Engormix
Home
Search
Explore
Publish
Explore

Communities in English

AquacultureMycotoxinsPoultry IndustryPig IndustryDairy CattleAnimal Feed

AgriculturaBalanceados - PiensosAviculturaGanaderíaLecheríaMicotoxinasPorciculturaMascotas

MicotoxinasAviculturaSuinoculturaPecuária de cortePecuária de leite
Advertise on Engormix
Home
Publish
Search
Engormix.com / Poultry Industry / Poultry management

Stocking density-induced changes in growth performance, blood parameters, meat quality traits, and welfare of broiler chickens reared under semi-arid subtropical conditions

Published: May 3, 2024
By: Kwena Kgaogelo Thema 1; Caven Mguvane Mnisi 1,2; Victor Mlambo 3 / 1 Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Science, North-West University, Mafikeng, South Africa; 2 Food Security and Safety Focus Area, Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Science, North-West University, Mafikeng, South Africa, 3 School of Agricultural Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Sciences, University of Mpumalanga, Nelspruit, South Africa.
Summary

Broiler production in semi-arid tropics must contend with high levels of heat stress, which have implications on stocking density, bird welfare, and profitability. Under these conditions, optimal stocking densities are likely to be lower than expected, thus must be experimentally determined. Therefore, this study investigated growth performance, haematology, serum biochemistry, carcass and meat quality, sizes of internal organs, and stress biomarkers in response to different stocking densities in broilers reared under semi-arid subtropical conditions. Five hundred, day-old Ross 308 broilers (44.0 ± 5.24 g live-weights) were randomly distributed to 25 replicate pens (1.32 m2 floor space each) to create five stocking densities: 1) 10 birds/pen (SD10); 2) 15 birds/pen (SD15); 3) 20 birds/pen (SD20); 4) 25 birds/pen (SD25); and 5) 30 birds/pen (SD30). There was a linear decrease (P < 0.05) in overall feed intake and weight gain in weeks 2 and 3 as stocking density increased. However, weight gain showed positive and negative quadratic responses (P < 0.05) in weeks 5 and 6, respectively, as stocking density increased. No linear or quadratic effects (P > 0.05) were observed for overall feed conversion ratio, haematological parameters, and meat quality traits in response to stocking density. Symmetric dimethylarginine, alanine transaminase, and albumin levels quadratically increased (P < 0.05) in response to increasing stocking densities. Serum glucose and thigh weight were not affected (P < 0.05) while final body, drumstick, breast, and wing weights linearly declined with stocking density. Increasing stocking density linearly reduced (P < 0.05) the weights of gizzard, proventriculus, caecum, and colon. Stocking density had no effect (P > 0.05) on latency-to-lie. It was concluded that higher stocking densities compromised feed intake, resulting in poor weight gains. Based on weight gain trends observed in week 5, it was determined that Ross 308 broilers should be reared at no more than 20 birds/pen (~15 birds/m2 or 27.27 kg/m2) under the experimental ambient conditions compared to the much higher globally accepted industry standard of 20 birds/m2.

Introduction

Broiler chickens require favourable rearing conditions to maximise their genetic potential for growth. Significant deviations from optimum rearing conditions can compromise feed utilization, growth performance, and bird welfare [1]. Stocking density is one critical rearing factor that has serious implications on the economic and social sustainability of the poultry industry. Globally, the accepted industry standard is to achieve between 30 and 38 kg bodyweight per m2 or to produce 20 adult birds (35 d of age) per m2 [2]. However, broiler producers often resort to high stocking densities to increase profit margins per unit area [3], despite the documented negative effects of this practice on bird performance [4, 5]. High stocking densities are especially detrimental to birds during the finisher phase when the bodyweight per unit area ratio is very high. Many other studies have demonstrated that high stocking density reduces growth and slaughter weight at day 42 [6–8]. Uzum & Toplu [9] and Das & Lacin [10] also reported negative effects of high stocking density (18 and 20 birds/m2) on overall feed intake, growth rates and feed conversion ratio in broilers from day 21. Less reported negative effects of high stocking densities include high ammonia and litter moisture levels, increased incidences of foot pad lesions, reduced preening behaviour, high heat stress and reduced locomotion in broiler chickens [11–14]. Nahashon et al. [15] reported that high stocking density rates have a negative effect on overall carcass performance of French guinea broilers. Moreover, Simitzis et al. [8] also observed a significant decrease in intramuscular fat due to higher stocking density (27.2 kg/m2). Accordingly, exceeding optimum (recommended) stocking densities has debilitating effects on bird welfare and profitability of the enterprise. On the other hand, using stocking densities below optimum (recommended) levels also has negative impacts on profitability due to underutilization of space. Therefore, there is a need to carefully determine functional stocking densities for different production systems and climatic conditions. Unlike the association between stocking density and farm profitability, which is rather straightforward, the relationship between stocking density and welfare is much more complex and difficult to unravel. Although many authors have studied this relationship, different results have been reported. This could be attributed to differences in production (experimental) systems, accuracy and validity of indicators of welfare, and climatic conditions.
While there are generally accepted industry standards regarding stocking density for broiler production, these are likely to vary depending on factors such as broiler strain, husbandry systems, and climatic conditions. For example, in some semi-arid subtropical areas, high temperatures and low humidity modulate stocking density effects on bird productivity and welfare. In such areas, it is imperative that optimal stocking density be experimentally determined. Thus, the aim of this study was to determine the optimal stocking density for Ross 308 broilers reared in a semi-arid subtropical environment using growth performance, blood and meat quality parameters, and welfare indicators. We hypothesized that high stocking densities would compromise the physiology, meat quality, and welfare indicators of the birds and that the semiarid subtropical rearing conditions require a much lower stocking density than the industry standard of 20 birds/m2.

