Review: Environmental enrichment builds functional capacity and improves resilience as an aspect of positive welfare in production animals.

The success of the animal in coping with challenges, and in harnessing opportunities to thrive, is central to its welfare. Functional capacity describes the capacity of molecules, cells, organs, body systems, the whole animal, and its community to buffer against the impacts of environmental perturbations. This buffering capacity determines the ability of the animal to maintain or regain functions in the face of environmental perturbations, which is recognised as resilience. The accuracy of physiological regulation and the maintenance of homeostatic balance underwrite the dynamic stability of outcomes such as biorhythms, feed intake, growth, milk yield, and egg production justifying their assessment as indicators of resilience. This narrative review examines the influence of environmental enrichments, especially during developmental stages in young animals, in building functional capacity and in its subsequent expression as resilience. Experience of enriched environments can build skills and competencies across multiple functional domains including but not limited to behaviour, immunity, and metabolism thereby increasing functional capacity and facilitating resilience within the context of challenges such as husbandry practices, social change, and infection. A quantitative method for measuring the distributed property of functional capacity may improve its assessment. Methods for analysing embedded energy (emergy) in ecosystems may have utility for this goal. We suggest functional capacity provides the common thread that links environmental enrichments with an ability to express resilience and may provide a novel and useful framework for measuring and reporting resilience. We conclude that the development of functional capacity and its subsequent expression as resilience is an aspect of positive animal welfare. The emergence of resilience from system dynamics highlights a need to shift from the study of physical and mental states to the study of physical and mental dynamics to describe the positive dimension of animal welfare.

Viability and development of Ascaridia galli eggs recovered in artificial media followed by storage under different conditions.

Eggs oviposited by Ascaridia galli females in artificial media are commonly used as a source of infective material. We investigated the rate of egg production by cultured mature females (n = 223), and changes in egg viability under different storage and incubation conditions. Eggs recovered after 1, 2 or 3 days of culture were subjected to either (1) storage in water at 4°C (1, 4 or 8 weeks) followed by incubation in 0.1 N H2SO4 at 26°C (2, 4 or 6 weeks); or (2) prolonged storage at 4°C (up to 14 weeks). Egg development and viability was assessed by morphology coupled with a viability dye exclusion test of hatched larvae. Of the 6,044 eggs recovered per mature female 49.2, 38.5 and 12.3% were recovered on days 1, 2 and 3 of worm incubation respectively with similar initial viability (≥99%) between days. Eggs recovered on different days had only minor differences in viability after storage. The prolonged storage period at 4°C significantly affected both viability and embryonation ability resulting in decline in viability of 5.7-6.2% per week. A smaller but significant decline in egg (2.0%) and hatched larval (1.4%) viability per week of incubation at 26°C was also observed. We conclude that storage and incubation conditions, not the day of egg recovery, are the main factors affecting A. galli egg viability. Our findings indicate that under aerobic conditions storage at 26°C may be preferable to 4°C whereas other studies indicate that under anaerobic conditions storage at 4°C is preferable.

Early rearing enrichments influenced nest use and egg quality in free-range laying hens.

