pasture-based system. The welfare scores, calculated by COWEL for these husbandry systems, correspond with the general opinion about these systems. A tie-stall receives a low and a pasture-based system a high welfare score: 211 and 271, respectively. A husbandry system can receive a maximum of 313 on the welfare scale of COWEL. We conclude that COWEL can be used to rank husbandry systems on a welfare scale, and may be a useful tool to develop new, sustainable and welfare-friendly systems for dairy cattle.
R75;On the feeding and social behaviour of the laying hen;"Meunier-Salaun, M. C.; Faure, J. M.";1984;Article;Applied Animal Behaviour Science;129-141;10.1016/0168-1591(84)90058-3;This paper describes a study of the influences of early husbandry conditions, social attraction and social rank on various aspects of the feeding behaviour of laying hens. Birds were raised in flocks of 10, 60 or 500. Groups of 3 birds, selected from flocks of the same size, were then housed in pens. Some groups consisted of hens raised in the same flock, and some of birds raised in different flocks. The feeding and agonistic behaviour of each group at each of 5 types of feeder was observed and compared with the behaviour shown when the birds had free access to a 1-m long food trough. Each of the 5 feeders offered the same area of feeding space, but differed in its partitioning and spatial distribution. One feeder had a single unpartitioned feeding space. The other 4 feeders had 3 partioned feeding spaces which were adjacent, or separated by distances of 10, 20 or 40 cm, respectively. For the 5 feeders, total feeding times and lengths of feeding bouts were greatest, and the number of feeding bouts least, when the feeding space was unpartitioned. Synchrony of feeding behaviour was low when the feeding space was unpartitioned or the partitioned spaces adjacent, but was comparable to that at the 1-m long food trough when the distance between partitioned feeding spaces was 10 cm or greater. When feeding space was partitioned, the likelihood that 2 birds would eat together at the same site increased with the distance between feeding space. Dominant birds always exhibited the longest feeding bouts and greatest total feeding times, but were less likely to feed in the same space as another bird, and exhibited less synchrony of feeding behaviour than subordinates. The size of the flock in which the birds were raised, and whether or not the birds in a group had been raised together or apart, had no clear effect on behaviour. These results indicate that, within the limits of this experiment, early husbandry conditions do not influence behaviour shown during feeding in later life, and that social attraction has a greater influence on the feeding behaviour of hens than is generally assumed. In view of this latter finding, it is postulated that in attempting to determine the requirements of laying hens for feeding space, attention must be paid to social attraction as well as to competition at the feeder.
R76;The effect of ahemeral light and dark cycles on patterns of food intake by the laying hen;"Bhatti, B. M.; Morris, T. R.";1978;Article;British Poultry Science;125–128;10.1080/00071667808416452;"1. Diurnal food intake rhythms of 1aying hens were studied under 21, 24 and 30-h cycles, using either a constant 12-h photoperiod or a 10-h scotoperiod in each cycle. The feeding patterns essentially followed a circadian periodicity under all experimental situations. The peak in food intake which normally occurs before ""sunset"" in a 24-h cycle was con- sistently observed to be timed from the onset of the previous dark period in each light and dark cycle, regard1ess of cycle length. 2. This study dcmonstrates that the laying fowl makes use of an endogenaus biological rhythm to regulate its feeding behaviour. A light to dark transition in a light and dark cycle is the primary signal for phase- setting the pattern of food intake."
R77;Behavioural needs, priorities and preferences of laying hens;"Weeks, C.A.; Nicol, C.J.";2006;Review;World's Poultry Science Journal;296–307;10.1079/WPS200598;We review the behavioural needs, priorities and preferences of laying hens for increased space, perching, nesting, foraging and dustbathing behaviour. Hens make full use of and may work to gain access to perches, however it is not yet known how perching ranks in comparison with other behaviours. Laying hens appear to have an instinctive need to perform pre-laying (nest-building) behaviour and have a strong preference for a discrete, enclosed nest site, for which they will work hard to gain access as oviposition approaches. Access to a nest site is a high-ranking priority for laying hens, preferred over food at this time. Foraging is a behavioural need, with peat, sand and wood shavings preferred substrates in choice experiments. There is no reduction in time spent foraging when a cost is imposed, nor when feed is freely available. Dustbathing is currently viewed as a behavioural need, as the extent to which hens value dustbathing is not known. Bird preferences for space are complex and confounded by interactions between group size and stocking density. There is some evidence that priority for space varies during the day and increases when the total space available to a group of birds is restricted, and that greater priority is given to space than to small group size. The presence of apparently purposeless behaviour, of high levels of aggression or redirected behaviours such as feather pecking and cannibalism are indicators that the housing system is not meeting the behavioural needs of the hens and hence is not satisfactory for bird welfare.
R78;Drinking behavior of dairy cows under commercial farm conditions differs depending on water trough design and cleanliness;"Burkhardt, F.K.; Hayer, J.J.; Heinemann, C.; Steinhoff-Wagner, J.";2022;Article;Applied Animal Behaviour Science;1-9;10.1016/j.applanim.2022.105752;"In dairy cows, an adequate water supply is necessary for optimal feed consumption, productivity, health, and animal welfare. In the present study, we tested the hypothesis that dairy cows’ drinking behavior is altered by the design and cleanliness of their drinking troughs. The study was conducted at a commercial dairy farm with a herd of 135 lactating cows held in a free-range barn. Drinking behavior at two identical tank troughs (length: 2.00 m; width, 0.43 m; depth, 0.15 m; volume, 70 L) and two identical double-valve troughs (length, 0.73 m; width, 0.32 m; depth, 0.10 m; variable volume, 5–15 L), each made of stainless steel, was video-recorded daily in the first 2 h after feeding for 15 d in each of two study periods (December 2019 and February 2020). To determine the effects of trough cleanliness on drinking behavior, one trough of each design was cleaned daily, and the other trough of each design was not cleaned (2 × 2 Latin square study design), allowing the cows to choose between clean and unclean troughs of each design. Drinking episodes were analyzed and characterized using Behavioral Observation Research Interactive Software. Drinking water quality was analyzed at the start and end of the study periods and monitored daily using rapid tests. At tank troughs relative to double-valve troughs, the following were observed: a shorter total duration of drinking episodes (P < 0.001), higher odds for smelling behavior while tasting (P = 0.01), lower odds for drinking episodes consisting only of tasting behavior (P = 0.002), shorter (P = 0.03) and fewer drinking breaks (P < 0.001), lower odds for swallowing difficulties (P = 0.001), and higher odds for interruptions due to agonistic behavior (P = 0.001). The water quality at the start and end of the study periods did not differ significantly. Nevertheless, the cows’ drinking behavior changed according to trough cleanliness. At unclean troughs relative to clean troughs, the following were observed: more (P = 0.02) and longer (P = 0.03) drinking breaks, a higher number of sips per drinking episode (P < 0.0001), tendentially higher odds for drinking episodes consisting only of tasting behavior (P = 0.08), and lower odds for swallowing difficulties (P = 0.001). In total, daily cleaning of the troughs altered 7 and trough design 8 out of 13 drinking behavior variables, giving additional insights in dairy cows drinking behavior."
