Cargando…

Review of Sensor Technologies in Animal Breeding: Phenotyping Behaviors of Laying Hens to Select Against Feather Pecking

SIMPLE SUMMARY: The European Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST) Action GroupHouseNet aims to provide synergy among scientists to prevent damaging behavior in group-housed pigs and laying hens. One goal of this network is to determine how genetic and genomic tools can be used to breed anima...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ellen, Esther D., van der Sluis, Malou, Siegford, Janice, Guzhva, Oleksiy, Toscano, Michael J., Bennewitz, Jörn, van der Zande, Lisette E., van der Eijk, Jerine A. J., de Haas, Elske N., Norton, Tomas, Piette, Deborah, Tetens, Jens, de Klerk, Britt, Visser, Bram, Rodenburg, T. Bas
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6466287/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30909407
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani9030108
_version_ 1783411073970339840
author Ellen, Esther D.
van der Sluis, Malou
Siegford, Janice
Guzhva, Oleksiy
Toscano, Michael J.
Bennewitz, Jörn
van der Zande, Lisette E.
van der Eijk, Jerine A. J.
de Haas, Elske N.
Norton, Tomas
Piette, Deborah
Tetens, Jens
de Klerk, Britt
Visser, Bram
Rodenburg, T. Bas
author_facet Ellen, Esther D.
van der Sluis, Malou
Siegford, Janice
Guzhva, Oleksiy
Toscano, Michael J.
Bennewitz, Jörn
van der Zande, Lisette E.
van der Eijk, Jerine A. J.
de Haas, Elske N.
Norton, Tomas
Piette, Deborah
Tetens, Jens
de Klerk, Britt
Visser, Bram
Rodenburg, T. Bas
author_sort Ellen, Esther D.
collection PubMed
description SIMPLE SUMMARY: The European Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST) Action GroupHouseNet aims to provide synergy among scientists to prevent damaging behavior in group-housed pigs and laying hens. One goal of this network is to determine how genetic and genomic tools can be used to breed animals that are less likely to perform damaging behavior on their pen-mates. In this review, the focus is on feather-pecking behavior in laying hens. Reducing feather pecking in large groups of hens is a challenge, because it is difficult to identify and monitor individual birds. However, current developments in sensor technologies and animal breeding have the potential to identify individual animals, monitor individual behavior, and link this information back to the underlying genotype. We describe a combination of sensor technologies and “-omics” approaches that could be used to select against feather-pecking behavior in laying hens. ABSTRACT: Damaging behaviors, like feather pecking (FP), have large economic and welfare consequences in the commercial laying hen industry. Selective breeding can be used to obtain animals that are less likely to perform damaging behavior on their pen-mates. However, with the growing tendency to keep birds in large groups, identifying specific birds that are performing or receiving FP is difficult. With current developments in sensor technologies, it may now be possible to identify laying hens in large groups that show less FP behavior and select them for breeding. We propose using a combination of sensor technology and genomic methods to identify feather peckers and victims in groups. In this review, we will describe the use of “-omics” approaches to understand FP and give an overview of sensor technologies that can be used for animal monitoring, such as ultra-wideband, radio frequency identification, and computer vision. We will then discuss the identification of indicator traits from both sensor technologies and genomics approaches that can be used to select animals for breeding against damaging behavior.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6466287
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64662872019-04-18 Review of Sensor Technologies in Animal Breeding: Phenotyping Behaviors of Laying Hens to Select Against Feather Pecking Ellen, Esther D. van der Sluis, Malou Siegford, Janice Guzhva, Oleksiy Toscano, Michael J. Bennewitz, Jörn van der Zande, Lisette E. van der Eijk, Jerine A. J. de Haas, Elske N. Norton, Tomas Piette, Deborah Tetens, Jens de Klerk, Britt Visser, Bram Rodenburg, T. Bas Animals (Basel) Review SIMPLE SUMMARY: The European Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST) Action GroupHouseNet aims to provide synergy among scientists to prevent damaging behavior in group-housed pigs and laying hens. One goal of this network is to determine how genetic and genomic tools can be used to breed animals that are less likely to perform damaging behavior on their pen-mates. In this review, the focus is on feather-pecking behavior in laying hens. Reducing feather pecking in large groups of hens is a challenge, because it is difficult to identify and monitor individual birds. However, current developments in sensor technologies and animal breeding have the potential to identify individual animals, monitor individual behavior, and link this information back to the underlying genotype. We describe a combination of sensor technologies and “-omics” approaches that could be used to select against feather-pecking behavior in laying hens. ABSTRACT: Damaging behaviors, like feather pecking (FP), have large economic and welfare consequences in the commercial laying hen industry. Selective breeding can be used to obtain animals that are less likely to perform damaging behavior on their pen-mates. However, with the growing tendency to keep birds in large groups, identifying specific birds that are performing or receiving FP is difficult. With current developments in sensor technologies, it may now be possible to identify laying hens in large groups that show less FP behavior and select them for breeding. We propose using a combination of sensor technology and genomic methods to identify feather peckers and victims in groups. In this review, we will describe the use of “-omics” approaches to understand FP and give an overview of sensor technologies that can be used for animal monitoring, such as ultra-wideband, radio frequency identification, and computer vision. We will then discuss the identification of indicator traits from both sensor technologies and genomics approaches that can be used to select animals for breeding against damaging behavior. MDPI 2019-03-22 /pmc/articles/PMC6466287/ /pubmed/30909407 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani9030108 Text en © 2019 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/).
