Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T02:10:51.791Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Behavioural needs, priorities and preferences of laying hens

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2007

C.A. Weeks  and
C.J. Nicol
C.A. Weeks*
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Veterinary Science, University of Bristol, Langford, Bristol BS40 5DU, United Kingdom
C.J. Nicol
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Veterinary Science, University of Bristol, Langford, Bristol BS40 5DU, United Kingdom
*
*Corresponding author: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

We review the behavioural needs, priorities and preferences of laying hens for increased space, perching, nesting, foraging and dustbathing behaviour. Hens make full use of and may work to gain access to perches, however it is not yet known how perching ranks in comparison with otherbehaviours. Laying hens appearto have an instinctive need to perform pre-laying (nest-building) behaviour and have a strong preference for a discrete, enclosed nest site, for which they will work hard to gain access as oviposition approaches. Access to a nest site is a high-ranking priority for laying hens, preferred over food at this time. Foraging is a behavioural need, with peat, sand and wood shavings preferred substrates in choice experiments. There is no reduction in time spent foraging when a cost is imposed, nor when feed is freely available. Dustbathing is currently viewed as a behavioural need, as the extent to which hens value dustbathing is not known. Bird preferences for space are complex and confounded by interactions between group size and stocking density. There is some evidence that priority for space varies during the day and increases when the total space available to a group of birds is restricted, and that greater priority is given to space than to small group size. The presence of apparently purposeless behaviour, of high levels of aggression or redirected behaviours such as feather pecking and cannibalism are indicators that the housing system is not meeting the behavioural needs of the hens and hence is not satisfactory forbird welfare.

Keywords

behavioural needsprioritiespreferenceslaying hennestingdustbathingperchingspaceforaging
Type
Reviews
Information
World's Poultry Science Journal , Volume 62 , Issue 2 , June 2006 , pp. 296 - 307
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2006

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

Abeyesinghe, S.M., Nicol, C.J., Hartnell, S.J. and Wathes, C.M. (2005) Can domestic fowl show self-control? Animal Behaviour 70: 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abrahamsson, P. and Tausson, R. (1997) Effects of group size on performance, health and birds'use of facilities in furnished cages for laying hens. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica A- Animal Science 47: 254–260.Google Scholar
Albentosa, M.J. and Cooper, J.J. (2004) Effects of cage height and stocking density on the frequency of comfort behaviours performed by laying hens housed in furnished cages. Animal Welfare 13: 419–424.Google Scholar
Appleby, M.C. (2004) What causes crowding? Effects of space, facilities and group size on behaviour, with particular reference to furnished cages for hens. Animal Welfare 13: 313–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Appleby, M.C., Duncan, I.J.H. and Mcrae, H.E. (1988) Perching and floor laying by domestic hens: experimental results and their commercial application. British Poultry Science 29: 351–357.Google Scholar
Appleby, M.C. and Mcrae, H.E. (1986) The individual nest box as a super-stimulus for domestic hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 15: 169–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Appleby, M.C., Hughes, B.O. and Elson, A. (1992) Poultry Production Systems: Behaviour, Management and Welfare. CAB International, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
Appleby, M.C.Smith, S.F. and Hughes, B.O. (1993) Nesting, dustbathing and perching by laying hens in cages – effects of design on behaviour and welfare. British Poultry Science 34: 835–847.Google Scholar
Appleby, M.C., Hughes, B.O., Mcdonald, M. and Cordiner, L.S. (1998) Factors affecting the use of perches in cages by laying hens. British Poultry Science 39: 186–190.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blokhuis, H.J., Beuving, G. and Rommers, J.M. (1993) Individual variation of stereotyped pecking in laying hens. In: Savory, C.J. and Hughes, B.O. (eds) Proceedings of the 4th European Symposium on Poultry Welfare, Edinburgh, UK, 18–21 September 1993. Universities Federation for Animal Welfare: Potters Bar UK. pp. 19–26.Google Scholar
