Influence of Housing System on Egg Weight and Shell Physical Quality Indicators of Laying Hens Eggs
Keywords:
laying hens, egg weight, eggshell quality, enriched cage housing system, floor housing systemAbstract
In this experiment the effects of different housing systems on physical indicators of egg yolk and egg albumen quality
of table eggs were studied. Hens of laying hybrid Lohmann Brown Lite were housed in two different housing systems,
in enriched cage or on floor housing system. In both systems, the hens were kept under standard bioclimatic conditions.
Eggs (n = 1080) were collected from the first phase of the laying cycle, at monthly intervals, at the age of laying hens
30-42 weeks. Egg weight (g), egg specific weight (g.cm-3), egg shape index (%), eggshell weight (g), eggshell
percentage (%), and average eggshell thickness (µm) were evaluated.
In the indicators of the whole egg quality was statistically significantly higher (P<0.001) the average weight of eggs
produced by laying hens kept in enriched cage (66.3 ± 3.6) mean ± SD in comparison with the eggs from laying hens
housed on litter (64.3 ± 4.0) mean ± SD. Similarly, in eggshell quality indicators (weight, proportion, average
thickness) there were significantly higher differences in favor of the eggs from caged breeding. The values of the
average egg shell thickness (µm) in the order of groups (392 ± 24.6; 377 ± 24.3) (mean ± SD). The results obtained
show that the eggs from caged breeding achieved better results in more quality indicators compared to the eggs from
litter breeding.
References
Sokołowicz, Z., Krawczyk, J., Dykie, M. 2018. The
effect of the type of alternative housing system,
genotype and age of laying hens on egg quality. Ann.
Anim. Sci., vol. 18, 2018, no. 2, p. 541–555 DOI:
2478/aoas-2018-0004.
Ochs, D. S., Wolf, A. CH., Nicole, J., Widmar, O.,
Bir, C. 2018. Consumer perceptions of egg-laying hen
housing systems Poultry Sci., vol. 97, 2018, no. 10, p.
-3396 DOI: 10.3382/ps/pey205.
Lay, D.C., Fulton, R.M., Hester, P.Y., Karcher,
D.M., Kjaer, J.B., Mench, J.A., Mullens, B.A.,
Newberry, R.C., Nicol, C.J. , O’Sullivan, N.P., Porter,
R.E. 2011. Hen welfare in different housing systems.
Poult. Sci., vol. 90, 2011, no. 1, p. 278-294.
Heng, Y., Peterson, H.H., Li, X. 2013. Consumer
attitudes toward farm-animal welfare: the case of
laying hens. J. Agr. Resource Econ., vol. 38, 2013, no.
, p. 418-434.
United Egg Producers, 2017. United Egg Producers.
Animal husbandry guidelines for U. S. egglaying flocks. http://uepcertified.com/wpcontent/uploads/2015/08/2017-UEP-Animal-WelfareCage-Free-Guidelines-6.2017-FINAL.pdf.
Chai, L., Xin, H., Zhao, Y., Wang, T., Soupir, M.,
Liu, K. 2018. Mitigating ammonia and PM generation
of cage-free henhouse litter with solid additive and
liquid spray. Trans. ASABE, vol. 61, 2018, no.1, p.
-294 DOI: 10.13031/trans.12481
Hannah, J.F., Wilson, J. L., Cox, N. A., Cason, J. A.,
Bourassa, D. V., Musgrove, M. T., Richardson, L.J.,
Rigsby, L.L., Buhr, R. J. 2011. Comparison of shell
bacteria from unwashed and washed table eggs
harvested from caged laying hens and cage-free floorhoused laying hens. Poult. Sci., vol. 90, 2011, no. 7, p.
-1593.
Jones, D.R., Cox, N. A., Guard, J., Fedorka-Cray, P.
J., Buhr, R. J., Gast, R. K., Abdo, Z., Rigsby, L.L.,
Plumblee, J. R., Karcher, D. M., Robison, C. I.,
Blatchford, R. A., Makagon, M. M. 2015.
Microbiological impact of three commercial laying
hen housing systems. Poult. Sci., vol. 94, 2015, no. 3,
p. 544-551. doi: 10.3382/ps/peu010.
Ali, A.B.A., Campbell, Dl. L. M., Karcher, D. M.,
Siegford, J. M. 2016. Influence of genetic strain and
access to litter on spatial distribution of 4 strains of
laying hens in an aviary system. Poult. Sci., vol. 95,
, no. 11, p. 2489-2502. DOI: 10.3382/ps/pew236
Lister, S., van Nijhuis, B. 2012. Alternative
Systems for Poultry - Health, Welfare and
Productivity, Glasgow, United Kingdom, 2012, pp. 62-
Leyendecker, M., Hamann, H., Hartung, J.,
Kamphues, J., Neumann, U., Sürie, C., Distl, O. 2005.
Keeping laying hens in furnished cages and an aviary
housing system ehances threir bone stability. Br. Poult.
Sci., vol. 46, 2005, no. 5, p. 536-544.
Yue, QX - Chen, H - Xu, YJ - Huang, CX - Xi,
JZ - Zhou, RY - Xu, LJ - Wang, H - Chen, Y, 2020.
