TITLE

COMPARISON BETWEEN LAYING PERCENTAGE OF CHICKEN IN BATTERY CAGE

SYSTEM & DEEP LITTER SYSTEM IN MOROGORO MUNICIPAL

INTRODUCTION

The production of chickens was estimated to have 34 million chickens in Tanzania by

2011, out of which almost 95% were local chicken and the rest were exotic breeds.
Poultry rearing contributes 16% of the livestock GDP, poultry sub sector contribute around
3% of the agricultural GDP and then contributes around 1% of the National Domestic
Products (MLDF 2011). The poultry management of the selected farms varied according to
prevailing weather conditions of the locality and system of poultry rearing (Datta, Islam, &
Kabir, 2013). Multi-tier aviary systems are becoming more common in organic egg production
(Steenfeldt & Nielsen, 2015). Poultry are raised in different systems such as extensive or
free-range system, semi-intensive system, batter-cage system and deep-litter system.
Conventional feeding systems for laying hens rely on a complete feed available ad libitum in
mash, pelleted or crumble form(Molnár, Hamelin, Delezie, & Nys, 2018). The housing and
management of laying hens and their productivity has gone through enormous developments in
the last century. Housing has changed from free-range systems, via battery cages to a variety of
loose housing and different types of battery cages, and back to outdoor access systems(Leenstra,
Ten Napel, Visscher, & Van Sambeek, 2016). The hens kept in the deep litter had higher ovary
weight, oviduct weight and oviduct length and higher number of large yellow follicles (Oke,
Ladokun, & Onagbesan, 2016). The design and management of different housing systems affect
poultry welfare, Indoor systems, especially laying cages, provide the safest welfare protection
but extensive systems, e.g. free-range, provide more freedom and allow the widest behavioural
repertoire (Elson, 2015). But will mainly base to discussion on two systems i.e battery cage
system and deep litter system of raising the laying poultry.

BATTERY-CAGE SYSTEM-In this system birds are kept under total confinement with
minimum space, feed and drinkers are provided from outside. Eggs laid will get rolled out
by the inclined floor bottom. Has its advantages like easy feeding and management, protect
chicken from vermin and wild birds, litter borne disease and pests are avoided, spreading
of disease are minimum. But has disadvantages like high cost of installation, cage layers
fatigue or paralysis is a most problem and also there is fatty liver syndrome.

DEEP-LITTER SYSTEM-Birds are raised in the building over litter materials which is of
organic in nature capable of absorbing moisture and releasing moisture to the atmosphere
and also to serve as bedding materials for birds. Example of litter materials are wood
shavings, straw chopping, paper straw chopping and paddy husk. It has advantages like
increments of poultry management, animal have ability to express normal behavior such
as flying and are very economical. In general, non-cage system can be characterized with more
space for hen that allows more locomotion of bird. It has been known that more locomotion of
the hen indicates more energy expenditure that need to be supported by increasing feed intake.
However, laying performance of chicken depend not only where the hens are kept but also many
of other factors (Ahammed et al., 2014). But has negative side like direct access to
droppings, need high capital cost for construction, wastage of feeds, high eruption of
disease and the eggs comes out dirty. Performances of vanaraja birds was found superior
over the indigenous birds in respect of all the productive and reproductive parameters under
backyard system of rearing(Hazarika, Bordoloi, & Borah, 2016). It has been observed that
most of poultry farmers in Morogoro urban have shifted from deep litter system of
keeping layer chickens to battery cage system. Rearing systems and types of fowl had
significant effect on different carcass and egg qualities, although there were no appreciable
differences in terms of proximate composition of meat (Doley, Barua, & Kalita, 2010).
Conventional feeding systems for laying hens rely on a complete feed available ad libitum in
mash, pelleted or crumble form. When complete feeds are used, intake is mainly controlled by
the hens’ energy requirement and feed presentation, but the birds cannot adjust their
consumption to other nutritional needs and thus over-consume to cover the calcium needed for
egg shell formation. Sequential loose-mix and choice feeding offer birds the opportunity to select
different diets in the short term. These feeding strategies have been proposed as(Oke et al.,
2016). The average body weight of cage type layers was found significantly higher than litter in
the later observation but it was vice-versa in initial observation. The cage type had a significantly
higher egg weight than the litter at the beginning of the experiment, but at the end of the
experiment litter system produced the heaviest eggs (Rakib et al., 2016).
REFERENCE

Ahammed, M., Chae, B. J., Lohakare, J., Keohavong, B., Lee, M. H., Lee, S. J., … Ohh, S. J.
(2014). Comparison of aviary, barn and conventional cage raising of chickens on laying
performance and egg quality. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 27(8), 1196–
1203. from https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2013.13394

Datta, R. K., Islam, M. S., & Kabir, M. A. (2013). Assessment of the production performance
and economic efficiencies of available chicken breeds (Gallus domesticus L.) in Rajshahi,
Bangladesh. University Journal of Zoology, Rajshahi University, 31(0), 13–18. from
https://doi.org/10.3329/ujzru.v31i0.15374

Doley, S., Barua, N., & Kalita, N. (2010). Effect of rearing systems on meat and egg qualities in
indigenous fowls, (72), 168–170.

Elson, H. A. (2015). Poultry welfare in intensive and extensive production systems. World’s
Poultry Science Journal, 71(03), 449–460.from
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043933915002172

Hazarika, H., Hazarika, D., Bordoloi, P. K., & Borah, D. K. (2016). Performances of vanaraja
and indigenous chicken under backyard rearing system. Indian Veterinary Journal, 93(9),
30–32.

Leenstra, F., Ten Napel, J., Visscher, J., & Van Sambeek, F. (2016). Layer breeding programmes
in changing production environments: a historic perspective. World’s Poultry Science
Journal, 72(01), 21–36. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043933915002743

Molnár, A., Hamelin, C., Delezie, E., & Nys, Y. (2018). Sequential and choice feeding in laying
hens: adapting nutrient supply to requirements during the egg formation cycle. World’s
Poultry Science Journal, 74(02), 199–210. from
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043933918000247

Oke, E.O., Ladokun, A.O And Onagbesan, O.M. (2016). Reproductive performance of layer
chickens reared on deep litter system with or without access to grass or legume pasture.
Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition, 100(2), 229–235. from
 https://doi.org/10.1111/jpn.12353

Rakib, T. M., Akter, L., Rarua, S. R., Azam, N. E., Erfan, R., Islam, S. M., … Miazi, O. F.
(2016). Effects of age , rearing system and their interaction on phenotypic characteristics in
hisex brown laying hens. Scientific Journal of Veternary Advance, 5(5), 87–96. from
https://doi.org/10.14196/sjva.v5i5.2174

Steenfeldt, S., & Nielsen, B. L. (2015). Welfare of organic laying hens kept at different indoor
stocking densities in a multi-tier aviary system. I: egg laying, and use of veranda and
outdoor area. Animal, 9(09), 1509–1517. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731115000713

Similarity between APA citation style and Havard citation style

 American Psychological Association APA style and Havard citation referencing style
both of them can be used mainly for education, social and behavioural science.
NAME OF GROUP MEMBER

MLAY, MOSES E. ANS/E/2016/0107

KELLER, WILLIUM S. ANS/E/2014/0100

MASSAY FLORIDI P. ANS/D/2016/0039