Highly pathogenic avian influenza detections in Europe remained at very low levels throughout the summer, continuing the decline recorded in spring.

Between 5 June and 28 August 2026, 110 detections were reported in 12 European countries, according to the latest joint monitoring report from the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) and the EU Reference Laboratory for Avian Influenza (EURL).

Most involved wild birds, with 103 detections. Seven occurred in domestic birds: two in poultry establishments and five in captive birds. The poultry outbreaks were reported in Germany and Sweden.

Compared with the same period in 2025, detections fell by 72% in domestic birds and 45% in wild birds. All 110 detections involved HPAI A(H5N1), while no new detections of HPAI A(H5N5) were recorded.

A different pattern in wild birds

Waterfowl accounted for most of the detections in European wild birds. This differs from summer 2025, when colony-breeding seabirds were the main group affected. No unusual HPAI-related mortality events were reported in wild birds during the latest monitoring period.

With so few outbreaks in domestic birds, it was not possible to make a meaningful comparison with the geographical and temporal distribution of the virus in wild populations. The outbreaks that did occur, however, were in areas where HPAI had also been detected in wild birds.

Direct or indirect contact with wild birds remained the main source of introduction into establishments keeping domestic birds.

The summer figures should therefore be read in their seasonal context. The joint report indicates that detections in wild birds are expected to increase in the coming months. The arrival of migratory birds, together with the addition of immunologically naïve juveniles to wild populations, will create more favourable conditions for avian influenza virus circulation.

Preparing poultry farms for the higher-risk season

Given the seasonal increase in HPAI A(H5) risk observed in previous years, the report calls for heightened preparedness over the coming months.

Biosecurity should be kept at a high level throughout the production cycle and during culling operations, including in vaccinated flocks. Particular attention is recommended for establishments under the same ownership, those belonging to integrated production chains and farms located in densely populated poultry areas.

Surveillance must also remain capable of identifying infected establishments promptly.

The report draws attention to developments in the French duck sector during the 2025–2026 epidemiological year. Outbreaks in domestic ducks decreased markedly despite sustained HPAI infection in wild birds. The authors consider it likely that mandatory preventive vaccination, combined with strict biosecurity, helped to reduce both spillover from wild birds and transmission between farms.

This experience also reinforces a central point: vaccination does not replace biosecurity.

Continued circulation outside Europe

Outside Europe, HPAI A(H5N1) continued to circulate in Central and South America. Outbreaks in domestic birds were frequently reported in non-commercial and backyard establishments.

Mexico officially reported three HPAI A(H7N3) detections in wild plain chachalacas during the monitoring period. Separately, media sources cited in the report described outbreaks of the same subtype in Mexican poultry establishments between January and July 2026.

Nepal continued to report a substantial number of HPAI outbreaks in poultry.

Australia also faced a changing situation following the first introduction of HPAI A(H5N1) to the mainland. The virus spread among resident wild bird species and was associated with unusual mortality in greater crested terns.

For European poultry producers, the low summer figures are encouraging, but they do not signal the end of the risk period. With autumn migration under way, early detection and consistently applied biosecurity will remain central safeguards against the introduction of HPAI into poultry establishments.

Source: EFSA, ECDC and EURL, “Avian influenza overview June–August 2026”, published on 22 September 2026.

DLG (German Agricultural Society) has announced the winners of the Innovation Award EuroTier 2026. This year, 176 innovations were recognised by the independent DLG Innovation Commission: four received Gold Medals and 27 Silver Medals. Among the Gold and Silver Medal winners, two innovations were also awarded the special Animal Welfare Award distinction.

The medal-winning companies represent ten countries and territories across Europe, Asia and North America. Overall, the submissions span 14 product areas, ranging from digital livestock management and smart farming to housing and feeding technologies for cattle, pigs and poultry, as well as manure management and environmental solutions.

Among the award-winning innovations are several solutions specifically developed for poultry, alongside cross-sector technologies that may also be relevant to poultry production.

ROVABARN SE, a highly automated mobile poultry barn

UKKÖ Robotics – ROVABARN SE
Hall 17, stand D45 – Silver Medal

Mobile poultry barns allow laying hens and broilers to be moved regularly to new areas, helping to distribute nitrogen and phosphorus more evenly across the land. Traditionally, however, moving these structures requires a tractor or winch, while adjusting ventilation and supplying feed and water also involves considerable work.

ROVABARN SE from UKKÖ Robotics combines the concept of a mobile poultry barn with a high degree of automation. Via an app, the system monitors water and feed consumption and can move autonomously across the land up to 20 times a day.

The birds are therefore regularly provided with fresh feeding areas, while nitrogen and phosphorus are distributed over a wider surface, avoiding high concentrations in individual locations.

The system also includes automatic folding walls for temperature control, integrated feed and water supply systems and protection against predators. Farmers can continuously monitor the barn’s feed, water and energy supply and analyse consumption data, bringing data-based flock monitoring functions to mobile poultry housing.

BarnBuddy, artificial intelligence for animal monitoring

VetVise GmbH – BarnBuddy
Hall 16, stand D23 – Silver Medal

BarnBuddy is a camera-based, AI-supported livestock and health management system developed for poultry, pigs and cattle.

The cameras analyse feeding behaviour, activity and animal distribution, helping to identify possible health or climate-related problems at an early stage.

At the core of the system is a generative AI assistant that combines the collected data with veterinary and agricultural science information and translates it into practical recommendations available in 35 languages.

BarnBuddy can also directly operate barn computers. Alerts are therefore not only generated but also assessed, with the aim of providing more precise guidance and reducing time-consuming trips to the barn.

Electronic Egg to reduce damage during egg transport

Bröring Technology GmbH – Bröring Electronic Egg
Hall 14, stand C44 – Silver Medal

In laying hen barns, egg transport from the nest to the grading and packing station is now extensively automated. During this process, however, a proportion of eggs can be damaged and, in some cases, the percentage can exceed 10%.

Electronic eggs are used to identify impacts and optimise transport systems. Existing devices often require computers and dedicated data transmission systems, making them more difficult to use in everyday farm operations.

The new Electronic Egg from Bröring Technology can instead be used directly in the barn without a computer. Impact intensity is indicated by LEDs of different colours, allowing critical points along the transport line to be identified precisely.

Problems can therefore be corrected directly within the system, with the aim of reducing egg breakage. The device can also be connected via Wi-Fi to a smartphone, tablet or PC for documentation purposes without the need to install specific software.

FEED CHECK for automated monitoring of feed silos

Constantec Co., Ltd. – FEED CHECK
Hall 12, stand B03 – Silver Medal

Among the cross-sector technologies that may also be relevant to poultry production is FEED CHECK from Constantec Co., Ltd.

Automated silo fill-level monitoring is an established tool for keeping track of feed stocks and ensuring that new feed can be ordered in good time.

FEED CHECK introduces LiDAR technology to precisely record the surface of the feed stored in the silo and determine its remaining volume.

The system also integrates temperature and humidity sensors, allowing the condition of stored feed to be monitored continuously and enabling early action in the event of potential quality deterioration.

With three measurements per day, the replaceable rechargeable battery can provide a service life of up to five years, supporting low-maintenance operation and greater process reliability.

Needle-free technologies for vaccine administration

Developments in animal health management also include the use of needle-free injection systems, in which liquid medicines are delivered through the skin using high pressure.

These technologies are already used in certain animal species, including pigs and poultry, and can reduce pain and stress associated with needles, the risk of infection at the injection site and cross-contamination. They also eliminate the need to dispose of single-use needles.

Among the award-winning innovations, RoBooVaxx from Obuda University applies the principle of needle-free administration to a robotic system developed specifically for cattle, integrating cameras and artificial intelligence to automatically identify the optimum injection site.

Overall, the awarded solutions highlight the growing integration of automation, sensor technology, artificial intelligence and data analysis. Among the poultry-related innovations presented, these technologies are applied to continuous monitoring of animals and their environment, feed and water management, housing automation and the control of egg-handling processes, with the aim of improving production efficiency and farm management.

Edited excerpt from a DLG press release

Avian influenza, cost volatility, automation and new technologies are reshaping the livestock sector. For poultry farming, disease prevention and biosecurity are emerging as key priorities in the run-up to EuroTier 2026.

Livestock farms are currently facing market instability, rising costs, animal disease risks, climate change and an increasing need to use resources more efficiently. These are among the key issues set to shape EuroTier 2026, scheduled to take place in Hanover from 10 to 13 November, under the guiding theme “Intelligence in Animal Farming”.

During the international EuroTier press conference held on 22 September, Dr. Lothar Hövelmann, CEO of the DLG, identified geopolitical uncertainty, fragile supply chains, rising feed and energy costs, extreme weather events, the global spread of livestock diseases and labour shortages in industrialized countries among the main factors transforming livestock production. These challenges are compounded by growing demands relating to animal welfare, emission reduction and resource efficiency.

Positive outlook for the poultry sector

Within this complex scenario, the poultry sector continues to benefit overall from positive market prospects, according to the analysis presented by Hövelmann.

Margins, however, remain highly sensitive to changes in feed, energy and housing costs. In Germany, the laying hen sector is currently performing robustly, supported by strong consumer demand for eggs.

Significant risks nevertheless remain. In addition to volatility in feed and energy markets, the analysis presented by Hövelmann particularly highlights the threat posed by avian influenza outbreaks, which can rapidly reduce livestock populations.

According to Hövelmann, future-oriented business strategies must combine economic resilience, animal health, biosecurity and responsible resource use. He also stressed that the economic performance of livestock farms can no longer be considered in isolation, as market prices, extreme weather events, feed availability, energy supply, animal health, political frameworks and technological developments are closely interconnected.

Biosecurity among the top priorities, especially in poultry

The DLG’s Agrifuture Insights Survey 2025/2026, whose findings were used to shape EuroTier’s technical programme, found that animal disease prevention emerged as one of the highest priorities.

Around 1,770 participants from the international DLG network took part in the online survey. Respondents identified priority areas for innovation and future investment.

Participants placed particular emphasis on prevention, monitoring systems and effective biosecurity concepts, especially in the poultry sector.

As Hövelmann stressed, biosecurity is not a single measure, but a continuous process combining prevention, monitoring and consistent management.

Automation and artificial intelligence

Another issue expected to become increasingly important is automation. Labour shortages and rising wage costs are expected to further accelerate automation in livestock farming.

The analysis presented by Hövelmann also highlights that AI-supported herd management systems are increasingly capable of analysing animal health indicators, feeding behaviour and activity patterns. These technologies can enable earlier detection of health problems and support more informed management decisions.

Hövelmann also stressed that smart farming and artificial intelligence must not become objectives in themselves. The decisive factor is the availability of practical, reliable and economically viable solutions that integrate seamlessly into existing farm operations and support better decision-making for livestock producers.

Technology, productivity and animal welfare

EuroTier 2026 will highlight the connection between technology, productivity and animal welfare.

Among the planned features is the Barn Robot Event, where automated livestock solutions can be experienced live.

The trade fair will showcase technologies, management concepts and technical expertise that support practical business solutions.

EuroTier 2026 will take place from 10 to 13 November 2026 at the Hanover Exhibition Grounds. More than 2,100 exhibitors from over 55 countries are expected to participate. The event will be held alongside EnergyDecentral, the international trade fair for decentralized energy supply, and the Inhouse Farming – Feed & Food Show.

Assuring optimal gut health across production phases is a cornerstone to safeguard poultry performance and wellbeing. Despite being a health and welfare problem, gut health issues also result in long-term consequences if birds struggle to recover and raise biosecurity concerns for other birds and staff.

The gastrointestinal tract is responsible for breaking down feed particles into digestible nutrients that are absorbed into the bloodstream to satisfy metabolic requirements and fuel production outcomes effectively. Certainly, the gastrointestinal tract succeeds at doing so by operating together with the microbiota within, which helps digest fibrous components, stimulates intestinal walls, enhances the immune response of the host, and produces beneficial by-products for the host. Birds with a healthy gut are active and have a strong appetite, digest and absorb nutrients efficiently, and have a competent immune response. All these traits favour production outcomes and reduce recovery time in case of digestive upsets. Producers should therefore not underestimate the benefits of maintaining a healthy, functional gut microbiota-host interaction. But what are the main factors to look at when it comes to concerns about poultry gut health?

Poor barn biosecurity

Sound biosecurity practices lower the risk of pathogen entry and its impact on flock performance in the case of outbreak. Meanwhile, pitfalls in biosecurity protocols are gateways for potential pathogens to colonize birds’ gastrointestinal tract and develop enteric disorders that take a toll on flock performance. Therefore, revising barn protocols to prevent pathogen entry and control their spread if they make it in is the best strategy to protect poultry gut health beforehand.

Potentially harmful microorganisms can be found in poultry houses mainly as the flock ages. This may not be a problem for the current flock because they are already habituated to this environment, but raises biosecurity concerns for the following flock. Implementing all-in/all-out practices between batches, followed by thorough cleaning and disinfection is paramount to avoid gut health issues in naïve chicks or pullets. Failure to do so can result in digestive upsets, pasty vents, and diarrhea during the first week after placement that can lead to growth check and threaten birds’ survivability. In production systems with bedding and feeding enrichments, every effort should be made to prevent cross-contamination between batches. Harmful microorganisms proliferate on humid patches of organic matter from leftover feed and manure, and any dirty surface becomes a source for infection. Temperatures over 50 ºC can destroy unhealthy bacteria such as Salmonella and Campylobacter, and heat treatment is sometimes recommended to reduce pathogen load in litter but cannot solve the problem even if done correctly. In between batches it’s also good timing to clean and disinfect in-depth water lines to remove biofilms built up during the last production phase since health problems can also arise from here.

Mycotoxin-producing fungi can also grow under warm, humid conditions in feed bins, becoming a source of health problems if feed is stored inadequately for a long time. Pelleting lowers the load of potentially harmful microorganisms in ingredients used for feed formulation. Nonetheless, feed quality declines over time after preparation, particularly when feed remains in storage for extended periods. From a biosecurity standpoint, bins should be emptied before adding the new batch of feed into them and producers should check regularly that feed bins are not a hotspot for pathogens.

Weak(ened) microbiota

Developing a flourishing ecosystem of diverse, beneficial bacteria in the intestinal tract acts as a powerful barrier against potential pathogens present in the feed, water, and litter. Any of them can disrupt the fine balance between the intestinal microbiota and the host, jeopardising the proper functioning of the gastrointestinal tract and putting at risk the recovery of both if gut microbiota is not resilient enough to halt the new intruders. Weak microbiota health is a gateway for pathogenic bacteria such as Salmonella serotypes that take advantage of stressful events to colonise intestinal walls.

Feeding poultry diets supplemented with probiotics that survive pelleting, resistant to stomach acids, and capable of growing quickly in the small intestine is key to support a healthy gut microbiota and achieve consistent performance outcomes across ages. This is particularly important for newly hatched chicks and after stressful events that alter the microbiota balance due to a decline in beneficial bacteria. Transportation, thermal stress, and other welfare problems can lead to microbiota imbalance, and reinforcement with probiotics can help restore a healthy balance. Lastly, supplementation is also recommended after treating the flock with antibiotics, which wipe out the intestinal microbiota, and before temporarily metabolically demanding phases, such as the onset of lay.

Implementing poultry diets rich in prebiotics can also prompt the development of already-present beneficial bacteria. They feed on these components that are non-digestible by the host, stimulating their growth and activity. These fibrous compounds also strengthen the gastrointestinal tract becoming more robust and less prone to lesions due to intestinal wall breakage which ultimately benefits the overall functioning of the gastrointestinal tract.

Optimal gut health is no longer a bonus producers should aspire to under the right conditions and should be seen instead as a key management strategy for broilers and layers to achieve performance objectives and good flock welfare. Strong, resilient gut health boosts performance efficiency from within and supports the economic sustainability of poultry barns. To attain this goal and achieve optimal performance records consistently: biosecurity protocols must be solid, staff should fully comply with them, and producers should implement feeding strategies that strengthen the gastrointestinal tract and support beneficial gut microbiota across production phases.

It is with deep regret that friends and former colleagues of Dr James “Jim” McKay note his death on 9 September 2026, following recurrent infections after a stroke.

Jim was a formidable scientist who, over nearly five decades, made a substantial and lasting contribution to the development and integrity of the global poultry industry. He worked at the UK Poultry Research Centre near Edinburgh and subsequently at Ross Breeders, Aviagen and the EW Group.

Born in 1952 and brought up in Ayrshire, Jim received a first-class honours degree and a PhD from the University of Edinburgh, followed by academic research in Dublin. Through his calm and disciplined application of the scientific method, Jim regularly addressed significant industry challenges, including avian leukosis virus, highly pathogenic avian influenza and the development of welfare regulations. Livelihoods depended on Jim’s ability to find solutions; he never let the industry down.

Colleagues, customers and competitors alike regarded Jim as completely trustworthy when he led collaborative projects, often in the most difficult circumstances. He was enjoyable to work with and always able to see the lighter side of events. His legacy includes the many scientists he mentored and encouraged through his generous and unassuming leadership.

Jim leaves his wife, Helen, whom he met on their first day at university. Helen built her own distinguished career in forestry research. Jim’s priority was always his family, including his son John and daughter Katie. He was happiest at home, developing and tending the garden that he and Helen created together.

Ian Panton, formerly CEO of Aviagen and a long-time colleague, said: “Jim’s commitment to professional research, combined with his humanity and decency, made him a very special friend who will be missed by many former colleagues. Our thoughts are with his family.”

This tribute was submitted by Peter Page, a long-time friend and colleague of Dr Jim McKay.

What does Avatec^® (lasalocid sodium) bring to coccidiosis-rotation programs?

VS: In a word: diversity. In-feed anticoccidials remain the most effective tool to control coccidiosis,¹ but prolonged use of any one product can lead to reduced efficacy as Eimeria sensitivity declines. This loss of sensitivity often affects other anticoccidials with similar chemical structures.² Ionophores fall into three classes, and cross-resistance is most common within—but not between—classes. So, if salinomycin is used, resistance may also develop to narasin and monensin, all monovalent ionophores. In contrast, lasalocid, the only divalent ionophore, is largely unaffected by this.

To preserve efficacy, rotating products from different classes via full or shuttle programs is essential.³ Lasalocid adds value to such rotations due to its distinct chemistry, and because it has historically been used less than monovalent ionophores, field Eimeria often shows greater sensitivity to it.⁴ This makes it an important option for maintaining long-term coccidiosis control.

You mentioned full and shuttle rotation programs. What is the best way to use lasalocid?

VS: Lasalocid is effective against all major Eimeria species in poultry. Choosing between full and shuttle programs depends on infection pressure and grow-out length. For lower pressure and shorter cycles (up to 4 to 5 weeks), it is best used in a full program, from placement to withdrawal. For higher pressure or longer grow-outs (over 35 to 42 days), a shuttle program is recommended. In shuttle programs, lasalocid can be used in either the starter (0 to 3 weeks) or grower phase (3 to 6 weeks), paired with a synthetic such as robenidine or decoquinate in the alternate phase.

This additive has not been used as intensively as other in-feed anticoccidials. Why is that?

VS: Market conditions and usage practices vary significantly across regions, and this helps explain differences in use over time. In some markets, lasalocid has historically been included more consistently in coccidiosis control programs than in others. Years ago, some markets reported performance concerns when this feed additive was used at higher inclusion rates (105 to 125 ppm).

Importantly, at recommended inclusion levels of 75 to 90 ppm, lasalocid has consistently demonstrated excellent safety and efficacy, with no negative impact on bird performance observed. Anticoccidial sensitivity tests (ASTs) have shown that it performs consistently better than many other ionophores in maintaining anticoccidial effectiveness. In fact, lasalocid remains one of the most effective ionophores available for coccidiosis control.

Do producers need to adjust electrolyte levels when using lasalocid?

VS: Lasalocid differs chemically from monovalent ionophores and has a distinct ion affinity. At the higher dose of 125 ppm, it’s important to maintain electrolyte balance (Na+K–Cl) within 172 to 240 mEq/kg.⁵ This aligns with typical diets, but in some cases, reducing sodium (and possibly potassium) while keeping chloride 20% to 40% higher than sodium may be necessary. There is no need to modify electrolyte levels between 75 and 90 ppm.

Are there any seasonal considerations when using this feed additive?

VS: Lasalocid offers year-round flexibility for broiler producers, unlike monensin or nicarbazin, which are often avoided in warm weather. It is particularly popular in summer, as it doesn’t reduce water intake.

In cooler seasons, when lower water intake may be beneficial, Na and K can be reduced—typically to 0.15% and 0.8% to 0.9%, respectively. Calcium levels also matter; major genetic suppliers now recommend lowering Ca to improve nutrient use and reduce water loss. When enzymes like phytase are included, mineral contributions must be accounted for to prevent excess mineral intake, which can increase water excretion.

Today, producers using a coccidiosis vaccine often want to supplement it with an in-feed anticoccidial. Can lasalocid be used in these so-called hybrid programs?

VS: Definitely. For immunity to develop, vaccinal Eimeria must complete its life cycle in the bird’s gut, which can cause tissue damage and invite secondary infections. To manage this after 18 to 21 days, producers often use low-dose ionophores—a bio-shuttle approach. A Southern Poultry Research Group study showed that broilers vaccinated in ovo and fed lasalocid at 75 ppm from day 18 to 35 or 50 showed at least a 3-point feed conversion improvement over vaccinated-only birds, while maintaining coccidial immunity.⁶

Does using lasalocid in broilers present any export barriers?

VS: Not anymore. Major regions, including the EU and Japan, have set maximum residue levels (MRLs) for lasalocid in poultry, and the UN’s Food Code supports international trade by listing lasalocid MRLs. Studies show lasalocid depletes quickly after it is withdrawn, and when the withdrawal time is followed.

Editor’s note: Content on Modern Poultry’s Industry Insights pages is provided and/or commissioned by our sponsors, who assume full responsibility for its accuracy and compliance.

¹ Noack, S., Chapman, H.D, and Selzer, P.M., (2019), Anticoccidial drugs of the livestock industry, Parasitological research, 118:2009–2026.
² Chapman, H.D., (1997) Biochemical, genetic and applied aspects of drug resistance in Eimeria parasites of the fowl, Avian Pathology, 26:2, 221-244.
³ Peek, H.W., and Landman, W.J.M. (2011) Coccidiosis in poultry: anticoccidial products, vaccines and other prevention strategies, Veterinary Quarterly, 31:3, 143-161.
⁴ Stanev, V., Naciri, M., Niepceron, A., Fort, Genevieve., & Vancraeynest, D. (2013). Efficacy of anticoccidial drugs in broilers – based on anticoccidial sensitivity tests in the period 2000-2012. Proceedings of the 19th European Symposium on Poultry Nutrition.
⁵ EFSA FEEDAP Panel. (2022). Scientific Opinion on the safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of lasalocid A sodium (Avatec® 150G) for chickens for fattening and chickens reared for laying (Zoetis Belgium SA). EFSA Journal 2022; 20(12):7715, 14 pp.
⁶ Mathis, G., Schaeffer, J., Cookson, K., Dickson, J., LaVorgna, M., & Waldrip, D. (2014). Effect of lasalocid or salinomycin administration on performance and immunity following coccidia vaccination of commercial broilers. Journal of Applied Poultry Research, 23(4), 577-585.

The post Divalent anticoccidial feed additive brings diversity to coccidiosis-rotation programs to counter resistance appeared first on Modern Poultry.

The Western egg industry is transitioning to cage-free housing, creating new welfare challenges for hens genetically adapted to battery cages. Research highlights that early-life experiences with structural complexity and load-bearing exercise are crucial for adaptation to aviary systems and long-term skeletal health. Feather pecking remains a significant issue, with new studies exploring the gut-brain axis and effective enrichment strategies. Future progress relies on optimizing genetics, refining pullet management, and developing automated, real-time monitoring tools to enhance welfare standards.

Summary

Whether through changes in animal welfare regulations or corporate commitments for cage-free eggs, most of the egg industry in the Western world is transitioning to cage-free housing for laying hens. The current genetics of commercial hybrids, as well as feeding and management practices were developed for life in conventional cages, and it is not surprising that new welfare problems have emerged. Multi-tiered aviary systems are commonly used for cage-free production to increase stocking capacity in barns. However, behavioural adaptation to these complex housing systems and skeletal health problems, such as keel fractures, are both significant challenges in aviaries. Recent research indicates that pullets’ early-life experiences with environmental complexity, specific structural elements (e.g., perches, ramps), and load-bearing exercise are crucial for their success in adapting to aviaries and for their long-term health and welfare. Feather pecking behaviour, a problem that can result in plumage damage, injury and cannibalism, occurs in all types of housing systems. However, the consequences can be worse in cage-free systems. New areas of research include investigations into the role of the gut-brain axis, the effects of early-life experiences, and effective edible enrichments to prevent feather pecking. Overall, new research is focusing on optimizing hen genetics and pullet management to match the birds to cage-free housing and reduce skeletal and behavioural problems. Finally, research into the development of automated methods for real-time assessment of hen welfare will help prevent problems in the barn and improve animal welfare audits for consumer-driven animal welfare assurances.

Introduction

The last 80 years have witnessed tremendous changes in the way eggs are produced and in the laying hens that produce them. In the decades following World War II, egg production underwent industrialization, transitioning from small, cage-free flocks to larger, cage-based operations as the use of battery cages began in the USA and later spread globally. At the same time, techniques in quantitative genetics were applied in earnest, and selection for production traits produced commercial hybrids with substantially earlier sexual maturity and higher egg production rates. The field of poultry science also flourished, with advances in nutrition and health management. These changes in genetics, housing, and feeding resulted in the production of one of the most nutritious animal proteins with one of the lowest environmental footprints. However, the use of conventional cages also came at a cost. Public perception of battery cages is largely negative and supported by scientific evidence that housing hens in barren cages compromises some important aspects of hen welfare.

Today, whether driven by legislation or corporate commitments, the entire Western world is experiencing another 360 ° shift in housing systems for laying hens. Societal concerns about hen welfare demand the elimination of conventional cages and a return to cage-free, or at least enriched, systems. However, this time, cage-free housing is being implemented on an industrial scale, with flocks of thousands or tens of thousands of hens housed in complex aviary systems. Additionally, we are using a knowledge base developed for the feeding and management of laying hens that were genetically selected for life in cages. Across countries, this shift is occurring through different means, at varying rates, and often with differing standards. The welfare trade-offs between conventional cages versus cage-free housing for laying hens are well established in the scientific literature (Hemsworth, 2021). Therefore, it is no surprise that the shift to cage-free housing presents challenges for producers, new welfare issues for laying hens, and a need for new areas of research to address them.

In this paper, I aim to provide an overview of the changing status of egg production in Europe, USA and Canada, current requirements for laying hen standards and assurances, and some of the animal welfare challenges associated with the change to cage-free housing. I will also discuss new and future areas of research needed to improve the welfare of laying hens.

Status of the egg industries in Europe and North America

Current legislation and corporate commitments

In Europe, the 1999/74/EC Directive on the keeping of laying hens came into effect in January of 2012, allowing cage-free systems and enriched cages with specific requirements for space, nests, perches, foraging, and dustbathing substrate. Some EU member countries have independently banned all types of caging systems. In 2018, a European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) “End the Cage Age,” calling for an EU-wide ban on the confinement of poultry, pigs, rabbits, and calves, as well as regulations for imported products derived from these systems, was registered with the EU Commission (European Commission, Animal Welfare). The “End the Cage Age” ECI registered 1.4 million signatures by 2019, with many signatures coming from the Netherlands and Germany (where cages are already prohibited). The EC responded by commissioning an updated Scientific Opinion on the welfare of laying hens (EFSA, 2023) and by initiating public consultation, an impact assessment, and a policy initiative to phase out cages in the EU completely. To date, no changes have been made, although the 2025 “Vision for Agriculture,” strategic planning document indicates consideration for updating the EU animal welfare regulations. In 2021, around 47% of eggs in the EU were produced in furnished cages, 36% in cage-free barns, 11% in free-range, and close to 6% in organic, with significant regional differences across EU countries in the housing systems used (Majewski et al., 2024).

Following the adoption of Brexit in 2020, the United Kingdom maintained the minimum standards set by the EU Directive, which had been formalized into UK legislation in 2006 and 2007 (The Welfare of Farmed Animals (England) Regulations, 2007). Although a large segment of the British egg industry had already moved to enriched cages by 2012, several major supermarket chains made commitments in 2016 to sell only cage-free eggs with a 2025 deadline. According to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA, 2025), 71% of egg production is free-range, and 17% is enriched cage, with the balance in barn and organic systems.

As of 2024, 10 U.S. states have enacted laws on the production or sale of cage-produced eggs. The impact of these laws was projected to surpass 16% of the hen inventory in the USA by 2026 (USDA Economic Research Service). However, a much greater impact on the US egg industry has been the 2015/2016 corporate commitments by retailers and food service to only sell eggs produced in cage-free systems by 2025. Although not all commitments have been met, the inventory of cage-free laying hens in the US as of October 2025 was estimated at >136M laying hens, or around 46% of the national hen inventory (USDA Egg Markets Overview). Of the cage-free hens in the US, the vast majority are in barns, with a small percentage (~16%) in organic systems and even fewer in free-range or pasture-based systems. The other 54% of US hens are in conventional cages.

The Canadian egg industry is also transitioning away from conventional cages, but on a very different pathway. In 2016, the Egg Farmers of Canada (EFC) announced that they would voluntarily stop using conventional cages by 2036. The Code of Practice for the Care and Handling of Pullets and Laying Hens was published the following year, requiring that all hens be provided with amenities for nesting, perching, and foraging by 2036, and all enriched cage systems installed after 2032 to include amenities to provide opportunities for dustbathing (NFACC, 2017). As a supply-managed industry, the EFC embarked on a steady, organized transition to prevent market disruptions. Although the global wave of corporate commitments also hit Canada in 2016, the Retail Council of Canada, representing the major grocery store chains, retracted their cage-free pledge in 2021, instead indicating support for the National Farm Animal Care Council, the multi-stakeholder body that develops the Codes of Practice for Canada (Edmiston, 2025). When the 2017 Code was published, close to 90% of hens in Canada were housed in conventional cages. As of 2024, just over 43% of the flock was in conventional cages, with close to 37% in enriched and 13.5%, 4.9%, and 1.4% in cage-free barn, organic and free-range systems, respectively (EFC Annual Report, 2024). To date, most Canadian egg producers have opted to transition to enriched cage systems.

Welfare standards, labeling and assurance schemes

In the EU, the table egg industry is the only food animal industry with a harmonized compulsory animal welfare labelling scheme (European Commission, Animal Welfare Labelling). Eggs are stamped with the production method based on EU legislation for laying hens, which defines minimum standards of care for housing in enriched cages and cage-free systems. Across EU countries and the UK, there are also a variety of voluntary and private animal welfare assurance schemes developed to demonstrate higher welfare standards to consumers, such as the Dutch SPCA 3-star Beter Leven system in the Netherlands and RSPCA Assured in the UK.

In the USA, state legislation and corporate commitments for cage-free production generally do not specify any housing or husbandry standards. The United Egg Producers (UEP) developed their own national, industry-led Animal Welfare Guidelines for Cage-free Housing in 2017. Since 1999, the UEP has been working with an independent scientific advisory committee to establish and regularly update animal care guidelines for hens in cages. The scientific committee comprises poultry welfare scientists, veterinarians and an ethicist. The UEP Certified Program involves annual third-party audits of farms to ensure compliance with its guidelines and represents 90% of the eggs produced in the USA (UEP Certified, 2024).

In Canada, the Code of Practice has specific requirements for floor, feeder, nest, perch, and litter or scratch mat space allowances, as well as husbandry and euthanasia practices for pullets and hens across all types of housing systems. The Codes for all farm animals are developed by multi-stakeholder committees (including farmers, processors, government, veterinarians and representation from animal advocacy and retailers) and informed by a Scientific Committee Report on priority welfare issues. Egg farmer compliance with all requirements in the Codes is assured through the national EFC Animal Care Program. Annual on-farm audits are conducted on 2/3 of farms by EFC or provincial field inspectors, with the remaining farms receiving third-party audits. The Animal Care program is bundled with the Start Clean-Stay Clean® food safety program for Egg Quality Assurance^TM certification (available at: https://eggquality.ca).

Animal welfare challenges and research needs

a. The importance of early-life experience

Most cage-free housing today comprises multi-tier aviary systems that allow for increased bird density within the barn. In aviaries, resources such as feeders, drinkers, perches, and nests are located on stacked tiers elevated well above the litter (ground floor). While an aviary may seem like a natural fit for a bird, laying hens are Galliformes, a heavy-bodied, terrestrial species better suited to life on the ground. Although laying hens do still prefer to roost in high places at night, the numerous aerial transitions required to navigate between different tiers and structures in an aviary often prove challenging for them.

When aviaries were first developed in Europe, it soon became apparent that pullets destined for these complex housing systems had to be reared in similarly complex systems (Janczak and Riber, 2015). When not well-prepared for aviary housing, hens are less able to navigate the system and find (or reach) food, water, and nests, resulting in higher mortality and substantially more eggs laid outside the nest and on the floor. Providing perches early in life was found to be particularly important (Gunnarsson et al., 1999), as was providing resources, such as food and water, at multiple levels (Colson et al., 2008), so that pullets can learn to access vertical space. Up until very recently, there was a lack of any husbandry standards or welfare guidelines for pullets, and little research on pullet behavioural and physical development (Giersberg and Rodenburg, 2023). Now that the success and welfare of laying hens in cage-free housing depends on a bird that is calm, experienced, and physically fit, research in this area has been rapidly growing.

In terms of behaviour, rearing experience affects cognitive development, spatial navigation, use of structures, and fearfulness (Campbell et al., 2019). Pullets reared in aviaries versus conventional cages have been shown to perform better on tests of cognition. For example, young hens reared in commercial aviaries were faster to find rewards and had better working memory in a spatial task (Tahamtani et al., 2015) and better success in a T-maze learning task (Rentsch et al., 2023a) than birds reared in conventional cages. Experience with structures such as perches, ramps, and elevated platforms also results in birds performing better on tests of navigation, such as ascending a series of offset platforms to receive a food reward (Gunnarsson et al., 2020; Rentsch et al., 2023b). Early experience with specific structural elements is also important. For example, exposure to ramps in the first weeks of life increases hens’ ramp use in the layer house and reduces hesitancy when moving between levels (Norman et al., 2021). Finally, rearing in more complex environments, such as aviaries, has been shown to reduce fear of novelty (Braenstater et al., 2016; Rentsch et al., 2024a) and improve overall use of 3-dimensional space (Braenstater et al., 2016).

As one might expect, musculoskeletal development is also affected by the rearing environment, as the amount of load-bearing exercise performed increases with the complexity of the rearing system (Pufall et al., 2021; Anderson et al., 2024; Rentsch et al., 2023c). Pullets reared in aviaries versus conventional cages have increased muscle mass (Casey-Trott et al., 2017a), larger keels (Casey-Trott et al., 2017a; Rentsch et al., 2024) and greater cortical cross-sectional area and breaking strength of the long bones (Regmi et al., 2015; Casey-Trott et al., 2017a). The addition of multi-tiered perching structures alone improved load-bearing activity, muscle mass, bone strength and biomarkers of bone formation in growing pullets housed in floor pens (Anderson et al., 2024). Specific designs of rearing systems can also affect pullet development, as there are considerable differences in the amount of vertical space, the number of structures requiring jumping, and the amount of horizontal space available for running, especially in the brooding sections where chicks are kept for the first few weeks (Pufall et al., 2021).

Interestingly, some of the effects on behavioural and musculoskeletal development mentioned above depend on the genetic strain of the bird. White-feathered strains tend to use more and higher structures in the environment and perform more aerial transitions between tiers (Pufall et al., 2021; Rentsch et al., 2023a); they also reap more of the benefits of growing up in a complex aviary than brown-feathered strains (Rentsch et al., 2023b,c).

b. Skeletal health

While the load-bearing exercise inherent to cage-free systems does improve bone strength, fragile bones and, in particular, keel bone fractures, are still a significant problem in laying hens. The prevalence of keel fractures is high; estimates from commercial farms range from 20 to 96%, and the condition can impair mobility and is likely painful for hens, at least in the early stages (see Toscano et al., 2020).

Egg production rate and its associated calcium demand is assumed to be a contributing factor for fragile bones, including the keel, but the etiology of keel fractures is complex. Fractures on the medial section of the keel apparently result from collisions with environmental structures. In contrast, fractures located in the caudal area of the keel are non-traumatic in nature, possibly related to the early onset of lay and the repeated strain from laying eggs prior to complete ossification of the keel (Thøfner et al., 2020). Now that egg production rates are close to their biological limit with hens laying nearly an egg per day, breeding goals for laying hens are focusing on laying persistency and maintaining egg quality to support extended production to over 100 weeks of age. One of the significant challenges of extended laying cycles will be maintaining the skeletal health of laying hens in non-cage systems, and research in this area is ongoing (Gautron et al., 2021). Bone traits are moderately heritable, and one study of genetic correlations between production and bone traits indicated that early onset of puberty, rather than egg production persistency, was associated with a loss of bone quality in laying hens (Dunn et al., 2021). Research is also targeting the identification of behavioural phenotypes associated with stronger bones and fewer keel fractures (Toscano et al., 2020).

More research is needed to optimize rearing for lifelong musculoskeletal health and behaviour. Enhanced bone characteristics, such as increased cortical (structural) bone area resulting from prepubertal load-bearing exercise, are maintained throughout adulthood (Casey-Trott et al., 2017b). Lower prevalence and severity of keel fractures have been observed at the end of lay when pullets were reared in high complexity aviaries versus conventional cages (Casey-Trott et al., 2017c) or less complex aviaries (Rentsch et al., 2024b). Fewer fractures could be due to better navigation skills, differences in keel bone properties or both. Hens reared in aviaries versus cages experienced fewer and less forceful collisions when subsequently housed in enriched systems (Pullin et al., 2020) and laying hens reared with ramps not only used ramps more but also had fewer keel fractures (Norman et al., 2021).

c. Feather pecking

Despite decades of research into its causes and prevention, feather pecking remains one of the major welfare issues in laying hen production. Severe feather pecking, which is the forceful pecking and pulling out of group-mates’ feathers (sometimes followed by feather eating), causes damage to plumage and integument and can lead to cannibalism (van Staaveren and Harlander, 2020). Feather pecking has economic as well as welfare implications, as plumage damage results in increased heat loss and thus, increased energy requirement. Although feather pecking occurs in every type of housing system, it can be worse in non-cage systems as it can spread quickly throughout a large flock through behavioural contagion. In countries that prohibit both beak trimming and cages (e.g., the Netherlands, Germany, Austria), feather pecking outbreaks can be devastating for flock welfare.

One hypothesis for feather pecking is that it is a form of redirected foraging behaviour. However, the problem is much more complex with underlying differences in brain chemistry in birds that perform feather pecking (van Staaveren and Harlander, 2020). Factors influencing feather pecking are numerous and multi-factorial, including lack of foraging substrates, genetics, nutritional factors such as feed composition and form, changes in diet, environmental stressors such as stocking density, air quality, social disruption, and the list goes on. One emerging area of research is the microbiota-gut-brain axis, which is known to influence behaviour (van Staaveren and Harlander, 2021). Populations of laying hens selected for feather pecking have been found to have distinct microbiota profiles, although the relationship between gut microbes and feather pecking is still unclear.

Another area of more applied research on feather pecking is the identification of effective environmental enrichments. Pecking blocks, which are edible enrichments, have been demonstrated to improve plumage condition in laying hens. Commercially available pecking blocks differ in nutrient composition, with some primarily mineral-based and others containing more grains, molasses or fibre (Ehigbor et al., 2025). Interestingly, preferences for different pecking blocks vary across genetic strain, and their use varies across individual birds and time of day, with high calcium mineral-based blocks consumed more at the end of the day, corresponding with calcium appetite. Pecking blocks offer opportunities to reduce feather pecking and give individual birds some choice over the nutrients in their diet.

The rearing experience of pullets can contribute to the development of feather pecking, even when the behaviour does not emerge until later in the bird’s life (Giersberg and Rodenburg, 2023). Research is needed to determine how experience with different foraging materials, interruptions in foraging availability, and dietary changes during rearing predict feather pecking in the layer barn. Additionally, research is needed into how nutritional interventions during rearing, especially during critical periods, might influence feather pecking by altering the microbiota, gut function, or feeding/foraging motivation (Mens et al., 2020).

d. Animal welfare assessment

Animal welfare audits are a reality for many producers worldwide, and there is a sub-discipline within animal welfare science that focuses on practical animal welfare assessments. Since both farmer livelihoods and assurance of animal welfare depend on sound assessment instruments, measures of animal welfare need to be valid (accurate measures of animal welfare), reliable (good inter- and intra-observer repeatability), and feasible (practical and cost-efficient in the field). Although it has long been acknowledged that animal-based measures (ABMs) (e.g., real-time measures of health, mortality and behaviour) are the best animal welfare indicators, most practical assessments still rely on resource- or management-based measures (e.g., checking compliance with housing or husbandry standards), particularly in poultry. One area of research with considerable effort in Europe is the development of animal welfare surveillance systems through tracking of ABMs, for example, at slaughter plants (EFSA, 2021). In some slaughter plants, these measures are already in place for internal food safety monitoring. For laying hens, potential ante- and post-mortem animal welfare measures include feather condition, DOA (dead on arrival), lesions, broken bones, broken keels, and condemnations, which can be tracked at the farm level. There is also considerable research effort to deploy intelligent technologies based on environmental sensors and computer vision in barns to provide real-time monitoring of laying hen health and welfare (Ma et al., 2025). Potential measures include auditory analysis of hen vocalizations and the identification of changes in flock behaviour to enable early detection of illness or outbreaks of feather pecking. A multidisciplinary effort will be critical for validating automated behaviour and welfare measures.

References are available on request.

From the proceedings of the Australian Poultry Science Symposium 2026, by courtesy of Professor Tina M. Widowski

Producers and animal health officials need reliable tools to quickly estimate the resources required for different depopulation methods.

A research team led by Sanjay Shah, PhD, professor in the department of biological and agricultural engineering at North Carolina State University, developed a new Excel-based mass-depopulation calculator to help poultry producers and animal health officials rapidly estimate the resources needed during HPAI outbreaks.

“Available methods include nitrogen and carbon dioxide whole-house gassing, foaming and ventilation shutdown with heat, but the availability and suitability of each method can vary based on farm conditions, housing systems and environmental factors,” Shah said.

The calculator estimates the amount of propane, propane plus steam, carbon dioxide or nitrogen needed to depopulate different types of poultry. It considers bird type, number and weight of birds, housing system, house dimensions, condition and outside temperature.

The tool is designed to provide the USDA, state animal health officials and poultry industry personnel with a practical, accessible resource for rapidly estimating depopulation requirements during disease emergencies.

“The calculator is more comprehensive than existing tools because it accommodates multiple poultry types, housing systems and depopulation methods,” Shah explained.

Validation using published data is still needed to confirm its accuracy and reliability. Once validated, the tool could enhance preparedness and response during HPAI outbreaks by helping officials and producers quickly determine the resources needed for emergency depopulation.

The calculator could also be adapted as an educational tool to demonstrate poultry-house energy efficiency, heat transfer and the effects of building characteristics on energy use.

More information regarding the tool can be found here. If you are interested in obtaining the calculator, please contact Dr. Denise Heard, vice president of research programs at USPOULTRY.

The research was funded by USPOULTRY and the USPOULTRY Foundation. Click here to view the industry summary.

Editor’s note: Content on Modern Poultry’s Industry Insights pages is provided and/or commissioned by our sponsors, who assume full responsibility for its accuracy and compliance.

The post New calculator helps poultry industry rapidly estimate HPAI depopulation resources appeared first on Modern Poultry.

As Europe prepares for the autumn bird migration season, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and the European Commission have released a range of practical resources to help farmers, small flock holders and veterinarians prevent the spread of avian influenza, under a campaign called #NoBirdFlu.

Outbreaks of avian influenza – also known as bird flu – can have serious consequences for animal health, food production, farmers’ livelihoods, and public health. However, simple preventive measures can reduce the risks.

Simple measures to keep bird flu out

The #NoBirdFlu campaign promotes five simple biosecurity measures that can help prevent the introduction and spread of avian influenza, especially on small farms and among backyard flocks:

• control access to farms
• maintain effective cleaning and disinfection routines
• prevent contact with wild birds
• keep poultry species separate
• recognise signs of disease and act early.

“Bird flu prevention starts with everyday biosecurity. #NoBirdFlu helps turn scientific knowledge into simple actions that farmers, small flock holders and veterinarians can apply before the virus reaches the farm,” said Nikolaus Kriz, EFSA’s Executive Director.

“As migratory birds cross Europe, the risk of avian influenza increases. Bird flu does not stop at borders. By working together across Member States and sectors, we can help reduce the risk of outbreaks and protect animal health, food production and livelihoods,” said Claire Bury, Deputy Director-General for Food Sustainability at the European Commission.

Why now?

Avian influenza, commonly known as bird flu, is a highly contagious viral disease that mainly affects poultry and wild water birds. Outbreaks can devastate poultry populations, disrupt supply chains and harm farmers’ livelihoods. They can also have an impact on public health.

Bird flu cases in Europe typically rise during the winter months when migratory birds travel across the continent. Between October 2025 and June 2026, almost 8,000 outbreaks were detected in Europe. Detections in wild birds were four times higher than in the previous winter. On poultry farms, most infections came from indirect contact with wild birds. This underscores the importance of applying strong biosecurity measures to limit introduction of the disease from wildlife and farm-to-farm spread.

Campaign toolkit

A toolkit that includes a range of communication materials is available to help campaign partners share the practical measures that will reduce the spread of bird flu on farms. Translations of the materials in all EU languages will be made available. They include:

• 2 infographics with simple guidance for farmers and small flock holders
• posters with visual reminders of key actions to integrate into daily routines
• a video showcasing the key measures farmers can take to help keep bird flu out
• ready-to-use social media materials, including posts and stickers, to help spread the message within farming communities and beyond.

How to get involved

If you want to support and be a part of the campaign, visit the #NoBirdFlu website and download the communication toolkit. Sharing these materials can help reduce the risk of avian influenza outbreaks, keeping bird flu out of Europe’s farms and flocks.