R79;Invited review: Freedom from thirst—Do dairy cows and calves have sufficient access to drinking water?;"Jensen, Margit Bak; Vestergaard, Mogens";2021;Review;Journal of dairy science;11368–11385;10.3168/jds.2021-20487;The importance of drinking water for production and animal welfare is widely recognized, but surveys and animal welfare assessment schemes suggest that many dairy calves and dairy cows do not have sufficient access. Limit milk-fed calves drink more water than calves fed milk ad libitum, but ad libitum milk-fed calves also require access to drinking water, as milk does not meet the animal's requirement for water. At hot ambient temperatures and when calves are sick, access to water is especially important and should be provided at all times. Many young calves do not have access to water throughout 24 h, and whether healthy young calves require free access to water at all times, or from which age, is not clear and requires further study. Dairy cow free water intake (FWI) is largely determined by milk yield, and high-yielding dairy cows may drink up 100 L of water per day. Dry matter, crude protein, and salt content of feed, as well as ambient temperature, have considerable effects on dairy cow water intake. Deprivation of water affects meal patterning for the cow, as well as increased subsequent rate of drinking and compensatory water intake. Although dairy cow ad libitum water intake may exceed the water provision necessary to maintain production, offering water for ad libitum intake may be necessary to safe guard animal welfare. Cattle are suction drinkers that prefer to drink from large open water surfaces, and Holstein dairy cows can drink at a rate of up to 24 L/min. Research on the effect of design and placement of water troughs for indoor-housed dairy cows on their drinking behavior and water intake is limited. Access to a water source at pasture increases the time cows spend there, and access to shade reduces water requirements during periods of warm weather. In both indoor and pastured cattle, there is a lack of knowledge about the effect of stocking of water troughs on competition, drinking behavior, and intake in dairy cows. Studies on the effect of available water trough length and placement, and of the number of cows being able to drink from the same trough of a given dimension, are needed to evaluate current recommendations.
R83;Influence of front curtain design on nest choice by laying hens;"Stämpfli. K.; Buchwalder, T.; Fröhlich, E.K.F.; Roth, B. A.";2012;Article;British poultry science;553-560;10.1016/j.applanim.2014.02.012;1. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of front curtains, one-piece (OP) or sliced in stripes (SL), on the hens’ nest preference and laying behaviour in an aviary system. We predicted that hens prefer SL-nests as they could perform nest inspections and enter and leave the nest along its whole width leading to fewer conflicts and more settled laying behaviour. 2. Eight pens containing 20 White Leghorn laying hens were equipped with two roll-away nests, one with OP and one with SL curtains. Laying behaviour was recorded for two days at peak lay in weeks 25 and 26. 3. More nest visits and more nest entries and exits along the whole width of the nest were counted in SL-nests. More sitting events without egg laying were performed in the OP-nests. No differences were found in the number of hens visiting the nests, egg number or aggressive behaviour. 4. Hens appeared to value the seclusion and protection provided by a closed front curtain. However, sliced curtains provided more opportunities to perform nest inspections.
R84;Does nest size matter to laying hens?;"Ringgenberg, N.; Fröhlich, E. K.F.; Harlander-Matauschek, A.; Würbel, H.; Roth, B.A.";2014;Article;"Applied Animal Behaviour Science
";66–73;10.1016/j.applanim.2014.02.012;Laying hens in loose housing systems have access to group-nests which provide space for several hens at a time to lay their eggs. They are thus rather large and the trend in the industry is to further increase the size of these nests. Though practicality is important for the producer, group-nests should also cater to the egg-laying behaviour ofhens to promote good welfare. One ofthe factors playing a role in the attractiveness ofa nest is the amount of enclosure: hens prefer more enclosure when having a choice between different nest types. The aim of this study was to investigate if hens prefer smaller group-nests to lay their eggs given that they may seem more enclosed than larger nests. The relative preference ofgroups oflaying hens for two nest sizes – 0.43m2 vs. 0.86m2 – was tested in a free-access choice test. The experiment was conducted in two consecutive trials with 100 hens each. They were housed from 18 to 36 weeks of age in five groups of 20 animals and had access to two commercial group-nests differing in internal size only. We counted eggs daily as a measure of nest preference. At 28 and 36 weeks of age, videos were taken of the pens and inside the nests on one day during the first 5h of lights-on. The nest videos were used to record the number of hens per nest and their behaviour with a 10min scan sampling interval. The pen videos were observed continuously to count the total number of nest visits per nest and to calculate the duration of nest visits of five focal hens per pen. We found a relative preference for the small nest as more eggs, fewer nest visits per egg and longer nest visit durations were recorded for that nest. In addition, more hens – including more sitting hens – were in the small nests during the main egg-laying period, while the number of standing hens did not differ. These observations indicate that even though both nests may have been explored to a similar extent, the hens preferred the small nest for egg-laying.
R85;Influence of nest site on the behaviour of laying hens;"Lentfer, T.L.; Gebhardt-Henrich, S.G.; Fröhlich, E.K.F.; Borell, E. von; ";2011;Article;"Applied Animal Behaviour Science
";70–77;10.1016/j.applanim.2011.08.016;Low rates of nest acceptance by laying hens are a major problem in commercial poultry farming operations with aviary systems, leading to costly manual collection and cleaning ofmislaid eggs. To gain knowledge about factors affecting nest use, laying hens’ preferences for different nest locations were tested. Nests are normally installed at one of two sites: against a wall ofthe hen house or integrated into one tier ofthe aviary rack. The preferences of laying hens for different nest sites have never been examined under commercial conditions. Theaimofthis study is to investigate whetherbehavioural differences canbedetected between the different nest sites. The study consists oftwo consecutive trials involving 5027 Lohmann Selected Leghorn hens (LSL) and 601 layer hybrids selected for extensive housing conditions (EXT). The hens were randomly assigned to eight compartments per trial in groups of355–360 LSL or 300 EXT in a laying hen house. Four compartments were equipped with a Volito Voletage® aviary system (VV), and four were equipped with a Rihs Bolegg®II aviary system (RB), both of which contained either integrated or wall-placed nests when the experiments started. A strongly balanced crossover design with four periods was used. At 36, 44 and 52 weeks of age, the nest site in four out of the eight compartments was switched. Before each change, the fronts of half of the nests were videotaped during the light period, and the behaviour throughout the main laying period was analysed. Furthermore, the numbers of nest eggs and mislaid eggs in each compartment were recorded every day. No differences in the number of mislaid eggs between the two nest sites could be detected, except at the age of 20/21 weeks when hens in VV aviaries mislaid more eggs when nests were integrated (P = 0.0012). More hens stood simultaneously in front of the integrated nests than in front of wall-placed nests (P= 0.015). Activity of the laying hens increased (P= 0.0073), and stationary behavioural patterns declined (P= 0.0093), when the nests were placed by the wall. Hens inspected integrated nests for a longer duration than wall-placed nests, but wall-placed nests were visited more frequently. In addition to the nest site, the width of the platform in front of the nest influenced laying hen behaviour. Compared with narrower platforms, balance movements decreased on wider ones. Additionally, the platform design had to be taken into account as well, given that hens could not stand or walk as securely on wooden slats as on a grid floor.
