Abdel-Azeem, A. (2019). EVALUATION OF FLOOR VS. CAGE SYSTEM OF BROILER CHICKENS REARED IN THREE DIFFERENT AREAS OF ENCLOSED HOUSES ON PRODUCTIVE AND PHYSIOLOGICAL PERFORMANCE. Egyptian Poultry Science Journal, 39(4), 953-971. doi: 10.21608/epsj.2019.67516
Abdel-Azeem Fahmy Abdel-Azeem. "EVALUATION OF FLOOR VS. CAGE SYSTEM OF BROILER CHICKENS REARED IN THREE DIFFERENT AREAS OF ENCLOSED HOUSES ON PRODUCTIVE AND PHYSIOLOGICAL PERFORMANCE". Egyptian Poultry Science Journal, 39, 4, 2019, 953-971. doi: 10.21608/epsj.2019.67516
Abdel-Azeem, A. (2019). 'EVALUATION OF FLOOR VS. CAGE SYSTEM OF BROILER CHICKENS REARED IN THREE DIFFERENT AREAS OF ENCLOSED HOUSES ON PRODUCTIVE AND PHYSIOLOGICAL PERFORMANCE', Egyptian Poultry Science Journal, 39(4), pp. 953-971. doi: 10.21608/epsj.2019.67516
Abdel-Azeem, A. EVALUATION OF FLOOR VS. CAGE SYSTEM OF BROILER CHICKENS REARED IN THREE DIFFERENT AREAS OF ENCLOSED HOUSES ON PRODUCTIVE AND PHYSIOLOGICAL PERFORMANCE. Egyptian Poultry Science Journal, 2019; 39(4): 953-971. doi: 10.21608/epsj.2019.67516
EVALUATION OF FLOOR VS. CAGE SYSTEM OF BROILER CHICKENS REARED IN THREE DIFFERENT AREAS OF ENCLOSED HOUSES ON PRODUCTIVE AND PHYSIOLOGICAL PERFORMANCE
This study was conducted to evaluate the effects of two housing systems cage vs. floor on productiveperformance and physiological response of broiler chickens reared in three rearing areas in enclosed housesincluding side cooling (vent area) , middle and at the end of the house (fan area). A total number of 3120 chicks were randomly chosen for both housing systems, where enclosed houses of cage battery and floor systems having 83200 and 22500 birds respectively.The number of 3120 chicks were divided into two groups: the first was housed in cages (n=1560) and the second was housed on the floor house (n=1560). Birds were placed in three different rearing areas containing 520 birds each. Each area per housing system was replicated four times containing 130 birds each. Results showed that LBW, BWG, FI, FCR, livability and EPEF recorded significantly (P ≤0.05) higher values for birds housed in cages than birds housed on floor. However, the former traits showed better (P ≤0.05) results for birds placed in vent area than birds placed in middle and fan area. Housing systems or rearing areas significantly (P ≤0.05) affected total faecal microbial count, where the birds housed on floor and placed in fan area exhibited (P ≤0.05) higher values than birds housed in cages and placed in middle and vent areas. Antibody titer response detected against NDV for birds placed in vent and middle areas showed higher values than birds placed in fan area. It may be concluded that, rearing broiler chickens in cage system and placed in vent area were better in obtaining the highest productivity and physiological response compared with those reared on floor system and placed in middle and fan areas.
View on SCiNiTO
Top