Diurnal behavior patterns of cage-reared Brown Tsaiya ducks (Anas platyrhynchos var. domestica)

Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 34 ( 1992 ) 255-262

255

Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., Amsterdam

Diurnal behavior patterns of cage-reared Brown Tsaiya ducks (Anas platyrhynchos var. domestica ) * S.R. Lee a, Y.P. Lee b and B.J. Chen a ~Duck Research Center, Taiwan Livestock Research Institute, 28-1, Je-Hsin l'illage. Wuchiett, I-Lan. Taiwan 268, People's Republic of China bDepartment of Animal Husbandt3,, National Chung-Hsing University, 250 Kao Kung Road, Taichung. Taiwan 402, People's Republic of China (Accepted 17 February 1992 )

ABSTRACT Lee, S.R., Lee, Y.P. and Chen, B.J., 1992. Diurnal behavior patterns of cage-reared Brown Tsaiya ducks (Arias platyrhynchos var. domestica ). Appl. Anita. Behav. Sci., 34: 255-262. Two batches of Brown Tsaiya ducks, 184 female ducks in each, were studied for diurnal behavior patterns and acclimatization to cage environment. Ducks were housed in individual cages at 14 weeks old. Video recordings were taken for 6 consecutive days at 25, 35, 45 and 55 weeks of age, and every duck's behavior was scanned once every hour. Results were as follows. Behavior patterns changed with increasing age, implying acclimatization of the ducks to the cage environment. Alert or nervous behaviors, such as standing and crouching, were the most frequently recorded behaviors at younger age. Relaxing or comfort behaviors, such as sleeping, frolicking, preening and feeding, increased with age. Most feeding and drinking activities were recorded in daytime. Compared with chickens, the ducks spent less time feeding and more time drinking. Preening activity followed the same diurnal pattern as that of drinking, implying a close relationship between two activities. Ducks lay eggs around midnight, which interrupts sleep activity and might also be responsible for other behavior patterns at night.

INTRODUCTION

The Brown Tsaiya duck is the only breed of laying duck in Taiwan. It has a small body size, high egg production and good eggshell quality. The traditional way to raise laying Tsaiya ducks is to confine them around a pond or along a riverbank. Recently, pollution of water resources by the ducks has Correspondence to: S.R. Lee, Duck Research Center, Taiwan Livestock Research Institute, 281, Je-Hsin Village, Wuchieh, I-Lan, Taiwan 268, People's Republic of China. *Contribution No. 473 from Taiwan Livestock Research Institute.

© 1992 Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. All rights reserved 0168-1591/92/$05.00

256

S.R. LEE E T A L

been an important issue in Taiwan, and attempts have been made to raise them in cages to resolve the problem. Although the egg production of cagereared ducks is as good as that of floor-reared ducks (Tai et al., 1979), feed loss and water pollution are still important m a n a g e m e n t problems. McKinney ( 1975 ) indicated that waterfowl exhibit a basic order in the sequence of four major daily activities: feeding, bathing, oiling and sleeping. However, there are considerable variations in the duration of each activity, presumably related to factors such as abundance of food, weather condition, demands of other activities and a m o u n t of disturbance. Ducks raised in individual cages have been used for many years at the Duck Research Center. However, no research has been done on the behavior of ducks in cages. Some studies have examined the activity of chicken hens in different housing systems (Craig and Bhagwat, 1974; Lee and Craig, 1981; Mench et al., 1984); however, behavior studies of ducks in cages have never been reported. Since the behaviors of ducks are quite different from those of chickens (e.g. chickens lay eggs in the daytime, ducks lay eggs at night), the behavior of ducks at night may be more relevant in understanding egg production. The purpose of this study was to investigate the diurnal behavior patterns and environmental adaption of laying Brown Tsaiya ducks reared in individual cages. Hopefully, the information might be useful in the practice of automated management and in the control of water pollution. ANIMALS, MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ducks and housing Two batches of 184 female Brown Tsaiya ducklings were hatched in December 1988 and February 1989, respectively. Each batch of ducklings was reared in a deep-litter floor pen (8 m X 5 m ) up to 8 weeks of age; infrared light ( 125 W) was supplied for the first 2 weeks of the brooding period. At 8 weeks of age, the ducks were moved to a 8 m X 15 m semi-confined, concretefloor pen. One-third of the pen (8 m X 5 m ) was roofed and the floor was paved with a wire-plastic pad. A water pool (4.5 m × 2.5 m X 0.15 m) was situated at the end of the run. The ducks were housed in two-tier (upper and lower) individual cages (30 c m X 3 3 c m X 4 5 cm) from 14 weeks of age. A long, deep trough feeder was set in front of the cages with a nipple drinker behind every two cages. When the ducks were 20 weeks old, white fluorescent lights were used during the night to aid behavior observation. Feed and water were given ad libitum during the whole experimental period. In order to reduce the influence of m a n a g e m e n t on the duck's behavior, after 25 weeks of age egg collection and filling the feed trough were done between 08:00 h and 09:00 h.