Source: EFSA press release

Biosecurity is a major issue in poultry farming today. Failures in biosecurity can lead to significant economic losses: lower animal production, mortality, poor egg quality, etc. In this article, we will explain all the steps for an efficient cleaning and disinfection of poultry houses.

Some bacteria and viruses can survive for a long time in farm conditions, some are able to survive in the absence of oxygen, in cold climates but also in heat. Therefore, a good cleaning and disinfection protocol is vital. This includes strict application of the different steps and product contact times (refer to the instructions for each product).

To achieve this, the protocol can be divided into four main steps.

1. Cleaning of poultry houses

This is the stage where all equipment is taken out of the building and all organic matter visible to the naked eye is removed by washing. The house should be visually clean.

• First, the batch is reformed, any dead birds are removed. Feed residues in feed lines and silos are removed. Finally, all removable equipment is taken from the building to be washed and disinfected.
• Second, pre-soaking of the slats outside the building is recommended. Sweep or wash all surfaces to remove dust from ceilings, water pipes, fan housings and inlets (with air pressure if available). The entire floor should be scraped and swept.
• The drinking system should also be thoroughly cleaned: – Fill the system with water, adding an adequate amount of disinfectant (hydrogen peroxide, chlorine or acetic acid). When diluting, be careful to respect the required concentration.
  • The disinfectant should be allowed to flow through the system to the watering point for the animals. Leave for about 1 hour, it is possible to leave the product in the system for up to 2 hours. If necessary, repeat the operation several times, up to a maximum of 3 times a day.
  • Fill the drinking lines with clean water and with the filter upside down.
  • Repeat the entire procedure if scale and biofilm persist.

• Once the above steps have been completed, pressure wash all surfaces with a detergent solution. All areas must be cleaned: inside but also concrete access areas, air inlets, etc.

2. Effective disinfection

This step consists of disinfecting clean surfaces. After cleaning, the level of pathogens is still quite high. It is essential to use a broad-spectrum disinfectant that is effective against viruses, bacteria, fungi and moulds.

• As a first step, all removable objects should be returned to the building to be disinfected as well.
• Using a low-pressure water pump (300 psi), apply the disinfectant solution evenly to all washed internal surfaces to ensure the surfaces are completely soaked.
• Pay particular attention to corners, cracks and seams, ensuring that all sides of the elements are covered.
• Spray, beginning with the ceilings, and working down the walls to the floors.
• At the end of the disinfection process, close all doors and place disinfectant foot baths at all entrances.
• To control organisms introduced into the building during the set-up procedure and disinfect the air and other inaccessible areas of the building, fumigation can be carried out using a fine mist sprayer with a disinfectant solution.

3. Empty period

This step does not begin until the first two steps have been fully completed. This is the time when the building is empty.

• It is advisable to carry out a sanitary period of at least 10 days, this step must be adapted according to the local regulations in force.

4. Preparing for the arrival of the new flock

• 3 days before the arrival of the new flock, spray all areas with a residual insecticide.
• Provide fresh litter (never use mouldy materials). Spray the litter surface with a larvicide insecticide.
• Prepare the equipment in the start-up area and ensure that all equipment is working properly.
• Twenty-four hours before the arrival of the new flock, carry out a final disinfection by thermal fogging.

In conclusion

Cleaning and disinfecting poultry buildings are key moments in biosecurity, in addition to the daily routine: washing hands, changing clothes, respecting the different areas of the farm, etc. This is an opportunity to achieve optimum cleaning and disinfection of the building. If properly carried out, it ensures that the farm maintains a good health status and a high level of biosecurity. The birds can therefore grow under optimal conditions and fully express their genetic potential.

The Novogen technical team remains at your disposal for any further information you may require.

For more information visit www.novogen-layers.com

The poultry industry is increasingly focused on extending the productive lifespan of laying hens beyond 100 weeks to enhance welfare, sustainability and profitability. A major challenge in achieving this goal is the age-related decline in eggshell quality, largely due to reduced calcium absorption.

“Simply increasing dietary calcium is often insufficient, as optimal eggshell formation also relies on a balance of other essential minerals,” said Ishab Poudel, PhD, North Carolina State University, the study’s principal investigator. DTB, a natural source of trace minerals, and phytase, an enzyme that improves nutrient availability, have demonstrated potential to support egg quality in older hens.

This study evaluated early DTB supplementation, beginning at 50 weeks, with or without phytase, to assess its effects on egg production, eggshell quality, skeletal integrity and economic outcomes through 100 weeks of age. A total of 720 hens were assigned to diets containing varying levels of DTB and phytase.

Results indicated that phytase alone had limited effects on egg production but significantly improved bone strength, supporting skeletal health during extended laying cycles. DTB, particularly at 0.25%, helped maintain egg production during late lay without negatively affecting feed efficiency or egg quality.

Although eggs naturally declined in quality with age, neither DTB nor phytase exacerbated this trend. Economically, overall feed costs and egg income were similar across treatments, though hens receiving 0.25% DTB without phytase achieved the highest egg income during late lay.

Collectively, these findings demonstrate that DTB can be included in late-phase layer diets without adverse effects and may enhance performance under specific conditions. Phytase remains critical for maintaining bone mineralization and strength during extended lay, while combining DTB and phytase did not consistently yield additive benefits.

In the long term, this research provides valuable insights for developing nutritional strategies that support extended laying cycles exceeding 100 weeks.

“By clarifying the roles of trace minerals and phytase in mineral metabolism, skeletal integrity and production performance, the study offers a foundation for designing diets that maintain hen health and productivity over prolonged production periods, contributing to greater sustainability and profitability in commercial egg production,” Poudel said.

The research was funded by USPOULTRY and the USPOULTRY Foundation. Click here to view the industry summary.

Editor’s note: Content on Modern Poultry’s Industry Insights pages is provided and/or commissioned by our sponsors, who assume full responsibility for its accuracy and compliance.

The post New research explores phytase, dacitic tuff breccia supplementation to maintain eggshell quality in older hens appeared first on Modern Poultry.

The currently circulating H5 clade is more infectious, affects far more bird species and has increasingly spilled over into mammals, including dairy cattle in the US. At the same time, the virus has become more persistent globally, creating continuous pressure on commercial poultry production rather than the cyclical outbreaks seen in the past.

Those changes are driving renewed discussion around vaccination as part of long-term HPAI control strategies, alongside biosecurity and surveillance.

Here, Rawi discusses how the virus has evolved, why vaccination is gaining momentum globally and what future HPAI control strategies could look like for the poultry industry.

Q: What is different about the current HPAI situation compared to previous outbreaks?

A: The biggest change is that the virus has become much more efficient at spreading and persisting globally.

The current H5 clade circulating worldwide, 2.3.4.4b, is much more infectious than previous strains. Compared to the virus circulating during the 2015 to 2016 outbreak period, dramatically fewer viral particles are needed to infect birds today.

At the farm level, the infectivity changed tremendously. To infect a chicken with the 2015 virus, you needed around 500,000 particles. With the current virus, you need around 3,000 particles. To infect a duck, you need only around 100 particles.

The virus has also expanded into many more species. Historically, HPAI circulation was largely associated with waterfowl and a relatively limited number of bird species. Since 2020, however, hundreds of species have been affected.

That changed the epidemiology completely. Some species, especially seabirds, helped introduce the virus into new geographies like South America. At the same time, spillover into mammals has become increasingly common, including infections in sea lions, cats and dairy cattle, suggesting the virus has become better adapted to infecting multiple species.

Q: Why are traditional HPAI control strategies under pressure?

A: Historically, HPAI control relied primarily on surveillance and stamping out infected flocks.

That approach was more effective when outbreaks occurred in waves and the virus disappeared for periods of time. But the current epidemiological situation is different because the virus is now continuously present in wild bird populations.

We are very far from eradication. The virus survives in wild birds, and we continue seeing introductions into commercial poultry.

As the virus became more widespread and environmentally persistent, the poultry industry and scientific community increasingly recognized that surveillance and depopulation alone were not enough to effectively manage the disease.

That shift has led organizations such as the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), along with many scientists, to support integrating vaccination into broader HPAI control strategies.

From a scientific perspective, vaccination is increasingly viewed as a necessary addition to HPAI control because the virus is no longer behaving like a short-term epidemic threat.

Q: How does vaccination fit into HPAI control programs?

A: HPAI control is really based on three core elements: biosecurity, vaccination and surveillance.

Biosecurity acts as the physical barrier intended to keep the virus from entering poultry farms. Vaccination increases birds’ resistance to infection and helps reduce virus shedding if infection occurs.

What you want to do is prevent the virus from entering the farm. But if infection happens, vaccination helps reduce shedding and reduce the environmental impact of the virus. That reduction in shedding is important because it helps limit spread to nearby farms and reduces secondary outbreaks.

Surveillance also remains essential, even in vaccinated systems, because infected flocks still need to be identified quickly and removed when necessary.

The combination of those three approaches is what helps reduce outbreaks and stop the epidemiological cycle.

Q: Why does vaccination remain a complicated issue in some countries?

A: The biggest challenge is trade. Historically, some countries worried vaccination could allow infected flocks to go undetected if birds did not show obvious clinical signs. Because of that concern, surveillance programs become critically important in vaccinated systems.

If you continuously monitor flocks with surveillance, there is less risk of silent infections.

Countries implementing vaccination must also demonstrate to trading partners that their surveillance systems are robust enough to rapidly detect infections. France, for example, introduced vaccination alongside extensive surveillance programs and discussions with importing countries.

It becomes a bilateral discussion between exporters and importers. You need to show the surveillance model you are implementing and build confidence that infections will still be detected.

At the same time, international attitudes toward vaccination are evolving. WOAH now considers that vaccination should be implemented without automatically impacting trade status. The infection itself is what should impact trade.

Q: What factors are shaping the vaccination discussion in the US poultry industry?

A: In the US, the discussion is particularly complex because HPAI affects sectors differently.

Long-lived birds such as layers, breeders and turkeys, as well as ducks, have been much more heavily impacted than broilers. The egg and turkey industries are very interested in vaccination because they are directly affected by the disease and have incurred significant losses since 2022.

At the same time, the US broiler industry exports about 14% of its poultry meat – significantly more than other sectors – magnifying concerns about possible trade implications tied to vaccination.[1]

Considering these dynamics, future vaccination strategies may need to account for regional differences in production. States or sectors with high concentrations of long-lived birds, such as layers and turkeys, may face different risk-benefit considerations than broiler-heavy regions focused on export markets. Ultimately, any decisions regarding vaccination would be made by US government authorities.

At the same time, European experience is providing more data on how targeted vaccination programs can work in practice. Recent trials in layers and turkeys have shown strong vaccine efficacy, including major reductions in outbreak risk.[2] Dutch government trials, for example, have demonstrated that vaccination can reduce outbreak risk in layers by 70% to 90%.

Those findings are helping shape broader industry discussions around whether vaccination could reduce the impact of HPAI in the most vulnerable sectors while balancing trade considerations.

Q: What advances are shaping newer HPAI vaccines?

A: One major focus is broader protection against the wide range of H5 viruses circulating globally.

COBRA technology (computationally optimized broadly reactive antigen) is one example. Rather than targeting only a single field strain, the technology was designed to create broader protection across relevant circulating viruses. Vaccines using this approach can provide cross-clade protection against diverse H5 viruses.

Another important development is the use of prime-boost vaccination strategies in long-lived birds, such as layers. In this approach, birds receive hatchery vaccination, followed by a booster vaccination later on the farm. Recent Dutch trials showed this type of program could maintain protection through most of a layer’s production cycle. The protection lasted through at least 84 weeks of age.

Differentiating infected from vaccinated animals — what’s known as DIVA capability — is also critical in vaccinated systems.

Using serology or PCR testing, DIVA-compatible vaccines allow surveillance programs to distinguish infected birds from vaccinated birds, which is important for both disease control and maintaining trade confidence.

Q: Looking ahead, what role could vaccination play in long-term HPAI control?

A: Around the world, vaccination is increasingly being viewed as an essential component of long-term HPAI control because the epidemiological situation has changed so significantly in recent years.

At the same time, vaccination should not be viewed as a standalone solution. Biosecurity, surveillance and stamping out infected flocks remain essential to limiting spread and maintaining safe trade.

But when combined with those measures, vaccination can help reduce outbreaks, limit environmental spread and better protect long-lived poultry populations facing continuous HPAI pressure.

References
1 National Chicken Council. Broiler Chicken Industry Key Facts 2025. Broiler Chicken Industry Key Facts 2025 – National Chicken Council (accessed June 9, 2026)
2 Bouwman KM, de Wit MK, Jansen CA, Fischer EAJ, Velkers FC, Germeraad EA, et al. Lelystad, Netherlands: Wageningen Bioveterinary Research; 2026. Available at: https://doi.org/10.18174/705406

Editor’s note: Content on Modern Poultry’s Industry Insights pages is provided and/or commissioned by our sponsors, who assume full responsibility for its accuracy and compliance.

The post HPAI control strategies evolve as virus changes appeared first on Modern Poultry.

The World Egg Organisation (WEO) has announced the winners of its 2026 Awards, recognising outstanding leadership, innovation, marketing excellence, and contribution to the global egg industry.

The awards were presented during the WEO Global Leadership Conference in Singapore on Thursday 10 September, bringing together egg industry leaders from around the world to celebrate the people and businesses helping to shape the future of the sector.

The 2026 WEO Award winners are:

• Denis Wellstead Award for International Egg Person of the Year: Franz Hofer, Austria
• Golden Egg Award for Marketing Excellence: Sundaily Farm, China
• Clive Frampton Egg Products Company of the Year Award: Ovobel Foods Limited, India

Denis Wellstead Award for International Egg Person of the Year

The Denis Wellstead Award was presented to Franz Hofer, in recognition of more than two decades of exceptional service and commitment to the global egg industry and WEO, through his role as CEO of Ovotherm, Austria.

Known for his commitment to collaboration, connection, and knowledge-sharing, Franz has been a familiar and valued presence at WEO conferences, rarely missing an event and renowned for sitting front row for speaker sessions.

In presenting the award, Juan Felipe Montoya Muñoz described Franz as an “unwavering advocate, a trusted partner, and an energetic voice for our industry”, adding that he “truly embodies the spirit of this award.”

On receiving the award, Franz Hofer said: “Thank you so much. I love to work for you, I love this business, I love all these partnerships we have, all the respect that is in this business. Whether you are a big company, or a small company, all the respect we get from you, the nice words we get from you, the challenges we get from you… that is the reason why I’m doing it.”

Golden Egg Award for Marketing Excellence

The Golden Egg Award 2026 was presented to Sundaily Farm, China, for an outstanding campaign that demonstrated creativity, consumer engagement, and measurable return on investment.

The Egg Marketing Showcase took place on Wednesday 9 September at the WEO Singapore Conference, featuring presentations from this year’s entrants.

Announcing the winner, Emily Metz (member of the judging panel) said: “I want to thank all the entrants for this year, because they were all truly incredible – and we have a bright future ahead of us with those bright minds marketing on behalf of our industry.

“But there was one stand-out entrant. This year’s winner demonstrated the new marketing techniques that are going to advance the egg industry for the future, including integrating into culture, delivering a strong return on investment, having a forward-looking long-term strategy and clear set of goals, measurable performance indicators, and all-around creativity. Congratulations, Sundaily Farm!”

Marketing Manager, Ivy Ma, accepted the award on behalf of the company. Sundaily Farm are the first Chinese company to win the Golden Egg Award.

Clive Frampton Egg Products Company of the Year Award

This year’s Clive Frampton Award was presented to Satish Babu and Sharad Satish, the father-and-son team representing Ovobel Foods Limited, India.

Ovobel Foods has a deep heritage in the egg industry, with the family behind the company involved in egg farming since 1965 and egg processing since 1996.

Presenting the award, Henrik Pedersen said: “When the Award Committee considered this year’s candidates, we were looking for a company that did more than simply perform well. We were looking for a company that demonstrated ambition, resilience, innovation, and a clear commitment to the future of our industry.

“A company that has successfully combined generations of experience with modern technology. A company that has expanded its production capabilities, developed international markets, invested in sustainability and, at the same time, remained firmly rooted in the fundamentals of our business: the egg, the farmer, the customer, and quality. Congratulations, Ovobel Foods!”

Ovobel Foods are the first company in India to receive this recognition.

Source: WEO press release

Eight broiler production concepts produced different breast meat profiles, but consumers distinguished far less between them. In the three concepts tested with consumers, juiciness was the only liking attribute that differed significantly.

Breast meat from more extensive broiler production systems can differ substantially in composition, firmness and sensory properties. Whether consumers value those differences is another matter.

A study from the EU-funded mEATquality project compared eight production concepts in the Netherlands and Germany, combining different genotypes, diets, stocking densities and environmental enrichment. Across the physicochemical and sensory data, the authors identified genotype as the principal driver of eating quality.

The consumer test produced a narrower picture. Among the three concepts evaluated, overall liking, appearance, taste, tenderness and texture did not differ significantly. Only juiciness separated two of the samples.

A distinctive profile for S757N

The eight concepts included Hubbard JA757, JA787 and S757N birds in higher-welfare non-organic production in the Netherlands, and JA757, dual-purpose ÖTZ Coffee birds and Lohmann male-layer strains in German organic production. All birds sampled were male.

One concept stood apart in several measurements. Breast meat from S757N-R-30-E contained 24.3% protein and 0.17% fat, resulting in a protein-to-fat ratio of 197.7. It also showed relatively low water losses.

The trained panel scored S757N at 6.2 on a 0–15 juiciness scale. The three higher-welfare non-organic JA757 concepts ranged from 8.1 to 9.4. S757N also had the highest shear force, 10.90 N, and received the highest first-bite hardness and lowest tenderness scores.

The authors relate the lower sensory juiciness of S757N to its very low fat content and firmer texture, discussing the roles of lubrication and water release during chewing.

Consumers were less discriminating

The consumer trial involved 76 Danish adults and three production concepts: JA757-R-39-NE, S757N-R-30-E and organic JA757-R-21-E. The results reported in the paper refer to the blind evaluations.

S757N-R-30-E received a significantly lower juiciness liking score than JA757-R-39-NE. Its scores for overall liking, tenderness and texture were numerically lower, without reaching statistical significance. Overall liking and liking of appearance, taste, tenderness and texture did not differ significantly among the three concepts.

Colour followed a similar pattern. Instrumental measurements and the trained panel distinguished the samples, while consumers did not rate their appearance differently.

The consumer findings concern three of the eight production concepts and a group of 76 Danish participants.

Genetics within a production concept

The integrated analysis placed the JA757 concepts closer to sensory characteristics such as tenderness and juiciness, while S757N had a firmer, less juicy profile. From the combined results, the authors identified genotype as the main driver of eating quality.

Each production concept, however, combined genetics with diet, space allowance and enrichment. These factors were not tested independently in a fully factorial design, so the experiment cannot assign separate causal effects to individual extensification measures.

The JA757 comparisons offer some indication of how limited those individual effects could be within the conditions tested. Roughage supplementation produced no consistent texture differences, nor did higher versus lower stocking density.

Cooking conditions varied between parts of the study as well. Instrumental cooking-loss and texture measurements used vacuum-packed samples heated in water; the trained panel and consumers evaluated oven-roasted meat. Future work proposed by the authors includes matched cooking methods for tenderness and juiciness and factorial experiments capable of separating genotype, diet, stocking density and enrichment.

For now, those factors remain bundled within the production concepts tested. Among the three concepts that reached the consumer panel, the many differences measured in the meat ultimately produced one significant difference in liking: juiciness.

Source

Yigitturk, S., Grønbeck, M.S., Barbut, S., Mielby, L.A., Steenberg, B., Erasmus, S.W. (2026). Can we taste extensiveness? Linking production concepts of extensification factors to the eating quality and consumer liking of chicken breast meat. Poultry Science, 105, 106379. DOI: 10.1016/j.psj.2026.106379.

Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Text summarized and editorially adapted by the Zootecnica – Poultry Magazine editorial team.

Every evisceration line assumes the birds are the same size. The venting, opening, drawing, cropping and neck-breaking machines fit the average bird. When a flock holds tight to that average, the equipment does what it was designed to do. When the flock uniformity spreads out, however, the machinery starts cutting in the wrong place, mutilating the carcass and sometimes spilling digestive tract contents.

That spillage is a problem because digestive tract content carries Salmonella and Campylobacter. Preventing that contamination is the heart of the government’s sanitary dressing requirement. Thus, a flock that shows up at the plant with too much size variation makes it difficult to meet that requirement.

Measuring the spread

Flock uniformity is measured with the coefficient of variation (CV). It is a unitless number, often reported as a percentage. A CV of zero would describe a flock with no variation, perfect uniformity that nobody ever sees. A healthy straight-run 6-pound flock should have a CV of about 12. The number climbs as uniformity gets worse. I’ve measured flocks below 10, but those were sexed flocks. I’ve also measured flocks in the low teens that ran clean and flocks above 16 that gave the evisceration crew fits.

One useful aspect of the CV is that the weight data is easy to obtain at the plant. In some operations, quality assurance already collects it. I recommend calculating a CV on every flock. It turns the processing plant into a diagnostic window looking back at the farm.

What variation costs at the line

A non-uniform flock forces a compromise with the evisceration equipment. Set it for the big birds and the small ones get missed. Set it for the small birds and the large ones get cut and mutilated. Contamination increases, as does the load on the downstream antimicrobial interventions.

Under the New Poultry Inspection System, establishment sorters identify abnormal carcasses. An inconsistent-sized flock makes that call harder. Sorters usually condemn runts rather than risk a federal inspector stopping the line for failure to sort.

However, condemning a small but wholesome carcass or stopping an evisceration line is expensive. For a complex running 1.3 million birds a week, a whole-bird condemnation rate of 0.2% unsupportable condemnations costs approximately $500,000 per year. A stopped evisceration line costs about $800 a minute.

Variation starts on the farm

A flock’s uniformity at the plant is a record of every stressor, management slip and disease challenge. Non-uniformity is a symptom pointing to opportunities on the live side.

I once measured a CV of 22.8 in a flock. The chicks in one section of the transport vehicle got hot on the way to the farm. Birds weighed 1 to 8 pounds, with an average weight of 6 pounds. Roughly 20% of the flock was affected. It’s the best example I’ve seen of a flock that could not be processed in a sanitary manner.

Several factors contribute to flock variation. For example, chicks from different-age breeder flocks create a uniformity problem. Also, males grow faster than females, which explains why a straight-run flock has a higher CV than a single-sex house.

Culling failure is a common source of flock variation. Additionally, immunosuppressive diseases such as infectious bursal disease, Marek’s, chicken infectious anemia and adenovirus cause a non-uniform flock. So does reovirus arthritis, femoral head necrosis, retained yolk and any gut insult.

Researchers report that gut health is an important factor.¹ Charles Hofacre, DVM, PhD, MAM, DACPV, has made the gut connection clear in his research.² Coccidia-damaged intestines will make the flock have a high CV. In a bad necrotic enteritis outbreak, the surviving poor doers push up the CV. Instead of one clean upright curve, you get a lagging tail.

The same intestinal damage also allows Salmonella to colonize internal organs. Poor gut health simultaneously widens the curve and raises the pathogen load. That’s two problems with one root cause.

Closing the loop

Fixing uniformity requires the plant and live operations to talk to each other. Report the CV on every flock. Set a limit. When a flock is above the limit, treat it as a signal to investigate: pull the health records, check the hatchery, look at which breeder flocks fed those chicks and assign a cause before the next placement.

Most of what drives a bad CV is preventable, but someone on the live side must act on the numbers. The plant can’t fix a flock after it arrives. Having the plant report uniformity for every flock is how you improve. Uniformity is an indicator for bird health, welfare, yield and food safety. You must measure it to fix it.

Editor’s note: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.

References

1. Choi J, Goo D, Ko H, Lee J, Kim WK. Factors Affecting Flock Uniformity in Broiler Production: Individual, Environmental, and Management Characteristics. Animals. 2026;16(2):185. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani16020185
2. Hofacre C. “Gut Integrity’s Impact on Bird Health and Food Safety” (presentation, Virtual Poultry Tech Summit, October 20, 2020), as reported in Austin Alonzo, “How Intestinal Damage Causes Disease and How to Avoid It,” com, November 18, 2020. https://www.wattagnet.com/broilers-turkeys/article/15532288/how-intestinal-damage-causes-disease-and-how-to-avoid-it.

The post Flock uniformity and sanitary dressing: how live-side variation impacts the processing plant appeared first on Modern Poultry.

The first 7–10 days of life represent the biologically most critical phase of the entire commercial broiler production cycle. Within this narrow timeframe, the chick undergoes an extreme physiological transition: from lipid-dependent embryonic metabolism (yolk-sac resorption) to exogenous carbohydrate-protein nutrition, while simultaneously developing thermoregulatory, digestive and immune systems. Modern fast-growth genetic lines (Ross 308/708, Cobb 500/700, Hubbard) exacerbate this fragility, making any management error physiologically amplified. This article analyzes, with an integrated veterinary approach, the pathophysiological mechanisms underlying the main first-week syndromes (omphalitis/YSI, starve-outs, early ascites, SDS, aspergillosis and early rickets) specifying correct chick placement management, providing reference tables for environmental and productive parameters, necropsy diagnostics and troubleshooting protocols useful for field veterinarians and poultry sector operators.

The neonatal window: a critical phase

First week mortality (FWM) is the quintessential sentinel parameter for evaluating hatchery efficiency and placement practices. An FWM exceeding 1% must be considered a clinical alarm signal requiring systematic diagnostic investigation. Modern commercial hybrids (selected for an exceptional ratio between muscle growth and feed consumption) possess growth rates that translate into extremely high metabolic and cardiopulmonary demand even in the first week.

From a thermoregulatory perspective, a chick at hatching is essentially a poikilothermic organism: hypothalamic maturation, necessary for autonomous thermoregulation, is completed only around 7–10 days of life. In parallel, the intestine is morphologically immature, with short villi and low pancreatic enzymatic activity, and the mucosal immune system (GALT, gut-associated lymphoid tissue) depends on early antigenic stimulation provided by exogenous feeding. These three variables converge in a temporal window where any management or infectious error produces irreversible consequences on the flock’s productive and sanitary development.

Environmental management: target parameters for the first week of life

Constructing an adequate microclimate is the most effective preventive measure available to the veterinarian and the farmer. House pre-heating must begin 24–72 hours before placement, with particular attention to litter temperature (measured at multiple points, at different levels, with a contact thermometer), which is the most frequently overlooked critical parameter in field practice. Synthetic operational guidelines are reported in Table 1.

Monitoring animal behaviour

Chicks should be left undisturbed for the first few hours post-placement to facilitate acclimatization; meanwhile, certain environmental parameters should be verified (light intensity and uniformity, minimum ventilation, and correct opening of vents).

Instrumental evaluation doesn’t replace observation of animal behavior; chicks distributed uniformly in the brooding area, active vocalization and regular access to water and feed indicate correct thermal comfort. Huddling beneath heat sources is the earliest and most reliable signal of hypothermia; peripheral dispersion with wings drooping and open-beak breathing indicates hyperthermia. Integrating both sources of information (instrumental + behavioral) is essential for clinically rigorous management.

Covering the brooding area with biodegradable paper on which starter feed is distributed must cover at least 70–80% of the surface, facilitating visual identification of food by chicks in the first hours of life, when the ability to locate traditional feeders is not yet fully developed.

Like feed, water represents one of the key factors for chick weaning: from its quality (interpreted as physico-chemical parameters) and temperature, one moves to systematic control of drinking lines (including nipples and cups) for correct filling and delivery, as well as verifying drinker height at all points in the brooding area. This also contributes to maintaining correct environmental humidity (expressed as Relative Humidity, RH), favouring animal acclimatization while preventing dehydration and starve-out phenomena (starvation due to lack of feed consumption).

Early feeding, GALT and nutritional transition phase

Immediate access to feed and water at the time of placement (defined in literature as early feeding) is a biological requirement, not merely a good practice. Feed intake within the first few hours triggers a cascade of interdependent physiological events:

• Pancreatic enzymes secretion (lipase, protease, amylase), necessary for the blood absorption of the residual yolk sac.
• Proliferation of intestinal villi: delays exceeding 24 hours induce irreversible atrophy, reducing intestinal absorption area and causing chronic malabsorption.
• GALT maturation: early antigenic stimulation is necessary for the development of the Bursa of Fabricius and spleen, and for antibody production in response to vaccination prophylaxis.
• Microbiota colonization: early microbial competition (principle of competitive exclusion) reduces colonization by pathogenic agents such as Salmonella spp. and Clostridium perfringens.

The crop filling control (crop check) is the management thermometer: monitoring crop filling at 2, 8–12 and 24 hours post-placement is the most immediate and reliable clinical tool to evaluate early feeding efficacy. A full and soft crop indicates combined intake of feed and water; an empty crop indicates starvation (starve-out); a hard crop indicates feed intake with insufficient water supply.

Chick quality verification: main parameters

Evaluating chick quality at the time of placement represents a fundamental diagnostic moment, capable of predicting group’s productive performance and promptly identifying critical issues related to incubation, hatching egg management or transport. The main morphological and behavioral parameters to examine include: navel closure and abdominal quality (absence of residues, scabs or signs of omphalitis; palpable and dry abdomen; absence of swellings), leg color and integrity (uniform yellow color, absence of lesions/inflammation or joint swellings), eye appearance (liveliness, full opening), beak conformation (absence of defects, clean nostrils), postural tone and reactivity level to stimuli. Added to these is the evaluation of vocalizations, an indirect indicator of the group’s welfare status and vitality. The Pasgar Score uses these criteria, divided into five macro-categories — lower limbs, beak, abdominal quality (intended as complete yolk sac resorption and navel closure with full healing) and reflexes — assigning each a value from 0 to 2, to assign a total maximum of 10. Animal groups with a score ≥8 are considered good quality; values between 6 and 7 indicate acceptable quality but require monitoring; scores ≤5 signal poor quality requiring investigation into causes.

At the time of unloading, it is important to record the rectal temperature of subjects, taking individual measurements from different points/zones of the transport vehicle, using appropriate instrumentation (e.g. thermoscan): this allows evaluation of group dispersion and any deviations from the expected range of 39.5–40.5 °C. If the latter is low, subjects will struggle to consume water and feed in the first hours, with potential development heterogeneity and phenomena of failed yolk sac resorption and related mortality. Conversely, if elevated, chicks may undergo dehydration phenomena, with depressed/lethargic profiles.

Similarly, another fundamental parameter to detect upon animal arrival is body weight. This should be measured by individually weighing at least 100 chicks, taken randomly from the crates. Individual data must be processed to calculate mean weight and uniformity, parameters useful for calculating the coefficient of variation (CV): generally, a CV between 6% and 7% is good (corresponding to approximately 85-90% uniformity); there should be no differences between the initial CV and that detected at 7 days (if over 3–4%, it is a signal of worsening management in the first days of rearing). Furthermore, body weight is a predictive factor (under good conditions) of weight at 7 days of age: the latter should approach a minimum of 4.5 times the initial weight.

Key points: performance and corrective actions

The veterinarian and operators must have a quantitative reference system to evaluate the week’s progress and identify deviations from the norm early. Table 2 summarizes the main performance indicators and operational thresholds requiring immediate corrective action.

Etiopathogenesis and diagnostics of main issues

First-week broiler pathologies often share a multifactorial pathophysiology where management stress, immune immaturity and infectious challenges intersect synergistically.

Among infectious conditions, we find Yolk Sac Infection (YSI) which, in complicated omphalitis profiles, represents one of the most frequent neonatal septicemic problems, sustained in 70–87% of cases by Escherichia coli and more rarely by Staphylococcus aureus, Salmonella spp., and Enterococcus spp. Failure of navel closure allows ascending bacterial contamination of the yolk sac, determining a profile of lethargy, distended abdomen and bluish skin with exitus within the first 3–7 days of life. Necropsy examination reveals an enlarged yolk sac, caseous or watery consistency and fetid odor, frequently associated with fibrinous peritonitis, pericarditis and perihepatitis in cases of systemic colibacillosis.

This pathology merits specific clarification for its implications regarding antimicrobial resistance management. In Italy and Europe, acquired resistance of avian E.coli to β-lactams (ESBL-producing strains), tetracyclines and fluoroquinolones is widely documented and directly correlated to indiscriminate preventive antibiotic use in the first week of chick life. Antibiotic therapy in subjects with severe YSI septicemia is frequently ineffective: tissue concentrations at the yolk sac level (an anaerobic, nutrient and rich substrate) are rarely sufficient to eradicate the infection, and mortality follows its course independently of treatment. The correct approach is therefore preventive, based on systematic hatchery audit (hatching temperature and humidity, hygiene of beak-trimming equipment, tray sanitation), elimination of hygienically poor eggs, litter pre-heating, and rigorous biosecurity at house entry. Any use of antimicrobials via drinking water must always be supported by culture and antibiogram, in compliance with principles sanctioned by EU Regulation 2019/6 and the PNCAR.

Of non-infectious nature but with high productive impact are starve-outs and early dehydration, conditions determined exclusively by management factors: lack of access to feed and water in the first 24 hours of life induces severe glycogen depletion, detectable at crop check as an empty or hard-consistency crop. Necropsy findings evidence a pale liver with glycogen exhaustion, pale kidneys and urate deposits (uricosis). Immediate correction of environmental parameters (temperature and relative humidity) together with increasing paper coverage surface to 70–80% and integration of drinking water with electrolytes and vitamins for 3–5 days, constitutes the reference management protocol.

Among cardiovascular and metabolic pathologies, ascites originates from pulmonary hypertension secondary to hypoxia (Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension, PAH), determined by insufficient temperatures or elevated CO₂ concentrations and/or an excessively rapid growth rate. Right ventricular overload results in the production of citrine-colored abdominal transudate, with right ventricular hypertrophy, hepatic congestion and edematous lungs at necropsy. Similarly, Sudden Death Syndrome (SDS, or flip-over) predominantly affects fast-growing male subjects through fatal ventricular arrhythmias, with a mortality peak between 14 and 28 days of life (anticipated in super-early hybrids) and absence of macroscopic visceral lesions at anatomo-pathological examination. For both conditions, there are no effective therapies: prevention is based on optimizing ventilation and temperature, reducing stocking density, and, in the case of SDS, modulating early growth speed through reduced starter nutritional programs.

Regarding other infectious pathologies, aspergillosis caused by Aspergillus fumigatus represents a diagnostic urgency, as there are no practicable therapeutic protocols in farming situations: triazoles (itraconazole, voriconazole) present prohibitive costs for mass use and scarce evidence of efficacy in production animal avian medicine. Massive inhalation of conidia in the first 24–72 hours of life determines a profile of severe dyspnea, gasping, and beak cyanosis, with mortality that can reach 50% in declared outbreaks. The pathognomonic lesion is represented by multifocal whitish granulomatous nodules at the level of lungs, trachea and air sacs, with mycelium visible under UV light. Prevention requires systematic mycological analysis of litter before placement (via plating on Sabouraud agar and incubation at 37 °C for 48–72 hours) as a routine protocol in houses with anamnestic history of early respiratory problems, as well as a rigorous hatchery audit.

Finally, skeletal pathologies like rickets and dysmorphism such as splay legs and tibial dyschondroplasia recognize a nutritional etiopathogenesis or malabsorption secondary to early enteritis, with deficit of calcium, available phosphorus and vitamin D₃. The necropsy profile evidences rib deformities, distorted cartilage growth and enlarged epiphyses, confirmable by bone diaphanization. Optimal starter formulation (Ca 1,0%; available P 0.45%; vitamin D₃ ≥2000 IU/kg), combined with maintaining dry and non-slippery litter, constitutes the fundamental preventive measure.

Veterinary troubleshooting guide

Clinical diagnosis in the first week is essentially a diagnosis of management issues. The veterinarian must be able to correlate farm clinical signs with predisposing factors and translate them into precise, rapid, and measurable corrective actions. Table 3 provides an operational scheme for the main scenarios encountered in the field.

Conclusions

The productive and sanitary success in broiler farming is built in the first 7 days of life. Correct management and careful monitoring in the first week by involved operators are of fundamental importance. The approach to this phase cannot be reduced to managing pathological emergencies: it must be structurally preventive, quantitative and integrated between hatchery, transport and farming.

Literature data converge unequivocally: every extra gram of weight gained at 7 days translates into 5–10 grams more live weight at slaughter, with significant impacts on conversion ratio, total mortality and overall carcass quality. The chick’s behavioral thermoregulation – not the thermometer – is the earliest and most reliable clinical indicator of environmental comfort. Systematic necropsies, weekly biometry, and a rigorous crop check at 24 hours are the fundamental diagnostic tools that every veterinarian and poultry operator must master and document.

Equally effective in interrupting recurrent cycles of neonatal pathology is a structured partnership with the hatchery, based on quantitative feedback (cumulative mortality, chick quality upon arrival, percentage of red hocks, etc.). Finally, in a European regulatory context, increasingly stringent regarding the fight against antimicrobial resistance, environmental and structural prevention is no longer an option: it is the only clinically sustainable response.

FEFAC today published its 4th update on the feed supply chain disruption risk and economic impact of the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) on soy supplies for animal feed in 2027.

The assessment warns that severe drought, Black Sea trade disruption and EUDR sourcing constraints are converging to squeeze the EU feed chain simultaneously.

FEFAC estimates a potential EU soybean meal (SBM) supply gap of at least around 5 million tonnes — roughly 20% of the EU’s total SBM footprint — for the 2026/2027 marketing year, with very limited substitution options available.

FEFAC estimates the direct extra cost of EUDR-compliant soy for feed use at up to €1.05 billion, based on total usage of around 35 million tonnes. Because rapeseed and sunflower meal prices are pegged to SBM quotations (at roughly 65%), the increase adds a further €449 million in costs for these alternative Hi-Pro proteins — bringing the total estimated impact to around €1.40 billion for SBM, RSM and SFM supplies to the EU feed and livestock sector.

Based on market information, we estimate this could translate into a direct cost impact of roughly +€40 per tonne of pig meat and +€15 per tonne of poultry meat, further undermining the competitiveness of the EU’s livestock sector.

FEFAC’s updated origin-by-origin risk assessment classifies North America, Argentina and Paraguay as low risk, with 90–100% expected SBM availability; EU origins, Ukraine and Serbia as low-to-medium risk, mainly on logistics concerns; Brazil as medium risk (an improvement, though with continued regional variation between Southern Brazil and the Cerrado/Northern export corridor); and West Africa, India and China as high risk, particularly for non-GM and organic soy niche markets.

A key open question is whether Brazil can shift part of its EU-bound SBM supply from the Northern to the Southern corridor to close this gap; however, FEFAC notes persistent bottlenecks related to storage capacity which may constrain this flexibility.

FEFAC President Nicolas Coudry-Mesny commented that “there is profound concern already about the EU’s feed material sourcing capacity due to the combined effects of persisting drought and closure of key maritime corridors, such as the Black Sea, leading to a market crunch by the end of the calendar year. The imminent application of the EUDR, which is currently disrupting EU purchases of soy from global markets after 30 December 2026, exacerbates the pressure, potentially leading to major disruption of essential feed supply chains”.

FEFAC urges EU institutions to take exceptional measures to ensure feed security and prevent an economically unviable situation for the EU livestock sector in early 2027, by ensuring immediate simplified implementation of the EUDR for in-scope soy products as well as suspending the EUDR application to palm kernel expeller.

FEFAC also urges EU institutions and national authorities to use existing and future EU trade agreements (e.g. MERCOSUR, CETA, DCFTA Ukraine, and EU-US agreement) to confirm long-standing zero-tariff schedules for soybean meal imports and to facilitate bilateral recognition of EUDR legality certification programmes.

Read the full 4th impact assessment.

Source: FEFAC press release

Mycotoxins are poisonous metabolites produced by naturally occurring mold organisms that contaminate corn, soybean meal and other feedstuffs. Even in very low concentrations, mycotoxins can hurt animal health and productivity.

The animal and food industries are constantly on the lookout for the most well-known, dangerous mycotoxins such as aflatoxins, deoxynivalenol (DON or vomitoxin), zearalenone and fumonisins.

However, recent research reveals a host of emerging mycotoxins that are not yet regularly determined or regulated. These mold metabolites include fusaric acid, moniliformin and beauvericin. Altogether, emerging mycotoxins now account for nearly a third of all identified mycotoxins.

Like the well-known mycotoxins, the emerging mycotoxins share many characteristics with ANFs that occur naturally in legume and cereal feedstuffs. ANFs include protease inhibitors (e.g., trypsin inhibitor in soybeans), amylase inhibitors and many other plant-based compounds that, left untreated, interfere with nutrient absorption and can cause micronutrient malnutrition and mineral deficiencies in poultry and livestock.

“Mycotoxins have actions similar to ANFs, leading to both direct and indirect losses associated with animal health, performance and profitability,” the report’s author explained. She provided a list of common attributes shared by ANFs and mycotoxins, making the case that both categories of naturally occurring compounds require attention with respect to poultry health and productivity. The growing prevalence of emerging mycotoxins warrants even more attention.

Mycotoxin prevalence

The report focused primarily on an analysis of nearly 6,000 corn grain samples from countries around the world conducted from January 2023 to May 2024 by the Alltech 37+ Analytical Laboratory using ultra-high performance liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry. The analysis found an average of 6.7 mycotoxins per sample, with emerging mycotoxins present in more than 30% of samples.

“Notably,” the author wrote, “these results also showed that the prevalence of seven of the key emerging mycotoxins has increased on average 6.6% between 2018 and 2024, underscoring the growing significance of these compounds in poultry feed safety.”

Fusarium molds produce many of the emerging mycotoxins, but other sources include Alternaria species. Key emerging mycotoxins include fusaric acid, moniliformin, beauvericin, enniatin A/A1 and enniatin B/B1.

The author highlighted the negative impacts of various well-known mycotoxins on poultry health and productivity, noting that only limited research is available that documents the effects of emerging mycotoxins in poultry:

• Fusaric acid can increase embryo mortality (even greater with the presence of fumonisin B1).
• Moniliformin can cause heart damage, respiratory distress, muscular weakness and immune suppression.

Meta-analyses

This report also mentioned meta-analyses that examined the use of dietary supplements to reduce or mitigate the effects of mycotoxins in poultry. The broiler and layer studies included in the meta-analyses analyzed the use of mycotoxin adsorbents, including clay minerals and yeast-based additives, particularly a commercially available yeast cell wall extract (YCWE).

The broiler studies suggested that YCWE inclusion provided several benefits, including improved efficiency and lower mortality, compared with mycotoxins alone. The layer studies demonstrated that feeding YCWE during mycotoxin challenges led to greater egg production and heavier egg weights than feeding mycotoxins alone.

What does this study mean for producers?

• Mycotoxins occur in feedstuffs and finished feeds worldwide, threatening poultry health and productivity, even in very low concentrations.
• Mycotoxins can cause losses in poultry comparable to dietary ANFs.
• Emerging mycotoxins are not yet regularly determined or regulated but can negatively impact bird health and productivity.
• Mycotoxin management includes risk assessment and potential mitigation strategies, including adsorbent feed additives.

The full paper, titled “Mycotoxins as antinutritional factors: occurrence, impacts and management,” can be found in Applied Poultry Research and online here.

Editor’s note: Content on Modern Poultry’s Industry Insights pages is provided and/or commissioned by our sponsors, who assume full responsibility for its accuracy and compliance.

The post Well-known, emerging mycotoxins are similar to antinutritional factors in poultry appeared first on Modern Poultry.

Researchers have combined wild bird sampling with environmental and disease data to map the probability of detecting avian influenza viruses across Egypt. Alongside the Nile Delta, the analysis points to southern and coastal wetlands where surveillance has so far been limited.

Egypt lies on migratory routes connecting Europe, Asia and Africa. Its wetlands provide important stopover and wintering sites for wild birds, which can carry avian influenza viruses over long distances.

A new study explores whether machine learning could help direct surveillance towards the areas where virus detection is more likely. The analysis covers wild bird populations; the occurrence of outbreaks in poultry was outside its scope.

H5 dominated the positive findings

Between 2019 and 2023, researchers sampled 1,087 wild birds belonging to 19 species. The work was carried out from September to January at four northern locations near water sources in Damietta, Port Said and Dakahlia.

Oropharyngeal and cloacal swabs were grouped in pools according to species, sampling date and location. Six species were reported positive for avian influenza virus. Eurasian teal had the highest reported prevalence, at 12.3%.

H5 accounted for 70.3% of the AIV-positive cases reported in the study, while H9 represented 9.9%. H5/H9 coinfections were found in common moorhen, Eurasian teal and northern pintail.

The presence of different influenza subtypes in the same host can create conditions for genetic reassortment. Whether this occurred in the sampled birds was not investigated.

The RT-qPCR protocol identified the H5 subtype without determining its pathotype. The H5 detections therefore cannot be classified as either highly or low pathogenic from the evidence presented in the study.

Wetlands shape the winter map

The field findings were integrated with 7,710 historical records drawn from international animal health and bioinformatics databases. After records sharing the same date and location were consolidated, 219 sampling instances across 46 geolocations remained for the spatial analysis.

The model examined a range of variables, including temperature, humidity, precipitation, vegetation, proximity to water, elevation, land cover and estimated chicken and duck populations.

Relative humidity, temperature, vegetation and proximity to wetlands had the greatest influence. Poultry density, elevation and land-cover category were excluded during the model’s final variable-selection stage. Their wider epidemiological role cannot be judged from that result alone.

Wetlands offer favourable habitats for migratory waterbirds and can concentrate large numbers of potential hosts. Temperature and humidity may also affect the persistence of influenza viruses in the environment.

According to the researchers, some of the patterns captured by the environmental variables probably reflect seasonal changes in wild bird distribution. Detailed information on bird abundance and movements was unavailable for inclusion in the model.

Surveillance gaps beyond the Nile Delta

The winter projection, calculated for conditions around 1 January, showed the highest probabilities of AIV detection along the Nile River and in the Nile Delta.

Higher values also appeared around the wetlands of Lake Nasser, parts of the south-eastern Red Sea coast and the Siwa lakes in north-western Egypt. Historical surveillance has been limited in some of these areas, particularly around Lake Nasser and along the south-eastern coast.

