Acknowledgements Book of abstracts - Publicaties - Vlaanderen.be

Tsuyoshi Shimmura presents Poster 49 during the poster sessions in the Aula.
Session theme 5: Development and improvement of welfare assessment protocols
121
Poster 49
A PROPOSAL OF OVERALL WELFARE ASSESSMENT FOR LAYING
HENS - COMPARISONS OF OUR SCIENCE-BASED WITH
ENVIRONMENT-BASED AND ANIMAL-BASED ASSESSMENT -
T. Shimmura 1 , S. Hirahara 2 , Y. Eguchi 1 , K. Uetake 1 , T. Tanaka 1
1
Department of Animal Science and Biotechnology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Azabu University,
Sagamihara, Japan
2
Swine and Poultry Research Group, Livestock Engineering Division, Kanagawa Prefectural Livestock
Industry Technology Center, Ebina, Japan
To increase the validity of evaluations and facilitate expansion and maintenance of assessment
systems, we have started a database of studies on the welfare of laying hens around the world. On
the basis of it and Bracke’s model, we have devised a science-based overall welfare assessment for
laying hens. We also evaluated the usefulness of the assessment system by comparing it with values
of Animal Needs Index (ANI) and animal-based measurements assessed a same farm with our
model.
First, applying the methods of Bracke et al. (J. Anim. Sci., 81: 1819-1834. 2002), we devised a
system for assessment of laying hens, which consisted of six processes: 1) Collection of scientific
knowledge (information shown by a paper), 2) collection of scientific declarations (doubtless
information shown by some papers; n=498), 3) selection of measurements for evaluation (n=29), 4)
setting levels in each measurement, 5) weighting each measurement, and 6) assignment of these
measurements to the five freedoms to show the advantages and disadvantages of housing systems
clearly. Second, housing systems for laying hens were scored by using ANI and our model, and
these assessments were compared. Third, correlations between the scores of ANI or our model and
the values from animal-based measurements were analyzed.
Our model clearly showed the advantages and disadvantages of the housing systems from the
viewpoint of the five freedoms. While freedom from injury, pain, and disease and from discomfort
was more secured in the cage system, non-cage systems scored better for natural behavior and
freedom from fear and distress. Assessment using our model seemed to be more sensitive than ANI.
A significant strong-positive correlation was found between the animal-based assessment and the
total scores of ANI (rs=0.94, p