English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

We compared broiler chicken welfare in free-range (FR) and intensive indoor (IN) systems using the Welfare Quality® Protocol. Ten FR and 11 IN farms in Brazil were assessed. Results are shown as either scores ranging from 0 to 100, where higher scores indicate better welfare, or prevalence, where lower prevalence indicates better welfare. In FR, the median prevalence was lower than in IN for mortality (2.0% vs. 4.7%,  p  = 0.0262), culling (0.0% vs. 0.6%,  p  = 0.0168), ascites (0.0% vs. 0.17%,  p =  0.0431). Median welfare scores on FR farms were better for plumage cleanliness (100 vs. 59,  p =  0.0001), panting or huddling (100 vs. 29,  p  = 0.0001), lameness (81 vs. 19,  p  = 0.0001), hock burn (93 vs. 37,  p  = 0.0001), footpad dermatitis (35 vs. 26,  p  = 0.0018). However, FR scores were worse for litter quality (34 vs. 100,  p  = 0.0003), dust (53 vs. 78,  p  = 0.0002), breast blisters (90 vs. 100,  p  = 0.0077), touch test (70 vs. 99,  p  = 0.0082). Better emotional states were observed in FR ( p  &lt; 0.001). Even though there is room for welfare improvement in both systems, the number of welfare indicators with better results was superior in FR than in IN farms.

Welfare of broiler chickens in Brazilian free-range versus intensive indoor production systems