They are possible priorities for further sampling. Their status as infection hotspots would need to be established through field surveillance.

The model produced its most consistent positive predictions along parts of the Nile. Areas of the western desert, where wetland habitat is scarce, were more consistently associated with negative predictions.

For 1 July, the geographical pattern became much more uniform. The authors link this result to more homogeneous summer conditions and seasonal differences in migratory bird presence. Since the model did not include direct measurements of wild bird abundance, this explanation remains tentative.

More data needed before operational use

Predictive performance was limited. The model recorded an AUC of 0.608 and an F1 score of 0.596, with better classification of negative records than positive ones.

The underlying data also had a clear geographical imbalance. Records were concentrated around Damietta and Port Said, while large parts of Egypt had received little sampling. Information on seasonal changes in wild bird abundance and diversity was also lacking.

At this stage, the map is best viewed as a guide for further investigation. Its most useful contribution may be the identification of places that existing surveillance has overlooked.

Sampling in the southern and coastal wetlands would test whether the predicted pattern holds beyond the Nile Delta. Combined with better data on wild bird movements, those results could provide a stronger basis for planning future avian influenza surveillance.

Source: Nabil, N.M. et al. (2026), “Molecular surveillance and predictive risk modelling of avian influenza virus in wild birds in Egypt”, Journal of General Virology, 107:002278. The original article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution licence.

Text summarized and editorially adapted by the Zootecnica – Poultry Magazine editorial team.

The environment offers broilers an enriched environment, allowing them to convert feed to weight more efficiently. Studies have shown improvements of 3 points or more in feed conversion when the birds are raised in a gradient lighting environment versus standard lighting.

Optient lighting from ONCE^® by Signify^® is a lighting system built entirely around how a chicken sees the world. “Signify’s Optient is the first gradient lighting system designed specifically for poultry,” said Aaron Stephan, PhD, director of research and innovation at Signify.

Optient features

Optient lighting uses poultry-specific LED lights to accommodate the heightened photosensitivity of chickens. Field studies demonstrate that chickens overwhelmingly prefer high-intensity light for eating and low-intensity light for resting. Birds also prefer higher-intensity light when they are young and gradient lighting as they age.

“Optient gives chickens the ability to choose what lighting and intensity level is comfortable for them,” explains Logan Auker, VAL-CO engineer.

The lights are distributed and evenly spaced down the length of the feed line, providing a gradient of light across the barn and at various feed pans. Chickens can step into the light to eat, choosing which intensity is preferable, and then move back into lower light areas to rest, reflecting their natural behavior.

Designed for easy installation, Optient lighting attaches to existing cables already in the barn without the need for new conduit, according to Auker. The system is also energy efficient, with each LED light rated at 2 watts, compared to conventional LED ceiling lights at 10 watts.

“Dimming and lighting periods can be controlled through the whole house control system,” Auker adds. Engineered to work seamlessly with Optient lighting, the FUZE V grill-less pan feeder provides birds with easy access to feed from day one. It’s designed with high flood windows for excellent feed presentation, plus a feed-saver lip to prevent waste.

Research-based lighting

The Optient system is based on chicken-lighting research conducted at the University of Arkansas (UA). The university researchers measured chicken preferences for light intensity and type, then correlated the results with performance data and natural behaviors.

The research evaluated four lighting-intensity groups: 5 lux, 20 lux, natural light and gradient light (5 lux in dark areas to 40 lux next to feed lines).

The results showed significantly higher daily physical activity among chickens in the gradient-lighting group compared to the other groups. For example, electronic measurements detected birds were twice as active in the gradient light as birds in the constant 20-lux light group.

In addition, birds raised under Optient lighting produced significantly more dust-bathing holes, an indicator of improved welfare, than birds under other lighting systems. Their litter was also drier, consistent with lower stress and improved intestinal health.

Overall, flocks under gradient lighting outperformed those raised in other uniform lighting systems, according to UA researchers. They also showed increased flock movement, reduced stress and higher feed and water intake.

Field trials affirm better feed efficiency

To support these findings, specialists with Signify’s Optient lighting conducted extensive field trials with seven integrators in the US and Ontario to compare 20 lux lighting to the Optient lighting system. The trials lasted 15 months and involved 10 farms for full production-level comparison.

Results across 24 field trials showed broilers raised under Optient lighting had a 3-point improvement in feed conversion — 1.75 vs. 1.78 — compared to birds under 20 lux lighting. A 3-point advantage equates to approximately 0.12 lb. of feed saved per bird, amounting to 8.25 tons of feed saved each year, assuming 25,000 birds per 66-day cycle and 5.5 cycles per year.

“The 3-point improvement in feed conversion from gradient lighting confirms the financial benefit of the Optient system,” Auker says.

“In addition, the system uses less power and promotes natural bird behavior,” he adds. “Overall, Optient lighting helps poultry operations raise healthy, profitable birds.”

Optient is available in the US and Canada through VAL-CO, a manufacturer and distributor of equipment and systems for poultry production. VAL-CO also offers the FUZE V feeder, which is fully compatible with Optient to help optimize grow-out margins.

To learn more about Optient lighting, visit the website Optient Gradient Lighting, call 800-998-2526 or send an email by clicking here.

Editor’s note: Content on Modern Poultry’s Industry Insights pages is provided and/or commissioned by our sponsors, who assume full responsibility for its accuracy and compliance.

The post Broilers raised under gradient lighting show better performance, welfare appeared first on Modern Poultry.

Salmonella infections in poultry production represent a turning point rather than a simple laboratory finding. In breeder and egg production systems, the identification of Salmonella Pullorum, Salmonella Gallinarum, or Salmonella Enteritidis triggers distinct epidemiological, economic, and public health consequences. This article presents a practical and science-based framework linking laboratory diagnosis with farm-level management decisions. Unlike many poultry pathogens that primarily affect bird health, Salmonella directly links flock productivity, hatchery performance, and public health. A single diagnostic report can influence egg flow, vaccination strategy, biosecurity level, and in certain cases the future of the flock itself.

The critical issue, therefore, is not only detection, but interpretation. Misreading laboratory data may lead either to costly overreaction or to dangerous inaction. The role of diagnostics is to guide decisions, not to trigger panic.

Stepwise diagnosis: from suspicion to confirmation

Field diagnosis usually begins with rapid screening tests. These tools are valuable for early warning, but they should not be treated as definitive evidence. A positive rapid result indicates possible exposure, not confirmed infection. At this stage, the correct action is increased sampling, review of hygiene weaknesses, and progression toward serology and bacteriology, not immediate drastic interventions.

Serology, particularly ELISA, adds another layer of information by describing the flock’s immune response. In vaccinated breeders, antibody levels typically follow a predictable and relatively uniform pattern. When titers rise clearly above baseline values provided by commercial kits and variation among samples increases, interpretation shifts toward field challenge rather than vaccine response alone.

The coefficient of variation (CV) becomes a practical field indicator. Lower CV values generally reflect uniform vaccine-induced immunity. Increasing CV suggests uneven exposure within the flock and supports suspicion of active infection pressure. ELISA therefore helps determine whether the immune system is reacting abnormally and whether confirmatory testing is required. Definitive interpretation depends on bacteriological isolation and molecular detection. At this stage, serovar identification determines the management pathway.

Why the serovar changes the decision

Not all Salmonella findings have the same meaning. S. Pullorum and S. Gallinarum are host-adapted and capable of vertical transmission. Their invasion of reproductive tissues allows infection to pass through eggs to the next generation. Because of this long-term epidemiological impact, their detection in breeder flocks often justifies eradication-oriented decisions.

S. Enteritidis, in contrast, is primarily a food safety concern. Adult breeders may remain clinically normal while eggs become internally contaminated. Management therefore focuses on risk mitigation: vaccination, egg monitoring, environmental testing, and reinforced biosecurity, rather than automatic depopulation.

Other serovars frequently indicate environmental contamination rather than systemic infection, directing attention toward sanitation and hygiene improvement.

Microbiology explains persistence

The biological behavior of Salmonella explains why flocks may show repeated immune stimulation. These Gram-negative bacteria can survive for weeks or months in litter, dust, feed systems, drinker lines, and equipment surfaces. Moisture, organic matter, and biofilms create protective niches where bacteria persist despite routine disinfection.

Even well-vaccinated flocks may therefore remain under environmental challenge if reservoirs such as feed bins, egg belts, rodents, or insects are not controlled. Salmonella is susceptible to many disinfectants when cleaning removes organic matter first. Effective agents include formaldehyde and glutaraldehyde, oxidizing compounds such as hydrogen peroxide and peracetic acid, chlorine-based disinfectants in low organic loads, phenolic compounds, and quaternary ammonium compounds on clean surfaces. Heat above 70 °C rapidly inactivates the organism. Suboptimal concentrations, insufficient contact time, or heavy organic contamination allow survival, particularly in biofilms. Drying and downtime between flocks significantly reduces environmental burden.

Transmission dynamics

Vertical transmission defines the severity of S. Pullorum disease and fowl typhoid. Infection of the ovary allows bacteria to enter eggs before shell formation, producing infected chicks and sustaining infection cycles. S. Enteritidis also contaminates internal egg contents, linking poultry infection to human outbreaks. Horizontal transmission occurs via fecal contamination, feed, rodents, insects, equipment, and personnel. Environmental persistence means that infection pressure may continue long after clinical signs disappear. Understanding which pathway dominates helps managers prioritize hatchery sanitation, egg safety monitoring, or environmental hygiene.

Clinical and pathological features: supportive but not definitive

Breeder infections are frequently subclinical. Subtle indicators such as decreased egg production, poorer shell quality, or declining hatchability may be the first field signs.

S. Pullorum disease predominantly affects young chicks, causing depression, white diarrhea, pasted vents, and high mortality. Fowl typhoid in older birds leads to septicemia, reduced egg production, and mortality. S. Enteritidis infection is often subclinical in adult breeders, making surveillance essential.

Necropsy commonly reveals enlarged liver and spleen, bronze liver discoloration, ovarian regression, caseous cecal cores, and peritonitis, especially in host-adapted infections.

Laboratory diagnosis as a management decision point

Isolation confirms Salmonella presence, but serotyping defines risk category. Detection of S. Pullorum or S. Gallinarum typically necessitates eradication due to vertical transmission. Identification of S. Enteritidis requires risk-reduction measures including vaccination, intensified biosecurity, egg testing, and trace-back. Thus, laboratory findings guide management philosophy.

Impact on hatching and table eggs

In breeder operations, S. Pullorum and S. Gallinarum infections compromise hatchability and chick viability. S. Enteritidis poses a major risk in table eggs, directly affecting public health and regulatory compliance.

Vaccination strategies

Live attenuated and inactivated vaccines reduce colonization and organ invasion, particularly against S. Enteritidis. However, vaccination does not eliminate infection and must complement surveillance and biosecurity.

Limitations of antimicrobial treatment

Antibiotics may reduce mortality but rarely eliminate carriers, interfere with monitoring, and promote resistance. Therefore, treatment is not a sustainable control strategy.

Prevention as a multi-layered system

Effective control integrates Salmonella-free chick sourcing, hatchery sanitation, heat-treated feed, rodent control, environmental monitoring, and strict biosecurity. Routine bacteriology and serology support early intervention.

Diagnostics as a decision tool: not just a test result

The real value of diagnostics lies in linking data to action. Rapid tests raise suspicion. ELISA describes immune dynamics. Culture and PCR identify the agent that determines the management response. When interpreted correctly, these tools prevent unnecessary treatments, poorly timed vaccination changes, and missed infections.

In breeder production, laboratory results are not the end of the process but the beginning of structured decision making. Interpretation is not detection alone, but protects productivity, reduces costs, and safeguards public health.

Practical field interpretation

When a Salmonella-related result appears, decisions should follow interpretation rather than reaction. A rapid positive slide agglutination test should not immediately trigger drastic measures, as it primarily reflects exposure to Salmonella antigens and may include maternal antibodies or vaccine-induced responses. Instead, it should trigger expanded investigation, acting as an early screening signal that identifies flocks requiring deeper evaluation through serology, bacteriology, or molecular testing.

ELISA patterns above kit baselines combined with rising CV suggest active field exposure rather than simple vaccine response. Uniform titers with low variability are more consistent with controlled vaccine immunity, whereas heterogeneous titers across the flock indicate uneven bacterial circulation. In this context, ELISA serves as a flock-level epidemiological tool rather than proof of bacterial presence.

PCR using commercial diagnostic kits provides rapid and sensitive detection of Salmonella genetic material and is particularly valuable in hatcheries, environmental monitoring, and early infection stages. However, PCR positivity should be interpreted carefully, as it may detect DNA from nonviable organisms after disinfection. A PCR-positive, culture-negative result therefore suggests contamination pressure or early-stage presence rather than confirmed active infection, and must be evaluated alongside serology and flock history.

Culture or PCR confirmation identifies the serovar that defines the management pathway. Isolation of host-adapted serovars such as S. Pullorum or S. Gallinarum indicates systemic and vertically transmissible infection with high management impact, while detection of S. Enteritidis signals zoonotic risk and egg-safety implications. Environmental serovars may point to hygiene gaps rather than flock infection.

Laboratory findings always gain meaning when matched with vaccination history, production performance, clinical signs, and environmental conditions. Only through integrated interpretation can veterinarians avoid overreaction, prevent unnecessary losses, and implement proportional control measures that protect both breeder productivity and public health.

References

Barrow, P. A., & Freitas Neto, O. C. (2011). Pullorum disease and fowl typhoid – new thoughts on old diseases: A review. Avian Pathology, 40(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/03079457.2010.542575

BioChek. (2023). BioChek Salmonella ELISA test kit manual. BioChek BV.

Davies, R., & Wales, A. (2010). Salmonella contamination of cereal ingredients for animal feeds. Food Research International, 43(2), 626–631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2009.07.014

Desin, T. S., Köster, W., & Potter, A. A. (2013). Salmonella vaccines in poultry: Past, present and future. Expert Review of Vaccines, 12(1), 87–96. https://doi.org/10.1586/erv.12.138

Gantois, I., Ducatelle, R., Pasmans, F., Haesebrouck, F., Gast, R., Humphrey, T. J., & Van Immerseel, F. (2009). Mechanisms of egg contamination by Salmonella Enteritidis. FEMS Microbiology Reviews, 33(4), 718–738. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6976.2008.00161.x

International Organization for Standardization. (2017). ISO 6579-1:2017 Microbiology of the food chain — Horizontal method for the detection, enumeration and serotyping of Salmonella — Part 1: Detection of Salmonella spp. ISO.

Shivaprasad, H. L. (2013). Fowl typhoid and pullorum disease. Revue Scientifique et Technique (OIE), 19(2), 405–424.

Zhang, Y., Chen, Y., Gu, T., Xu, Q., Zhu, G., & Chen, G. (2019). Effects of Salmonella enterica serovar Enteritidis infection on egg production and the immune response of the laying duck (Anas platyrhynchos). Poultry Science. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps/pey532

Poultry rendering professionals will explore the latest operational, regulatory and workforce issues affecting the industry at U.S. Poultry & Egg Association’s (USPOULTRY) upcoming Poultry Protein & Fat Seminar, sponsored by USPOULTRY and the Poultry Protein & Fat Council (PPFC). The program, to be held Oct. 8-9 in Nashville, Tenn., will bring together industry experts to share practical strategies for improving plant performance, strengthening safety and addressing emerging challenges across poultry rendering operations.

The seminar will cover a broad range of topics, including regulatory developments, best practices, operation and maintenance for presses and cookers, recruiting and retaining employees, preventive maintenance through vibration analysis, supply chain control, and ingredient traceability and safety in rendering plants. Attendees will also hear a panel discussion on artificial intelligence, automation and system controls, as well as a session on dissolved air flotation treatment, handling and disposal.

“Rendering operations are continually evolving, and this seminar gives industry professionals an opportunity to learn from one another while staying current on the issues that directly affect their facilities,” said Michael Fairbairn, vice president of protein conversion at Fieldale Farms Corporation, and program committee chair. “From equipment reliability and workforce challenges to safety, regulatory requirements and new technologies, the program focuses on practical information attendees can take back to their operations and put to use.”

The program planning committee includes Colin Acedo, Pilgrim’s; Hal Davis, Darling Ingredients Inc.; Anthony Seidel, Simmons Foods; Dr. Katelyn Bennett, Pilgrim’s; and Michael Fairbairn, Fieldale Farms Corporation and program committee chair.

USPOULTRY and PPFC members can register at a discounted rate. Attendance is limited to rendering companies that are members of USPOULTRY and PPFC. Representatives from non-member rendering companies are not eligible to attend, and membership in PPFC requires approval by the Council.

Source: U.S. Poultry & Egg Association press release

Hungary has confirmed outbreaks of Newcastle disease on two commercial broiler farms in Bács-Kiskun County, according to the country’s National Food Chain Safety Office (Nébih).

The disease was detected in Fülöpháza, in the Kecskemét district. The two farms housed approximately 220,000 broilers in total. This is reportedly the first confirmed occurrence of Newcastle disease in Hungary’s commercial poultry sector in several decades, with the last official report dating back to 1992.

Clinical signs reported

The suspicion of infection arose after the flocks developed clinical signs compatible with Newcastle disease. These included increased mortality, lower feed and water consumption, and greenish diarrhoea.

Laboratory testing by Nébih confirmed the presence of Newcastle disease virus on 8 September.

Culling and control zones

The national chief veterinarian ordered the culling of the affected flocks after the disease was suspected. Authorities have also established a 3-kilometre protection zone and a 10-kilometre surveillance zone around the infected farms.

Poultry keepers have been instructed to maintain strict biosecurity and to report unusual mortality or clinical signs without delay.

Further investigations under way

An epidemiological investigation has been launched in connection with the outbreaks.

Newcastle disease is a highly contagious viral disease that can spread rapidly among poultry populations and cause severe disease and mortality.

The two confirmed holdings are located in Fülöpháza, while the authorities have established protection and surveillance zones around the affected premises.

Ghana’s 24-Hour Economy Secretariat and the Accelerated Export Development Authority have mobilised financing commitments exceeding GH¢1 billion to support the transformation of the country’s poultry value chain.

The initiative is intended to increase domestic chicken production, create employment and reduce Ghana’s dependence on imported poultry meat, according to the Ghana News Agency (GNA).

Financing for the entire chain

The announcement was made during stakeholder discussions on the National Transformation Poultry Programme in Accra.

Arnold Parker, Funding Team Lead at the 24-Hour Economy Secretariat, said the financing would cover several stages of the poultry value chain, including:

• feed production;
• day-old chick supply;
• poultry equipment;
• processing;
• storage;
• veterinary services.

The private-sector financing will involve Absa, Fidelity Bank and Ecobank. The first phase of the programme is expected to mobilise approximately GH¢300 million, with additional financing expected to be mobilised after the initial implementation cycle.

Parker said the funds were ready, but that the necessary structures still had to be established to enable them to be drawn down and effectively deployed across the industry.

The programme will therefore focus not only on increasing production, but also on strengthening the entire poultry value chain, from input suppliers and breeders to processors and off-takers.

Tailored loans for poultry producers

According to Parker, the financing framework will have to reflect the realities of poultry production cycles.

Conventional lending products can place excessive pressure on farmers when repayment schedules do not match the time required to rear birds and market them. Banks and industry stakeholders are therefore expected to develop financing products tailored to poultry operations.

The programme is also linked to Ghana’s export-development strategy, with the objective of positioning locally produced poultry products for regional and international markets.

The Secretariat is expected to work with research institutions, including the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), to improve productivity and promote innovation in the sector.

Ghana remains heavily dependent on imports

The financing announcement comes as Ghana continues to rely heavily on imported poultry products.

According to Ghana’s 2024 Budget Statement, the country consumed approximately 324,047 metric tonnes of poultry meat in 2022, while domestic production stood at 15,000 tonnes. Local production therefore accounted for 4.6% of national demand, leaving a demand-production gap of 95.4%.

The USDA Foreign Agricultural Service forecast Ghana’s 2024 chicken-meat imports at 270,000 tonnes. This figure was a forecast rather than a final import total.

The Ghana National Association of Poultry Farmers estimates that the country spends nearly US$400 million annually on imported poultry products, according to the GNA.

A broader sector challenge

The new financing initiative is intended to address constraints affecting the poultry industry across the value chain rather than production alone.

Access to competitively priced feed, reliable supplies of day-old chicks, suitable equipment, processing capacity, cold storage, veterinary services and working capital remain essential to the development of a competitive domestic sector.

The Ghanaian government had already identified poultry as an area requiring increased support in its 2024 budget. Under the Planting for Food and Jobs (PFJ) 2.0 programme, plans included supplying day-old chicks, vaccines and starter-pack feed to anchor farmers and their out-growers, with the aim of increasing domestic poultry meat production.

The programme’s impact will ultimately depend on how effectively the financing commitments are deployed and accessed by businesses across the poultry value chain.

Source: Ghana News Agency, Ghana Ministry of Finance and USDA Foreign Agricultural Service.

Corn and soybean meal still dominate Brazilian feed formulations, but the balance is beginning to shift. The expansion of corn ethanol and soybean processing is producing larger volumes of feed coproducts, while sorghum is becoming a more relevant alternative in some regions.

This matters for poultry producers because feed remains their largest operating cost. In Paraná, it accounted for around 63% of broiler production costs during the first half of 2026, according to Embrapa data cited in a new RaboResearch report.

More DDGS and soybean meal

Corn ethanol is a central part of the change. The industry absorbs corn that might otherwise go directly into feed, but it also produces distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS), which supply energy, protein and fibre.

Brazilian DDGS supply has grown by an average of 21% a year over the past five years. RaboResearch expects supply to reach 8 million metric tons by 2031. In broiler diets, the report estimates a substitution potential of 5% to 15%, depending on nutritional requirements, product quality, formulation limits and cost.

Soybean meal supplies are also likely to increase as the country raises its production of biodiesel and renewable diesel. Brazil’s Fuel of the Future framework provides for the mandatory biodiesel blend in diesel to reach 20% by 2030, although the timetable could be delayed.

RaboResearch calculates that meeting this requirement could lift soybean crushing to about 69 million metric tons. Soybean meal output would then rise by around 5 million metric tons compared with the estimated 2025 volume.

Sorghum adds another option. It is particularly suited to areas where rainfall or delays in soybean planting and harvesting make second-crop corn less viable. Brazil produced 6 million metric tons of sorghum in the 2025/26 season. Production is forecast to reach 10 million metric tons by 2031.

Implications for chicken production

The report does not anticipate a shortage of the main feed ingredients as Brazil’s animal protein industries expand. For the chicken sector, this adds to an already strong production and export base.

Brazil accounts for about 11% of global chicken production and nearly 34% of international trade, based on figures presented by RaboResearch. Improvements in farm productivity have supported this position. Average broiler carcass weight increased by around 0.9% a year between 1997 and 2025.

A larger choice of raw materials will not automatically make feed cheaper. Corn prices are expected to remain firm as ethanol demand grows, and the value of DDGS and sorghum will vary with their quality, nutritional contribution and local price.

The main advantage is flexibility. Wider access to alternative ingredients gives feed manufacturers more room to adjust formulations when commodity markets change. For a poultry industry that competes heavily on cost, that could prove increasingly valuable.

Source: RaboResearch, “Brazil: The feed and protein powerhouse strengthens its competitive edge”, 9 September 2026.

Derived from the bark of the South American soapbark tree, quillaja is increasingly used in broiler production to support gut health and coccidiosis control programs.

However, three recent studies by Huvepharma found that birds receiving quillaja alongside different anticoccidials achieved feed-conversion improvements of approximately three to four points compared with birds receiving the anticoccidials alone.

Those increases occurred without consistent changes in lesion scores, oocyst shedding or other measures of coccidiosis control, suggesting quillaja provides an additional performance benefit beyond simply increasing the anticoccidial effect of existing programs.

Testing quillaja alongside anticoccidials

In the first study, researchers fed broilers salinomycin and narasin at the midpoint of their approved dosage ranges — 50 g/ton and 72 g/ton, respectively — or the chemical anticoccidial clopidol at its lowest approved dose of 113.5 g/ton. Each treatment was compared with the same anticoccidial supplemented with quillaja at 250 parts per million (ppm).

By day 42, birds receiving quillaja alongside each of the three anticoccidials had significantly better feed conversion than those receiving the anticoccidial alone. Average bodyweight was also significantly higher among birds receiving salinomycin with quillaja.

Some supplemented groups had lower E. tenella lesion scores at day 27, but the differences were no longer significant by day 35. No significant differences were recorded in microscopic E. maxima lesions across any of the groups.

Although the results indicated that quillaja supported broiler performance, they did not establish whether this was due to improved coccidiosis control or another effect.

Comparing quillaja with higher ionophore doses

The second study was designed to compare higher ionophore doses with mid-range doses supplemented with quillaja.

Salinomycin, narasin and monensin were fed at their highest approved rates of 60 g/ton, 90 g/ton and 110 g/ton respectively. Each was compared with the same ionophore at a mid-range dose — 50 g/ton for salinomycin, 72 g/ton for narasin and 100 g/ton for monensin — plus quillaja at 250 ppm.

By day 42, birds receiving the mid-range ionophore doses with quillaja had significantly better feed conversion than those receiving the higher ionophore doses alone. Average bodyweight did not differ between treatments.

Some differences in lesion scores were recorded at day 27, including lower gross E. tenella scores in the monensin comparison and lower gross E. maxima scores in the salinomycin comparison. However, none remained significant at day 35.

“If you saw the same improvement simply by using more of the anticoccidial, then all you’re really seeing is better coccidiosis control,” explained David Smith, DVM, director of technical services at Huvepharma.

“But because we saw that benefit even when we compared quillaja with higher doses of the anticoccidial, we think it’s doing more than simply improving coccidiosis control.”

Performance gains persist at maximum ionophore doses

A third study tested that conclusion by feeding salinomycin, narasin and monensin at their highest recommended rates, with and without 250 ppm quillaja.

Feed conversion again improved with quillaja supplementation, particularly in birds receiving salinomycin, where significant differences were recorded at days 35 and 42. The salinomycin group supplemented with quillaja also had significantly lower gross E. tenella lesion scores at day 27, but there were no differences in microscopic E. maxima scores. By day 35, lesion scores were again similar across all treatments.

Across the three studies, quillaja supplementation improved feed conversion by about two to three points, although the response varied depending on the anticoccidial used, the stage of production and the treatment comparison, said Brandon Doss, DVM, professional services veterinarian at Huvepharma.

Doss said the findings support earlier research evaluating quillaja alongside live coccidiosis vaccination. Across five controlled studies and three field evaluations, supplemented birds recorded an average feed-conversion improvement of about five points compared with vaccination alone.

As with the latest studies, those improvements were not accompanied by consistent changes in lesion scores, oocyst shedding or other measures of coccidiosis control.

“We didn’t see meaningful differences compared with vaccine alone, but we did consistently see an improvement in overall performance, particularly feed conversion,” Doss said.

Benefits go beyond coccidiosis control

For Smith, the fact that quillaja produced a response alongside vaccination and anticoccidials suggests its benefits go beyond managing Eimeria.

“We’ve seen additional performance benefits even in programs we considered to already have strong coccidiosis control,” he said. “That suggests quillaja is having some other effect on gut health and gut integrity, even if we don’t yet know exactly what’s driving it.”

In earlier trials, Huvepharma investigated several measures of intestinal health, including tight-junction proteins, villus-to-crypt measurements and intestinal morphology. Although researchers saw some favorable trends, none were consistent enough across studies to explain the performance responses, Smith said.

“I think quillaja is probably creating a more favorable environment for beneficial bacteria in the gut,” he added. “Whether that’s by promoting beneficial bacteria or suppressing harmful ones, we don’t know, but I think it’s changing the microbiome in a way that improves performance.”

Complementing coccidiosis control programs

While the latest research suggests quillaja offers benefits beyond coccidiosis control, Smith says producers should not view it as a replacement for vaccines or pharmaceutical anticoccidials.

“Quillaja isn’t a good enough anticoccidial to be an anticoccidial alone, but there is a benefit that is not just anticoccidial activity,” he said. “It makes a good complement to existing anticoccidial drugs or vaccines.”

Doss said Huvepharma’s research has also found no evidence that supplementation interferes with the vaccine cycling required for a live vaccine to stimulate immunity.

“We’ve demonstrated in multiple studies that it doesn’t have a negative effect on vaccine cycling or immunity. It allows the vaccine to do its job and develop immunity in the birds.”

That flexibility could become increasingly useful as producers seek additional tools to support existing programs, particularly as coccidiosis-control options become more limited, Doss said.

“If you look at the history of the US poultry industry, our toolbox for supporting coccidiosis control programs has become more and more limited,” he added. “We see this product as another tool to support those programs, regardless of whether you’re using vaccination or ionophores.”

Start early, feed continuously

Based on the studies, Smith recommends feeding quillaja throughout the production cycle rather than introducing it at a later feed stage.

“Our research has shown that you gain the most benefit when the product is fed continuously throughout the bird’s life,” he said. “If quillaja is affecting the microbiome and you wait until birds are 14 to 16 days old to start feeding it, the microbiome is already well established by the time they transition to the second feed,” he said.

“I think you would still see some improvement if you fed it for only part of the production cycle, but I don’t think it would be as consistent or as pronounced as feeding it throughout the bird’s life.”

For producers considering adding a quillaja product to their feed, Smith says the value of improved feed conversion outweighs the cost of supplementation in most production systems.

“Obviously the returns are different for every customer based on bird size and feed costs and the response within each system, but generally speaking the cost of a quillaja product per ton of treated feed is more than covered by the feed-conversion improvements,” he said.

Doss says Huvepharma is now evaluating quillaja alongside synthetic chemical anticoccidials. If the feed-conversion response is repeated, it would complete the evidence that the benefit can occur regardless of the primary coccidiosis-control approach.

“We’ve got the data with vaccine. We’ve got the data with ionophores, and then if we get the data with the chemical synthetic anticoccidials, that will complete the story,” he said. “It shows a benefit, no matter what you choose as your coccidiosis-control option.”

The post Evidence builds for quillaja benefits beyond coccidiosis control appeared first on Modern Poultry.

“We don’t really know what goes on at day of age regarding immune responses,” said Rodrigo Gallardo, DVM, PhD, DACPV, professor in poultry medicine at the University of California–Davis School of Veterinary Medicine.

“Several experiments suggest that we should vaccinate chicks later, but the industry won’t abandon day-of-age vaccination because it’s simply too convenient,” he added.

The main immune deficiencies in young chicks are found within heterophils and natural killer cells, reducing the phagocytic and oxidative capabilities. Additionally, the number of T, B and MHC class II-positive cells is reduced, gradually increasing until 8 to 9 weeks of age.

“Immature, ’non-conventional’ T cells though, are abundant after vaccination; these cells might be the key to protective immune responses,” Gallardo said.

He presented the findings of his study evaluating the immune responses of early chick vaccination with two respiratory virus strains at the 2026 International Poultry Scientific Forum.

Focus on immune response

The first objective was to determine the cellular and humoral responses after day-of-age vaccination with an infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) Massachusetts-strain vaccine and a Newcastle disease virus (NDV) enteric strain.

The second objective was to assess immune responses to the challenge of a heterologous IBV strain.

Gallardo used specific-pathogen-free chickens, with the chicks divided in four groups: unvaccinated controls, NDV vaccinated, IBV mass vaccinated and a group vaccinated with both vaccines.

Five days post-vaccination, Gallardo necropsied a group of birds and collected Harderian glands and tracheas for flow cytometry (to characterize immune cells). He also collected blood to determine specific antibodies and recorded respiratory signs.

Twelve days post-vaccination, researchers collected tears and blood from birds to evaluate Immunoglobulin A (IgA), an antibody associated with the immune system, and antiviral responses. On day 15, Gallardo’s team challenged the birds with a heterologous IBV-DMV1639 strain to evaluate a potential boost in cross protection. At this time, researchers divided each of the four groups in two (challenged and unchallenged) for a total of eight groups.

Five days after the challenge, the team again collected Harderian glands and tracheas to evaluate cellular immunity. They also collected blood and information about respiratory signs.

The study concluded on day 35, with a final blood sample.

Key findings

• Five days post-vaccination, “the birds’ mucosal respiratory system was conditioned, vaccines multiplied activating macrophages, while we saw mild respiratory signs. The results also showed a normal increase in IgA in tears and IgY in serum for each of the viruses, indicating a good mucosal and systemic priming,” Gallardo said.
• In tracheas and Harderian glands, undifferentiated T cell and B cells expanded, while conventional T cells remained stable. “Although poorly defined in chickens, these undifferentiated T cells seem to be important, covering functions that regular T cells would perform,” he noted.
• The study found an increase in IgY responses after IBV vaccination. “When we vaccinate day-of-age chicks with IBV, there’s a poor antibody response. Surprisingly, in the dual-vaccinated chickens, we saw a statistically significant increase in these antibodies. So, there’s something interesting occurring when you combine these two vaccines.”
• “After challenge, we noticed IBV vaccine protection ameliorating respiratory signs and viral shedding” Gallardo said. “Interestingly, vaccinated non-challenged birds still had IBV virus almost 20 days after vaccination; this virus might be stimulating the immune system, inducing memory.”
• “The persistence of the virus and maybe the presence of another virus (in the case of double-vaccinated birds) increased the retention of macrophages and T cells, improving immune responses after a heterologous challenge,” he said.

Maximizing the early immune response

Gallardo offered these take-home points from the study to further understand and optimize the early immune response in chicks.

Dual-vaccinated chickens demonstrated the largest macrophage and T-cell accumulation, suggesting strong local responses when challenge occurs.

Viral shedding persisted in vaccinated birds without challenge, potentially increasing the recruitment and retention of macrophages and T cells to the infected site. This improves the responses after challenge even though a vaccine overload might cause rolling reactions, underscoring the importance of proper vaccination in the hatchery, Gallardo concluded.

The post Vaccine options to optimize chicks’ early immune response appeared first on Modern Poultry.

The U.S. Poultry & Egg Association (USPOULTRY) and the USPOULTRY Foundation are seeking research preproposals to address colibacillosis, one of the most common and economically significant bacterial diseases affecting commercial layer operations worldwide. Caused by avian pathogenic Escherichia coli (APEC), colibacillosis can lead to increased mortality, reduced production and bird health and welfare challenges, particularly during periods of physiological or environmental stress.

Through its Board Research Initiative (BRI), USPOULTRY is requesting practical, science-based solutions to better understand, prevent and control colibacillosis in commercial layer flocks. Priority areas include disease epidemiology and transmission, APEC strains and virulence factors, environmental and management risk factors, concurrent infections, pullet management, vaccination and nutrition, as well as biosecurity and sanitation practices. The goal is to identify strategies that reduce disease incidence and severity, minimize production losses, improve bird health and welfare and support sustainable antibiotic stewardship.

Researchers from colleges, universities and research institutions are invited to submit preproposals by Nov. 2. To view more information about this topic and how to submit preproposals, visit the USPOULTRY BRI webpage.

Source: U.S. Poultry & Egg Association press release

Although links between the gut microbiome and broiler performance are well established, translating microbiome data into practical decisions has been a challenge, said Fernanda Castro, PhD, micronutrition and health technology lead for Cargill Animal Nutrition.

To address the gap, Cargill developed Galleon, a microbiome intelligence platform that uses non-invasive sampling to assess flock gut-health status. Combined with years of gut health and nutritional expertise, Galleon helps create nutritional, management and health-related recommendations tailored to individual production systems.

Microbiome maturity

Drawing on a database of more than 70,000 microbiome samples, Cargill researchers have identified a consistent pattern of microbiome development associated with good bird performance, Castro explained.

Young birds typically have high levels of lactate-producing and proteolytic bacteria, but as birds age, levels of proteolytic bacteria drop, while short-chain fatty acid (SCFA)-producing bacteria increase.

“That switch to the microbiome that is richer in SCFA-producing bacteria typically suggests that the microbiome is more mature in broilers,” Castro said. “That’s because it indicates good ceca development and production of beneficial metabolites in the gut.”

Achieving microbiome maturation earlier in life can help support overall bird health and performance throughout production, she added.

Impacts of crude protein on microbiome development

In an analysis of data from five nutrition research trials, Cargill researchers used Galleon to investigate how crude protein levels impact microbiome development.

Birds fed lower crude protein diets showed the expected decrease in lactate-producing bacteria, while SCFA-producing bacteria increased.

In contrast, birds fed higher crude protein diets maintained elevated levels of lactate-producing bacteria at later ages, indicating that microbiome maturation was delayed, Castro explained.

The study also found that Campylobacter jejuni levels were higher at two sampling points in the higher-protein group.

“By knowing this information, we can provide recommendations to our customers,” Castro explained.

“[In this situation] we could add more fiber to the starter diet to promote more SCFA-producing bacteria. And we could also use postbiotics or some kind of essential oil.

“With Galleon, we’re not only looking specifically into nutritional alternatives. We can also make suggestions on changes in management,” she added. “By giving a snapshot of what’s happening over time, we can help customers make better, more informed decisions.”

The post Video: Artificial intelligence-powered platform helps translate microbiome data into practical management decisions appeared first on Modern Poultry.

The 2026 Women’s Leadership Conference brought together women from across the poultry, egg and agriculture industries for conversations centered on leadership, professional growth, resilience and the importance of supporting one another. From navigating burnout and building a professional reputation to finding mentorship and creating space for the next generation of women leaders, the conference reinforced the value of confidence, connection and community at every stage of a career.

Kicking off the conference, Kim Rice, vice president of food safety and quality at Rose Acre Farms, discussed the growing influence of women in agriculture and the importance of expanding leadership opportunities across the industry. With approximately 1.2 million female producers in the United States, Rice encouraged attendees to build on that momentum by supporting and advocating for other women through mentorship, professional development and trusted networks. She challenged attendees to say “yes” to opportunities, invest in one another and help create meaningful pathways for women to succeed in agriculture.

Lisa Burdick, head of human resources, safety and operational excellence at Pilgrim’s, addressed building high-performance teams while moving beyond burnout. Nearly every hand in the room went up when she asked who had experienced burnout or witnessed its effects, underscoring the widespread challenge. Burdick discussed the additional pressures women leaders often face and emphasized that sustainable leadership and healthy boundaries are critical to long-term performance. “Boundaries are not barriers. They are guardrails,” she said, encouraging leaders to protect their time, energy and focus while modeling healthy practices for their teams.

Two panel discussions, “Building Personal Brand and Reputation” and “Successes, Setbacks and Comebacks,” offered practical perspectives on navigating career growth, leadership and professional challenges. Panelists encouraged attendees to take chances, step outside their comfort zones and intentionally build a reputation rooted in authenticity, consistency and accountability. The panelists and moderators emphasized that professional growth often requires strong communication, teamwork, problem-solving, and an ability to read the room and recognize the right time to raise an issue or pursue an opportunity. The discussions also highlighted the importance of giving and receiving honest feedback, setting boundaries and staying true to personal values. When setbacks occur, panelists encouraged attendees not to view rejection as the end of the road, noting that a missed opportunity can ultimately lead to a better fit. Above all, attendees were reminded to embrace challenges, learn from setbacks, give themselves grace during demanding seasons and remain open to the opportunities that can shape their careers.

Source: U.S. Poultry & Egg Association press release

When a strain of highly pathogenic avian influenza, HPAI, tore through U.S. poultry farms in early 2025, farmers culled tens of millions of birds, and egg prices soared.

The losses highlighted the poultry industry’s urgent need for additional tools and methods to limit the virus’ spread.

Now, researchers from the Texas A&M College of Agriculture and Life Sciences are preparing to test a new potential line of defense. They will use a form of ultraviolet light called far-UVC to see if it can kill HPAI without harming birds on poultry farms.

“The current HPAI outbreak began around 2022 and hasn’t ended,” said Morgan Farnell, avian microbiology and immunology professor, Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service program leader and associate department head in the Texas A&M Department of Poultry Science. “Avian influenza is still being found in Texas wildlife. It is not considered to be endemic in the U.S. and is classified as a reportable poultry disease.”

Farnell and Ziteng “Tim” Xu, Texas A&M AgriLife Research smart technologies in poultry production scientist and assistant professor in the Department of Poultry Science, will lead the third and final phase of a multiyear study starting in February, examining whether far-UVC light can reduce airborne pathogen loads inside commercial poultry houses.

Testing far-UVC light in real-world conditions

Far-UVC light differs from conventional germicidal UV light because it can inactivate viruses and bacteria without penetrating deeply enough to damage human or animal skin and eyes. Far-UVC light is of interest as an anti-pathogen tool because it could be used safely in occupied spaces such as hospitals, clinics, classrooms, restaurants and poultry houses.

Researchers from Columbia University Center for Radiological Research and St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital are studying how effective far-UVC light is against pathogens in a specialized isolator. The results established the groundwork for further testing in commercial farm settings, Farnell said.

Texas A&M’s role is to determine whether far-UVC performs similarly under commercial conditions.

“The isolators used at St. Jude are small and not very representative of the real world,” Farnell said. “We’ll stock birds at commercial density and test it at Texas A&M.”

Researchers will use air-sampling equipment to measure indicator organisms, including aerobic bacteria, coliforms and Staphylococcus aureus, before and after far-UVC exposure. Those readings will inform far-UVC’s potential impact on pathogens like HPAI.

The Barbara J. Huffman and William M. “Bill” Huffman ’53 Poultry Science Farm Complex, where the trials will be conducted, along with the department’s Biosafety Level 2 laboratory and biosecurity and environmental sampling experience, made the university a natural partner for the project’s applied phase, Farnell said.

Measuring how far-UVC works around birds

Xu will focus on the engineering challenges of deploying the technology in poultry houses. Dust can absorb or scatter far-UVC light before it reaches spaces occupied by birds. His team will measure how much ultraviolet radiation reaches those areas.

Using artificial intelligence-assisted camera tracking, researchers also will monitor whether the light will affect the behavior, circadian rhythms and growth performance in the chickens.

Xu is also designing an integrated disinfection system that combines far-UVC air treatment with UVC-enabled positive-pressure ventilation and robotic floor-disinfection modules.

The team will test which components are necessary to effectively control pathogens. If the project is successful, researchers could eventually apply the technology beyond poultry facilities to swine and dairy operations, Xu said.

A potential new tool for poultry producers

The study by Farnell and Xu will span two years and include four flocks, two raised under summer conditions and two under winter conditions.

Farnell said the poultry industry needs new tools to protect bird health. The industry has steered away from using antibiotics over the past decade. However, vaccinating for avian influenza is problematic with broilers for a number of reasons.

Any tool must maintain flock productivity to make economic sense for farmers, he said. Fewer infections could reduce mortality and economic losses throughout the poultry supply chain.

“Anything to improve bird health improves animal welfare and ultimately creates better outcomes for producers,” Farnell said.

The project is funded through a $2 million U.S. Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service grant from the Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza Poultry Innovation Grand Challenge award.

Source: Karn Dhingra, Texas A&M AgriLife press release

H5 confirmed in Colonia backyard birds

The outbreak was identified in backyard birds in Colonia, in south-western Uruguay. According to the MGAP, the case was investigated following a health alert involving mortality among birds of different species at the affected premises. An initial rapid test was negative, but samples were subsequently sent to the official laboratory, where testing confirmed the presence of the virus.

The veterinary authorities have placed the affected holding under official sanitary measures and have begun an epidemiological investigation to establish the origin of the event and identify possible links with other premises. Measures include sanitary depopulation of exposed birds, their safe disposal, and cleaning and disinfection of the premises and potentially contaminated materials.

Authorities are also tracing potential movements, contacts and other epidemiologically relevant events during the preceding weeks. Surveillance has been reinforced in the surrounding area, while the Ministry of Public Health is following up people who may have been exposed to birds at the infected premises.

Emergency measures apply nationwide

The national emergency was established through Resolution No. 202/026 of the General Directorate of Livestock Services (DGSG). Although the outbreak has so far been identified in backyard poultry, the response applies across Uruguay, reflecting the need to limit the risk of further spread through bird movements and contact between domestic and wild birds.

Movements of backyard poultry and birds that are not controlled through the country’s official Poultry Monitoring System have been restricted. Birds controlled through that system are exempt from the movement restriction.

Backyard poultry and birds kept in free-range production systems must now be housed in closed and roofed facilities. The requirement is part of the preventive measures established under Uruguay’s avian influenza contingency plan.

The emergency order also suspends fairs, auctions, exhibitions and other events involving avian species. As a direct consequence, birds will not be present at Expo Prado, Uruguay’s major agricultural and livestock fair, scheduled to run from 11 to 20 September.

No cases detected in commercial poultry

The distinction between backyard and commercial poultry is central to the current situation. Uruguay’s authorities have stated that, as of the latest update, no highly pathogenic avian influenza cases had been detected in commercial poultry production.

This does not eliminate the risk for the sector. Backyard flocks, free-range systems and smallholders can represent potential interfaces between wild birds, domestic poultry, people, equipment and local trade. In this context, the nationwide confinement requirement is a preventive biosecurity measure rather than an indication that the virus is already widespread in industrial poultry farms.

The authorities have also stressed that the consumption of poultry meat and eggs does not present a risk to human health in relation to this event. The public-health concern is instead linked to direct exposure to sick or dead birds, which is why citizens have been advised not to handle them and to report unusual mortality or suspect clinical signs immediately.

A second emergency in 2026

This is Uruguay’s second avian influenza emergency declaration in 2026. The first was issued on 24 February after the virus was detected in wild birds in the departments of Maldonado, Rocha and Canelones. That emergency was subsequently lifted in May, making the September declaration a new emergency rather than a continuation of the February measures.

The first case in that episode was confirmed on 20 February in a coscoroba swan found near Laguna Garzón, in eastern Uruguay.

The recurrence of an emergency within the same year illustrates the persistent pressure posed by avian influenza at the wildlife–domestic poultry interface. It also shows why surveillance cannot be limited to commercial farms: early warning depends on timely reporting from backyard flock owners, wildlife monitoring, diagnostic capacity and close coordination between veterinary and public-health services.

Biosecurity remains the first line of defence

For commercial poultry producers, the Uruguayan emergency is a reminder that biosecurity must be maintained even when no cases have been reported in the production sector itself. The priority is to reduce opportunities for virus introduction through birds, people, vehicles, equipment, feed, water and contact with wild fauna.