Effect of housing system and age on products and bone
properties of Taihang chickens. Poultry Sci., vol. 99,
, no. 3, p. 1341-1348
DOI:10.1016/j.psj.2019.10.052 .
Tůmová, E., Skřivan, M., Englmaierová, M., Zita,
L. 2009. The effect of genotype, housing system and
collection time on egg quality in egg type hens. Czech
Journal of Animal Science, vol. 54, 2009, no. 1, p.17-
DOI: 10.17221/1736-CJAS
Englmaierová, M., Tůmová, E., Charvátová, E.,
Skřivan, M. 2014. Effects of laying hens housing
system on laying performance, egg quality
characteristics, and egg microbial contamination.
Czech Journal of Animal Sci., vol. 59, 2014, no. 8, p.
-352. DOI: 10.17221/7585-CJAS
Yilmaz Dikmen, B., Ipek, A., Şahan, Ü., Sözcü,
A., Baycan, S. C. 2017. Impact of different housing
systems and age of lay-ers on egg quality
characteristics. Turkish Journal of Veterinary and
Animal Sci., vol. 41, 2017, no. 1, p. 77-84.
Zita, L., Jeníková, M., Härtlová, H. 2018. Effect of
housing system on egg quality and the concentration of
cholesterol in egg yolk and blood of hens of native
resources of the Czech Re-public and Slovakia. The
Journal of Applied Poultry Research, vol. 27, 2018, no.
, p. 380-388.
Wilson, P. B. 2017. Recent advances in avian egg
science: A review. Molecular and Cellular Biology.
Poultry Sci., vol. 96, 2017, no. 10, p. 3747-3754,
DOI:10.3382/ps/pex187.
Vlčková, J., Tůmová, E., Miková, K.,
Englmaierova, M., Okrouhlá, M., Chodová, D. 2019.
Changes in the quality of eggs during storage
depending on the housing system and the age of hens.
Poultry Sci., vol. 98, 2019, no. 11, p. 6187-6193
DOI:10.3382/ps/pez401.
Zhao, Y., Zhao, D., Ma, H., Liu, K., Atilgan, A.,
Xin, H. 2016. Environmental assessment of three egg
production systems – Part III: airborne bacteria
concentrations and emissions. Poult. Sci., vol. 95,
, no. 7, p. 1473-1481. doi.org/10.3382/ps/pew053
Rizzi, L. Simioli, M., Martelli, G., Paganelliandl,
R., Sardi, L. 2015. Effects of or-ganic farming on egg
quality and welfare of laying hens. WPSA European
Poultry Conference, pp. 677–10094.
Blatchford, R. A., Fulton, R. M., Mench, J. A.
The utilization of the Welfare Quality assessment
for determining laying hen condition across three
housing systems. J. Dairy Sci., vol. 95, 2016, no. 1, p.
-5903. DOI: 10.3382/ps/pev227
Louton, H., Bergmann, S. M., Rauch, E., Liebers,
C., Reese, S., Erhard, M. H., Hoeborn, C., Schwarzer,
A. 2017. Evaluation of welfare parameters in laying
hens on the basis of a Bavarian survey. Poult. Sci., vol.
, 2017, no. 9, p. 3199-3213.
https://doi.org/10.3382/ps/pex156
Regmi, P. Robison, C. I., Jones, D. R., Gast, R. K.,
Tempelman, R. J., Karcher, D. M. 2018. Effects of
different litter substrates and induced molt on
production performance and welfare quality
parameters of white Leghorn hens housed in multitiered aviary system. Poultry Sci., vol. 97, 2018, no.
, p. 3397-3404, DOI:10.3382/ps/pey21.
Oliveira, J. L., Xin, H. W., Chai, L. L., Millman, S.
T. 2019. Effects of litter floor access and inclusion of
experienced hens in aviary housing on floor eggs, litter
condition, air quality, and hen welfare. Poultry Sci.,
vol. 98, 2019, no. 4, p. 1664-1677, DOI:
3382/ps/pey525.
Colson, S. Arnould, C., Michel, V. 2007.
Motivation to dust-bathe of laying hens housed in
cages and in aviaries. Animal, vol. 1, 2007, no. 3, p.
DOI: 10.1017/S1751731107705323
De Reu, K., Messens, W., Heyndrickx, M.,
Rodenburg, T.B.B., Uyttendaele, M., Herman, L.
Bacterial contamination of table eggs and the
influence of housing systems. Worlds Poult. Sci., vol.
, 2008, no. 1, p. 5-19. DOI:
1017/S0043933907001687
Wilson, P. B. 2017. Recent advances in avian egg
science: A review. Molecular and Cellular Biology.
Poultry Sci., vol. 96, 2017, no. 10, p. 3747-3754,
DOI:10.3382/ps/pex187.
Hunton, P. 2005. Research on eggshell structure
and quality: an historical overview. Revista Brasileira
de Ciência Avícola, vol. 7, 2005, no. 2, p. 67-71,
DOI:10.1590/S1516-635X2005000200001.