Blokhuis, H.J. and Wiepkema, P.R. (1998) Studies of feather pecking in poultry. Veterinary Quarterly 20: 6–9.Google Scholar
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: 127–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradshaw, R.H. (1991) Discrimination of group members by laying hens Gallus domesticus. Behavioural Processes 24: 143–151.Google Scholar
Bradshaw, R.H. (1992) Conspecific discrimination and social preference in the laying hen. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 33: 69–75.Google Scholar
Bubier, N.E. (1996a) The behavioural priorities of laying hens: the effect of cost/no cost multi-choice tests on time budgets. Behavioural Processes 37: 225–238.Google Scholar
Bubier, N.E. (1996b) The behavioural priorities of laying hens: the effects of two methods of environment enrichment on time budgets. Behavioural Processes 37: 239–249.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Channing, C.E., Hughes, B.O. and Walker, A.W. (2001) Spatial distribution and behaviour of laying hens housed in an alternative system. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 72: 335–345.Google Scholar
Cooper, J.J. and Albentosa, M.J. (2003) Behavioural priorities of laying hens. Avian and Poultry Biology Reviews 14: 127–149.Google Scholar
Cooper, J.J. and Appleby, M.C. (1995) The effects of experience on motivation: prelaying behaviour in laying hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 42: 283–295.Google Scholar
Cooper, J.J. and Appleby, M.C. (1996a) Demand for nest boxes in laying hens. Behavioural Processes 36: 171–182.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cooper, J.J. and Appleby, M.C. (1996b) Individual variation in pre-laying behaviour and the incidence of floor eggs in laying hens. British Poultry Science 37: 245–254.Google Scholar
Cooper, J.J. and Appleby, M.C. (1997) Motivational aspects of individual variation in response to nest boxes by laying hens. Animal Behaviour 54: 1245–1253.Google Scholar
Cooper, J.J. and Appleby, M.C. (2003) The value of environmental resources to domestic hens: a comparison of the work-rate for food and for nests as a function of time. Animal Welfare 12: 39–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danbury, T.C., Weeks, C.A., Chambers, J.P., Waterman-Pearson, A.E and Kestin, S.C. (2000) Preferential selection of the analgesic drug carprofen by lame broiler chickens. Veterinary Record 146: 307–311.Google Scholar
Dawkins, M.S. (1985) Cage height preference and use in battery kept hens. Veterinary Record 116: 345–347.Google Scholar
Dawkins, M.S. (1989) Time budgets in red junglefowl as a baseline for the assessment of welfare in domestic fowl. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 24: 77–80.Google Scholar
Dawkins, M.S. (2003) Behaviour as a tool in the assessment of animal welfare. Zoology 106: 383–387.Google Scholar
D'Eath, R.B. and Keeling, L.J. (1998) Social discrimination by hens and small flocks: implications for social organisation. In: Veissier, I. and Boissy, A. (eds) Proceedings of the 32nd Congress of the International Society for Applied Ethology, 21–25 July 1998, Clermont-Ferrand France. INRA France. p. 68.Google Scholar
De Jong, I., Fillerup, M. and Van Reenen, K. (2005) Substrate preferences in laying hens. In: Proceedings of the 7th European symposium on poultry welfare15–19 June 2005Lublin, Poland, Animal Science Papers and Reports, 23 Suppl. 1, 143–152. Institute of Genetics and Animal Breeding Jastrz′biec Poland.Google Scholar
Duncan, I.J.H. and Hughes, B.O. (1972) Free and operant feeding in domestic fowl. Animal Behaviour 20: 775–777.Google Scholar
Faure, J.-M. (1986) Operant determination of the cage and feeder size preferences of the laying hen. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 15: 325–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faure, J.-M. and Jones, R.B. (2004) Genetic influences on resource use, fear and sociality. In: Perry, G.C. (Editor) ‘Welfare of the Laying Hen’ Poultry Science Symposium Series 27, CABI Publishing, Wallingford, Oxon, UK pp. 99–108.Google Scholar
Faure, J.-M., Bessei, W. and Jones, R.B. (2003) Direct selection for improvement of animal well-being. In: Muir, W.M. and Aggrey, S.E. (editors) Poultry Genetics, Breeding and Technology, CABI Publishing, Wallingford, Oxon, UK pp. 221–245.Google Scholar