R86;Influence of nest seclusion and nesting material on pre-laying behaviour of laying hens;"Struelens; E.; Van Nuffel; A.; Tuyttens; F. A.; Audoorn; L.; Vranken; E.; Zoons; J.; Berckmans; D.; Oedberg; F.; van Dongen; S.; Sonck; B.";2007;Article;"Applied Animal Behaviour Science
";106–119;10.1016/j.applanim.2007.07.010;Provision of nest sites is beneficial for the welfare of laying hens in intensive production systems. The design of these nest sites has a direct effect on pre-laying behaviour. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of screening off the entrances of the nest boxes with non-transparent flaps and providing nesting or flooring material on pre-laying behaviour. Eighteen individual Hisex brown laying hens and 18 groups of five hens were tested for 2 days in a test cage containing three nest boxes each with a different nesting material (peat, artificial turf and plastic-coated wire mesh). On one of the days the nest boxes were equipped with plastic flaps at the entrances. Pre-laying behaviour was analysed using focal sampling. Both degree of seclusion and nesting material had an effect on pre-laying behaviour of hens. Nest boxes with flaps were visited less frequently but for a longer duration per visit than nest boxes without flaps. Hens spent more time sitting and scratching, and less time standing and moving when flaps were present. Hens also received fewer pecks (group test) when nest boxes were equipped with flaps. Major differences were found between pre-laying behaviour on coated wire mesh compared to peat and artificial turf with shorter duration of nest visits (group test), more standing (group test) and moving (individual and group test), and less sitting (individual and group test) and object pecking (group test) on coated wire mesh. Differences in pre-laying behaviour on peat versus artificial turf were observed for the behaviours moving (less on peat), sitting (more on peat in the individual test) and object pecking (more on peat in the group test). It is concluded that hens show more settled pre-laying behaviour and more nest-building behaviour in the presence of flaps at the entrances of nest boxes. These results indicate that seclusion of nest boxes with non-transparent flaps is beneficial to laying hen welfare. Differences in pre-laying behaviour also suggest that plastic-coated wire mesh is less suitable as nesting material than peat and artificial turf.
R87;Preference and motivation of laying hens to eat under different illuminances and the effect of illuminance on eating behaviour;"Prescott, N. B.; Wathes, C. M.";2002;Article;British poultry science;190–195;10.1080/00071660120121382;"1. In experiment 1, 10 laying hens were given the choice to eat food pellets from any of 4 food bowls illuminated by overhead, incandescent luminaires at <1, 6, 20 or 200 lux. During a trial hens were allowed to eat for 5 min. After each minute had elapsed (from the start of eating) the light sources were extinguished and the illuminances re-assigned to the food bowls in a random manner. Each hen received two trials, one where the food was freely available and another where it was hidden in a sand and gravel mix. 2. The hens chose to eat for most time in the brightest (200 lux) and least in the dimmest (<1 lux) environments for both free and hidden food (free: 5.9, 10.5, 10.4, 15.7s for increasing illuminance; Hidden: 5.5, 9.8, 9.1 and 15.7s. 3. In experiment 2, 9 hens were trained to peck at either an illuminated or unilluminated panel to access a food reward behind a guillotine door for 3 s. Five hens were trained to peck the illuminated panel to access food brightly lit (200 lux) or the unilluminated panel to access food dimly lit (<1 lux); 4 hens were trained vice versa. The flock was then divided into three groups of three, and three treatments imposed on each group in a Latin-square arrangement. In treatment 1, one peck at either panel allowed access to the chosen light environment (F1:F1). In treatment 2, 5 pecks were required to access food brightly lit on a variable ratio, but only one to access food dimly lit (ratio V5:F1). In treatment 3, the variable ratio was increased to V10:F1 to access food in the light. 4. Over 40 trials for each hen, the mean number of attempts to eat food in the light (where the panel which allowed access to food brightly lit was pecked at least once) was 34.5 for F1:F1, 12.1 for V5:F1 and 8.5 for V10:F1. The mean number of food rewards taken in bright light was 34.5, 3.1 and 1.8, respectively. For both variables, the difference between F1:F1 and V5:F1 was significant but not between V5:F1 and V10:F1. By interpolation of the 'attempts' data, it was estimated that hens would work 2.3 times harder to gain access to food brightly lit than for food dimly lit. 5. In experiment 3, the influence of the same illuminances applied over a food bowl as in experiment 1 (<1, 6, 20 or 200 lux) on the number of pecks/min, food consumed/min, food consumed/peck and the force of pecks was examined. 6. The amount of food consumed was lowest in the dimmest environment (3.1 vs 7.5, 7.4 and 7.1 g/ min for increasing illuminance, respectively); as was the number of pecks (35.6 vs. 125.0, 123.1, and 125.4 pecks/min respectively for increasing illuminance). The amount consumed per peck did not vary significantly with illuminance. The mean peck force showed a trend to be lowest in the dimmest environment (5.3 vs. 6.6, 7.0 and 6.6 N respectively, for increasing illuminance). 7. Overall, the hens showed a preference and appeared motivated to eat in bright as opposed to dim light. The hens were unwilling to eat at low illuminances although the 'efficiency' of eating (g/peck) was not impaired significantly. These data may have implications for novel lighting systems and those where hens are required to eat in the dark or in very dim light."
R88;Mitigation Strategies of Air Pollutants for Mechanical Ventilated Livestock and Poultry Housing—A Review;"Guo, L.; Zhao, B.; Jia, Y.; He, F.; Chen, W.";2022;Review;Atmosphere;1-22;10.3390/atmos13030452;The fast development of large-scale intensive animal husbandry has led to an increased proportion of atmospheric pollution arising from livestock and poultry housing. Atmospheric pollutants, including particulate matter (PM), ammonia (NH3), hydrogen sulfide (H2S), and greenhouse gases (GHG), as well as other hazardous materials (e.g., gases, bacteria, fungi and viruses), have significant influences upon the local atmospheric environment and the health of animals and nearby residents. Therefore, it is imperative to develop livestock and poultry housing mitigation strategies targeting atmospheric pollution, to reduce its negative effects on the ambient atmosphere and to promote sustainable agricultural production. In this paper, we summarize the various strategies applied for reducing outlet air pollutants and purifying inlet air from mechanical ventilated livestock and poultry housing. This review highlights the current state of knowledge on the removal of various atmospheric pollutants and their relative performance. The potential optimization of processes and operational design, material selection, and other technologies, such as electrostatic spinning, are discussed in detail. The study provides a timely critical analysis to fill the main research gaps or needs in this domain by using practical and stakeholder-oriented evaluation criteria.
R89;Poultry Housing and Management;Oloyo, A. and Ojerinde, A.;2019;Book chapter;Poultry- An advanced learning;ch1;10.5772/intechopen.83811;Majority of the people in the poorest regions of the tropics rely on poultry production as their major source of protein supply. However, poultry production is hindered by the harsh environmental conditions in this regions therefore, reducing the daily supply of protein. It is believed that understanding heat stress in birds by paying detail attention to the sources of heat generation in a poultry house can help manage the heat stress situation in this region. This text reviews the internal climatic conditions of the poultry houses, how the birds respond to them, and their implications for heat management in poultry production. Thus, it provides pertinent information for guidance on parameters for open poultry houses architectural design that ensures optimum climatic conditions that will alleviate heat stress problem in poultry production in hot and humid climate.
R90;Effect of type of aviary, manure and litter handling on the emission kinetics of ammonia from layer houses;Groot-Koerkamp, P.W.G., Bleijenberg, R.;1998;Article;British poultry science;372-392;10.1080/00071669888935;" An experiment with laying hens of 16 to 36 weeks of age was carried out to investigate differences in ammonia emission between 3 commercially available aviary housing systems and the additional effect of manure and litter handling. 2. Ammonia emission from Tiered Wire Floor (TWF), Natura and Boleg aviary systems increased rapidly from placement of the hens to a peak at 20 weeks of age and showed respective equilibrium level at 11.55, 11.24 (N.S. compared to TWF) and 14.55 (P 0.001 compared to TWF) mg ammonia per h per hen. 3. Emission increased by 5.6% on the first day and 11% on subsequent days after removal of the manure on the belts. The litter layer increased up to about 7 cm; removal of 6.5 cm reduced emission by 20%. 4. Ammonia concentrations varied between 1 and 16 ppm, while ventilation rates were between 1 and 4 m3/h per hen to maintain inside temperature at about 22 5. About 82% of the droppings produced by the hens was found on the belts, either directly deposited there, or put there as litter material. The composition of the manure on the belts and the litter, a sand-droppings mixture, changed significantly during the first part of the laying cycle and differences were found between the 3 aviary systems with respect to the DM, pH, ash, Nkjeldahl and Total Ammoniacal Nitrogen concentration. 6. The changes in time and differences between the 3 systems in ammonia emissions and manure and litter composition were related to design of the systems, behaviour of the hens and degradation (of nitrogenous components) and volatilisation processes (water and ammonia)"
R91;Designing better water troughs: dairy cows prefer and drink more from larger troughs;"Pinheiro Machado Filho, L. C.; Teixeira, D. L.; Weary, D. M.; Keyserlingk, M.A.G. von; Hötzel, M. J.";2004;Article;Applied Animal Behaviour Science;185-193;10.1016/j.applanim.2004.07.002;"Little previous work has examined the effects of water trough design on dairy cattle. In the
current study we tested the effects of water trough height and size on preference and water intake
of cows on pasture. In the first experiment, cows (n = 14) were individually given access to two
commercially available water troughs that differed in height (30 cm versus 60 crn) and size
(126 cm x 68 cm versus 139 cm x 95 cm), but were otherwise similar. Cows (mean + S.E.M.)
spent more time drinking (27.26 + 6.22 s versus 2.43 + 2.08 s), consumed more water (9.28 +
2.271 versus 0.68 + 0.711) and took more sips (17.56 + 4.31 versus 1.64 + 1.48) from the higher
and !arger of the two troughs. In a second experiment the smaller trough was placed into the !arger
60 cm trough, so that the two choices were presented to the cows (n = 12) at identical heights.
When presented in this way, there was no significant difference in cow drinking behaviour or
consumption from the two troughs, although there was some tendency for cows to drink more and
spend more time drinking from the !arger trough. To deterrnine if the preference for the !arger and
deeper trough also affected consurnption when cows did not have a choice, we measured
consumption over a 24 h period when eight groups (each of three to four animals) had access
to one of the two troughs tested in Experiment I. Each group was tested with each trough
on consecutive days, with the order of testing balanced across groups. All groups ·drank more water when they were provided the higher and !arger trough. Consumption was 43.841 cow- 1
(+ 2.95) from this trough compared to 33.351 cow- 1 (+2.591 cow- 1 ) from the lower, smaller
version (P < 0.03). In conclusion, cows prefer and drink more water from !arger troughs.
© 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved."
R92;Influence of manure scrapers on dairy cows in cubicle housing systems;"Buck, M.; Friedli, K.; Steiner, B.; Gygax, L.; Wechsler, B.; Steiner, A.";2013;Article;Livestock Science;129–137;10.1016/j.livsci.2013.10.011;"Manure scrapers are widely used in dairy cow loose-housing systems. In order to evaluate the effects of the scrapers on the cows, we assessed their impact on the animals' cardiac activity, feeding behaviour, and the behavioural reactions of cows confronted with different types of scrapers. In part I of the study, we measured cardiac activity (mean R–R interval and RMSSD, a parameter of heart-rate variability) whilst observing the behaviour of 29 focal cows on three farms during situations with and without active manure scrapers. Lower RMSSD values were observed during scraping events while cows were either lying, standing or walking in the alleyway, standing completely in the lying cubicle, or standing half in the lying cubicle (P¼0.03), but only tended to differ while directly confronted with the scraper (P¼0.06). This indicates that dairy cows experienced at least some mild stress during manure-scraping events. In part II, the feeding behaviour of 12 cows on each of two farms was recorded by means of a jaw-movement sensor and compared between situations with the manure-scraping event following forage provision either within or outside the main daily feeding period (i.e. within 1 or after 2 h from forage provisioning, respectively). The duration of night-time feeding (P¼0.049) and the number of feeding bouts (P¼0.036) were higher when a manurescraping event took place within the main daily feeding period, indicating that the cows' feeding behaviour had been disturbed. In part III, we observed the cows' behaviour on 15 farms during eight manure scraping events per farm, where each of five farms had one of three different scraper types. We assessed the cows' immediate reactions when confronted with the scraper. In addition, we recorded the number of animals present in the alleyways before and after the manure-scraping events. The more cows that were present in the alleyways before the scraping event, the lower the proportion of cows showing direct behavioural reactions both with (P¼0.017) and without (P¼0.028) scraper contact, and the higher the number of cows that left the alleyways (Po0.001). Scraper type did not influence the proportion of cows showing behavioural reactions.
