Influence of the preplacement holding time and feeding hydration supplementation before placement on yolk sac utilization, the crop filling rate, feeding behavior and first-week broiler performance
- PMID: 35988377
- PMCID: PMC9405083
- DOI: 10.1016/j.psj.2022.102056
Influence of the preplacement holding time and feeding hydration supplementation before placement on yolk sac utilization, the crop filling rate, feeding behavior and first-week broiler performance
Abstract
This study investigated the effects of the broiler chick preplacement holding time and feeding hydration supplementation before placement on yolk sac utilization, the crop filling rate, feeding-drinking behavior and first-wk broiler performance. Broiler hatching eggs were obtained from a commercial broiler breeder flock of Ross 308 at 37 wk of age and incubated in a commercial hatchery. At 510 h of incubation, all chicks were removed from the hatcher and separated into cardboard chick boxes containing 80 chicks each. The chick boxes were randomly separated into two groups with either added commercial hydration supplementation (gel: Hydrogel-95) or the control (no gel). Then, the chicks were randomly distributed into 5 groups with different holding times across each hydration supplementation treatment (gel and control). The preplacement holding times were 6, 24, 48, 60, and 72 h from the pull time from the hatchers in the hatchery to placement in the broiler house on the farm, at which point the chicks were able to access feed and water. There were 10 subtreatment groups comprising 5 chick preplacement holding time groups × 2 hydration supplementation groups. There were 12 replicates (160 chicks per pen) per holding period × gel treatment, with a total of 19,200 chicks placed. The feed and water access time did not influence yolk sac utilization, but the absolute or relative residual yolk sac (g, %) decreased linearly with the duration after the pull time (P < 0.001). Longer preplacement holding times were associated with a higher percentage of chicks with full crops at 3 h after placement (P < 0.001). Chicks with the shortest (6 h) preplacement holding time had a lower percentage of feed-seeking activity compared to the 24, 48, and 72 h holding time groups at 3 h after placement (P < 0.001). The highest chick eating and drinking activity was observed in the 72 h group at both 3 and 8 h after placement. Chick weight at placement was significantly reduced linearly with the duration after the pull time (0.106 g/h; R2 = 0.775), and as expected, the highest and lowest BW were found in the 6 (41.51 g) and 72 h (34.50 g) preplacement holding time groups, respectively. However, BW and BW gain were higher in the 24 h group than in the other preplacement holding time groups (P < 0.001) at 7 d after placement. Mortality within the first 3 d after placement increased only when the preplacement holding time was extended to 72 h (P = 0.002). Mortality during 4 to 7 d postplacement was not affected by the holding time at all, but the 72-h holding time group still had statistically significantly higher mortality cumulatively from 0 to 7 d (P = 0.024). Neither BW nor mortality was affected by feeding the hydration supplement at placement, and the lack of effect persisted through 7 d after placement (P > 0.05). It can be concluded that the BW at 7 d after placement was greater in the 24 h holding time group than in shorter (6 h) or longer (48, 60, and 72 h) preplacement holding time groups. In the present study, a greater number of chicks were raised, and it was clearly demonstrated that mortality, as a direct indicator of flock health and welfare, was not affected by preplacement holding times up to and including a 60 h after take-off under thermal comfort conditions, but holding for a further 12 h to 72 h, mortality at 7 d of age after placement was increased. On the other hand, holding chicks in a short period (6 h) did not improve mortality and the BW at 7 d, suggesting that some delay to placement can be beneficial. In addition, feeding hydrogel during the preplacement holding period had no positive effect on BW gain and cumulative mortality during the first week of the growing period.
Keywords: body weight; hydration supplement; mortality; preplacement holding time; residual yolk sac.
Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Figures


Similar articles
-
Effects and Interactions of Incubation Time and Preplacement Holding Time on Mortality at Placement, Yolk Sac Utilization, Early Feeding Behavior and Broiler Live Performance.Animals (Basel). 2023 Dec 12;13(24):3827. doi: 10.3390/ani13243827. Animals (Basel). 2023. PMID: 38136864 Free PMC article.
-
Research Note: Interaction between hatching time and chick pull time affects broiler live performance.Poult Sci. 2022 Jun;101(6):101845. doi: 10.1016/j.psj.2022.101845. Epub 2022 Mar 10. Poult Sci. 2022. PMID: 35468425 Free PMC article.
-
Effect of posthatch feed and water access time on residual yolk and broiler live performance.Poult Sci. 2020 Dec;99(12):6737-6744. doi: 10.1016/j.psj.2020.09.036. Epub 2020 Sep 25. Poult Sci. 2020. PMID: 33248589 Free PMC article.
-
Comparative effects of in ovo versus subcutaneous administration of the Marek's disease vaccine and pre-placement holding time on the early post-hatch quality of Ross × Ross 708 broiler chicks.Poult Sci. 2016 Sep 1;95(9):2038-44. doi: 10.3382/ps/pew132. Epub 2016 May 3. Poult Sci. 2016. PMID: 27143771
-
Effect of chick body temperature during post-hatch handling on broiler live performance.Poult Sci. 2019 Jan 1;98(1):244-250. doi: 10.3382/ps/pey395. Poult Sci. 2019. PMID: 30165697
Cited by
-
Effects and Interactions of Incubation Time and Preplacement Holding Time on Mortality at Placement, Yolk Sac Utilization, Early Feeding Behavior and Broiler Live Performance.Animals (Basel). 2023 Dec 12;13(24):3827. doi: 10.3390/ani13243827. Animals (Basel). 2023. PMID: 38136864 Free PMC article.
-
Chemical Composition, Cytotoxicity, and Encapsulation of Lavender Essential Oil (Lavandula angustifolia) in Alginate Hydrogel-Application and Therapeutic Effect on Animal Model.Molecules. 2025 Jul 11;30(14):2931. doi: 10.3390/molecules30142931. Molecules. 2025. PMID: 40733198 Free PMC article.
-
Welfare of broilers on farm.EFSA J. 2023 Feb 21;21(2):e07788. doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2023.7788. eCollection 2023 Feb. EFSA J. 2023. PMID: 36824680 Free PMC article.
-
Developments in welfare of parent stock and commercial broilers.Poult Sci. 2025 Feb;104(2):104732. doi: 10.1016/j.psj.2024.104732. Epub 2024 Dec 27. Poult Sci. 2025. PMID: 39827694 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Effects of early feeding technologies providing methionine supplementation on performance, lipid oxidation, and some immune-related gene expression in broiler chicken.Poult Sci. 2025 Aug;104(8):105335. doi: 10.1016/j.psj.2025.105335. Epub 2025 May 26. Poult Sci. 2025. PMID: 40449108 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Alcorn M.J. In: Pages 14-38 in Poultry Diseases. 6th edition. Pattison M., McMullin P.F., Bradbury J.M., Alexander D.J., editors. Elsevier; 2008. How to carry out a field investigation.
-
- Almeida J.G., Vieira S.L., Gallo B.B., Conde O.R.A., Olmos A.R. Period of incubation and posthatching holding time influence on broiler performance. Rev. Bras. Ciene. Avic. 2006;8:153–158.
-
- Aviagen 2018a. Ross broiler management handbook. http://tmea.aviagen.com/assets/Tech_Center/Ross_Broiler/Ross-BroilerHand.... Accessed Dec 2021.
-
- Aviagen 2018b. Why assess to assess crop fill. http://en.aviagen.com/assets/Tech_Center/BB_Resources_Tools/BB_HowTos/AV.... Accessed Dec 2021.
-
- Aviagen 2019. Ross 308 broilers nutrition specifications. . http://tmea.aviagen.com/assets/Tech_Center/Ross_Broiler/RossBroilerNutri.... Accessed Dec 2021.
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources