Advertisement

Effects of free-range broiler production on vegetation characteristic and soil physicochemical property of the stocking areas in China

  • Chunlin Yu
  • Xiaosong Jiang
  • Huarui Du
  • Qingyun Li
  • Zengrong Zhang
  • Mohan Qiu
  • Tianbao Chen
  • Bo Xia
  • Xiaoyan Song
  • Chenming Hu
  • Xia Xiong
  • Li Yang
  • Han Peng
  • Jialei Chen
  • Chaowu YangEmail author
Article

Abstract

Free-range broiler production is an effective combination of ecological and economic benefits which should be further standardized. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of free-range broiler production on ecosystem by measuring the changes in vegetation characteristics and soil physicochemical properties under different stocking densities. A natural meadow with rich biodiversity was created and further divided into three groups. The broilers were reared in door and provided range access around 6 to 22 weeks of age with two different densities, 600 and 1200 broilers/ha. The vegetation characteristics and soil physicochemical properties, such as total coverage, soil nutrition and pH value, were measured at the beginning and the end of stocking. The results showed that the vegetation characteristics and soil physicochemical properties changed significantly after free-range stocking. The dominant plants, total coverage, richness index, diversity and biomass above-ground of treatment groups illustrated a considerable difference comparing with those in control group, and the indicators of soil physicochemical properties in treatment groups increased remarkably except the pH value. The present study demonstrated the higher stocking density would cause a more serious destruction of vegetation characteristics and modification of soil physicochemical properties, which suggested that an even lower stocking density or an alternative management such as rotational grazing could be a better choice for free-range broiler production.

Keywords

Chinese chicken production Natural meadow Stocking density Ecosystem 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the editors and reviewers for the careful reviews and the honest advice. Particular thanks go to all of the people for their help with sample collection. This work was supported by Chinese National Agriculture Research System (CARS-41-G04), the Project of National Science and Technology Plan for the Rural Development in China (2015BAD03B03) and Key Technology Support Program of Sichuan Province (2016NYZ0025, 2016NYZ0052, 2019YFN0009).

