Antimicrobial Use in Broilers Reared at Different Stocking Densities: A Retrospective Study
Abstract
:Simple Summary
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Data Collection
2.2. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Statistical office of the European Union, EUROSTAT. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/ (accessed on 11 August 2020).
- Kralik, G.; Kralik, Z.; Grčević, M.; Hanžek, D. Quality of Chicken Meat. Anim. Husb. Nutr. 2018, 63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tavárez, M.A.; De los Santos, F.S. Impact of genetics and breeding on broiler production performance: A look into the past, present, and future of the industry. Anim. Front. 2016, 6, 37–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abudabos, A.M.; Samara, E.M.; Hussein, E.O.S.; Al-Ghadi, M.Q.; Al-Atiyat, R.M. Impacts of Stocking Density on the Performance and Welfare of Broiler Chickens. Ital. J. Anim. Sci. 2013, 12, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hartcher, K.M.; Lum, H.K. Genetic selection of broilers and welfare consequences: A review. Worlds Poult. Sci. J. 2020, 76, 154–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dawkins, M.S.; Donnelly, C.A.; Jones, T.A. Chicken welfare is influenced more by housing conditions than by stocking density. Nature 2004, 427, 342–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ritz, C.; Fairchild, B.D.; Lacy, M.P. Litter Quality and Broiler Performance. University of Georgia, extension bulletin. 2009. Available online: https://secure.caes.uga.edu/extension/publications/files/pdf/B%201267_5.PDF (accessed on 11 August 2020).
- Buijs, S.; Keeling, L.; Rettenbacher, S.; Van Poucke, E.; Tuyttens, F.A. Stocking density effects on broiler welfare: Identifying sensitive ranges for different indicators. Poult. Sci. 2009, 88, 1536–1543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hall, A.L. The Effect of Stocking Density on the Welfare and Behaviour of Broiler Chickens Reared Commercially. Anim. Welfare 2001, 10, 23–40. [Google Scholar]
- EU Council Directive 2007/43/EC. Laying down Minimum Rules for the Protection of Chickens Kept for Meat Production. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32007L0043 (accessed on 11 August 2020).
- Bessei, W. Welfare of broilers: A review. Worlds Poult. Sci. J. 2006, 62, 455–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fortané, N. Veterinarian ‘responsibility’: Conflicts of definition and appropriation surrounding the public problem of antimicrobial resistance in France. Palgrave Commun. 2019, 5, 67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- EMA. Principles on Assignment of Defined Daily Dose for Animals (DDDvet) and Defined Course Dose for Animals (DCDvet). 2015. Available online: https://www.ema.europa.eu/documents/scientific-guideline/principles-assignment-defined-daily-dose-animals-dddvet-defined-course-dose-animals-dcdvet_en.pdf (accessed on 11 August 2020).
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). FAOSTAT. 2019. Available online: http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#country/106 (accessed on 11 August 2020).
- EMA. Guidance on Collection and Provision of National Data on Antimicrobial Use by Animal Species/Categories. 2018. Available online: https://www.ema.europa.eu/documents/scientific-guideline/guidance-collection-provision-national-data-antimicrobial-use-animal-species/categories_en.pdf (accessed on 11 August 2020).
- Caucci, C.; Di Martino, G.; Dalla Costa, A.; Santagiuliana, M.; Lorenzetto, M.; Capello, K.; Mughini-Gras, L.; Gavazzi, L.; Bonfanti, L. Trends and correlates of antimicrobial use in broiler and turkey farms: A poultry company registry-based study in Italy. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2019, 74, 2784–2787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nota del Ministero Della Salute Prot. n. 0010365 del 28/04/2016 con Oggetto: Piano Nazionale Benessere Animale (PNBA) 2016—Protezione dei Polli Allevati per la Macellazione di Carne (d. lgs 181/2010)—Monitoraggio del Benessere Animale al Macello. Available online: https://www.alimenti-salute.it/doc/nota_10365_del_28_apr_2016_pnba_polli_da_carne.pdf (accessed on 11 August 2020).
- Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the Application of Directive 2007/43/EC and Its Influence on the Welfare of Chickens Kept for Meat Production, as well as the Development of Welfare Indicators. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/1/2018/EN/COM-2018-181-F1-EN-MAIN-PART-1.PDF (accessed on 11 August 2020).
