The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Stocking density effects on broiler welfare: Identifying sensitive ranges for different indicators
Open accessAbstract
Although stocking density is perceived as a topic of major importance, no consensus has been reached on what density would allow for good welfare. In the present study, the welfare of 4 replicates of birds stocked at 8, 19, 29, 40, 45, 51, 61, and 72 broilers per pen (or 6, 15, 23, 33, 35, 41, 47, and 56 kg actually achieved BW/m(2)) was studied using 6 welfare indicators. Density did not affect bursa weight, mortality, or concentrations of corticosterone metabolites in droppings but did influence leg health (P = 0.015) and footpad and hock dermatitis (P < 0.001) and tended to influence fearfulness (P = 0.078). However, not every increase in density or group size, or both, led to poorer welfare for the affected indicators: leg health and fearfulness showed unexpected peaks at intermediate densities. Furthermore, the indicators were influenced at different densities: leg strength showed a steep decrease from 6 to 23 kg/m(2), hock dermatitis rose from 35 to 56 kg/m(2), and footpad dermatitis and fearfulness were only significantly higher at the highest density of 56 kg/m(2). No threshold stocking density above which all aspects of welfare were suddenly altered was found in this study. Instead, different aspects of welfare were influenced at different densities or group sizes, or both. Thus, evaluating the effects of stocking density on welfare as a whole would require either identification of acceptable levels for each separate indicator or a weighting of the indicators in an integrated welfare score. A tentative attempt to such an integration, made using equal weights for all parameters, showed a decrease in welfare as density increased (P < 0.001). The lowest 2 densities (6 and 15 kg/m(2)) scored better than most middle densities (23, 33, 35, and 47 kg/m(2)), whereas all densities scored better than the highest density (56 kg/m(2)).
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Corticosteroids in relation to fear, anxiety and psychopathology
Korte, S. M. (2001) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/s0149-7634(01)00002-1 · Cited by 607
Cited by
Shepherd, E. M., & Fairchild, B. D. (2010) · Poultry Science · doi:10.3382/ps.2010-00770 · Cited by 458
Scientific report updating the EFSA opinions on the welfare of broilers and broiler breeders
de Jong, I., Berg, C., Butterworth, A., & Estevéz, I. (2012) · EFSA Supporting Publications · doi:10.2903/sp.efsa.2012.en-295 · Cited by 87
Paxton, H., Tickle, P. G., Rankin, J. W., Codd, J. R., & Hutchinson, J. R. (2014) · PeerJ · doi:10.7717/peerj.473 · Cited by 55
Metadata
- Authors
- Buijs, S., Keeling, L., Rettenbacher, S., Van Poucke, E., & Tuyttens, F. A. M.
- Venue
- Poultry Science
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2009-08
- Volume
- 88
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1536-1543
- ISSN
- 0032-5791 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2164512379
- Cited by
- 225
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 12.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Stocking density effects on broiler welfare: Identifying sensitive ranges for different indicators. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3382/ps.2009-00007
- The paper
- Buijs, S., Keeling, L., Rettenbacher, S., Van Poucke, E., & Tuyttens, F. A. M. (2009). Stocking density effects on broiler welfare: Identifying sensitive ranges for different indicators. Poultry Science. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2009-00007
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.