In practical terms, farms should review the integrity of housing, prevent access by wild birds, rodents and other animals, and ensure that personnel, visitors and vehicles follow appropriate hygiene and disinfection protocols. Producers should also maintain mortality records and establish procedures for the immediate reporting of abnormal mortality or respiratory, digestive or neurological signs. The MGAP has specifically called on poultry owners to strengthen cleaning and disinfection of facilities, equipment, vehicles and materials used for bird management.

For free-range and backyard systems, temporary housing in covered and enclosed facilities is particularly important. While this may create management and welfare challenges, the measure is designed to reduce opportunities for contact with wild birds during a period of heightened epidemiological risk.

The importance of early reporting

The Uruguayan response underlines the importance of rapid detection. The Colonia case was investigated after unusual bird mortality was observed, and confirmation followed laboratory testing despite an initially negative rapid test. This sequence is a practical reminder that a negative initial screening result should not automatically close a suspected avian influenza investigation when mortality patterns or other evidence remain compatible with the disease.

Prompt notification allows veterinary services to impose movement controls, investigate contacts, collect samples, conduct surveillance and reduce the likelihood that infected birds, contaminated equipment or other risk pathways will spread the virus further.

For Uruguay’s poultry industry, the immediate objective is to keep the outbreak contained within the affected non-commercial setting. The longer-term objective is broader: maintaining strong surveillance, disciplined farm biosecurity and effective communication with producers, backyard flock owners and the public, so that suspected cases are reported before a local event becomes a production-wide crisis.

Pakistan’s poultry sector provides an important example of the challenges associated with the intensification of broiler production and antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Rapidly expanding production, substantial antimicrobial use — particularly preventive use — and shortcomings in biosecurity and farm management can create conditions that favour the selection and dissemination of antimicrobial-resistant bacteria.

A rapidly growing sector under sanitary pressure

Pakistan has a large and rapidly expanding poultry industry. According to the Pakistan Economic Survey 2025–26, the poultry sector has grown at an average annual rate of 8.1% over the past decade. The country is the world’s eleventh-largest poultry producer, and poultry contributes approximately 43.3% of Pakistan’s total meat production.

Punjab is one of Pakistan’s main poultry-producing regions, with a high concentration of commercial broiler farms. The scale of production makes antimicrobial stewardship and disease prevention increasingly important.

Extensive antibiotic use: evidence from commercial farms

Several studies have documented extensive antimicrobial use on Pakistani poultry farms.

A 2023 cross-sectional survey of 40 poultry farms in rural Punjab found that all the farms surveyed used antibiotics. Sixty per cent of farmers reported obtaining antibiotics without a veterinary prescription, while 45% reported using antibiotics as growth promoters. Colistin, either alone or in combination with amoxicillin, was reported by 60% of the farms. The study also identified significant shortcomings in farm infrastructure: 85% of the farms had no wastewater drainage system.

The findings should, however, be interpreted within the scope of the study: the survey covered 40 farms in Pindi Gheb, Attock district, and therefore cannot be considered representative of all poultry farms in Pakistan.

More recent research provides detailed data on antimicrobial use in commercial broiler production. A 2024 study covering 100 farms, 225 flocks and 741 group treatments found that 34% of treatments were administered for therapeutic purposes, while 66% were used prophylactically. A large proportion of treatments were administered during the first week of production.

Colistin accounted for 17% of group treatments, followed by enrofloxacin at 8%, while neomycin and amoxicillin each accounted for 7%. Procaine penicillin and streptomycin each accounted for 6%. Overall, 57% of the active substances identified in the study were classified as critically important for human medicine, including 30% classified as highest-priority critically important antimicrobials.

These findings do not mean that every farm uses antibiotics in the same way, but they highlight the extent to which antimicrobial use remains embedded in some commercial broiler production systems.

Resistance genes and dissemination along the production chain

The potential consequences become particularly significant when resistance genes are detected at several stages of the poultry production chain.

A 2026 study investigated antimicrobial-resistant Escherichia coli in a vertically integrated broiler production system in Pakistan. Researchers collected 200 samples in 2024 from four successive stages: broiler breeders, day-old chicks, 30-day-old broilers and retail poultry meat.

Eighteen E. coli isolates were recovered using selective media for colistin- and tigecycline-resistant bacteria. Of these isolates, 11 carried the tet(X4) gene, which is associated with resistance to tetracyclines including tigecycline, while seven carried mcr-1.1, a gene associated with transferable colistin resistance. One isolate carried both genes.

The mcr-1.1 gene was detected at all four stages of the production chain. Genomic analysis also identified an ST-1011 lineage showing a pattern consistent with clonal transmission of tet(X4) across successive stages of the integrated production system.

The findings therefore provide molecular evidence consistent with the dissemination of resistant bacteria and resistance determinants across an integrated poultry production chain. They do not, however, constitute definitive experimental proof of a continuous farm-to-fork transmission pathway. Nor did the study demonstrate that consumers became infected. Its public-health significance lies instead in the potential for foodborne exposure to bacteria carrying clinically important resistance determinants.

Antimicrobial resistance is also present in backyard poultry

The problem is not limited to intensive commercial production.

A 2023 study of backyard chickens in Pakistan analysed 320 cloacal swabs and recovered 164 E. coli isolates, including 74 extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing isolates.

Among the E. coli isolates, approximately 71% were resistant to enrofloxacin, 70% to colistin and 77% to cefotaxime. Resistance was also high for several other antimicrobials.

Although backyard and commercial production systems differ substantially, these findings indicate that antimicrobial resistance is also present in non-commercial poultry populations.

Regulation and national action plans

Pakistan has introduced measures aimed at addressing antimicrobial resistance. The country’s National Action Plan on Antimicrobial Resistance adopts a One Health approach and includes measures to improve antimicrobial-use optimisation, surveillance and stewardship, as well as actions aimed at phasing out the use of antimicrobials as growth promoters.

At provincial level, Punjab’s poultry legislation prohibits the use of colistin and ciprofloxacin as antimicrobial growth promoters in poultry feed. This should not be interpreted as a general ban on these substances for all veterinary or therapeutic purposes.

The existence of regulations, however, does not automatically guarantee effective implementation. Research assessing antimicrobial-use governance in Pakistan has identified weaknesses in legislation, enforcement and surveillance, while the 2024 farm-level study also noted the absence of formal nationwide surveillance of antimicrobial use in food-producing animals.

Biosecurity and good management: the farmer-veterinarian perspective

The experience of Pakistani veterinarian and poultry farmer Adnan Shoukat, reported by the Financial Times, illustrates how improvements in farm management may help reduce reliance on antibiotics.

Shoukat manages around 54,000 chickens near Faisalabad and has implemented a series of biosecurity and environmental measures, including vehicle and personnel disinfection, water treatment with citric acid and controlled ventilation.

According to his own estimate, these measures have reduced his annual expenditure on antibiotics by around 25% per bird.

This is a farm-level example rather than the result of a controlled scientific trial, so the figure should not be interpreted as proof that these specific interventions necessarily produce a 25% reduction in antibiotic use across poultry farms. Nevertheless, it illustrates how disease prevention and environmental management may reduce the need to rely on antimicrobials.

A public-health and economic challenge

Antimicrobial resistance is not only a veterinary issue. It is one of the major global public-health challenges of the coming decades.

Projections from the Global Research on Antimicrobial Resistance (GRAM) project indicate that bacterial AMR could directly cause more than 39 million deaths worldwide between 2025 and 2050 if current trends are not reversed.

For a large and rapidly developing poultry sector such as Pakistan’s, responsible antimicrobial use is therefore relevant both to public health and to the long-term sustainability of production.

The issue is also becoming increasingly important for international trade, as importing markets introduce stricter requirements concerning antimicrobial use, residues and food safety.

What is needed now

Reducing antimicrobial resistance in poultry requires more than simply limiting the number of antibiotics used. The priority should be to reduce the need for antibiotics in the first place.

Key measures include:

• stronger enforcement of existing regulations;
• greater transparency and control throughout the feed supply chain;
• systematic monitoring of antimicrobial use at farm level;
• improved farmer and veterinarian training;
• stronger biosecurity protocols;
• effective vaccination programmes;
• improved ventilation, litter and environmental management;
• rapid diagnosis and targeted treatment of bacterial diseases;
• and integrated AMR surveillance covering farms, animals, food products and the environment.

Better data are particularly important. Standardised monitoring of antimicrobial consumption can help identify where and why antibiotics are being used and determine whether interventions are actually reducing their use.

A challenge for the entire production chain

The Pakistani case illustrates a broader problem facing intensive livestock production worldwide.

High animal density, frequent disease pressure and extensive antimicrobial use can create favourable conditions for the selection and dissemination of resistant bacteria, particularly when preventive measures and biosecurity are inadequate.

The solution is therefore not simply to remove antibiotics from the production system. It is to build production systems in which antibiotics are needed less often: systems based on effective biosecurity, vaccination, environmental management, accurate diagnosis and responsible veterinary oversight.

The detection of resistance determinants such as mcr-1.1 and tet(X4) at multiple stages of an integrated poultry production system demonstrates why this approach must extend beyond individual farms. The available genomic evidence is consistent with the dissemination of resistant bacteria and resistance determinants along the production chain, although the precise transmission pathways require further investigation.

The challenge for Pakistan — and for poultry production more broadly — is to make disease prevention the first line of defence, with antimicrobial treatment reserved for situations in which it is genuinely necessary.

The next gains in egg production may come not only from better genetics, nutrition or flock management, but also from making better use of information already collected across the supply chain.

This is the central message of a new report published by RaboResearch in collaboration with the World Egg Organisation (WEO). The future of egg value chains: How data, digital tools, and smart, connected systems will reshape the industry looks at how digitalization could affect the sector over the next decade and beyond.

Adoption is still at an early stage and varies widely between regions and production systems. Yet the reasons to invest are becoming clearer. Labour is harder to find, feed and energy costs remain volatile, disease risks are high, and customers increasingly expect evidence on welfare, sustainability and traceability.

Sensors are already able to collect information on climate, feed, water, energy use and equipment. Cameras can monitor bird behaviour and distribution, floor eggs, mortality and equipment status, while acoustic systems may help detect changes in bird health or stress. Robotics and automation can reduce repetitive work and improve consistency.

Artificial intelligence adds another layer by turning these streams of information into alerts, forecasts and recommendations. The aim is not to replace farmers, veterinarians or nutritionists, but to help them identify problems earlier and make better-informed decisions.

From individual farms to a connected chain

The larger opportunity, according to RaboResearch, lies in connecting data between the different stages of the egg value chain.

Flock forecasts, for example, could be compared with grading results, stocks and customer demand. Producers and packing operations would then be able to identify shortages or surpluses earlier and adjust their plans.

In many cases, the data already exists but remains scattered across systems that were not designed to communicate with each other. Progress will therefore depend as much on integration and common standards as on new sensors, cameras or AI applications.

There are also unresolved questions. Companies will need to decide who owns the data, how it can be shared safely and how the benefits should be divided. Cybersecurity, investment costs and staff skills will also influence the pace of adoption.

Most of the industry is still building basic data visibility or starting to connect separate systems. Only a minority of leading companies have moved towards predictive management, and RaboResearch expects a broadly coordinated value chain to take a decade or more to emerge.

Rather than fully automated egg production, the report sees “supervised autonomy” as the more realistic direction: digital systems will take on more monitoring and forecasting, while people will remain responsible for strategy, investment and professional judgement.

Source: RaboResearch and World Egg Organisation, “The future of egg value chains: How data, digital tools, and smart, connected systems will reshape the industry”, September 2026.

Electron beam treatment, or eBeam, can reduce microbial contamination without the use of heat. Its effects on poultry meat, however, are not always the same: chicken and turkey may respond differently, and the dose applied can influence some product characteristics.

A study published in Poultry Science evaluated eBeam doses of 3 and 4 kGy in ground chicken and turkey purchased from a local grocery store. The products were treated in their original modified-atmosphere packages and compared with untreated controls.

The work follows an earlier study by the same research group, in which treatment at 3 kGy reduced experimentally inoculated Salmonella and Campylobacter by 99.99% in commercial packages of ground poultry meat. The new study did not repeat the microbiological tests. Instead, the researchers examined pH, cooking loss, colour, texture and sensory characteristics.

In ground chicken, pH did not change significantly at either 3 or 4 kGy. Both doses reduced cooking loss without altering the instrumental texture of the cooked patties. Redness decreased in the raw meat, while lightness and yellowness remained largely unchanged.

Turkey responded differently. The treatment had no significant effect on cooking loss or on the colour of the raw meat. After cooking, however, redness was higher at 4 kGy than at 3 kGy, while the control did not differ significantly from either treatment. At 4 kGy, the researchers also recorded a reduction in pH and changes in almost all the instrumental texture parameters, with the exception of adhesiveness. At 3 kGy, texture values remained similar to those of the control.

Sensory analysis was carried out by seven trained panellists, who evaluated aroma, flavour, basic tastes, texture and after-feel attributes. No significant differences were found among the turkey samples. Most attributes also remained unchanged in chicken, although an aroma off-note was more pronounced in samples treated at 3 and 4 kGy than in the control.

The researchers suggest that this off-note may be linked to oxidation induced by irradiation. Packaging could also play a part, although the study did not directly compare different packaging materials or atmospheres. Future work proposed by the authors includes examining vacuum packaging, the use of antioxidants and other possible adjustments to the process.

Overall, the 3 kGy dose produced fewer changes in meat quality than 4 kGy, particularly in turkey. The findings show that eBeam treatment needs to be optimised according to the type of meat, dose and product characteristics. According to the authors, its industrial application will also depend on economic feasibility and consumer acceptance, supported by appropriate labelling, education and communication.

Source: Kalapala T. et al. (2026), “Impact of Electron Beam (eBeam) Treatment on Meat Quality and Sensory Attributes of Ground Chicken and Turkey”, Poultry Science, 105, 107037. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2026.107037

Insect meals are receiving growing attention as possible alternative protein sources for poultry diets. However, it would be misleading to treat insects as a single feed ingredient. Species, rearing substrate, developmental stage and processing method can all have a substantial effect on their composition and nutritional value.

A recent narrative review examined the available evidence on the most widely studied species, including black soldier fly (Hermetia illucens), yellow mealworm (Tenebrio molitor), house cricket (Acheta domesticus) and silkworm (Bombyx mori). The studies covered full-fat and defatted meals, oils, extracts and, in some cases, whole larvae. Since the products and experimental conditions vary considerably, the results are not always directly comparable.

Crude protein is only part of the picture

Insect-derived ingredients can provide protein, lipids, minerals and vitamins. Crude protein content alone, however, is not enough to assess their nutritional value. Amino acid profile, digestibility and actual nutrient availability must also be considered.

Processing plays an important role. Defatting can increase protein concentration and improve product consistency, while excessive heat treatment may reduce the availability of some amino acids.

Chitin, a component of the insect exoskeleton, also requires attention. At moderate concentrations, it has been associated with possible prebiotic and immunomodulatory effects. At higher levels, however, it may reduce digestibility. Its contribution to gut health and immune responses still needs to be better understood, particularly under commercial production conditions.

There are also marked differences in lipid composition. Black soldier fly larvae are generally rich in lauric acid, while mealworms and crickets contain higher proportions of unsaturated fatty acids. The choice of insect species may therefore affect not only the energy supplied by the diet, but also the lipid profile of poultry meat and eggs.

Results depend on the diet

Overall, the available evidence shows that insect-derived ingredients can partially replace conventional protein sources without compromising broiler or laying hen performance, provided that the diet remains properly balanced. Some studies have reported improvements in growth, feed efficiency or selected intestinal and immune-related parameters.

The response is not consistent across all studies. Results vary with the insect species, type of product, inclusion level, age of the birds and overall feed composition. At higher inclusion levels, chitin and changes in the structure, colour or composition of the diet may affect digestibility, feed intake and performance.

The findings on meat and egg quality are also mixed. Moderate inclusion levels generally do not appear to compromise the main quality traits, although changes in yolk or meat colour have been recorded in some trials. One of the studies cited in the review also associated the use of full-fat black soldier fly larvae meal with a higher proportion of saturated fatty acids and a lower proportion of polyunsaturated fatty acids in meat. Product quality should therefore be considered when assessing this ingredient.

From research to commercial use

Production scale and cost remain two important barriers. For insect meals to gain a larger role in feed formulation, production will need to reach sufficient volumes and become more cost-competitive with established protein sources.

Safety is another consideration. Rearing substrates need to be carefully controlled, as any heavy metals, pesticides or other contaminants they contain may accumulate in insect tissues. Heating and drying can reduce microbial loads, but these treatments must form part of clearly defined production processes supported by regular quality controls.

Standardisation is another unresolved issue. Feed formulators need ingredients with predictable specifications, while the composition of insect-derived products can still vary considerably.

Insect meals may therefore offer new opportunities, both as nutrient sources and through the presence of potentially functional compounds. They are not, however, ready-made or universally cost-effective replacements for soybean meal or fishmeal. Their value depends on the product, the inclusion level and the way the diet is formulated. More consistent products and further long-term trials under commercial conditions will be needed to define their role more clearly.

Source: Naeem M. (2026), “Insects in poultry nutrition: nutritional value, functional effects, challenges, and future perspectives”, Bulletin of the National Research Centre, 50:62. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42269-026-01449-0. Published under a CC BY 4.0 licence.

Drawing on more than 70,000 hatchery vaccination audits conducted through Ceva Animal Health’s C.H.I.C.K (Chick Hatchery Immunization Control Keys) Program, Alba Pfaff, MS, senior technical marketing manager at Ceva Animal Health, discusses what helps hatcheries maintain high vaccination standards, the details that matter most and how better use of data could support even greater consistency.

Q: Ceva’s C.H.I.C.K Program has provided hatcheries with vaccination quality monitoring, technical support and training for 17 years, encompassing more than 70,000 audits across nearly 100 countries. What has that experience taught you about the factors that determine vaccination quality in practice?

A: One of the clearest lessons we have learned is that teaching is about repetition. Vaccination quality is not achieved through a single training session or a one-time equipment setup. It requires continuous reinforcement.

The more frequently we provide training, observe vaccination practices and give feedback to hatchery teams, the better and more consistent vaccination quality becomes. Even when people know the correct procedure, small deviations can gradually become part of the daily routine. Regular audits and training help bring the process back to the standard and reinforce why each step matters.

We have also learned that vaccination quality is rarely determined by one factor alone. It is the combination of people, equipment, vaccine preparation, application technique, chick handling and continuous monitoring.

The best equipment cannot compensate for poor technique, and even a highly trained team cannot consistently deliver good vaccination if equipment is not correctly maintained or calibrated.

Q: The program focuses on five critical control points — vaccine preparation, dose accuracy, vaccination quality, equipment maintenance and staff training. Where can problems be most easily missed?

A: Problems often arise from small details that can easily be overlooked. Vaccine preparation is one example.

We focus on having a clean, dedicated vaccine preparation room for day-old chick vaccines, correct use of personal protective equipment and adherence to proper preparation and hygiene procedures. Good organization of the preparation area, correct vaccine handling and maintaining a clean environment throughout the process are all important steps in protecting vaccine quality and ensuring consistency.

Q: Data collected between 2021 and 2025 show vaccination quality consistently above 95% for spray vaccination and above 97% for gel application. What does it take to maintain that level of consistency across different hatcheries and production environments?

A: The high consistency comes from standardized procedures, trained hatchery vaccination crews, well-maintained and correctly calibrated equipment and regular quality-control checks.

Spray and gel application also present different challenges. With spray vaccination, droplet size, spray pattern and coverage are important. With gel, we focus on gel consistency, droplet distribution and uniform coverage across the chicks.

Understanding those differences allows hatchery teams to focus their quality-control checks on the factors that matter most for each application method.

Q: What role can data play in helping hatchery teams identify problems before they have a significant impact on vaccination quality?

A: Greater use of data allows hatcheries to identify trends, benchmark performance and address potential issues earlier.

Instead of looking at a single audit in isolation, the C.H.I.C.K Program application allows us to track vaccination quality over time. For example, if the data show a gradual decline in spray coverage, the team can investigate the equipment, settings or application process and make a practical adjustment on the hatchery floor.

Q: How much of maintaining consistent vaccination comes down to the people performing the work, and how much to the equipment?

A: Both people and equipment play an important role in vaccination consistency. Well-trained operators understand what good vaccination should look like, while preventive maintenance ensures the equipment can consistently deliver it.

Hatcheries that sustain high performance are those that invest in both: regular staff training, clear procedures, routine equipment checks and preventive maintenance, rather than waiting for a problem to occur.

Q: The C.H.I.C.K Program has now maintained independent Quality Recognition from Bureau Veritas for 10 years. What role can external quality standards play in maintaining consistency over time?

A: Independent recognition from Bureau Veritas has reinforced our commitment to consistent, standardized practices across countries and to continuous improvement of the program.

The recognition involves independent review of how the C.H.I.C.K Program’s Quality Code of Practice is implemented, including whether processes and procedures are properly defined, documented and controlled. That external scrutiny also gives customers confidence that the same high standards are being applied consistently across hatcheries and countries.

Q: If vaccination quality is already consistently high, where is the greatest opportunity to improve further?

A: The greatest opportunity is in using technology and data to move from monitoring quality to predicting and preventing variability.

Greater connectivity between vaccination equipment, real-time data and benchmarking will allow hatcheries to identify opportunities for improvement even earlier. At the same time, continued innovation in equipment, training and strong partnerships will help ensure that high vaccination standards are maintained as hatcheries become increasingly automated.

Editor’s note: Content on Modern Poultry’s Industry Insights pages is provided and/or commissioned by our sponsors, who assume full responsibility for its accuracy and compliance.

The post Hatchery vaccination: why consistency requires constant attention appeared first on Modern Poultry.

Poultry industry safety professionals gathered at the 2026 National Safety Conference for the Poultry Industry to explore strategies for to continue to promote safe workplaces through prevention, early intervention and greater employee engagement. Across the various discussions, one message remained consistent: effective safety programs depend on recognizing potential risks early and turning that information into meaningful action. The conference also celebrated industry achievements in workplace safety, recognizing a record 272 poultry facilities for outstanding safety performance.

Michele Garner-Janna, CSP, CPE, chief experience officer and co-founder at What Works Institute, examined the importance of shifting from lagging to leading safety indicators to better identify and address risks before incidents occur. Attendees were encouraged to develop metrics tailored to their organization’s specific risks and focus on three key shifts: measuring activity effectiveness, identifying risks before harm occurs, and increasing the speed at which organizations learn and respond. Garner-Janna emphasized that meaningful safety metrics should drive conversations, decisions and actions, allowing organizations to focus on behaviors that prevent harm rather than simply tracking outcomes after the fact.

A panel discussion featuring Rick Hellinga, senior director of safety, health and loss prevention at Simmons Foods; John Horne, vice president of safety and health at Wayne-Sanderson Farms; Pam Satchel, senior area safety manager at Tyson Foods; and moderated by James Ferrell, senior director of safety and security at Perdue Farms, focused on serious injury and fatality prevention and explored how companies can turn high-level safety strategies into consistent action at the plant, line and team member levels. Panelists discussed identifying significant risk categories, establishing clear standards, and using routine assessments and leading indicators to identify potential exposures before incidents occur, stressing that effective SIFP requires engaging team members, operations and maintenance personnel while embedding risk awareness, accountability and prevention into daily conversations and activities.

Halie Silva, BSN, RN, COHN-S, complex nurse manager at Simmons Foods, discussed standardizing ergonomic intake to support early intervention and reduce the progression of musculoskeletal disorders that may account for a portion of injuries in poultry processing. She also emphasized creating a workplace culture where employees feel comfortable reporting discomfort early, allowing organizations to intervene before symptoms develop into more serious injuries.

Source: U.S. Poultry & Egg Association press release

In a webinar supported by the Poultry Science Association and Animal Nutrition Centre of Canada, Rychlik explained, “In nature, chicks are hatched in a nest and remain in contact with their parents from the very first moment of their lives. This difference is important for the development of chicken gut microbiota.”

Rychlik and his team compared chicks raised in commercial hatcheries with chicks placed in physical contact with an adult hen. They analyzed gut bacteria using DNA sequencing.

“The cecal microbiota composition differs in chicks kept alone,” Rychlik said. He found that chicks raised in hatcheries are dominated by intestinal Gram-positive bacteria, specifically Firmicutes, and are sensitive to infections. In contrast, “chicks kept with an adult hen developed gut microbiota that couldn’t be differentiated from the microbiota of the adult hen and were resistant to infections.

“This experiment completely denies the long-held belief of age-dependent development of chicken gut microbiota,” Rychlik said. He found that early microbial development is driven by exposure, not time. “If you add a proper source (parent, adult, birth, contact), chicks can be colonized by adult-type microbiota from the very first days of their lives.”

Disease resistance

“Hatchery chicks are sensitive to different intestinal infections, while chicks exposed to adult microbiota are resistant to infections like a Salmonella challenge,” he said.

After more than a decade of work, Rychlik’s team developed a unique mixture of nine specific anaerobic bacteria that promote disease resistance.

When this bacterial mixture, QunCNA, was administered to newly hatched chicks that were challenged with Salmonella a week later, the research team observed dramatic protection.

“Chicks colonized by this mixture were 100 times more resistant to a Salmonella challenge,” he said. “In addition, we have evidence that if there is increased resistance to a Salmonella challenge, chicks are also more resistant to other enteric diseases as well.”

QunCNA was approved for use in the Czech Republic in 2024, and in 2025, it was used in about 5% of chicks produced nationally, mostly broilers. “Farmers and users were quite satisfied,” Rychlik noted. Adoption has continued to rise with a critical side benefit: reduced antibiotic use.

Early protection for chicks

Rychlik explained that most mortalities occur during the first 3 or 4 days after chicks are placed in houses. Thus, from a producer and industry perspective, 7 days is too long to wait for protection. “Waiting until day 7 for protection wouldn’t cover chicks during their most vulnerable period.”

The team began investigating bacterial exposure early in chicks’ lives, including bacteria present in embryos, eggshell waste and newly hatched chicks themselves. They found that day-old chicks often carried near-monocultures of either Enterococcus faecalis or Escherichia coli.

“Either chicks were completely free of bacteria or, when these bacteria were present, they formed nearly 100% of the bacteria found,” he said.

This opened the door to bacteriophage use. “If there are nearly monocultures of E. faecalis or E. coli, it might be possible to use phages. When you administer the phages, the bacteria target is in there, and there is no interference with other bacteria,” Rychlik explained.

His early trials suggest that phages, when combined with probiotics, work synergistically. “Initial experiments were a moderate success, but when we combined the phages with our probiotic product, we noted an increase in treatment efficacy.”

He then analyzed eggshell waste from newly hatched hatchery chicks. Unsurprisingly, Salmonella was identified, and he observed an interesting trend: Salmonella was always absent whenever Chryseobacterium and Sphingobacterium were present in eggshell waste, but present when the other two were absent.

“We started to be interested in these two bacteria for the potential anti-effects against Salmonella,” he noted. “When Chryseobacterium and Sphingobacterium dominated, farmers reported lower mortalities.”

To protect the chicks in hatchery environments, Rychlik began experimenting with a combination of Chryseobacterium and Sphingobacterium, spraying surfaces, floors and walls of hatcheries.

“Spraying the hatchery environment on day 20 of embryonic development reduced the unwanted microbiota.”

Multi-pronged approach reduces mortality and antibiotic use

Summarizing his work, Rychlik said that using a multi-pronged approach — probiotics at hatch, phages in early drinking water and beneficial bacteria in the hatchery environment — reduces mortality and the need for antibiotics.

“When we combine all these three steps, chickens can be produced without any use of antibiotics, protecting not only the chickens but also human populations.”

The post Early microbial exposure shapes chick gut health, improves disease resistance and reduces antibiotic use appeared first on Modern Poultry.

Antimicrobial-use context

ANVOL contrasted the Brazilian situation with the efforts made by French poultry producers to reduce antibiotic use. Citing the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety (Anses), the organisation said exposure of poultry to antibiotics fell by 71% between 2011 and 2024. The figure is consistent with the long-term decline documented by Anses in antimicrobial exposure among French poultry.
For the French sector, the issue is therefore not limited to the immediate restriction on trade. It also concerns whether imported products compete under equivalent animal-health, traceability, environmental and animal-welfare requirements.

Audit under scrutiny

The French organisation called for close attention to an audit being carried out in Brazil by the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Health and Food Safety (DG SANTE).

The audit focuses on poultry and honey, for which Brazil had provided written guarantees of compliance. The Commission’s audit team was expected to complete its work on 4 September, after which an audit report will be prepared. If the findings are positive, the Commission could propose adding Brazil back to the EU list of authorised third countries for the sectors concerned, subject to approval by EU Member States.

ANVOL said the review should go beyond checking administrative commitments and should verify compliance in practice throughout the poultry chain, from farms to processing facilities. It called for documented, regular and verifiable controls, as well as a rigorous assessment of the audit’s conclusions before any possible resumption of Brazilian poultry meat exports to the EU.

Call for mirror measures

ANVOL described “mirror measures” as an essential tool for ensuring reciprocity in agri-food trade. European poultry producers are subject to stringent rules on sanitary standards, environmental performance, traceability and animal welfare, it said; imported products competing on the EU market should meet equivalent requirements.

These demands represent ANVOL’s position on the broader debate over reciprocity and should not be interpreted as meaning that EU legislation currently imposes identical requirements across all these areas on imported poultry.

French poultry self-sufficiency strategy

The association linked the debate to France’s broader poultry self-sufficiency strategy. It noted that more than one in two chickens consumed in France is imported and set out a 2035 target of recovering 33% of imported volumes, reducing the share of imported chicken to less than one in three.

According to ANVOL, achieving this objective would require 2,200 new standard poultry houses, nearly 600 Label Rouge houses and €2.8 billion in investment across farms, hatcheries, animal nutrition and processing. These figures are targets and investment estimates put forward by the French poultry sector rather than EU requirements.

The EU suspension therefore represents not only a trade issue for Brazil but also a wider point of contention for European poultry producers, who argue that imported products should compete under comparable regulatory conditions.

Source: interpro-anvol.fr/importations-de-volailles-bresiliennes-anvol-salue-linterdiction-europeenne-et-demande-des-garanties-avant-toute-reprise/

See also:

EU suspension puts Brazilian animal-protein exports at risk

UK urged to ban Brazilian meat imports over antibiotic and AMR concerns

Brazil debates possible feed additive restrictions as it races to meet EU antimicrobial rules

The European Union has suspended the entry of certain Brazilian animal products, including beef, poultry meat, equine products, aquaculture products, honey and animal casings, after Brazil was not included in the EU list of third countries recognised as providing the required guarantees on antimicrobial use. The measure took effect on 3 September 2026 and is expected to affect an estimated US$1.84 billion in Brazilian exports to the European market annually, with beef and poultry accounting for the largest share.

The restriction is not based on reported irregularities in individual consignments. Rather, it reflects the European Union’s assessment that Brazil had not provided sufficient guarantees that the relevant products exported to the EU comply with its antimicrobial-use requirements and that the necessary measures are in place to demonstrate such compliance. Under Article 118 of Regulation (EU) 2019/6, third countries exporting the affected animals and animal products to the EU must provide the required guarantees concerning antimicrobial use.

New EU requirements

EU rules prohibit the use of antimicrobials to promote growth or increase yield in food-producing animals. They also restrict the use of certain antimicrobials that are reserved in the EU for treating certain human infections, as part of the bloc’s wider response to antimicrobial resistance.

These requirements have applied to EU producers since 2022, while the provisions governing imports from third countries entered into effect on 3 September 2026. On 12 May, EU Member States endorsed a revised list of third countries authorised to export to the EU under Article 118. Brazil was not included in that list.

Brazil’s exclusion has effectively halted the entry into the EU of the affected categories of Brazilian animal products. The measure covers bovine and equine animals and products, poultry, aquaculture products, honey and casings. Beef and poultry account for the largest share of the trade affected by the measure.

Poultry audit under way

Poultry and honey may be among the first affected sectors to regain access to the EU market. Brazilian authorities have provided documentation and information concerning the relevant export chains, with particular attention to poultry meat, fish, beef, eggs and honey. A European Commission audit of the poultry and honey chains began on 24 August and is scheduled to conclude on 4 September.

The audit is intended to allow European authorities to assess the structure and functioning of Brazil’s official control system in practice, including the procedures used to demonstrate compliance with EU antimicrobial requirements. After the mission, the Commission will assess its findings and prepare its conclusions. If Brazil is considered to have provided the necessary guarantees, it could subsequently be considered for inclusion again in the EU list of authorised third countries. Any restoration of market access would therefore require a further EU decision and would not follow automatically from the completion of the audit.

Brazil cites antimicrobial reforms

The Brazilian government has challenged the restriction, saying it had maintained technical and political discussions with the EU since the bloc’s decision in May. In a joint statement issued on 3 September, the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said Brazil had implemented measures to meet the applicable requirements and had submitted documentation and information concerning poultry meat, fish, beef, eggs and honey. The government also reaffirmed the strength of Brazil’s official agricultural-defence system.

Brazil has also tightened its domestic antimicrobial policy. On 24 April, with the measure published in the Official Gazette on 27 April, the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock issued Ordinance SDA/MAPA No. 1,617/2026, prohibiting the import, manufacture, sale and use of performance-enhancing feed additives containing antimicrobials classified as important in human or veterinary medicine. The substances listed include avoparcin, bacitracin, zinc bacitracin, bacitracin methylene disalicylate and virginiamycin.

The ordinance also provides a 180-day transitional period for certain products manufactured or imported before the rule entered into force.

The Brazilian government says these measures reinforce its action against antimicrobial resistance and are consistent with One Health principles. However, the EU restriction will remain in place unless and until Brazil provides the guarantees required under Article 118 and the European authorities determine that the applicable requirements have been satisfactorily addressed.

Trade and market implications

The suspension comes at a sensitive moment for EU-Mercosur trade relations. Brazil argues that the affected products were subject to quotas and tariff reductions negotiated under the EU-Mercosur agreement and has warned that their exclusion from the European market could alter the balance of concessions underpinning the agreement. The Brazilian government has also indicated that it could consider reciprocal measures and use available legal and trade-settlement mechanisms if the issue is not resolved.

Brazilian poultry industry association ABPA has maintained that the country’s poultry sector complies with EU import requirements and has defended the industry’s production and control systems. The immediate challenge for exporters is therefore to demonstrate compliance in a form accepted by EU authorities while the Commission assesses the information supplied by Brazil and the findings of its audit.

For the poultry sector, the outcome of the ongoing audit could be an important step towards restoring access to the EU market. A positive assessment would not automatically reopen the market, but it could provide the basis for Brazil to be considered again for inclusion on the EU’s list of authorised third countries. The timing of any such decision remains uncertain.

See also:

EU suspends Brazilian poultry imports, French sector calls for strict safeguards

UK urged to ban Brazilian meat imports over antibiotic and AMR concerns

Brazil debates possible feed additive restrictions as it races to meet EU antimicrobial rules

Controlling ILT is a priority for broiler producers in regions where the virus is endemic, particularly during the fall and winter periods, when lower temperatures and concurrent respiratory challenges increase disease pressure.

The clinical presentation of ILT in long-lived birds can pose challenges when managing flocks in the field, Ivan Alvarado, DVM, PhD, associate director at Merck Animal Health, explained.

“A particular characteristic of ILT is that when you realize your birds are sick, those birds have been spreading the virus for many days,” he said. He noted that infected but clinically asymptomatic flocks can enable the spread of the disease through movement of personnel or equipment to susceptible farms.

Changes in how birds are handled and moved during high-risk periods can help curb the spread of disease, but vaccines are needed in endemic areas.

In broilers, preventative programs often use recombinant HVT products at the hatchery, such as Merck Animal Health’s Innovax® range, alongside live chicken-embryo-origin (CEO) vaccines, with some variation depending on US state regulations and producer preferences. Although HVT vaccines are known for their safety and efficacy, CEO vaccines have been associated with reversion to virulence and adverse effects on performance in some cases.¹

For longer-living birds, such as commercial layers or broiler breeders, tissue culture origin (TCO) vaccines are available, providing good protection without the potentially negative effects associated with CEO vaccines.

Enhancing protection of long-life birds against ILT

Research conducted at the Poultry Diagnostic and Research Center at the University of Georgia focused on using Innovax® HVT-ND-ILT and LT-IVAX® vaccines, both alone and in combination, against ILT challenge in longer-living birds.² Chickens in the study fell into five groups:

1. HVT-ND-ILT alone
2. Live TCO ILT vaccine alone
3. HVT-ND-ILT and Live TCO ILT vaccine
4. Unvaccinated, challenged
5. Unvaccinated, unchallenged

The researchers administered HVT-ND-ILT subcutaneously at day of age and performed live TCO ILT vaccination by eye drop at 10 weeks. They challenged the birds at 15 weeks via intratracheal and eye-drop routes with a highly virulent strain. To assess the efficacy of the dual program, they evaluated clinical signs, shedding of the challenge virus in the trachea, mortality and ability to transmit the virus to naive birds.

They observed no mortality in the group vaccinated with both the HVT-ND-ILT and the LT-IVAX vaccines, compared with 95% survivability in the group vaccinated with the HVT-ND-ILT vaccine alone and 87.5% in the group receiving the TCO ILT vaccine alone. Survivability was only 41.7% in the unvaccinated, challenged group, corroborating the virulence of the challenge virus.

Striking results on viral shedding

The researchers also saw the lowest clinical signs in dually vaccinated birds, while viral shedding was lowest in the dually vaccinated and TCO groups.

The shedding recorded in the dually vaccinated group was comparable to that of the unvaccinated, unchallenged control, and the introduction of the contact-naive, unvaccinated birds post-challenge further confirmed this. Here, the team recorded no infection of naïve birds from the group that received the dual program.

“We have recommended that our customers with long-lived birds use the recombinant HVT-ND-ILT vaccine at the hatchery and the TCO ILT vaccine at about 10 to 12 weeks of age by eye drop. When implementing a dual vaccination program, outstanding protection has been observed in endemic areas time and time again,” Alvarado said.

“Running this study under controlled conditions not only supported our field observations but also showed us where the dual program makes a difference. We found that it not only better controls clinical signs associated with the challenge virus, but also essentially eliminated viral shedding.

“There was no transmission of the virus after challenge because birds vaccinated with the dual program had solid local and systemic protection, preventing the challenge virus from replicating to levels compatible with horizontal transmission to naïve birds.”

Tackling the evolving threat of Newcastle disease

ND remains a concern for managers of US broiler flocks in some states due to its potential role in complicated respiratory conditions, elevated mortality and the possible presence of virulent strains.

A second study, conducted at the National Poultry Research Center (SPRL), evaluated combinations of Innovax HVT-ND-IBD administered subcutaneously at day of age with a commercial Newhatch-C2® live vaccine administered by coarse spray.³] The groups were:

1. HVT-ND-IBD at day 1
2. HVT-ND-IBD and live C2 vaccine at day 1
3. HVT-ND-IBD at day 1 plus live vaccine C2 at day 11
4. Live C2 vaccine at day 1 and 11
5. Unvaccinated

The study also explored the use of two challenge times: 3 and 4 weeks of age. For the challenge, the researchers used the California 2018 strain of ND virus, a highly virulent strain that causes severe illness and mortality in the field.

HVT and live vaccine at hatchery bring best results

All vaccinated birds had 100% survival when challenged at 3 weeks of age, with a slight drop-off at 4 weeks in the group receiving two live vaccines. In contrast, 100% mortality was observed in the non-vaccinated challenged group, with birds dying before day 5 post-challenge. Similar to the ILT study, the team recorded the most notable results in viral shedding.

The data suggested that the best combination overall was the use of the recombinant HVT-ND-IBD vaccine plus the live Newhatch-C2 vaccine at day one. This approach resulted in no clinical signs, a higher antibody response and reduced viral shedding across time points in the study.

Strong challenges call for dual approach

Alvarado noted that his colleagues have seen particular success using dual vaccination approaches in areas where ILT and ND are considered endemic, or in flocks placed on farms with previous outbreaks. “My advice is, when you have a strong challenge, think about adding a live vaccine to your recombinant vaccine,” he said.

“This elicits local immunity, which is critical for the protection against respiratory diseases such as ILT and ND. It doesn’t have to be a very strong live vaccine; it can be mild. You just need that synergy, which is going to give you the best performance during the whole production cycle.”

“By protecting broilers and long-life birds against ILT and ND, they can achieve their genetic potential, optimizing performance,” he added. “The cost of the program is largely insignificant if you can prevent the adverse effects associated with these potentially devastating diseases from occurring.”

1 García M. 2017. Current and future vaccines and vaccination strategies against infectious laryngotracheitis (ILT) respiratory disease of poultry. Vet Microbiol. 206:157–62.
2 Becerra R, Maekawa D, García M. 2023. Protection efficacy of recombinant HVT-ND-LT and the live attenuated tissue culture origin vaccines against infectious laryngotracheitis virus when administered individually or in combination. Avian Dis. 67(2):145–52.
3 Ferreira HL, Reilley AM, Goldenberg D, Ortiz IR, Gallardo RA, Suarez DL. 2020. Protection conferred by commercial NDV live attenuated and double recombinant HVT vaccines against virulent California 2018 Newcastle disease virus (NDV) in chickens. Vaccine. 38(34):5507–15.

Editor’s note: Content on Modern Poultry’s Industry Insights pages is provided and/or commissioned by our sponsors, who assume full responsibility for its accuracy and compliance.

The post Dual HVT recombinant and live attenuated vaccine programs enhance overall protection against ILT and ND appeared first on Modern Poultry.

The U.S. Poultry & Egg Association (USPOULTRY) and the USPOULTRY Foundation are accepting research preproposals for the 2027 Spring Research Competition. Colleges, universities and research institutions are invited to submit preproposals by Nov. 2.

USPOULTRY research funding supports projects that address broad industry needs and deliver practical, science-based benefits to the poultry and egg industries, including animal welfare; breeder management for turkeys and broilers; meat bird management; commercial egg production; poultry health and disease; environmental management; food safety; hatchery management; nutrition; processing; and employee safety and health. Research focused primarily on the development, validation or advancement of a specific commercial product or technology, as well as projects receiving substantial commercial support, may be less likely to receive funding.

Applicants should submit a one-page synopsis outlining the proposed research project and its potential benefit to the industry. USPOULTRY’s Foundation Research Advisory Committee, composed of poultry industry professionals, will evaluate the preproposals and invite full proposals for projects that demonstrate relevance to current industry needs and research priorities. Final funding decisions for the 2027 Spring Research Competition will be announced in April 2027.

USPOULTRY updates its research priorities every two years to reflect evolving challenges and opportunities across the poultry and egg industries. The complete 2026–2028 Research Priorities are available on the USPOULTRY website. Innovative research concepts outside the identified priorities are also encouraged and will be considered based on demonstrated industry need.

Since the program’s inception, USPOULTRY and the USPOULTRY Foundation have invested more than $39 million in research grants supporting projects at more than 50 universities and federal and state facilities.

For detailed submission guidelines and to review the 2026–2028 Research Priorities, visit the USPOULTRY website.

Source: U.S. Poultry & Egg Association press release

FEFAC’s national feed industry associations confirmed significant adverse impacts from repeated heatwaves in many EU Member States, both in Central, Southern and SouthEastern Europe as well as in key production regions in North-Western Europe.  This assessment aligns with findings highlighted in the JRC MARS report, published last week and the initial impact assessment published by Copa-Cogeca.

The most severe impacts on the feed supply chains are the shortage of forages and summer crops, which mainly affect the cattle population, with farmers forced to already start feeding winter silage/forages increasing feed insecurity. The expected substantial shortfall in EU maize production will further exacerbate pressure on the feed supply chain in the coming months, reducing availability of both maize silage and maize grain on the EU market.

This exceptional situation, already considered worse than the last major EU heat wave recorded in 2018, calls for exceptional measures to help facilitate the EU feed supply chain’s coordinated efforts to alleviate pressure on the supply of essential feed grains and forages. FEFAC members are fully engaged in assisting and supporting downstream value chain partner efforts, ensuring feed and food security and business continuity at the livestock farm level, while safeguarding animal welfare through adaptation of diet formulations to cope with heat stress. However, further contingency measures are urgently required at EU level to help mitigate and prevent the growing risk of disruption of essential feed supplies, particularly in the ruminant sector.

In our view, the drought situation calls in particular for initiating again the full range of EU crisis mitigation measures released in 2022 as part of the response to the combined effects of the COVID crisis the direct impact of the Russian invasion in Ukraine, which led to a severe disruption and shortfall in the availability of feed grains, in particular maize, for which the EU faces a structural deficit.

FEFAC experts’ feed market impact analysis

• At this stage, FEFAC market experts expect an additional import need for the EU in the new marketing year of more than 7 mio. tons of maize, leading to a total EU import estimate of more than 26 mio. tons (main origins: Ukraine, USA, Brazil). This situation also requires facilitating access to feed grains from other Third Countries to diversify the sourcing;
• Increased market access to imported fibre crops / co-products is also essential especially for ruminants to compensate for the loss of forages (Palm Kernel Expeller, sugar beet pulp, distiller grains). Concerning PKE, the current implementation date of 31/12/2026 for the EU Deforestation Regulation will significantly reduce market availability (current EU imports reach 2 mio. tons / annually);
• A lower forage harvest means also increasing the EU feed protein deficit, including for organic feed materials. This will lead to additional pressure and demand on import of soy products used in feed. FEFAC’s latest EUDR trade disruption and economic impact assessment indicates additional direct feed sourcing costs for soy products of more than 1 bio. € for 2027, with no guarantees on sufficient market availability to meet expected increased EU import demand (35 mio. tons in 2025). This is economically unviable for EU livestock farmers in the context of depressed prices for most livestock products.

