Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T21:38:50.563Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Preferences of Growing Fowls for Different Light Intensities in Relation to Age, Strain and Behaviour

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

N J Davis ,
N B Prescott ,
C J Savory  and
C M Wathes
N J Davis
Affiliation:
Institute of Ecology and Resource Management, School of Agriculture, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, UK
N B Prescott*
Affiliation:
Silsoe Research Institute, Wrest Park, Silsoe, Bedfordshire MK45 4HS, UK
C J Savory
Affiliation:
SAC Poultry Science Department, Auchincruive, Ayr KA6 5HW, UK
C M Wathes
Affiliation:
Silsoe Research Institute, Wrest Park, Silsoe, Bedfordshire MK45 4HS, UK
*
† Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The preferences of broiler and layer strains of fowl for four different intensities of incandescent luminaire (6, 20, 60 and 200 lux; Osram, 60W, pearl) were tested at 2 and 6 weeks of age. With each strain, four replicates of 12 birds were each allowed to move freely between four compartments illuminated continuously at the different intensities for 6 days. The distribution of light intensities among the compartments was changed daily. After 2 days of conditioning, the birds’ location and behaviour were recorded once every 15min over 23h on each of the remaining 4 days. The other hour was devoted to changing light intensities and refilling the feeders and drinkers. Six, mutually exclusive behaviours were defined: resting, perching, feeding, drinking, litter-directed activity and locomotion.

With both strains, most time was spent in the brightest (200 lux) environment at 2 weeks of age. but in the dimmest (6 lux) at 6 weeks. This apparent change in preference was associated only with the two behaviours which took up most time, resting and perching, whereas the highest intensity was consistently preferred for all other behaviours. Older birds thus preferred to be in dim light when they were relatively inactive.

The finding that older birds prefer to spend much of their time in a light environment of < 10 lux intensity, depending on behaviour, is contrary to current recommendations that minimum light intensities for broilers and laying hens should be increased to as much as 20 lux. Some variation in the spatial or temporal distribution of ambient light intensity, to provide both dimly (< 10 lux) and brightly (eg > 50 lux) lit environments, might benefit the welfare of older poultry, although further work is needed to establish their optimal light environment.

Keywords

animal welfarebehaviourbroilersenvironmental preferencelayerslight intensity
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 8 , Issue 3 , August 1999 , pp. 193 - 203
Copyright
© 1999 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

