Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Poult Sci ; 95(12): 2971-2978, 2016 Dec 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27486253

RESUMO

Demand for meat from free-range broiler chickens is increasing in several countries. Consumers are motivated by better animal welfare and other product attributes such as quality and taste. However, scientific literature is not unanimous about whether free-range access influences quality, composition, and taste of the meat. Because chickens normally do not use free-range areas optimally, it is possible that provision of more suitable shelter will lead to more pronounced differences between chickens raised indoors and outdoors. In this study, an experiment with 2 production rounds of 600 slow-growing broilers each was performed. In each round, 200 chickens were raised indoors (IN), 200 had free-range access to grassland with artificial shelter (AS), and 200 had free-range access to short-rotation coppice with willow (SRC). Free-range use, feed intake, and growth were monitored, and after slaughter (d72) meat quality, composition, and taste were assessed. Free-range use was higher in SRC than in AS chickens (42.8 vs. 35.1%, P < 0.001). IN chickens were heavier at d70 than AS and SRC chickens (2.79 vs. 2.66 and 2.68 kg, P = 0.005). However, feed intake and conversion did not differ. Breast meat of chickens with free-range access was darker (P = 0.021) and yellower (P = 0.001) than that of IN chickens. Ultimate pH was lower (5.73 vs. 5.79; P = 0.006) and drip loss higher (1.29 vs. 1.09%; P = 0.05) in IN versus AS chickens. The percentage of polyunsaturated fatty acids was higher in AS than in IN meat (35.84 vs. 34.59%; P = 0.021). The taste panel judged breast meat of SRC chickens to be more tender (P = 0.003) and less fibrous (P = 0.013) compared to that of AS and IN chickens, and juicier compared to the IN chickens (P = 0.017). Overall, free-range access negatively affected slaughter weight, but positively affected meat quality, taste, and composition. Only a few differences between AS and SRC were found, possibly due to limited differences in free-range use.


Assuntos
Criação de Animais Domésticos/métodos , Galinhas/fisiologia , Carne/normas , Animais , Galinhas/anatomia & histologia , Galinhas/crescimento & desenvolvimento , Dieta/veterinária , Ácidos Graxos/análise , Feminino , Qualidade dos Alimentos , Abrigo para Animais , Masculino , Carne/análise
2.
Animals (Basel) ; 6(1)2015 Dec 22.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26703742

RESUMO

As of 2012, the EU has banned the use of conventional cages (CC) for laying hens, causing a shift in housing systems. This study's aim was to gain insight into farmers' opinions on hen health and welfare in their current housing systems. A survey was sent to 218 Belgian egg farmers, of which 127 (58.3%) responded, with 84 still active as egg farmer. Hen welfare tended to be less important in choosing the housing system for farmers with cage than with non-cage systems. Respondents currently using cage systems were more satisfied with hen health than respondents with non-cage systems. Reported mortality increased with farm size and was higher in furnished cages than in floor housing. Feather pecking, cannibalism, smothering and mortality were perceived to be higher in current housing systems than in CC, but only by respondents who shifted to non-cage systems from previously having had CC. Health- and production-related parameters were scored to be more important for hen welfare as compared to behavior-related parameters. Those without CC in the past rated factors relating to natural behavior to be more important for welfare than those with CC. This difference in opinion based on farmer backgrounds should be taken into account in future research.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...