Freire, R., Appleby, M.C. and Hughes, B.O. (1997a) The interaction between pre-laying behaviour and feeding in hens: Implications for motivation. Behaviour 134: 1019–1030.Google Scholar
Freire, R., Appleby, M.C. and Hughes, B.O. (1997b) Assessment of pre-laying motivation in the domestic hen using social interaction. Animal Behaviour 54: 313–319.Google Scholar
Freire, R., Cheng, H.W. and Nicol, C.J. (2004) Development of spatial memory in occlusion-experienced domestic chicks. Animal Behaviour 67: 141–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freire, R. and Nicolc, J. (1999) Effect of experience of occlusion events on the domestic chick's strategy for locating a concealed imprinting object. Animal Behaviour 58: 593–599.Google Scholar
Grigor, P.N., Hughes, B.O. and Appleby, M.C. (1995) Social inhibition of movement in domestic hens. Animal Behaviour 49: 1381–1388.Google Scholar
Guesdon, V. and Faure, J.M. (2004) Laying performance and egg quality in hens kept in standard or furnished cages. Animal Research 53: 45–57.Google Scholar
Gunnarsson, S., Matthews, L.R., Foster, T.M. and Temple, W. (2000) The demand for straw and feathers as litter substrates by laying hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 65: 321–330.Google Scholar
Huber-Eicher, B. and Wechsler, B. (1998). The effect of quality and availability of foraging materials on feather pecking in laying hen chicks. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 55: 861–873.Google Scholar
Hughes, B.O. (1977) Selection of group size by individual laying hens. British Poultry Science 18: 9–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, B.O. and Duncan, I.J.H. (1988) The notion of ethological ‘need’, models of motivation and animal welfare. Animal Behaviour 36: 1696–1707.Google Scholar
Hughes, B.O., Duncan, I.J.H. and Brown, M. (1989) The performance of nest building by domestic hens: is it more important than the construction of the nest? Animal Behaviour 36: 327–335.Google Scholar
Hughes, B.O., Carmichael, N.L., Walker, A.W. and Grigor, P.N. (1997) Low incidence of aggression in large flocks of laying hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 54: 215–234.Google Scholar
Jensen, P. and Toates, F. (1993) Who needs behavioural needs – motivational aspects of the needs of animals. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 37: 161–181.Google Scholar
De Jong, I.C., Fillerup, M. and Van Reenen, K. (2005) Substrate preferences in laying hens. Animal Science Papers and Reports 23 Supplement 1: 143–152.Google Scholar
Lagadic, H. and Faure, J-M. (1987) Preferences of domestic hens for cage size and floor types as measured by operant conditioning. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 19: 147–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laywel, (2006) Report in preparation (may include publication on web).Google Scholar
Lindberg, A.C. and Nicol, C.J. (1996a) Effects of social and environmental familiarity on group preferences and spacing behaviour in laying hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 49: 109–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindberg, A.C. and Nicol, C.J. (1996b) Space and density effects on group size preferences in laying hens. British Poultry Science 37: 709–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindberg, A.C. and Nicol, C.J. (1997) Dustbathing in modified battery cages: Is sham dustbathing an adequate substitute? Applied Animal Behaviour Science 55: 113–128.Google Scholar
Lindberg, A.C. and Nicol, C.J. (2001) Influence of prior exposure to wood shavings on feather pecking, dustbathing and foraging in adult laying hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 73: 141–155.Google Scholar
Lindqvist, C.E.S., Schutz, K.E. and Jensen, P. (2002) Red junglefowl have more contra free-loading than white leghorn layers: effects of food deprivation and consequences for information gain. Behaviour 139: 1195–1209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keeling, L.J. (1994) Inter-bird distances and behavioural priorities in laying hens: the effect of spatial restriction. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 39: 131–140.Google Scholar
Keeling, L.J. (1995) Spacing behaviour and an ethological approach to assessing optimum space allocations for groups of laying hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 44: 171–186.Google Scholar
Mason, G., Mcfarland, D and Garner, J. (1998) Ademanding task: Using economic techniques to assess animal priorities. Animal Behaviour 55: 1071–1075.Google Scholar