DIURNAL BEHAVIOR PATTERNS OF CAGE-REARED TSAIYA DUCKS

257

Behavioral observations Behavioral activities were recorded by a video recorder and camera, which was placed beneath the roof and could be automatically moved along a rail in parallel with the row of the cages. Video recordings were taken for 6 consecutive days at 25, 35, 45 and 55 weeks of age, and individual behaviors were scanned once every hour. It took about 4 min to move the camera for one run to record all 184 ducks' activities. The ducks' behavior was classified into one of the following activities: Feed: Drink: Preen: Sleep: Stand:

Pecking at feed in the feed trough. Drinking m o v e m e n t with the bill striking at the nipple drinker. Preening, oiling or scratching while standing or crouching. Sleeping with head on the back or under the wing. Standing in an erect position and not in the act of feeding, drinking or preening. Crouch: Sitting with breast touching the cage floor. Wag: Rapid side-to-side m o v e m e n t of the tail. Stretch: An extension of the neck, wing or leg. Frolic: Including exploratory activities such as stretching the head outside the cage, pecking at inedible objects, biting the neighbour's feathers mildly, rapid up-and-down m o v e m e n t of the head, etc.

Data analysis In every observational week, every duck was observed 144 times within 6 consecutive days. Therefore, the proportion of an activity for every duck TABLEI P r o p o r t i o n s o f b e h a v i o r a c t i v i t i e s at d i f f e r e n t agest Behavior

Feeding Drinking Preening Sleeping Standing Crouching Frolicking Wagging Stretching

Age ( w e e k s ) 25

35

45

55

4.03+0.15 c 8.97_+ 0.19 a 8.77 + 0.18 ¢ 7.55 + 0.34 d 30.35 + 0.55 a 21.66 + 0.54" 16.53_+ 0.29 ¢ 1.95+0.11 ° 0.21 _+0.02 °

4.91 _ 0 . 1 6 b 7.59_+ 0.16 b 11.69 _+0.22 b 12.37 ___0.48 ¢ 22.11 ___0.55 b 18.42 __+0.52 b 20.71 _+ 0.30 ~ 2.01+0.10 ° 0.22 ___0.02 °

4.87-+0.16 b 7.84 + 0.17 b 11.63 + 0.21 b 19.75 _+ 0.43 b 14.40 + 0.37 c 18.45 + 0.50 b 20.97 + 0.29 ~ 1.76-+0.09 ° 0.33 + 0.03 a

5.89+0.18 a 7.87 + 0.17 b 12.33 + 0.20" 23.27 _+0.43 a 15.61 + 0.38 ¢ 12.66 + 0.40 ¢ 19.33 + 0.29 ° 2.76+0.13" 0.32 + 0.02 "~

T h e v a l u e s w i t h i n s a m e row w i t h d i f f e r e n t s u p e r s c r i p t s are s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t ( P < 0.05 ). M e a n + s t a n d a r d error.