In Australia, free-range egg production pullets are typically reared indoors, but adult layers get outdoor access. This new environment may be challenging to adapt to, which could impair egg production and/or egg quality. Adaptation might be enhanced through rearing enrichments. We reared 1386 Hy-Line Brown® chicks indoors with three treatments across 16 weeks: (1) a control group with standard litter housing conditions, (2) a novelty group providing novel objects that changed weekly, and (3) a structural enrichment group with custom-designed structures to partially impair visibility across the pen and allow for vertical movement. Pullets were transferred to a free-range system at 16 weeks of age with daily outdoor access provided from 25 until 64 weeks. Daily egg production at different laying locations (large nests, small nests and floor), weekly egg weights and egg abnormalities were recorded from 18 to 64 weeks old. External and internal egg quality parameters of egg weight, shell reflectivity, albumen height, haugh unit, yolk colour score, shell weight and shell thickness were measured at 44, 52, 60 and 64 weeks. There was a significant interaction between rearing treatment and nest box use on hen-day production from weeks 18 to 25 (P < 0.0001) with the novelty hens laying the most eggs and the control hens the fewest eggs in the nest box. Similarly, from 26 to 64 weeks, the novelty hens laid more eggs in the large nest boxes and fewer eggs on the floor than both the structural and control hens (P < 0.0001). Egg weight and abnormalities increased with age (P < 0.0001), but rearing treatment had no effect on either measure (both P ≥ 0.19). Rearing treatment affected shell reflectivity and yolk colour with the control hens showing paler colours across time relative to the changes observed in the eggs from enriched hens. The novelty hens may have established nest box laying patterns as they were more accustomed to exploring new environments. The differences in egg quality could be related to stress adaptability or ranging behaviour. This study shows that enriching environments during rearing can have some impacts on production parameters in free-range hens.

Nighttime roosting substrate type and height among 4 strains of laying hens in an aviary system1.

Multi-tiered aviaries for laying hens are designed to provide resources, such as perches, that allow birds to perform natural behaviors, thus improving their welfare. This research examined nighttime roosting heights and substrates used by laying hens of 4 genetic strains (Dekalb White: W1, Hy-Line W36: W2, Hy-Line Brown: B1, Bovans Brown: B2), in multitier aviaries (144 hens/unit, 4 units/strain) at 25 to 28 wk of age (peak lay). Influence of litter provision on roosting patterns of the strains was also tested. Direct observations of hens' nighttime roosting patterns on wire floors, ledges and perches across tiers were conducted before (PRE), immediately after (IMM), and 3 wk after (ACC) hens gained access to litter. During all periods, more W1 and W2 hens roosted on middle and upper ledges than B1 and B2 hens (all P≤0.05), while more B1 and B2 hens used perches throughout the aviary than W1 and W2 hens (all P≤0.05). W1 (15±1.9, 14±3.36) and W2 (19±2.1, 18±2.6) hens occupied perches in the upper tier in greater numbers than B1 (7±3.2, 3±4.6) and B2 (11±2.1, 5±3.36) hens during PRE (P = 0.01) and ACC (P = 0.02) periods, respectively. B1 and B2 hens occupied wire floors in larger numbers than W1 and W2 hens during PRE (P = 0.02) and IMM (P = 0.03) periods, though this difference disappeared in the ACC period. During the IMM period, more W1 and W2 roosted in the lower tier, while more B1 and B2 hens were observed in the middle and upper tiers (all P ≤ 0.05). These findings demonstrate the importance of perches for B1 and B2 hens and space to roost higher in aviary units for W1 and W2 hens during the night, and underscore the need to consider aviary design, management practices, and preferences of different hen strains to ensure good hen welfare in aviaries.

A review of environmental enrichment for laying hens during rearing in relation to their behavioral and physiological development.

Globally, laying hen production systems are a focus of concern for animal welfare. Recently, the impacts of rearing environments have attracted attention, particularly with the trend toward more complex production systems including aviaries, furnished cages, barn, and free-range. Enriching the rearing environments with physical, sensory, and stimulatory additions can optimize the bird's development but commercial-scale research is limited. In this review, "enrichment" is defined as anything additional added to the bird's environment including structurally complex rearing systems. The impacts of enrichments on visual development, neurobehavioral development, auditory stimulation, skeletal development, immune function, behavioral development of fear and pecking, and specifically pullets destined for free-range systems are summarized and areas for future research identified. Visual enrichment and auditory stimulation may enhance neural development but specific mechanisms of impact and suitable commercial enrichments still need elucidating. Enrichments that target left/right brain hemispheres/behavioral traits may prepare birds for specific types of adult housing environments (caged, indoor, outdoor). Similarly, structural enrichments are needed to optimize skeletal development depending on the adult layer system, but specific physiological processes resulting from different types of exercise are poorly understood. Stimulating appropriate pecking behavior from hatch is critical but producers will need to adapt to different flock preferences to provide enrichments that are utilized by each rearing group. Enrichments have potential to enhance immune function through the application of mild stressors that promote adaptability, and this same principle applies to free-range pullets destined for variable outdoor environments. Complex rearing systems may have multiple benefits, including reducing fear, that improve the transition to the layer facility. Overall, there is a need to commercially validate positive impacts of cost-effective enrichments on bird behavior and physiology.

