Scholarlink

Background <p>Feather pecking and cannibalism are multifactorial problems that affect most laying hens in modern husbandry. As to which hens are predisposed to being pecked and suffer from feather and skin damage is still under investigation.</p> Animals, Materials and Methods <p>In this retrospective study, hens’ live weight and plumage condition were each recorded and investigated for a potential relationship. Data were collected from 5,764 laying hens (various genetics) from 17 flocks (alternative housing systems) during several visits over their entire laying period. At each visit, a sample of hens was weighed and scored for plumage und skin damage. Afterwards, depending on each hen’s weight deviation from the target weights provided by the breeders (WTW), they were grouped as too light with &lt; -10% of target weight (L-hens), as good showing ± 10% of target weight (G-hens) or too heavy with &gt; + 10% of target weight (H-hens). Using a general linear mixed model, potential influencing factors on the hens’ plumage and skin condition were evaluated.</p> Results <p>The results showed that most investigated hens (74.9%) were categorised as such with no great deviation from target weight (G-hens: mean 1,823.0 ± 198.9&#xa0;g), while L-hens made up 13.5% (mean 1,569.9 ± 192.7&#xa0;g) and H-hens 11.6% (mean 2,097.4 ± 205.7&#xa0;g). The statistical model on plumage damage revealed statistically significant effects of the laying phase, the season, the weight group with relation to the target weights (WTW) and the colour of plumage, while the housing system showed no effect. The season and laying phase were also found to have a significant effect on the sum of skin damage in the statistical model.</p> Conclusion <p>As the weight classes with relation to the target weights assigned in the statistical model had an influence on the sum of plumage damage, and the animals from the group with the smallest deviations from the recommendations (G-hens) also had the lowest number of animals with plumage damage over the entire laying period, the results highlight the importance of good weight management in laying hen husbandry. Given the increased problems documented for the lighter animals in the L-hen group, the question remains as to what the trigger was and what the cause was: insufficient weight or existing plumage and/or skin damage.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

A retrospective study on possible association between live weights and plumage or skin damage in laying hens

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月13日

查看全文
  • Nina Volkmann,
  • Anna Riedel,
  • Nicole Kemper,
  • Birgit Spindler

摘要

Background

Feather pecking and cannibalism are multifactorial problems that affect most laying hens in modern husbandry. As to which hens are predisposed to being pecked and suffer from feather and skin damage is still under investigation.

Animals, Materials and Methods

In this retrospective study, hens’ live weight and plumage condition were each recorded and investigated for a potential relationship. Data were collected from 5,764 laying hens (various genetics) from 17 flocks (alternative housing systems) during several visits over their entire laying period. At each visit, a sample of hens was weighed and scored for plumage und skin damage. Afterwards, depending on each hen’s weight deviation from the target weights provided by the breeders (WTW), they were grouped as too light with < -10% of target weight (L-hens), as good showing ± 10% of target weight (G-hens) or too heavy with > + 10% of target weight (H-hens). Using a general linear mixed model, potential influencing factors on the hens’ plumage and skin condition were evaluated.

Results

The results showed that most investigated hens (74.9%) were categorised as such with no great deviation from target weight (G-hens: mean 1,823.0 ± 198.9 g), while L-hens made up 13.5% (mean 1,569.9 ± 192.7 g) and H-hens 11.6% (mean 2,097.4 ± 205.7 g). The statistical model on plumage damage revealed statistically significant effects of the laying phase, the season, the weight group with relation to the target weights (WTW) and the colour of plumage, while the housing system showed no effect. The season and laying phase were also found to have a significant effect on the sum of skin damage in the statistical model.

Conclusion

As the weight classes with relation to the target weights assigned in the statistical model had an influence on the sum of plumage damage, and the animals from the group with the smallest deviations from the recommendations (G-hens) also had the lowest number of animals with plumage damage over the entire laying period, the results highlight the importance of good weight management in laying hen husbandry. Given the increased problems documented for the lighter animals in the L-hen group, the question remains as to what the trigger was and what the cause was: insufficient weight or existing plumage and/or skin damage.