Mason, G.J.Cooper, J.J. and Clarebrough, C. (2001) Frustrations of fur-farmed mink. Nature 410: 35–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Matthews, L.R., W. Temple, W., Foster, T.M., Walker, A.W. and Mcadie, T.M. (1995) Comparison of the demand for dustbathing substrates by layer hens, 29th International Congress of the ISAE, pp. 11–12.Google Scholar
Mclean, K.A., Baxter, M.R. and Michie, W. (1986) A comparison of the welfare of laying hens in battery cages and in a perchery. Research and Development in Agriculture 3: 93–98.Google Scholar
Meijsser, F.M. and Hughes, B.O. (1989) Comparative analysis of pre-laying behaviour in battery cages and in three alternative systems. British Poultry Science 30: 747–760.Google Scholar
Merrill, R.J.N. (2004) Dustbathing behaviour of laying hens on novel materials in furnished cages. PhD Thesis, University of Bristol UK.Google Scholar
Moinard, C.Statham, P., Haskell, M.J., Mccorquodale, C., Jones, R.B. and Green, P.R. (2004) Accuracy of hens in jumping upwards and downwards between perches in different light environments. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 85: 77–92.Google Scholar
Ng, Y.-K. (1990) The case for and difficulties in using “demand areas” to measure changes in well-being. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13: 30–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicol, C.J. (1986) Non-exclusive spatial preference in the laying hen. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 15: 337–350.Google Scholar
Nicol, C.J. (1987) Behavioural responses of laying hens following a period of spatial restriction. Animal Behaviour 35: 1709–1719.Google Scholar
Nicol, C.J. (1997) Making sense of variation: acquired functional categories and conditional discriminations. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 54: 59–62.Google Scholar
Nicol, C.J. and Guilford, T. (1991) Exploratory activity as a measure of motivation in deprived hens. Animal Behaviour 41: 333–341.Google Scholar
Nicol, C.J., Gregory, N.G., Knowles, T.G., Parkman, I.D. and Wilkins, L.J. (1999) Differential effects of increased stocking density, mediated by increased flock size, on feather pecking and aggression in laying hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 65: 137–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicol, C.J., Lindberg, A.C., Phillips, A.J., Pope, S.J., Wilkins, L.J. and Green, L.E. (2001) Influences of prior exposure to wood shavings on feather pecking, dustbathing and foraging in adult laying hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 73: 141–155.Google Scholar
Olsson, I.A.S. and Keeling, L.J. (2000) Night-time roosting in laying hens and the effect of thwarting access to perches. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 68: 243–256.Google Scholar
Pagel, M. and Dawkins, M.S. (1997) Peck orders and group size in laying hens: ‘Futures contracts’ for non-aggression. Behavioural Processes 40: 13–25.Google Scholar
Petherick, J.C., and Duncan, I.J.H. (1989) Behaviour of young domestic fowl directed towards different substrates. British Poultry Science 30: 229–238.Google Scholar
Petherick, J.C., Seawright, E. and Waddington, D. (1993) Influence of motivational state on choice of food or a dustbathing foraging substrate by domestic hens. Behavioural Processes 28: 209–220.Google Scholar
Sanotra, G.S., Vestergaard, K.S., Agger, J.F., et al. (1995) The relative preference for feathers, straw, wood-shavings and sand for dustbathing, pecking and scratching in domestic chicks. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 43: 263–277.Google Scholar
Savory, J., Jack, M.C. and Sandilands, V. (2005) Behavioural responses of hens in pens to different floor space allowances. In: Proceedings of the 7th European symposium on poultry welfare15–19 June 2005Lublin, Poland, Animal Science Papers and Reports, 23 Suppl 1, 135–141. Institute of Genetics and Animal Breeding, Jastrz′biec Poland.Google Scholar
Schutz, K.E. and Jensen, P. (2001) Effects of resource allocation on behavioural strategies: Acomparison of red junglefowl (Gallus gallus) and two domesticated breeds of poultry. Ethology 107: 753–765.Google Scholar
Sherwin, C.M. and Nicolc, J. (1993) Factors influencing floor-laying by hens in modified cages. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 36: 211–222.Google Scholar
Smith, S.F., Appleby, M.C. and Hughes, B.O. (1990) Problem solving by domestic hens opening doors to reach nest sites. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 28: 287–292.Google Scholar