Early enrichment in free-range laying hens: effects on ranging behaviour, welfare and response to stressors.

Free-range laying hen systems are increasing within Australia. The pullets for these systems are typically reared indoors before being provided first range access around 21 to 26 weeks of age. Thus, the rearing and laying environments are disparate and hens may not adapt well to free-range housing. In this study, we reared 290 Hy-Line® Brown day-old chicks divided into two rooms each with feed, water and litter. In the enriched room, multiple structural, manipulable, visual and auditory stimuli were also provided from 4 to 21 days, the non-enriched room had no additional objects or stimuli. Pullets were transferred to the laying facility at 12 weeks of age and divided into six pens (three enriched-reared, three non-enriched-reared) with identical indoor resources and outdoor range area. All birds were first provided range access at 21 weeks of age. Video observations of natural disturbance behaviours on the range at 22 to 23 and 33 to 34 weeks of age showed no differences in frequency of disturbance occurrences between treatment groups (P=0.09) but a decrease in disturbance occurrences over time (P<0.0001). Radio-frequency identification tracking of individually tagged birds from 21 to 37 weeks of age showed enriched birds on average, spent less time on the range each day (P<0.04) but with a higher number of range visits than non-enriched birds from 21 to 24 weeks of age (P=0.01). Enriched birds accessed the range on more days (P=0.03) but over time, most birds in both treatment groups accessed the range daily. Basic external health scoring showed minimal differences between treatment groups with most birds in visibly good condition. At 38 weeks of age all birds were locked inside for 2 days and from 40 to 42 weeks of age the outdoor range was reduced to 20% of its original size to simulate stressful events. The eggs from non-enriched birds had higher corticosterone concentrations following lock-in and 2 weeks following range reduction compared with the concentrations within eggs from enriched birds (P<0.0001). Correspondingly, the enriched hens showing a greater increase in the number of visits following range area reduction compared to non-enriched hens (P=0.02). Only one rearing room per treatment was used but these preliminary data indicate 3 weeks of early enrichment had some long-term effects on hen ranging behaviour and enhanced hen's adaptability to environmental stressors.

Laying hens in aviaries with different litter substrates: Behavior across the flock cycle and feather lipid content.

The tiered aviary for laying hens includes a floor litter area to promote foraging and dust bathing. Data are needed on hens' use of different litter substrates and effectiveness of substrates in removing excess feather lipids to ensure a suitable litter area. Bovans White hens were housed in commercial-style aviaries with access to one of 3 litter substrates (wood shavings, straw, or plastic turf mats-AstroTurf®, n = 4 aviary pens per substrate, 144 cage-reared hens populated per pen). Litter areas were videoed across 2 d each at 4 ages: immediately following first aviary opening (25 wk), then at 28, 50, and 68 weeks. Observations of hens throughout the d included percentages of all hens in each pen on the litter area, foraging and transitioning between the tiered enclosure and litter area. Percentages of hens dust bathing were observed from 11:00 to 15:00. Breast and back feather samples from 7 birds per pen at 28, 50, and 68 wk were analyzed for lipid content. Overall, fewer hens simultaneously accessed the AstroTurf® (P < 0.0001), but flocks showed relatively balanced transitions between the tiered enclosure and the litter area throughout the d, regardless of substrate. On average, less than 5% of all hens were observed dust bathing (peaks up to 15% of hens) with no differences among litter substrates or ages (P ≥ 0.18). On average, less than 2% of hens were observed foraging (peaks up to 4% of hens) with fewer hens foraging on AstroTurf® (P < 0.0001). Feather lipid differences among litter substrates (P < 0.0001) were inconsistent across sampling periods, possibly due to different birds sampled across time. At all ages, lipid levels were higher on the back over breast feathers (P < 0.0001) for hens housed with AstroTurf®. AstroTurf® may be suitable for nest boxes, but straw and shavings are more ideal litter substrates. Further study should investigate alternative substrates or regular substrate addition to encourage more foraging and dust bathing.

Nest use and patterns of egg laying and damage by 4 strains of laying hens in an aviary system.

Laying hens are strongly motivated to use nests for egg laying, and alternative production systems (e.g., aviaries) provide artificial sites to meet this need and ensure efficient collection of clean, undamaged eggs. However, nests are typically not provided to allow simultaneous use by all hens; therefore, competition or mislaid eggs can result. To understand the influence of strain on laying eggs outside nests and damage to eggs, we compared daily patterns of nests use and egg laying among 4 laying hen strains (Hy-Line Brown (HB), Bovans Brown (BB), DeKalb White (DW), and Hy-Line W36 (W36)). Hens were observed over 3 consecutive days in aviaries with colony nests in the enclosure's top tier (2 nests/unit, 4 aviary units/strain, 144 hens/unit). The number and location of hens in nests and the number, location and condition of eggs throughout aviaries were recorded. Most eggs (90 to 95%) were laid in nests; however, brown hens consistently laid more non-nest eggs and damaged more eggs than white hens (P ≤ 0.05). Higher nest occupancy by brown hens was correlated with more non-nest and damaged eggs (P ≤ 0.05). In the morning, brown hens occupied more nest space and laid more nest eggs than white hens (e.g., HB vs. DW: 82.97 and 34.66% of space; 91.35 and 68.73% of nest eggs; P ≤ 0.05). At midday, white hens occupied more nest space and laid more nest eggs than brown hens (e.g., HB vs. DW: 28.47 and 15.81% of space; 27.39 and 8.29% of nest eggs; P ≤ 0.05). Brown hens preferred right nest compartments and laid more eggs there, whereas white hens preferred left compartments and W36 laid more eggs there (P ≤ 0.05). These findings indicate that different strains of hens have different patterns of nest use and laying behavior. In brown hens, heavy morning nest use was related to laying eggs outside nests and more damaged eggs, suggesting insufficient space for oviposition in nests. Specific facility design should be matched to hens' preferences to accommodate behavioral needs of different strains.

Egg production and egg quality in free-range laying hens housed at different outdoor stocking densities.

Free-range laying hen systems are increasing in number within Australia. Variation in outdoor stocking densities has led to development of a national information standard on free-range egg labeling, including setting a maximum density of 10,000 hens per hectare. However, there are few data on the impacts of differing outdoor densities on production and egg quality. ISA Brown hens in small (150 hens) flocks were housed in identical indoor pens, each with access (from 21 weeks) to different sized ranges simulating one of three outdoor stocking densities (2 replicates each: 2,000 hens/hectare (ha), 10,000 hens/ha, 20,000 hens/ha). Hen-day production was tracked from 21 through 35 weeks with eggs visually graded daily for external deformities. All eggs laid on one day were weighed each week. Eggs were collected from each pen at 25, 30, and 36 weeks and analyzed for egg quality. There were no effects of outdoor stocking density on average hen-day percentage production (P = 0.67), egg weight (P = 0.09), percentages of deformed eggs (P = 0.30), shell reflectivity (P = 0.74), shell breaking strength (P = 0.07), shell deformation (P = 0.83), or shell thickness (P = 0.24). Eggs from hens in the highest density had the highest percentage shell weight (P = 0.004) and eggs from the lowest density had the highest yolk color score (P < 0.001). The amount of cuticle present did not differ between densities (P = 0.95) but some aspects of shell colors (P ≤ 0.01) and location of protoporphyrin IX (P = 0.046) varied. Hen age affected the majority of measurements. Stocking density differences may be related to hen diet as previous radio-frequency identification tracking of individual hens in these flocks showed birds used the range for longer in the lowest density and the least in the highest density, including depleting the range of vegetation sooner in the smaller ranges. An additional study assessing the relationship between individual hen range use, nutrition, and egg quality is warranted.

Outdoor stocking density in free-range laying hens: radio-frequency identification of impacts on range use.

The number and size of free-range laying hen (Gallus gallus domesticus) production systems are increasing within Australia in response to consumer demand for perceived improvement in hen welfare. However, variation in outdoor stocking density has generated consumer dissatisfaction leading to the development of a national information standard on free-range egg labelling by the Australian Consumer Affairs Ministers. The current Australian Model Code of Practice for Domestic Poultry states a guideline of 1500 hens/ha, but no maximum density is set. Radio-frequency identification (RFID) tracking technology was used to measure daily range usage by individual ISA Brown hens housed in six small flocks (150 hens/flock - 50% of hens tagged), each with access to one of three outdoor stocking density treatments (two replicates per treatment: 2000, 10 000, 20 000 hens/ha), from 22 to 26, 27 to 31 and 32 to 36 weeks of age. There was some variation in range usage across the sampling periods and by weeks 32 to 36 individual hens from the lowest stocking density on average used the range for longer each day (P<0.001), with fewer visits and longer maximum durations per visit (P<0.001). Individual hens within all stocking densities varied in the percentage of days they accessed the range with 2% of tagged hens in each treatment never venturing outdoors and a large proportion that accessed the range daily (2000 hens/ha: 80.5%; 10 000 hens/ha: 66.5%; 20 000 hens/ha: 71.4%). On average, 38% to 48% of hens were seen on the range simultaneously and used all available areas of all ranges. These results of experimental-sized flocks have implications for determining optimal outdoor stocking densities for commercial free-range laying hens but further research would be needed to determine the effects of increased range usage on hen welfare.

Outdoor stocking density in free-range laying hens: effects on behaviour and welfare.

Free-range laying hen systems are increasing within Australia and research is needed to determine optimal outdoor stocking densities. Six small (n=150 hens) experimental flocks of ISA Brown laying hens were housed with access to ranges simulating one of three outdoor stocking densities with two pen replicates per density: 2000 hens/ha, 10 000 hens/ha or 20 000 hens/ha. Birds were provided daily range access from 21 to 36 weeks of age and the range usage of 50% of hens was tracked using radio-frequency identification technology. Throughout the study, basic external health assessments following a modified version of the Welfare Quality® protocol showed most birds were in visibly good condition (although keel damage was increasingly present with age) with few differences between stocking densities. Toenail length at 36 weeks of age was negatively correlated with hours spent ranging for all pens of birds (all r⩾-0.23, P⩽0.04). At 23 weeks of age, there were no differences between outdoor stocking densities in albumen corticosterone concentrations (P=0.44). At 35 weeks of age, density effects were significant (P<0.001) where the eggs from hens in the highest outdoor stocking density showed the highest albumen corticosterone concentrations, although eggs from hens in the 10 000 hens/ha density showed the lowest concentrations (P<0.017). Behavioural observations of hens both on the range and indoors showed more dust bathing and foraging (scratching followed by ground-pecking) was performed outdoors, but more resting indoors (all P<0.001). Hens from the 2000 hens/ha densities showed the least foraging on the range but the most resting outdoors, with hens from the 20 000 hens/ha densities showing the least amount of resting outdoors (all P<0.017). Proportions of dust bathing outdoors tended to differ between the stocking densities (P=0.08). For each of the health and behavioural measures there were differences between pen replicates within stocking densities. These data show outdoor stocking density has some effects on hen welfare, and it appears that consideration of both individual and group-level behaviour is necessary when developing optimal stocking density guidelines and free-range system management practices.