258

S.R. LEE E T A L .

within an observational week was estimated by dividing the number of times an activity was recorded by 144. These figures were arcsin transformed into angles before being subjected to analysis of variance. RESULTS

In this study, each duck was scanned once an hour during the observation period, and the observed result was classified into one of the defined activi11.

Feeding

10. 9. 8. 7"

o a_ o L n

6' 5, 4.

.............

......... •

3" 2

1 11_ - ~ - - ' q

I

08

10

'4t A 13 12 11

o

. .."" '

..-. :" ""...

...... ~ ::

"

I

14

1

... .

•

I

I

I

I

I

10

I

I

12

I

''o'

02

.'". . . . . -.

"'''""" ,L

6

04

Drinking

""'...

I

l

14

I

I

16

|

I

/."

I

18

I

20

I

22

I

I

I

24

I

"'"

I

I

02

04

l

I

06

A

Preening

./~

16 ~b'-. k",. \ i~.I-... "," v:,, "---,.

~ ,2.

I

.--'"

'".

08

22" 204

.-.¢ Z/

22 '2;4

20

16

7 '

l

~

"'- "', .: ,,'~-/\.'7~-

.,,

-~.~....~/_.~

lo.

.... --- -~" - --.-

,~~-

-,---~-.<,,

~I...~,,

4' . . . . . . 08 10 12

-T'" 14

I

, 16

,

'l---T 18 Time

2 of

10 ,

21 2

'2'4

.

. . 02

.

04

6

day

Fig. 1. Average proportion ( % ) o f d u c k s feeding, drinking and preening in Brown Tsaiya ducks at25( ..... ),35 (---),45 (----)and 55 ( - - ) w e e k s o f a g e .

259

D I U R N A L BEHAVIOR PATTERNS O F C A G E - R E A R E D TSAIYA D U C K S

40t

-~ 35

104

Sleeping

"

/

~

~

I

I

,t ....

o-I

1

08 39

'

~

-

I

I

-~

I

10

~

-

I

~

I

12

"

[

I

14

I

I

16

I

18

.

-""

" I

.

I

.

~

I

20

.

.

.

.

I

.

.

.

I

22

24

k

;

I

"

I

02

I

I

I

04

06

~

36, 33 3O 27 ~

"

----

.-" ..,

•" ' " ' -

...-'"" " "::.......:Standing

".% "%..'''..

"""

-""

."""...

"

"'"""

I•

.:

• • #~ ,

1 ~

• ••

•

i

•~

...

24

t ' 21, 0 ~. 18' L n

15' 12' 9'

I

I

08

I

I

10

I

3o -

I

12

I

I

I

14

I

16

I

I

18

\-...

.~t

\

/ ~

I

I

08

I

^ /7

I

I

I

24

I

I

02

I

I

04

06

crouch,og

",

""...

,<,...-.,'V

-L

'1/--.,','/

I

22

j.i:

/ ............. ;): ,. ,--,

~u] i

I

20

- , , ' - . . _"-. . . . . . .

. ..'

I

10

I

I

12

I

I

14

I

I

16

I

I

I

18 Time of

I

20

I

I

22

I

I

24

I

I

02

I

I

04

I

I

06

day

Fig. 2. Average proportion (%) of ducks sleeping, standing and crouching in Brown Tsaiya ducksat 25 ( ..... ),35 (---), 45 ( - - - - ) and55 ( ) weeks ofage. ties; each activity at every age studied was represented by the frequency recorded for that activity. The proportions of behavioral activities at different ages are shown in Table 1. Standing and crouching were recorded m o r e frequently than the other activities at 25 weeks of age. With increasing age, the ducks spent m o r e time sleeping, preening, feeding and frolicking and less time standing, crouching and drinking. At 55 weeks of age, sleeping was the p r e d o m i n a n t behavior recorded. Wagging and stretching were rarely recorded through the whole experimental period.

260

S.R. LEE ET AL.

5"

Wagging 4

~,,". ~

g

3

0

2-

13.