Vlčková, J., Tůmová, E., Ketta, M., Englmaierová,
M., Chodová, D. 2018. Effect of housing system and
age of lay-ing hens on eggshell quality, microbial
contamination, and pen-etration of microorganisms
into eggs. Czech Journal of Animal Sci., vol. 63, 2018,
no. 2, p. 51-60.
Ketta, M., Tůmová, E. 2016. Eggshell structure,
measurements, and quality-affecting factors in laying
hens: A review. Czech Journal of Animal Sci, vol. 61,
, no. 7, p. 299-309, DOI:10.17221/46/2015-
CJAS.
Leyendecker, M., Hamann, M., Hartung, J.,
Kamphues, J., Ring, C., Gluender, G., Ahlers, C.,
Sander, I., Neumann, U., Distl, O. 2001. Analysis of
genotype-environment interactions between layer
lines and housing systems for performance traits, egg
quality and bone breaking strength - 2nd
communication: Egg quality traits. Züchtungskunde,
vol. 73, 2001, no. 5, p. 308-323.
Lewko, L., Gornowicz, E. 2011. Effect of housing
system on egg quality in laying hens. Ann. Anim. Sci.,
vol. 11, 2011, no.4, p. 607-616. DOI:10.2478/v10220-
-0012-0
Mohan, B., Mani, V., Nagarajan, S. 1991. Effect of
different housing systems on the physical qualities of
commercial chicken eggs. Indian J. Poult. Sci., vol. 26
, 1991, p. 130-131.
Dvořák, P., Suchý, P., Straková, E., Doležalová, J.
Variation in egg yolk colour in different systems
of rearing laying hens. Acta Vet. Brno.,vol. 79, 2010,
no. 9, p. S13-S19. DOI: 10.2754/avb201079S9S013
Pišteková, V., Hovorka, M., Vecerek, V. Straková,
E., Suchý, P. 2006. The quality comparison of eggs
laid by laying hens kept in battery cages and in a deep
litter system. Czech J. Anim. Sci., vol. 51, 2006, no. p.
-325.
Vlčková, J., Tumová, E., Englmaierová, M. 2014.
The effect of housing system on egg quality of
Lohmann white and Czech hen, Acta fytotechnica et
zootechnica, vol. 17, 2014, no. 2, p. 44-46.
Stanley, V.G., Nelson, D., Daley, M. B. 2012.
Evaluation of Two Laying Systems (Floor vs. Cage)
on Egg Production, Quality and Safety Biology.
Iranian Journal of Applied Animal Science, Corpus ID:
DOI:10.4172/21689881.1000109
Sekeroglu, A. 2002. The effect of free range system
on egg production and egg quality of brown and white
layer genotypes. PhD Thesis, Gaziosmanpasa
University, Institute of Science, Animal Sci.
Department.
Pavlovski, Z., Skribic, Z., Lukic, M. 2004. Effekt
of housing system on egg quality traits in small layers flocks. Proceeding of the 22th World's Poultry
Congress, June 8-13, Istanbul – Turkey, pp. 357-357.
Ledvinka, Z., Tůmová, E., Arent, E., Holoubek, J.,
Klesalová, L. 2000. Egg shell quality in some whiteegged and brown-egged cross combinations of
dominant hens. Czech J. Anim. Sci., vol. 45, 2000, no.
, p. 285-288.
Lichovníková, M., Zeman, L. 2008. Effect of
housing system on the calcium requirements of laying
hens and eggshell quality. Czech Journal of Animal
Sci., vol. 53, 2008, no. 4, p. 162–168.
Svobodova, J., Tůmová, E., Englmaierová, M.
The effect of housing system on egg quality of
Lohmann white and Czech hen. Acta Fytotechnica et
Zootechnica, vol. 17, 2014, no. 2, p. 44 – 46 DOI:
15414/afz.2014.17.02.44–46
Tůmová, E., Englmaierová, M., Charvátová, V.,
Lednika, Z. 2011. Interaction between housing system
and genotype in relation to internal and external egg
quality parameters. Czech Journal of Animal Sci., vol.
, 2011, no. 11, pp. 490–498.
Toussant, M. J., Latshaw, J. D. 1999. Ovomucin
content andcomposition in chicken eggs with different
interior quality. J. Sci.Food Agric., vol. 79, 1999, no.
, p.1666–1670.
Voslářová, E., Hanzálek, Z., Straková, V. 2006.
Comparison between Laying Hen Performance in the
Cage System and the Deep Litter System on a Diet
Freefrom Animal Protein. Acta Vet. Brno, vol. 75,
, no. 2, p. 219-225.
Hidalgo, A., M. Rossi, F. Clerici, and S. Ratti.
A market study on the quality characteristics of
eggs from different housing systems. Food Chem., vol.
, 2008, no. 3, p.1031–1038
Tumova E., Vlckova J., Charvatova V., Drabek O.,
Tej-necky V., Ketta M., Chodova D. 2016. Interactions
of genotype, housing and dietary calcium in layer
perfor-mance, eggshell quality and tibia
characteristics. South African Journal of Animal
Science, vol. 46, 2016. no. 3, p. 285–293.