Material and methods

Feeding trial

The procedures employed during the rearing, handling, and slaughtering of the chickens were approved (NWU-02006-20-A5) by the Research Ethics Committee for Animal Production studies at the North-West University (Mafikeng, South Africa). The six-week feeding trial was conducted during the autumn season at the North-West University Experiential Farm (26º41’36” S, 27º 05’35” E). The temperature ranged between a minimum of 12˚C at night and a maximum of 30˚C during the day. Five hundred, day-old male Ross 308 chicks were bought from Superbird (Pty) Ltd (Brits, South Africa), weighed, and randomly distributed to 25 replicate pens (experimental units), each measuring 1.1 m L × 1.2 m W × 1.55 m H, providing a floor space of 1.32 m2, including space occupied by feeders and drinkers. Standing pens (partitioned into two), built using wire-mesh, were used for this study and polyethene plastics were used to cover the floors. In a completely randomised design, the chicks were reared under five different stocking densities as follows: 10 birds/pen (SD10), 15 birds/pen (SD15), 20 birds/pen (SD20), 25 birds/pen (SD25) and 30 birds/pen (SD30). The recommended market weight for broilers in South Africa is currently 1.8 kg, therefore, these experimental stocking densities can be translated into SD10 = 13.64 kg/m2, SD15 = 20.45 kg/m2, SD20 = 27.27 kg/m2, SD25 = 34.09 kg/m2 and SD30 = 40.91 kg/m2. Each stocking density group was replicated five times. The birds were reared on starter (0–21 days), grower (22–35 days) and finisher (36–42 days) commercial diets (Table 1), which were bought from Nutrifeeds (Lichtenburg, South Africa). The chemical composition and digestible amino acids in starter, grower, and finisher diets used for feeding the broilers are presented in S1 Table. For the entire duration of the feeding trial, the commercial diets and clean, fresh water were offered ad libitum to the birds.
Table 1. Ingredient composition (%, as fed basis) of experimental starter, grower, and finisher phase diets.
Table 1. Ingredient composition (%, as fed basis) of experimental starter, grower, and finisher phase diets.

Performance measurements

Feed intake (FI) was measured daily by calculating the difference between feed offered and feed refusals. All the birds in every pen were weighed on a weekly basis by weighing them on scale to calculate average weekly body weight gain (ABWG). Feed conversion efficiency (FCE) was determined as weight gain divided by feed intake.

Blood collection and analysis

On the final day (day 42), two birds were randomly selected from each pen and blood samples were collected from the brachial vein. A needle (23-gauge) and syringes (5 mL) were used to collect blood and immediately the blood was transferred into serum and whole blood tubes. An automated LaserCyte Haematology Analyzer (IDEXX Laboratories Inc., Gauteng, South Africa) was used to determine white blood cells, lymphocytes, haematocrit, monocytes, heterophils, and platelets. An automated Vet Test Chemistry Analyzer (IDEXX Laboratories Inc., Gauteng, South Africa) was used to analyse for total protein, gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT), glucose, albumin, cholesterol, symmetric dimethylarginine (SDMA), creatinine, phosphorus, alanine transaminase (ALT), alkaline phosphatase (ALKP), calcium and urea.

Carcass traits and internal organs

At day 42 of age, all the birds were weighed to calculate final body weight (FBW). Immediately after weighing, all the birds were transported to a locally registered abattoir. Firstly, the birds were electrically stunned and slaughtered by cutting the jugular vein with a sharp knife. After bleeding, the plucker machine was used to remove all feathers before the carcasses were manually eviscerated. Records of hot carcass weight (HCW) were immediately taken after slaughter. Carcass yield was calculated by expressing HCW as a proportion of slaughter weight (FBW). Weights of drumstick, breast, thigh, wing, liver, gizzard, spleen, heart, and proventriculus were measured. The duodenum, jejunum, ileum, caecum, and colon with their contents were weighed and expressed in grams.

