Effects of dietary energy content on the performance of laying hens in furnished and conventional cages

被引:37
|
作者
Valkonen, E. [1 ]
Venalainen, E. [1 ]
Rossow, L. [2 ]
Valaja, J. [1 ]
机构
[1] MTT Agrifood Res Finland, Anim Prod Res, FI-31600 Jokioinen, Finland
[2] Finnish Food Safety Author, EVIRA, Anim Dis & Food Safety Res, FI-00790 Helsinki, Finland
关键词
laying hen; furnished cage; dietary energy; production; well-being;
D O I
10.3382/ps.2007-00237
中图分类号
S8 [畜牧、 动物医学、狩猎、蚕、蜂];
学科分类号
0905 ;
摘要
This study examined the effects of dietary energy content on the egg production and egg quality of hens kept in 3-hen conventional cages or 8-hen furnished cages. A total of 1,088 Lohmann Selected Leghorn hens were housed in either furnished or conventional cages and offered low-or high-energy diets (from 2,342 to 2,414 kcal/kg or from 2,581 to 2,629 kcal/kg) during 3 consecutive feeding phases of 20, 16, and 16 wk, respectively. The same dietary energy effects were observed in both cage systems. The hens that received the low-energy diet consumed more feed (P < 0.01) and produced fewer eggs per day (P < 0.05) than the birds fed the high-energy diet. Over the entire experiment, housing had no significant effects on production parameters, but during the third feeding phase, the production rate was smaller in furnished cages than in conventional cages (P < 0.01). Because of the greater live weight of the hens in furnished cages at the beginning of the experiment, these hens consumed more feed during the first feeding phase than the hens in conventional cages. During the third feeding phase, the hens in furnished cages consumed less feed than those in conventional cages (P < 0.01), probably because of their better feather cover. No differences in feed conversion ratio were found between the cage types. The results of this study confirm the results of previous studies providing evidence of equal production rates and feed conversion ratios in furnished and conventional cages.
引用
收藏
页码:844 / 852
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] COMPARE THE PERFORMANCE AND EGG QUALITY OF TWO STRAINS OF LAYING HENS HOUSED IN FURNISHED CAGES
    Denli, Muzaffer
    Demirel, Ramazan
    Tutkun, Muhittin
    SCIENTIFIC PAPERS-SERIES D-ANIMAL SCIENCE, 2018, 61 (02): : 16 - 19
  • [22] Laying hens in conventional and enriched cages
    Tactacan, G. B.
    House, J. D.
    Guenther, W.
    JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE, 2007, 85 : 464 - 464
  • [23] Laying hens in conventional and enriched cages
    Tactacan, G. B.
    House, J. D.
    Guenther, W.
    JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE, 2007, 90 : 464 - 464
  • [24] Laying hens in conventional and enriched cages
    Tactacan, G. B.
    House, J. D.
    Guenther, W.
    POULTRY SCIENCE, 2007, 86 : 464 - 464
  • [25] PERFORMANCE OF 4 HYBRIDS OF LAYING HENS IN MODIFIED AND CONVENTIONAL CAGES
    ABRAHAMSSON, P
    TAUSON, R
    APPLEBY, MC
    ACTA AGRICULTURAE SCANDINAVICA SECTION A-ANIMAL SCIENCE, 1995, 45 (04): : 286 - 296
  • [26] Egg quality in furnished cages for laying hens - Effects of crack reduction measures and hybrid
    Wall, H
    Tauson, R
    POULTRY SCIENCE, 2002, 81 (03) : 340 - 348
  • [27] Evaluation of the effects of cage height and stocking density on the behaviour of laying hens in furnished cages
    Albentosa, M. J.
    Cooper, J. J.
    Luddem, T.
    Redgate, S. E.
    Elson, H. A.
    Walker, A. W.
    BRITISH POULTRY SCIENCE, 2007, 48 (01) : 1 - 11
  • [28] Effects of separation of resources on behaviour, physical condition and production of laying hens in furnished cages
    Shimmura, T.
    Azuma, T.
    Eguchi, Y.
    Uetake, K.
    Tanaka, T.
    BRITISH POULTRY SCIENCE, 2009, 50 (01) : 39 - 46
  • [29] Effects of separation of resources on behaviour, physical condition and production of laying hens in furnished cages
    Tanaka, T.
    Shimmura, T.
    Azuma, T.
    Eguchi, Y.
    Uetake, K.
    POULTRY SCIENCE, 2008, 87 : 130 - 130
  • [30] Physicochemical determinants of pH in pectoralis major of three strains of laying hens housed in conventional and furnished cages
    Frizzell, K. M.
    Jendral, M. J.
    Maclean, I. M.
    Dixon, W. T.
    Putman, C. T.
    BRITISH POULTRY SCIENCE, 2018, 59 (03) : 286 - 300