References

  1. Acosta-Martínez V, Harmel RD (2006) Soil microbial communities and enzyme activities under various poultry litter application rates. J Environ Qual 35:1309–1318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chen TB, Wang ZJ, Fu MZ, Zhang H, Zhang JL, Yang CW, Jiang XS (2012) Modeling and application of livestock supporting capacity estimation of cropland based on nitrogen cycling in southwest China. Trans CSAE 28(2):191–195 (in Chinese) Google Scholar
  3. Dal BA, Mugnai C, Mattioli S, Rosati A, Ruggeri S, Ranucci D, Castellini C (2016) Transfer of bioactive compounds from pasture to meat in organic free-range chickens. Poult Sci 95(10):2464–2471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. de Almeida GD, Hinrichsen LK, Horsted K, Thamsborg SM, Hermansen JE (2012) Feed intake and activity level of two broiler genotypes foraging different types of vegetation in the finishing period. Poult Sci 91(9):2105–2113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dlm C, Hinch GN, Downing JA, Lee C (2017) Early enrichment in free-range laying hens: effects on ranging behaviour, welfare and response to stressors. Animal 12(3):575–584Google Scholar
  6. Elsheikh EA, Elnesairy NN, Mahdi AA (2006) Effect of Sinorhizobium inoculation and chicken manure on nodulation and forage yield of Alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) under irrigation in a semi-arid environment. Univ Khartoum J Agric Sci 14(2):182–197Google Scholar
  7. EU (1991) Commission regulation No. 1538/91 of 15 June 1991 introducing detailed rules for implementing regulation 1906/90 on certain marketing standards for poultry. Off J Eur Communities L143:11–22Google Scholar
  8. Ferreira TCR, Buery JC, Moreira NIB, Santos CB, Costa JGL, Pinto LV, Baraviera RCA, Vitor RWA, Fux B (2018) Toxoplasma gondii: isolation, biological and molecular characterisation of samples from free-range Gallus gallus domesticus from countryside Southeast Brazil. Rev Bras Parasitol Vet 27:384–389Google Scholar
  9. Friend AL, Roberts SD, Schoenholtz SH, Mobley JA, Gerard PD (2006) Poultry litter application to loblolly pine forests: growth and nutrient containment. J Environ Qual 35:837–848CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gong ZT (1999) Soil classification system in China. In: Soil classification. Science Press, Beijing, pp 252–267 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  11. Hansen HH (2007) Botanical composition of herbage intake of free-range laying hens determined by microhistological analysis of faeces. Archiv Fur Geflugelkunde 71(4):145–151Google Scholar
  12. Husak RL, Sebranek JG, Bregendahl K (2008) A survey of commercially available broilers marketed as organic, free-range, and conventional broilers for cooked meat yields, meat composition, and relative value. Poult Sci 87(11):2367–2376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Idm G, Mueller S, Kreuze RM, Messikommer RE, Siegrist M, Visschers VHM (2018) Swiss consumers’ willingness to pay and attitudes regarding dual-purpose poultry and eggs. Poult Sci 97(3):1089–1098CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jiang XS, Du HR, Yang CW, Li W, Li QY, Li XC (2011) Problems in the free-range broiler chicken production in Sichuan province. Sichuan Anim Vet Sci 38(10):35–36 (in Chinese) Google Scholar
  15. Kratz S, Rogasik J, Schnug E (2004) Changes in soil nitrogen and phosphorus under different broiler production systems. J Environ Qual 33(5):1662–1674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kühn J, Schutkowski A, Kluge H, Hirche F, Stangl GI (2014) Free-range farming: a natural alternative to produce vitamin D-enriched eggs. Nutrition 30(4):481–484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Omeira N, Barbour EK, Nehme PA, Hamadeh SK, Zurayk R, Bashour I (2006) Microbiological and chemical properties of litter from different chicken types and production systems. Sci Total Environ 367(1):156–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ponte PI, Alves SP, Bessa RJ, Ferreira LM, Gama LT, Brás JL, Fontes CM, Prates JA (2008) Influence of pasture intake on the fatty acid composition, and cholesterol, tocopherols, and tocotrienols content in meat from free-range broilers. Poult Sci 87(1):80–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. SAS Institute, Inc. 2000. SAS system for Microsoft windows. Version 8 (TS M1). SAS Institute Inc Cary NCGoogle Scholar
  20. Schares G, Bangoura B, Randau F, Goroll T, Ludewig M, Maksimov P, Matzkeit B, Sens M, Bärwald A, Conraths FJ, Opsteegh M, Giessen J (2017) High seroprevalence of Toxoplasma gondii and probability of detecting tissue cysts in backyard laying hens compared with hens from large free-range farms. Int J Parasitol 47(12):765–777CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sharma N, Hunt PW, Hine BC, Sharma NK, Swick RA, Ruhnke I (2018) Detection of Ascaridia galli, infection in free-range laying hens. Vet Parasitol 256:9–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Singh M, Ruhnke I, Koning CD, Drake K, Skerman AG, Hinch GN, Glatz PC (2017) Demographics and practices of semi-intensive free-range farming systems in Australia with an outdoor stocking density of ≤1500 hens/hectare. PLoS ONE 12(10):e0187057CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sistani KR, Brink GE, Mcgowen SL, Rowe DE, Oldham JL (2003) Characterization of broiler cake and broiler litter, the by-products of two management practices. Bioresour Technol 90(1):27–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Stadig LM, Rodenburg TB, Ampe B, Reubens B, Tuyttens FAM (2017) Effects of shelter type, early environmental enrichment and weather conditions on free-range behaviour of slow-growing broiler chickens. Animal 11(6):1046–1053CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Stadig LM, Tuyttens FAM, Rodenburg TB, Vandecasteele B, Ampe B, Reubens B (2018) Interactions between broiler chickens, soil parameters and short rotation coppice willow in a free-range system. Agroecol Sustain Food Syst.  https://doi.org/10.1080/21683565.2018.1557777 Google Scholar
  26. The Regional Institute Ltd (1998) Changes in botanical composition under free-range chicken farming 1. Regional Institute LtdGoogle Scholar
  27. Vittoz P, Hainard P (2002) Impact of free-range pigs on mountain pastures in the Swiss Jura. Appl Veg Sci 5(2):247–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Warman PR, Cooper JM (2000) Fertilization of a mixed forage crop with fresh and composted chicken manure and NPK fertilizer: effects on dry matter yield and soil and tissue N, P and K. Can J Soil Sci 80(2):345–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Williams CM, Barker JC, Sims JT (2005) Management and utilization of poultry wastes. Rev Environ Contam Toxicol 162:105–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Won S, Ahmed N, You BG, Shim S, Kim SS, Ra C (2018) Nutrient production from Korean poultry and loading estimations for cropland. J Anim Sci Technol 60(1):3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zhang T (2011) The effect of free-range chicken on vegetation and soil in mountainous. Doctoral dissertation, Jilin Agricultural University of ChinaGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chunlin Yu
    • 1
    • 2
  • Xiaosong Jiang
    • 1
  • Huarui Du
    • 1
  • Qingyun Li
    • 1
  • Zengrong Zhang
    • 1
  • Mohan Qiu
    • 1
  • Tianbao Chen
    • 1
  • Bo Xia
    • 1
  • Xiaoyan Song
    • 1
  • Chenming Hu
    • 1
  • Xia Xiong
    • 1
  • Li Yang
    • 1
  • Han Peng
    • 1
  • Jialei Chen
    • 1
  • Chaowu Yang
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Sichuan Animal Science AcademyChengduChina
  2. 2.Animal Breeding and Genetics Key Laboratory of Sichuan ProvinceSichuan Animal Science AcademyChengduChina

Personalised recommendations