Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T09:10:12.977Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Push-Door for Measuring Motivation in Hens: Laying Hens are Motivated to Perch at Night

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

I A S Olsson  and
L J Keeling
I A S Olsson*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Environment and Health, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, P O Box 234, SE 532 23 Skara, Sweden
L J Keeling
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Environment and Health, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, P O Box 234, SE 532 23 Skara, Sweden
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Free-living hens perch on branches in trees and domestic hens (Gallus gallus domesticus) show signs of unrest if they cannot reach a perch, suggesting that night-time perching is a behaviour that hens are motivated to perform. This motivation was quantified in two experiments using a weighted push-door that hens had to push open in order to gain access to a perch. First, the motivation of individual birds to perch, and second, the effect of a companion bird on perching motivation, were measured. Eight adult laying hens (Lohmann Selected Leghorn) were trained to push through the door at increasing resistances, and the individual capacity of each hen was determined. Hens were then tested once per day, at lights-off in a test pen where pushing through the push-door gave access to the resource. Two consecutive series of increasing resistances were used in the experiment: 25, 50, 75 and 100 per cent of each bird's maximum capacity. In the first experiment, the resources offered were either a perch (treatment) or a ‘sham perch’ that could not be used for perching (control). Hens opened significantly heavier doors in order to gain access to a perch than to gain access to the sham perch. In the second experiment, pushing through the door gave access either to a perch with a companion hen already perching on it (treatment) or to a perch and a companion hen roosting on the floor (control). In this comparison, four of the hens did not push through the door, probably because of aggressive interactions with the companion, and no significant differences between treatments were found. We conclude that hens are motivated to use a perch for night-time roosting and that they should be housed in systems with perches.

Keywords

animal welfarebehaviourmotivationperchespoultryroosting
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 11 , Issue 1 , February 2002 , pp. 11 - 19
Copyright
© 2002 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

Footnotes

*

Present address: Institute for Molecular and Cell Biology, Rua Campo Alegre 823, 4150-180 Porto, Portugal

References

Abrahamsson, P 1996 Furnished cages and aviaries for laying hens. Dissertation Report 234. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Animal Nutrition and Management, Skara, SwedenGoogle Scholar
Appleby, M C, Smith, S F and Hughes, B O 1993 Nesting, dust bathing and perching by laying hens in cages: effects of design on behaviour and welfare. British Poultry Science 34: 835–847CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Braastad, B O 1990 Effects on behaviour and plumage of a key-stimuli floor and a perch in triple cages for laying hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 27: 127–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colgan, P 1989 Animal Motivation. Chapman and Hall: London, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawkins, M S 1983 Battery hens name their price: consumer demand theory and the measurement of ethological “needs”. Animal Behaviour 31: 1195–1205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawkins, M S 1990 From an animal's point of view: motivation, fitness and animal welfare. Behavioural and Brain Sciences 13: 1–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, E T, Appleby, M C and Hughes, B O 1992 Effect of perches in laying cages on welfare and production of hens. British Poultry Science 33: 25–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faure, J M and Jones, R B 1982a Effects of sex, strain and type of perch on perching behaviour in the domestic fowl. Applied Animal Ethology 8: 281–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faure, J M and Jones, R B 1982b Effects of age, access and time of day on perching behaviour in the domestic fowl. Applied Animal Ethology 8: 357–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, D and Matthews, L R 1997 Preference and motivation testing. In: Appleby M C and Hughes B 0 (eds) Animal Welfare. CAB International: Wallingford, Oxon, UKGoogle Scholar
Freire, R, Appleby, M C and Hughes, B O 1997 Assessment of pre-laying motivation in the domestic hen using social interaction. Animal Behaviour 54: 313–319CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gunnarsson, S, Keeling, L J and Svedberg, J 1999 Effects of rearing factors on the prevalence of floor eggs, cloacal cannibalism and feather pecking in commercial flocks of loose housed laying hens. British Poultry Science 40: 12–18CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hughes, B O and Duncan, I J H 1988 The notion of ethological ‘need’, models of motivation and animal welfare. Animal Behaviour 36: 1696–1707CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, P and Toates, F M 1993 Who needs “behavioural needs”? Motivational aspects of the needs of animals. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 37: 161–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kent, J P, McElligott, A G and Budgey, H V 1997 Ground-roosting in domestic fowl (Gallus gallus domesticus) in the Gambia: the anticipation of night. Behavioural Processes 39: 271–278CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kilgour, R, Foster, T M, Temple, W, Matthews, L R and Bremmer, K J 1991 Operant technology applied to solving farm animal problems. An assessment. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 30: 141–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lambe, N R and Scott, G B 1998 Perching behaviour and preferences for different perch designs among laying hens. Animal Welfare 7: 203–216Google Scholar
Mason, G, McFarland, D and Garner, J 1998 A demanding task: using economic techniques to assess animal priorities. Animal Behaviour 55: 1071–1075CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McBride, G, Parer, I P and Foenander, F 1969 The social organisation and behaviour of the feral domestic fowl. Animal Behaviour Monographs 2: 127–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olsson, I A S and Keeling, L J 2000 Nighttime roosting in laying hens and the effect of thwarting access to perches. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 68: 243–256CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Olsson, I A S, Keeling, L J and McAdie, T M 2002 The push-door for measuring motivation in hens: an adaptation and a critical discussion of the method. Animal Welfare 11: 1–10Google Scholar
Petherick, J C and Rutter, S M 1990 Quantifying motivation using a computer-controlled push-door. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 27: 159–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tauson, R 1984 Effects of a perch in conventional cages for laying hens. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica 34: 193–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood-Gush, D G M, Duncan, I J H and Savory, C J 1978 Observations on the social behaviour of domestic fowl in the wild. Biology of Behaviour 3: 193–205Google Scholar