Meat quality measurements

A meat pH meter (HI98163, Hanna Instruments, Woonsocket, RI, USA) was used to determine the pH of breast meat after slaughter. The pH meter was calibrated with pH 4, 7, and 10 standard solutions, provided by the supplier, after taking measurements from every replicate pen. Meat lightness (L*), yellowness (b*) and redness (a*) were measured on the surface of the breast muscle using a Minolta colour spectrophotometer (BYK-Gardener GmbH, Geretsried, Germany), which has a 20-mm diameter measurement area (aperture size) and an illuminant D65-day light. Measurements were collected using a 10˚ observation angle. The colour guide was calibrated and set following the manufacturer’s recommendation. Cooking loss was determined by pre-weighing raw breast muscle and then placed in a foil plate and cooked to reach 75˚C internal temperature as described by Honikel at al. [16]. Another set of raw breast meat samples were sheared using a Meullenet-Owens Razor Shear Blade (A/MORS) mounted on a Texture Analyzer (TA.XT plus, Stable Micro Systems, Surrey, UK) to determine shear force (N). Breast meat water holding capacity (WHC) was determined following the filter-paper press method by Grau and Hamm [17]. Drip loss was determined by suspending 80–120 g pieces of breast muscle in closed containers, allowing them to drip. The samples were left in a chilled environment (1–5˚C) for 72 hours before re-weighing to calculate the percentage of fluid lost due to dripping as described by Honikel at al. [16].

Latency-to-lie

At day 42, two birds per pen were randomly selected for the latency-to-lie test (LTL). The LTL as defined by Berg and Sanotra [18], focuses on the body interaction with water, as it is an unusual experience for broiler chickens. All the participating birds were individually placed in a plastic container filled with 3 cm of water at 32˚C. The time it took for the bird to lie down and come into contact with the water was recorded. This test is based on the principle that the longer the bird stays on its feet before lying down (touching the water), the better is its leg health. If the bird was still standing after 10 minutes, the test was terminated, and the legs judged to be strong and healthy.

Statistical analysis

Measurements from multiple broilers per pen were averaged before analysis, resulting in each replicate pen having one average value per parameter of interest. Data were analysed for homogeneity of variance and for normality using Levene’s test and the NORMAL option in the Procedure Univariate statement, respectively. Weekly feed intake (FI), weight gain and feed conversion efficiency (FCE) data were analysed using the repeated measures in the general linear model (GLM) procedure of SAS [19]. Response surface regression analysis (Proc RSREG; SAS [19]) was employed to determine linear and quadratic effects of different stocking density rates. The optimum stocking density (y = -b/2a) was estimated from significant quadratic responses. Overall growth performance, blood parameters, carcass characteristics, internal organs, meat quality and welfare indicators data were analysed using the GLM procedure of SAS, where stocking density was the only factor. For all measured parameters, significance was declared at P < 0.05 and least squares means were compared using the probability of difference option.

Results

Repeated measures analysis revealed significant week × stocking density interaction effect on average weight gain (P = 0.019), but not on FI (P = 0.184) and FCE (P = 0.072). Table 2 shows that overall feed intake linearly declined [y = 4890 (±0.014)– 98.7 (±45.26) x; R2 = 0.45, P = 0.0002] as stocking density increased. Neither linear nor quadratic effects were observed for overall FCE as stocking density increased. Average weight gain declined in week 1 [y = 100.7 (±16.96)– 2.61 (±1.84) x; R2 = 0.16, P = 0.046] and week 2 [y = 296.7 (±44.80)– 4.58 (±4.87) x; R2 = 0.26, P = 0.01] in response to increasing stocking density. In week 5, a positive quadratic effect was observed for average weight gain [y = 967.8 (±209.9) + 60.07 (±28.39) x– 1.57 (±0.70) x2 ; R2 = 0.18, P = 0.03], but in week 6 a negative quadratic effect [y = 967.8 (±209.91)– 53.21 (±22.83) x + 1.28 (±0.56) x2 ; R2 = 0.18, P = 0.03] was observed. From the positive quadratic weight gain response in week 5, an optimum stocking density of 20 birds/pen (~27.27 kg/m2) was determined. There were no stocking density effects on overall BWG and FCE but overall FI was significantly influenced. The SD10 group had higher overall FI (4096.2 g/bird) than the SD20, SD25 and SD30 groups, which did not differ (P > 0.05).
Table 2. The effects of increasing stocking density on growth performance of Ross 308 broiler chickens.
Table 2. The effects of increasing stocking density on growth performance of Ross 308 broiler chickens.
Table 3 reveals that there were no linear or quadratic effects (P > 0.05) for all haematological parameters in response to increasing stocking density in broilers. Quadratic effects were observed for SDMA [y = –5.30 (±2.57) + 1.03 (±0.27) x– 0.02 (±0.007) x2 ; R2 = 0.144, P = 0.002], albumin [y = –91.41 (±59.10) + 21.05 (±6.43) x– 0.047 (±0.16) x2 ; R2 = 0.236, P = 0.007] and ALT [y = –61.61 (±56.36) +17.12 (±6.13) x– 0.35 (±0.15) x2 ; R2 = 0.137, P = 0.030] as stocking density rates increased. Birds reared under SD10 had the lowest level of SDMA (2.7 μg/L), albumin (68.7 g/L), and ALT (69.3 g/L) compared to other stocking density groups. In contrast, birds raised under SD20 had the lowest GGT (31.68 U/L) while SD25 and SD30 birds had the highest GGT (36.28 U/L and 35.17 U/L, respectively).
Table 3. The effects of increasing stocking density on blood parameters of Ross 308 broiler chickens.
Table 3. The effects of increasing stocking density on blood parameters of Ross 308 broiler chickens.
Table 4 shows that there were linear decreases (P < 0.05) for FBW, wing, drumstick, liver, spleen, heart, duodenum, jejunum, and ileum weights in response to increasing stocking density. Chickens on SD10 and SD15 had higher (P < 0.05) FBW than SD20. The SD20 group had the highest carcass yield (83.59 g) while the lowest was from the SD15 group (72.46 g). Birds reared on SD30 and SD25 groups had the least wing weight compared to other groups. The SD25 group had lower drumstick weight (87.28 g) compared to SD 20 (94.60 g), which was the highest. For duodenum weight, SD25 (16.38 g) and SD30 (16.92 g) birds had the least weights compared to other stocking density groups.
Table 4. The effects of increasing stocking density on carcass characteristics and internal organs (g, unless stated otherwise) of Ross 308 broiler chickens.
Table 4. The effects of increasing stocking density on carcass characteristics and internal organs (g, unless stated otherwise) of Ross 308 broiler chickens.
There were neither linear nor quadratic trends (P > 0.05) for all meat quality parameters as stocking density increased (Table 5). The GLM analysis also showed no significant effect of stocking densities on measured meat quality traits of the birds.
Table 5. The effects of increasing stocking density rates on meat quality parameters of Ross 308 broiler chickens.
Table 5. The effects of increasing stocking density rates on meat quality parameters of Ross 308 broiler chickens.
There were neither quadratic nor linear effects (P > 0.05) observed for latency-to-lie (LTL) as the stocking density increased. The recorded LTL ranged from 138.8 to 276.8 seconds.

Discussion

Stocking density is a vital management factor in broiler production because it is directly related to bird welfare, productivity, and profitability [20]. While higher stocking densities may reduce labour, equipment, energy, and housing costs, exceeding optimum stocking quickly reverses these gains by compromising the health, welfare, and productivity of birds [20]. In addition, textbook recommendations regarding stocking density of broilers may not be suitable in semi-arid tropical areas that are characterized by high ambient temperatures and humidity. The current study showed a linear decline in overall feed intake in response to increasing levels of stocking density. The birds raised under lower stocking densities (SD10 and SD20) consumed more feed and had higher weights compared to birds that were reared on higher stocking densities. These findings are similar to those reported by Thomas et al. [21] who observed that birds reared on low stocking density of 5 birds per m2, grew faster and consumed more feed than birds stocked at 10, 15, and 20 birds per m2. However, results in this study do not agree with those of Vargas-Rodriguez et al. [22] where all growth parameters were not affected by stocking density. Verheyen et al. [23] reported that as stocking density increases, feed intake decreases because physical access to feed and water is limited as the number of birds requiring feeder space increases. Thus, feed consumption decreases in birds reared under high stocking density resulting in poor FCE and weight gain. The effects are more pronounced as birds reach the grower and finisher phases when space availability becomes a major limiting factor [24]. This explains the current results were there was a positive quadratic response in weight gain observed only in weeks 5, but not earlier in the feeding trial.
Blood parameters are an effective, convenient tool for diagnosing and evaluating any pathophysiological abnormalities and nutritional status of animals [23]. Accordingly, haematological and serum biochemical indices were determined and used to monitor the effects of stocking density on the general welfare of the birds. Results from the present study indicated that there was neither linear nor quadratic trends for all haematological parameters in response to varying stocking densities. This contradicts Agusetyaningsih et al. [25] who found that a higher stocking density (16 birds/m2) resulted in higher levels of erythrocytes and haematocrits than a lower stocking density (10 birds/m2). In the current study, the concentration of serum glucose was higher in birds raised at lower stocking densities than in those reared at higher stocking densities. Since feed intake linearly declined in the current study, this can be explained by stocking density-induced changes in feed intake, which declined as density increased. Birds reared at lower stocking densities had higher serum glucose level because they consumed higher amounts of feed, translating to higher carbohydrate uptake, unlike birds reared at higher stocking densities whose feed intake was much lower.
The current serum glucose results are consistent with those reported by Karthiayini and Philomina [26], where serum glucose levels were reduced at high stocking density in broiler chickens. Indeed, the concentration of blood glucose is normally associated with environmental factors like heat stress and stocking density [27]. The current study showed that the serum concentration of albumin and ALT were higher in birds raised at a higher stocking density than in those reared at a lower stocking density. Nwaigwe et al. [28] and Jeong et al. [29] also showed that serum albumin concentrations increase in birds raised at a high stocking density. An increase in serum albumin is usually used as a reliable indicator of physiological stress in broilers [28]. Broilers tend to increase serum albumin as a homeostatic response to stress induced by high stocking density [30]. Alanine transaminase and AST are commonly used as effective biomarkers to identify tissue damages, especially in the liver. In the current study, birds reared at high stocking density (SD15, SD20, SD25, and SD30) had the highest levels of ALT and AST. Since broilers that are raised at high stocking densities endure increased competition for feed and water, the possibility of muscular injury is high and could be the reason for the higher levels of these two liver enzymes in the blood serum [31]. It was also observed that birds raised at the lowest stocking density (SD10) showed the lowest levels of SDMA. Usually, elevated levels of amino acid metabolites such as SDMA are harmful since this leads to oxidative stress, diseases, and disorders of the heart and neurological systems [32].
Carcass yields and weights of carcass portions are used when grading meat products, making them vital traits when determining sale prices [33]. In this study, SD20, SD25 and SD30 birds had lower final body weights compared to SD10 and SD15 birds. These results corroborated those reported by Thomas et al. [21] who observed that the average bird performance decreased when birds were reared at high stocking densities. Other carcass characteristics, which were negatively affected by stocking density include wing, drumstick, and duodenum weights. In contrast, Ravindran et al. [34] revealed that carcass characteristics were not affected by stocking density. These discrepancies between studies concerning the effect of stocking density on carcass characteristics of the broiler chickens may be explained by the different experimental conditions, such as bird strain [35], the presence or absence of antibiotics [34], or litter type [5]. Higher stocking densities have been reported to significantly decrease carcass yield and quality [36–40]. Current findings are in concordance with these observations, where carcass yield was higher at lower stocking densities but declined at higher stocking densities. Poor carcass yields at high stocking densities are mostly explained by the decrease in feed intake as the population of birds increases while feed space remains constant [1, 23]. Increasing stocking densities especially in the finisher period reduces physical access to feeders resulting in competition amongst the birds to get to the feeders. Verheyen et al. [23] reported a linear decline in feed intake as stocking density increased from 20 to 50 birds/m2, resulting in poor muscle development and fat deposition due to reduced nutrient uptake. Similar findings were reported by Dozier et al. [36], where increasing stocking density resulted in a linear reduction in absolute weight of the breast fillet. With regards to internal organs, jejunum and ilium weights linearly decreased as the stock density increased.
There are a limited number of studies that have investigated the effects of stocking density on intestinal development [41]. In this study, size of duodenum decreased with increasing stocking density, which agrees with the findings of Yin et al. [41] who reported similar results in geese. This means that high stocking density delays the general development of the small intestine, possibly due to lower feed intake and the associated nutrient deficiency. The weights of lymphoid organs like spleen are known to decrease in response to elevated levels of stress [42]. The same effect was observed in the current study where the weight of the spleen linearly decreased as the stocking the density increased. The bursa of Fabricius and spleen are crucial lymphoid organs in broiler chickens. Differentiation of B lymphocytes is completed in the bursa of Fabricius and the mature lymphocytes migrate to the peripheral lymphoid organs like the spleen [43]. Consequently, the reduction in the size of the spleen of broilers in the current study could have compromised the birds’ immune function. However, Heckert et al. [42] reported that stocking density had no influence on spleen weights. On the other hand, stress may also result in an increase in the weight of lymphoid organs to support immune responses in birds [44, 45].
The present study investigated the effect of stocking density on meat quality of Ross 308 broiler chickens. Stocking density did not affect any meat quality parameters observed. These findings are in accordance with previous studies [46–48] where stocking density did not induce any changes in meat quality traits. In contrast, Bilgili and Hess [49] stated that high stocking density compromises meat quality in broiler chickens. Genetic selection for rapid muscle growth in poultry has altered the ability of animals to respond and adapt to environmental stressors like stocking density [50]. Oxidative stress and tissue acidosis lead to cytotoxicity, free radical-mediated chain reaction, protein and lipid oxidation, impairment of animal health status and production resulting in products of inferior quality and shorter shelf life [51– 53].
Stocking density had no influence on latency-to-lie of the birds. Various scholars have reported higher prevalence of hock and foot burns when birds are reared at high stocking densities [21, 54]. This has been attributed to high levels of moisture and ammonia trapped in the litter in highly stocked pens. Latency-to-lie test is used to assess the leg strength as a welfare indicator. The results were unexpected because leg strength was not significantly affected by stocking density. The current results are not consistent with Buijs et al. [55] who reported a decrease in leg strength with increasing density causing a decrease in LTL duration. Furthermore, other studies by Sørensen et al. [54] and Sanotra et al. [56] reported that broilers raised at high stocking densities show increased incidences of leg weaknesses.

Conclusion

High stocking densities decreased overall feed intake, which negatively affected final body weight in Ross 308 broilers. An optimum stocking density of 20 birds/pen (~15 birds/m2 or 27.27 kg/m2) was determined in the current study, which is lower than the globally accepted density of 20 birds/m2. It can be recommended that feed additives with immune-boosting antioxidant and nutritional properties could be used if broiler chickens are reared at stocking densities higher than this optimum determined in the current study.
    
This article was originally published in PLoS ONE 17(10):e0275811. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275811. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License.

1. Puron D, Santamaria R, Segaura JC, Alamilla JL. Broiler performance at different stocking densities. Journal of Applied Poultry Research. 1995; 4:55–60.

2. Weeks CA, Butterworth A. Measuring and auditing broiler welfare. CABI publishing. 2004.

3. Tsiouris V, Georgopoulou I, Batzios C, Pappaioannou N, Ducatelle R, Fortomaris, P. High stocking density as a predisposing factor for necrotic enteritis in broiler chicks. Avian Pathology. 2015; 4:59–66.

4. Vanhonacker F, Verbeke W, Van Poucke E, Buijs S, Tuyttens FAM. Societal concern related to stocking density, pen size and group size in farm animal production. Livestock Science. 2008; 123:16–22.

5. Al Homidan A, Robertson JF, Petchey AM. Review of the effect of ammonia and dust concentrations on broiler performance. World’s Poultry Science Journal. 2003; 59:340–349.

6. Sekeroglu A, Demir E, Sarica M, Ulutas Z. Effects of housing systems on growth performance, blood plasma constituents and meat fatty acids in broiler chickens. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences. 2009; 12:631–636. https://doi.org/10.3923/pjbs.2009.631.636 PMID: 19634488

7. Hassanein HHM. Growth performance and carcass yield of broiler as affected by stocking density and enzymatic growth promoters. Asian Journal of Poultry Science. 2011; 5:94–101.

8. Simitzis PE, Kalogeraki E, Goliomytis M, Charismiadou MA, Triantaphyllopoulos K, Ayoutanti A, et al. Impact of stocking density on broiler growth performance, meat characteristics, behavioural components and indicators of physiological and oxidative stress. British Poultry Science. 2012; 56:721–730.

9. Uzum MH, Toplu HO. Effects of stocking density and feed restriction on performance, carcass, meat quality characteristics and some stress parameters in broilers under heat stress. Revue de Medecine Veterinaire. 2013; 164:546–554.

10. Das H, Lacin E. The effect of different photoperiods and stocking densities on fattening performance, carcass and some stress parameters in broilers. Israel Journal of Veterinary Medicine. 2014; 69:211– 20.

11. Singh KD, Pramanik PS, Kumar S, Kumar R, Srivastav AK, Verma MK. Impact of stocking density on gait score and mortality in broiler chickens. Journal of Pharmaceutical Innovation. 2021; 10: 210–214.

12. Bessie W, Reiter K. The influence of floor space on the behaviour of broilers. German Society of Veterinary Medicine and Behavioural Research Group, Freiburg, Breisgau, Germany. 1992.

13. Cravener TL, Roush WB, Mashaly MM. Broiler production under varying population densities. Poultry Science. 1992; 71:427–433. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.0710427 PMID: 1561208

14. Sˇ krbić Z, Pavlovski Z, Lukić M, Milić D. The effect of rearing conditions on carcass slaughter quality of broilers from intensive production. African Journal of Biotechnology. 2011; 10:1945–1952.

15. Nahashon SN, Adefope N, Amenyenu A, Tyus J II, Wright D. The effect of floor density on growth performance and carcass characteristics of French guinea broilers. Poultry Science. 2009; 88:2461–2467. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2008-00514 PMID: 19834101

16. Honikel KO. Reference methods for the assessment of physical characteristics of meat. Meat Science. 1998; 49:447–457. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0309-1740(98)00034-5 PMID: 22060626

17. Grau R, Hamm R. About the water-binding capacity of the mammalian muscle. II. Communication. Zeitschrif Lebensm Unters Briskly. 1957; 105:446.

18. Berg C, Sanotra GS. Can a modified latency-to-lie test be used to validate gait-scoring results in commercial broiler flocks? Animal Welfare. 2003; 12:655–659.

19. SAS. Users Guide: Statistics. Version 9.3. Cary: SAS Institute, NC, USA. 2010.

20. Thaxton JP, Dozier WA III, Branton SL, Morgan GW, Miles DW, Roush WB, et al. Stocking density and physiological adaptive responses of broilers. Poultry Science. 2006; 85:819–824. https://doi.org/10. 1093/ps/85.5.819 PMID: 16673757

21. Thomas DG, Ravindran V, Thomas DV, Camden BJ, Cottam YH, Morel PC, et al. Influence of stocking density on the performance, carcass characteristics and selected welfare indicators of broiler chickens. New Zealand Veterinary Journal. 2004; 52:76–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/00480169.2004.36408 PMID: 15768100

22. Vargas-Rodriguez LM, Duran-Melendez LA, Garcia-Masias JA, Arcos-Garcia JL, Joaquin-Torres BM, Ruelas-Inzunza MG. Effect of probiotic and population density on the growth performance and carcass characteristics in broiler chickens. International Journal of Poultry Science. 2013; 12:390–395.

23. Verheyen AJ, Maes DG, Mateusen B, Deprez P, Janssens GP, de Lange L, et al. Serum biochemical reference values for gestating and lactating sows. The Veterinary Journal. 2007; 174:92–98. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.tvjl.2006.04.001 PMID: 16723263

24. Cengiz O, Koksal BH, Tatli O, Sevim O, Ahsan U, Uner AG, et al. Effect of dietary probiotic and high stocking density on the performance, carcass yield, gut microflora, and stress indicators of broilers. Poultry Science. 2015; 94:2395–2403. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps/pev194 PMID: 26240393

25. Agusetyaningsih I, Widiastuti E, Wahyuni HI, Yudiarti T, Murwani R, Sartono TA, et al. Effect of encapsulated leaf extract on the physiological conditions, immune competency, and antioxidative status of broilers at high stocking density. Annals of Animal Science. 2022; 22:653–662.