FEFAC recommendations on mitigation measures to ensure feed supply security

In our first evaluation, the EU authorities should envisage the following targeted short-term mitigation measures to strengthen the EU feed chain’s capabilities to compensate (at least partially) for the shortfall of forages and feed grain crops: The EU should:

• ensure open transit of and market access to feed grains originating in Ukraine; o consider temporary derogations at national level, where necessary, for setting risk based MRL’s for imported feed grains destined for exclusive feed use, subject to EFSA evaluation to ensure feed safety, as have been granted in 2022 in compliance with the EU legislation;
• suspend application of EUDR for Palm Kernel Expeller, to safeguard market access to a key alternative fibre source for ruminants in 2027;
• speed up work for further real simplification measures and reduction of administrative burden for operators, linked to EUDR implementation for soy products used in feed;
• consider extension of the EU temporary derogations for protein sources in organic feed, and for forages.

In addition, the EU and Member States should allow for temporary derogations at national level for feed truck driving hours incl an increase of max load for “cross-border” feed transports to 44 tons (national derogations exist but are currently not applicable for cross-border transport of feed to drought -stricken regions), including further state aid measures reducing fuel costs in the feed chain. These derogations are necessary due to continued low water levels in main inland shipping corridors, requiring transfer of significant volumes of feed materials to road and rail transport, increasing feed transport costs.

FEFAC calls also for mid-to longer term measures: 

• The EU should accelerate ongoing efforts to strengthen the resilience of home-grown production of feed grains and forages as laid down in the recently published EU Protein Action Plan. This includes improved seeds for drought-resistant crops using NGT technology;
• Targeted investments via European Competitiveness Fund (ECF) in EU transport logistics and infrastructure, incl storage capacity, which could lower costs in moving feed grains and forages from EU feed grain surplus regions to deficit areas;
• FEFAC also urges the European Commission to broaden the scope of the Food and Feed Safety Omnibus package, including the ABP legislation and other parts of the EU feed legislation, which could facilitate availability of safe, circular alternative feed resources; o FEFAC strongly recommends establishing a biomass balance sheet both at national and EU level to better monitor availability of eligible Biomass resources for feed use, including co-products from biofuel and other food and non-food industries.

Source: FEFAC press release

By joining the Zootecnica Poultry Magazine Telegram channel, you can receive our latest website articles, technical insights and every new issue of the digital magazine directly on Telegram.

A simple way to keep up with the content published by Zootecnica Poultry Magazine, all in one place.

👉 Join our Telegram channel
https://t.me/zootecnicapoultrymagazine

Hairline cracks are an important area to investigate when hatchability decreases or contamination increases. To understand the impact of cracked eggs on hatchability, a trial was conducted comparing cracked eggs with non-cracked eggs.

As shown in Table 1, cracked eggs decreased hatchability and increased 2nd grade chicks, cull chicks, embryonic mortality and contamination. The data clearly indicate that shell damages cause great losses. Therefore, it is extremely important to manage all processes, from the farm to the hatchery, in order to identify where cracks are occurring.

Considering the impact of hairline cracks on production, identifying and correcting the sources of cracked eggs can improve hatchability and chick quality. From the farm to the hatchery, there are multiple areas in the production continuum to investigate.

On the farm

Hens

If the hens were not in the correct condition before light stimulation, they may have abnormal nesting behaviors. This can include hens dropping eggs from a standing or even walking position, which can cause eggs to crack on impact.

Hens may also cause cracks by pecking at eggs. Pecking at eggs occurs primarily with floor and slat eggs. There are multiple reasons for egg pecking including the house configuration, slat type and design, nest quality and management related issues.

Team member handling

The care taken in egg collection can have a big impact on the quality of eggs. Whether in manual or mechanical nests, collection is a critical control point. It is important to observe the frequency, duration and time interval between collections. If eggs are accumulating in the nests, or on the collection belt and tables, the number of cracked eggs is likely to increase. After feeding, the hens will begin laying eggs. Time collection accordingly and keep in mind as hens get older, they lay eggs later in the day. Monitor egg production and adjust collection times to align with peak laying periods.

In manual nests collect eggs 4 times each day. Three collections before midday, with a fourth collection in the late afternoon to ensure all nests are clean. If there are more than three eggs in a nest, revise the egg collection schedule.

With manual collections, extreme care should be taken when transporting eggs from different nest rows or houses to a central on-farm location. It is very important that eggs are protected from sun and rain. Like collection, the packing process requires care and it is important to prevent the accumulation of eggs, excessive egg rolling and rough handling.

In mechanical nests, where eggs are collected on a belt and sent to an egg collection table, the number of collections depends on environmental house temperature and the belt capacity. However, typically a minimum of 3 collections per day is sufficient. Activating the conveyor belt system only once per day is not recommended, as 7 to 8 hours of production will accumulate on the belt system and increase the risk of cracked eggs.

If eggs are accumulating on the collection tables, reduce the speed of the egg transport belt to prevent accumulations. It is important to have belts that are wide enough (25 cm for each nest side is ideal) so that eggs can collect on the belts without microfractures.

Equipment maintenance

As automation increases, equipment maintenance is critical as it can have a big impact on the number of cracked eggs. An electronic egg can be used to measure the G-forces applied to the eggshells along the transport system. Areas in the transport system where eggs are more likely to crack can be identified and addressed.

For nests, check the nest pads and replace them before they become excessively worn. Also ensure that the nest pads are installed correctly. In community nests, if the plastic flaps between the nest pads and the egg belt are damaged and curling, hens may peck at eggs when the conveyor belt is visible.

Egg yolk present on the belt can be an indication of broken and shell-less eggs. If eggs are breaking, it is also likely that eggs are cracking.

Conveyor belts moving eggs to a packing unit or a central collection table must be wide enough to support a large quantity of eggs. Systems that have only one conveyor belt in the center that is shared by nests on both sides are more prone to egg damage. In poorly adjusted systems, eggs can roll to the center of the belt, hitting each other.

Check that the mechanical community nests are level, collection belts are not warped, and clamps are holding the belt in place. Adjust the tension on the belt so that the eggs are evenly distributed on the belt. The belt should not sag which will cause eggs to bunch together, nor should it be too tight as this can cause eggs to bounce. These items should be part of a regularly scheduled maintenance program, which includes replacing parts before they fail.

When designing a new system, factors to consider include the number of birds per nest, the system being used (manual or mechanical) and flock density.

Feed and nutrition

It is difficult to correct eggshell quality once it deteriorates considerably. Regularly evaluate eggshell quality and if issues occur, check calcium availability and particle sizes, as well as phosphorous and vitamin D3 levels in the diet.

• An imbalance of calcium, phosphorous and vitamin D3 can cause weak eggshells.
• If the hens deplete calcium reserves, eggshell quality decreases and more cracked eggs occur. This could be the result of low or fluctuating calcium levels. Test the feed and determine if the formulation is correct. If so, mixing or milling inaccuracies may be an issue.
• If limestone particles in the feed are too fine, calcium uptake may be reduced. This issue is more common in pelleted and crumbled feeds.
• Feed contaminants including Nicarbazine and mycotoxins may have a negative effect on eggshell color, quality and hatchability.

Environmental issues

Ventilation issues that cause the house temperatures to rise above the thermo-neutral zone of the birds can induce heavy respiration. As a result, respiratory alkalosis can occur. In this condition, the blood pH rises above normal, the kidneys attempt to compensate by excreting bicarbonate and calcium levels are depleted. Ultimately eggshell quality is reduced.

Disease challenges

Disease challenges can have a negative effect on the uterus and/or oviduct of the bird and ultimately impact the eggshell quality. Eggs should have a uniform color and a shiny appearance if the cuticle is formed correctly. If the oviduct is impacted by disease, the shell cuticle may be malformed or absent.

Transportation

Transporting eggs is critical and must be consistently monitored. Evaluate the condition of roads and transportation vehicles. Supervise employees and prevent rough handling. Make drivers aware of the fragility of the eggs. In order to assess the care and quality of transport, communicate with the hatchery regarding the number of cracked eggs before and after delivery.

Hatchery

In the hatchery, monitor the egg quality weekly, evaluating a sample of at least 600 eggs per breeder flock, divided among the houses. Evaluate and record the number of cracked, upside down, dirty and thin shelled eggs. Sample eggs or trays per house, when it is possible to track the house origin of the eggs. Remove the eggs from the tray and evaluate them individually by candling.

If the eggs are evaluated on the farm and arrive at the hatchery in incubation trays, ready to incubate, cracked eggs can be counted and removed. However, if the eggs are sorted in the hatchery, the evaluation will be more complicated and must consider how to identify cracked eggs and their sources. Note that the automated equipment used for classification must be closely monitored, as it can be an important cause of cracks if machines are not adjusted correctly. By evaluating and sorting cracked eggs, the hatchery can communicate with the farm and work together to improve the quality of the eggs.

Conclusions

A fundamental factor of success is monitoring critical control points in the egg production process. Assessing and auditing the process along the production continuum will provide information about where the operation should focus to reduce losses from cracked eggs. Consistent communication between the farm and hatchery is also very valuable to improve the quality and reduce damage to hatching eggs.

This issue explores current trends, standards and research directions in laying hen welfare, as well as the role of rest and movement in improving bird welfare and performance.

Other articles cover poultry house cleaning and disinfection, Newcastle disease, aspergillosis and the main threats to poultry gut health. The market section looks at the role of the G20 in global meat production and trade, India’s egg exports and the challenges facing the French egg sector.

📖 Read the magazine online on Issuu

📄 Download the full PDF

Would you like to receive every new issue of Zootecnica Poultry Magazine directly at your home or office? Click here to subscribe

By David L. Wicker, PhD, industry consultant, Gainesville, Georgia and W.A. Dozier, III, PhD, Department of Poultry Science, Auburn University and Alabama Cooperative Extension System

The poultry industry faces increased challenges to improve broiler-production efficiency with fewer inputs. The economic success of the grower and integrator depends on management practices, bird growth, disease, morbidity and mortality, among other factors.

A lack of labor can lead to poor poultry-management practices, resulting in economic losses to the grower. Providing growers with technologies to supplement existing labor to improve bird movement and feed consumption, increase bodyweight uniformity and decrease mortality will strengthen the profitability of poultry farms.

Autonomous robots

Apelie Robotics has developed a robot, AviSense, for broiler houses. AviSense is a mobile, autonomous robot that navigates poultry houses without human intervention. The dimensions of the robot are 27.6 × 29.5 × 33.5 inches, and it weighs approximately 53 pounds (24 kg). It operates on programmable routes throughout the house at variable speeds up to 0.3 feet per second and can function for approximately 10 hours when it autonomously recharges.

The system incorporates autonomous navigation technology with camera systems to monitor bird dispersion and bird movement. The robot contains sensors to collect data on humidity, air temperature and litter temperature at bird level per second via the programmable route it follows in the house (see main article image).

The robot is a mobile data-sensing platform at bird level that collects data throughout the house and transmits information in real time to a storage site. The farm manager can access data via communication with a mobile phone or computer. These real-time data support precision poultry management by the farm manager.

Robot benefits

The robot can potentially reduce the time required for pre-placement checks by providing information on mapping temperature and relative humidity profiles, as well as images of proper or improper house setup (Figure 1). During production, these data enable farm managers to detect and correct temperature/ventilation problems to improve house conditions and identify areas of potential welfare concern.

Figure 1. An example of a profile map displaying ambient temperature, relative humidity, litter temperature of the robot. This provides an indication of areas in the house that an equipment problem may be occurring. Click on image to enlarge.

The robot can stimulate chicks to move, encouraging feed and water consumption, particularly during brooding. Additionally, the robot can prompt older birds to move, potentially improving heat removal during times of high temperatures during summer production.

Field trials

A series of field trials has been conducted in Canada and the US to assess the effects of implementing an AviSense robot in broiler production on performance objectives and economic revenue.

Canada

Trial 1 was conducted from June to August of 2025, with one house of 32,000 broilers on a broiler farm; the house was divided by a lengthwise separation fence. The robot was placed in the house at day 10 and operated daily until marketing.

The average bodyweight of broilers in the house with the robot was 5.17 pounds (2.35 kg) and in the house without the robot, 5.24 pounds (2.37 kg). Bird rejection data showed a 3% rejection rate (1% at the farm and 2% during processing) for birds without a robot compared to a 1.6% rejection rate (0.8% at the farm and 0.8% during processing) for birds with a robot.

The decrease in rejection rates resulted in more saleable pounds of meat at the processing plant: 856 pounds (388 kg) at $0.91 per pound, totaling a $779 greater return for the side of the house with the robot.

A second trial at this farm was implemented from September to October 2025 using the same design and conditions. The area with no robot had an average weight of 4.41 pounds (2 kg) at 37 days of age, with a rejection rate of 1%. The side with the robot had an average weight of 4.67 pounds (2.12 kg), with a rejection rate of 0.62%.

With greater weights and lower rejection rates, an increase of 3,865 pounds (1,753 kg) of live weight transported to the processing plant was determined for two loads of broilers per treatment group. The increase of 3,865 pounds (1,753 kg) at $0.91 per pound translated into an increase in revenue of $3,517.15 for the side of the house equipped with the robot.

The trial had six loads of broilers. However, two loads of broilers subjected to the sides of the house with and without a robot were mixed and could not be used in the evaluation.

The third trial was conducted from August to September 2025 on a nearby farm with two paired houses for the test. Average bodyweight was slightly less for the house with the robot, at 5.10 pounds (2.31 kg), with a rejection rate of 1.91% and a feed-conversion ratio (FCR) of 1.457. The control house weighed 5.12 pounds (2.32 kg), with a rejection rate of 1.46% and FCR of 1.477.

Because of the higher rejection rate due to subcutaneous lesions and 0.54% higher mortality for the broilers in the robot house, the control house had 5,824 more pounds (2,641 kg) of live weight transported to the processing plant at $0.91 per pound, translating into an increase in revenue of $5,300. The robot house had a 0.02 better FCR, valued at $720 per house.

United States

A fourth trial was initiated in October 2025 on a farm in the southeastern US in an integrated broiler operation. House 1 was used as the test house with the robot starting on day of placement, and House 2 was used as the control house. In each house, chicks originated from the same breeder flocks.

House 1 with the robot had a weight of 7.69 pounds (3.49 kg) per bird at 47 days, with an FCR of 1.653 and a livability of 92.19%, for a total house weight of 194,967 pounds (88,435 kg). House 2 had a weight of 7.52 pounds (3.41 kg ) per bird at 47 days, with an FCR of 1.701 and a livability of 92.47%, for a total house weight of 191,226 pounds (86,739 kg). This farm experienced late-occurring kinky back and a higher-than-expected mortality rate, but the control house had a slightly higher livability percentage than the house using the robot.

The increase in bodyweight and feed conversion in House 1 with the robot reduced the grower’s cost per pound of meat compared with the control house. This lower cost increased the grower’s pay by $1,052 for the house with the robot.

The integrator would obtain a large return from more pounds of meat in the processing plant and a lower production cost due to the improved FCR. Standard costs were reduced by $0.0054 per pound in the robot house versus the control house.

For example, the integrator’s live cost could be reduced from $0.435 to $0.429 per pound of live weight produced. For every million birds placed with a final live weight of 6.5 pounds (2.95 kg), an economic return of $35,100 per week could be obtained due to live cost. An increase in total live weight delivered to the processing plant would improve its margins.

Conclusion

Based on these initial field trials, implementing a robot in broiler production led to improved economically important live-production metrics. The reduction in live-production costs due to increased bodyweight and decreased rejection rates can increase returns to the grower and integrator, with more pounds of weight, using Apelie robots during commercial production.

Additional field trials are being conducted in the US and Europe to further define the benefits of improved condemnations, bodyweights, feed conversion and bird welfare. These field trials indicate that robots are being used to reduce labor and return economic benefits to the grower and the integrator. Further improvements to the robots and additional trials will continue to refine these benefits of using robots in commercial poultry production.

Editor’s note: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the authors.

This article was submitted to Modern Poultry as an educational article by one of the co-authors, William Dozier, PhD, Auburn University, who actively participated in the US trials. All data were supplied by the integrator who owned the broilers. Neither Dozier nor Auburn University has a commercial stake in this technology. The co-author, David L. Wicker, PhD, is a retired former vice president of live operations for a US broiler integrator. He participated in the US trials and now consults with Apelie, the company that developed AviSense.

The post Autonomous robots address labor shortages, economic challenges in broiler production appeared first on Modern Poultry.

Broilers do not spread evenly across their environment. Some may cluster near a wall, equipment line, or other boundary, while other areas appear relatively unoccupied. This pattern is not necessarily a sign that something is wrong. Broilers do not use space randomly and tend to congregate along the sidewalls of broiler houses¹. This behavior, referred to as thigmotaxis, is the tendency to remain near walls (Figure 1) or other vertical surfaces.

Figure 1. Broilers clustered along the side wall of a commercial house. Photo credit: Shawna Weimer.

What is wall-hugging behavior?

Where broilers choose to spend time is influenced by more than space allowance. Broilers make use of peripheral areas more than would be expected by the amount of floor space available alone^2-4. This pattern originates from their natural history. Red Junglefowl, the wild ancestor of domestic chickens, inhabit forests with dense vegetation that provides natural cover⁵.

Useful observations

When you ask yourself, “How much space do my birds have?” also ask, “How are my birds using the space they have?”

Why do broilers choose the wall?

Where broilers spend time can vary by environmental conditions, resource location, stocking density, age, time of day, and social interactions.

Temperature and litter condition

Temperature and litter condition vary within a broiler house. Heating, cooling, and ventilation systems create a temperature gradient within the house, with differences increasing as broilers grow⁶. For example, solar radiation can warm house sidewalls, while cool air from inlets can create cooler areas near sidewalls. Litter moisture varies with equipment and tends to be greater around waterlines⁷. Broilers may avoid areas with wet litter (Figure 2), making bird distribution a useful observation of litter condition.

Figure 2. Broilers avoiding a wet spot in a commercial house. Photo credit: Shawna Weimer.

Resource location

Birds stay near areas where feed, water, enrichments, or other resources are available. Stocking density and locations of feeders and drinkers affect how birds use space. At low stocking densities, birds tend to remain near feeders and drinkers, but at higher densities they move farther from these resources, likely because competition and disturbance increase around resource areas⁴. Environmental enrichments can further influence space use. Visual cover, vertical panels, and platforms encourage broilers to use areas that might otherwise be less frequently occupied^3,9,11. Domestic fowl use visual cover more than uncovered areas and rest and preen more in covered locations⁶. Depending on facility design, the location of resources may help explain why birds cluster in areas of the house, including near sidewalls.

Age and time of day

Broiler space use follows a diurnal pattern and changes as birds grow. Broilers in pens with sidewall-mounted platforms showed increased side occupancy compared to unenriched controls, especially during the dark period at younger ages (Figure 3). The highest platform occupancy was 80% at younger ages during the dark period, compared with less than 40% in controls¹². This pattern may be the result of a greater tendency for younger birds to seek protection.

Figure 3. Overhead image of broilers on platforms in a pen during the dark period. Colored circles and numerical labels indicate the total number of birds (red), and positions within the pen: east platform (green), west platform (yellow), and litter area (orange). Images were measured using ImageJ. Adapted from Weimer et al. (2026).

Social environment

Broilers are social animals, and the presence of other birds can influence where they spend their time. Broilers tend to remain near flockmates, and this social attraction can result in clusters of birds within an area even when no physical feature is drawing the birds to that location¹³. Wall preference has also been linked to reduced disturbance from neighboring birds, especially as local density increases¹.

What does it mean for broiler housing?

Broiler housing is more than the amount of floor space available. Broilers interact with boundaries, resources, lighting, litter, enrichment, flockmates, and environmental conditions, and these factors can shape where they spend time. For producers, regular observation of bird distribution can provide useful clues about how birds use their environment. The goal is to understand bird distribution patterns to help identify management practices that support bird welfare. Wall-hugging behavior should not be interpreted as a direct indicator of good or poor welfare without also considering the surrounding environment and other welfare indicators. Understanding how broilers use space and what motivates their behavior can help producers and researchers provide housing that considers the birds’ perspective.

Summary

• Broilers do not necessarily use all available space evenly; wall-hugging or thigmotaxis is one example of a spatial behavior.
• Spatial distribution can be influenced by boundaries, resource placement, stocking density, flock behavior, age, and time of day.
• A spatial pattern does not automatically indicate poor welfare or a production problem; it should be interpreted alongside the broader environment and other bird welfare measures.
• Observing where birds choose to spend time can help producers think about housing from the birds’ perspective.

References

1. Buijs, S., Keeling, L.J., Vangestel, C., Baert, J., Vangeyte, J., & Tuyttens, F.A.M. (2010). Resting or hiding? Why broiler chickens stay near walls and how density affects this. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 124, 97-103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2010.02.007
2. Newberry, R.C., & Hall, J.W. (1990). Use of pen space by broiler chickens: Effects of age and pen size. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 25, 125-136. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-1591(90)90075-O
3. Newberry, R.C., & Shackleton, D.M. (1997). Use of visual cover by domestic fowl: A Venetian blind effect? Animal Behaviour, 54, 387-395. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.1996.0421
4. Arnould, C., & Faure, J.M. (2003). Use of pen space and activity of broiler chickens reared at two different densities. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 84, 281-296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2003.07.003
5. Collias, N.E., & Collias, E.C. (1967). A field study of the red jungle fowl in north-central India. The Condor, 69(4), 360–386
6. Miragliotta, M.Y., Nääs, I.A., Manzione, R.L., & Nascimento, F.F. (2006). Spatial analysis of stress conditions inside broiler house under tunnel ventilation. Scientia Agricola, 63(5), 426–432. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-90162006000500002
7. Tasistro, A.S., Kissel, D.E., & Bush, P.B. (2004). Spatial variability of broiler litter composition in a chicken house. Journal of Applied Poultry Research, 13(1), 29–43. https://doi.org/10.1093/japr/13.1.29
8. Leone, E.H., & Estevez, I. (2008). Space use according to the distribution of resources and level of competition. Poultry Science, 87, 3-13. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2007-00026
9. Cornetto, T., & Estevez, I. (2001). Influence of vertical panels on use of space by domestic fowl. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 71, 141-153. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(00)00171-4
10. Cornetto, T., Estevez, I., & Douglass, L.W. (2002). Using artificial cover to reduce aggression and disturbances in domestic fowl. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 75, 325-336. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(01)00195-2
11. Ventura, B.A., Siewerdt, F., & Estevez, I. (2012). Access to barrier perches improves behavior repertoire in broilers. PLOS ONE, 7, e29826. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0029826
12. Weimer, S.L., Kidd, M.T., Vaught, M., et al. (2026). Age and time of day influence broiler use of platform enrichments. Poultry Science, 105, 106720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2026.106720
13. Febrer, K., Jones, T.A., Donnelly, C.A., & Dawkins, M.S. (2006). Forced to crowd or choosing to cluster? Spatial distribution indicates social attraction in broiler chickens. Animal Behaviour, 72, 1291-1300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2006.03.019

To view all issues of Poultry Press, click here.

Editor’s note: Content on Modern Poultry’s Industry Insights pages is provided and/or commissioned by our sponsors, who assume full responsibility for its accuracy and compliance.

The post Why do broilers hug the walls? Understanding how broilers use space appeared first on Modern Poultry.

The U.S. Poultry & Egg Association and its Foundation (USPOULTRY) have announced its 2026–2028 Research Priorities, establishing a focused research agenda to address emerging challenges and advance innovation, sustainability, poultry health and food safety across the poultry and egg industries.

USPOULTRY’s research priorities are developed through an industry-driven process that brings together poultry producers, veterinarians and other industry professionals to identify critical research needs. The USPOULTRY Foundation Research Advisory Committee plays a central role in this process, drawing on the expertise of industry professionals to identify research needs and evaluate proposals.

“Research plays an important role in helping our industry anticipate challenges, improve practices and identify solutions that can make a difference at the farm, plant and industry levels,” said Dr. Denise Heard, vice president of research programs for USPOULTRY. “These priorities help connect the expertise of the research community with the real-world needs of the poultry and egg industries, ensuring our investments remain relevant, practical and innovative.”

The 2026–2028 priorities address key areas across the broiler, turkey, layer and breeder sectors, including food safety; poultry health and disease prevention; nutrition; processing; production and management efficiency; animal welfare; environmental management; and other emerging issues.

Updated every two years, the priorities allow USPOULTRY to remain responsive to advancements in science and technology, evolving production practices, regulatory developments and emerging industry threats. They also provide researchers with greater insight into the areas where applied, science-based research can have the greatest impact.

The priorities will help guide USPOULTRY’s research funding programs and provide strategic direction for researchers seeking funding. While proposals that align with identified priorities are encouraged, USPOULTRY will continue to consider innovative research that addresses significant or emerging industry needs.

USPOULTRY has a long history of supporting research that delivers practical benefits to the poultry and egg industries. Research proposals that promote or advance a specific commercial company or product are generally unlikely to receive USPOULTRY funding.

U.S. Poultry & Egg Association press release

Kuala Lumpur, 31 August 2026 — Retail prices for chicken and eggs are rising in Malaysia as poultry farms face closures and suspensions amid fly infestations, labour shortages, higher feed costs and regulatory pressure. The New Straits Times reports that these combined pressures are tightening supply and contributing to higher consumer prices. The government is also reviewing rising egg prices following concerns from producers about high operating costs.

Farm closures tighten supply

Industry sources say several farms, mainly in Negeri Sembilan, have been ordered to shut or suspend production following complaints about flies and problems linked to manure management. The closures have affected production involving an estimated 3.7 million live chickens, although some farms have since reopened.

The Federation of Livestock Farmers’ Associations of Malaysia says farms are capable of meeting domestic demand, although national supply is currently tight.

The situation is also creating uncertainty for individual producers. One poultry farmer interviewed by the New Straits Times said persistent fly problems and tighter regulatory expectations could threaten a family poultry business that has operated for about 40 years.

Prices at the shelf

Supermarket and retail data show higher egg prices in August. At Lotus’s Malaysia, Grade A eggs were retailing at RM14.79 per tray of 30, Grade B at RM14.19 and Grade C at RM13.89. Focus Malaysia reported that earlier in 2026 prices were around or below RM13.50, RM12.50 and RM11.50 respectively.

Fresh chicken has also become more expensive, with retail prices reported around RM9–9.50/kg in some retail outlets in some cases.

The increase in egg prices is not being attributed solely to recent farm closures. QL Resources expects egg prices to remain relatively high over the next two quarters, citing strong demand and tighter supply. The company said production had previously been reduced as farmers retired spent layers, while hot weather has also affected hen productivity.

Four key pressures

Farmers and industry bodies point to several overlapping factors:

• Fly infestations and enforcement. Open-house farms have faced complaints about flies and odours, while authorities have responded with inspections, fines and closure or suspension orders in cases involving poor farm and manure management.
• Labour shortages. Producers say shortages of workers make it more difficult to meet cleaning and manure-management requirements, adding to the operational pressures facing farms.
• Rising feed costs. Higher feed costs are putting further pressure on poultry producers. QL Resources expects continued pressure from higher prices for key feed ingredients such as corn and soybean meal, alongside rising energy and logistics costs.
• Push toward closed-house systems. Malaysia has promoted closed-house farming as a way to improve biosecurity and farm management, but only about 8% of poultry houses are fully closed-house. High capital costs remain a major barrier to wider adoption.

Policy backdrop

There is no nationwide legal mandate requiring all poultry farms in Malaysia to convert to closed-house systems. However, Perak is due to begin full enforcement of its closed-house policy on 1 January 2027, increasing pressure on operators that have yet to make the transition.

According to the Department of Veterinary Services, farms that have ceased operations so far have not generally done so solely because they failed to convert to closed-house systems; poor management and public complaints have been among the reasons for closures.

The investment required to establish or convert to closed-house production can be substantial. Industry estimates cited by the New Straits Times put the cost at up to RM60 million, excluding land costs, while other industry reporting has placed the cost of constructing a new poultry farm at more than RM10 million.

Government reviews egg prices

The government is reviewing rising egg prices following concerns from producers about high operating costs and broader pressures on the poultry industry.

At the same time, industry expectations point to continued price pressure in the near term. QL Resources expects egg prices to remain high over the next two quarters, supported by resilient demand and tighter supply, while higher selling prices could help poultry producers offset rising feed and other operating costs.

By Abigail Graham, DVM, MAM, DACPV, Associate Director, Poultry Technical Services at Zoetis

Imagine this: You’re a veterinarian and at one of the farms you oversee, flock performance is down and mortality is up. You take appropriate steps to identify the disease challenge, using field surveillance and diagnostics. Then, you select vaccines suited to the current strains threatening a flock. The vaccine arrives, and your new vaccination program begins; but weeks later, flock performance does not improve as expected.

Is the vaccine not living up to its claims? Was the wrong vaccine selected?

When vaccine decisions are grounded in sound diagnostics and veterinary guidance, the vaccine itself may not be the problem. It may be time to review how the product was stored, prepared and applied.

Vaccines must remain viable throughout the entire process from delivery and storage through mixing, administration and bird exposure. A breakdown at any point may reduce the amount of viable vaccine that reaches the target tissue and impact the immune response.

1. Are label instructions being followed?

Every vaccine has specific requirements for storage, preparation, dose, application method and time of use after mixing. Those instructions should form the foundation of the vaccination protocol.

Different vaccine formats also require different handling practices. Frozen, freeze-dried and emulsified vaccines should not be treated interchangeably. Teams need product-specific standard operating procedures and training that cover:

• Required storage and transport temperatures
• Appropriate diluent and water requirements
• Thawing or reconstitution procedures
• Mixing order and technique
• Maximum time between preparation and administration
• Correct dose and application method

Timing and temperature are especially important, because live vaccines can lose viability when exposed to unfavorable conditions or held too long after preparation.

For example, for frozen vaccine, the total time span from removing ampules from liquid nitrogen to thawing and adding to diluent should be no more than three minutes. A longer time span may compromise vaccine cell livability and reduce vaccine efficacy.

2. Is the in ovo vaccination process being protected?

Successful in ovo vaccination depends on following specific processes for vaccine preparation, sanitation, consistent management of the vaccination equipment and more.

The vaccine preparation room should be clean, controlled and used for its intended purpose only. Work surfaces, thaw baths and equipment need to be cleaned and disinfected before vaccine preparation. And it’s important to limit traffic through in this area to reduce opportunities for contamination or product mix-ups.

Day-to-day management of the in ovo vaccination system is equally important. Hatchery teams should follow a checklist for setup, shutdown, cleaning and storage. This includes properly sanitizing the vaccine pathway within the device.

Small deviations can become significant when multiplied across hundreds of thousands of eggs. A missed cleaning step, extended vaccine-thawing time or inconsistent preparation procedure could impact downstream flock health.

3. Is the spray cabinet applying optimal coverage?

Spray cabinet vaccination allows an entire basket of chicks to be vaccinated quickly, but application must be consistent. The goal is to deliver viable vaccine droplets to the eyes, nares and mouth, where the vaccine can contact the appropriate tissues and initiate an immune response.

Some factors that deserve close attention include:

• Application volume. The spray process must deliver the intended amount of vaccine solution to every chick basket with equal volume dispensed from each nozzle.
• Droplet size and coverage. Droplets that are too small may evaporate or create gaps in coverage, and it’s critical the entire area within the chick basket is covered.
• Nozzle condition. Worn or clogged nozzles can alter the spray pattern and droplet size.

At startup, assess the spray pattern by using a quality control plate or another approved method. Nozzles, syringes and tubing should also be cleaned or replaced according to a defined schedule.

4. Are field vaccination practices uniform?

Vaccination practices in growout houses present a different set of variables.

For drinking-water vaccination, the objective is to deliver viable vaccine through the water system and have the entire flock consume it within a relatively short period.

Water treatment that could damage the vaccine should be discontinued according to protocol. Lines need to be charged uniformly, and birds should be encouraged to drink through appropriate water withdrawal, line management and movement through the house.

Dye in the vaccine solution can help confirm that vaccine reached the birds. Tongue checks shortly after the vaccine is consumed provide a helpful indication of flock exposure.

For backpack spraying, application uniformity depends on bird density, walking speed, spray volume and droplet distribution. A dry run with water-sensitive paper can help teams evaluate coverage before applying vaccine. It’s recommended to reassess periodically and whenever personnel change.

5. Are you inspecting for what you expect?

A completed vaccination procedure does not automatically confirm successful application.

Vaccine-take monitoring can help determine whether live vaccine reached the birds and replicated as expected. Depending on the vaccine, this may involve physical checks or diagnostics such as PCR.

For respiratory vaccines such as infectious bronchitis virus or Newcastle disease virus, PCR testing from samples collected from appropriate tissue a few days after vaccination can provide information about the uniformity of vaccine exposure. Poor or inconsistent results can help direct the investigation back toward mixing, handling, spray settings or environmental conditions.

One result is only a snapshot, but routine monitoring can establish a baseline, identify changes and help guide corrective action.

Vaccine application fundamentals are not complicated

The fundamentals of vaccine application are not complicated, but they require monitoring to sustain success. Clear protocols, regular routine training, properly maintained equipment and verification tools help protect the vaccine investment and give each flock an opportunity to develop the intended immune response. Turnover can contribute to gaps in consistency or understanding of proper vaccine application protocols.

Zoetis has created an extensive and growing Poultry Vaccine Administration resource hub of vaccine application best practices. The materials include resources for broilers, layers and turkeys. There are videos and PDF guides, with several Spanish-language resources, covering the multitude of application methods.

Zoetis also offers comprehensive diagnostic services that can help you identify disease challenges and evaluate vaccine response in your birds. Contact your Zoetis representative to learn more.

All trademarks are the property of Zoetis Services LLC or a related company or a licensor unless otherwise noted.

Editor’s note: Content on Modern Poultry’s Industry Insights pages is provided and/or commissioned by our sponsors, who assume full responsibility for its accuracy and compliance.

The post Five quality control questions every veterinarian should ask about vaccine application appeared first on Modern Poultry.

Leading UK farming organisations have called on the government to urgently prohibit imports of Brazilian beef, poultry and other affected animal products, bringing Great Britain into line with restrictions due to take effect in the European Union and, through the EEA framework, in relevant EEA countries from 3 September 2026. The National Farmers’ Union, NFU Scotland, NFU Cymru and the Ulster Farmers’ Union have jointly written to Defra Secretary of State Dame Angela Eagle, warning that continued imports could pose concerns for public health, consumer confidence and domestic producers.

The request follows the European Union’s decision to remove Brazil from the list of third countries authorised to export certain products of animal origin to the EU under new requirements concerning the use of certain antimicrobial medicinal products. The measure, established by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2026/1189, applies from 3 September 2026. It affects several categories of Brazilian products of animal origin, including bovine and equine products, poultry, aquaculture products, honey and casings. The EU decision reflects the fact that the European Commission had not received information guaranteeing that Brazil had implemented the necessary measures to comply with the relevant requirements by 3 September 2026.

The EU measure should not, however, be interpreted as a finding that Brazilian meat is inherently unsafe or that all Brazilian meat is produced in violation of EU rules. The issue is whether Brazil has provided the guarantees and implemented the measures required under the EU regulatory framework concerning the use of certain antimicrobials in animals intended for food production.

The UK farming organisations’ concerns have also been reinforced by an investigation published in 2025 by the Irish Farmers Journal and the Irish Farmers’ Association. The investigation involved travelling approximately 3,000 km through four Brazilian states. The researchers reported being able to purchase prescription-only antibiotics from agricultural supply stores without providing identification, a prescription or a herd or animal number, and found little evidence of traceability for such sales. The investigation also reported the availability of antibiotics classified as highest-priority critically important antimicrobials for human medicine. These findings are those of the investigation and should not be presented as evidence that such practices are universal across Brazil.

The investigation also reported the use, on farms visited, of feed containing monensin, an antimicrobial that can be used for animal-health purposes and to improve feed efficiency and weight gain. The evidence does not by itself demonstrate that therapeutic use and growth promotion were being systematically conflated, and the original description of “medicated feed blocks” has therefore been omitted.

The reported practices have raised concerns because they differ from the European approach to antimicrobial stewardship. In the EU and UK, the use of antibiotics for growth promotion has been prohibited since 2006, while policies have increasingly focused on reducing unnecessary antimicrobial use and limiting the use of substances considered particularly important for human medicine. The UK farming unions argue that imported food should be subject to standards that provide equivalent protection to those required of domestic producers.

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a broader public-health concern because resistant microorganisms can make infections more difficult to treat. Resistant bacteria and resistance genes can circulate between humans, animals and the environment, with food being one of the possible routes of exposure and transmission. The existence of this pathway does not, however, demonstrate that Brazilian meat currently entering the UK is causing AMR infections among consumers.

The Alliance to Save Our Antibiotics has also highlighted the global burden of antimicrobial resistance. Its campaigners cite estimates according to which AMR is directly responsible for about 1.14 million deaths globally and is associated with several million additional deaths. These figures are estimates of the global burden of AMR and should not be interpreted as evidence of a specific health impact from Brazilian meat imports.

Despite the pressure from farming organisations, the UK government has not introduced an equivalent ban. Defra has said that its experts have sought urgent information and assurances from Brazil as part of a rapid assessment of beef and poultry production systems, while the department is also monitoring the market impact of the EU restrictions. The government has stressed that the UK maintains robust import controls designed to protect animal and public health.

The British farming unions argue that, if Brazilian products lose access to EU markets but remain eligible for the British market under existing UK rules, some shipments could potentially be redirected towards Great Britain. This is a possible market consequence rather than an established outcome. The unions also warn that such a development could increase competitive pressure on British producers, who are required to comply with UK production and antimicrobial-use rules.

The issue is particularly complex for Northern Ireland because, under the Windsor Framework, Northern Ireland remains within the EU sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) zone for relevant goods, meaning that EU import requirements continue to apply to animal products entering Northern Ireland from third countries. A divergence between Great Britain and the EU over Brazilian animal-product imports could therefore create additional regulatory and trading complications within the UK.

For the wider livestock sector, including producers in Italy and elsewhere in the EU, the dispute highlights the growing importance of antimicrobial stewardship, treatment traceability and the ability to demonstrate compliance with production requirements in international trade. As governments tighten requirements concerning antimicrobial use and food safety, the ability to demonstrate compliance with verifiable standards may become an increasingly important factor alongside price and other aspects of competitiveness.

The case nevertheless needs to be distinguished from a finding that Brazilian meat is unsafe. The EU decision concerns Brazil’s ability to provide the guarantees and demonstrate implementation of the measures required under the EU antimicrobial framework, while the UK is conducting its own assessment and, as of 31 August 2026, has not announced an equivalent prohibition.

Hubbard will attend SPACE 2026 in Rennes, France, from 15 to 17 September. Visitors will be able to meet the company’s team in Hall 10A, Booth C64.

Hubbard offers genetic options for both Premium and conventional markets.

Hubbard Premium genetics

The Hubbard Premium range includes a broad portfolio of breeds offering colour differentiation, slower growth and robustness.

According to the company, Hubbard Premium breeds are used worldwide in Label Rouge, organic, free-range and extensive indoor production, as well as in programmes based on the Better Chicken Commitment and European Chicken Commitment. The range also includes options for dual-purpose and traditional concepts.

The portfolio includes Hubbard REDBRO, a slower-growing breed for the BCC and ECC markets. Hubbard states that REDBRO offers a balance between animal welfare, environment and economics.

Genetics for conventional broiler markets

For conventional broiler production, Hubbard offers the Efficiency Plus female together with the M77 and M99 males.

According to the company, these genetics meet the requirements of markets seeking efficient production of hatching eggs and chicks, strong broiler growth, low feed conversion, good conformation and uniformity.

During SPACE 2026, visitors will be able to discuss their business with the Hubbard team and identify genetic options for their markets.

Meet Hubbard at SPACE 2026
15–17 September 2026
Hall 10A – Booth C64
Rennes, France

communication@hubbardbreeders.com
www.hubbardbreeders.com

Exhibitors, buyers, and industry leaders converge on Rwanda’s capital for the region’s anticipated feed to food event

With VIV Africa 2026 set to open its doors on 7 to 8 October at the Kigali Convention Centre, the show’s exhibitor and delegate line-up is taking shape, and it paints a clear picture of an industry converging on Rwanda’s capital to do business. Preceded by a dedicated Leadership Conference on 6 October, the fifth edition of VIV Africa brings together producers, suppliers, investors and policymakers from across the feed to food value chain.

Who’s in the room

VIV Africa has built its reputation as the meeting point for professionals working across East Africa, Sub-Saharan Africa and the wider international agrifood community. Visitors include farm owners and operators, feed millers, hatchery and breeding specialists, veterinarians and animal health professionals, processors, distributors, investors and government stakeholders, all drawn by the chance to compare solutions from international and regional suppliers side by side.

That business focus is sharpened by two dedicated platforms running alongside the exhibition. The Investment & Market Access Forum connects investors and policymakers with businesses across the region, while the Hosted Buyer Program brings senior purchasing decision-makers directly to the show floor for scheduled introductions with exhibitors.

An exhibitor base spanning the full value chain

About 150 exhibitors from around the world will fill the show floor, organized across five core sectors that trace the journey from feed to food.

The Animal Health sector brings veterinary pharmaceuticals, diagnostics, vaccines and biosecurity solutions from companies including Ceva/Laprovet, Kemin Biologics, LVL Animal Health, Biovet and Innovad Group.

Breeding & Hatching exhibitors offer genetics, hatchery equipment and incubation technology, with names such as Aviagen, Hendrix Genetics, Hubbard, Novogen, Petersime and Lohmann Breeders on the floor.

Farm Production covers housing, feeding, drinking, climate control and general farm equipment, represented by suppliers including Big Dutchman, Chore-Time, Roxell, Facco, Vencomatic Group and Vostermans Ventilation.

The Feed, Ingredients & Additives sector features nutrition, premix and feed additive specialists such as Cargill, De Heus and Koudijs Animal Nutrition, Trouw Nutrition, Adisseo and Techna, while Feed & Grain Technology brings milling and processing technology from companies including Bühler, Andritz, Famsun and SCE, Silo Construction & Engineering.

A dedicated Processing and Food Engineering contingent, among them Baader Food Systems, Birds Prefer Meyn, Insta-Pro International and Duram Industries, rounds out the value chain on the downstream end. The growing Dairy Pavilion extends the show’s scope beyond poultry into broader livestock production, reflecting demand for stronger dairy production systems across the region.

Specialists across the spectrum

Within those sectors, the exhibitor list reflects just how specialized the industry has become. Incubation and hatchery specialists such as EMKA Incubators, Vet7 Incubators and Emtech Hatchery Systems sit alongside genetics and breeding houses like Hy-Line/Kenchic/Hybrid and Hastavuk.

Feed formulation and nutrition houses ranging from global players like ADM Animal Nutrition and Cargill to regional specialists such as Soproda Poultry Feed and MG2Mix Premix Nutrition will be on hand to discuss diet optimization for local conditions.

On the health side, exhibitors span everything from mycotoxin biomonitoring with Innovad Group to full matrix phytase nutrition with IFF Animal Nutrition & Health and probiotic gut health solutions from other exhibiting specialists.

Regional representation is also a defining feature of the floor. Alongside international suppliers from Europe, Asia and the Americas, exhibitors and delegates from across Sub-Saharan Africa, including Rwanda’s own poultry and agriculture sector, will be present throughout the two exhibition days. That local presence is reinforced by supporting associations such as the Rwanda Poultry Industry Association and the Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources, both closely involved in the show’s preparation.

Knowledge sharing runs in parallel

The exhibition days are supported by a full Technical Best Practice Seminar program, with sessions on topics ranging from drinking water-based nutrition and feed efficiency modelling to gut health and probiotic application in broiler production. These run alongside the Leadership Conference sessions on market outlook, poultry sector transformation and animal health, held the day before the show opens.

Register now for VIV Africa 2026

Visitor registration for VIV Africa 2026 is open now at www.vivafrica.nl. Registering in advance secures a free badge, avoids queues onsite, and gives early access to the exhibitor list and full onsite program — helping visitors plan their visit in Kigali before they even arrive.

Source: VIV Worldwid press release

The 2027 Latin American Poultry Summit is set for Monday, Jan. 25, in Atlanta, Ga., USA. The event will be held in conjunction with the International Poultry Expo, part of the International Production & Processing Expo (IPPE), and is co-hosted by the Latin American Poultry Association.

The Summit will explore how the poultry industry continues to lead the way in animal protein, highlighting the breakthroughs, technologies and strategies shaping the future of production. The one-day agenda is designed to maximize participants’ time at the Expo while providing valuable opportunities to exchange ideas and build industry connections.

Networking opportunities will include a luncheon, coffee breaks and a reception, and these are included in the cost of attending the summit. Students and advisors participating in the USPOULTRY Foundation International Student Program will also receive special recognition during the event.

For more than a decade, the Latin American Poultry Summit has served as a key gathering for poultry professionals throughout Latin America to explore emerging technologies, gain insights from animal health and food safety experts, and discuss the issues and opportunities influencing the region’s poultry industry.

The 2027 IPPE will run from Jan. 26-28 at the Georgia World Congress Center in Atlanta, Ga. For more details about the IPPE, visit ippexpo.org, and for information about the Latin American Poultry Summit, go to lacumbreavicolalatinoamericana.org.

Source: USPOULTRY press release

Authorities have extended restrictions to the entire affected farm and ordered a second recall. The eggs were also reported as having been distributed to other European countries, including Italy.

At least 306 cases of salmonellosis reported in Belgium have been linked to eggs marketed by Laerco BV, a company based in Geel, Flanders. According to Belgium’s Federal Agency for the Safety of the Food Chain (FASFC), the same strain of Salmonella Enteritidis found at the farm was identified in those who tested positive.

The actual number of infections could be higher, as cases involving mild or no symptoms may remain undiagnosed. As of August 25, no deaths associated with the outbreak had been reported. A FASFC spokesperson told Reuters that Belgium had not previously recorded a salmonellosis cluster of this scale.

An initial egg recall was issued in May, with restrictions first applied to a poultry house on the farm.

The number of new cases did not decline as quickly as expected. Further sampling detected the bacterium in a second poultry house, prompting the authorities to extend the restrictions to the entire farm.

On August 10, Laerco BV, in coordination with FASFC, announced a further withdrawal from the market and consumer recall. The measure covers eggs from barn production systems bearing the shell codes 2-BE-1073-01, 2-BE-1073-02, 2-BE-1073-03 and 2-BE-1073-04.

FASFC advised consumers not to eat eggs carrying these codes and to return them to the point of purchase. According to Reuters, the entire farm was closed and the birds were culled following the second recall.

