Effects of separation of resources on behaviour of high-, medium- and low-ranked hens in furnished cages

• Published in: Applied animal behaviour science 2008-09, Vol.113 (1), p.74-86
• Main Authors: Shimmura, Tsuyoshi, Eguchi, Yusuke, Uetake, Katsuji, Tanaka, Toshio
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: animal behavior; Behaviour; body condition; cage design; cage size; Dust bath; dust bathing; dust baths; Furnished cage; Laying hens; Nest box; nest boxes; poultry housing; social dominance; Social order; spatial distribution
• ISSN: 0168-1591; 1872-9045
• DOI: 10.1016/j.applanim.2007.11.007

In our previous studies, we demonstrated that dominant hens had priority in using the dust bath, resulted in increased competition for the resource. It seemed that the problem was that the resource was placed on one side of the cage (‘localised’). Therefore, we designed a medium-sized furnished cage with a dust bath and nest box on both sides of the cage (‘separated’, MFS). To evaluate the effects of separation of these resources, we compared the behaviour of high-, medium- and low-ranked hens in MFS cage with that in small (SF) and medium furnished (MFL) cages with a localised resource. In total, 150 White Leghorn layers were used. At the age of 17 weeks, the hens were randomly divided into three groups and moved to small furnished cages (SF, 90 cm wide; five birds per cage) and two types of medium furnished cages (180 cm wide; 10 birds per cage) with a nest box and dust bath on both sides (MFS) and a nest box and dust bath on one side of the cage (MFL). The total dust bath and nest box areas per hen were same for the three cages. The dominance hierarchy was determined by observing the aggressive interactions and by this high-, medium- and low-ranked hens in each cage were identified. The behaviour, use of facilities and physical condition of these hens were measured. Data were analysed by using repeated measure ANOVA. A significant interaction between social order and cage design was found in the proportions of time spent in the dust bath and on performing dust-bathing (both P < 0.001), and these proportions tended to be higher in higher-ranked hens in SF and MFL. Conversely, the MFS low-ranked hens tended to use the dust bath more than the SF and MFL low-ranked hens. Thus, hens from each rank used the dust bath equally in MFS, though the MFS high-ranked hens tended to use the resource less than the SF and MFL high-ranked hens. While the frequency of pre-laying sitting was lower among low-ranked hens ( P < 0.05), the proportion of time in the nest box was higher among low- than high-ranked hens ( P < 0.01). The low-ranked hens spent more time performing escaping, moving and standing in the nest box. In conclusion, it is suggested that separation of the dust bath to two locations would be an effective arrangement to promote more equal usage of the dust bath by hens from each rank in the furnished cages. It was also confirmed in the present study that nest boxes were not only used for laying eggs but also as a refuge by lower ranked hens.