Evidence mapPaperPMID 40075899Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2025

Analysis of Risk Factors of Feather Pecking Injurious Behavior in Experimentally Raised Yangzhou Goslings in China.

Mingfeng Wang, Guoyao Wang, Wang Gu, Zhengfeng Cao, Yu Zhang, Yang Zhang, Qi Xu, Guohong Chen, Yang Chen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. DietaryFrontiers in microbiology · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Mingfeng WangCollege of Animal Science and Technology, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225009, China.ORCID 0009-0002-3407-5935
Guoyao WangCollege of Animal Science and Technology, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225009, China.
Wang GuCollege of Animal Science and Technology, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225009, China.ORCID 0000-0003-4988-5439
Zhengfeng CaoCollege of Animal Science and Technology, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225009, China.
Yu ZhangCollege of Animal Science and Technology, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225009, China.
Yang ZhangCollege of Animal Science and Technology, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225009, China.
Qi XuCollege of Animal Science and Technology, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225009, China.ORCID 0000-0003-2791-0429
Guohong ChenCollege of Animal Science and Technology, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225009, China.
Yang ChenCollege of Animal Science and Technology, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225009, China.

Funding

Mingfeng Wang Postgraduate Research & Practice Innovation Program of Jiangsu Province (SJCX24_2292)QiXu 2023YFD1300305QiXu CARS-42-3YangChen Qinglan Project of Yangzhou University (2022)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Feather pecking can influence the welfare and health concerns of all farmed poultry and affect production and economic aspects. Although some information is available about feather pecking behavior in chickens and ducks, the risk factors of feather pecking in goslings have not been fully demonstrated. In this study, 3-day-old Yangzhou goslings were chosen, and risk factors of feather pecking injurious behavior were investigated, including stocking density, rearing method, flock uniformity, and environmental enrichment. The gosling performed three different pecking behaviors in starter barns from 3d of age to 10d, including gentle feather pecking (GFP), severe feather pecking (SFP), and aggressive pecking (AGP), and the corresponding proportions were 82.16%, 17.02%, and 0.82%, respectively, with peak aggressive feather pecking at 4-5 days of age. The pecked gosling also led to further pecking by conspecifics. Goslings preferred to peck the back (77.32%) and head (11.14%), which caused skin damage to the epidermal and dermal layers, accompanied by a decrease in feather follicle number and diameter. In addition, the effect of the stocking density and population uniformity on the occurrence of feather pecking was determined. The higher feather pecking frequencies and poorer feather quality of goslings were observed under high-density conditions than those of lower-density environments. Importantly, the lower population uniformity resulted in more aggressive pecking, potentially linked to the establishment of a social hierarchy. Finally, environment-related changes in pecking behavior were investigated. The results showed that damp and dirty housing conditions deteriorated plumage conditions and the occurrence of feather pecking, and environment enrichment (the grass section) could significantly reduce the incidence of pecking. Taken together, lower stocking density, higher population uniformity, and the provision of enrichment can reduce the prevalence of feather pecking. Meanwhile, feather pecking in goslings, with the back being the most commonly targeted area, can lead to the loss of back feathers and even skin damage. These results help to develop effective management and prevention strategies to reduce the negative effects of pecking behavior on goose health and performance.

Indexed as

feather pecking behaviorgoslingrearing environmentskin damage

Identifiers

PMID40075899
PMCPMC11898179

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.