Comparison of two Different Breeding Systems of Laying Hens in Relation to Egg Damage and Dirty

Authors

  • Mária Angelovičová Slovak University of Agriculture, 949 01 Nitra, Tr. A. Hlinku 2, Slovakia
  • Viera Ševčíková Slovak University of Agriculture, 949 01 Nitra, Tr. A. Hlinku 2, Slovakia
  • Ondřej Bučko Slovak University of Agriculture, 949 01 Nitra, Tr. A. Hlinku 2, Slovakia

Keywords:

table egg, damage, dirty, laying hen, breeding system, age

Abstract

The aim of work was to follow up and statistically evaluate the damage and dirty eggs and egg weight, depending on two different breeding systems and different ages of laying hens. Object of investigation were table eggs, their damage and dirty in the laying hens of the final hybrid ISA Brown reared in enriched cage system, and the free range system. In both rearing systems were ensured the conditions for laying hens in accordance with legislation establishing minimum standards for the laying hens minimum standards for the protection of laying hens, protection of animals kept for farming purposes in accordance with the principles of the so-called five freedoms. That was used to feed a complete feed mixture HYD 10 in both breeding systems. The feeders were supplemented with feed by hand every day and the same day were supplemented water to drinking troughs. Egg collection was hand in both breeding systems. This paper is a contribution to the solution of optimal breeding hens and production of high quality and safe of table eggs. Based on the results was formulated conclusion, which shows that to the damage and dirty eggs are not affected by the age of the breeding system and age of laying hens. Statistically significant difference (p ≤ 0.05) in the egg weight was observed between breeding cage system and breeding free range system and between age 30 and 40 weeks of laying hens.

References

Safehouse Project, 2010. Project short presentation: Summary. Home page address: http://www.safehouse-project.eu/index.php?rub

Silva, I. J. O., Ambiência na produção de aves em clima tropical, Piracicaba, 2001, 2, 150-204

Padron, M. N., Salmonella typhimurium penetration through the eggshell of hatching eggs, Avian Disease, 1990, 34, 463-465

USDA/APHIS, 2000b. NAHMS Layers ’99 Part II: Reference of 1999 table egg layer management in the U.S., January 2000. Home page address: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/ceah/ncahs/nahms/poultry/layers99/Layers99_dr_PartII.pdf, Accessed June 7, 2010

Carrique-mas, J. J., Breslin, M., Snow, L., McLaren, I., Sayers, A. R., and Davies, R. H., Persistence and clearance of different Salmonella serovars in building housing laying hens, Epidemiology and Infection, 2009, 137, 837-846

Abrahamsson, P., Tauson, R., and Appleby, M. C., Performance of four hybrids of laying hens in modified and conventional cages, Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A – Animal Science, 1995, 45, 286-296

Guesdon, V., Faure, J. M., Laying performance and egg quality in hens kept in standard or furnished cages, Animal Research, 2004, 53, 45-57

Food Regulation/NSW, 2010. Home page address: http://www.foodauthority.nsw.gov.au/industry/food-standards-and-requirements/legislation/ foodregulation/#.Ushxioex7bh

Abrahamsson, P., Tauson, R., Aviary systems and conventional cages for laying hens, Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A – Animal Science, 1995, 45, 191-203.

Abrahamsson, P., Tauson, R., and Elwinger, K., Effects on production, health and egg quality of varying proportions of wheat and barley in diets for two hybrids of laying hens kept in different housing systems, Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A – Animal Science, 1996, 46, 73-182

Wall, H., Tauson, R., Egg quality in furnished cages for laying hens. Effects of crack reduction measures and hybrid, Poultry Science, 2002, 81, 340-348

Souza, E. R. N., Carvalho, E. P., and Dionizio, F. L., Estudo da presença de Salmonella sp. em poedeiras submetidas a muda forçada, Ciência Agrotécnica, 2002, 26, 140-147

De Reu, K., Messens, W., Heyndrickx, M., Rodenburg, T. B., Uyttendaele, M., and Herman, L., Bacterial contamination of table eggs and the influence of housing systems, World’s Poultry Science Journal, 2008, 64, 5-19

Greenberg, B., Kowalski, J. A., and Klowden, M. J., Factors affecting the transmission of salmonellae by flies: Natural resistance to colonization and bacterial interference, Infection and Immunity, 1970, 2, 800-809

Harein, P. K., Delas Casas, E., Pomeroy, B. S., and York, M. D., Salmonella spp. and serotypes of Escherichia coli isolated from the lesser mealworm collected in poultry houses, Journal of Economic Entomology, 1970, 63, 80-82

Henzler, D. J., Opitz, H. M., The role of mice in the epizootiology of Salmonella enteritidis infection on chicken layer farms, Avian Diseases, 1992, 36, 625-631

Davies, R. H., Wray, C., Mice as carriers of Salmonella enteritidis on persistently infected poultry units, Veterinary Record, 1995a, 137, 337-341

Davies, R. H., Wray, C., Contribution of the lesser mealworm (Alphitobius diaperinus) to carriage of Salmonella enteritidis in poultry, Veterinary Record, 1995b, 137, 407-408

Gray, J. P., Maddox, C. W., Tobin, P. C., Gummo, J. D., and Pitts, C. W., Reservoir competence of Carcinops pumilio for Salmonella enteritidis (Eubacteriales: Enterobacteriaceae), Journal of Medical Entomology, 1999, 36, 888-891

Olsen, A. R., Hammack, T. S., Isolation of Salmonella spp. from the housefly, Musca domestica L., and the dump fly, Hydrotaea aenescens (Wiedemann) (Diptera: Muscidae), at caged-layer houses, Journal of food protection, 2000, 63, 958-960

Mian, L. S., Maag, H., and Tacal, J. V., Isolation of Salmonella from muscoid flies at commercial animal establishments in San Bernardino County, California, Journal of Vector Ecology, 2002, 27, 82-85

Wales, A. D., Carrique-Mas, J. J., Rankin, M., Bell, B., Thind, B. B., and Davies, R. H., Review of the carriage of zoonotic bacteria by arthropods, with special reference to Salmonella in mites, flies and litter beetles, Home page address: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1863-2378.2008.01222.x/pdf. Accessed June 7, 2010

Hughes, B. O., Dun, P., and Mccorquodale, C. C., Shell strength of eggs from medium-bodied hybrid hens housed in cages or on range in outside pens, British Poultry Science, 1985, 26, 129-136

Hidalgo, A., Rossi, M., Clerici, F., and Ratti, S., A market study on the quality characteristics of eggs from different housing systems, Food Chemistry, 2008, 106, 1031-1038

Commission Regulation (EC) No 589/2008 of 23 June 2008 laying down detailed rules for implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 as regards marketing standards for eggs

Tanaka, T., Hurnik, J. F., Comparison of behavior and performance of laying hens housed in battery cages and an aviary, Poultry Science, 1992, 71, 235-243

Taylor, A. A., Hurnik, J. F., The long-term productivity of hens housed in battery cages and an aviary, Poultry Science, 1996, 75, 47-51

Van den Brand, H., Parmentier, H. K., and Kemp, B., Effects of housing system (outdoor vs cages) and age of laying hens on egg characteristics, British Poultry Science, 2004, 45, 745-752.

Downloads

Published

2023-09-05