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

Alsam, H and Wathes, C M 1991 Cojoint preferences of chicks for heat and light intensity. British Poultry Science 32: 899–916Google Scholar
Appleby, M C, Hughes, B O and Elson, H A 1992 Poultry Production Systems: Behaviour, Management and Welfare. CAB International: Wallingford, UKGoogle Scholar
Appleby, M C, McRae, H E and Pietz, B E 1984 The effect of light on the choice of nests by domestic hens. Applied Animal Ethology 11: 249–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barott, H G and Pringle, E M 1946 Energy and gaseous metabolism of the chicken from hatching to maturity as affected by temperature. Journal of Nutrition 31: 35–50Google Scholar
Berk, J 1995 Light-choice by broilers. In: Rutter, S M, Rushen, J, Randle, H D, Eddison, J C (eds) Proceedings of the 29th International Congress of the International Society for Applied Ethology pp 25–26. Universities Federation for Animal Welfare: Potters Bar, UKGoogle Scholar
Bessei, W 1992 The behaviour of broilers under intensive management conditions. Archiv für Geflügelkunde 56: 1–7Google Scholar
Blokhuis, H J and van der Haar, J W 1990 The effect of stocking density on the behaviour of broilers. Archiv für Geflügelkunde 54: 74–77Google Scholar
Boshouwers, F M G and Nicaise, E 1987 Physical activity and energy expenditure of laying hens as affected by light intensity. British Poultry Science 33: 711–717CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Candland, D K, Nagy, Z M and Conklyn, D H 1963 Emotional behavior in the domestic chicken (White Leghorn) as a function of age and developmental environment. Journal of Comparative Physiological Psychology 56: 1069–1073CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
FAWC 1992 Report on the Welfare of Broiler Chickens. Farm Animal Welfare Council: Surbiton, UKGoogle Scholar
FAWC 1997 Report on the Welfare of Layer Hens. Farm Animal Welfare Council: Surbiton, UKGoogle Scholar
Freeman, B M 1963 Gaseous metabolism of the domestic chicken. IV. The effect of temperature on the resting metabolism of the fowl during the first month of life. British Poultry Science 4: 275–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, B O and Black, A J 1974 The effect of environmental factors on activity, selected behaviour patterns and fear of fowls in cages and pens. British Poultry Science 15: 375–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, B O and Duncan, I J H 1972 The influence of strain and environmental factors upon feather pecking and cannibalism in the fowl. British Poultry Science 13: 525–547Google Scholar
Jones, R B 1995 Ontogeny of response to humans in handled and non-handled female domestic chicks. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 42: 261–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, J B, Burgess, L R, Webster, A J F and Wathes, C M 1996 Behavioural responses of pigs to atmospheric ammonia in a chronic choice test. Animal Science 63: 437–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawes Agricultural Trust 1989 Genstat 5 Reference Manual. Oxford University Press: New York, USAGoogle Scholar
Li, T, Troiło, D, Glasser, A and Howland, H C 1995 Constant light produces severe corneal flattening and hyperopia in chickens. Vision Research 35: 1203–1209CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Manser, C E 1996 Effects of lighting on the welfare of domestic poultry: A review. Animal Welfare 5: 341–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newberry, R C, Hunt, J R and Gardiner, E E 1988 Influence of light intensity on behaviour and performance of broiler chickens. Poultry Science 67: 1020–1025CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nuboer, J F W, Coemans, M A J M and Vos, J J 1992 Artificial lighting in poultry houses: Are photometric units appropriate for describing illumination intensities. British Poultry Science 33: 135–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perry, G and Lewis, P 1993 Light perception and behaviour. In: Savory, C J and Hughes, B O (eds) Fourth European Symposium on Poultry Welfare pp 27–38. Universities Federation for Animal Welfare: Potters Bar, UKGoogle Scholar
Prescott, NB and Wathes, CM 1999a Spectral Sensitivity of the Domestic Fowl {Gallus g. domesticus). British Poultry Science: (in press)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prescott, N B and Wathes, C M 1999b The reflective properties of domestic fowl (Gallus g. domesticus), the fabric of their housing, and the characteristics of the light environment in environmentally controlled poultry houses. British Poultry Science: (in press)Google Scholar
Proudfoot, F G and Sefton, A E 1978 Feed texture and light treatment effects on the performance of broiler chickens. Poultry Science 57: 408–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
RSPCA 1994a Freedom Food: The RSPCA Welfare Standards for Broiler Chickens. RSPCA: Horsham, UKGoogle Scholar
RSPCA 1994b Freedom Food: The RSPCA Welfare Standards for Laying Hens. RSPCA: Horsham, UKGoogle Scholar
Sasaki, H, Coffey, P, Villegas-Perez, M P, Vidal-Sanz, M, Young, M J, Lund, R D and Fukuda, Y 1996 Light induced EEG desynchronization and behavioural arousal in rats with restored retinocollicular projection by peripheral nerve graft. Neuroscience Letters 218: 45–48Google ScholarPubMed
Savory, C J and Duncan, B O 1982/83 Voluntary regulation of lighting by domestic fowls in Skinner boxes. Applied Animal Ethology 9: 73–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savory, C J and Mann, J S 1997 Behavioural development in groups of pen-housed pullets in relation to genetic strains, age and food form. British Poultry Science 38: 38–47CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Slater, P J B 1978 Data collection. In: Colgan, P W (ed) Quantitative Ethology pp 7–24. Wiley: New York, USAGoogle Scholar
Stone R A, Lin T, Desai D and Capehart 1995 Photoperiod, early post-natal eye growth, and visual deprivation. Vision Research 35: 1195–1202Google Scholar
Tucker, S S and Charles, D R 1993 Light intensity, intermittent lighting and feeding regime during rearing as affecting egg production and egg quality. British Poultry Science 34: 255–266Google Scholar
Wathes, C M and Clark, J A 1981 Sensible heat transfer from the fowl, radiative and convective heat losses from a flock of broiler chickens. British Poultry Science 22: 185–196Google ScholarPubMed
Wathes, C M, Spechter, H H, Bray, T S and Charles, D R 1982 Brooding temperature regimes for broilers. In: Proceedings of the Second International Livestock Environment Symposium, Ames, Iowa pp 338-342. American Society of Agricultural Engineers: St. Joseph, Michigan, USAGoogle Scholar
Widowski, T M, Keeling, L J and Duncan, I J H 1992 The preferences of laying hens for compact fluorescent over incandescent lighting. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 72: 203–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar