Search

As an integral part of the Coalition for Sustainable Egg Supply (CSES) Project, this study simultaneously monitored air emissions of 3 commercially operated egg production systems at the house level and associated manure storage over 2 single-cycle flocks (18 to 78 wk of age). The 3 housing systems were 1) a conventional cage house (CC) with a 200,000-hen capacity (6 hens in a cage at a stocking density of 516 cm2/hen), 2) an enriched colony house (EC) with a 50,000-hen capacity (60 hens per colony at a stocking density of 752 cm2/hen), and 3) an aviary house (AV) with a 50,000-hen capacity (at a stocking density of 1253 to 1257 cm2/hen). The 3 hen houses were located on the same farm and were populated with Lohmann white hens of the same age. Indoor environment and house-level gaseous (ammonia [NH3] and greenhouse gasses [GHG], including carbon dioxide [CO2], methane [CH4], and nitrous oxide [N2O]) and particulate matter (PM10, PM2.5) emissions were monitored continually. Gaseous emissions from the respective manure storage of each housing system were also monitored. Emission rates (ERs) are expressed as emission quantities per hen, per animal unit (AU, 500 kg live BW), and per kilogram of egg output. House-level NH3 ER (g/hen/d) of EC (0.054) was significantly lower than that of CC (0.082) or AV (0.112) (P < 0.05). The house-level CO2 ER (g/hen/d) was lower for CC (68.3) than for EC and AV (74.4 and 74.0, respectively), and the CH4 ER (g/hen/d) was similar for all 3 houses (0.07 to 0.08). The house-level PM ER (mg/hen/d), essentially representing the farm-level PM ER, was significantly higher for AV (PM10 100.3 and PM2.5 8.8) than for CC (PM10 15.7 and PM2.5 0.9) or EC (PM10 15.6 and PM2.5 1.7) (P < 0.05). The farm-level (house plus manure storage) NH3 ER (g/hen/d) was significantly lower for EC (0.16) than for CC (0.29) or AV (0.30) (P < 0.05). As expected, the magnitudes of GHG emissions were rather small for all 3 production systems. Data from this study enable comparative assessment of conventional vs. alternative hen housing systems regarding air emissions and enhance the U.S. national air emissions inventory for farm animal operations.

Hen housing for commercial egg production continues to be a societal and regulatory concern. Controlled studies have examined various aspects of egg safety, but a comprehensive assessment of commercial hen housing systems in the US has not been conducted. The current study is part of a holistic, multidisciplinary comparison of the diverse aspects of commercial conventional cage, enriched colony cage, and cage-free aviary housing systems and focuses on environmental and egg microbiology. Environmental swabs and eggshell pools were collected from all housing systems during 4 production periods. Total aerobes and coliforms were enumerated, and the prevalence of Salmonella and Campylobacter spp. was determined. Environmental aerobic and coliform counts were highest for aviary drag swabs (7.5 and 4.0 log cfu/mL, respectively) and enriched colony cage scratch pad swabs (6.8 and 3.8 log cfu/mL, respectively). Aviary floor and system wire shell pools had the greatest levels of aerobic contamination for all eggshell pools (4.9 and 4.1 log cfu/mL, respectively). Hens from all housing systems were shedding Salmonella spp. (89–100% of manure belt scraper blade swabs). The dry belt litter removal processes for all housing systems appear to affect Campylobacter spp. detection (0–41% of manure belt scraper blade swabs) considering detection of Campylobacter spp. was much higher for other environmental samples. Aviary forage area drag swabs were 100% contaminated with Campylobacter spp., whereas enriched colony cage scratch pads had a 93% positive rate. There were no differences in pathogen detection in the shell pools from the 3 housing systems. Results indicate egg safety is enhanced when hens in alternative housing systems use nest boxes. Additionally, current outcomes indicate the use of scratch pads in hen housing systems needs to be more thoroughly investigated for effects on hen health and egg safety.

