Discusses latest research on welfare issues for laying hens such as beak trimming; Summarises advances in optimising hen nutrition and health; Assesses developments in reducing the environmental impact of egg production

This collection features three peer-reviewed literature reviews on feather-pecking in poultry. The first chapter describes the three main forms of injurious pecking (IP) in poultry: tissue pecking (TP), aggressive pecking (AP) and feather-pecking (FP). It discusses the origin of severe feather-pecking, the most severe form of injurious pecking. The chapter concludes with a discussion on the risk factors and current management strategies used to reduce injurious pecking in poultry production. The second chapter assesses the use of beak trimming of laying hens as an effective preventative strategy for injurious pecking (IP). It considers the welfare costs and benefits of the two different methods: hot blade (HB) and infrared (IR). The chapter concludes with a section on alternative strategies that could reduce the need for beak trimming. The final chapter reviews the different types of feather-pecking and considers the origins of this behaviour. The chapter offers a detailed discussion on the management techniques available for the prevention of feather-pecking, during both rearing and the laying period. What is an Instant Insight? An Instant Insight gives you immediate access to key research on a topic, allowing you to get right to the heart of a subject in an instant and empowering you to contribute to sustainable agriculture.

The aim of the current study was two-fold. First, we tested whether or not a scan sampling technique can be used as a relatively quick, simple scoring of the behaviour in commercial-size broiler chicken flocks, and could thus be included as a measure of appropriate behaviour in the Welfare Quality® broiler assessment protocol. Four existing datasets were analysed, these were collected for different purposes but were based on the same sampling technique, i.e. counting the number of broilers engaged in different behaviours using direct observations, at different time intervals and at different locations in the house. Analysis showed that various factors affected the outcome. Whereas those such as observer, time of the day and location could be taken into account when designing an observation protocol (e.g. by training, by selection of different observation locations and times), it must first be determined how to take into account the effect of subsequent scans, the apparent difference between flocks and genetic strains, and the effects of different behaviours. This is important when e.g. thresholds need to be set or scores reliably assigned regarding the prevalence of birds showing certain behaviours during a farm visit. Second, it was tested whether alternative measures (rather than distance to observer or a novel object) could be used as indicators of fear in broiler chickens. Previous research suggested a possible relationship between walking ability and the number of birds within arm’s reach in the touch test, thus implying that the touch test may be confounded by impaired walking ability and might thus be a suboptimal method of assessing fear of humans in broilers. The present study was carried out at an experimental farm and reported in detail in a student thesis. An extended summary is included in this report. The results showed that both distance to observer or novel object and behaviour of the bird (alert body posture, neck posture, body position towards object or observer) seemed to be valid indicators of fear, however, when a relatively short time is available for testing, the birds’ behaviour should always be measured as older broilers need more time to move away.