Evaluation of Two Compressed Air Foam Systems for Culling Caged Layer Hens

Outbreaks of avian influenza (AI) and other highly contagious poultry diseases continue to be a concern for those involved in the poultry industry. In the situation of an outbreak, emergency depopulation of the birds involved is necessary. In this project, two compressed air foam systems (CAFS) were...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Eric R. Benson, Jaclyn A. Weiher, Robert L. Alphin, Morgan Farnell, Daniel P. Hougentogler
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2018-04-01
Series:Animals
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/8/5/61
_version_ 1818196057812631552
author Eric R. Benson
Jaclyn A. Weiher
Robert L. Alphin
Morgan Farnell
Daniel P. Hougentogler
author_facet Eric R. Benson
Jaclyn A. Weiher
Robert L. Alphin
Morgan Farnell
Daniel P. Hougentogler
author_sort Eric R. Benson
collection DOAJ
description Outbreaks of avian influenza (AI) and other highly contagious poultry diseases continue to be a concern for those involved in the poultry industry. In the situation of an outbreak, emergency depopulation of the birds involved is necessary. In this project, two compressed air foam systems (CAFS) were evaluated for mass emergency depopulation of layer hens in a manure belt equipped cage system. In both experiments, a randomized block design was used with multiple commercial layer hens treated with one of three randomly selected depopulation methods: CAFS, CAFS with CO2 gas, and CO2 gas. In Experiment 1, a Rowe manufactured CAFS was used, a selection of birds were instrumented, and the time to unconsciousness, brain death, altered terminal cardiac activity and motion cessation were recorded. CAFS with and without CO2 was faster to unconsciousness, however, the other parameters were not statistically significant. In Experiment 2, a custom Hale based CAFS was used to evaluate the impact of bird age, a selection of birds were instrumented, and the time to motion cessation was recorded. The difference in time to cessation of movement between pullets and spent hens using CAFS was not statistically significant. Both CAFS depopulate caged layers, however, there was no benefit to including CO2.
first_indexed 2024-12-12T01:28:02Z
format Article
id doaj.art-2f1436ca13964850b30a78d29bccbc0d
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2076-2615
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-12T01:28:02Z
publishDate 2018-04-01
publisher MDPI AG
record_format Article
series Animals
spelling doaj.art-2f1436ca13964850b30a78d29bccbc0d2022-12-22T00:43:03ZengMDPI AGAnimals2076-26152018-04-01856110.3390/ani8050061ani8050061Evaluation of Two Compressed Air Foam Systems for Culling Caged Layer HensEric R. Benson0Jaclyn A. Weiher1Robert L. Alphin2Morgan Farnell3Daniel P. Hougentogler4Department of Animal and Food Sciences, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716, USADepartment of Animal and Food Sciences, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716, USADepartment of Animal and Food Sciences, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716, USADepartment of Poultry Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843, USADepartment of Animal and Food Sciences, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716, USAOutbreaks of avian influenza (AI) and other highly contagious poultry diseases continue to be a concern for those involved in the poultry industry. In the situation of an outbreak, emergency depopulation of the birds involved is necessary. In this project, two compressed air foam systems (CAFS) were evaluated for mass emergency depopulation of layer hens in a manure belt equipped cage system. In both experiments, a randomized block design was used with multiple commercial layer hens treated with one of three randomly selected depopulation methods: CAFS, CAFS with CO2 gas, and CO2 gas. In Experiment 1, a Rowe manufactured CAFS was used, a selection of birds were instrumented, and the time to unconsciousness, brain death, altered terminal cardiac activity and motion cessation were recorded. CAFS with and without CO2 was faster to unconsciousness, however, the other parameters were not statistically significant. In Experiment 2, a custom Hale based CAFS was used to evaluate the impact of bird age, a selection of birds were instrumented, and the time to motion cessation was recorded. The difference in time to cessation of movement between pullets and spent hens using CAFS was not statistically significant. Both CAFS depopulate caged layers, however, there was no benefit to including CO2.http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/8/5/61depopulationfoamcagelayer henchickenpoultryemergencyeuthanasiaculling methods
spellingShingle Eric R. Benson
Jaclyn A. Weiher
Robert L. Alphin
Morgan Farnell
Daniel P. Hougentogler
Evaluation of Two Compressed Air Foam Systems for Culling Caged Layer Hens
Animals
depopulation
foam
cage
layer hen
chicken
poultry
emergency
euthanasia
culling methods
title Evaluation of Two Compressed Air Foam Systems for Culling Caged Layer Hens
title_full Evaluation of Two Compressed Air Foam Systems for Culling Caged Layer Hens
title_fullStr Evaluation of Two Compressed Air Foam Systems for Culling Caged Layer Hens
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of Two Compressed Air Foam Systems for Culling Caged Layer Hens
title_short Evaluation of Two Compressed Air Foam Systems for Culling Caged Layer Hens
title_sort evaluation of two compressed air foam systems for culling caged layer hens
topic depopulation
foam
cage
layer hen
chicken
poultry
emergency
euthanasia
culling methods
url http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/8/5/61
work_keys_str_mv AT ericrbenson evaluationoftwocompressedairfoamsystemsforcullingcagedlayerhens
AT jaclynaweiher evaluationoftwocompressedairfoamsystemsforcullingcagedlayerhens
AT robertlalphin evaluationoftwocompressedairfoamsystemsforcullingcagedlayerhens
AT morganfarnell evaluationoftwocompressedairfoamsystemsforcullingcagedlayerhens
AT danielphougentogler evaluationoftwocompressedairfoamsystemsforcullingcagedlayerhens