In conclusion, our results show that dairy cows perceive the manure-scraping event negatively in some situations, that feeding behaviour may be disturbed when scrapers are active during the main feeding period, and that cows avoid the scraper during crowded situations."
R93;The effect of stocking density and a blind on the behavior of Holstein dairy cattle in group maternity pens. Part I: Calving location, locomotion, and separation behavior;"Creutzinger, K. C.; Dann, H. M.; Krawczel, P. D.; Habing, G. G.; Proudfoot, K. L.";2021;Article;Journal of dairy science;7109–7121;10.3168/jds.2020-19744;In a more natural setting, dairy cows separate from herdmates and seek a secluded area to give birth. However, on many dairy facilities, cows calve in barren group pens with limited space, which may limit their ability to perform these behaviors. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of stocking density and provision of a blind (a single-sided solid partition) in group bedded pack maternity pens on the behavior of dairy cattle. The study included 4 experimental treatments: (1) high stocking density (7.7–12.9 m2 of lying space/cow) with a blind, (2) low stocking density (15.4–25.8 m2) with a blind, (3) high stocking density without a blind, and (4) low stocking density without a blind. We analyzed the effect of these treatments on locomotor and separation behavior as well as blind use during the 24 h before calving. A total of 127 primiparous heifers and 247 multiparous cows were housed in 16 mixed-parity groups (4 groups per treatment) from approximately 3 wk before to immediately after calving. Locomotor behavior increased from 24 to 2 h before calving regardless of treatment but increased the most in high stocking density pens without a blind. Additionally, heifers performed more locomotion than cows. Animals increased their distance from other cows beginning approximately 4 h before calving. Animals in low stocking density pens had a greater distance from other cows compared with those in high stocking density pens. Additionally, heifers had a greater distance from penmates during the 4 h before calving than cows. More animals calved in the area of the pen that contained a blind compared with the same respective areas of high and low stocking density pens that did not contain a blind. These results suggest that periparturient dairy cattle in group maternity pens are motivated to seek seclusion at calving, but increased stocking density may impede their ability to do so. Providing additional space and a blind may benefit periparturient dairy cows and heifers by facilitating natural calving behaviors.
R94;Major advances associated with environmental effects on dairy cattle;"Collier, R. J.; Dahl, G. E.; VanBaale, M. J.";2006;Article;Journal of dairy science;1244-1253;10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(06)72193-2;It has long been known that season of the year has major impacts on dairy animal performance measures including growth, reproduction, and lactation. Additionally, as average production per cow has doubled, the metabolic heat output per animal has increased substantially rendering animals more susceptible to heat stress. This, in turn, has altered cooling and housing requirements for cattle. Substantial progress has been made in the last quarter-century in delineating the mechanisms by which thermal stress and photoperiod influence performance of dairy animals. Acclimation to thermal stress is now identified as a homeorhetic process under endocrine control. The process of acclimation occurs in 2 phases (acute and chronic) and involves changes in secretion rate of hormones as well as receptor populations in target tissues. The time required to complete both phases is weeks rather than days. The opportunity may exist to modify endocrine status of animals and improve their resistance to heat and cold stress. New estimates of genotype x environment interactions support use of recently available molecular and genomics tools to identify the genetic basis of heat-stress sensitivity and tolerance. Improved understanding of environmental effects on nutrient requirements has resulted in diets for dairy animals during different weather conditions. Demonstration that estrus behavior is adversely affected by heat stress has led to increased use of timed insemination schemes during the warm summer months to improve conception rates by discarding the need to detect estrus. Studies evaluating the effects of heat stress on embryonic survival support use of cooling during the immediate postbreeding period and use of embryo transfer to improve pregnancy rates. Successful cooling strategies for lactating dairy cows are based on maximizing available routes of heat exchange, convection, conduction, radiation, and evaporation. Areas in dairy operations in which cooling systems have been used to enhance cow comfort, improve milk production, reproductive efficiency, and profit include both housing and milking facilities. Currently, air movement (fans), wetting (soaking) the cow's body surface, high pressure mist (evaporation) to cool the air in the cows' environment, and facilities designed to minimize the transfer of solar radiation are used for heat abatement. Finally, improved understanding of photoperiod effects on cattle has allowed producers to maximize beneficial effects of photoperiod length while minimizing negative effects.
R95;Review of wallowing in pigs: implications for animal welfare;Bracke, M.B.M., Spoolder, H.A.M.;2011;Review;Animal Welfare ;347-364;10.1017/S0962728600002918;Most modern production systems, especially in temperate climates, do not offer wallowing facilities to pigs and, to date, this has neither generated much concern in welfare science nor public debate on pig welfare. Nevertheless, wallowing is a natural behaviour of pigs which may be important to them. This paper systematically examines the overall importance of wallowing for pig welfare using principles developed in semantic modelling. As a first step, relevant citations were collected from the scientific literature. Secondly, since the importance of the attribute (‘wallowing’) is dependent upon the discrepancy between its best and worst levels, these levels were specified in relation to the status quo in pig husbandry, ie no pool (even during periods of overheating) and the ideal mud pool, respectively. Criteria for an ideal mud pool were formulated in terms of pool location and size, substrate, thermal conditions, body care and hygiene. Thirdly, available scientific information about wallowing was systematically described in relation to ten so-called weighting categories identified in semantic modelling (pain and illness, survival/heat stress, fitness, stress, aggression, abnormal behaviour, frustration, natural behaviour, preferences and demand). Fourthly, the welfare importance of wallowing was assessed by tentatively comparing it to several other welfare attributes, such as food, foraging substrate, social contact and non-castration. This leads to the suggestion that wallowing is important for pig welfare because of its multifaceted nature. It may even be very important when other forms of thermoregulation are sub-optimal. This paper, finally, discusses the ‘ethical room for manoeuvre’ concerning the (non-) implementation of mud pools in practice. An integrated approach is suggested to address related scientific, technological and ethical issues, because stakeholders are faced not only with scientific and technological gaps in knowledge but also with economical, ecological, food-safety and psychological barriers. As an important element of natural behaviour and positive welfare, the subject may provide an opportunity for pig farming. This should be recognised more explicitly in transition processes towards fully sustainable pig production systems.
