DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effects of four dim vs high intensity red color light regimens on growth performance and welfare of broilers

  • Senaratna, D. (Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Ruhuna) ;
  • Samarakone, T.S. (Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Peradeniya) ;
  • Gunawardena, W.W.D.A. (Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Ruhuna)
  • Received : 2016.02.18
  • Accepted : 2016.05.16
  • Published : 2018.01.01

Abstract

Objective: Broilers show clear preference towards red color light (RL). However setting of an optimum light intensity is difficult since dim intensities that favor growth reduce welfare. This experiment was conducted to test the most effective RL intensity regimen (Dim [5 lux; DI] vs high [320 lux; HI]) in combination applied at different growth stages that favors for both performance and welfare. Methods: Complete randomize design was adopted with 6 replicates. Treatments were; T1 = early DI (8-21 d)+latter HI (22-35 d); T2 = early DI (8-28 d)+latter HI (29-35 d), T3 = early HI (8-21 d)+latter DI (22-35 d), T4 = early HI (8-28 d)+latter DI (29-35 d) and T5 = control (white light; WT) (8-35 d) at medium intensity (20 lux). Body weight (BW), weight gain (WG), water/feed intake and ratio, feed conversion ratios (FCR) were assessed. Common behaviours (15) were recorded by scan sampling method. Lameness, foot pad dermatitis, breast blisters, hock burning damage were assessed as welfare parameters. Fear reactions were tested using Tonic Immobility Test. Ocular and carcass evaluations were done. Meat and tibiae were analyzed for fat and bone ash respectively. Results: On 35 d, the highest BW ($2,155.72{\pm}176g$), WG ($1,967.78{\pm}174g$) were recorded by T2 compared to WT ($BW_{WT}=1,878.22{\pm}155$, $WG_{WT}=1,691.83{\pm}160$). But, application of RL, either DI, or HI during early/latter stage had no significant effect on FCR. Under HI, birds showed much higher active behaviours. DI encourages eating. Though LI changed from DI to HI, same trend could be seen even under HI. The highest leg strength ($218.5{\pm}120s$) was recorded by T2. The lowest leg strength ($64.58{\pm}33s$) and the highest ocular weight ($2.48{\pm}1g$) were recorded by T1. Significantly (p<0.05) the highest skin weight ($162.17{\pm}6g$) but the lowest fat% in meat ($13.03%{\pm}5%$) was recorded by T2. Conclusion: Early exposure to DI-RL up to 28 days followed by exposure to HI-RL is the most favorable lighting regimen for optimizing production, better welfare of broilers and improving health benefits of meat.

