Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35327072›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2022

The Effect of Hard Pecking Enrichment during Rear on Feather Cover, Feather Pecking Behaviour and Beak Length in Beak-Trimmed and Intact-Beak Laying Hen Pullets.

Paula Elizabeth Baker, Christine Janet Nicol, Claire Alexandra Weeks

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Paula Elizabeth BakerLaying Hen Welfare Forum, 22 City Road, London EC1Y 2AJ, UK.
Christine Janet NicolRoyal Veterinary College, Hawkshead Lane, Brookmans Park, Hatfield AL9 7TA, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6734-2177
Claire Alexandra WeeksBristol Veterinary School, University of Bristol, Langford House, Bristol BS40 5DU, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4280-9604

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Injurious pecking, commonly controlled by beak trimming (BT), is a widespread issue in laying hens associated with thwarted foraging. This controlled study compared the effect in intact and beak-trimmed pullets of providing pecking pans to eight treatment flocks from six weeks of age. Flocks (mean size 6843) comprised eight British Blacktail, six Lohmann Brown and two Bovans Brown. All young birds (6−7 weeks) pecked more frequently at the pecking pans (mean 40.4) than older pullets (mean 26.0, 23.3 pecks/bird/min at 10−11 weeks and 14−15 weeks, respectively) (p < 0.005). There was no effect on feather pecking or plumage cover. Mean side-beak length and mean top-beak lengths were shorter in treatment flocks at 6−7 weeks and 10−11 weeks (p < 0.001). Intact-beak treatment flocks had shorter mean side-beak length at 10−11 weeks (p < 0.001) and at 14−15 weeks (p < 0.05) and mean top-beak length at 6−7 weeks (p < 0.05) and at 10−11 weeks (p < 0.05). BT treatment flocks had shorter side-beak and top-beak lengths at 6−7 weeks and at 10−11 weeks (p < 0.001). Beak lengths showed linear growth, with individual bird variation indicating a potential for genetic selection. The study demonstrated that abrasive material can reduce beak length in pullets.

Indexed as

beak lengthinjurious peckingpecking panpulletrear

Identifiers

PMID35327072
PMCPMC8944788

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.