Internal roosting location is associated with differential use of the outdoor range by free-range laying hens.

1. In commercial free-range systems for laying hens, popholes to the outdoor range are often installed on one side of the house only. In multi-tier systems, it is possible that some individuals fail to access the range due to internal barriers to movement. 2. Five commercial multi-tier flocks from different units were studied. For each flock, two different colour markers were used to distinguish 200 birds roosting near the popholes (NP-Roost) and 200 birds roosting far from the popholes (FP-Roost) at night. The following day, counts of marked birds on the range and inside the house were performed. 3. Significantly more NP-Roost birds were observed in all areas of the outdoor range than FP-Roost birds the next day. Distance of FP area from the popholes was very strongly positively correlated with effect size in the adjacent range area. 4. Additionally, in the indoor area far from the popholes (FP) more FP-Roost birds were observed the next day than NP-Roost birds. In the indoor area near to the popholes (NP) more NP-Roost birds were observed the next day than FP-Roost birds. 5. These results suggest that roosting location is associated with differential range use when popholes are only available on one side of the shed as birds that roosted far from the popholes used the range less.

Elevated arousal at time of decision-making is not the arbiter of risk avoidance in chickens.

The somatic marker hypothesis proposes that humans recall previously experienced physiological responses to aid decision-making under uncertainty. However, little is known about the mechanisms used by non-human animals to integrate risk perception with predicted gains and losses. We monitored the behaviour and physiology of chickens when the choice between a high-gain (large food quantity), high-risk (1 in 4 probability of receiving an air-puff) option (HGRAP) or a low-gain (small food quantity), no-risk (of an air-puff) (LGNAP) option. We assessed when arousal increased by considering different stages of the decision-making process (baseline, viewing, anticipation, reward periods) and investigated whether autonomic responses influenced choice outcome both immediately and in the subsequent trial. Chickens were faster to choose and their heart-rate significantly increased between the viewing and anticipation (post-decision, pre-outcome) periods when selecting the HGRAP option. This suggests that they responded physiologically to the impending risk. Additionally, arousal was greater following a HGRAP choice that resulted in an air-puff, but this did not deter chickens from subsequently choosing HGRAP. In contrast to human studies, we did not find evidence that somatic markers were activated during the viewing period, suggesting that arousal is not a good measure of avoidance in non-human animals.