BIOLOGICAL INSIGHTS INTO THE INFLUENCE OF BREEDING TYPES ON BEHAVIORAL TRAITS IN BIRDS

Hassan, Maha M.; Abdulateef, S. M.

doi:10.63298/asj.2025.184947

	BIOLOGICAL INSIGHTS INTO THE INFLUENCE OF BREEDING TYPES ON BEHAVIORAL TRAITS IN BIRDS
Anbar Science Journal
Volume 1, Issue 1, February 2025, Pages 7-15 PDF (817.65 K)
Document Type: Original Article
DOI: 10.63298/asj.2025.184947
Authors
Maha M. Hassan¹; S. M. Abdulateef^* ²
¹University Of Anbar, College of Agriculture, Iraq
²Department of Biology, College of Education for Pure Sciences, University of Anbar, Iraq
Abstract
This study was conducted in the bird fields of the Department of Animal Production, College of Agriculture, University of Anbar, to investigate the effect of different breeding types on desirable and undesirable behavioral traits in birds. The study focused on the impact of roosting behavior, sand bedding, theater systems, and other breeding methods to determine which approach best enhances animal welfare. Additionally, the research explored the influence of breeding types on behavioral, physiological, and productive traits. A total of 120 ROSS 308 birds, with an average weight of approximately 40 grams, were randomly assigned to six treatments. The treatments were as follows: T1 – indoor rearing with free theater systems and perches; T2 – indoor rearing with perches using conventional methods; T3 – indoor rearing with free theater systems; T4 – control group (indoor rearing with regular methods); T5 – outdoor rearing with perches; and T6 – outdoor rearing without perches. Each treatment consisted of 20 birds, with each bird treated as an experimental unit. To simulate natural conditions, sand flooring was utilized in the free theater treatments. Birds were fed using an ad libitum system. The results provide insights into the influence of these breeding types on bird behavior and welfare, with important implications for optimizing physiological and productive outcomes.
Highlights
Examines the impact of different breeding systems on desirable and undesirable behavioral traits in broiler chickens. Compares indoor, outdoor, and mixed rearing systems to assess their effects on poultry welfare and productivity. Finds significant improvements (P≤0.05) in productive performance, body weight, weight gain, and growth rate for birds raised in free-range and perch-based systems. Reports reduced undesirable behaviors such as feather plucking and aggressiveness in certain treatments, contributing to better welfare. Demonstrates that environmental enrichment (sand bedding, perches, and outdoor access) enhances behavioral and physiological traits, leading to improved poultry production.
Keywords
Breeding types; Behavioral traits; Animal welfare; Productive traits; Physiological traits

References
[1] E. C. D. O. Sans, F. A. M. Tuyttens, C. A. Taconeli, P. M. Rueda, J. R. Ciocca, and C. F. M. Molento, “Welfare of broiler chickens reared in two different industrial house types during the winter season in Southern Brazil,” Br Poult Sci, vol. 62, no. 5, 2021, doi: 10.1080/00071668.2021.1908519. [2] J. Webster, Management and welfare of farm animals : UFAW farm handbook, vol. 11, no. 5. 2011. [3] A. P. O. Souza, F. A. M. Tuyttens, C. A. Taconeli, J. C. Biscarra, and C. F. M. Molento, “Ordinal or visual analogue scales for assessing aspects of broiler chicken welfare?,” Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, vol. 27, no. 3, 2024, doi: 10.1080/10888705.2022.2105648. [4] M. S. Zahoor et al., “Effects of mirror and coloured balls as environmental enrichment tools on performance, welfare and meat quality traits of commercial broiler,” Trop Anim Health Prod, vol. 54, no. 2, 2022, doi: 10.1007/s11250-022-03155-1. [5] G. A. Coria-Avila et al., “The Neurobiology of Behavior and Its Applicability for Animal Welfare: A Review,” 2022. doi: 10.3390/ani12070928. [6] Poultry behaviour and welfare. 2004. doi: 10.1079/9780851996677.0000. [7] A. L. Geng et al., “Effects of indoor stocking density on performance, egg quality, and welfare status of a native chicken during 22 to 38 weeks,” Poult Sci, vol. 99, no. 1, 2020, doi: 10.3382/ps/pez543. [8] C. W. Van Der Pol et al., “Lighting schedule and dimming period in early life: Consequences for broiler chicken leg bone development,” Poult Sci, vol. 94, no. 12, 2015, doi: 10.3382/ps/pev276. [9] J. A. Mench, J. P. Garner, and C. Falcone, “Behavioral activity and its effects on leg problems in broiler chickens,” Proc. 6th Eur. Symp. Poult. Welf. H. Oester and C. Wyss, ed. World’s Poultry Science Association, Zollikofen, Switzerland, pp. 152–156, 2001. [10] B. J. Mtileni, K. A. Nephawe, A. E. Nesamvuni, and K. Benyi, “The influence of stocking density on body weight, egg weight, and feed intake of adult broiler breeder hens,” Poult Sci, vol. 86, no. 8, 2007, doi: 10.1093/ps/86.8.1615. [11] D. and M. M. C. Nelson, Lehninger Principles of Biochemistry (4th ed.), vol. 33, no. 1. 2004. [12] D. C. Lay et al., “Hen welfare in different housing systems,” Poult Sci, vol. 90, no. 1, 2011, doi: 10.3382/ps.2010-00962. [13] C. Arnould, D. Bizeray, J. M. Faure, and C. Letterrier, “Effects of the addition of sand and string to pens on use of space, activity, tarsal angulations and bone composition in broiler chickens,” Animal Welfare, vol. 13, no. 1, 2004, doi: 10.1017/s0962728600026713. [14] J. L. Grimes, J. Smith, and C. M. Williams, “Some alternative litter materials used for growing broilers and turkeys,” 2002. doi: 10.1079/WPS20020037. [15] W. Timberlake and G. A. Lucas, “Behavior systems and learning: From misbehavior to general principles,” in Contemporary Learning Theories: Instrumental Conditioning Theory and the Impact of Biological Constraints on Learning, 2019. doi: 10.4324/9781315788982-12. [16] R. Tauson, “Mortality in Laying Hens Caused by Differences in Cage Design,” Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, vol. 35, no. 2, 1985, doi: 10.1080/00015128509435772. [17] C. J. Nicol, “Effect of Cage Height and Area on the Behaviour of Hens Housed in Battery Cages,” Br Poult Sci, vol. 28, no. 2, 1987, doi: 10.1080/00071668708416965. [18] T. Z. Sibanda, M. Kolakshyapati, M. Welch, D. Schneider, J. Boshoff, and I. Ruhnke, “Managing free-range laying hens–part a: Frequent and non-frequent range users differ in laying performance but not egg quality,” Animals, vol. 10, no. 6, 2020, doi: 10.3390/ani10060991. [19] V. H. B. Ferreira, V. Guesdon, and L. Calandreau, “How can the research on chicken cognition improve chicken welfare: a perspective review,” 2021. doi: 10.1080/00439339.2021.1924920. [20] P. C. Glatz, “Effect of Poor Feather Cover on Feed Intake and Production of Aged Laying Hens,” Asian-Australas J Anim Sci, vol. 14, no. 4, 2001, doi: 10.5713/ajas.2001.553. [21] A. L. Hall, “The effect of stocking density on the welfare and behaviour of broiler chickens reared commercially,” Animal Welfare, vol. 10, no. 1, 2001, doi: 10.1017/s096272860002323x.
Statistics Article View: 1,078 PDF Download: 126