R96;The effect of drinker design on the performance, behaviour and water usage of growing pigs;"Magowan, E.; O’Connell, N.E..; McCann, M.E.E.";2007;Article;"Report for UFU and PPDC Committees
";1-20;NA;Water intake is a key factor influencing feed intake, which is the main driver of growth in pigs. Factors which can reduce water intake include poor drinker design. In addition the economy of water usage is important for both financial and slurry volume control reasons. A total of 720 Landrace x Large White pigs, grouped in pens of 20, were offered water from six different drinker arrangements. The standard Drik-O-Mat bowl drinker was compared with the normal Verba nipple drinker, the Halfman Bite drinker and the Jalmarsen Bite Ball drinker, flow rates (ml/min) 250, 600, 700 and 1200 respectively. Two drinkers/nipples were offered per pen. The position of the Drik-O-Mat bowl and Verba nipple drinkers was also compared. Drinkers were either placed side by side or 2 metres apart. When pigs were offered water from the 6 drinker arrangements, no difference in growth performance was found. However, significantly more water was used with the Halfman Bite and Jalmarsen Bite Ball drinkers compared to the Drik-O-Mat Bowl and Verba Nipple drinkers. Behavioural observations showed that this was due to a greater use of these drinkers for ‘recreational’ purposes than other drinkers. Although pigs appeared to adapt more quickly post weaning to the Halfman Bite and Jalmarsen Bite Ball drinkers, overall the extra water used was assumed to be wasted and increased slurry volume. If this assumption is correct the use of the Halfman Bite and Jalmarsen Bite Ball drinkers, compared to the Verba nipple drinkers resulted in an extra 17 and 32 tanker loads (1500 gallons) of slurry produced per year respectively. When the Drik-O-Mat Bowl drinkers were placed apart, significantly less water was used compared to when they were side by side. This was accompanied by a significant reduction in swapping between drinkers. These effects did not occur to the same extent when Verba Nipple drinkers were placed apart, and this suggests that the benefits of placing drinkers apart are reduced when higher water flow rates are used. In conclusion, no difference in growth rate of weaned pigs from 4–10 weeks of age was observed with pigs offered water via either Drik-O-Mat bowl, Verba Nipple, Halfman Bite or Jalmarsen Bite Ball drinkers but significantly more water was used with the latter two drinkers. There is some evidence that water usage could be reduced by placing Drik-O-Mat bowl drinkers approximately 2 meters apart within pens.
R97;The effects of components of grazing system on welfare of fattening pigs;"Tozawa, A.; Tanaka, S.; Sato, S.";2016;Article;Asian-Australas Journal of Animal Sciences;428-435;10.5713/ajas.15.0190;The objective of this study was to clarify the most effective component of grazing for improving welfare of fattening pigs. This study compared welfare indicators of 20 fattening pigs aged 100 to 124 days (the prior period) and 138 to 164 days (the latter period) in an indoor housing system (IS), an outdoor pasturing system (OP), a concrete floor paddock system (CF), a concrete floor paddock system with fresh grass (FG), or a soil floor paddock system (SF). The last three treatments include important components of a grazing system: extra space, grass feed, and soil floor. Behavior, wounds on the body, and performances, measured as average daily gain (ADG) and feed conversion ratio, were observed. CF pigs behaved similarly to IS pigs. FG pigs showed higher levels of foraging, chewing and activity. SF pigs engaged in higher levels of foraging, exploring, activity, and rooting, and showed a similar amount of playing behavior as OP pigs. ADG was the same in all treatments at the prior period, and increased in the order FG, IS, CF, SF, and OP at the latter. The behaviors and performance of SF pigs resembled those of OP which seemed to indicate a consistently higher standard of welfare than the other treatments. In conclusion, the existence of a soil floor is the most important component of a pasture for improving the welfare of pigs.
R98;Elevated platforms for weaners: do pigs use the extra space?;"Fels, M.; Lüthje, F.; Bill, J.; Aleali, K.; Kemper, N.";2018;Article;Veterinary Record;1-3;10.1136/vr.104789;NA
R99;Usage of outdoor runs and defaecation behaviour of fattening pigs;"Höne, U.; Krause, E.T.; Bussemas, R.; Traulsen, I.; Schrader, L.";2023;Article;Applied Animal Behaviour Science;1-7;/10.1016/j.applanim.2022.105821;Access to an outdoor run improves the housing conditions of fattening pigs by an enlarged space allowance, access to different climatic conditions and environmental stimulation. One central conflicting issue regarding outdoor runs is the emission of harmful gases such as ammonia resulting from faeces and urine. However, by establishing appropriate functional areas in fattening pens, the area soiled by faeces and urine can potentially be reduced. Here, we investigated the usage of an outdoor run and the frequencies and locations of defaecation behaviour of fattening pigs kept in groups of ten in eight pens. Usage of the outdoor run was registered by scan sampling at the group level in three observation periods (pigs at 16, 19, and 22 weeks of age). Furthermore, in each pen, two focal pigs were individually marked and continuously observed for 24 h in each observation period to record defaecation behaviour. At the group level, the fattening pigs used the outdoor run mainly during the daytime between 06:00 h and 20:00 h. A total of 99.4% of defaecation events occurred in the outdoor run, most often in the corner next to the wall of the barn. On average, 11.08 ( ± SD 3.06) defaecation events per pig per day were recorded, whereby the time of day significantly affected the relative frequencies of defaecation behaviour (GLMER, X2 1 = 4.11, P < 0.043). Fattening pigs defaecated more often during the daytime than during the nighttime. The number of daily defaecations decreased with age. In pens as used in our study, fattening pigs perform nearly all defaecations in the outdoor run and within a small area. This may enable technical possibilities to reduce ammonia emissions in pig pens with outdoor runs, such as regular cleaning of dunging areas by an automatic floor scraper
R100;Review on heat stress in pigs on farm;"Herman M. Vermeer, H.M.; Aarnink, A.J.A.";2023;Review;EURCAW report;1-17;NA;NA
R101;Review: Concrete outdoor runs for organic growing-finishing pigs – a legislative, ethological and environmental perspective;"Wimmler, C.; Vermeer, H. M.; Leeb, C.; Salomon, E.; Andersen, H. M-L";2022;Review;Animal;1-11;10.1016/j.animal.2021.100435;Concrete Outdoor Runs (OUTRUNs) are a characteristic part of organic pig housing. They must allow species-specific behaviours such as rooting and elimination, as explicitly required by organic legislation of the European Union (EU). However, OUTRUN design often fails to fulfil behavioural needs, and excreta can cover large parts of the OUTRUN leading to poor pen hygiene and associated ammonia (NH3) emissions. This review integrates legislative, ethological and environmental requirements for OUTRUNs for organic growing-finishing pigs. While EU regulations specify some welfare-related standards for OUTRUNs (e.g. minimal space allowance), national and private standards interpret some aspects differently, e.g. the proportion of roofed and slatted floor area. Furthermore, reducing NH3 emissions is equally a challenge for organic systems, even though EU legislation does not explicitly refer to OUTRUNs. Depending on the actual use of the OUTRUN for elimination, higher space allowance compared to conventional production norms increases the potential for a large NH3-emitting surface. The design of pen features (e.g. roof, floor, enrichment) can encourage pigs to separate functional areas and consequently reduce the elimination area and associated NH3 emissions. While providing the main lying area indoors, resting outdoors should be possible for sub-groups during the day. A roof protects pigs and resources (e.g. bedding) from adverse weather, but the effect on pig welfare and NH3 emissions is site-specific. A floor design that ensures practicable manure removal and drainage is most important to reduce emissions. Providing opportunities for exploring and rooting in the OUTRUN has particular relevance for pigs’ behavioural needs and can improve pen hygiene by reducing the elimination area. Cooling facilities are increasingly important to prevent heat stress and its detrimental effects on welfare and pen hygiene. Finally, practicability for farmers needs to be ensured for all resources provided in OUTRUNs, as good management is crucial. Research gaps emerge regarding the association between soiling and NH3 and the influence of certain pen features (shape, roof, feeder location, pen partitions and wet areas) on pig behaviour and soiling.