- Shepherd, E.M.; Fairchild, B.D. Footpad dermatitis in poultry. Poult. Sci. 2010, 89, 2043–2051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Petracci, M.; Bianchi, M.; Cavani, C.; Gaspari, P.; Lavazza, A. Preslaughter mortality in broiler chickens, turkeys, and spent hens under commercial slaughtering. Poult. Sci. 2006, 85, 1660–1664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Di Martino, G.; Capello, K.; Russo, E.; Mazzucato, M.; Mulatti, P.; Ferrè, N.; Garbo, A.; Brichese, M.; Marangon, S.; Bonfanti, L. Factors associated with pre-slaughter mortality in turkeys and end of lay hens. Animal 2017, 11, 2295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Dunlop, M.W.; Moss, A.F.; Groves, P.J.; Wilkinson, S.J.; Stuetz, R.M.; Selle, P.H. The multidimensional causal factors of ‘wet litter’ in chicken-meat production. Sci. Total Environ. 2016, 562, 766–776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Marangon, S.; Capua, I.; Rossi, E.; Ferrè, N.; Dalla Pozza, M.; Bonfanti, L.; Mannelli, A. The control of avian influenza in areas at risk: The Italian experience 1997–2003. In Avian Influenza Prevention and Control; Schrijver, R., Koch, G., Eds.; Springer: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2005; pp. 33–39. [Google Scholar]
Variables | Stocking Density (kg/m2) | N | Q1 | Median | Q3 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
overall (N = 344) | |||||
Antimicrobial use (DDDita/kg) | 33 | 87 | 0.16 | 0.44 | 1 |
39 | 257 | 0.13 | 0.47 | 1.39 | |
Feed conversion ratio | 33 | 87 | 1.68 | 1.72 | 1.75 |
39 | 257 | 1.68 | 1.71 | 1.74 | |
Mortality (%) | 33 | 87 | 3.5 | 4.1 | 5 |
39 | 257 | 3.6 | 4.3 | 5.2 | |
sex: Female (N = 46) | |||||
Antimicrobial use (DDDita/kg) | 33 | 18 | 0 | 0 | 0.53 |
39 | 28 | 0 | 0 | 0.41 | |
Feed conversion ratio | 33 | 18 | 1.63 | 1.69 | 1.74 |
39 | 28 | 1.68 | 1.72 | 1.77 | |
Mortality (%) | 33 | 18 | 2.9 | 3.45 | 4 |
39 | 28 | 2.75 | 3.45 | 3.8 | |
sex: Male (N = 130) | |||||
Antimicrobial use (DDDita/kg) | 33 | 32 | 0.17 | 0.25 | 0.69 |
39 | 98 | 0.14 | 0.29 | 1.21 | |
Feed conversion ratio | 33 | 32 | 1.68 | 1.71 | 1.74 |
39 | 98 | 1.68 | 1.71 | 1.73 | |
Mortality (%) | 33 | 32 | 3.75 | 4.5 | 5.75 |
39 | 98 | 3.9 | 4.9 | 6 |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Tarakdjian, J.; Capello, K.; Pasqualin, D.; Cunial, G.; Lorenzetto, M.; Gavazzi, L.; Manca, G.; Di Martino, G. Antimicrobial Use in Broilers Reared at Different Stocking Densities: A Retrospective Study. Animals 2020, 10, 1751. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10101751
Tarakdjian J, Capello K, Pasqualin D, Cunial G, Lorenzetto M, Gavazzi L, Manca G, Di Martino G. Antimicrobial Use in Broilers Reared at Different Stocking Densities: A Retrospective Study. Animals. 2020; 10(10):1751. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10101751
Chicago/Turabian StyleTarakdjian, Jacopo, Katia Capello, Dario Pasqualin, Giovanni Cunial, Monica Lorenzetto, Luigi Gavazzi, Grazia Manca, and Guido Di Martino. 2020. "Antimicrobial Use in Broilers Reared at Different Stocking Densities: A Retrospective Study" Animals 10, no. 10: 1751. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10101751
APA StyleTarakdjian, J., Capello, K., Pasqualin, D., Cunial, G., Lorenzetto, M., Gavazzi, L., Manca, G., & Di Martino, G. (2020). Antimicrobial Use in Broilers Reared at Different Stocking Densities: A Retrospective Study. Animals, 10(10), 1751. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10101751