Air quality and bird health status in three types of commercial egg layer houses

Thumbnail Image
Date
2009-01-01
Authors
Green, Angela
Wesley, Irene
Trampel, Darrell
Xin, Hongwei
Major Professor
Advisor
Committee Member
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Authors
Person
Xin, Hongwei
Distinguished Professor Emeritus
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Organizational Unit
Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering

Since 1905, the Department of Agricultural Engineering, now the Department of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering (ABE), has been a leader in providing engineering solutions to agricultural problems in the United States and the world. The department’s original mission was to mechanize agriculture. That mission has evolved to encompass a global view of the entire food production system–the wise management of natural resources in the production, processing, storage, handling, and use of food fiber and other biological products.

History
In 1905 Agricultural Engineering was recognized as a subdivision of the Department of Agronomy, and in 1907 it was recognized as a unique department. It was renamed the Department of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering in 1990. The department merged with the Department of Industrial Education and Technology in 2004.

Dates of Existence
1905–present

Historical Names

  • Department of Agricultural Engineering (1907–1990)

Related Units

Journal Issue
Is Version Of
Versions
Series
Department
Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering
Abstract

In this field observational study, 3 types of laying-hen houses, namely, high-rise (HR), manure-belt (MB), and cage-free floor-raised (FR), were monitored for air temperature, RH, CO2 , and atmospheric NH3 under winter and summer conditions in Iowa. Under winter conditions, the HR and MB houses had more comfortable temperature and NH3 levels (mean 24.6 and 20.6°C, and maximum 9 to 24 ppm of NH3 , respectively) than the FR houses (mean 15.5°C and maximum 85 to 89 ppm of NH3 , respectively), and house temperature varied more with outside conditions. Under summer conditions, house temperature showed the least increase above ambient in the FR houses (mean 0.3°C vs. 4.7 and 1.2°C for the MB and HR houses, respectively), and NH3 levels were similar for all housing types (mean 3 to 9 ppm). Examination of the hen health status revealed differences in pathogen prevalence between housing systems for winter and summer, but not conclusively in favor of one system over another. Results of this study indicate that the benefits of each system were season dependent. Further monitoring of the environment, bird health, and production performance over an extended period (e.g., 1 yr) to quantify the benefits and limitations of each system is warranted. Information of this nature will aid in optimizing hen housing systems for enhanced bird welfare and sustained production efficiency for the egg industry

Comments

This article is from Journal of Applied Poultry Research 18 (2009): 605–621, doi:10.3382/japr.2007-00086.

Description
Keywords
Citation
DOI
Copyright
Collections