Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T15:31:31.531Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Social behaviour of domestic animals II. Effect of the peck order on poultry productivity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

G. McBride
G. McBride
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Husbandry, University of Queensland Brisbane, Australia
Get access

Summary

1. Peck order position was assessed by aggressiveness scores for birds housed intensively on deep litter on the floor and in cages.

2. Relationships were shown between scores and egg weight, egg number and egg mass for the birds on the floor but not for the caged birds. The nature of the relationships found was discussed.

3. The correlation between egg weight and egg number was higher in the flock on the floor than in the caged flock. This appeared to be due to a significant positive correlation among the lowest scoring birds on the floor.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 6 , Issue 1 , February 1964 , pp. 1 - 7
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1964

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

REFERENCES

Abplanalp, H., 1957. Genetic and environmental correlations among production traits in poultry. Poult. Sci., 36: 226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blyth, J. S. S., 1952. The correlation between egg weight and number; an investigation of its inconstancy. Poult. Sci., 31: 254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collias, N. E., 1943. Statistical analysis of factors which make for success in initial encounters between hens. Amer. Nat., 11: 519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guhl, A. M., 1953. Social behaviour of domestic fowl. Tech. Bull. Kans. Expt. Sta., no. 73.Google Scholar
Guhl, A. M. & Allee, W. C., 1944. Some measurable effects of social organisation in flocks of hens. Physiol. Zool., 17: 320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hale, R. W., 1952. Experimental errors in laying experiments. J. agric. Sci., 42: 347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hazel, L. N., 1943. The genetic basis for constructing selection indexes. Genetics, 28: 476.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
James, J. W. & Foenander, F., 1961. Social behaviour studies on domestic animals. I. Hens in laying cages. Aust. J. agric. Res., 12: 1239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
James, J. W. & McBride, G., 1958. The spread of genes by natural and artificial selection in a closed poultry flock. J. Genet., 56: 55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, C. E., Henry, C. L. & Presto, J., 1952. The feeding space requirements of laying birds receiving a mash, grain and supplementary pellet ration. Poult. Sci., 31: 290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McBride, G., 1958. The measurement of aggressiveness in the domestic fowl. Anim. Behav.,6: 87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McBride, G., 1958a. The relationship between aggressiveness, peck order and some characters of selective significance in the domestic fowl. Proc. roy. phys. Soc. Edinb., 28: 56.Google Scholar
McBride, G., 1962. Interactions between genotypes and housing environment in the fowl. Proc. Bienn. Conf., Aust. Soc. Anim. Prod., 4: 95.Google Scholar
Sancturary, W. C., 1932. A study of avian behaviour to determine the nature and persistency of the order of dominance in the domestic fowl and to relate these to certain physiological reactions. Thesis for M.Sc, degree, Mass. State Coll., Amherst (unpublished).Google Scholar
Schjelderuppe Ebbe, TH., 1913. Honsenes stemme. Bidrag til honsenes psykologi. Naturen, 37: 262.Google Scholar
Trrus, H. W., 1953. Variation in egg production and hatchability. Poult. Sci., 32: 593.Google Scholar
Wood-Gush, D. G. M., 1955. The behaviour of the domestic chicken. A review of the literature. Brit. J. Anim. Behav., 11l: 81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar