Effects of auditory enrichment on Pekin duck production and welfare.

IF 4.2 1区 农林科学 Q1 AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE
J M Schober, G Ayres, G Chambers, E Stuart, B Peterson, J Curry, G S Fraley
{"title":"Effects of auditory enrichment on Pekin duck production and welfare.","authors":"J M Schober, G Ayres, G Chambers, E Stuart, B Peterson, J Curry, G S Fraley","doi":"10.1016/j.psj.2025.105877","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Few studies have looked at the effects of auditory enrichment on the production and welfare of poultry species, while none have looked at Pekin ducks specifically. We utilized 400 grow-out Pekin ducks obtained on day-of-hatch from a commercial hatchery and evenly and randomly placed into 4 pens in 3 rooms. Each room was randomly assigned one of three audio treatments: control (CON; no auditory enrichment), classical music (MOZ; Mozart's String Quintets) or pond sounds (POND; Pond Sounds - Relaxator on Apple Music®). Ducks were housed to closely approximate industry standards for density with30 ducks/pen. The POND and MOZ audio started on week 1 (day 7) and were played starting at 0300h (lights on) until 2100h (lights off) one hour on, one hour off, in a cyclic manner with a range of 65-75dB. Body condition scores were taken on 10 birds/pen/week (final N=80 ducks/treatment/week) using a published rubric. Production data were collected weekly. On weeks 2, 4, and 6, two ducks/pen were euthanized using pentobarbital and organ and body weights were recorded (final N=16 ducks/treatment/week). Body condition scores were analyzed using the PROC LOGISTIC procedure (SAS v9.4) and odds ratios were calculated. All other data were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA with repeated measures using PROC MIXED (SAS v9.4) and Tukey's test for post-hoc analyses. A p≤0.05 was considered significant. The study was repeated, resulting in experiment 1 and experiment 2. For experiment 1, no significant differences were observed among groups for weekly body weights, dissection measures, or FCR. For experiment 2, ducks in the MOZ group weighed less than ducks in the POND (p=0.0010) and CON groups (p=0.0109). MOZ ducks had worse feather cleanliness scores, worse foot pad scores, and worse feather quality scores than POND and CON ducks. These present differing results, so future research is needed to fully understand how different auditory enrichment affects the production and welfare of Pekin ducks under more specific flock conditions.</p>","PeriodicalId":20459,"journal":{"name":"Poultry Science","volume":"104 11","pages":"105877"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Poultry Science","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2025.105877","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Few studies have looked at the effects of auditory enrichment on the production and welfare of poultry species, while none have looked at Pekin ducks specifically. We utilized 400 grow-out Pekin ducks obtained on day-of-hatch from a commercial hatchery and evenly and randomly placed into 4 pens in 3 rooms. Each room was randomly assigned one of three audio treatments: control (CON; no auditory enrichment), classical music (MOZ; Mozart's String Quintets) or pond sounds (POND; Pond Sounds - Relaxator on Apple Music®). Ducks were housed to closely approximate industry standards for density with30 ducks/pen. The POND and MOZ audio started on week 1 (day 7) and were played starting at 0300h (lights on) until 2100h (lights off) one hour on, one hour off, in a cyclic manner with a range of 65-75dB. Body condition scores were taken on 10 birds/pen/week (final N=80 ducks/treatment/week) using a published rubric. Production data were collected weekly. On weeks 2, 4, and 6, two ducks/pen were euthanized using pentobarbital and organ and body weights were recorded (final N=16 ducks/treatment/week). Body condition scores were analyzed using the PROC LOGISTIC procedure (SAS v9.4) and odds ratios were calculated. All other data were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA with repeated measures using PROC MIXED (SAS v9.4) and Tukey's test for post-hoc analyses. A p≤0.05 was considered significant. The study was repeated, resulting in experiment 1 and experiment 2. For experiment 1, no significant differences were observed among groups for weekly body weights, dissection measures, or FCR. For experiment 2, ducks in the MOZ group weighed less than ducks in the POND (p=0.0010) and CON groups (p=0.0109). MOZ ducks had worse feather cleanliness scores, worse foot pad scores, and worse feather quality scores than POND and CON ducks. These present differing results, so future research is needed to fully understand how different auditory enrichment affects the production and welfare of Pekin ducks under more specific flock conditions.

听觉富集对北京鸭生产和福利的影响。
很少有研究关注听觉富集对家禽生产和福利的影响,而没有研究专门关注北京鸭。选用某商业孵化场孵化日龄北京野鸭400只,均匀随机放置在3个房间的4个圈中。每个房间被随机分配三种音频处理中的一种:对照(CON,没有听觉丰富),古典音乐(MOZ,莫扎特的弦乐五重奏)或池塘声音(pond; pond sounds - relax on Apple music®)。鸭子的饲养密度接近行业标准,每圈30只鸭子。POND和MOZ音频开始于第1周(第7天),从0300h(灯亮)开始播放,直到2100h(关灯),一小时开,一小时关,以循环方式播放,范围为65-75dB。采用已公布的评分标准,对10只鸭/圈/周(最终N=80只鸭/处理/周)进行体况评分。每周收集生产数据。在第2、4和6周,用戊巴比妥对2只鸭/围栏实施安乐死,并记录器官和体重(最终N=16只鸭/处理/周)。采用PROC LOGISTIC程序(SAS v9.4)分析体况评分,并计算优势比。所有其他数据采用重复测量的双因素方差分析,采用PROC MIXED (SAS v9.4)和事后分析的Tukey检验。A p≤0.05被认为是显著的。重复研究,得到实验1和实验2。在实验1中,各组之间的周体重、解剖量或FCR均无显著差异。试验2,MOZ组鸭的体重低于POND组(p=0.0010)和CON组(p=0.0109)。MOZ鸭的羽毛清洁度评分、脚垫评分和羽毛质量评分均低于POND鸭和CON鸭。这些结果存在差异,因此需要进一步研究在更具体的群体条件下,不同的听觉富集如何影响北京鸭的生产和福利。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Poultry Science
Poultry Science 农林科学-奶制品与动物科学
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
15.90%
发文量
0
审稿时长
94 days
期刊介绍: First self-published in 1921, Poultry Science is an internationally renowned monthly journal, known as the authoritative source for a broad range of poultry information and high-caliber research. The journal plays a pivotal role in the dissemination of preeminent poultry-related knowledge across all disciplines. As of January 2020, Poultry Science will become an Open Access journal with no subscription charges, meaning authors who publish here can make their research immediately, permanently, and freely accessible worldwide while retaining copyright to their work. Papers submitted for publication after October 1, 2019 will be published as Open Access papers. An international journal, Poultry Science publishes original papers, research notes, symposium papers, and reviews of basic science as applied to poultry. This authoritative source of poultry information is consistently ranked by ISI Impact Factor as one of the top 10 agriculture, dairy and animal science journals to deliver high-caliber research. Currently it is the highest-ranked (by Impact Factor and Eigenfactor) journal dedicated to publishing poultry research. Subject areas include breeding, genetics, education, production, management, environment, health, behavior, welfare, immunology, molecular biology, metabolism, nutrition, physiology, reproduction, processing, and products.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信