To comprehensively assess conventional vs. some alternative laying-hen housing systems under U.S. production conditions, a multi-institute and multi-disciplinary project, known as the Coalition for Sustainable Egg Supply (CSES) study, was carried out at a commercial egg production farm in the Midwestern United States over two single-cycle production flocks. The housing systems studied include a conventional cage house (200,000 hen capacity), an aviary house (50,000 hen capacity), and an enriched colony house (50,000 hen capacity). As an integral part of the CSES project, continual environmental monitoring over a 27-month period described in this paper quantifies indoor gaseous and particulate matter concentrations, thermal environment, and building ventilation rate of each house. Results showed that similar indoor thermal environments in all three houses were maintained through ventilation management and environmental control. Gaseous and particulate matter concentrations of the enriched colony house were comparable with those of the conventional cage house. In comparison, the aviary house had poorer indoor air quality, especially in wintertime, resulting from the presence of floor litter (higher ammonia levels) and hens' activities (higher particulate matter levels) in it. Specifically, daily mean indoor ammonia concentrations had the 95% confidence interval values of 3.8 to 4.2 (overall mean of 4.0) ppm for the conventional cage house; 6.2 to 7.2 (overall mean of 6.7) ppm for the aviary house; and 2.7 to 3.0 (overall mean of 2.8) ppm for the enriched colony house. The 95% confidence interval (overall mean) values of daily mean indoor carbon dioxide concentrations were 1997 to 2170 (2083) ppm for the conventional cage house, 2367 to 2582 (2475) ppm for the aviary house, and 2124 to 2309 (2216) ppm for the enriched colony house. Daily mean indoor methane concentrations were similar for all three houses, with 95% confidence interval values of 11.1 to 11.9 (overall mean of 11.5) ppm. The 95% confidence interval values (overall mean) of daily mean PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations, in mg/m3, were, respectively, 0.57 to 0.61 (0.59) and 0.033 to 0.037 (0.035) for the conventional cage house, 3.61 to 4.29 (3.95) and 0.374 to 0.446 (0.410) for the aviary house, and 0.42 to 0.46 (0.44) and 0.054 to 0.059 (0.056) for the enriched colony house. Investigation of mitigation practices to improve indoor air quality of the litter-floor aviary housing system is warranted.

This article reports the first publicly available egg production costs compared across 3 hen-housing systems. We collected detailed data from 2 flock cycles from a commercial egg farm operating a conventional barn, an aviary, and an enriched colony system at the same location. The farm employed the same operational and accounting procedures for each housing system. Results provide clear evidence that egg production costs are much higher for the aviary system than the other 2 housing systems. Feed costs per dozen eggs are somewhat higher for the aviary and lower for the enriched house compared with the conventional house. Labor costs are much lower for the conventional house than the other 2, and pullet costs are much higher for the aviary. Energy and miscellaneous costs are a minimal part of total operating costs and do not differ by housing system. Total capital investments per hen-capacity are much higher for the aviary and the enriched house. Capital costs per dozen eggs depend on assumptions about appropriate interest and depreciation rates. Using the same 10% rate for each housing system shows capital costs per dozen for the aviary and the enriched housing system are much higher than capital costs per dozen for the conventional house. The aviary has average operating costs (feed, labor, pullet, energy, and miscellaneous costs that recur for each flock and vary with egg production) about 23% higher and average total costs about 36% higher compared with the conventional house. The enriched housing system has average operating costs only about 4% higher compared with the conventional house, but average total costs are 13% higher than for the conventional house.

In the United States, empirical information on the sustainability of commercial-scale egg production is lacking. The passage of state regulations specific to hen housing created urgency to better understand the effects of different housing systems on the sustainability of the egg supply, and stimulated the formation of a coalition, the Coalition for a Sustainable Egg Supply (CSES), to conduct research on this topic. The CSES is a multi-stakeholder group with 27 members, including food manufacturers, research institutions, scientists, restaurants, food service, retail food companies, egg suppliers, and nongovernmental organizations. A commercial-scale study was developed to better understand the effect of 3 housing systems (conventional cage, enriched colony, and cage-free aviary) on 5 areas related to a sustainable egg supply. These 5 sustainability areas represent effects on people, animals, and the environment: animal health and well-being, environment, food safety, worker health and safety, and food affordability. Five teams of scientists, each associated with a sustainability area, conducted an integrated field study at a commercial site in the upper Midwest through 2 flock cycles in 3 housing systems. This paper provides a brief overview of the CSES project to serve as an introduction for the papers that follow in this volume of Poultry Science.