Influence of genetic strain and access to litter on spatial distribution of 4 strains of laying hens in an aviary system.

Many laying hen producers are transitioning from conventional cages to new housing systems including multi-tier aviaries. Aviary resources, such as litter areas, are intended to encourage hens' expression of natural behaviors to improve their welfare. Little research has examined the influence of laying hen strain on distribution and behavior inside aviaries, yet differences could influence a strain's suitability for an aviary design. This research examined how laying hens of 4 strains (Hy-Line Brown [HB], Bovans Brown [BB], DeKalb White [DW], and Hy-Line W36) distributed themselves among 3 enclosed aviary tiers and 2 litter areas at peak lay (25 to 28 wk of age) and after gaining access to litter on the floor (26 wk). Observations of hens' spatial distribution were conducted immediately before and after, and 3 wk after hens gained access to litter. More HB and BB hens were in upper tiers in morning compared to DW and W36 (all P ≤ 0.05). However, DW and W36 hens roosted in upper tiers in larger numbers than HB and BB during evening (all P ≤ 0.05). More DW and W36 hens were on litter compared to BB and HB, particularly when litter was first accessible (all P ≤ 0.05). The number of hens on litter increased over time for all strains (P ≤ 0.06). White hens on litter occupied open areas in higher numbers (P ≤ 0.05), while more brown hens occupied litter under the aviary after acclimation (P ≤ 0.05). In the dark period, W36 and DW hens were present in higher numbers in upper tiers than HB and BB, while HB and BB showed higher tier-to-tier movement than DW and W36 (P ≤ 0.05). In general, more white hens roosted higher at night and explored litter sooner, while more brown hens were near or in nests in the morning and moved at night. Distinct strain differences indicate that attention should be paid to the match between configuration of the aviary design and strain of laying hen.

Perch use by laying hens in a commercial aviary.

Non-cage housing systems, such as the aviary, are being implemented by the laying hen industry, including in North America, in an attempt to improve the welfare of hens. Perches are a resource that is consistently included in aviaries. Hens are strongly motivated to perch, and perching can improve leg bone strength. However, hens may prefer elevated perches, particularly at night, and thus simply providing perches is not enough to improve welfare; they must be provided in a way that allows all hens to access them. Observations of laying hens using perches and ledges (flat, solid metal shelves to assist hens' movement between tiers) in a commercial aviary revealed variation in where hens roosted within the tiered aviary enclosure across the flock cycle (peak, mid and end of lay; P < 0.001 for all age points). Hens most often preferred roosting in the highest enclosure levels, leading to crowding on upper perches and ledges while perch space remained available on lower levels. Restricted access to preferable perches may cause frustration in hens, leading to welfare issues. Hens roosted more on perches at peak lay than mid and end lay (P < 0.001) but roosted less on ledges at peak lay than mid and end lay (P < 0.001). Additionally, more hens roosted on both perches and ledges in the 'dark' observation period compared with the number of hens roosting during the 'light' observation period (P < 0.001). Further research should look at all structural elements within the system that are used by hens for roosting, such as edges of tiers and upper wire floors, to evaluate how changes in perching preferences across the lay cycle may correlate with system design and bird-based parameters.

Litter use by laying hens in a commercial aviary: dust bathing and piling.