26. Karthiayini K, Philomina PT. Effect of stocking density on blood biochemical and leukocyte profile of broiler chicken in summer season. Indian Journal of Poultry Science. 2015; 50:218–221.

27. Puvadolpirod S, Thaxton JP. Model of physiological stress in chickens 1. Response parameters. Poultry Science. 2000; 79:363–369. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/79.3.363 PMID: 10735203

28. Nwaigwe CU, Ihedioha JI, Shoyinka SV, Nwaigwe CO. Evaluation of the hematological and clinical biochemical markers of stress in broiler chickens. Veterinary World. 2020; 13:2294. https://doi.org/10. 14202/vetworld.2020.2294-2300 PMID: 33281369

29. Jeong SB, Kim YB, Lee JW, Kim DH, Moon BH, Chang HH, et al. Role of dietary gamma-aminobutyric acid in broiler chickens raised under high stocking density. Animal Nutrition. 2020; 6:293–304. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.aninu.2020.03.008 PMID: 33005763

30. Ozbey O, Yildiz N, Aysondu MH, Ozmen O. The effects of high temperature on blood serum parameters and the egg productivity characteristics of Japanese quails (Coturnix coturnix japonica). International Journal of Poultry Science. 2004; 7:485–489.

31. Nobakht A, Fard BH. The effects of using rice bran, enzyme and probiotic on performance, egg quality traits and blood metabolites in laying hens. Iranian Journal of Animal Science. 2016; 4:417–427.

32. Wu G. Functional amino acids in nutrition and health. Amino Acids. 2013; 45:407–411. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s00726-013-1500-6 PMID: 23595206

33. Matshogo TB, Mnisi CM, Mlambo V. Dietary green seaweed compromises overall feed conversion efficiency but not blood parameters and meat quality and stability in broiler chickens. Agriculture. 2020; 10:547.

34. Ravindran V, Thomas DV, Thomas DG, Morel PC. Performance and welfare of broilers as affected by stocking density and zinc bacitracin supplementation. Animal Science Journal. 2006; 77:110–116.

35. Skomorucha I, Muchacka R, Sosno´wka-Czajka E, Herbut E. Response of broiler chickens from three genetic groups to different stocking densities. Annals of Animal Science. 2009; 9(2):175–184.

36. Dozier WA III, Thaxton JP, Branton SL, Morgan GW, Miles DM, Roush WB, et al. Stocking density effects on growth performance and processing yields of heavy broilers. Poultry Science. 2005; 84:1332–1338. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/84.8.1332 PMID: 16156220

37. Dozier WA III, Thaxton JP, Purswell JL, Olanrewaju HA, Branton SL, Roush WB. Stocking density effects on male broilers grown to 1.8 kilograms of body weight. Poultry Science. 2006; 85:344–351. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/85.2.344 PMID: 16523637

38. Chmelnicna L, Solcianska L. Relationship between cage area and yield of the main elements of chicken carcasses. Polish Journal of Food and Nutrition Sciences. 2007; 57:81–83.

39. Mtileni BJ, Nephawe KA, Nesamvuni AE, Benyi K. The influence of stocking density on body weight, egg weight, and feed intake of adult broiler breeder hens. Poultry Science. 2007; 86:1615–1619. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/86.8.1615 PMID: 17626803

40. Skrbic Z, Pavlovski Z, Lukic M, Peric L, Milosevic N. The effect of stocking density on certain broiler welfare parameters. Biotechnology in Animal Husbandry. 2009; 25:11–21.

41. Yin LY, Wang ZY, Yang HM, Xu L, Zhang J, Xing H. Effects of stocking density on growth performance, feather growth, intestinal development, and serum parameters of geese. Poultry Science. 2017; 96:3163–3168. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps/pex136 PMID: 28595380

42. Heckert RA, Estevez I, Russek-Cohen E, Pettit-Riley R. Effects of density and perch availability on the immune status of broilers. Poultry Science. 2002; 81:451–457. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/81.4.451 PMID: 11989743

43. Yanai T, Abo-Samaha MI, El-Kazaz SE, and Tohamy HG. Effect of stocking density on productive performance, behaviour, and histopathology of the lymphoid organs in broiler chickens. European Poultry Science. 2018; 82:247.

44. Pope CR. Pathology of lymphoid organs with emphasis on immunosuppression. Veterinary Immunology and Immunopathology. 1991; 30:31–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-2427(91)90006-x PMID: 1781156

45. Gore AB, Qureshi MA. Enhancement of humoral and cellular immunity by vitamin E after embryonic exposure. Poultry Science. 1997; 76:984–991. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/76.7.984 PMID: 9200234

46. Onbasilar EE, Poyraz O, Erdem E, Ozturk H. Influence of lighting periods and stocking densities on performance, carcass characteristics and some stress parameters in broilers. European Poultry Science. 2008; 72:193–201.

47. Tong HB, Lu J, Zou JM, Wang Q, Shi SR. Effects of stocking density on growth performance, carcass yield, and immune status of a local chicken breed. Poultry Science. 2012; 91:667–673. https://doi.org/ 10.3382/ps.2011-01597 PMID: 22334742

48. Dabes AC. Fresh meat properties. Revista nacional da Carne. 2001; 25:32–40.

49. Bilgili SF, Hess JB. Placement density influences broiler carcass grade and meat yields. Journal of Applied Poultry Research. 1995; 4:384–389.