R102;A note on piglets’ preferences for drinker types at two weaning ages;"Torrey, S.; Widowski, T.M.";2006;Article;Applied Animal Behaviour Science;333–341;10.1016/j.applanim.2005.12.007;Piglets weaned younger than 3 weeks of age often exhibit excessive amounts of drinking behaviour compared to pigs weaned at later ages. Piglets of different ages may be attracted to different drinking devices because of the oral motor patterns used for drinking from them or because they provide different amounts of tactile stimulation to the snout. Therefore, this study was designed to examine individual piglet preference for drinker type when piglets were weaned at two different ages. In three separate experiments, newly weaned piglets’ preferences for drinker devices were examined through 10 days after weaning. In all three experiments, individually housed piglets were weaned at either 19 or 26 days of age and given access to two drinker devices (either a nipple drinker and a push-lever bowl drinker or a push-lever bowl drinker and a float bowl drinker). According to both drinking behaviour and water intake, pigs preferred the nipple drinker or the float bowl drinker rather than the push-lever bowl drinker. These results suggest that piglets prefer a drinker that is easy to find or simply provides easier access to water.
R103;Elevated platforms for pigs – A review;"Kauselmann, K.; Schrader, L.; Krause, E.T.";2023;Review;Livestock Science;1-7;10.1016/j.livsci.2023.105362;In pig housing systems, measures to increase the welfare of pigs by environmental enrichment, establishing different functional areas, and improved space allotment are demanded. One interesting way to achieve these improvements can probably be elevated platforms that can be integrated into already existing pens and be part of new pens. First initial  studies on elevated platforms for pigs were conducted about 30 years ago, but interest somehow faded out. Due to possible positive effects of elevated platforms on pig welfare, research on this topic has currently re-increased. This review provides an overview on the existing literature, while discussing different mdesigns of platforms and ramps, the biological ability of pigs to use elevated platforms and ramps, advantages and disadvantages for both pigs and farmers, and methods used to evaluate the effects of the platforms on pigs. In summary, due to their biological abilities, pigs are able to use elevated platforms and accept them well. However, ramp design affects the usage and the accessibility of the platform in rearing and fattening pigs. A small number of pigs might refuse to use the ramp to the platform and might only benefit indirectly. Performance, health and behavior of pigs are not negatively affected by elevated platforms. Compared to pigs kept in pens without elevated platforms, aggressive behavior and tail biting can even be reduced in pens with platforms. Increasing space allotment in existing stables by installing elevated platforms has been calculated 50 % less expensive compared to increasing space allotment by new buildings. However, to our knowledge, within the European Union elevated platforms may only be accounted as unobstructed area for pigs in some countries.
R104;Preference of growing pigs for illuminance;"Taylor, N.; Prescott, N.; Perry, G.; Potter, M.; Le Sueur, C.; Wathes, C.";2006;Article;Applied Animal Behaviour Science;19-31;10.1016/j.applanim.2005.04.016;"This experiment investigated the preference of juvenile pigs for illuminance, and indirectly photoperiod, at two ages. The animals were equally familiar with all illuminances prior to testing. Four groups, each offour pigs, occupied a four-compartment preference chamber in which a different illuminance was applied to each compartment: minimum (2.4), 4, 40 and 400 lx. Illuminances were rearranged every 2 days to avoid positional bias. The pigs significantly preferred the dimmest illuminance (mean occupancy 7 h 20 min per 24 h, backtransformed data) and spent the least time in the brightest (4 h 49 min per 24 h), with an intermediate and similar length of time spent in the other illuminances (6 h 25 min and 5 h 25 min in 4 and 40 lx, respectively, F3127 = 8.93, P < 0.001). The most common behaviours of the pigs when in the darkest compartment were resting and sleeping. The EU directive 2001/88 requires a minimum illuminance of 40 lx for pig production; this illuminance was neither aversive nor strongly preferred by the pigs. Our findings also suggest that pigs should be provided with an appropriate period of rest at an illuminance of 2.4 lx for at least 6 h per day. The only active behaviour affected by illuminance was defecation; the pigs preferred to defecate in the brighter illuminances. Spatial provision of minimal illuminance could potentially improve pig welfare by providing a preferred light environment for resting and also by creating a resting area distinct from dunging areas, thus improving hygiene."
R105;Comparison of feeding behaviour and performance of weaned pigs given food in two types of dry feeders with integrated drinkers;"Laitat, M.; Vandenheede, M.; Désiron, A.; Canart, B.; Nicks, B.";1999;Article;Animal Science;35-42;10.1017/s1357729800050050;NA
R106;Outdoor climate housing systems for fattening pigs;"Neser, S. L.; Rathmer, B.; Gronauer, A. G.";2003;Report;American Society of Agricultural Engineers;144-151;10.13031/2013.15480;Different systems of outdoor climate houses for fattening pigs on a practice farm were compared to the existing supplemental heated insulated stable with 400 places. The three different systems were an outdoor climate stable with kennels (partly slatted and with straw litter) and partial slatted floor on liquid manure basis for 600 fattening pigs. The three-year investigations were completed studying the construction, stable climate, animal behavior, costs and achievements, ammonia concentrations and emissions. Results from the investigated systems were comparable with standard usage. In summary, outdoor climate stables with kennels represent an alternative to conventional stable systems and offer a practicable solution for the future.