spellingShingle Review
Ellen, Esther D.
van der Sluis, Malou
Siegford, Janice
Guzhva, Oleksiy
Toscano, Michael J.
Bennewitz, Jörn
van der Zande, Lisette E.
van der Eijk, Jerine A. J.
de Haas, Elske N.
Norton, Tomas
Piette, Deborah
Tetens, Jens
de Klerk, Britt
Visser, Bram
Rodenburg, T. Bas
Review of Sensor Technologies in Animal Breeding: Phenotyping Behaviors of Laying Hens to Select Against Feather Pecking
title Review of Sensor Technologies in Animal Breeding: Phenotyping Behaviors of Laying Hens to Select Against Feather Pecking
title_full Review of Sensor Technologies in Animal Breeding: Phenotyping Behaviors of Laying Hens to Select Against Feather Pecking
title_fullStr Review of Sensor Technologies in Animal Breeding: Phenotyping Behaviors of Laying Hens to Select Against Feather Pecking
title_full_unstemmed Review of Sensor Technologies in Animal Breeding: Phenotyping Behaviors of Laying Hens to Select Against Feather Pecking
title_short Review of Sensor Technologies in Animal Breeding: Phenotyping Behaviors of Laying Hens to Select Against Feather Pecking
title_sort review of sensor technologies in animal breeding: phenotyping behaviors of laying hens to select against feather pecking
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6466287/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30909407
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani9030108
work_keys_str_mv AT ellenestherd reviewofsensortechnologiesinanimalbreedingphenotypingbehaviorsoflayinghenstoselectagainstfeatherpecking
AT vandersluismalou reviewofsensortechnologiesinanimalbreedingphenotypingbehaviorsoflayinghenstoselectagainstfeatherpecking
AT siegfordjanice reviewofsensortechnologiesinanimalbreedingphenotypingbehaviorsoflayinghenstoselectagainstfeatherpecking
AT guzhvaoleksiy reviewofsensortechnologiesinanimalbreedingphenotypingbehaviorsoflayinghenstoselectagainstfeatherpecking
AT toscanomichaelj reviewofsensortechnologiesinanimalbreedingphenotypingbehaviorsoflayinghenstoselectagainstfeatherpecking
AT bennewitzjorn reviewofsensortechnologiesinanimalbreedingphenotypingbehaviorsoflayinghenstoselectagainstfeatherpecking
AT vanderzandelisettee reviewofsensortechnologiesinanimalbreedingphenotypingbehaviorsoflayinghenstoselectagainstfeatherpecking
AT vandereijkjerineaj reviewofsensortechnologiesinanimalbreedingphenotypingbehaviorsoflayinghenstoselectagainstfeatherpecking
AT dehaaselsken reviewofsensortechnologiesinanimalbreedingphenotypingbehaviorsoflayinghenstoselectagainstfeatherpecking
AT nortontomas reviewofsensortechnologiesinanimalbreedingphenotypingbehaviorsoflayinghenstoselectagainstfeatherpecking
AT piettedeborah reviewofsensortechnologiesinanimalbreedingphenotypingbehaviorsoflayinghenstoselectagainstfeatherpecking
AT tetensjens reviewofsensortechnologiesinanimalbreedingphenotypingbehaviorsoflayinghenstoselectagainstfeatherpecking
AT deklerkbritt reviewofsensortechnologiesinanimalbreedingphenotypingbehaviorsoflayinghenstoselectagainstfeatherpecking
AT visserbram reviewofsensortechnologiesinanimalbreedingphenotypingbehaviorsoflayinghenstoselectagainstfeatherpecking
AT rodenburgtbas reviewofsensortechnologiesinanimalbreedingphenotypingbehaviorsoflayinghenstoselectagainstfeatherpecking