Abstract

The study was carried out to compare the growth performance, gut microbiota, incidence of footpad dermatitis (FPD), leg weakness, physiological, and immunological responses in broilers kept in cage (CS) and floor pen (FS) rearing systems under a tropical environment. One-day-old male Cobb 500 chicks were allocated to either three-tiered wire-floored battery cages or floor pens with wood shavings. The body weight on day 42 and feed intake from days 1 to 42 of caged chickens were lower than those of chickens reared in floor pens. However, the caged chickens had significantly better overall (days 1–42) feed conversion ratios than those on floor pens. The FS system was detrimental to the incidence of FPD. The FS birds showed higher and lower caecal counts of Escherichia coli and Salmonellae, respectively than the CS birds. The FS birds had longer durations of latency-to-lie than their caged counterparts, which suggested that the former had a lower incidence of leg weakness. Higher serum basal concentrations of corticosterone, ovotransferrin and ceruloplasmin were noted in the FS chickens compared to the CS group. Antibody titre against Newcastle disease vaccinations was not affected by the rearing system. In conclusion, the cage rearing system appeared to benefit performance, the incidence of FPD, physiological response, fear reactions, and intestinal population of E. coli in broiler chickens under the hot and humid tropical conditions. However, raising broilers on floor pens improves body weight and leg strength, and reduces the caecal Salmonellae population compared to caged broilers.

• HIGHLIGHTS

• Caged broilers have better feed efficiency and lower caecal Escherichia coli population and incidence of food-pad dermatitis than those on floor pens.

• Raising broilers on floor pens improves body weight and leg strength, and reduces the caecal Salmonellae population compared to caged broilers.

• Broilers on floor pens are more physiologically distressed than their caged counterparts.

摘要

进行了这项研究，以比较热带环境下饲养在笼子（CS）和落地围栏（FS）饲养的肉鸡的生长性能，肠道菌群，足垫皮炎（FPD）的发生，腿无力，生理和免疫反应。 。将一天大的Cobb 500雄性小鸡分配到三层铁地板电池笼或带有刨花的落地笔中。笼养鸡在第42天的体重和从第1天到第42天的饲料摄入量均低于用圈舍圈养的鸡。但是，笼养鸡的总体饲料转化率（1-42天）要比地上圈舍的要好得多。FS系统对FPD的发生有害。FS鸟类的大肠杆菌和沙门氏菌的盲肠计数较高和较低分别比CS小鸟。FS鸟类的潜伏期比笼养的鸟类更长，这表明前者的腿无力发生率较低。与CS组相比，FS鸡的皮质酮，卵转铁蛋白和铜蓝蛋白的血清基础浓度更高。抵抗纽卡斯尔病疫苗的抗体滴度不受饲养系统的影响。总之，在炎热和潮湿的热带条件下，笼养系统似乎对肉鸡的性能，FPD的发生率，生理反应，恐惧反应以及大肠杆菌的肠道种群都有好处。然而，在地板笔上饲养肉鸡可改善体重和腿部力量，并减少盲肠沙门氏菌 与笼养肉鸡相比。

• 强调

• 笼养肉鸡的饲喂效率更高，盲肠大肠埃希菌的数量和食用垫皮炎的发生率均比自来水鸡高。

• 与笼养肉鸡相比，在地板笔上饲养肉鸡可改善体重和腿部力量，并减少盲肠沙门氏菌种群。

• 与笼养同类相比，落地笔上的肉鸡在生理上更加痛苦。