X

-

",,

\\\",..

o

O,_

~

,....\ ,,,

k

~

.~

,.

~ - ......

.,<.~Y,...-,

.....~.,~.,.:.,....~.--~,..-._~2. ~".....

1

/.

"~"--~L;'y-\.

..:,

:~,~1:.__/

j..-~/

.

~ "

,,,

0 o.~ . .,o. . ~. . . ~. . .,~.

°7t

~s ' ~ ' ~ '

,~

~4'

A

[

Stretching

~ .

°~1

/A'~

•

/

'o' ~ . .o ~. . o ~

\

/'---~

,4

g "d

•

' /', ~ " ,

.""'L

0 13_

o

13..

o.o~ . . . .

.

08

10

. . . . 12

. . . . . .

:

14

16

18

20

";-K' 22

24

32" 30"

~

2422i .~- 20~o 18o o.

,";'" 04

,<"-A

,,.

, 06

Frolicking

,,

/%-

it

L.

......

1210-'

8-

,

02

'. i

08

I

I

10

i

i

12

i

I

14

i

16

I

I

18

i

,"-. ]"

20

i

,.," i

22

I

1

24

I

02

I

i

04

i

06

Time of day

Fig. 3. Average proportion (%) of ducks wagging, stretching and frolicking in Brown Tsaiya ducks at 25 ( ..... ), 35 ( - - - ) , 45 ( - - - - ) and 55 ( ) weeks of age.

The diurnal activity patterns of feeding, drinking and preening at different ages are shown in Fig. 1. Most feeding activities were recorded between 03:00 and 09:00 h. Drinking was mainly recorded in the daytime, especially at 25 weeks of age; it was at its lowest level at 23:00 h. Contrary to the drinking activity, the preening activity was lowest at 25 weeks of age; however, diurnal preening followed the same pattern as that of drinking. Figure 2 shows the diurnal patterns of sleeping, standing and crouching. During the night, the proportion of sleeping ducks increased, although it dropped at midnight, with one peak during the early night hours and one after

DIURNAL BEHAVIOR PATTERNS OF CAGE-REARED TSAIYA DUCKS

261

midnight. Interestingly, after 45 weeks of age peak 1 was higher than peak 2. The sleeping time increased with age; on the other hand, standing at 25 and 35 weeks was greater than at 45 and 55 weeks of age. After sunrise, the proportion of standing ducks increased steadily to the peak at 23:00 h (Fig. 2). The proportion of ducks crouching was at its lowest rate around sunrise and its frequency at 55 weeks of age was much lower than that at the other ages. Diurnal patterns of wagging, stretching and frolicking are shown in Fig. 3. Wagging was recorded at a very low frequency, its diurnal pattern indicating it peaked around sunrise. During the daytime hours wagging recorded at 55 weeks of age was significantly more frequent than at other ages. Stretching was the activity least recorded and was randomly distributed over the entire 24 h. Frolicking activity occurred frequently, but no clear diurnal pattern was found. DISCUSSION

In comparison with chicken (Lee et al., 1985; Koelkebeck et al., 1987 ), the Brown Tsaiya ducks in this study spent much less time on feeding. This might have been for the following reasons: ( 1 ) the duck's bill is more efficient in taking feed than the chicken's beak, thus it requires less time to consume the same amount of feed; (2) Brown Tsaiya ducks are more nervous than chickens; (3) ducks may be less interested in playing with feed than chickens are. The frequent drinking activities recorded in this study reflect the ducks' high water consumption or their interest in playing with water. Between 25 and 55 weeks of age, the proportion of sleeping increased almost three-fold but standing and crouching decreased by about 50%, which might be explained as an indication of the gradual accommodation of the ducks to the cage environment. The peak of feeding and drinking activities at 09:00 (Fig. 1 ) might have been caused by the filling of the feed trough by the caretaker, which could facilitate the ducks' activities, although the feed trough always contained some feed. In general, drinking usually occurred with feeding or preening activities, so these three activities had the same diurnal pattern, i.e. a peak in the early morning and a trough just before midnight (Fig. 1 ). Chicken hens are very active when searching for a nesting place and feeding activity is reduced before oviposition (Wood-Gush and Horne, 1970; Savory, 1977 ). This study also found that the egg-laying time of these ducks was concentrated around midnight (72% of eggs were laid between 23:00 h and 02:00 h; Lee and Lee, 1990), which might be the reason for the lack of feeding, drinking and preening activities at that time. Laying activity interrupted sleep, which could be responsible for the two peaks for sleep at night. Increased sleeping during the daytime and early night-time hours at the older ages suggested again that it takes time for the ducks to adapt to the cage environment.