R107;Tail-biting: a new perspective;"Taylor, N. R.; Main, D.C.J.; Mendl, M.; Edwards, S. A.";2010;Review;Veterinary record;137-147;10.1016/j.tvjl.2009.08.028;Tail-biting data from different studies are difficult to compare because a range of definitions of tail-biting behaviour and tail-biting lesions are used. Although records from abattoirs provide a large database, their usefulness is restricted as tail-biting is under-recorded and environmental and husbandry factors associated with the behaviour are unlikely to be known. Both farm and abattoir data provide no information on the number of pigs biting, only those bitten. Studying individual animals that tail-bite should give a better understanding of the pig's motivation to tail-bite and which of the components of its environment should be adjusted to improve welfare. This review examines the existing literature on tail-biting in pigs but considered from a new perspective using three different descriptive behavioural types, namely, 'two-stage', 'sudden-forceful' and 'obsessive', each of which may have different motivational bases. The article also considers the different environmental and husbandry factors which may affect each type of behaviour and discusses why this is such a complicated field and why it is often difficult to draw conclusions from available research.
R108;Welfare of pigs on farm;EFSA;2022;Report;EFSA Journal ;1-319;10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7421;This scientific opinion focuses on the welfare of pigs on farm, and is based on literature and expert opinion. All pig categories were assessed: gilts and dry sows, farrowing and lactating sows, suckling piglets, weaners, rearing pigs and boars. The most relevant husbandry systems used in Europe are described. For each system, highly relevant welfare consequences were identified, as well as related animal-based measures (ABMs), and hazards leading to the welfare consequences. Moreover, measures to prevent or correct the hazards and/or mitigate the welfare consequences are recommended. Recommendations are also provided on quantitative or qualitative criteria to answer specific questions on the welfare of pigs related to tail biting and related to the European Citizen's Initiative 'End the Cage Age'. For example, the AHAW Panel recommends how to mitigate group stress when dry sows and gilts are grouped immediately after weaning or in early pregnancy. Results of a comparative qualitative assessment suggested that long-stemmed or long-cut straw, hay or haylage is the most suitable material for nest-building. A period of time will be needed for staff and animals to adapt 
R109;Behavior and extensive management of domestic sows (Sus scrofa) and litters;"Dellmeier, G.R.; Friend, T.H.";1991;Review;Applied Animal Behaviour Science;327-341;10.1016/0168-1591(91)90258-Y;"Application of knowledge of the ethological characteristics of domestic swine (Sus scrofa) facilitates their efficacious management under extensive agricultural conditions. Domestic swine exhibit complex maternal and social behavior that includes nest building, communal nesting, and a high degree of tolerance of young that are not their own even to the extent of defending those young and often allowing them to suckle. Neonatal piglets are highly precocial; they typically establish a teat order within 24 h of birth, can readily identify their own dams by odor and sound, and integrate into the herd when 1 week-10 days of age. A varied environment that includes grass, brush and water enables swine to optimize behaviorally their own welfare. Maintenance of farrowing sows in small groups in which individual farrowing dates are closely synchronized fosters formation of stable social relationships and minimizes displacement of young piglets from their dam's udder by older piglets. Human mimicry of key elements of typical greeting rituals facilitates positive interspecific socialization. Sows positively socialized to people usually tolerate close human approach and touch even during and after farrowing, making this species particularly well suited to educational, recreational or other programs that involve the close observation of, or human interaction with, animals."
R110;Air quality and factors related to sub-optimal pig housing conditions in nursery and finishing rooms;"Fablet, C.; Bidan, F.; Dorenlor, V.; Eono, F.; Eveno, E.; Rose, N.; Madec, F.";2018;Book chapter;Air quality and livestock farming;87-106;Chapter 7;NA
R111;Invited Review: Design and management of group maternity areas for dairy cows;"Creutzinger, K. C.; Proudfoot, K. L.";2020;Article;Applied Animal Science;124–132;10.15232/aas.2019-01899;Purpose: The purpose of this review is to describe the research to date on the housing and management of dairy cows in group maternity areas. Sources: We used a review of the peer-reviewed literature to identify articles that included an experimental study using dairy cows kept in groups at calving. Our review also includes studies from the broader literature using cows kept in individual maternity pens, dry cows, lactating cows, and beef cattle. Synthesis: Housing cows in group maternity areas creates unique challenges compared with housing cows in individual pens. Advantages to calving in group pens include limited pen moves, reduced risk that cows calve in freestalls, and potentially improved labor efficiency. Disadvantages of group maternity areas include the limited ability of cows to express natural behaviors before calving such as seclusion from pen mates, the risk of the calf being nursed by the wrong dam, a lack of space for cows as they prepare to give birth, social instability caused by regrouping, and challenges with pen cleanliness. Conclusions and Applications: Research to date has focused on creating opportunities for isolation-seeking behavior for dairy cows in group maternity areas. Cows in group pens are motivated to seek isolation at calving, but the ability to do so can be limited by competition. Research is still needed to determine potential negative effects of high stocking density and frequent regrouping in group maternity areas on cow behavior and health.
R112;Mitigating emissions from pig and poultry housing facilities through air scrubbers and biofilters: State-of-the-art and perspectives;"van der Heyden, C.; Demeyer, P.; Volcke, E.I.P.";2015;Review;Biosystems Engineering;74–93;10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2015.04.002;The global intensification of livestock production resulted in potentially higher emissions of ammonia, odour, particulate matter (PM) and greenhouse gases (nitrous oxide and methane). Air scrubbers and biofilters were introduced as a low ammonia emission housing technique. However, regulations with regard to the use of air scrubbers changed, including also removal efficiencies for odour and PM besides ammonia. In practice however, the required removal efficiencies for these pollutants are not always obtained, indicating the need of process optimisation in terms of process design and/or operation. When optimising air scrubbers, it is argued and recommended to anticipate the growing attention towards greenhouse gases, such as methane and nitrous oxide, which are present in exhaust air from animal housing facilities. However up till now, very little is known about the behaviour of greenhouse gases in air scrubbers and biofilters. Moreover, the formation of nitrous oxide in (biological) air scrubbing systems cannot be excluded. This contribution summarises the state-of-the-art of air scrubbers and biofilters for the reduction of emissions of ammonia, odour, nitrous oxide, methane and fine dust and points out perspectives for process optimisation in terms of design and control. The air and liquid flow configuration, packing dimensions and packing material should be carefully considered. Control options for water flow rate, water discharge and acid dosage need to be optimised. Dosage of apolar solvents and inoculation of the packing material can be innovative control options to achieve a better removal of less water-soluble components.
R113;Ammonia emissions from manure belt laying hen houses and manure storage;Hong, L.;2006;Thesis;Thesis;1-123;https://dr.lib.iastate.edu/bitstreams/d5ea4f98-a817-43d4-acdb-71807a299f21/download;NA