Comparison of Floored and Cage Housed Broiler Breeder Farms for Energy and Economic Efficiency in Pakistan: A Case Study of Broiler Breeder’s Farm in District Punjab
Comparison of Floored and Cage Housed Broiler Breeder Farms for Energy and Economic Efficiency in Pakistan: A Case Study of Broiler Breeder’s Farm in District Punjab
Ishtiaq Ahmad Khan1, Sarzamin Khan1, Muhammad Shuaib2*, Sohaib Ul Hassan3, Abdulmohsen Hussen Alqhtani4, Anthony Pokoo-Aikins5, Ashraf Ali Qureshi6, Majid Ali2 and Waqas Alam1
ABSTRACT
Research trials were conducted at commercial broiler breeder farms (n=60,000) to compare the economic and energy efficiency of floored and caged housing systems. Efficiency was evaluated by the inputs and outputs used. The egg prices were as per market rates at the time of this study. The cost for good settable eggs was 12% higher in floor-house (24.8) compared to enriched cages (22.1). The settable egg cost and the input costs during the entire egg production cycle for the floor and caged houses were human resource (labor) 3.03, 12.2% and 2.49, 11.3%; energy 0.5, 2.02% and 0.49, 2.26%; inputs purchased 11.4, 46.1% and 9.36, 42.3% and growing, rental and depreciation 9.81, 39.6% and 9.77, 44.2%, respectively. The floored flocks exhibited higher revenues when compared to caged broilers and had a total revenue of day-old chicks; 65.3, 92.6% and 53.4, 94.1%; spent birds 2.98, 4.22% and 3.12, 5.42% and manure; 2.26 and 3.2% and 0.22, 0.39% respectively. Except for spent birds, all output variables contributed more to the total higher sales revenue generated by caged flocks. Production costs per hen (4,456) and per hatched chick (33.4) at the floor houses were higher by 5.6 and 29% than the flocks housed in the enriched houses (4,219 and 25.8). Net income generated was 2.3 times higher in the enriched cages and they generated 1.67 more than floored flocks (1.27). The energy input and output values of the floored houses were 16% higher and 9% less than cage houses, respectively. Eggs were the highest energy output contributors followed by manure and meat. Energy efficiency for both types of housing were economical however, the energy used at the enriched cage housing was more efficient than in the floor pens. Specific energy use was 0.25 MJ kg-1 for the floor houses and 0.2 MJ kg-1 for the enriched cage houses, indicating judicious energy use in the current trials. The cost per chick is the determining factor for choosing the type of housing, considering addition to the environmental safety and bird’s welfare.
To share on other social networks, click on any share button. What are these?