The laying hen industry, including in the United States, is responding to social concerns about hen welfare by implementing alternative housing systems such as the aviary, to provide more space and resources to large groups of hens. Data detailing the behavior of hens in commercial aviaries is needed to determine hens' use of the resources in order to understand their impact on hen welfare. The open litter area of aviaries provides additional space for hens during the day. Litter is also a substrate for dust bathing which is a strongly motivated natural behavior. Hens are often synchronous in their performance of dust bathing, which may lead to overcrowding in the litter area. Additionally, the open litter area can facilitate expression of unusual behavior such as flock piling (defined as the occurrence of densely grouped clusters of hens, resulting from no obvious cause and occurring randomly throughout the day and flock cycle) which may be a welfare concern. Therefore, we conducted observations of hen occupancy of the open litter area and the performance of dust bathing and flock piling across 3 production points (peak lay, mid lay and end of lay) for two flocks of Lohmann White laying hens housed in a commercial aviary. All areas of the open litter area were occupied to the same degree. Hens performed dust bathing throughout the day but showed peak dust bathing activity in the afternoon for Flock 1 (all P < 0.001) and in the late morning for Flock 2 (all P < 0.001). Overall, 174 incidents of piling behavior were observed between the 2 flocks, with piles varying in size, duration, and time of occurrence; however, no smothering was detected. Crowding on the open litter area sometimes occurred during peak periods of synchronous dust bathing and when hens piled. Further research is needed to understand the welfare implications of individual hen use of the open litter area and the causes and welfare implications of hen piling.

Laying hen movement in a commercial aviary: Enclosure to floor and back again.

Many producers in the laying hen industry, including in North America, are phasing out conventional cages in response to consumer demands and sometimes subsequent legislation. Alternative housing systems such as aviaries are being implemented in an attempt to improve hen welfare. Aviaries provide additional space and resources to groups of hens, including a litter area on the floor. However, little is known about hen movement between tiered enclosures and floor litter areas in aviary systems. Diurnal rhythms and social attraction may result in peak times of movement that could lead to overcrowding of areas, or alternatively hen preferences may lead to some areas not being fully utilized. We monitored hen movement between tiered enclosures and litter areas, including movement on and off the outer perch, across the day at peak, mid and end of lay in a commercial aviary. Hens moved onto and off of the open litter area across the day, transitioning between tiered enclosures, outer perches, open litter areas, and litter areas under tiered enclosures. At certain times of day, there were periods of greater hen movement down to the open litter area and between litter areas. For example, more hens were typically observed exiting enclosures, jumping from perches to open litter, and traveling between open litter and litter under tiered enclosures in the morning (all P ≤ 0.001). In all but one instance, more hens were observed on open litter areas in the afternoon than at other times of day (all P ≤ 0.029). However, hen re-entry to tiered enclosures showed less circadian patterning. Hen movement was observed between areas of interest at all sampled time periods, indicating hens use all areas of the system. Further research should examine whether all individual hens do move between areas equally, including within levels of the tiered enclosure, or if crowding occurs on the outer perches or in the litter during times of peak movement.

Failed landings after laying hen flight in a commercial aviary over two flock cycles.

Many egg producers are adopting alternative housing systems such as aviaries that provide hens a tiered cage and a litter-covered open floor area. This larger, more complex environment permits expression of behaviors not seen in space-limited cages, such as flight. Flight is an exercise important for strengthening bones; but domestic hens might display imperfect flight landings due to poor flight control. To assess the potential implications of open space, we evaluated the landing success of Lohmann white laying hens in a commercial aviary. Video recordings of hens were taken from 4 aviary sections at peak lay, mid lay and end lay across two flock cycles. Observations were made in each focal section of all flights throughout the day noting flight origin and landing location (outer perch or litter) and landing success or failure. In Flock 1, 9.1% of all flights failed and 21% failed in Flock 2. The number of flights decreased across the laying cycle for both flocks. Proportionally more failed landings were observed in the double row sections in Flock 2. Collisions with other hens were more common than slipping on the ground or colliding with aviary structures across sections and flocks. More hens slipped on the ground and collided with physical structures at peak lay for Flock 2 than at other time points. More collisions with other hens were seen at mid and end lay than at peak lay for Flock 2. Landings ending on perches failed more often than landings on litter. These results indicate potential for flight-related hen injuries in aviary systems resulting from failed landings, which may have implications for hen welfare and optimal system design and management.