Keywords

Broiler;Intensity;Production;Red-light;Welfare

Acknowledgement

Supported by : University Grants Commission

References

  1. Deep AK, Schwean-Lardne TG, Crowe BI, Fancher HL, Classen A. Effect of light intensity on broiler production, processing characteristics and welfare. Poult Sci 2010;89:2326-33.
  2. Blatchford RA, Klasing KC, Shivaprasad HL, et al. The effect of light intensity on the behavior, eye and leg health and immune function of broiler chickens. Poult Sci 2009;88:20-8.
  3. Newberry RC, Hunt RJ, Gardiner EE. Influence of light intensity on behaviour and performance of broiler chickens. Poult Sci 1988; 67:1020-5.
  4. Lien RJ, Hess JB, McKee SR, Bilgili SF, Townsend JC. Effect of light intensity and photoperiod on live performance, heterophil to lymphocyte ratio and processing yields of broilers. Poult Sci 2007;86:1287-93. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/86.7.1287
  5. Senaratna D, Samarakone T, Madusanka AAP, Gunawardena WWDA. Performance, behaviour and welfare aspects of broilers as affected by different colours of artificial light. J Trop Agric Res Exten 2011;14:38- 44.
  6. Senaratna D, Samarakone T, Madusanka AAP, Gunawardane WWDA. Preference of broiler chicken for different light colours in relation to age, session of the day and behaviour. 23rd Annual Congress, PGIA, University of Peradeniya. (Proc. P6) J. Trop Agric Res 2011;23:193-203.
  7. Prayitno DS, Phillips CJC, Omed H. The effects of colour of lighting on the behavior and production of meat chicken. Poult Sci 1997;76:452-7. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/76.3.452
  8. Senaratna D, Samarakone T, Gunawardena WWDA. Red colour light at different intensities affects the performance, behavioural activities and welfare of broilers. Asian-Auatralas J Anim Sci 2016;29:1052-9.
  9. Elrom K. Handling and transportation of broilers-Welfare, stress, fear and meat quality. Part III: A review, Israel J Vet Med 2000;55:11-5.
  10. Weeks CA, Knowles TG, Gordon RG, et al. New method for objectively assessing lameness in broiler chickens. Vet Record 2002;151:762-4.
  11. Kestin SC, Knowles TG, Tinch AE, Gregory NG. Prevalence of leg weakness in broiler chickens and its relationship with genotype. Vet Rec 1992;131:190-4.
  12. Ekstrand C, Carpenter TE. Temporal aspects of foot pad dermatitis in Swedish broilers. Acta Vet Scand 1998;39:229-36.
  13. Campo JL, Davila SG. Effect of photoperiod on heterophil to lymphocyte ratio and tonic immobility duration of chickens. Poult Sci 2002;81:1637-9. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/81.11.1637
  14. AOAC. Official Methods of analysis 15th Association of Official Analytical Chemist (AOAC). Arlington, VA: AOAC International;1990.
  15. Downs KM, Lien RJL, Hess JB, Bilgili SF, Dozier WA. The effects of photoperiod length, light intensity and feed energy on growth responses and meat yield of broilers. J Appl Poult Res 2006;15: 406-16.
  16. Charles RG, Robinson FE, Hardin RT, et al. Growth, body composition and plasma androgen concentration of male broiler chickens subjected to different regimes of photoperiod and light intensity. Poult Sci 1992;71:1595-605. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.0711595
  17. Newberry RC, Hunt RJ, Gardiner EE. The influence of light intensity on behavior, leg disorders and sudden death syndrome of chickens. Can J Anim Sci 1986;66:1159-60.
  18. Kristensen HH, Aerts JM, Leroy T, Wathes CM, Berckmans D. Modelling the dynamic activity of broiler chickens in response to step-wise changes in light intensity. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2006;101:125-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2006.01.007
  19. Lewis PD, Morris TR. Responses of domestic poultry to various light sources. World's Poult Sci J 1998;54:7-25. https://doi.org/10.1079/WPS19980002
  20. Newberry RC, Hunt RJ, Gardiner EE. Effects of alternating lights and strain on behaviour and leg disorders and sudden death syndrome of roaster chickens. Poult Sci 1985;64:1863-8.
  21. Gorden SH, Thorp BH. Effect of lightintensity on broiler liveweight and tibial plateau angle. Volume 1, Proceedings of the 9th European Poultry Conference, Glasgow, UK: 1994. p. 7-12.
  22. Olanrewaju HA, Thaxton JP, Dozier WA III, et al. A Review of lighting programmes for broiler production. Int J Poult Sci 2006;5:301-8. https://doi.org/10.3923/ijps.2006.301.308
  23. Hester PY, Sutton AL, Elkin RG. Effect of light intensity, litter source, and litter management on the incidence of leg abnormalities and performance of male turkeys. Poult Sci 1987;66:666-75. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.0660666
  24. Miles DM, Miller WW, Branton SL, Maslin WR, Lott BD. Ocular responses to ammonia in broiler chickens. Avian Dis 2006;50:45-9. https://doi.org/10.1637/7386-052405R.1
  25. SimsekN, Karadeniz A, Kalkan Y, Keles ON, Unal B. Spirulina platensis feeding inhibited the anaemia and leucopenia-induced lead and cadmium in rats. J Hazard Mater2009;164:1304-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2008.09.041