Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T23:45:34.435Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of performance, health and welfare aspects between commercially housed hatchery-hatched and on-farm hatched broiler flocks

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 October 2018

I. C. de Jong Open the ORCID record for I. C. de Jong [Opens in a new window] ,
H. Gunnink ,
T. van Hattum ,
J. W. van Riel ,
M. M. P. Raaijmakers ,
E. S. Zoet  and
H. van den Brand
I. C. de Jong*
Affiliation:
Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen Livestock Research, PO Box 338, 6700 AHWageningen, The Netherlands
H. Gunnink
Affiliation:
Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen Livestock Research, PO Box 338, 6700 AHWageningen, The Netherlands
T. van Hattum
Affiliation:
Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen Livestock Research, PO Box 338, 6700 AHWageningen, The Netherlands
J. W. van Riel
Affiliation:
Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen Livestock Research, PO Box 338, 6700 AHWageningen, The Netherlands
M. M. P. Raaijmakers
Affiliation:
Wageningen University and Research, Adaptation Physiology Group, PO Box 338, 6700 AHWageningen, The Netherlands
E. S. Zoet
Affiliation:
Wageningen University and Research, Adaptation Physiology Group, PO Box 338, 6700 AHWageningen, The Netherlands
H. van den Brand
Affiliation:
Wageningen University and Research, Adaptation Physiology Group, PO Box 338, 6700 AHWageningen, The Netherlands
*
†E-mail: ingrid.dejong@wur.nl
Get access

Abstract

On-farm hatching systems for broiler chicks are increasingly used in practice. We studied whether or not performance, health and welfare aspects differed between commercial flocks hatched on-farm or in a hatchery (control). In two successive production cycles on seven farms, a total of 16 on-farm hatched flocks were paired to 16 control flocks, housed at the same farm. Paired flocks originated from the same batch of eggs and were subjected to similar on-farm management. On-farm hatched and control flocks only differed with respect to hatching conditions, with on-farm hatched flocks not being exposed to, for example, chick handling, post-hatch feed and water deprivation and transport, in contrast to control flocks that were subjected to standard hatchery procedures, subsequently transported and placed in the poultry house. Day-old chick quality (navel and hock scores), 1st week mortality, total mortality, BW at day (d) 0, d7 and at depopulation, and (total) feed conversion ratio were determined. Prevalence of footpad dermatitis, hock burn, breast discoloration/blisters and cleanliness, litter quality and gait score were determined at d21 of age and around depopulation (d39 on average). Gross pathology and gut morphology were examined at depopulation age in a sample of birds of five flocks per treatment. On-farm hatching resulted in a higher BW at d0 (Δ=5.4 g) and d7 (Δ=11.5 g) (P<0.001), but day-old chick quality as measured by navel (P=0.003) and hock (P=0.01) quality was worse for on-farm hatched compared to control birds. Body weight, 1st week and total mortality, and feed conversion ratio at slaughter age were similar for both on-farm hatched and control flocks. On-farm hatched flocks had less footpad dermatitis (P=0.05), which indicated a better welfare. This was likely related to a tendency for better litter quality in on-farm hatched flocks at 21 days of age in comparison to control flocks (P=0.08). No major differences in gross pathology or in intestinal morphology at depopulation age were found between treatments. In conclusion, on-farm hatching resulted in better 1st week broiler performance and better welfare compared to conventional hatching in a hatchery.

