Kenrett Y. Jefferson-Moore

Early access to perches in caged White Leghorn pullets

Osteoporosis, a progressive decrease in mineralized structural bone, causes 20 to 35% of all mortalities in caged White Leghorn hens. Previous research has focused on manipulating the egg laying environment to improve skeletal health, with little research on the pullet. The objective of the current study was to determine the effect of perch access on pullet health, bone mineralization, muscle deposition, and stress in caged White Leghorns. From 0 to 17 wk of age, half of the birds were placed in cages with 2 round metal perches, while the other half did not have perches (controls). Bone mineralization and bone size traits were determined in the tibia, femur, sternum, humerus, ulna, radius, and phalange (III carpometacarpal) using dual energy x-ray absorptiometry. Muscle weights were obtained for the breast and left leg (drum and thigh). A sample of pullets from each cage was evaluated for foot health, BW, right adrenal weight, and packed cell volume. Most measurements were taken at 3, 6, and 12 wk of age. Access to perches did not affect breast muscle weight, percentage breast muscle, percentage leg muscle, bone mineral density, bone length, bone width, adrenal weight, packed cell volume, and hyperkeratosis of the foot-pad and toes. There were no differences in BW, bone mineral content, and leg muscle weight at 3 and 6 wk of age. However, at 12 wk of age, BW (P = 0.025), bone mineral content of the tibia, sternum, and humerus (P = 0.015), and the left leg muscle weight (P = 0.006) increased in pullets with access to perches as compared with controls. These results suggest that perch access has beneficial effects on pullet health by stimulating leg muscle deposition and increasing the mineral content of certain bones without causing a concomitant decrease in bone mineral density.

The effect of perches in cages during pullet rearing and egg laying on hen performance, foot health, and plumage

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.

A Market-based Mitigation Program for Wind-borne Diseases

Wind-borne diseases can spread rapidly and cause large losses. Producers may have little incentive to prevent disease spread because prevention may not be welfare-maximizing. This study proposes a market-based mitigation program that indemnifies producers against disease-related losses and provides an incentive to neighboring producers to take preventive action, which can substantially mitigate infestations, reduce the likelihood of catastrophic losses, and increase social welfare. An equilibrium displacement model simulates introduction of the program for U.S. soybeans. Simulations reveal that the market-based solution contributes to minor market distortions but also reduces social welfare losses and could succeed for other at-risk commodities.