Smith, S.F., Appleby, M.C. and Hughes, B.O. (1993) Nesting and dustbathing by hens in cages – matching and mismatching between behavior and environment. British Poultry Science 34: 21–33.Google Scholar
Tauson, R. (2003) Experiences of production and welfare in small group furnished cages in Sweden. In: Proceedings of the XVI European Symposium on the Quality of Poultry and Meat & X European Symposium on the Quality of Eggs and Egg ProductsSt Brieuc, France.Ploufragan, France pp. 219–229.Google Scholar
Tauson, R. and Abrahamsson, P. (1996) Foot and keel bone disorders in laying hens – Effects of artificial perch material and hybrid. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica A- Animal Science 46: 239–246.Google Scholar
Tauson, R. and Holm, K.-E. (2002) Evaluation of Victorsson furnished cage for 8 laying hens according to the 7§ of the Swedish Animal Welfare Ordinance and according to the New Technique Evaluation Program at the Swedish Board of Agriculture. Rapport 251. SLU, Funbo-Lövsta Forskningscenter, 755 97 UPPSALA. (Swedish, with English tables, graphs and summary)Google Scholar
Tauson, R. and Holm, K.-E. (2003) Evaluation of “Aviplus” – Big Dutchman – furnished cage for 10 laying hens according to the 7§ of the Swedish Animal Welfare Ordinance and according to the New Technique Evaluation Program at the Swedish Board of Agriculture. Rapport 251. SLU, Funbo-Lövsta Forskningscenter, 755 97 UPPSALA. (Swedish, with English tables, graphs and summary).Google Scholar
Tauson, R. and Holm, K.-E. (2005) Mortality, production and use of facilities in furnished cages for layers in commercial egg production in Sweden from 1998–2003. In: Proceedings of the 7th European symposium on poultry welfare15–19 June 2005Lublin, Poland, Animal Science Papers and Reports, 23 Suppl 1, 95–102. Institute of Genetics and Animal Breeding, Jastrz′ biec Poland.Google Scholar
Taylor, P.E., Scott, G.B. and Rose, P. (2003) The ability of domestic hens to jump between horizontal perches: effects of light intensity and perch colour. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 83: 99–108.Google Scholar
Valkonen, E., Valaja, J. and VenÄLÄInen, E. (2005) The effects of dietary energy and perch design on the performance and condition of laying hens kept in furnished cages. In: Proceedings of the 7th European symposium on poultry welfare15–19 June 2005Lublin, Poland, Animal Science Papers and Reports, 23 Suppl 1, 9103–110. Institute of Genetics and Animal Breeding, Jastrz′biec Poland.Google Scholar
Van Liere, D.W. (1991) Function and organization of dustbathing in laying hens. Landbouwuniversiteit Wageningen (Thesis).Google Scholar
Van Liere, D.W. (1992) Dustbathing as related to proximal and distal feather lipids in laying hens. Behavioural Processes 26: 177–188.Google Scholar
Van Liere, D.W., Kooijman, J. and Wiepkema, P.R. (1990) Dustbathing behaviour of laying hens as related to quality of dustbathing material. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 26: 127–141.Google Scholar
Van Liere, D.W., and Siard, N. (1991) The experience with litter and subsequent selection of bathing substrates in laying hens. In: Appleby, M. C., Horrell, R. I., Petherick, J. C., and Rutter, S. M. (Eds.), Applied animal behaviour: past present and future pp. 132–133. UFAW, Potters Bar Herts.Google Scholar
Van Liere, D.W. and Wiepkema, P.R. (1992) Effects of long-term deprivation of sand on dustbathing behaviour in laying hens. Animal Behaviour 43: 549–558.Google Scholar
Vestergaard, K. (1982) Dust-bathing in the domestic fowl: diurnal rhythm and dust deprivation. Applied Animal Ethology 8: 487–495.Google Scholar
Vestergaard, K. and Hogan, J.A. (1992) The development of a behavior system – dustbathing in the Burmese Red Junglefowl.3 Effects of experience on stimulus preference. Behaviour 121: 215–230.Google Scholar
Vestergaard, K. and Lisborg, L. (1993) A model of feather pecking development which relates to dustbathing in the fowl. Behaviour 126: 291–308Google Scholar
Vestergaard, K.S., Damm, B.I., Abbott, U.K. and Bildsoe, M. (1999) Regulation of dustbathing in feathered and featherless domestic chicks: the Lorenzian model revisited. Animal Behaviour 58: 1017–1025.Google Scholar
Warburton, H. and Mason, G. (2003) Is out of sight out of mind? The effects of resource cues on motivation in mink, Mustela vison. Animal Behaviour 65: 755–762.Google Scholar
Widowski, T.M. and Duncan, I.J.H. (2000) Applied Animal Behaviour Science 68: 39–53.Google Scholar