Keywords

broileron-farm hatchingearly feedingwelfareperformance
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 13 , Issue 6 , June 2019 , pp. 1269 - 1277
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Archer, GS and Mench, JA 2014. Natural incubation patterns and the effects of exposing eggs to light at various times during incubation on post-hatch fear and stress responses in broiler (meat) chickens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 152, 44–51.Google Scholar
Bailie, CL, Ball, MEE and O’Connell, NE 2013. Influence of the provision of natural light and straw bales on activity levels and leg health in commercial broiler chicks. Animal 7, 618–626.Google Scholar
Bigot, K, Mignon-Grasteau, S, Picard, M and Tesseraud, S 2003. Effects of delayed feed intake on body, intestine, and muscle development in neonate broilers. Poultry Science 82, 781–788.Google Scholar
Careghi, C, Tona, K, Onagbesan, O, Buyse, J, Decuypere, E and Bruggeman, V 2005. The effects of the spread of hatch and interaction with delayed feed access after hatch on broiler performance until seven days of age. Poultry Science 84, 1314–1320.10.1093/ps/84.8.1314Google Scholar
de Jong, IC, Bracke, MBM, Riel, J van and Brand, H van den 2017. A meta-analysis of effects of post-hatch food and water deprivation on development, performance and welfare of chickens. PloS One 12, e0189350.Google Scholar
de Jong, IC, Gunnink, H and van Harn, J 2014. Wet litter not only induces footpad dermatitis but also reduces overall welfare, technical performance, and carcass yield in broiler chickens. Journal of Applied Poultry Research 23, 51–58.Google Scholar
Decuypere, E, Tona, K, Bruggeman, V and Bamelis, E 2001. The day-old chick: a crucial hinge between breeders and broilers. Worlds Poultry Science Journal 57, 127–138.Google Scholar
Elfwing, M, Natt, D, Goerlich-Jansson, VC, Persson, M, Hjelm, J and Jensen, P 2015. Early stress causes sex-specific, life-long changes in behaviour, levels of gonadal hormones, and gene expression in chickens. Plos One 10, e0125808.Google Scholar
Ericsson, M, Henriksen, R, Belteky, J, Sundman, AS, Shionoya, K and Jensen, P 2016. Long-term and transgenerational effects of stress experienced during different life phases in chickens (Gallus gallus). Plos One 11, e0153879.Google Scholar
Fairchild, BD, Northcutt, JK, Mauldin, JM, Buhr, RJ, Richardson, LJ and Cox, NA 2006. Influence of water provision to chicks before placement and effects on performance and incidence of unabsorbed yolk sacs. The Journal of Applied Poultry Research 15, 538–543.Google Scholar
Geyra, A, Uni, Z and Sklan, D 2001. The effect of fasting at different ages on growth and tissue dynamics in the small intestine of the young chick. British Journal of Nutrition 86, 53–61.Google Scholar
Gonzales, E, Kondo, N, Saldanha, E, Loddy, MM, Careghi, C and Decuypere, E 2003. Performance and physiological parameters of broiler chickens subjected to fasting on the neonatal period. Poultry Science 82, 1250–1256.Google Scholar
Hepworth, PJ, Nefedov, AV, Muchnik, IB and Morgan, KL 2010. Early warning indicators for hock burn in broiler flocks. Avian Pathology 39, 405–409.Google Scholar
Johnson, J and Reid, WM 1970. Anticoccidial drugs: lesion scoring techniques in battery and floor-pen experiments with chickens. Experimental Parasitology 28, 30–36.Google Scholar
Lamot, DM, van de Linde, IB, Molenaar, R, van der Pol, CW, Wijtten, PJA, Kemp, B and van den Brand, H 2014. Effects of moment of hatch and feed access on chicken development. Poultry Science 93, 2604–2614.Google Scholar
Leksrisompong, N, Romero-Sanchez, H, Plumstead, PW, Brannan, KE and Brake, J 2007. Broiler incubation. 1. Effect of elevated temperature during late incubation on body weight and organs of chicks. Poultry Science 86, 2685–2691.Google Scholar
McCullagh, P and Nelder, JA 1989. Generalized linear models. Chapman and Hall, London. UK.Google Scholar
Mitchell, MA 2009. Chick transport and welfare. Avian Biology Research 2, 99–105.Google Scholar
Shepherd, EM and Fairchild, BD 2010. Footpad dermatitis in poultry. Poultry Science 89, 2043–2051.Google Scholar
Sherwin, CM, Lewis, PD and Perry, GC 1999. The effects of environmental enrichment and intermittent lighting on the behaviour and welfare of male domestic turkeys. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 62, 319–333.Google Scholar
Sklan, D and Noy, Y 2000. Hydrolysis and absorption in the small intestines of posthatch chicks. Poultry Science 79, 1306–1310.Google Scholar
Teirlynck, E, Gussem, MDE, Dewulf, J, Haeserouck, F, Ducatelle, R and Van Immerseel, F 2011. Morphometric evaluation of ‘dysbacteriosis’ in broilers. Avian Pathology 40, 139–144.Google Scholar
Uni, Z, Ganot, S and Sklan, D 1998. Posthatch development of mucosal function in the broiler small intestine. Poultry Science 77, 75–82.Google Scholar
Uni, Z, Smirnov, A and Sklan, D 2003. Pre-and posthatch development of goblet cells in the broiler small intestine: effect of delayed access to feed. Poultry Science 82, 320–327.Google Scholar
van de Ven, LJF, van Wagenberg, AV, Debonne, M, Decuypere, E, Kemp, B and van den Brand, H 2011. Hatching system and time effects on broiler physiology and posthatch growth. Poultry Science 90, 1267–1275.Google Scholar
Van de Ven, LJF, Van Wagenberg, AV, Groot Koerkamp, PWG, Kemp, B and Van den Brandt, H 2009. Effects of a combined hatching and brooding system on hatchability, chick weight, and mortality in broilers. Poultry Science 88, 2273–2279.Google Scholar
van de Ven, LJF, van Wagenberg, AV, Uitdehaag, KA, Koerkamp, P, Kemp, B and van den Brand, H 2012. Significance of chick quality score in broiler production. Animal 6, 1677–1683.Google Scholar
van der Pol, CW, van Roovert-Reijrink, IAM, Maatjens, CM, van den Brand, H and Molenaar, R 2013. Effect of relative humidity during incubation at a set eggshell temperature and brooding temperature posthatch on embryonic mortality and chick quality. Poultry Science 92, 2145–2155.Google Scholar
Welfare Quality® 2009. The Welfare Quality® assessment protocol for broiler chickens and laying hens. The Welfare Quality Consortium, Lelystad, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Willemsen, H, Debonne, M, Swennen, Q, Everaert, N, Careghi, C, Han, H, Bruggeman, V, Tona, K and Decuypere, E 2010. Delay in feed access and spread of hatch: importance of early nutrition. Worlds Poultry Science Journal 66, 177–188.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: Image

de Jong et al. supplementary material

Figure S2

Download de Jong et al. supplementary material(Image)
Image 346.8 KB
Supplementary material: Image

de Jong et al. supplementary material

Figure S1

Download de Jong et al. supplementary material(Image)
Image 333.1 KB
Supplementary material: File

de Jong et al. supplementary material

Table S3

Download de Jong et al. supplementary material(File)
File 14 KB
Supplementary material: File

de Jong et al. supplementary material

Table S4

Download de Jong et al. supplementary material(File)
File 13.8 KB
Supplementary material: File

de Jong et al. supplementary material

Table S2

Download de Jong et al. supplementary material(File)
File 13.7 KB
Supplementary material: File

de Jong et al. supplementary material

Table S1

Download de Jong et al. supplementary material(File)
File 13.1 KB