50. Gonzalez-Rivas PA, Chauhan SS, Ha M, Fegan N, Dunshea FR, Warner RD. Effects of heat stress on animal physiology, metabolism, and meat quality: A review. Meat Science. 2020; 162:108025. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2019.108025 PMID: 31841730

51. Celi P, Gabai G. Oxidant/antioxidant balance in animal nutrition and health: the role of protein oxidation. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2015; 26:48. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2015.00048 PMID: 26664975

52. Chauhan SS, Celi P, Ponnampalam EN, Leury BJ, Liu F, Dunshea FR. Antioxidant dynamics in the live animal and implications for ruminant health and product (meat/milk) quality: role of vitamin E and selenium. Animal Production Science. 2014; 54:1525–1536.

53. Imik H, Ozlu H, Gumus RE, Atasever MA, Urcar S, Atasever M. Effects of ascorbic acid and α-lipoic acid on performance and meat quality of broilers subjected to heat stress. British Poultry Science. 2012; 53:800–808. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071668.2012.740615 PMID: 23398425

54. Sørensen P, Su G, Kestin SC. Effects of age and stocking density on leg weakness in broiler chickens. Poultry Science. 2000; 79:864–870. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/79.6.864 PMID: 10875769

55. Buijs S, Keeling L, Rettenbacher S, Van Poucke E, Tuyttens FA. Stocking density effects on broiler welfare: Identifying sensitive ranges for different indicators. Poultry Science. 2009; 88:1536–1543. https:// doi.org/10.3382/ps.2009-00007 PMID: 19590066

56. Sanotra GS, Lund JD, Ersbøll AK, Petersen JS, Vestergaard KS. Monitoring leg problems in broilers: a survey of commercial broiler production in Denmark. World’s Poultry Science Journal. 2001; 57:55–69.

Related topics:
#Poultry industry
#Poultry management
#Poultry welfare
Related Questions

Table 2 shows that overall feed intake linearly declined [y = 4890 (±0.014)– 98.7 (±45.26) x; R2 = 0.45, P = 0.0002] as stocking density increased. Neither linear nor quadratic effects were observed for overall FCE as stocking density increased. Average weight gain declined in week 1 [y = 100.7 (±16.96)– 2.61 (±1.84) x; R2 = 0.16, P = 0.046] and week 2 [y = 296.7 (±44.80)– 4.58 (±4.87) x; R2 = 0.26, P = 0.01] in response to increasing stocking density. In week 5, a positive quadratic effect was observed for average weight gain [y = 967.8 (±209.9) + 60.07 (±28.39) x– 1.57 (±0.70) x2 ; R2 = 0.18, P = 0.03], but in week 6 a negative quadratic effect [y = 967.8 (±209.91)– 53.21 (±22.83) x + 1.28 (±0.56) x2 ; R2 = 0.18, P = 0.03] was observed. From the positive quadratic weight gain response in week 5, an optimum stocking density of 20 birds/pen (~27.27 kg/m2) was determined. There were no stocking density effects on overall BWG and FCE but overall FI was significantly influenced.

Table 3 reveals that there were no linear or quadratic effects (P > 0.05) for all haematological parameters in response to increasing stocking density in broilers. Quadratic effects were observed for SDMA [y = –5.30 (±2.57) + 1.03 (±0.27) x– 0.02 (±0.007) x2 ; R2 = 0.144, P = 0.002], albumin [y = –91.41 (±59.10) + 21.05 (±6.43) x– 0.047 (±0.16) x2 ; R2 = 0.236, P = 0.007] and ALT [y = –61.61 (±56.36) +17.12 (±6.13) x– 0.35 (±0.15) x2 ; R2 = 0.137, P = 0.030] as stocking density rates increased. Birds reared under SD10 had the lowest level of SDMA (2.7 µg/L), albumin (68.7 g/L), and ALT (69.3 g/L) compared to other stocking density groups. In contrast, birds raised under SD20 had the lowest GGT (31.68 U/L) while SD25 and SD30 birds had the highest GGT (36.28 U/L and 35.17 U/L, respectively).

The same effect was observed in the current study where the weight of the spleen linearly decreased as the stocking the density increased.

The reduction in the size of the spleen of broilers in the current study could have compromised the birds’ immune function.
Authors:
Caven Mguvane Mnisi
Caven Mguvane Mnisi
North-West University - Sudáfrica
0Recommendations
0Comments
·
40Views
Recommend
Comment
Share
Profile picture
Would you like to discuss another topic? Create a new post to engage with experts in the community.
Featured users in Poultry Industry
Padma Pillai
Padma Pillai
Cargill
United States
Shivaram Rao
Shivaram Rao
Pilgrim´s
PhD Director Principal de Nutrición y Servicios Técnicos de Pilgrim’s Pride Corporation
United States
Karen Christensen
Karen Christensen
Tyson
Tyson
PhD, senior director of animal welfare at Tyson Foods
United States
Show more
Join Engormix and be part of the largest agribusiness social network in the world.