Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36239449›Full record

ArticleJournal of animal science2022

Behavior and welfare impacts of water provision via misting in commercial Pekin ducks.

Dana L M Campbell, Sue Belson, Marisa A Erasmus, Jim M Lea

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of animal science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Welfare of ducks, geese and quail on farm.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2023
    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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Dana L M CampbellAgriculture and Food, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Armidale, New South Wales 2350, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4028-8347
Sue BelsonAgriculture and Food, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Armidale, New South Wales 2350, Australia.
Marisa A ErasmusDepartment of Animal Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47906, USA.
Jim M LeaAgriculture and Food, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Armidale, New South Wales 2350, Australia.
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation · AUPurdue University West Lafayette · US

Funding

Australian Duck Meat AssociationPoultry Hub Australia 20-220
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ducks will access water to maintain feather condition and exhibit natural water-related behaviors such as wet preening. Providing water to ducks commercially is challenging as it may reduce litter and air quality leading to higher duck mortality or illness. This research aimed to measure the behavioral and welfare impacts of water provision via a misting system for commercial Pekin grower ducks in Victoria, Australia. Seven grower flocks were observed (four misted and three nonmisted in open-sided sheds) during May and November 2021. From 26 until 33 d of age, treatment ducks were provided 1 h of misting with shed curtains closed in both treatment and control sheds. At the start and end of the misting application period, external health and welfare measures were taken directly on the ducks via transect walks throughout each shed and catch-and-inspect observations on a sample of 150 ducks from each shed. Video recordings were also made of the misted and nonmisted ducks for 3 h representing time periods prior to, during, and after the 1-h misting across all sheds for all 8 d of the treatment period. Observations were made of all behavior that ducks exhibited at 10-min scan sample intervals across four cameras per shed, totaling 4,198 scans across the seven sheds. General linear mixed models showed the misting application predominantly had impacts on the patterns of behavioral change across the treatment time periods between the misted and nonmisted ducks rather than increasing or decreasing the overall expression of specific behaviors (interaction terms all P ≤ 0.003). The misted ducks increased drinking, tail wagging, and walking, and reduced preening, rooting litter, sitting, and stretching during misting relative to what they showed prior. The nonmisted ducks showed less sitting and more panting during misting relative to prior. Pearson's Chi-square tests showed some differences between the treatment groups in feather cleanliness on the back and wings (both P < 0.0001), likely resulting from pre-existing differences between sheds in blood from pin feathers. Most welfare indicators showed no positive or negative effect of the misting treatment. These results indicate overhead misting does affect duck behavior to some degree without compromising their welfare, but further research with larger water droplet sizes resulting in greater accumulation of surface water or extended durations of misting may lead to greater effects.

Indexed as

Animal HusbandryAnimal WelfareAnimalsDucksFeathersWaterWaterbloodfeathershealthpoultrypreening

Identifiers

PMID36239449
PMCPMC9733503
OpenAlexW4306247754

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.