title: The effect of perches in cages during pullet rearing and egg laying on hen performance, foot health, and plumage.
abstract: Enrichment of pullet cages with perches has not been studied. Our objective was to determine if access to metal perches during all or part of the life cycle of caged White Leghorns affected egg traits, foot health, and feather condition. Treatment 1 represented control chickens that never had access to perches during their life cycle. Treatment 2 hens had perches only during the egg laying phase of the life cycle (17 to 71 wk of age), whereas treatment 3 chickens had perches during the pullet phase (0 to 16.9 wk of age). Treatment 4 chickens always had access to perches (0 to 71 wk of age). Comparisons between chickens that always had perches with controls that never had perches showed similar performance relative to egg production, cracked eggs, egg weight, shell weight, % shell, and shell thickness. More dirty eggs occurred in laying cages with perches. Feed usage increased resulting in poorer feed efficiency in hens with perch exposure during the pullet phase with no effect during egg laying. Perches did not affect hyperkeratosis of toes and feet. The back claw at 71 wk of age broke less if hens had prior experience with perches during the pullet phase. In contrast, during egg laying, the back claw at 71 wk of age broke more due to the presence of perches in laying cages. Perches in laying cages resulted in shorter trimmed claws and improved back feather scores, but caused poorer breast and tail feather scores. In conclusion, enriching conventional cages with perches during the entire life cycle resulted in similar hen performance compared with controls. Fewer broken back claws but poorer feed efficiency occurred because of prior experience with perches as pullets. Perch presence during egg laying improved back feather scores with more trimmed nails but caused more dirty eggs, broken back claws, and poorer breast and tail feather scores. Although perches allow chickens to express their natural perching instinct, it was not without causing welfare problems.
authors.affiliation: Department of Animal Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA. phester@purdue.com
authors.forename: P Y
authors.initials: PY
authors.lastname: Hester
authors.forename: S A
authors.initials: SA
authors.lastname: Enneking
authors.forename: K Y
authors.initials: KY
authors.lastname: Jefferson-Moore
authors.forename: M E
authors.initials: ME
authors.lastname: Einstein
authors.forename: H W
authors.initials: HW
authors.lastname: Cheng
authors.forename: D A
authors.initials: DA
authors.lastname: Rubin
mesh_terms: D000822:Animal Husbandry; D000824:Animal Nutritional Physiological Phenomena; D000827:Animal Welfare; D000818:Animals; D002645:Chickens / Q000254:growth & development / Q000502:physiology*; D004531:Eggs / Q000592:standards; D005241:Feathers / Q000502:physiology*; D005260:Female; D005528:Foot / Q000502:physiology; D005534:Foot Diseases / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000662:veterinary; D006799:Housing, Animal; D007642:Keratosis / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000662:veterinary; D010063:Ovum / Q000502:physiology; D011201:Poultry Diseases / Q000453:epidemiology; D012098:Reproduction