Suppr超能文献

巴西自由放养与室内密集养殖系统中肉鸡的福利状况

Welfare of broiler chickens in Brazilian free-range versus intensive indoor production systems.

作者信息

Sans Elaine Cristina de Oliveira, Dahlke Fabiano, Freitas Federici Juliana, Tuyttens Frank Andre Maurice, Forte Maiolino Molento Carla

机构信息

Animal Welfare Laboratory, Department of Animal Science, Federal University of Parana, Curitiba, Parana, Brazil.

Department of Animal Science and Rural Development, Federal University of Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, Santa Catarina, Brazil.

出版信息

J Appl Anim Welf Sci. 2023 Oct-Dec;26(4):505-517. doi: 10.1080/10888705.2021.1992280. Epub 2021 Nov 11.

Abstract

We compared broiler chicken welfare in free-range (FR) and intensive indoor (IN) systems using the Welfare Quality® Protocol. Ten FR and 11 IN farms in Brazil were assessed. Results are shown as either scores ranging from 0 to 100, where higher scores indicate better welfare, or prevalence, where lower prevalence indicates better welfare. In FR, the median prevalence was lower than in IN for mortality (2.0% vs. 4.7%, = 0.0262), culling (0.0% vs. 0.6%, = 0.0168), ascites (0.0% vs. 0.17%, 0.0431). Median welfare scores on FR farms were better for plumage cleanliness (100 vs. 59, 0.0001), panting or huddling (100 vs. 29, = 0.0001), lameness (81 vs. 19, = 0.0001), hock burn (93 vs. 37, = 0.0001), footpad dermatitis (35 vs. 26, = 0.0018). However, FR scores were worse for litter quality (34 vs. 100, = 0.0003), dust (53 vs. 78, = 0.0002), breast blisters (90 vs. 100, = 0.0077), touch test (70 vs. 99, = 0.0082). Better emotional states were observed in FR ( < 0.001). Even though there is room for welfare improvement in both systems, the number of welfare indicators with better results was superior in FR than in IN farms.

摘要

我们使用“福利质量”协议比较了散养(FR)和室内集约化养殖(IN)系统中肉鸡的福利状况。对巴西的10个散养农场和11个室内集约化养殖农场进行了评估。结果以0至100分的分数表示,分数越高表明福利越好,或以患病率表示,患病率越低表明福利越好。在散养系统中,死亡率(2.0%对4.7%,P = 0.0262)、淘汰率(0.0%对0.6%,P = 0.0168)、腹水症(0.0%对0.17%,P = 0.0431)的中位患病率低于室内集约化养殖系统。散养农场在羽毛清洁度(100对59,P = 0.0001)、喘气或扎堆(100对29,P = 0.0001)、跛行(81对19,P = 0.0001)、跗关节灼伤(93对37,P = 0.0001)、脚垫皮炎(35对26,P = 0.0018)方面的中位福利分数更高。然而,散养系统在垫料质量(34对100,P = 0.0003)、灰尘(53对78,P = 0.0002)、胸水泡(90对100,P = 0.0077)、触摸测试(70对99,P = 0.0082)方面的分数更低。在散养系统中观察到更好的情绪状态(P < 0.001)。尽管两种养殖系统的福利都有改善空间,但散养农场中福利指标结果更好的数量比室内集约化养殖农场更多。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验