Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38608391›Full record

ArticlePoultry science2024

Do flickering lights impact turkey hen behavior, stress, and fear?

A Hammond, K Buchynski, T Shynkaruk, J Brown, T Crowe, K Schwean-Lardner

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Poultry science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Welfare assessment of turkeys (EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2026
    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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

A HammondDepartment of Animal and Poultry Science, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N5A8, Canada.
K BuchynskiDepartment of Animal and Poultry Science, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N5A8, Canada.
T ShynkarukDepartment of Animal and Poultry Science, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N5A8, Canada.
J BrownDepartment of Animal and Poultry Science, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N5A8, Canada.
T CroweDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N5A9, Canada.
K Schwean-LardnerDepartment of Animal and Poultry Science, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N5A8, Canada. Electronic address: karen.schwean@usask.ca.
University of Saskatchewan · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Little is known about the effect of light-flicker frequency on poultry, particularly on turkeys. This experiment examined the impact of light-flicker frequency on the behavior, stress, and fear response of Nicholas Select turkey hens reared to 11 wk. The experiment was a randomized complete block design (2 trials), with a one-way factorial analysis evaluating 3 light-flicker frequencies (30, 90, or 195 Hertz; Hz). Birds (n = 3,276 per trial) were housed in 9 individual environmentally controlled rooms (3 replicates per treatment per trial). Data collected included: behavior (4, 8, and 10 wk), incidence of aggressive damage, heterophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, and novel object test (daily d 1-7 and at 4, 8, and 11 wk). Data were analyzed using Proc Mixed (SAS 9.4), with significance declared at P ≤ 0.05. Behavior data are presented as the percentage of time spent performing the behavior. At 4 wk, gentle feather pecking and exploratory behaviors were higher under 195 Hz compared to 30 Hz (P = 0.04 and P = 0.05, respectively). Preening was higher under 90 Hz compared to 30 Hz (P = 0.05). At 8 wk, wing flapping was lowest under 195 Hz (P < 0.01). Gentle feather pecking was higher under 90 and 195 Hz compared to 30 Hz (P = 0.02). Fighting (P = 0.05), aggressive pecking (P = 0.02), and aggressive behaviors (P = 0.01) were lower under 30 Hz compared to 90 Hz. At 10 wk, preening was decreased under 30 Hz (P = 0.03). Incidences of aggressive damage were reduced under 30 Hz compared to 90 Hz (0 d-4 wk; P = 0.01) and under 30 compared to both 90 and 195 Hz (4-8 wk; P = 0.01). At 11 wk, heterophil-to-lymphocyte ratios were lowest under 30 Hz (P = 0.04). The novel object test was unaffected by flicker treatment. In conclusion, many behaviors and the stress and fear responses were unaffected by either visible or non-visible flicker. However, visible flicker (30 Hz) reduced some comfort and exploratory behaviors early in life, and the impact on preening continued to older ages, suggesting minor negative impacts of flicker, particularly early in life.

Indexed as

Behavior, AnimalFearTurkeysAggressionAnimal HusbandryAnimalsAnimal WelfareFemaleLightLightingRandom AllocationStress, PhysiologicalStress, Psychologicalaggressionaggressive damageflicker frequencywelfare

Identifiers

PMID38608391
PMCPMC11017336
OpenAlexW4393320858

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.