According to Food Safety News, which referred to a notification submitted through the European Union’s Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (RASFF), the eggs were also distributed to Luxembourg, France, the Czech Republic, Italy, Poland, Portugal, Spain and the Netherlands. The information currently available does not establish whether the products reached consumers in each of these countries.

Reuters reported that as many as two million potentially contaminated eggs may have been marketed in Belgium and Luxembourg. FASFC warned that some of the eggs could still remain in consumers’ homes despite the recalls.

Salmonellosis commonly causes diarrhoea, fever and abdominal cramps, sometimes accompanied by nausea and vomiting. Young children, older people and those with weakened immune systems are at greater risk of developing severe illness. Eggs covered by the recall should not be consumed, including in preparations that will be cooked.

Sources: FASFC – Laerco BV egg recall, August 10, 2026; Reuters – Record salmonella outbreak in Belgium infects at least 306; Food Safety News – Belgian Salmonella outbreak climbs to 300 cases

UK authorities are investigating an outbreak of Salmonella Enteritidis that, according to the latest update from the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA), involved 207 confirmed cases and one associated death as of 13 August 2026. Egg consumption is the strongest signal identified in the investigation to date, although the source of the contamination has not yet been established.

The increase in cases was detected on 26 May 2026 by the UKHSA through the analysis of whole genome sequencing data.

All cases fall within the same 5-single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) single-linkage cluster. According to the UKHSA, this indicates a common source of contamination.

The cases were detected between 11 August 2025 and 1 August 2026, with 206 of the 207 reported in 2026. Most involve people living in England, where 199 cases have been recorded. A further six cases were identified in Scotland, one in Wales and one in Northern Ireland.

Within England, the highest numbers have been reported in London, with 47 cases, and Yorkshire and the Humber, with 38.

Those affected range in age from 0 to 90, with a median age of 30. Females account for 51% of cases, or 105 people. Only six of the 207 cases, representing 3% of the total, had reported travel outside the UK. The evidence gathered by the UKHSA therefore suggested that the outbreak was not associated with international travel.

Most patients experienced self-limiting gastrointestinal illness. However, among cases for whom hospitalisation information was available, 38% were admitted to hospital because of their salmonellosis symptoms. Two people developed bloodstream infections and one death had been associated with the outbreak as of 13 August.

Egg consumption remains the strongest signal

Epidemiological and food chain investigations are continuing to identify the source and origin of the contamination.

By 13 August, 114 cases had been interviewed and had completed either a regional or outbreak questionnaire. Of these, 95, or 83%, reported eating food prepared outside the home during the week before their symptoms began.

The interviews also identified five food businesses attended by two or more independent cases during that period. These businesses are linked to 24 cases in total, 11 of whom reported eating dishes made with eggs.

According to the UKHSA, egg consumption remains the strongest signal in the investigation. The businesses concerned received eggs from multiple sources, including egg importers. Possible cross-contamination risks were also identified at two of the premises.

At the time of the latest update, no link had been identified with UK-produced eggs or poultry. The available evidence is not sufficient to establish imported eggs as the source of the outbreak, and investigations into the origin of the contamination remain ongoing.

The Food Standards Agency is working with local authority environmental health teams, which have provided food safety management advice to businesses where issues have been identified.

Link to a 2025 outbreak

The strain involved in the current outbreak is phylogenetically linked, within 25 SNPs, to a previous outbreak in 2025 that was also linked to imported eggs.

The UKHSA, the Animal and Plant Health Agency, the Food Standards Agency and the UK’s devolved administrations are bringing together information from the two outbreaks. The aim is to assess any potential risks associated with imported eggs and introduce preventive measures if necessary.

The outbreak control team has also used the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control’s EpiPulse platform to notify member countries and determine whether genetically related cases of Salmonella Enteritidis have been identified elsewhere.

Salmonellosis can cause diarrhoea, stomach cramps and, in some cases, vomiting and fever. It generally results in self-limiting gastroenteritis, but young children, older people and immunocompromised individuals may experience more severe illness. To help prevent its spread, health authorities recommend washing hands thoroughly, cooking food thoroughly and, where possible, avoiding preparing food for others while experiencing symptoms.

Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/health-protection-report-volume-20-2026/hpr-volume-20-issue-8-news-18-august-2026

10 to 13 November 2026 in Hanover, Germany – Guiding theme “Intelligence in Animal Farming” – DLG Expert Stage: Biosecurity and Feed Safety – addressing current challenges and innovative strategies – Hall 21.

Biosecurity is a key success factor for healthy, sustainable and economically viable livestock production. Whether in pig, cattle or poultry farming, consistent hygiene measures, effective disease prevention, continuous health monitoring and farm-tailored vaccination programs play a crucial role in preventing animal diseases and safeguarding herd health over the long term. In addition to sound management practices, barn hygiene, access controls, early detection and modern preventive measures are essential components of effective disease control.

EuroTier 2026, a leading trade fair for livestock farming, taking place from 10 to 13 November in Hanover, Germany will address these challenges through its DLG Expert Stage: Biosecurity and Feed Safety, placing particular emphasis on practical solutions for disease prevention and herd health management. Organized by the DLG (German Agricultural Society), the world’s leading trade fair for professional livestock farming and livestock management is expecting some 2,100 exhibitors from 55 countries across 13 halls.

As livestock production faces increasing demands related to animal health, animal welfare and economic performance, effective biosecurity management has become more important than ever. At the same time, animal diseases such as African swine fever (ASF), foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) and highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) continue to pose significant risks.

For pig, cattle and poultry producers alike, prevention remains the most effective form of protection. Robust biosecurity measures, hygiene protocols and tailored vaccination strategies form the foundation for interrupting infection chains, maintaining animal health and avoiding economic losses.

Pig production: animal health begins with prevention

For pig producers, improving animal health remains a top priority. A stable herd health status enhances animal welfare, reduces labor and production costs and improves overall performance. Key factors include an optimized barn climate and feeding strategies tailored to the animals’ needs, both of which contribute significantly to health and productivity.

Biosecurity, the practice of protecting livestock from infectious diseases through preventive management and hygiene measures, is increasingly important. Against the backdrop of African swine fever, biosecurity remains one of the most important areas of innovation in pig production. ASF has led to strict biosecurity requirements, continuous monitoring obligations and, in the event of an outbreak, herd depopulation and movement restrictions. Smaller operations in particular face considerable challenges in meeting these demands. The outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease last year further underlined the importance of preventive measures.

Cattle: biosecurity protects both herd health and profitability

Improving animal health is also a key priority in dairy farming. Although cattle production has experienced fewer major disease outbreaks in recent years than the pig and poultry sectors, biosecurity should not be underestimated. The practice provides essential protection for the health of the entire herd.

Since the outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in January 2025, particular attention has been paid to biosecurity measures on farms keeping cloven-hoofed animals. Consistent barn and personnel hygiene, vehicle disinfection, reducing unnecessary farm visits and replacing in-person meetings with digital or telephone consultations where possible can significantly reduce disease introduction risks. Comprehensive documentation and immediate reporting of suspected cases are equally important.

Poultry: biosecurity determines flock protection

In the poultry sector, biosecurity and hygiene are of paramount importance, with highly pathogenic avian influenza representing the greatest threat. Since October 2025, numerous outbreaks in poultry populations and infections among wild birds have been recorded worldwide. The most effective protection remains the rigorous implementation of biosecurity measures to prevent disease introduction and spread.

Particular emphasis is placed on thorough cleaning and disinfection of poultry houses during downtime periods. This includes removing fat and protein residues using alkaline cleaners, followed by disinfection with approved products and effectiveness testing through environmental swabs. Strict personnel hygiene is equally critical. The separation of clean and dirty areas, changing footwear and clothing, regular handwashing and visitor logs are standard practice. External vehicles should avoid entering farm premises whenever possible. If vehicles must visit multiple farms, cleaning and disinfection are essential. Preventing contact between wild birds and feed, water or outdoor areas is also crucial, while rodent and insect control remain important components of disease prevention.

EuroTier 2026: biosecurity in focus

Biosecurity will be one of the major themes of EuroTier 2026 under the guiding theme “Intelligence in Animal Farming.” Through its DLG Expert Stages and DLG Spotlights, the exhibition will address key future challenges in livestock production, including disease prevention and feed safety.

The DLG Expert Stage “Biosecurity and Feed Safety” in Hall 21 will feature specialist presentations and panel discussions covering current challenges and practical solutions, from modern hygiene concepts and feed quality assurance to innovative technologies for herd management and disease prevention.

The program will be complemented by species-specific DLG Expert Stages, where experts from farming, science, industry and advisory services will present the latest developments and future-oriented production and housing concepts.

For professional visitors, EuroTier 2026 offers a unique opportunity to gain concise insights into the latest findings and proven strategies for improving biosecurity, while discussing practical solutions directly with experts. Presentations, panel discussions, live demonstrations and networking formats will provide an ideal platform for exchanging experiences, exploring new technologies and evaluating solutions for individual farming operations.

For poultry companies, a successful infectious bronchitis (IB) vaccination program depends on more than choosing the right vaccine for the challenge at hand. According to Jose Linares, DVM, diagnostician and technical services veterinarian with Ceva Animal Health, consistently high vaccine takes depend just as much on the quality of vaccine application.

“High vaccine takes don’t happen by accident,” Linares said. “They’re the result of the specific vaccine, precise application, good equipment and consistent attention to detail.”

Protection starts with biology

The reason is rooted in how live infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) vaccines work.

Unlike inactivated vaccines, live IB vaccines must successfully replicate in the bird before they can stimulate the relevant, local mucosal immunity that protects the respiratory tract.

“The vaccine has to reach the bird, remain viable and successfully replicate,” Linares said. “Only then can it stimulate the protective immune response we’re trying to achieve.”

Successful replication not only provides early local protection but also helps prime the bird’s broader immune system. Any factor that reduces vaccine viability or prevents birds from receiving an adequate dose can therefore limit immunity before it even begins.

For Linares, that’s why hatchery vaccination deserves the same level of attention producers devote to vaccine selection.

Precision starts in the hatchery

Nearly all commercial broiler chicks receive their first IB vaccination in the hatchery using either coarse spray or gel. Regardless of the delivery method, Linares said success begins long before chicks are vaccinated.

Proper vaccine storage and handling help preserve vaccine viability, while careful preparation and equipment calibration ensure consistent droplet size, distribution and coverage from the first chick box to the last.

“The equipment has to deliver consistent droplet size and distribution while providing complete coverage of the chicks,” he said. “Attention to detail throughout the vaccination process is critical.”

For spray systems, that means producing a uniform spray pattern that evenly covers chicks throughout each transport box. Gel systems likewise depend on consistent droplet distribution, adequate lighting and sufficient time for chicks to preen and consume the vaccine.

“The goal isn’t simply to apply vaccine,” Linares said. “The goal is to create the conditions that allow every bird to develop protection.”

Good hatcheries don’t guess – they measure

Presenting data at the 2026 American Association of Avian Pathologists (AAAP) annual meeting, Linares said successful hatcheries don’t rely on assumptions – they routinely verify that vaccination worked.¹

For IB vaccines, vaccine takes are typically evaluated about five days after hatchery vaccination using RT-qPCR performed on choanal swabs collected from individual birds to confirm that vaccine virus successfully replicated following administration.

More than 75% positive is generally considered an acceptable result. Linares reported that Ceva’s variant GA08 vaccine routinely achieves vaccine takes exceeding 80% and often approaches 100% when application quality is optimized.

The industry’s highest-performing hatcheries take that quality assurance philosophy even further. Drawing on data collected from hatcheries in multiple states and countries, Linares showed that leading operations consistently achieve vaccine takes of at least 97%. Rather than viewing vaccination as a single event, these hatcheries monitor performance, validate equipment and continually refine application procedures to maintain consistent results.

Monitoring also helps identify problems before they become flock-level issues. If vaccine takes fall below expectations, hatchery managers can investigate equipment performance, vaccine handling or application procedures before protection is compromised.

“We help their efforts via structured vaccination process audits as needed,” Linares said.

More than spray or gel

While Linares stressed that application quality is ultimately more important than the delivery method itself, he also presented evidence suggesting gel vaccination may offer practical advantages under commercial conditions.

In one comparison, gel-vaccinated chicks experienced less thermal stress, showed no huddling after vaccination and demonstrated improved livability after placement than spray-vaccinated birds. Thermal imaging showed that gel-vaccinated chicks maintained crate temperatures approximately 5°F higher than spray-vaccinated chicks, while adjusted feed conversion significantly improved.

Even so, Linares emphasized that both spray and gel application can produce excellent IB protection when performed correctly.

“Whether you’re using spray or gel, the goal is the same,” he said. “Aim to deliver the vaccine consistently so every bird has the opportunity to develop protection.”

Consistency creates confidence

For Linares, the common thread linking successful hatcheries isn’t a particular vaccine or delivery system. It’s a commitment to treating vaccination as a quality-controlled process.

That means maintaining equipment, standardizing application procedures, monitoring vaccine performance and continually looking for opportunities to improve consistency. Even seemingly small details – from vaccine handling to chick behavior immediately after vaccination – can influence whether birds receive a viable dose and develop a relevant and protective immune response.

“Top-performing hatcheries consistently achieve high vaccination delivery because they combine precise application, standardized monitoring and a strong understanding of vaccine biology,” Linares said. “When you get those things right consistently, you give every bird the best opportunity to develop protection.”

Want to learn more?
Explore Ceva’s Infectious Bronchitis Knowledge Hub for additional technical resources, practical guidance and expert insights on infectious bronchitis vaccination. [Knowledge Hub]

1 Linares J. Precision matters: Maximizing infectious bronchitis vaccine performance through hatchery application and monitoring. Presented at: American Association of Avian Pathologists Annual Meeting; July 2026; St. Louis, MO.

The post High vaccine takes don’t happen by accident appeared first on Modern Poultry.

VIV Select China 2026 attracted 20,300 professional visitors from 113 countries and regions, according to figures released by the organisers following the event.

Held from August 19 to 21 at the Shanghai World Expo Exhibition & Convention Center, the exhibition occupied 50,000 square metres and brought together 550 exhibitors from 20 countries and regions. The organisers reported a 36.7% year-on-year increase in exhibitor numbers, while overseas attendance was three times higher than in 2025.

International exhibitors came from markets including the Netherlands, the United States, Denmark, France, Brazil, Germany, Italy, Turkey, South Korea, Malaysia and India. Products and technologies on display covered animal nutrition, farm production, animal health, biosecurity, feed processing, digitalisation and aquaculture.

Focus on smart farming and aquaculture

A dedicated “V-AI + Smart Animal Husbandry” area featured more than 15 companies specialising in farming technology. The solutions presented included data platforms, automated feeding systems, environmental monitoring equipment and inspection robots.

The 2026 edition also introduced an Aquatic Breeding Zone covering different parts of the aquaculture production chain. Exhibits included smart control and environmental monitoring systems, recirculating water technologies, disease-prevention solutions and sustainable feeds.

Artificial intelligence and automation were also among the subjects discussed during the eighth VIV International Summit. The programme addressed the practical application of AI and robotics, agricultural large language models, sustainable production, changes in global supply chains and opportunities in emerging markets.

Speakers included Jeroen van Hooff, President and CEO of Royal Dutch Jaarbeurs; Nan-Dirk Mulder, Senior Global Specialist – Animal Protein at Rabobank; and Rifki Weno, Senior Advisor at Indonesia’s Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries.

International business meetings

More than 20 Chinese and international industry associations organised buyer delegations for the event.

According to the organisers, the V-Match business programme connected 745 exhibitor representatives with 94 buyers through two days of individual meetings. Participating buyers came from countries including Vietnam, India, Pakistan, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Turkey, Egypt, Brazil, the United States and Poland.

The meetings covered product specifications, certification requirements, regional distribution agreements and supply arrangements.

The organisers also reported that several companies confirmed their participation in the 2027 edition during the event. These exhibitors operate in sectors including feed and feed-milling technology, animal health, farm equipment and services for the livestock production chain.

Jeroen van Hooff said that the exhibition area is expected to be expanded for the next edition to accommodate more companies and increase opportunities for meetings between Chinese suppliers and international buyers.

According to the announcement released after the show, the next edition of VIV Select China is scheduled to take place in Shanghai from August 17 to 19, 2027.

Visit www.china.viv.net

Chicken production in the Philippines reached a new second-quarter record in 2026. Higher supplies of chicken and eggs coincided with lower farmgate prices during the quarter, while rising production and inventory levels point to continued expansion of the sector.

According to preliminary data from the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA), chicken production reached 586,181 tonnes liveweight between April and June, up 4.1% from 563,038 tonnes in the second quarter of 2025. This was the highest second-quarter level recorded by the authority since 1997.

Broilers drive output growth

Broilers accounted for 87.8% of total quarterly output, at 514,496 tonnes. Native and improved chickens contributed 61,900 tonnes, or 10.6% of production, while culled layers accounted for 8,286 tonnes, equal to 1.4% of the total.

Central Luzon remained the country’s leading producing area, with 193,724 tonnes, representing around one-third of national production. It was followed by Calabarzon with 123,635 tonnes, Northern Mindanao with 41,568 tonnes, Soccsksargen with 31,363 tonnes, and Central Visayas with 30,664 tonnes.

The national chicken inventory also increased. As of June 30, 2026, the national flock stood at 228.49 million birds, up 7.4% year on year. Native and improved chickens represented 35.2% of the total, followed by broilers at 34.9%, layers at 25.8%, and gamefowl at 4.1%.

Farmgate prices fall

Higher production coincided with weaker prices at farm level. The average farmgate price of broiler chicken fell to PHP 116.38 per kg liveweight in the second quarter, down 8.1% from PHP 126.63 per kg in the same period of 2025.

The same pattern was seen in the egg market. National egg production rose by 13.2% to 235,152 tonnes, while the laying flock increased by 7.3% to 80.53 million birds. At the same time, the average farmgate price of eggs declined by 7.9% to PHP 6.30 per egg, from PHP 6.84 a year earlier.

The available data show that higher production and inventories coincided with lower producer prices during the second quarter, but they do not by themselves establish that the increase in supply was the direct cause of the price declines.

Further expansion expected in 2026

According to projections published by the USDA Foreign Agricultural Service in Manila in September 2025, Philippine chicken meat production is forecast to reach 1.81 million tonnes ready-to-cook (RTC) in 2026, up 7% from the USDA’s 2025 estimate of 1.69 million tonnes.

The USDA identified several factors supporting the expected expansion, including the commercial rollout of a vaccine against highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI), enhanced biosecurity measures adopted by poultry farms, the continued impact of African swine fever (ASF) on local pork supplies, and strong performance in the foodservice sector.

Chicken consumption is also forecast to remain strong. The USDA projects domestic chicken meat consumption at around 2.38 million tonnes in 2026, approximately 6% above its 2025 estimate. The agency attributes the expected increase to chicken’s relatively competitive retail price compared with other major animal proteins, growing consumer preference, wide availability, population growth and economic expansion.

Imports remain relevant

Despite the expected increase in domestic production, imports are forecast to remain an important component of the Philippine chicken market. The USDA estimates chicken meat imports at 560,000 tonnes in 2026, up about 2% from its 2025 estimate of 550,000 tonnes.

According to the USDA, the projected increase in imports is supported by population-driven demand and the competitive pricing of imported chicken. The lifting of temporary trade restrictions related to HPAI, together with an increase in the number of accredited foreign suppliers, is also expected to facilitate larger volumes entering the Philippine market.

The Philippine poultry sector is therefore experiencing strong production growth, accompanied by rising inventories and expectations of further expansion in 2026. At the same time, the decline in farmgate prices for broilers and eggs during the second quarter shows that increased production and availability coincided with weaker producer prices, although the available data do not establish a direct causal relationship between the two.

The 2026 USPOULTRY Live Production, Welfare and Biosecurity Seminar will equip poultry professionals with practical tools and insights to address evolving challenges in live production, animal welfare and biosecurity. Scheduled for Sept. 23-24 in Nashville, Tenn., the seminar will focus on strategies to strengthen operational efficiency, protect flock health and prepare poultry operations for emerging industry challenges.

“The challenges facing live production continue to evolve, from disease and biosecurity threats to new technologies and changing expectations around animal welfare. This seminar brings those issues together and gives attendees practical information they can take back to their operations and put to work,” said Eric Greene, live operations manager at Claxton Poultry Farms and program planning committee chair.

The seminar will bring together industry managers, veterinarians and poultry professionals to address key live production issues, including immigration, disease and parasite updates, pest and rodent control, emergency preparedness, rural poultry house site challenges, gender identification efficiencies and effective biosecurity practices.

Additional sessions will explore precision farming technology, artificial intelligence-generated animal activist content, lessons learned from highly pathogenic avian influenza and outcome-based animal welfare and key welfare indicators.

The program planning committee includes Sarah Ballard, Mountaire Corporation; Mike Glass, Peco Foods Inc.; Shelley Harless, Peco Foods Inc.; Dr. Alexa Johnson, Butterball LLC; Craig Link, Cooper Farms Inc.; Dr. Claudia Dunkley, University of Georgia; Eric Greene, Claxton Poultry Farms and program planning committee chair; Heather Hillman-Easley, George’s Inc.; Clay Lindley, Perdue Farms; Ken Martin, Fieldale Farms Corporation; Heidi Parnin, Culver Duck Farms Inc.; Travis Strickland, Farbest Foods Inc.; Dr. Casey Ritz, University of Georgia; and Kimber Ward, Allen Harim Foods LLC.

The Professional Animal Auditor Certification Organization grants 10.5 CE credit hours for this seminar. To view the full agenda, register for the Live Production, Welfare and Biosecurity Seminar and reserve your hotel room, click here or visit uspoultry.org.

Source: USPOULTRY pless release

Franceinfo cited a CNPO estimate of approximately 500,000 laying hens lost during the June heatwave, although earlier industry estimates had placed the figure between 500,000 and 700,000 birds. CNPO Director Alice Richard said the overall impact remained relatively limited at national level, although some farms were severely affected.

Brittany and Pays de la Loire were among the regions that experienced particularly intense heat and drought conditions in June. Temperatures were less severe during July and August.

High temperatures also affected the performance of surviving hens. According to Richard, hens eat less feed during hot weather and consequently produce fewer and smaller eggs. Egg weight declined by only one or two grams, and the effect is expected to be reversible.

Cooler temperatures should allow production to recover and egg weights to return to the sizes normally found on the market.

Despite the recent production pressure, the CNPO does not expect egg shortages in the coming weeks. Demand nevertheless remains strong. Egg consumption in France has increased by around 5% annually over the past three years, and domestic production has struggled to keep pace.

The situation eased somewhat during the summer, when egg consumption is generally lower.

The effects of the June heatwave varied considerably between farms and regions, depending on their location and equipment. According to Richard, producers in south-western France are more accustomed to high temperatures and often have more effective ventilation and misting systems.

The temperatures recorded in Brittany during June were more unusual, and some farms were not sufficiently equipped to manage such conditions. Richard said the situation would require further consideration and investment.

She also pointed to Italy and Spain, where farms are generally better equipped to manage high temperatures because such conditions are more familiar to producers.

Read also: France: extreme heat causes hundreds of thousands of losses in poultry farms

Heat and drought put Europe’s poultry sector under pressure

At the mid-term TransRegional Eggspert Panel meeting in Ploufragan, France, the OMELETTE project presented its first results, highlighting how a more proactive and data-driven approach can support longer and healthier laying cycles. The event gathered 48 participants from five countries and 11 organisations, reflecting the broad European interest in improving hen longevity.

The OMELETTE project is part of the European Interreg North-West Europe programme and runs from 2023 to 2028 with a total budget of over €6.3 million, including €3.7 million EU funding. The project brings together partners from Belgium, the Netherlands, France, Germany and Switzerland to address one central challenge: how to keep laying hens productive for longer while maintaining animal health, welfare and farm profitability.

The project’s ambition is to make egg production in North-West Europe more sustainable and resilient by integrating longevity into everyday farm management. This requires not only technical innovation, but also better monitoring, knowledge exchange and behavioural change among farmers and advisors.

A first important theme presented during the meeting was lighting management. Dynamic lighting systems can influence behaviour by alternating between cold and warm white light. Cold light stimulates activity, while warm light supports rest and calm behaviour. Within OMELETTE, a decision-tree approach was developed to help farmers adjust lighting in response to pecking or aggression. However, researchers emphasised that lighting should be seen as a supportive tool, not a substitute for addressing underlying issues in the barn.

A second focus was enrichment materials. Trials showed that enrichment plays a key role in preventing harmful behaviour by satisfying natural pecking and foraging needs. Not all materials were equally effective: refillable enrichments performed best, as hens regained interest after refilling, while some objects quickly lost their appeal or even increased aggression. These insights underline the importance of active management, including rotation and renewal of materials.

Digitalisation is another cornerstone of the project. Tools presented by project partners combine production data, health indicators and behavioural monitoring into integrated dashboards. These systems help farmers detect problems earlier and shift from reactive to preventive management. Camera-based monitoring further enhances this approach by enabling automated detection of feather condition, piling behaviour and other welfare indicators.

This strong focus on smart monitoring reflects the broader OMELETTE strategy, which combines digital technologies with practical farm management to support early detection and continuous improvement. By integrating real-time data and structured decision-making, the project aims to improve both individual animal follow-up and overall flock management.

Beyond technology, OMELETTE also addresses the systemic barriers to longer laying cycles. Interviews with farmers in Belgium and France show that profitability remains the key driver, but that success depends on a combination of factors such as pullet quality, vaccination strategies, nutrition, ventilation, heat stress management, and consistent lighting.

To bring these elements together, the project is developing a cross-border Longevity Action Plan. This plan is being tested on pilot farms across participating countries and combines structured farm visits, data collection, welfare scoring and tailored advice. The goal is to translate research findings into practical, farm-specific solutions that can be widely adopted across the sector.

In addition, OMELETTE places strong emphasis on training and communication. By sharing knowledge with farmers, advisors, authorities and consumers, the project aims to bridge gaps in understanding and build trust in the egg production chain. Demonstrations on pilot farms and targeted communication campaigns are key tools in this process.

The mid-term results confirm that extending the productive life of laying hens is feasible, but requires an integrated approach combining management, monitoring and collaboration. OMELETTE shows that with the right tools and support, hen longevity can become a realistic pathway towards more sustainable egg production in North-West Europe.

The NPR 590 figure refers to the farm-gate support price rather than a retail price. At the retail level, OnlineKhabar reported that consumers were paying as much as NPR 30 per egg in some shops, despite the association’s notices continuing to list a consumer price of NPR 25 per egg.

Production shortfall drives prices up

The price increases come as Nepal’s poultry sector deals with substantial production losses associated with bird flu. According to figures cited by OnlineKhabar from the Department of Livestock Services, 835,563 birds were culled, while 1,225,536 eggs and 264,213 kg of poultry feed were destroyed as part of measures to control the disease.

The Nepal Layers Poultry Farmers Association has estimated that between 1 million and 1.2 million layer chickens were lost nationwide because of bird flu, according to statements reported by OnlineKhabar. A separate estimate published by Nepal News put the total loss at around 1.3 million layer chickens, attributing the losses to a combination of bird flu, extreme heat and rising production costs. The two figures therefore refer to somewhat different scopes and should not be treated as equivalent estimates of bird-flu losses alone.

The reduction in the layer population has also affected egg production. Association president Binod Pokharel said daily production had fallen from around 4–4.1 million eggs to approximately 2.9–3 million, leaving supply below market demand.

Nepal News separately reported that daily production had fallen from around 28,000 cartons to approximately 22,000 cartons.

The supply shortage has contributed to higher consumer prices. OnlineKhabar reported that retail consumers were paying up to NPR 30 per egg in some shops, although retail prices can vary according to location, egg size and the structure of the distribution chain.

Farmers still operating at a loss

Despite the repeated increases in egg prices, farmers have continued to report that prices do not fully cover production costs. The association puts the production cost at around NPR 19.12 per egg, equivalent to NPR 573.60 for a crate of 30 eggs.

On 11 August, for example, the support price for large eggs was NPR 545 per crate, below the reported production cost of NPR 573.60 per crate. Association chairperson Binod Pokharel said farmers were still unable to recover their production costs despite the price increase.

The financial pressure has also affected the structure of the sector. Business operators told Khabarhub that some farmers have started leaving the profession after failing to obtain prices sufficient to cover production costs. Declining production and recurring poultry diseases have also increased farmers’ reliance on bank loans, according to industry representatives cited by Khabarhub.

OnlineKhabar also reported that many poultry sheds remain empty following losses suffered during the bird-flu outbreak, while some farmers have left the business because of financial difficulties.

Outlook for the sector

Egg prices remain under pressure because production is currently below market demand. Industry representatives have attributed the latest increases primarily to declining production following bird-flu-related poultry losses.

The sector is also entering a period in which farmers expect stronger market conditions around the Dashain festival. However, the available sources do not provide sufficient evidence to state specifically that both Dashain and Tihar will cause a further increase in egg demand.

The current situation illustrates the vulnerability of Nepal’s layer sector to disease-related losses and other production pressures, while also highlighting the difficulties farmers face when farm-gate prices remain below reported production costs.

The event is dedicated to the poultry, livestock, dairy, meat processing and aquaculture industries. The exhibition will cover breeding and genetics, animal health and nutrition, feed production and ingredients, hatchery and incubation, animal housing, automated processing and cold-chain technologies. A conference programme will also take place during the event.

View the conference programme

Register to attend ILDEX Philippines 2026

That extra volume has landed on a market that hadn’t fully absorbed it. Composite chicken prices averaged 10% below year-ago levels in the second quarter, sitting well under historical norms. Boneless breast meat has been hit hardest, running 37% below both year-ago prices and the five-year average heading into the third quarter. Deboned thigh and leg meat are also under pressure as the market works through the added supply. Wing prices are the exception, showing modest improvement on the back of World Cup-related takeaway demand, with the upcoming football season offering another potential source of support.

RaboResearch expects a normal seasonal production cut this fall to help rebalance the market by the fourth quarter, but sees little relief materializing during the third quarter itself. Higher inventories and softer foodservice traffic are likely to cap near-term price gains, particularly with gasoline prices showing limited improvement and no visible easing in consumer price points. The bank’s current forecast calls for 3% year-over-year growth in full-year RTC production. Even with better retail and foodservice promotion expected to help stabilize the market, RaboResearch says a marked repricing could still be several quarters away.

June broiler exports told two different stories. Volumes were flat, while export values fell 1.6% year-over-year. Shipments to Mexico, the largest single export market at 25% of the total, rose 1%, a notable result given the relatively depressed local market. Volumes to Guatemala, Angola, Ghana, China and the United Arab Emirates posted double-digit growth, while shipments to Canada, Cuba and the Philippines dropped sharply. Chinese HPAI-related restrictions were lifted for 17 US states during the quarter, a change that could support additional export volumes in the second half of 2026 and into 2027. Lower leg-quarter prices may further aid US competitiveness in key export markets during the second half of the year. RaboResearch has raised its export outlook to a range of flat to +2% versus last year, while continuing to monitor US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) negotiations and the effect of a stronger Mexican peso on import volumes.

The 2026 US corn crop is estimated at 180.7 bushels per acre, down from last year’s record yield of 186.5 bushels but still resulting in just over 16 billion bushels, the second-largest crop on record. Nearby corn futures continue to trade within their long-standing USD 3.90–4.75 range despite volatile crude oil prices, strong demand, high stocks, tariffs and variable weather conditions. US soybean meal demand is also increasing, with a growing poultry flock among the main drivers of domestic growth, alongside higher inclusion rates in dairy rations.

Source: RaboResearch Food and Agribusiness, North American Agribusiness Quarterly Q3 2026, Rabobank, August 2026.

As a veterinarian with experience leading live operations and animal welfare programs, I have spent my career focused on improving animal welfare. I have worked globally across farms, facilities and leadership settings, emphasizing the importance of education, training and risk mitigation. I have also built systems designed to promote accountability and ownership and empowered those on the front lines to act in ways that mitigate welfare compromise for the birds and risk to the business.

Over time, one truth has become unmistakably clear to me: Animal welfare programs succeed or fail not because of audits, policies or even good intentions but because of the cultivation — or lack thereof — of a robust culture. And culture is something that we must build deliberately.

Role of audits

When I first entered the industry, welfare programs were primarily audit-based. We focused on compliance: meeting industry standards, passing annual third-party audits and responding when gaps were identified.

Audits were, and still are, an important tool. They provide structure, accountability and a common language around expectations. Routine point-in-time audits, however, are poorly suited to actively manage dynamic fields like animal welfare performance because they capture only a moment in time, fail to reflect normal variability or emerging trends and often incentivize short-term compliance rather than sustained performance.

Historically, audits have emphasized documentation and program management over true outcome-based performance, although audits today are much more focused on animal outcomes. Prior auditing programs were unlikely to detect rare but consequential failures and provided little insight into learning or continuous improvement. Most importantly, their episodic nature shifted accountability away from daily ownership, reinforcing the misconception that performance is something to be demonstrated occasionally rather than managed continuously.

As customer expectations, societal scrutiny and our own understanding of animal welfare evolved, so did the opportunity to fundamentally improve our approach to welfare management.

Cultural shift

Organizations faced a choice. Would they continue to treat animal welfare as a regulatory- and customer-compliance exercise, or would it be treated as a core expression of its values? Ultimately, the answer to this question would define an organization’s welfare approach and culture.

When an organization relies on a compliance-driven approach, it tends to be reactive, focused on risk avoidance, minimum standards and correcting problems after they occur. Engagement and transparency are limited, and success is defined almost exclusively by audit results rather than by sustained performance or outcomes.

In contrast, a culture-driven approach is proactive. It treats animal welfare not only as a moral obligation but as a strategic priority — investing in people, processes and systems to prevent problems before they occur. Data are used to drive learning and improvement rather than defensiveness, and welfare objectives are intentionally aligned with enterprise goals, incentives and long-term planning.

Culture is built, or undermined, through communication and action. Employees quickly discern whether animal welfare messaging is authentic or merely performative. Clearly articulated, welfare-specific mission and vision statements can serve as powerful strategic and cultural anchors, but they carry weight only when reinforced through consistent messaging, predictable action and visible leadership commitment.

When words are backed by resources, training, recognition and well-communicated goals, a strong and durable animal welfare culture takes hold. For those leading welfare programs, this requires clearly communicating both short- and long-term strategic objectives that signal priorities, build leadership alignment and enable progress to be tracked over time.

Laying the foundation

As organizations moved away from a purely audit-based model toward a more holistic, operationally grounded approach focused on intentionally building an animal welfare culture, several key questions that would define the evolving program had to be addressed.

One of the first and most important questions was a basic one: Who owns animal welfare? In our case, we wanted to create a program in which it was clear that everyone who worked directly with our birds had the shared responsibility of owning animal welfare. We recognized that culture did not exist in a vacuum; it was shaped every day by engagement, empowerment and appropriate actions of every individual involved in the process.

Another question that organizations had to address was where within the structure the animal welfare function should reside. There is not one correct answer. In practice, I have seen the welfare function housed within operations, food safety and quality, or sustainability. It may operate as a standalone group or be integrated directly into operations.

Where it sits is not critical. What is critical for effective poultry welfare programs is explicit leadership. Roles and responsibilities must be clearly defined, and accountability must be embedded across the organization, from the hatchery to the farm and from live haul to processing. Ultimately, if the individuals responsible for welfare cannot influence the decisions that shape bird care, welfare becomes symbolic rather than operational, eroding accountability and undermining the culture needed to consistently deliver strong welfare outcomes.

As we assessed our program and set its future direction, we had to be honest about the operational maturity of our production system. Poultry production is complex, fast-moving and highly automated, with birds constantly interacting with people, equipment and environments that must function efficiently at scale. In that context, foundational welfare elements are non-negotiable.

We established clear expectations supported by robust standard operating procedures, job-specific training and competency testing, and strong accountability mechanisms such as whistleblower protections and verification through first-, second- and third-party audits. These were not administrative box-checking exercises; they were safeguards for the birds and for the people who handled them.

Just as importantly, the structure and governance of these programmatic components provided the scaffolding that sustained and reinforced the organizational culture being cultivated, ensuring welfare expectations were not only stated but also consistently lived.

Culture in action

We believed a culturally based program would sustain employee engagement because it intentionally connected organizational intent to the operational realities of the people who handled the birds. Shared values and purpose clarified why animal welfare matters, while a common language and clear expectations helped employees understand what “good” looked like and how their actions contributed to animal welfare outcomes.

We reinforced this through simple, memorable phrases that emphasized both individual ownership (“100/0” — 100% accountable, zero excuses) and collective responsibility (“See it? Stop it!” — awareness and action for the birds, each other and the process). When managers consistently modeled welfare-first behaviors and held themselves accountable, they signaled that engagement was expected, supported and safe.

Psychological safety and trust are critical, allowing concerns to be raised early and recognizing frontline ownership and expertise as strengths rather than risks. This shared ownership at every level reinforced the idea that animal welfare did not belong to a single function or role but was lived by those working with birds every day.

Education and training, grounded in science and a framework like the Five Domains, helped employees connect the assessment of animal welfare outcomes to both the physical and affective states of birds, shifting welfare from rule-following to informed, active engagement. A focus on behaviors and outcomes, supported by continuous learning and improvement, keeps employees involved in promoting positive outcomes and mitigating welfare compromise, rather than solely reacting to system failures.

Finally, sustained engagement depends on reinforcement. When incentives, recognition and consequences align with welfare goals, employees see that what they are asked to value is genuinely valued by leadership. Celebrating progress, highlighting innovation and acknowledging teams when things go right reinforce desired behaviors and build pride. In this way, culturally based programs do more than drive compliance; they empower people, strengthen accountability and create conditions for sustained engagement and better outcomes for the birds.

Evolution of animal welfare programs

Throughout my career, I have had the opportunity to design, develop and assess a wide range of animal welfare programs. Over time, I have found it helpful to broadly classify these programs as elementary, maturing or enriching, based on several factors: their core components and activities, the approach to welfare management and, most importantly, the level of culture the organization has achieved. Although organizations may move between these stages over time, each category reflects a fundamentally different mindset about how animal welfare is understood, managed and sustained.

Elementary programs

Elementary programs are largely compliance-driven. They focus on meeting industry standards and passing required audits, with success defined almost entirely by audit performance. These programs tend to prioritize rules over continuous improvement and are often reactive rather than proactive, responding to issues after they occur rather than working systematically to prevent them.

Transparency is limited, and stakeholder engagement is typically confined to what is strictly required. Although elementary programs can establish a basic foundation and provide assurance that minimum expectations are being met, they rarely drive meaningful or sustained improvements in welfare outcomes.

Maturing programs

Maturing programs represent an important evolution. At this stage, organizations begin to build cultural commitment supported by more robust foundational elements. Governance structures become clearer, with formalized roles and responsibilities for animal welfare defined across the organization. Standard audits remain important, but they are supplemented by an increased focus on continuous improvement and the introduction of key welfare indicators (KWIs) to help monitor performance.

Organizations may begin to share select welfare metrics with customers or other stakeholders, signaling greater transparency. Success is no longer judged solely by audit scores but by a combination of compliance and performance on measurable welfare outcomes. Although culture is still developing, the organization is actively moving beyond checklist compliance toward a more operational and outcome-oriented approach.

Enriching programs

Enriching programs reflect the highest level of maturity. In these organizations, animal welfare is fully embedded in culture, strategy and leadership identity. Engagement, accountability and ownership are sustained at all levels, and routine, meaningful engagement with stakeholders is the norm rather than the exception.

Research, innovation and data-driven decision-making are actively used to drive continuous improvement. Clear welfare goals and KWIs are established, tracked and often reported publicly. Importantly, welfare objectives are integrated into broader enterprise goals, with incentives aligned to performance outcomes. Leaders not only model welfare-first behaviors internally but also demonstrate leadership externally, contributing to industry advancement. At this stage, animal welfare is no longer a program — it is part of how the organization defines success.

Across all three classifications, the distinction is not whether audits or standards exist — they do at every level — but how they are used. Elementary programs use audits to prove compliance. Maturing programs use them as part of a broader management system. Enriching programs treat them as one verification tool within a deeply rooted culture of accountability, learning and continuous improvement. This progression reflects a shift from managing welfare as a requirement to leading welfare as a core organizational value.

Knowing your starting point, raising the bar

Every organization is at a different stage in the maturity of its animal welfare program, and meaningful progress begins with an honest assessment of where you are today, followed by a deliberate commitment to take the next step.

Here are three steps an organization can take to continue to evolve its program:

1. Move beyond audits and build welfare as a management system. Stop treating animal welfare as something you demonstrate periodically and start managing it as something you deliver every day. Use audits as verification tools, not the definition of success. Incorporate outcome-based indicators, continuous feedback loops and operational ownership that reflect how welfare performs over time, not just how it looks on audit day.
2. Make animal welfare everyone’s job. Clarify ownership. If the people responsible for animal welfare cannot influence decisions affecting bird care, then welfare will remain symbolic rather than operational. Define roles, decision rights and accountability across the system, and ensure frontline teams are educated, empowered and expected to act. Culture does not emerge organically; it must be intentionally designed and reinforced.
3. 3. Align leadership, incentives and culture with welfare outcomes. Examine what your organization truly rewards. Align incentives and recognition with welfare performance. Communicate clear short- and long-term welfare objectives, resource them appropriately and celebrate progress. When leadership commitment is visible and consistent, sustained engagement and better outcomes for birds follow.

The evolution of animal welfare programs ultimately reflects a shift from demonstrating compliance to delivering consistent outcomes. Audits and standards remain essential, but their role changes, from defining success to verifying it within a broader, outcome-driven management system.

Organizations that make this transition recognize that welfare cannot be integrated into a system. Rather, it must be intentionally designed, operationalized and reinforced through clear ownership, aligned leadership and the disciplined use of data. When these elements are in place, animal welfare becomes both a moral obligation and a source of operational strength.

The progression from elementary to enriching programs is less about added complexity and more about deeper accountability and engagement. As organizations advance, responsibility shifts from centralized oversight to shared ownership, and success is defined by sustained performance, not point-in-time results. Organizations that lead treat culture as the primary lever for change by sharing ownership, aligning incentives, empowering frontline teams, embracing continuous improvement and embedding welfare into everyday decisions. In doing so, they move beyond meeting expectations to setting the standard for the future.

The post From compliance to culture: evolving animal welfare management appeared first on Modern Poultry.

In the final session of Phibro Academy’s three-part webinar series, “Coccidiosis Tools and Strategies,” Greg Mathis, PhD, president of Southern Poultry Research, Inc., said that while AST can provide valuable insight into how field isolates respond to different products, its real value depends on how well those results are interpreted and applied in the field.

Coccidial resistance develops through selection pressure, with anticoccidial drugs eliminating susceptible parasites while allowing less sensitive strains to survive and multiply, Mathis explained.

Over time, that process shifts the population towards reduced sensitivity. The rate of change depends on factors including drug type, inclusion level, duration of use and the overall coccidial load within the birdhouse.

Larger populations increase the likelihood that resistant strains are present, accelerating the loss of sensitivity.

Comparing isolates

AST is designed to replicate a field challenge under controlled conditions, allowing producers to compare how isolates respond to different anticoccidial treatments.

The process involves collecting litter samples containing oocysts from commercial houses, propagating them and challenging birds receiving different drugs, with outcomes measured through lesion scoring and performance.

“Six days post-challenge, we weigh them and lesion score all the birds,” Mathis said.

The resulting data provides a structured comparison with untreated controls, but Mathis said it should not be reduced to a single index or used to rank products without context.

“You’re missing some of the really important interpretations of what influenced lesions, what influenced feed conversion,” he explained.

Instead, AST should be viewed as one component of a broader evaluation that includes species composition, challenge level and the biological characteristics of each drug.

Interpreting results correctly

One of the most important variables affecting AST outcomes is the nature of the challenge itself. Mathis noted that challenge level can significantly influence how products appear to perform. In high-dose challenges, lesion scores can be uniformly elevated, masking differences between treatments and making products appear less effective than they would under commercial conditions.

Under more moderate challenge conditions, separation between treatments becomes clearer, providing a more realistic indication of relative sensitivity. This highlights the need to interpret results in the context of how closely the test reflects field conditions.

Mode of action also plays a critical role, Mathis said. Ionophore anticoccidials, for example, do not act as coccidicidal agents. Instead, they combine direct parasite control with the development of immunity through controlled cycling. That dual mechanism complicates interpretation in AST testing, where the short test period limits the immune component.

As a result, ionophores often appear less effective in AST results than they do in the field, where immunity contributes to overall control, he said.

Synthetic anticoccidials present a different picture. Their strong coccidicidal activity can produce clear reductions in lesion scores, but that does not necessarily translate to long-term sustainability. Their potency can increase selection pressure, accelerating the development of resistance if they are used too intensively.

Species differences complicate results

Species composition further complicates interpretation, Mathis said. Different Eimeria species vary in both pathogenicity and response to treatment.

Mathis highlighted that Eimeria maxima, in particular, has a greater impact on feed conversion than other species, meaning performance data can be influenced by species mix rather than drug sensitivity alone.

In some cases, drugs can allow certain life stages of the parasite to develop, resulting in visible lesions without a corresponding drop in performance. Without understanding those dynamics, there is a risk of misclassifying efficacy as resistance, he said.

Sampling strategy is another critical factor shaping AST results, Mathis explained.

Timing has a direct impact on how representative an isolate is, so collecting samples too early, particularly in vaccinated flocks, can skew results towards vaccine-derived strains rather than field populations.

To better reflect field conditions, he recommended sampling later in the grow-out, typically between 23 and 28 days of age, when coccidial cycling is more established and wild strains are more prominent.

Supporting better program decisions

Even with optimal sampling, Mathis stressed that AST results should not be treated as a definitive answer.

“Anticoccidial sensitivity tests are the only way to truly determine drug resistance and sensitivity,” he said, but added that their value lies in how they are used alongside other information.

Without performance data, field observations and historical program use to provide context, there is a risk of making decisions based on a single data point that represents only a snapshot in time.

In practice, AST is most useful as a guide for rotation and program planning, he explained.

By identifying relative sensitivity across available products, producers can make more informed decisions about which anticoccidials to use and when to rest them, he told attendees. Used correctly, they can help producers avoid over-reliance on individual products and support more strategic use of a limited range of anticoccidials.