262

S.R. LEE ET AL.

Rouen drakes showed more sleeping between 10:00 h and 14:00 h during daytime observations in floor pens (Balthzart, 1976). In this study Brown Tsaiya ducks did not show a similar pattern. The difference in species, sex, rearing system and lighting program (natural lighting for the Rouen drakes) might have been the reason. Wagging usually occupied a short time and occurred mostly after or during feeding, drinking, preening, stretching or frolicking. When wagging occurred with any of the above activities, it was not classified as wagging. Therefore, the frequency of wagging was actually higher than the reported figures. Very few stretching activities were recorded in this study. Nicol ( 1987 ) reported no wing/leg stretching when hens were housed in cages lower than 30 cm in height or floor area of less than 870 cm 2 per hen. Whether cage size or species differences was responsible for the low frequency of stretching recorded in this study remains to be determined.

REFERENCES Balthazart, J., 1976. Daily variations of behavioral activities and of plasma testosterone levels in the domestic duck Arias plao,rhynchos. J. Zool., 180:155-173. Craig, J.V. and Bhagwat, A.L., 1974. Agonistic and mating behavior of adult chickens modified by social and physical environments. Appl. Anim. Ethol., 1: 57-65. Koelkebeck, K.W.. Amoss, Jr., M.S. and Cain, J.R., 1987. Production, physiological, and behavioral responses of laying hens in different management environments. Poult. Sci., 66: 397-407. Lee, S.R. and Lee, Y.P., 1990. The relationship between behavior and performance of laying Brown Tsaiya. Proceedings of the 5th AAAP Animal Science Congress, 27 May-1 June, 1990, Taiwan, Vol. 3, p. 224. Lee, Y.P. and Craig, J.V., 1981. Evaluation of egg-laying strains of chickens in different housing environment: role ofgenotype by environment interactions. Poult. Sci., 60:1769-1781. Lee, Y.P., Chen, C.T., Fan, Y.K. and Huang, C.C., 1985. Daily activities of three varieties of meat-type chickens in Taiwan and their influences on carcass traits. Proceedings of the 3rd AAAP Animal Science Congress, Korea, 6 May-10 May, 1985 Vol. 1, pp. 257-259. McKinney, F., 1975. The behavior of duck. In: E.S.E. Hafez (Editor), Behavior of Domestic Animals, 3rd edn. Balli~re Tindall, London, pp. 491-519. Mench, J.A., McCormick, C.C., Cunningham, D.L. and Baker, R.C., 1984. Welfare of laying hens housed in pens and cages. Poult. Sci., 63 (Suppl. 1 ): 149 (Abstract). Nicol, C.J., 1987. Effect of cage height and area on the behaviour of hens housed in battery cages. Br. Poult. Sci., 28: 327-335. Savory, C.J., 1977. Effects of egg production on the pattern of food intake of broiler hens kept in continuous light. Br. Poult. Sci., 18: 331-337. Tai,'C., Liu, J.J. and Huang, H.H., 1979. Environment and duck breeding problem. I. A comparison of the performance of Tsaiya housed in laying cage and floor pens. J. Chin. Soc. Anim. Sci., 8:51-56. Wood-Gush, D.G.M. and Home, A.R., 1970. The effect of egg formation and laying on the food and water intake of Brown Leghorn hens. Br. Pouh. Sci., 11: 459-466.