Injurious pecking in organic turkey fattening-effects of husbandry and feeding on injuries and plumage damage of a slow- (Auburn) and a fast-growing (B.U.T.6) genotype

D Haug; R Schreiter; B Thesing; L Rathmann; C Lambertz; P Hofmann; M Erhard; G Bellof; E Schmidt

doi:10.1016/j.psj.2023.102746

Injurious pecking in organic turkey fattening-effects of husbandry and feeding on injuries and plumage damage of a slow- (Auburn) and a fast-growing (B.U.T.6) genotype

Poult Sci. 2023 Aug;102(8):102746. doi: 10.1016/j.psj.2023.102746. Epub 2023 Apr 29.

Authors

D Haug¹, R Schreiter², B Thesing³, L Rathmann⁴, C Lambertz⁵, P Hofmann⁶, M Erhard⁷, G Bellof³, E Schmidt³

Affiliations

¹ Weihenstephan-Triesdorf University of Applied Sciences, 85354 Freising, Germany. Electronic address: desiree.haug@hswt.de.
² Centre for Applied Research and Technology e.V. at the Dresden University of Applied Sciences, 01069 Dresden, Germany.
³ Weihenstephan-Triesdorf University of Applied Sciences, 85354 Freising, Germany.
⁴ Bavarian State Estates, Kitzingen, Germany.
⁵ Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), 37213 Witzenhausen, Germany.
⁶ Bavarian State Research Center for Agriculture, Kitzingen, Germany.
⁷ Chair of Animal Welfare, Ethology, Animal Hygiene and Animal Husbandry, Department of Veterinary Sciences, LMU Munich, 80539 Munich, Germany.

Abstract

Injuries and plumage damage (PD) are important indicators of welfare. First priority in turkey fattening is to reduce injurious pecking, which includes aggressive pecking (agonistic behavior) and additionally severe feather pecking (SFP) and cannibalism with their multifactorial reasons. Still, there are few studies available evaluating different genotypes for their welfare status under organic conditions. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of genotype and husbandry with 100% organic feeding (2 variants with different riboflavin content: V1 and V2) on injuries and PD. During rearing nonbeaktrimmed male turkeys of a slow- (Auburn, n = 256) and fast-growing (B.U.T.6, n = 128) genotype were kept in 2 indoor housing systems (without environmental enrichment (EE) = H1-, n = 144 and with EE = H2+, n = 240). During fattening 13 animals per pen of H2+ were relocated to a free-range system (H3 MS, n = 104). EE included pecking stones, elevated seating platforms and silage feeding. The study included five 4-wk feeding phases. At the end of each phase, injuries and PD were scored to assess animal welfare. Injury scores ranged from 0 (=no damage) to 3 (=severe damage) and PD from 0 to 4. Injurious pecking was observed from the 8th week onward (injuries: 16.5% and PD: 31.4%). Binary logistic regression models showed that both indicators were affected by genotype (each P < 0.001), husbandry (each P < 0.001), feeding (injuries P = 0.004; PD P = 0.003), and age (each P < 0.001). Auburn showed less injuries and PD than B.U.T.6. H1- had the fewest injuries and PD for Auburn animals compared to H2+ or H3 MS. In summary, the use of alternative genotypes (Auburn) in organic fattening improved welfare, but keeping them in free-range systems or in husbandry with EE, does not lead to a reduction of injurious pecking. Therefore, further studies are needed with more and changing enrichment materials, further management measures, changes in housing structure, and even more intensive animal care.

Keywords: animal welfare; injurious pecking; organic turkey fattening; plumage damage; severe feather pecking.

MeSH terms

Aggression
Animal Husbandry
Animal Welfare
Animals
Behavior, Animal
Cannibalism
Chickens*
Feathers
Housing, Animal
Male
Turkeys*