This article is based on the third session in Phibro Academy’s three-part webinar series, “Coccidiosis tools and strategies.” To access the full webinar series, click here.

The post Interpreting AST results key to maintaining anticoccidial effectiveness appeared first on Modern Poultry.

Hendrix Genetics announces that it has acquired 100% of the shares of Pintobar Exploração Avícola, Lda., effective July 31, 2026. The acquisition marks an important step in Hendrix Genetics’ long-term commitment to the Iberian egg and poultry industry, strengthening its local production footprint and enhancing its ability to serve customers across Portugal, Spain and export markets.

Hendrix Genetics and Pintobar have worked together for many years, building a strong partnership to supply egg and poultry producers with high-quality genetics and technical support. The acquisition builds on this long-standing relationship and creates new opportunities to further enhance operational excellence, customer service, and supply security throughout the region.

Founded in 1982, with roots in poultry production dating back to the 1960s, Pintobar operates breeder rearing facilities, hatching egg production farms and hatcheries, supplying customers in Portugal and international markets. Throughout its history, the company has earned a reputation for technical expertise, product quality and reliability, supported by continuous investment in production technology and a highly experienced team. Pintobar generates annual revenues of approximately €20 million and employs around 125 people.

“Pintobar has been a valued and trusted partner for many years. This acquisition reinforces our long-term commitment to the Iberian market and reinforces our commitment to customers across the Iberian region. Together, we will continue to invest in people, production and innovation to support the long-term success of poultry producers”, said Pelayo Casanovas, Managing Director Layers & Broilers Business Unit, Hendrix Genetics.

“We are proud of what Pintobar has achieved over the past decades. Joining Hendrix Genetics represents an important next step that creates new opportunities for our employees, customers and business partners while preserving the values and expertise that have made Pintobar successful,” said Eduardo Fraga, General Manager, Pintobar.

Customers, suppliers and business partners can expect a seamless transition with full continuity of operations. The existing leadership team and employees will remain integral to the business, ensuring uninterrupted customer service, technical expertise and reliable product supply throughout the integration process.

Source: Hendrix Genetics press release

France – Hubbard is pleased to announce that Anaëlle Le Teuff joins the Hubbard Customer Support department as Technical Manager for France. Anaëlle is based at Hubbard’s headquarters in Brittany and reports directly to Roberto Yamawaki, Hubbard’s Global Technical Director.

After obtaining her University degree in Biological Engineering (specialisation in Agronomy) in June 2020, Anaëlle enrolled at ESA (École Supérieure des Agricultures – Angers, France). In September of that same year, she started working at Hubbard to complete her higher education through a work-study program. She joined the Applied Innovation department, where she was entrusted with applied research projects for the next three years. Anaëlle defended her thesis in October 2023; holding a degree in Agricultural Engineering, she then joined Hubbard’s Production department, where she diligently and enthusiastically managed internal Grandparent stock farms in Brittany.

From March 2026, Anaëlle gradually took on a new challenge by joining the Customer Support department for France. Working alongside Nicolas Neyra (Sales Manager France) and Émeric Denieul (Premium Range Manager and Nutritionist), she further developed her technical and commercial expertise. Early summer 2026, she officially became Technical Support Manager forming a new duo with Émeric Denieul within the French Customer Support department.

In her new role, in which she collaborates closely with the existing team and Hubbard’s global support department, Anaëlle focuses on supporting customers with the continuous improvement of their breeding stock management and strengthening technical dialogue. In doing so, she shares the expertise of Hubbard’s Customer Support team and the latest innovations from the field.

Roberto Yamawaki comments: “I am delighted to see Anaëlle taking on this new role within the Customer Support team. Throughout her journey with Hubbard, Anaëlle has consistently demonstrated commitment, professionalism and a strong passion for supporting our customers. She embodies a new generation of talented professionals who combine solid technical expertise with a collaborative mindset and a customer-focused approach. We are confident that she will make a valuable contribution to strengthening our customer support in France and continue helping our customers achieve the best flock performance, while further reinforcing Hubbard’s commitment to technical excellence and innovation.”

Nicolas Neyra adds: “Anaëlle brings a fresh dynamic to the Customer Support department. Her keen observational skills, technical expertise and personal qualities will provide new momentum to the monitoring of breeder flocks of our customers in France. I am certain she will quickly earn the respect of her peers and become an indispensable member of the team. I wish her every success.”

Émeric Denieul concludes: “I have known Anaëlle for a number of years and am delighted that she is joining the team. With her experience and knowledge in monitoring Grandparent flocks, she brings a fresh approach to supporting our French customers. I am convinced that by combining our respective experiences and expertise, we will provide increasingly effective support and contribute fully to customer satisfaction.”

The Hubbard team wishes Anaëlle great success and fulfilment in her new role!

Source: Hubbard press release

Two previous articles examined the role of the G19¹ countries in global meat production and exports (Windhorst, 2026, 2026a). These studies highlighted the significant role of this group of countries, as they accounted for approximately 70% of the production volume of the four most important meat types² and 55% of global meat exports. Another article analyses whether a similar dominance of a few countries existed in trade involving the meat types considered here. The findings revealed that exports increased faster than production, indicating a growing demand for meat. Furthermore, it was found that the concentration of exports to just two countries was very high for poultry meat, and to just one country for sheep and goat meat, while for pork and beef, four countries each accounted for over 80% of the export volume. This article aims to analyse whether there are corresponding patterns in meat exports and in meat imports, or whether they differ.

Imports rose faster than production

A comparison of the long-term development of global meat production and meat imports reveals that the trade volume has increased more sharply than the production volume. Between 2010 and 2024, global production increased by 28.4%, while meat imports grew by 45.2%. The development was similar in the G19 group. Here, production increased by 34.3%, but imports by only 42.5%, remaining below the global average. This had impacts on the G19’s share of global production and imports. The G19’s share of production grew from 72.3% to 75.7% during the period under review, but its share of imports increased only from 51.4% to 52.7%. Figure 1 shows that meat imports increased, in particular between 2000 and 2005, and then again after 2010, especially for poultry meat.

A comparative analysis of the dynamics, broken down by meat type, from 2010 onwards is interesting (Table 1). Globally, poultry meat showed the highest absolute increase in both production and imports, but the relative increase was higher for beef, sheep and goat meat exports. However, the significantly lower starting values must be taken into account. This pattern was repeated in the G19 group. Here, too, the production volume of poultry meat increased much faster than that of the other three meat types. The high import volume of pork is surprising at first glance. The collapse in pork production in China following the massive outbreaks of African swine fever and the resulting supply problems led to a sharp increase in imports of other meat types for several years. The shortage of pork in other Asian countries, which were also affected by the disease, had a similar impact on beef trade and explains the high absolute and relative growth rates.

It is noteworthy that despite the high absolute increase in poultry meat production among the G19 countries, which accounted for almost 94% of the global increase, the relative increase in imports was roughly in line with the global average. It must be taken into account that in some G19 countries in Asia, Europe, and in Mexico, demand rose significantly, and production was insufficient to meet the domestic needs, thus increasing imports became necessary (see also Table 2).

Significant differences between exports and imports at the country level

A comparison of the composition and ranking of countries in meat exports and meat imports reveals similarities, but also significant differences depending on the meat type. For poultry meat, the regional concentration in imports was considerably lower than in exports. While Brazil and the USA accounted for over two-thirds of the export volume, imports were more evenly distributed. The five leading countries accounted for 65.8% of the import volume (Table 2).

A detailed analysis of the development in the four leading importing countries (Figure 2) reveals a remarkable correlation in the absolute increase in their import volumes between 2010 and 2024, with values ranging from 425,000 tons to almost 500,000 tons. However, the relative growth rates differed significantly, with Japan‘s increase at 44.0% compared to China‘s at 85.5%. The graph for China reveals that the outbreaks of African swine fever in China triggered a doubling of imports starting in 2019, but that these imports declined significantly once the disease was contained. Germany’s imports are attributable to the steadily increasing per capita consumption of chicken, which led to a drop in its self-sufficiency rate below 100%. The significant undersupply of duck and goose meat also contributed to the rising imports.

The pattern was repeated for pork. Here, too, the concentration of imports in just a few countries was about 25% lower at 64.9% than at exports.

A closer look at the import trends of the four leading countries reveals significant differences, as reflected in the respective graphs in Figure 2. While Italy‘s imports remained very consistent over the period under review, increasing by only 8.5%, Mexico‘s imports rose by 930,000 tons, or 163%. China experienced particularly large fluctuations. Imports roughly quadrupled between 2010 and 2024. A relatively steady increase until 2018 was followed by a dramatic rise between 2019 and 2021. The peak was reached in 2020 at over 4.5 million tons, representing a relative increase of 1,800% compared to 2010. With the successful control of African swine fever, imports fell by 3.4 million tons, 76% since 2021. This unusual dynamic had far-reaching consequences for the global pork trade. Rapid gains in exports to China by some countries, e.g. Spain, were offset by equally rapid declines in exports and caused economic problems.

In the beef sector as well, regional concentration was 13% lower for imports than for exports. However, there were significant differences in the spatial pattern. While four countries in the Americas, in addition to Australia, led the export markets, three Asian countries were leading in the import rankings, with China, for the reasons already mentioned, ranking first by a considerable margin. Surprisingly, the USA, despite its high domestic production and substantial exports, ranked second among importing countries. The unusual dynamics are reflected in the import trends of the four leading countries. While Japan’s import volume changed only slightly, increasing by 76,500 tons or 10.8%, it rose by 3.6 million tons or 9,150% in China and by 1.1 million tons or 109% in the USA. The dynamics in China are particularly interesting. Imports saw a slow increase until 2017, after which they rose significantly faster, reaching a preliminary peak of 3.6 million tons in 2024. In addition to supply problems resulting from the collapse in pork production, which led to compensatory imports of other meat types, the increasing consumption of beef by higher-income groups, which is regarded as an indicator of wealth and a status symbol, was also an important steering factor.

The trade in sheep and goat meat also showed a considerable imbalance between exports and imports. Here, Australia, the dominant exporter, contrasts with China, two European countries, and the USA as the main importers. It is noteworthy that the United Kingdom and France were represented in both top groups. Looking at the overall dynamics across the four meat types, it becomes obvious that China, Japan, and Mexico were the most significant importing countries within the G19 group. The USA was only a major destination for beef. Several European countries imported larger quantities of poultry meat and pork; however, trade within the EU (27) was more significant than trade with other G19 countries. A detailed analysis of trade flows would document this.

Summary: lower concentration in imports than in exports

The preceding analysis of the role of the G19 countries in global meat imports focused on whether the countries that dominated exports also played a leading role in imports. It was shown that, overall, the degree of concentration in imports was lower than in exports, and the composition of the leading importing countries differed considerably from that of the exporting countries. Figure 3 shows the share of the top ten importing countries in the total imports of the group for each of the four meat types. For poultry meat and pork, there was no high concentration in just a few countries. For beef, sheep, and goat meat, however, the concentration was significantly higher due to the large shares of China and the USA.

In conclusion, it can be noted that the G19 countries dominated meat production and exports. Regarding imports, it became clear that, in addition to trade between member countries, sales to countries outside the group were of great importance for countries with a production surplus.

Data source and supplementary literature

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (n.d.). FAOSTAT. https://www.fao.org/faostat

Windhorst, H.-W. (2026). The role of the G20 countries in global meat production and trade. Part 1: Production. Zootecnica Poultry magazine, (4).

Windhorst, H.-W. (2026). The role of the G20 countries in global meat production and trade. Part 2: Global meat exports. Zootecnica Poultry magazine, (5).

¹ Only the 19 member states are considered in the analysis, not the EU (27) and the African Union.

² Poultry meat, pork, beef, as well as sheep and goat meat.

See also:

The role of the G20 in global meat production and trade. Part 1: meat production

New research from the University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture suggests that green, moisture-rich feed attractants may help turkey poults find feed sooner, forage earlier and gain more weight during the first 10 days after placement.

The findings point to a practical opportunity for turkey producers: using visual feed cues not only to draw poults to feed, but also to deliver hydration support and other early-life additives during a critical window in poult development.

Why early feed discovery matters

Commercial turkey poults may go through hatchery processing, handling and transport before they reach feed and water in the brooder. During that window, they rely on residual yolk reserves for hydration and nutrients. However, that reserve is limited.

Delayed access to feed and water can contribute to dehydration, reduced body weight, altered metabolism and impaired early tissue development. For turkey producers, helping poults find feed quickly after placement can support a stronger, more uniform start.

That challenge has researchers searching for practical ways to encourage poults to engage with feed sooner.

Testing a green visual attractant

The Arkansas study, led by graduate student Victor Oyeniran and published in the Journal of Applied Poultry Research, evaluated whether green alginate beads used as a feed top dressing could attract day-of-hatch turkey hen poults to starter feed.

The project brought together the work of Danielle Graham, MS, PhD, in early nutrition and gut health and the work of Shawna Weimer, MS, PhD, in poultry behavior and welfare to understand how birds respond to their environment and how behavioral responses relate to performance.

The beads were moisture-rich and contained electrolytes, vitamins C and D and betaine, making them a potential carrier for early-life additives and a visual cue.

Turkey hen poults were placed into three treatment groups. Control pens received untreated feed flats. A treated group received green beads on both feed flats. A preference group received one treated feed flat and one untreated feed flat, allowing researchers to evaluate whether poults showed a behavioral preference when both options were available. (Figure 1)

Figure 1.

“Turkey poults are naturally curious. But getting them to engage with feed quickly after placement can still be a challenge,” Weimer said. “We were interested in whether a green attractant could help stimulate that first feeding behavior.”

Poults preferred treated feed flat

The preference treatment provided one of the study’s most compelling behavioral results.

When poults had access to both a treated and an untreated feed flat, more birds were observed on the feed flat with the green attractant. More poults were also actively engaged on the treated flat, with more observed walking, standing or foraging rather than sitting or resting.

That distinction is important. The birds were not simply gathering randomly on the feed flats; they showed greater interest in the treated feed source and were more active when they got there.

“We saw evidence that the green beads drew poults to the feed and encouraged active engagement,” Graham said. “That early activity is important because the sooner poults begin exploring and consuming feed, the better positioned they may be for early growth.”

Across treatment groups, poults exposed to the green attractant were also more active on feed flats during the first hour after placement compared with poults in the control group.

Beads consumed quickly

The green attractant was consumed rapidly after placement.

In the treated group, beads were found in the crop of 50% of sampled poults within 15 minutes and in 100% of sampled poults by 45 minutes. Beads were also detected in the lower ileum within the first hour, showing rapid movement through the gastrointestinal tract.

At 24 hours after placement, crop fill was similar among treatments. Most poults across all groups had soft, full crops, indicating they had consumed feed and water. That finding suggests the green attractant did not interfere with normal feed and water intake.

Growth improved by day 10

The early behavioral response was reflected in performance.

By day 10, poults with access to the green attractant were heavier than control poults. Poults in the treated and preference groups averaged about 124 grams, compared with about 118 grams for controls. Body weight gain followed a similar pattern, with poults exposed to the attractant gaining about 6 to 7 grams more than control poults during the first 10 days.

Feed conversion ratio and mortality were not statistically different among treatments, suggesting the attractant improved early growth without negatively affecting feed efficiency or livability.

Implications for turkey production

The results point to two potential opportunities for turkey production.

First, green visual attractants may be a practical way to encourage poults to find and interact with feed shortly after placement. That could be especially useful during the critical early brooding period, when producers focus on hydration, feed intake, livability and flock uniformity.

Second, moisture-rich beads may offer a delivery platform for targeted early-life additives. In addition to attracting poults to feed, the beads could potentially carry ingredients such as electrolytes, vitamins, energy sources or other functional additives designed to support gut health, immune readiness and resilience to placement stress.

The researchers noted that the current study followed poults only through 10 days of age, so additional studies are needed to determine whether early improvements carry through a full commercial turkey production cycle.

Still, the findings suggest that a simple visual cue may do more than catch a poult’s attention. It may help poults get off to a better start during one of the most important windows in production.

The post Could green feed cues give poults a stronger start? appeared first on Modern Poultry.

Researchers from Auburn University and the University of Guelph conducted a trial to answer those questions. During the trial, they recorded where the birds spent their time, egg production and body fat deposition.

Olivia McGuire, a graduate student at Auburn, discussed the research and results during the 2026 International Poultry Scientific Forum.

Trial design

The study involved 600 Lohmann LSL Lite pullets at 12 weeks of age. The pullets were randomly assigned to four rooms divided into six aviary pens. Each pen had two perches, two elevated platforms, a 45-degree ramp and nest boxes.

At 13 weeks of age, birds in half of the pens were fed ad libitum. Birds in the other half were fed twice daily and received 20% less feed than average consumption. The feed restriction ended at 21 weeks of age.

Pen-mounted cameras scanned pens hourly to record bird locations. The number of eggs laid and where chickens laid the eggs were also recorded.

Every 2 weeks, one bird per pen was euthanized to measure abdominal fat, record weight and collect hypothalamus and pituitary tissue for analysis.

Feed-restricted outcomes

Overall, restricted birds spent more time on the litter while ad libitum birds preferred perches and elevated platforms, McGuire noted.

“We noticed a shift in location preference during the time of sexual maturation,” she added. “Between 18 and 20 weeks of age, both treatment groups spent more time on the litter than in other locations.”

Feeding treatment did not affect birds’ location at the start of the night. All birds chose to roost or seek shelter.

“But feed-restricted birds definitely had a delay in egg production compared to birds fed ad libitum from 20 to 21 weeks of age,” McGuire said. “We also observed that all birds preferred to lay eggs within the nest boxes rather than on the litter. So, restricted feed did not impact where eggs were laid.

“We expected to see a weight decrease with feed restriction,” she continued. “By the time feed restriction was lifted, those birds were 8.8% lighter than birds fed ad libitum.”

Feed-restricted birds had lower abdominal fat measurements at 16 to 20 weeks of age than ad libitum hens.

The researchers also tested whether the mild feed restriction elicited a hypothalamic response to increase feed intake or decrease locomotion. They did not observe an increase in neuropeptide Y (NPY) or Agouti-related peptide (AgRP) expression in either feeding group. McGuire added that the expression of these peptides, which stimulate hunger, typically increase during energy deficit.

Final takeaways

“Mild feed restriction caused a decrease in bodyweight, energy reserves and delayed maturation,” McGuire said. “The birds preferred to stay on the floor.

“Decreased energy intake did not affect NPY and AgRP expression,” she continued. “Feed-restricted birds ate less than an hour a day. They were fed twice a day but never reached chronic hunger.”

McGuire suggested that the level of energy restriction was not sufficient to trigger a hypothalamic response to hunger.

Feed restriction also did not affect the choice to seek shelter at night or the location of egg laying.

She also noted that the increased use of litter by the feed-restricted birds “is likely not to conserve energy but rather due to unmet behavioral satisfaction.”

The post Mild feed restriction has variable effects on cage-free pullets’ weight, activity and egg production appeared first on Modern Poultry.

Of all the levers a broiler operation can pull in the final hours before a flock is harvested, few pay back as quickly — or cost as much — as the feed-deprivation program. Get the timing right and you ship cleaner birds, hit your microbiological performance standards and protect every ounce of yield.

Get it wrong and you make your feed conversion worse, lose saleable meat weight and increase the Salmonella load at the processing plant. Optimizing the period from the flock’s last meal to the kill blade makes money you can bank.

Timing the deprivation

The bird’s body experiences two stages during feed deprivation: emptying of digestive tract contents and depletion of water and muscle mass. The first stage happens during the first 6 hours and cannot be changed. The second stage is where you can make a difference.

A comfortable broiler under full or near-full light eats about every 4 hours and drinks several times in between. This is steady-state consumption. The instant that feed is pulled, that eat-drink-rest rhythm becomes a clock. The crop is empty and the bird is hungry roughly 4 hours after the last meal. Feed leaving the gizzard clears the lower intestine in about 2 more hours.

But even the best-run 6-hour deprivation program cannot overcome the reality of a flock’s eating pattern. The flock should be eating continuously. When the feed pans are raised, some birds will have just filled their crops, and some birds’ crops will be empty. Under the best circumstances, the time off feed for individual birds will range from 5 to 11 hours at slaughter.

That time span comes from the plant. If you have a 33,600-head house, the plant runs 16,800 head per hour. Feed-up time is calculated from the midpoint of processing, and you get a 5-to-11-hour deprivation range for individual birds, as shown in the graphic (Figure 1).

If your operation has mega-houses with over 45,000 broilers, feed deprivation becomes even more difficult! For houses of that size, the plant needs to run about 21,000 birds per hour to keep the slaughter window as small as possible. The logistics then become really complicated when trying to catch and deliver four, five or even six truckloads per hour to the plant.

Figure 1.

Unforgiving numbers

There is extensive scientific research about this subject, and the arithmetic is unforgiving. Researchers have observed that live shrink, which is pre-processing weight loss, ranges from 0.18% to 0.43% of bodyweight per hour.

In the following scenario, the dollar math is painful.

• Plant processes 1.2 million broilers per week.
• Average live weight at catch is 6.7 pounds (3 kg).
• Average live shrink is conservative — about 0.25% per hour.
• Feed-conversion ratio (FCR) increases by about 0.005 per hour.
• FCR is about 1.67.
• Feed costs about $270 per ton (907 kg).
• Plant sells whole carcasses for about $1.20 per pound.
• Optimal feed deprivation period is 6 hours.
• Actual feed deprivation period is 10 hours.

This same 4-hour over-deprivation loss shows up in two ledgers — farm feed cost and plant revenue — and the two don’t add together. The 10-hour program is costing roughly $1 million per year in feed value tied up in weight lost to shrink and approximately $4 million-per-year loss in saleable product.

It is important to remember that you cannot value live shrink at whole-bird prices — it’s the dressed broiler that gets sold.

In my career, I have evaluated more than 1,000 feed deprivations, and I have never found a program where the period was too short. Plant personnel will tell you they would rather deal with feed in the crop than feces in the colon.

With the parameters above, a 10-hour target puts some birds at 15 hours off feed. That’s a problem. At 15 hours the lining is sloughing, bile is backing up into the gizzard, the ceca are about to empty and the intestine breaks easily.

Final points

Here are important takeaways regarding feed deprivation:

• Avoid feed outages, light interruptions and temperature extremes that trigger binge eating.
• Count deprivation from the flock’s last meal to the kill blade. Catching, loading, transportation and lairage are logistics that occur within the deprivation window. They do not impact the clock.
• Calculate feed-up time backward from the midpoint of the processing window.
• Target empty but strong intestines — shorter beats longer.
• Leave water available until the catch crew arrives.
• Regularly evaluate intestinal tracts at the plant.

Six hours isn’t a stretch goal. Hitting it doesn’t take new equipment or a bigger budget. It takes a calculation and a habit: Figure feed-up time backward from the kill, and open intestinal tracts at the plant. By doing that, you protect feed conversion and yield, the plant gets cleaner birds and the money stops leaking from both ledgers at once.

Editor’s note: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.

The post Six hours: Why the feed-deprivation clock impacts feed conversion, yield, food safety and profit appeared first on Modern Poultry.

A previous article analysed the role of the G19¹ countries in the global meat industry (Windhorst, 2026). This revealed the significant role of this group of countries, as they accounted for approximately 70% of the production volume of the four most important types of meat. Within the group, the most populous countries dominated, with China, the USA, Brazil, India, and Russia holding the leading positions. Two subsequent articles will explore whether a similar situation existed in the trade of the meat types analyzed here. This article focuses on the role of the G19 in global meat exports.

Exports increased faster than production

A comparison of the long-term development of global meat production and meat exports reveals that trade volume increased faster than the production volume. Between 2010 and 2024, global production increased by 28.4%, while meat trade grew by 36.5%. The development was even more dynamic among the G19 countries. Here, production rose by 34.3%, but trade increased by 61.3%. This had a significant impact on the G19’s share in global production and exports. The G19’s share of production grew from 72.3% to 75.7% during the period under review, and its share in trade increased from 51.4% to 60.7%. Figure 1 shows that meat exports increased particularly sharply after 2010, especially poultry meat. The increase in pig meat production was interrupted from 2020 onwards due to the massive outbreaks of African swine fever in Asia and Eastern Europe.

A comparative analysis of the dynamics, broken down by meat type, from 2010 onwards is interesting (Table 1). Globally, poultry meat showed the highest absolute increase in both production and exports, but the relative increase was higher for beef, sheep, and goat meat exports. However, the significantly lower starting values must be taken into account. This pattern is repeated in the G19 group. Here, too, the production volume of poultry meat increased much faster than that of the other three meat types. The high export volume of pig meat is surprising at first glance. The production slump in China following the massive outbreaks of African swine fever and the resulting imports caused pork trade to rise sharply for several years. This will be discussed in detail in the following article on import development. The shortage of pig meat in the countries affected by African swine fever also impacted beef trade and explains the high absolute and relative increases observed there.

It is noteworthy that despite the high absolute increase in poultry meat production among the G19 countries, which accounted for almost 94% of the global increase, the relative rise in exports was significantly lower than both the absolute and relative global figures. It must be considered that the strong production increase occurred primarily in some Asian countries where demand rose sharply due to higher disposable incomes and production was therefore mainly for domestic consumption. Exports, dominated by Brazil and the USA, which accounted for over 40% of global poultry meat trade in 2024, did not increase as sharply in their respective markets as in some emerging and developing countries outside the G19.

Significant differences between production and exports at country level

A comparison of countries rankings in meat production and meat exports reveals similarities but also significant differences depending on the meat type. For poultry meat (Figure 2), regional concentration in exports was much higher than in production. Brazil and the USA together accounted for over two-thirds of the group’s total exports, but contributed only 31.5% to production. China, which accounted for almost a quarter of global production in 2024, lagged significantly behind the other two countries with a share of less than 10%. Production primarily focused on supplying its own population. The sharp decrease in pig meat production due to African swine fever resulted in consumers increasingly favoring the cheaper broiler meat over beef. Germany, which was not among the top ten G19 producers, ranked fourth.

A detailed look at the development of poultry meat exports from the four leading countries between 2010 and 2024 reveals some notable differences. Overall, exports from the G19 countries increased by 2.25 million tons. Of this, Brazil accounted for 1.22 million tons, or 54.2%, and China for 568,000 tons, or t.2%. In contrast, the US export share declined by 200,000 tons, or 5.4%, despite a significant increase in production. The rising per capita consumption of broiler meat and the recurring outbreaks of the avian influenza virus since 2015, which resulted in high losses (Windhorst, 2025), were the decisive steering factors.

The export volume of pig meat from the G19 countries increased by 3.64 million tons between 2010 and 2024 (Figure 2). The USA saw the highest absolute increase at 1.1 million tons, representing a rise of 62.0%. However, the highest relative increase was in Brazil at 143.7%, resulting from an expansion of exports by 900,000 tons. Canada also recorded a significant growth in exports of 297,000 tons, or 28.9%. These three countries together shared 63.6% in the G19’s total export growth. In Germany, which still ranked third among the leading exporting countries in 2024, exports have declined by 528,000 tons, or 25.0%, since 2020. The reasons for this decline were, firstly, a decrease in the per capita consumption, with pork losing significantly to broiler meat, and secondly, outbreaks of African swine fever in wild boar populations. These outbreaks led some major importing countries to either drastically reduce or even completely stop their imports. Furthermore, declining profits caused numerous pig farmers to abandon pig fattening. The unresolved situation regarding eligible housing systems for financial support by the government also deterred many pig farmers from investing. In France, pork exports fell by 88,000 tons during the period under review, resulting in a drop to seventh place among the leading G19 exporting countries. Export growth was particularly dynamic in the four leading cattle meat exporting countries, as can be seen from the graphs in Figure 2. Exports from the G19 countries increased by 5.02 million tons between 2010 and 2024, thus tripling. Brazil recorded the largest absolute increase at 2.15 million tons, representing a relative increase of 144.5%. Argentina followed with 717,000 tons. With an increase of 217.6%, Argentina had the highest relative growth rate of the four countries. Australia expanded its beef exports by 635,000 tons, or 45.8%, while the USA only showed an increase of 274,000 tons. The USA also recorded the lowest relative growth rate at 22.5%.

A comparison of the four countries’ shares in the overall increase in cattle meat exports for the G19 shows that Brazil contributed the largest share at 42.7%, followed by Australia at 18.6% and Argentina at 14.3%. The USA, at 4.9%, lagged significantly behind the other three countries. In total, the four countries accounted for 74.5%. Looking at the overall dynamics across the three meat types, it becomes obvious that Brazil, Australia, and Argentina were the big winners in meat exports for the G19. The USA lost market shares in poultry, pig meat, and cattle meat, while Germany lost ground primarily in pig meat. China began to expand its position in poultry meat exports. Brazil is positioned to become the dominant power in the meat trade, not only within the G19 but also globally (see Windhorst, 2025a).

Summary: higher concentration in exports than in production

The preceding analysis of the G19’s role in global meat trade focused on the question of whether the countries dominating production also played a leading role in exports.

Figure 3 shows the share of the top 10 exporting countries in the total exports of each of the four meat types considered here. It is apparent that there was a strong concentration in a few countries for all meat types, but significant differences existed nonetheless. This concentration was very high for sheep and goat meat as well as poultry meat, and lower for pig meat and cattle meat. To answer the initial question, Table 2 compares the top five countries in production with those in exports.

Even a cursory glance at the data reveals that for all four meat types, the five countries’ share in exports was significantly higher than their share in production. With the exception of poultry meat, shares of nearly 90% or even more were achieved. However, a more detailed analysis of the composition and ranking of the countries reveals remarkable differences. For poultry meat, Brazil accounted for only 12.9% of production but 39.8% of exports. The opposite was true for China. It is evident that Brazil was heavily focused on the global market, while China primarily on its domestic demand. This was also the case for Russia and India.

In pork production, China held a dominant position but played no role in exports; Russia also produced almost exclusively for its own population. The USA, Canada, and Germany were more strongly oriented towards the global market, although, as already mentioned, Germany has lost considerable market share in recent years. It is worth noting that Brazil accounted for over a third of cattle meat exports but only for 21.1% of production. Here, too, the focus on the global market was evident, as it was in Argentina and Australia. The ratio between production and exports in the USA requires explanation. The analysis of imports, which follows in the third section, will show that despite its high production volume, the USA imported a considerable amount of high-quality beef but exported lower-value cuts.

China and India, which together produced nearly three-quarters of the G19’s sheep and goat meat, played no significant role in exports because both meat types were almost exclusively used by their own populations. Overall, it should be noted that while populous countries also played an important role in meat exports, they were not as dominant, and countries with smaller populations, such as Canada, Australia, Saudi Arabia, and South Africa, were also able to break into the top group. The importance of the top five countries in each meat type, not only within the G19 group but also in global meat trade as a whole, is evident in the fact that they accounted for over 50% of the meat reaching the world market.

Data source and supplementary literature

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (n.d.). FAOSTAT. https://www.fao.org/faostat

Windhorst, H.-W. (2025a). Der Seuchenzug im Winter 2024/2025. Vierte AI-Epidemie in den USA innerhalb des zurückliegenden Jahrzehnts. Fleischwirtschaft, 105(9), 33-36.

Windhorst, H.-W. (2025b). Fourth AI epidemic in the USA in the past decade – The epidemic in winter 2024/25. Zootecnica Poultry magazine, 1(7/8), 22-27.

Windhorst, H.-W. (2025c). The dynamics of global meat trade. Part 1: Exports. Meatingpoint, (63), 34-37.

Windhorst, H.-W. (2026). Die Rolle der Gruppe der G20 in der Weltfleischerzeugung und im Weltfleischhandel. Teil 1: Weltfleischerzeugung. Fleischwirtschaft, 106.

Windhorst, H.-W. (2026). The role of the G20 group in global meat production and trade – Part 1: meat production. Zootecnica Poultry magazine, 2 (4), 28-33.

¹The following analysis considers only the 19 member countries. The population and economic output of the EU (27) and the African Union are not included.

See also

The role of the G20 in global meat production and trade. Part 1: meat production

The Joint Poultry Industry Safety & Health Council recognized a record 272 chicken and turkey facilities for outstanding safety performance at the 2026 National Safety Conference for the Poultry Industry in Destin, Fla. The facilities were honored for their commitment to employee safety and health through the implementation of innovative and effective programs.

Award consideration was based on injury statistics from a three-year period (2023–2025) and a review of written applications evaluated by academic and industry safety experts.

This year, 81 facilities earned the highest level of recognition, the Award of Distinction, which honors facilities that demonstrate excellence in safety and health training, education and employee involvement and that maintain injury and illness rates at least 75% lower than the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) averages.

One hundred and thirteen facilities received the Award of Honor, recognizing the same core safety principles with incident rates between 75% and 50% lower than BLS results. An additional 78 facilities received the Award of Merit, which recognizes facilities with rates between 50% lower and equal to BLS results.

“Safety is not simply a metric, a program or something we measure at the end of the year. It is a responsibility we share every day, and it is reflected in how we work and how we care for the people who do that work,” said Rick Hellinga, senior director of Safety, Health and Loss Prevention at Simmons Foods and chair of the Joint Poultry Industry Safety & Health Council. “Recognizing a record 272 facilities this year is an outstanding achievement. More importantly, it reflects the poultry and egg industry’s continued commitment to putting people first and creating workplaces where working safely is simply how we work.”

The Joint Industry Safety & Health Council consists of members from the U.S. Poultry & Egg Association, National Chicken Council and National Turkey Federation. Collectively, the three organizations represent companies that produce 95% of the nation’s poultry products and directly employ more than 350,000 workers.

Source: USPOULTRY press release

Of all the levers a broiler operation can pull in the final hours before a flock is harvested, few pay back as quickly — or cost as much — as the feed deprivation program. Get the timing right and you ship cleaner birds, hit your microbiological performance standards and protect every ounce of yield.

Get it wrong and you make your feed conversion worse, lose saleable meat weight and increase the Salmonella load at the processing plant. Optimizing the period from the flock’s last meal to the kill blade makes money you can bank.

Timing the deprivation

The bird’s body experiences two stages during feed deprivation: emptying of digestive tract contents and depletion of water and muscle mass. The first stage happens during the first 6 hours and cannot be changed. The second stage is where you can make a difference.

A comfortable broiler under full or near-full light eats about every 4 hours and drinks several times in between. This is steady-state consumption. The instant that feed is pulled, that eat-drink-rest rhythm becomes a clock. The crop is empty and the bird is hungry roughly 4 hours after the last meal. Feed leaving the gizzard clears the lower intestine in about 2 more hours.

But even the best-run 6-hour deprivation program cannot overcome the reality of a flock’s eating pattern. The flock should be eating continuously. When the feed pans are raised, some birds will have just filled their crops, and some birds’ crops will be empty. Under the best circumstances, the time off feed for individual birds will range from 5 to 11 hours at slaughter.

That time span comes from the plant. If you have a 33,600-head house, the plant runs 16,800 head per hour. Feed-up time is calculated from the midpoint of processing, and you get a 5-to-11-hour deprivation range for individual birds, as shown in the graphic (Figure 1).

If your operation has mega-houses with over 45,000 broilers, feed deprivation becomes even more difficult! For houses of that size, the plant needs to run about 21,000 birds per hour to keep the slaughter window as small as possible. The logistics then become really complicated when trying to catch and deliver four, five or even six truckloads per hour to the plant.

Figure 1.

Unforgiving numbers

There is extensive scientific research about this subject, and the arithmetic is unforgiving. Researchers have observed that live shrink, which is pre-processing weight loss, ranges from 0.18% to 0.43% of bodyweight per hour.

In the following scenario, the dollar math is painful.

• Plant processes 1.2 million broilers per week.
• Average live weight at catch is 6.7 pounds (3 kg).
• Average live shrink is conservative — about 0.25% per hour.
• Feed-conversion ratio (FCR) increases by about 0.005 per hour.
• FCR is about 1.67.
• Feed costs about $270 per ton (907 kg).
• Plant sells whole carcasses for about $1.20 per pound.
• Optimal feed deprivation period is 6 hours.
• Actual feed deprivation period is 10 hours.

This same 4-hour over-deprivation loss shows up in two ledgers — farm feed cost and plant revenue — and the two don’t add together. The 10-hour program is costing roughly $1 million per year in feed value tied up in weight lost to shrink and approximately $4 million-per-year loss in saleable product.

It is important to remember that you cannot value live shrink at whole-bird prices — it’s the dressed broiler that gets sold.

In my career, I have evaluated more than 1,000 feed deprivations, and I have never found a program where the period was too short. Plant personnel will tell you they would rather deal with feed in the crop than feces in the colon.

With the parameters above, a 10-hour target puts some birds at 15 hours off feed. That’s a problem. At 15 hours the lining is sloughing, bile is backing up into the gizzard, the ceca are about to empty and the intestine breaks easily.

Final points

Here are important takeaways regarding feed deprivation:

• Avoid feed outages, light interruptions and temperature extremes that trigger binge eating.
• Count deprivation from the flock’s last meal to the kill blade. Catching, loading, transportation and lairage are logistics that occur within the deprivation window. They do not impact the clock.
• Calculate feed-up time backward from the midpoint of the processing window.
• Target empty but strong intestines — shorter beats longer.
• Leave water available until the catch crew arrives.
• Regularly evaluate intestinal tracts at the plant.

Six hours isn’t a stretch goal. Hitting it doesn’t take new equipment or a bigger budget. It takes a calculation and a habit: Figure feed-up time backward from the kill, and open intestinal tracts at the plant. By doing that, you protect feed conversion and yield, the plant gets cleaner birds and the money stops leaking from both ledgers at once.

Editor’s note: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.

The post Six hours: Why the feed deprivation clock impacts feed conversion, yield, food safety and profit appeared first on Modern Poultry.

Over the last decades, there have been increasing attempts to implement animal welfare standards within the food production systems, aiming to prevent unnecessary suffering for animals. Particularly as regards poultry production, both for meat and eggs, many non-governmental campaigns have put birds’ welfare under the spotlight with the goal of improving their living conditions. They also made consumers more aware of some poultry production practices, stimulating their demand for greater welfare standards to be met by all stakeholders involved in the production chain, from farms to slaughterhouses. At the same time, it is beneficial for industry stakeholders to guarantee animal welfare: not only will they satisfy both market demands and legal requirements but they will also witness better animal performances and reduced losses, leading to substantial economic gain.

Poultry meat production and trade increased in the European Union during the first four months of 2026. Imports grew faster than exports, while the average broiler price in week 32 was lower than one month and one year earlier.

The figures come from the latest European Commission poultry meat dashboard, updated on 13 August. The production and trade data cover January-April 2026, while the latest price refers to week 32.

EU poultry meat production rises by 5.1%

EU poultry meat production increased by 5.1% in the first four months of 2026 compared with the same period in 2025, according to Eurostat data included in the dashboard.

Production rose in most Member States, although national trends differed widely. Hungary recorded the largest increase, at 21.7%, followed by Poland at 15.1% and Romania at 14.8%. Output also grew by 12.4% in Latvia and 10% in Cyprus.

Several major producers reported lower volumes. Production declined by 1% in France, 2.7% in Italy and 4.1% in Germany. Sweden registered the largest fall, at 6.7%.

The dashboard also shows the structure of European poultry meat production. EU output totalled 14.32 million tonnes in 2025. Poland was the leading producer, with 2.89 million tonnes and a 21% share of the total.

Spain accounted for 13% of EU production, France for 12%, Germany for 11%, Italy for 10% and the Netherlands for 6%. Together with Poland, these five countries represented 72% of EU output.

Broiler meat accounted for 87.1% of poultry meat production. Turkey represented 9%, duck 2% and other poultry meat 1.8%.

EU broiler price down 6.7% year on year

The average EU broiler price stood at €281.67 per 100 kg of carcase weight in week 32. It was 3.1% lower than the previous week and 7.4% below the level recorded one month earlier. Compared with the same week in 2025, the price was down by 6.7%.

The Commission also compares the broiler farm price with directly attributable fattening costs. Feed is the largest cost included in the calculation, followed by other costs and energy.

The chart does not cover every cost borne by poultry farms and therefore cannot be used as a complete measure of production costs or profitability.

Production and price figures also refer to different periods. The dashboard reports their respective movements but does not establish a connection between the increase in output and the decline in the broiler price.

Poultry meat imports grow faster than exports

EU poultry meat exports reached 695,407 tonnes between January and April 2026, 2.1% more than in the same period of 2025. Their value increased by 3.5% to €1.74 billion.

The United Kingdom remained the largest destination, receiving 242,046 tonnes. This was 0.2% more than in January-April 2025.

Exports to Ghana rose by 18.5% to 70,444 tonnes, while shipments to the Democratic Republic of the Congo increased by 22.4% to 49,159 tonnes. The strongest percentage growth among the main destinations was recorded for the Philippines, where exports rose by 48.1% to 22,209 tonnes.

EU poultry meat imports totalled 362,326 tonnes, an increase of 7% compared with the first four months of 2025. Import value rose by 1.9% to €963.2 million.

Brazil was the largest supplier, with 154,649 tonnes, 31.7% more than in the same period last year. The country accounted for 42.7% of total EU poultry meat imports during the period.

Ukraine was the second-largest supplier, with 76,993 tonnes, an increase of 7.9%. Imports from Thailand rose by 6% to 61,811 tonnes.

Imports from the United Kingdom moved in the opposite direction, falling by 32.4% to 41,977 tonnes. The country nevertheless remained the leading destination for EU poultry meat exports. Imports from China also declined, falling by 5.6% to 20,678 tonnes.

Volume and value did not always follow the same pattern. Imports from Ukraine increased by 7.9% in volume but declined by 11.3% in value. The dashboard does not include a product-level breakdown that would explain the difference.

EU poultry meat market at a glance

EU poultry meat exports exceeded imports by 333,081 tonnes during the first four months of 2026. The EU therefore remained a net exporter in volume terms over the period covered by the trade data.

The dashboard presents three distinct developments: higher production, growth in both exports and imports, and a broiler price below the levels recorded one month and one year earlier. Imports showed the strongest rate of increase, while production trends varied considerably between Member States.

Source: European Commission, DG Agriculture and Rural Development, Poultry Meat Dashboard, updated 13 August 2026.
13 AUGUST 2026 Dashboard: Poultry meat

One innovation taking the broiler industry by storm is Comfort Nest, a mechanical egg-laying system that more than doubles the nest size to accommodate high-yield broiler-strain hens.

“Hens are getting bigger and need more space to be comfortable in the nest and lay their eggs in today’s high-production systems,” says Doug Bertke, an engineer for VAL-CO, which designs and manufactures equipment and systems for poultry and egg production.

“We wanted to expand the nest and build on the success of our proven technology.”

Minimizing floor eggs

Introduced in 2019, Comfort Nest provides extra room and increased nest darkness that, according to Bertke, promotes optimum egg production while minimizing costly floor eggs.

VAL-CO field data with Comfort Nest show that increasing production by just five extra eggs per hen housed will provide an extra $2,875 per cycle ($0.60/dozen eggs) — enough to offset labor costs required to gather and attempt to dry-clean floor eggs, Bertke says.

In addition, he says Comfort Nest easily accommodates today’s larger birds, which weigh 5% more than they did 10 years ago, according to industry figures.

Incidental reports from the field showed a strong response, says Andrew Thompson, VAL-CO territory sales manager.

“One customer producer had an average of 150 floor eggs a day,” he explains. “The Comfort Nest reduced floor eggs by two-thirds to an average of 50 eggs per day.”

Today, Comfort Nest accounts for more than 90% of VAL-CO’s nest-box business, Bertke adds.

“The acceptance of our Comfort Nest has greatly increased among growers and integrators,” he states. “The rest of the poultry market is going in that direction too, but we were the first to the market with this design.”

Creating a better nesting environment

When VAL-CO engineers began designing the Comfort Nest, they enlarged the original nest by removing every other nest divider to create 19-inch-wide nesting areas.

“The extra space gave us what we needed for the comfort of the birds,” Bertke explains. “But in the process, it allowed more light into the nest. We had to make sure the nests were dark enough, so the birds were still comfortable enough to lay their eggs.”

VAL-CO engineers used hen trials to determine how much light hens need to lay eggs and the optimum size of the nest opening to allow enough light.

“This is when we came up with covers that allowed enough opening for the birds and the right amount of light for nesting,” he says.

The design of the Comfort Nest also produced more useable floor space, at 19 inches X 12 inches in each nest, compared to the original single nest (5.5 inches X 10 inches).

“In a 500-foot hen house, the pad area increased 70%, which is a lot more available space to lay the eggs,” notes Thompson.

After determining what worked best for the hens, VAL-CO tested the nest in a four-barn site. Two barns had original-size nests, and two barns were equipped with the newly designed Comfort Nests.

“We found the amount of floor eggs was drastically lower in the barns with Comfort Nests compared to barns with the original nests,” Thompson reports. “The hens seemed to do better in Comfort Nests where they laid their eggs versus finding a dark spot on the floor.”

Features of Comfort Nest

Bertke describes the Comfort Nest as a modern evolution of the original design, providing hens with a private, well-ventilated and comfortable environment for laying eggs while ensuring smooth transfer onto the collection belt. Durable wire nest bottoms with plastic turf pads promote cleaner eggs, improve airflow and provide secure footing for hens.

Nests can be automatically programmed to open and close at specific times. An optional plastic tube kit is available to prevent egg expulsion when hens pile into a nest.

VAL-CO continues to use high-quality materials in the nests, including galvanized metal and ammonia-resistant plastic components to ensure long operational life.

For more information on the Comfort Nest and other product innovations, click here .

The post Innovative nesting system significantly reduces floor eggs, maximizing income appeared first on Modern Poultry.

10-13 November 2026 in Hanover, Germany – Leading theme: “Intelligence in Animal Farming”– DLG Spotlights: Live demonstrations and special feature exhibitions focus on key topics at the world’s leading trade fair for professional animal farming and livestock management www.eurotier.com

Covering all major livestock species, including pigs, cattle, poultry, horses, sheep and goats, the DLG Spotlights at EuroTier 2026 – the leading exhibition for livestock professionals, will showcase innovations and future-focused developments across the livestock sector. From 10 to 13 November, attendees can explore the latest developments in robotics, emission reduction and forage production. Among the highlights of the DLG Spotlights are the “TopTierTreff” (“Top Genetics”), where selected breeding animals are presented live, the “Barn Robot Event”, Emission Reduction and the new Forage Production focus. DLG (German Agricultural Society), the organizer of EuroTier, expects around 2,100 exhibitors from more than 55 countries at the global industry event in Hanover, Germany.

The technical program of EuroTier 2026 includes lectures, panel discussions and networking formats covering all key areas of livestock production and related energy sectors. Complementing this program, the DLG Spotlights provide practical insights into the industry’s most important future-oriented themes. Through live demonstrations and curated special exhibitions, visitors can discover innovative technologies, processes and concepts designed to make livestock farming more efficient, sustainable and animal-friendly.

Practical DLG spotlights bring innovation to life

One of the key attractions for the cattle sector is the Barn Robot Event in Hall 13, where manufacturers of advanced milking technology will present their latest robotic solutions for automated milking systems. The focus will be on conversion concepts from conventional milking parlors to robotic systems, solutions for new barn construction projects and technologies for milking large dairy herds. Moderated demonstrations throughout the exhibition will provide practical insights into the potential of automation in modern dairy farming.

The DLG Spotlight “Emission Reduction” in Hall 17 will demonstrate how livestock farming and climate protection can be successfully combined in practice. Exhibitors will present innovative technologies and processes for reducing emissions in pig and poultry production. Through direct exchanges with industry experts and presentations on the adjacent Expert Stages for pigs and poultry, visitors will gain valuable insights into environmentally responsible and economically viable production systems.

The “TopTierTreff” (“Top Genetics”) in Hall 11 will once again serve as a central meeting place for national and international breeders in 2026. Leading breeding companies and organizations will present current breeding strategies while providing a platform for knowledge transfer, networking and innovation in dairy and beef cattle breeding. New in 2026, live animals can be viewed both at their stands and on a large panoramic video screen.

The DLG Spotlight “Forage Production” will celebrate its premiere at EuroTier 2026. In Hall 12, exhibitors will demonstrate how smart farming technologies can improve the quality of maize silage, grass silage and hay throughout the entire production chain, from harvesting to ensiling and storage. This offering will be complemented by the new “Forage Days”, taking place on 12 and 13 November. During these special theme days, the DLG Expert Stage Cattle, as part of the Forage Production Spotlight, will focus on the production of high-quality forage and its targeted use in ruminant nutrition.

Another new feature at EuroTier 2026 is the “Innovation Boulevard”. Located in a central area at the entrance to Hall 21, this special exhibition will feature products recognised with the Innovation Award, alongside other notable innovations in animal farming, feed, management and technology. Visitors will gain a concise overview of the latest developments and then have the opportunity to meet the product developers directly at their exhibition stands for more in-depth discussions.

Poultry operators in South Trinidad are facing a critical shortage, receiving up to 50% fewer birds than usual, forcing some businesses to reduce staff or temporarily close their doors as chicken prices surge.

The shortfall has been ongoing for several months, with suppliers reporting dramatic reductions in weekly volumes. At the Lallbeharry Chicken Depot, a source confirmed the business previously sold about 7,000 chickens per week but is now receiving between 3,000 and 4,000 birds. At least one poultry depot in Penal has limited customers to two chickens each.

Prices surge as supply tightens

The retail price of chicken in parts of South Trinidad has increased from about $5.99 to as much as $9 per pound. The shortage has also resulted in smaller birds reaching the market, compounding the challenge for both retailers and consumers.

“Sometimes we have to close because we’re not getting any supplies right now,” said Jitta, a poultry depot operator. Customers confirmed difficulties sourcing chicken, with at least one depot limiting purchases to two chickens per customer.

Multiple factors behind the crisis

According to industry sources and the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, the shortage reflects a combination of factors affecting both imported chick supplies and local production.

International supply disruptions: St Mary’s Hatchery owner Vijay Bhagwat said that his supply of chicks from the United States had declined significantly. He attributed part of the wider supply disruption to international factors, including avian influenza outbreaks that have affected breeding flocks in several countries. According to Bhagwat, these disruptions have affected the local fertilised hatching egg market and reduced the number of chicks available for export and import.

Bhagwat also said that import constraints from the United States had limited the ability to supplement local shortages, with suppliers reporting reduced availability even at short notice.

Heat stress on local production: Extreme heat has also put additional pressure on local poultry production. The Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries said exceptionally hot weather has affected poultry farmers, with some reducing the number of birds placed on farms to protect bird welfare, limit heat-related losses and maintain healthy growth.

Customers have also attributed part of the shortage to heat stress. One customer, Franklyn Ramsaroop, said some farms lacked adequate insulation and were therefore unable to maintain normal production levels.

Government response and outlook

The Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries says the current tightening in chicken supplies is temporary, with availability expected to improve in the coming weeks. Based on current hatchery projections, the Ministry expects an increase in chick availability over the next two weeks, with poultry supplies expected to progressively increase and return to full levels approximately three weeks later.

However, the Trinidad and Tobago Farmers’ Union has warned that the current chicken shortage could recur within the next six to 12 months if key structural issues are not addressed.

Long-term solutions under consideration

To strengthen the sector’s resilience, the Ministry is pressing ahead with new measures aimed at securing a more reliable supply of eggs and day-old chicks for local farmers. Central to the plan is a proposed Public-Private Partnership (PPP) to establish a large-scale poultry breeding and hatchery facility in Trinidad and Tobago.

If realized, the facility would produce fertile eggs, breeder stock and day-old chicks locally for both the broiler and layer industries. Officials say building this kind of domestic breeding and hatchery capacity would reduce the sector’s reliance on imported inputs, strengthen biosecurity and food security, conserve foreign exchange, generate employment and lower the risk of disruptions tied to international supply chains.

Alongside the hatchery initiative, the Ministry is working to diversify supply sources. The Netherlands has been approved as an additional source for hatching eggs and live chicks, joining the United States as an approved supplier.

The Ministry emphasised that simply increasing the number of egg farms will not, on its own, resolve supply shortages. A stable domestic egg supply depends on the strength of the entire poultry value chain, from access to quality layer chicks, feed and feed ingredients, and suitable housing, to reliable water and electricity, veterinary services, biosecurity, financing, labour, transportation, packaging and stable markets.

Brazilian poultry exporters are rejecting claims that their shipments to South Africa amount to dumping, arguing that imports play a complementary role in the local market, particularly when domestic production is affected by disease outbreaks or shortages of specific poultry products.

The issue was discussed during the International Animal Protein Trade Show (SIAVS) in São Paulo, where Ricardo Santin, president of the Brazilian Association of Animal Protein (ABPA), said Brazilian poultry helps meet South Africa’s animal protein needs and supports supply during disruptions such as avian influenza.

Brazil’s position: complementing South African supply

Santin argued that Brazilian poultry exports should not be viewed simply as competition for South African producers. According to ABPA, Brazil supplies products that fill specific gaps in the South African market, including mechanically deboned meat (MDM).

MDM is widely used as an ingredient in processed meat products. Brazilian representatives argue that South Africa has limited domestic capacity to produce this ingredient and therefore relies heavily on imports for some processed-food applications.

Santin said South Africa was Brazil’s fourth-largest destination for chicken meat exports in 2025, with 336,022 tonnes, equivalent to 6.5% of Brazil’s total chicken exports, according to figures presented by ABPA at SIAVS. The United Arab Emirates, Japan and Saudi Arabia ranked ahead of South Africa.

ABPA said it has 140 member companies, whose combined operations account for approximately 15% of Brazil’s poultry exports and 98% of its pork exports. These figures are ABPA’s own organisational data.

“Protectionism from industry, not government”

Santin and Estevao Carvalho, ABPA’s executive manager for markets, argued that opposition to Brazilian poultry imports is largely driven by domestic industry concerns about competition.

“There is protectionism, not from the government, but from industry,” Santin said, arguing that Brazilian supplies can help maintain protein availability when South African production is disrupted by events such as avian influenza.

Carvalho also highlighted the importance of MDM in South Africa’s processed-food sector. He said much of the Brazilian poultry entering the country is MDM and argued that South African producers have limited capacity to replace these imports quickly.

Brazilian poultry entering South Africa is also subject to substantial import tariffs. Carvalho cited rates of 42% for deboned poultry, 62% for bone-in chicken and 82% for whole chickens. These are general import tariff rates for the relevant products and should not be confused with the separate anti-dumping duties imposed on certain frozen bone-in chicken portions.

Anti-dumping duties and a long-running trade dispute

The dispute over Brazilian poultry imports has a long history. South African producers have accused Brazilian exporters of dumping poultry products, and the issue has resulted in investigations and trade-remedy measures.

In 2022, the International Trade Administration Commission of South Africa (ITAC) concluded an investigation concerning frozen bone-in chicken portions originating in or imported from Brazil, Denmark, Ireland, Poland and Spain. The investigation resulted in anti-dumping duties being approved on these products.

The South African government subsequently suspended implementation of the duties for 12 months. The decision reflected concerns about food prices and the affordability of chicken for consumers.

The suspension expired in 2023. ITAC subsequently confirmed that the anti-dumping duties on frozen bone-in chicken portions from Brazil and the other countries concerned had been reinstated.

The duties should not, however, be described as a single 265.1% tariff applying to all Brazilian poultry. Different rates were established for different exporters, while the highest residual rate applied to exporters that did not cooperate with the investigation. The anti-dumping measures also concern specific frozen bone-in portions, rather than all Brazilian poultry products.

This distinction is particularly important because MDM and other poultry products are not necessarily covered by the same trade-remedy measures.

Food security and the role of imports

South African meat importers argue that imports play an important role in food security by filling supply gaps that domestic producers cannot immediately cover.

Georg Southey of Merlog Foods said imports have a stabilising role in South Africa’s food system, particularly for products that cannot be rapidly replaced at scale. He also said Brazil supplies a large share of the MDM used in affordable processed products such as viennas and polony.

Southey estimated that imports account for approximately 10% of South Africa’s total meat consumption and said imported poultry products support more than 100 million meals per week. These figures are industry estimates and should therefore be treated as such rather than as official national statistics.

The importance of imports can become more pronounced when domestic production is affected by animal-health problems. South African producers have faced disruptions associated with diseases including avian influenza, while foot-and-mouth disease and African swine fever have also affected other parts of the country’s livestock and meat sectors.

A dispute between food security and industry protection

The latest statements from Brazilian exporters and South African importers present the relationship as one of complementarity: Brazil supplies products that South Africa needs, particularly MDM, and can help maintain availability when domestic production is disrupted.

South African poultry producers, however, have historically argued that imported chicken can place pressure on domestic production, employment and investment. The South African authorities have used anti-dumping investigations and other trade measures to address allegations of unfair competition.

The dispute therefore involves more than the question of whether Brazilian poultry is competitively priced. It reflects a broader tension between protecting domestic poultry production and maintaining affordable food supplies.

The current debate should also be distinguished from the long history of Brazil-South Africa trade disputes at the WTO and in bilateral trade relations. Rather than describing the issue as a single unresolved WTO “chicken dispute”, it is more accurate to view the current controversy as part of a broader and long-running disagreement over poultry imports, tariffs, trade remedies, domestic production and food security.

For Brazil, the message from SIAVS 2026 is clear: Brazilian exporters want South Africa to be viewed as a market in which imports can complement domestic production rather than undermine it. For South African producers, however, the continuing use of trade-remedy measures shows that concerns about the competitive impact of imports remain significant.

VETCONVERGENCE 2026 – 2nd edition of Vice chancellors meets supported by IPEMA-Poultry India concludes successfully: Hon’ble Shri Bandaru Dattatreya, Former Union Minister, Government of India and former Governor of Himachal Pradesh, graced the conclave as Chief Guest.

Hyderabad, July 11, 2026 – VETCONVERGENCE 2026 brought together more than 30 Vice-Chancellors to impact actionable roadmap for the sustainable growth of the livestock and poultry sectors.

The 2nd Edition of the Vice-Chancellors’ Conclave – VETCONVERGENCE 2026, organized by Maharashtra Animal and Fishery Sciences University (MAFSU), Nagpur and supported by Indian Poultry Equipment Manufacturers Association (IPEMA)–Poultry India, was successfully held on 10th and 11th July 2026 at Hotel AVASA, Hyderabad.

The two-day event brought together more than 30 Vice-Chancellors from veterinary universities across India, policymakers, scientists, academicians, and industry leaders under the theme “Aligning Livestock Research with Industry Demand and Entrepreneurship Development.” The conclave focused on strengthening academia-industry collaboration to drive innovation, entrepreneurship, and sustainable growth in the livestock and poultry sectors.

Hon’ble Shri Bandaru Dattatreya, Former Union Minister, Government of India and former Governor of Himachal Pradesh, graced the conclave as Chief Guest. In his inspiring address, he emphasized making veterinary education and research more practical, industry-focused, and impact-oriented. He highlighted the need for universities to produce employable graduates equipped with hands-on skills and an entrepreneurial mindset, while stressing demand-driven research, technology transfer, and university-industry partnerships. Shri Dattatreya also specifically highlighted the involvement of the female workforce in the poultry sector promoting inclusive growth.

The conclave featured impactful panel discussions covering critical topics including reorienting veterinary research to demand-driven frameworks, entrepreneurship development and agri-business incubation, technology commercialization and start-up promotion, priority research areas for the poultry sector in the next decade, developing a collective roadmap with institutional commitments, and applications of Artificial Intelligence in the livestock sector.

The following six impactful panel discussions were conducted addressing critical priorities in veterinary research, entrepreneurship, technology commercialisation, poultry sector needs, institutional collaboration, and AI applications in the livestock sector.

Session I: Reorienting Veterinary Research from Publication-Driven to Demand-Driven Frameworks

Moderated by Shri Tarun Shridhar, IAS (Retd.), DG, ICFA, with Dr. Atul Dhok as Rapporteur. 

Distinguished panellists shared insights on making veterinary research more industry-focused, impactful, and innovation-driven.

Session II: Entrepreneurship Development and Agri-Business Incubation in Veterinary Universities

Moderated by Dr. Niteen V. Patil, Vice-Chancellor, MAFSU, Nagpur. 

Experts discussed strengthening entrepreneurship, innovation, and incubation ecosystems within veterinary education and the livestock sector.

Session III: Technology Commercialisation, Start-up Promotion, and Stakeholders Empowerment

Moderated by Dr. Nazeer Ahmad Ganai, Vice-Chancellor, SKUAST, Kashmir. 

The session explored pathways to bridge research and enterprise, promoting startups and translating innovations into impactful ventures for the livestock sector and rural economy.

Session IV: Poultry Sector – Priority Research Areas for the Next Decade

Moderated by Mr. O. P. Singh, Managing Director, ABTL & Huvepharma India. 

Industry leaders and experts identified key research priorities, technology adoption needs, and collaborative strategies to enhance the sector’s competitiveness and resilience.

Session V: Developing a Collective Road Map – Institutional Commitments and Actionable Outcomes

Moderated by Dr. Yashpal Singh Malik, Dy. Director General (Edn.), ICAR, New Delhi. 

Leaders from academia, research, and regulatory bodies emphasised stronger collaboration, institutional commitments, and measurable strategies to drive innovation and growth in the livestock sector.

Session VI: Artificial Intelligence Applications in Livestock Sector

Moderated by Mr. O. P. Singh, Managing Director, ABTL & Huvepharma India. 

The panel highlighted AI’s transformative potential in productivity, disease surveillance, precision farming, and building a more efficient, sustainable livestock ecosystem.

The Commemorative Souvenir of the 2nd Edition of the Vice-Chancellors’ Conclave, VETCONVERGENCE 2026, was unveiled during the inaugural session, symbolizing the shared commitment to collaborative progress.

Shri Uday Singh Bayas, President, IPEMA–Poultry India, led the IPEMA delegation along with Treasurer Shri M. Srikanth and other senior members, actively contributing to the deliberations. The event witnessed enthusiastic participation from key industry representatives including Prof. M. Gnana Prakash (VC, PVNRTVU), Suresh Chitturi (MD, Srinivasa Farms), O.P. Singh (MD, ABTL & Huvepharma India), and several others.

Dr. Niteen Vasantrao Patil, Vice-Chancellor of MAFSU, led the knowledge-sharing efforts on behalf of the organizers. Maharashtra Animal and Fishery Sciences University (MAFSU) excelled in fostering insightful discussions and enriching the overall quality of the conclave.

Shri Uday Singh Bayas, President, IPEMA–Poultry India remarked, “VETCONVERGENCE 2026 has successfully created a powerful platform for dialogue between academia and industry. The rich insights and commitments made here will translate into tangible outcomes that benefit farmers, entrepreneurs, and the entire livestock ecosystem, and most importantly Poultry sector.”

During the conclave, IPEMA–Poultry India unveiled the official poster for the 18th Poultry India Expo 2026. The World’s Largest Poultry Expo to be held at HITEX, Hyderabad, from 25–27 November 2026, preceded by the Poultry Knowledge Day on 24 November 2026, bringing together innovation, knowledge, and collaboration for the global poultry industry.

Source: IPEMA–Poultry India press release

The impetus for the research was that modern broilers “have been selected for rapid growth and increased muscle mass,” Elmore said, which can lead to “leg lameness and reduced mobility” near market age. She explained that this prompts veterinary visits and is “a major welfare concern” that can “lead to economic losses.”

Prior studies

Research has shown that exposing birds to a laser could increase their activity levels and decrease leg lameness. In one study, the birds were exposed to a laser in their pen 4 times a day, each exposure lasting 4 minutes. The laser’s presence increased their activity for several days, generally during weeks 3, 4 and 5 of age.

The laser-enriched birds also walked significantly farther than control birds on the first day and generally in weeks 3 and 4.

A second study increased laser exposure from 4 to 6 minutes. Again, the exposed birds exhibited more active behaviors for several days during week 1 and then overall in weeks 2 and 3. They also walked farther than control birds on many days and throughout week 2.

Increasing laser exposure, measuring behavior

Elmore hypothesized that increasing the laser exposure duration to 8 minutes would increase the positive effects on the exposed birds.

The study included 1,360 day-old straight-run Ross 708 broilers housed in 20 floor pens and randomly assigned to laser enrichment or control. The researchers selected 80 birds from 8 control and 8 laser-enriched pens (5 birds per pen) as focal birds to measure behavior and welfare.

A second-generation laser projected four red dots in a random pattern over two pens 4 times a day, at 5:30 and 11:30 a.m. and p.m.

Video ran for 20 hours and was edited into 8-minute segments covering both the enriched and control groups. For behavioral analysis, the researchers collected data on the first 9 days of life and then weekly for 7 weeks. For welfare assessments, they collected data on the third day and each week thereafter.

“Birds with their legs moving in continuous forward motion” were considered to be active, Elmore explained, while those birds that were standing without moving or resting in the litter were considered inactive.

A bird was at the feeder if its head was resting in the feeder or feeder tray. A bird standing beneath the drinker was at the drinker.

Gait scores were collected weekly: 0 (walk 5 feet without lameness), 1 (walk 5 feet but with an awkward or uneven gait) and 2 (can’t walk 5 feet without lameness).

Birds that were obstructed by a feeder or heat lamp were considered out of view. Other behaviors, such as preening and dust bathing, were not evaluated.

Laser-exposure effects

During the first week of life, the laser-enriched birds were more active and walked farther distances than the control birds.

The at-drinker behavior of the enriched and control birds was similar during week 1, but the birds exposed to lasers spent less time at the feeder.

After week 1, the control birds continued to spend more time at the feeder and drinker than the laser-enriched birds.

The inactivity of laser-enriched birds increased in weeks 3, 5, and 6. Meanwhile, active behaviors, and specifically distance walking, correspondingly decreased after week 1.

Measures of animal welfare indicated no breast blisters or footpad dermatitis throughout the study period. All birds had a gait score of 0 until week 7, when a few birds scored 1. Week 7 results were too insignificant to analyze.

Future plans

Elmore concluded that laser enrichment stimulated walking distance and activity only during the first week of life, but both measures fell off each succeeding week. Meanwhile, the enriched birds spent less time at the feeder than control birds.

Therefore, she said, “This 8-minute duration might just be too much for the birds, based on the measures that we’ve currently analyzed.”

In the future, she plans to investigate the effects of twice-daily 6-minute laser on performance, behavior, and meat and bone quality.

The post Laser enrichment produces short-term increases in broiler activity appeared first on Modern Poultry.

Dr. Chavonda Jacobs-Young and Dr. Temple Grandin will headline the Atlanta summit; University of Saskatchewan researcher Domenica Medina receives the 2026 IPWA Student Award of Excellence

The U.S. Roundtable for Sustainable Poultry & Eggs (U.S.-RSPE) and the International Poultry Welfare Alliance (IPWA) have announced the keynote speakers and student award winner who will be featured at the 2026 Poultry Sustainability & Welfare Summit, taking place September 21–23 at the Loews Atlanta Hotel. The biennial summit brings together leaders from across the poultry and egg value chain, academia, government, civil society and allied industries to examine emerging challenges and identify practical, science-based opportunities to advance poultry sustainability and welfare.

Dr. Chavonda Jacobs-Young will deliver the summit’s Sustainability Keynote. Jacobs-Young previously served as the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Under Secretary for Research, Education and Economics and as USDA’s Chief Scientist. Confirmed by the U.S. Senate, she led a research enterprise spanning five national science agencies and helped shape strategies addressing agricultural innovation, food and nutrition security, climate resilience and global scientific collaboration.

The Welfare Keynote Session will feature a recorded conversation sponsored by American Humane with Dr. Temple Grandin, professor of animal sciences at Colorado State University and one of the world’s most influential authorities on animal behavior, handling and welfare. Grandin’s pioneering research, facility designs and practical approaches to welfare assessment have contributed to significant improvements in the care and handling of farm animals around the world.

“Bringing together Dr. Jacobs-Young, Dr. Grandin and the next generation of poultry researchers reflects exactly what this summit is designed to accomplish,” said Andy Vance, executive director of U.S.-RSPE and IPWA. “Meaningful progress requires visionary leadership, credible science and practical collaboration across the full poultry value chain. These speakers will challenge attendees to consider both the progress already achieved and the opportunities still ahead of us.”

Domenica Medina named 2026 IPWA Student Award of Excellence winner

IPWA also announced that Domenica Medina, a researcher in the University of Saskatchewan’s College of Agriculture and Bioresources, has been selected as the winner of the 2026 IPWA Student Award of Excellence.

Medina received the award for her research:

“Illuminating Poultry Science: Light Wavelength Effects on the Production and Health of Nicholas Select Beak-Treated and Non-Beak-Treated Turkey Hens Reared to 11 Weeks.”

The IPWA Student Award of Excellence recognizes outstanding student research that advances poultry welfare knowledge, practices or outcomes. Submissions were evaluated for their relevance to poultry welfare, scientific merit, clarity, organization and presentation quality.

Medina will be recognized during the summit and will present her research as part of the student award program.

“Supporting emerging researchers is essential to the future of poultry welfare,” Vance said. “Domenica’s work demonstrates the value of examining management decisions through measurable bird health, welfare and production outcomes. We are pleased to recognize her achievement and provide a platform for her research at the summit.”

About the Summit

The 2026 Poultry Sustainability & Welfare Summit begins September 21 with an industry site visit and opening reception. Sustainability-focused programming will take place September 22, followed by poultry-welfare programming on September 23.

In addition to the keynote sessions and student research recognition, the program will include executive leadership discussions, scientific presentations, cross-sector panels, emerging technology sessions, interactive conversations and networking opportunities.

Attendees may earn up to 12 continuing education credit hours certified by the Professional Animal Auditor Certification Organization. In-person registration is open to members and nonmembers, and a virtual attendance option is available to members.

For the complete program, registration information, hotel details and sponsorship opportunities, visit:

https://poultrywelfare.org/Membership/About_Membership_Join

About U.S.-RSPE

The U.S. Roundtable for Sustainable Poultry & Eggs is a multistakeholder organization working across the U.S. chicken, turkey and egg value chains to advance sustainability through collaboration, continuous improvement and credible measurement. U.S.-RSPE provides a neutral forum where poultry-sector stakeholders can identify shared priorities, develop practical resources and support measurable progress for people, planet and poultry.

About IPWA

The International Poultry Welfare Alliance is an independent, global, multistakeholder organization committed to continuously advancing poultry welfare. IPWA fosters open dialogue, shares practical resources and best practices, and supports science-based research and innovation that improve poultry welfare in socially, environmentally and economically viable ways.

Source: IPWA and US-RSPE press release

Record temperatures and drought are adding pressure to Europe’s poultry sector, affecting bird welfare, farm productivity, water availability, feed costs and logistics. While EU chicken meat production is still expected to grow in 2026, recent developments in Germany and France show how extreme weather is creating significant challenges for individual poultry producers.

German poultry production falls

Germany provides one of the clearest indications of the pressure currently facing the sector. During the first half of 2026, German commercial slaughterhouses produced approximately 755,000 tonnes of poultry meat, 3.2% less than in the same period of 2025. This was the lowest first-half production level since 2017.

The number of poultry birds slaughtered also declined by 0.8%, to 343.2 million.

The decline in German poultry production has several possible causes and should not be attributed to heat and drought alone. The sector has also been affected by animal diseases, including highly pathogenic avian influenza, while Newcastle disease has affected poultry production elsewhere in Europe.

The figures therefore point to a challenging operating environment in which animal health, weather conditions and production costs are all important factors.

Heat stress becomes a direct production risk

The scale of the climate challenge became particularly evident in western Europe during June and July. According to the Copernicus Climate Change Service, western Europe experienced its warmest June–July period on record, with an average temperature of 21.62°C, 2.79°C above the 1991–2020 average.

For poultry producers, the significance of these figures lies not in the temperature record itself, but in its effect on birds and farm management.

As temperatures and humidity rise, poultry have increasing difficulty dissipating body heat. Heat stress can reduce feed intake and production performance and, under severe conditions, cause mortality. Extreme temperatures are also a recognised animal-welfare risk during catching, handling and transport.

The risk is particularly significant in poultry houses with inadequate ventilation or cooling capacity. Reliable electricity and functioning ventilation systems are therefore important components of heat-stress management.

France shows the immediate impact

The effects have already been visible in France. During the late-June heatwave, hundreds of thousands of poultry died, according to agricultural organisations cited by Reuters. The losses were severe enough to overwhelm carcass collection services in some areas.

The episode illustrates how quickly extreme heat can move from a weather event to a direct production problem for poultry farms.

The main measures available to producers include:

• effective ventilation and cooling systems;
• adequate access to drinking water;
• regular checks of electrical systems and emergency generators;
• monitoring of temperature, humidity and bird behaviour;
• reducing handling and catching during the hottest hours;
• avoiding unnecessary transport during periods of extreme heat;
• reducing loading densities where appropriate to improve ventilation.

European animal-welfare guidance identifies high temperatures as a major risk during animal transport and stresses the importance of ventilation, appropriate space allowances and minimising journey times under challenging thermal conditions.

Drought could add pressure on feed costs

The effects of drought extend beyond the poultry house. Reduced rainfall and soil moisture can affect cereal production, potentially increasing volatility in the availability and price of feed ingredients.

The situation is uneven across Europe. In Germany, the German Farmers’ Association expected an average grain harvest for 2026, while warning of significant regional differences.

For poultry producers, the key issue is not simply the size of the cereal harvest, but whether weather-related production losses translate into higher prices for feed ingredients.

Any sustained increase in the cost of cereals, protein sources or other feed components can put additional pressure on poultry producers’ margins. However, a direct increase in European poultry feed prices attributable specifically to the 2026 drought has not yet been established.

Low river levels add a logistics risk

Low water levels on major European rivers are creating an additional challenge for agricultural supply chains.

The Rhine has been particularly affected. In early August, water levels at Kaub reached record lows, with the disruption forcing greater reliance on road transport and contributing to higher freight rates. The situation has become severe enough for several German states to suspend Sunday driving restrictions for trucks in an effort to ease the pressure on supply chains.

For poultry production, the relevance is primarily through the movement of feed ingredients and other inputs. Cereals, soybean products, feed additives and fuel all depend on reliable logistics.

If low water levels persist, higher transport costs could add further pressure to poultry production costs. The extent of the impact will depend on the duration of the disruption and the ability of suppliers to switch to alternative transport routes.

Disease remains a major threat

Extreme weather is only one part of the risk picture. Animal disease continues to have a direct impact on European poultry production.

Newcastle disease was particularly significant in Poland during 2025. According to USDA data, Poland reported 53 Newcastle disease outbreaks in commercial broiler farms, out of 83 outbreaks in poultry farms overall, leading to the culling of almost 7.1 million broilers.

Spain reported its first Newcastle disease case on a chicken farm in December 2025, with additional cases reported in early 2026. Newcastle disease was also detected in Slovakia and Bulgaria during 2025.

Highly pathogenic avian influenza remains another important risk for the European poultry industry, although the USDA expected HPAI pressure in the EU to be lower in 2026 than in previous years.

For producers, disease prevention therefore remains a critical part of risk management alongside measures to protect birds from extreme temperatures.

EU production still expected to grow

Despite these pressures, the broader European poultry market remains on a growth trajectory.

According to the USDA Foreign Agricultural Service, EU chicken meat production is forecast to reach 12.25 million tonnes in 2026, compared with 12.09 million tonnes in 2025 and 11.73 million tonnes in 2024. The forecast represents growth of approximately 1.3% compared with 2025.

Poland is expected to remain the EU’s largest chicken meat producer, accounting for more than 22% of total production. France and Spain are also expected to increase output.

These figures show that the impact of heat, drought and disease is not uniform across Europe. While some producers are experiencing significant operational pressure, the overall EU market is still expected to expand.

However, the USDA forecast was published in March 2026, before the full extent of the summer heatwaves and drought became apparent. It therefore provides a baseline for the market outlook rather than a final assessment of the impact of the 2026 summer.

What comes next for poultry producers?

For the European poultry sector, the key issue is how effectively farms and supply chains can adapt to increasingly challenging weather conditions while maintaining animal health and production efficiency.

The main factors to watch during the second half of 2026 will be:

• heat-related mortality and reductions in bird performance;
• availability and cost of drinking water;
• cereal and protein feed prices;
• new HPAI and Newcastle disease outbreaks;
• reliability of ventilation and cooling systems;
• electricity availability during extreme heat;
• transport conditions for feed and other inputs.

EU poultry production may still increase in 2026, but the experience of Germany and France shows that growth at market level does not necessarily mean that individual farms are operating under favourable conditions.

For poultry producers, the growing challenge is the interaction between heat stress, animal disease, feed costs, water availability and logistics. Extreme weather is therefore becoming an increasingly important production risk for the European poultry industry—not as a single cause of market disruption, but as an additional pressure on an already complex production system.

See also:

Alternative feed additives to help broilers cope with heat stress

Summer heat stress is detrimental to broiler chickens

France: extreme heat causes hundreds of thousands of losses in poultry farms

The findings are significant because DOA vaccination is widely used throughout the poultry industry, yet relatively little is known about how newly hatched chicks develop protection following vaccination, said Rodrigo Gallardo, DVM, PhD, who led the research at UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine.

“We know a lot about adult immunology in chickens, but until recently, we didn’t know much about young chick immunology,” he said. “By helping explain how young birds respond to vaccine stimulation, our research could ultimately support efforts to optimize vaccination programs and improve health outcomes in commercial flocks.”

In a recent study, Gallardo and his team evaluated how chicks respond to live vaccines against respiratory diseases when administered at DOA. They vaccinated groups of chicks against Newcastle disease virus (NDV), the Mass strain of infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) or both, while a control group was left unvaccinated. The team used a heterologous IBV strain (DMV/1639) to challenge the chicks on day 15 of age. They collected Harderian glands and tracheas to evaluate cellular immune responses, and serum and tears to evaluate antibody responses.

Immature but effective

The researchers found that despite the immaturity of the chicks’ immune systems, effective application boosted mucosal and cellular immunity. Vaccinated birds had increased macrophages (specialized white blood cells of the innate immune system), B cells and unconventional T cells, which bridge innate and adaptive immunity. They also had increased levels of key antibodies (IgA and IgY), including elevated NDV-specific and IBV-specific IgY responses.

Another notable finding was that dual vaccination appeared to promote stronger immune training in the respiratory tract and a faster response when later exposed to the IBV DMV/1639 strain. IBV vaccination reduced respiratory signs and viral shedding following the challenge.

“Immature adaptive responses play a role in protecting chickens against subsequent challenges, when they are vaccinated at day of age,” Gallardo said.

Most critical, however, may have been evidence that immature T cells are capable of generating immunological memory.

“It’s a very early finding, but if correct, it suggests that when these cells are stimulated through vaccination, they can remember the pathogen. Then, if the bird is exposed to that pathogen again, the immune response is more efficient,” Gallardo continued.

“If that proves to be the case, we would need to make sure that the vaccines we use persist long enough to stimulate those cells and support development of immune memory. In turn, that could help generate a stronger protective response when birds are later exposed to the pathogen.”

One possible intervention could be to include adjuvants or cytokines in vaccines to stimulate these immature cells, though he acknowledged that such innovations could still be several years away from commercial use.

Maximizing the benefits of DOA vaccination

Despite the encouraging findings, vaccinating newly hatched chicks still comes with inherent biological challenges, Gallardo said, stressing that vaccination doesn’t always lead to immunization. Because their immune systems are still developing, producers must balance multiple vaccines while ensuring optimal vaccine delivery and hatchery management.

According to Gallardo, the key is understanding and managing the critical control points that influence vaccine performance.

“There are several key points in the hatchery that need to be managed consistently,“ he said. “When those are under control, you give the birds the best opportunity to develop protection.”

Managing control points

Gallardo said hatcheries can maximize vaccine effectiveness by focusing on fundamentals, such as maintaining the cold chain, ensuring proper vaccine reconstitution through water-quality management, administering vaccines at the correct time and keeping equipment properly calibrated.

Spray vaccination quality is also important, including droplet size and coverage. Beyond vaccination itself, factors such as egg quality, sanitation, environmental management and monitoring vaccine take all contribute to creating the conditions needed for a strong immune response.

“The message for producers is to go back to the basics and make sure those critical control points are being checked every time,” Gallardo said. “Those management practices are what help ensure the vaccination program performs as intended.”

DOA vaccination highly effective when well managed

While researchers continue to investigate exactly how protection develops in young chicks, including the role of immune memory and the effects of different vaccine delivery methods, the latest findings are helping explain why DOA vaccination remains an important pillar of broiler health.

For most producers, vaccinating at DOA is the only economically feasible option, Gallardo said. Modern facilities may hatch millions of birds each week, and chicks generally receive 2 to 4 vaccines before leaving for farms.

“When you have the chicks in the hatchery, it’s much easier. You can control vaccine delivery. If you spray a certain number of milliliters or deliver a certain amount of gel, you make sure that every chicken gets exposed,” he noted.

“Our research offers reassurance that when vaccines are properly administered and supported by good hatchery management, DOA vaccination remains a highly effective tool for protecting flocks,” Gallardo said.

Editor’s note: Content on Modern Poultry’s Industry Insights pages is provided and/or commissioned by our sponsors, who assume full responsibility for its accuracy and compliance.

The post Research sheds light on how chicks develop immunity after DOA vaccination appeared first on Modern Poultry.

The World Bank Group has announced US$60 million in financing for a project aimed at strengthening poultry and aquaculture value chains in the Republic of Congo, with poultry production being one of the project’s two target value chains. The financing was announced on 7 August 2026 under the Poultry and Aquaculture Development Project, also known as PADeP or PD-2AC. The project was approved on 25 June 2026.

The project seeks to improve the competitiveness and resilience of Congo’s poultry value chain by addressing some of the main constraints affecting producers and agribusinesses, including limited access to quality feed and day-old chicks, inadequate infrastructure, insufficient technical skills and difficulties accessing finance.

For the poultry industry, these constraints affect several stages of the value chain, from the supply of inputs and farm production to processing, distribution and market access.

Improving access to feed and day-old chicks

Access to quality inputs is one of the central issues identified by the World Bank. The project will support improved access to poultry feed and quality day-old chicks, two essential inputs for the development of domestic poultry production. It also includes measures aimed at improving access to improved parent stock and supporting private operators involved in the production of commercial day-old chicks.

The availability and affordability of these inputs are particularly important in a market where domestic poultry production remains insufficient to meet national demand. World Bank project documents indicate that Congo relies heavily on imported poultry products and that local producers face significant competitiveness challenges.

By improving access to inputs, production efficiency and technical support, the project aims to help poultry farmers increase productivity and strengthen the competitiveness of the domestic value chain.

Technical assistance and training will also form part of the intervention. Farmers, entrepreneurs, processors, traders and other value-chain operators will receive support aimed at improving production practices, business management and market access.

Strengthening poultry infrastructure and investment

Infrastructure is another important component of the project. The programme will finance productive and climate-resilient infrastructure in selected Protected Agricultural Zones, helping improve conditions for agricultural production and related businesses.

The project will also support critical infrastructure and services relevant to the poultry value chain, while improving access to finance for farmers and private investors and seeking to mobilise additional private capital.

These measures are intended to create a more favourable environment for poultry businesses seeking to invest in equipment, infrastructure and productive capacity.

The Republic of Congo’s Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries will act as the project’s implementing agency. The overall development objective is to improve the competitiveness and resilience of the country’s poultry and aquaculture value chains.

Addressing Congo’s poultry supply gap

Strengthening domestic poultry production is particularly relevant because Congo remains heavily dependent on imports to meet demand for poultry products.

According to recent World Bank project documentation, poultry-product imports were worth approximately US$222 million in 2024. The same analysis highlights the strong competitive pressure faced by domestic producers from imported poultry products.

The World Bank identifies a substantial cost disadvantage for local producers competing with imported poultry meat, particularly frozen products. In the analysis used for project preparation, imported poultry meat could reach the Congolese market at a cost of less than US$1,000 per tonne, while local production costs could exceed US$2,000 per tonne.

These figures underline the competitiveness challenge facing Congo’s poultry industry and help explain the project’s focus on improving access to inputs, increasing production efficiency, strengthening infrastructure and facilitating investment.

At the same time, the cost comparison should not be interpreted as meaning that all domestic poultry production is uncompetitive. Local producers can benefit from advantages associated with supplying fresh poultry to the domestic market, while imported products are largely frozen.

The project therefore targets several structural constraints that currently limit the expansion and competitiveness of the Congolese poultry industry.

Supporting a stronger poultry value chain

The project will also seek to strengthen links between farmers, producer organisations, micro, small and medium-sized enterprises, financial institutions and markets.

Women and young people are expected to receive particular attention within the project’s employment and economic inclusion objectives, potentially creating new opportunities across the poultry value chain.

Environmental and social safeguards will also be incorporated into project implementation. The World Bank’s framework identifies potential risks associated with waste, water use, disease, biodiversity, occupational health and safety and community health. These risks will need to be managed as project-supported production and infrastructure investments are implemented.

The project follows preparatory work carried out with the Congolese authorities and development partners. A pre-appraisal mission conducted in Brazzaville in January 2025 identified limited access to finance, shortages of quality inputs, weak distribution networks, insufficient technical skills and poor market access among the main constraints to the development of the poultry and aquaculture sectors.

For Congo’s poultry industry, the new financing represents an effort to strengthen domestic production capacity and develop a more competitive local value chain. The effectiveness of the programme will ultimately depend on how successfully investments in infrastructure, inputs, finance, technical capacity and market access are translated into greater productive capacity for poultry farmers and businesses.

The aquaculture component remains part of the broader World Bank programme, while the poultry component is expected to contribute to efforts to strengthen domestic poultry production and reduce reliance on imported poultry products.

Campinas, SP, Brazil – Hubbard do Brasil connected with customers and poultry industry stakeholders at the 2026 International Animal Protein Show (SIAVS), hosted by the Brazilian Animal Protein Association (ABPA). Held Aug. 4-6 in São Paulo, SIAVS brought together poultry producers, processors, suppliers, researchers and other industry stakeholders. The Hubbard team took the opportunity to share commercial field results for Hubbard Efficiency Plus, discuss industry trends and exchange ideas across the poultry sector.

Field results reflect genetic progress

A key focus was the presentation of commercial field results for Hubbard Efficiency Plus broiler breeders. The results demonstrate how Hubbard’s continued investment in genetic improvement and innovation supports strong production performance, flock welfare and efficient resource use under commercial conditions. According to Carlos Antônio Costa, General Manager of Hubbard do Brasil, broiler breeding must continue to evolve to meet the changing needs of broiler producers.

“The broiler industry is constantly evolving and requires solutions that improve production efficiency. Hubbard Efficiency Plus has consistently delivered the results our customers need throughout the production cycle. Brazil offers significant opportunities for growth, and we are confident the Efficiency Plus is well positioned to support the continued success of the country’s broiler sector,” said Carlos Costa.

Supporting customers and strengthening relationships

Hubbard’s commercial and customer support teams were available throughout SIAVS to discuss flock management, share practical knowledge and help broiler producers maximize the potential of Hubbard genetics. “SIAVS gave us valuable time to meet directly with broiler producers, better understand their priorities and discuss how Hubbard genetics can help them achieve their goals. We leave the event with stronger customer relationships and confidence that Hubbard is well positioned to continue expanding its presence in Brazil,” concluded Carlos Costa.

Source: Hubbard press release

Social interactions may help explain part of the variation in fertility in breeder flocks

Broiler breeder fertility may be influenced not only by the characteristics of individual males, but also by the dynamics that develop within the group. This is one of the findings to emerge from research conducted by researchers at Auburn University and presented at the 2025 International Poultry Scientific Forum, with support from the U.S. Poultry & Egg Association and the USPOULTRY Foundation.

The study investigated the effects of group size, male spiking, and flock uniformity on reproductive performance in broiler breeders. The experimental design involved a total of 396 females and 64 males, distributed among groups of different sizes and subjected to treatments with or without the introduction of new males.

The results suggest that reproductive performance in broiler breeders cannot be interpreted solely by considering individual male characteristics. The conditions and dynamics of the group may also contribute to the overall reproductive outcome.

Larger groups, higher fertility

In the experiment, birds were distributed between large and small pens. The 396 female and 64 male breeders were randomly allocated to four treatments: large groups with spiking, large groups without spiking, small groups with spiking, and small groups without spiking. There were four pens per treatment.

The results showed differences in reproductive performance associated with group size. Fertility declined with age, but the larger groups had higher fertility rates than the smaller groups at 40 and 50 weeks of age. At the same time, smaller groups produced more eggs per hen.

The finding highlights that egg production and fertility do not necessarily change in the same direction. Higher egg production does not automatically translate into a higher proportion of fertile eggs and, consequently, greater reproductive efficiency.

Group size therefore emerges as an important management factor to be considered alongside the other parameters that determine breeder performance. The study also found effects of group size on embryonic mortality, although these effects varied according to the stage of embryonic development.

Individual indicators do not tell the whole story

One of the most interesting aspects of the research concerns the relationship between individual characteristics and the reproductive outcome of the group.

Previous scientific literature had already highlighted the complexity of this relationship. A study published in Poultry Science by Bilcik, Estevez, and Russek-Cohen in 2005 investigated reproductive success in broiler breeders under natural mating systems, examining male-male competition, mating behavior, sperm quality, and morphological characteristics. The researchers compared males under competitive and noncompetitive mating conditions and found that reproductive behavior plays an important role in male fertility, alongside sperm competition and morphological and physiological characteristics.

However, the study did not find a simple relationship between individual traits and fertility. The authors reported an overall lack of association between mating behavior, morphological traits, sperm quality, and fertility. They also found that some individual characteristics were associated with mating behavior without necessarily predicting fertility.

These findings help put the Auburn research into perspective. The point is not that the characteristics of individual males are irrelevant, but that individual measurements may not fully predict reproductive performance under natural mating conditions, where interactions among birds can influence the outcome.

The role of spiking

The Auburn research also examined the introduction of new males, a practice commonly referred to as spiking. The experimental design included treatments with and without spiking in both large and small groups.

According to USPOULTRY, male spiking improved reproductive outcomes in the study, while group size and flock uniformity also influenced reproductive performance.

The results should nevertheless be interpreted in the context of the experimental conditions rather than as evidence that spiking will always increase fertility under every commercial management system. The Auburn study compared different combinations of group size and spiking, allowing the researchers to examine reproductive performance under different management conditions.

The role of uniformity and weight management

Broiler breeder reproductive performance is also influenced by body weight management and flock uniformity. These factors are particularly important because growth, body development, sexual maturity, and reproductive capacity need to remain in balance.

In broiler breeders, therefore, fertility management cannot be separated from overall flock management. Body weight, male-to-female ratio, flock age, reproductive behavior, and management strategies such as spiking can all contribute to the final reproductive outcome.

The Auburn research also identified flock uniformity as a factor influencing reproductive performance. USPOULTRY reported that traditional measures of reproductive capacity and individual male or female reproductive traits were poor predictors of fertility and age-related declines.

Towards behavior-based management

The findings suggest that reproductive management should consider not only the numerical ratio of males to females and the individual characteristics of breeders, but also group structure and interactions among birds.

A fertility problem, therefore, should not automatically be attributed to a single male or to an isolated semen-related parameter. Where possible, assessment should also consider male and female distribution, mating behavior, flock age, body-weight uniformity, and the overall management of the breeding group.

The most cautious conclusion to emerge from the research is that broiler breeder fertility is a multifactorial phenomenon in which individual breeder characteristics interact with flock conditions and group dynamics. Group size may therefore represent an important management factor and, under the conditions examined in the Auburn study, was associated with differences in fertility and other reproductive outcomes.

Mumbai, 10^th August, 2026: The Compound Livestock Feed Manufacturers Association (CLFMA) of India, the apex industry body representing the country’s livestock sector, will host its 59th Annual General Meeting (AGM) and 67th National Symposium on September 11–12, 2026, at The Leela Mumbai. Centered on the theme, “Animal Agriculture – The Backbone of Sustainable Development,” the two-day event will convene policymakers, industry leaders, academicians, researchers, farmers and allied stakeholders to discuss the future of India’s animal agriculture sector.

As India’s livestock ecosystem continues to evolve, the symposium will provide a platform to address the key priorities shaping its growth. Discussions will focus on sustainability, animal nutrition, feed innovation, technology adoption, policy support and international trade, while encouraging greater collaboration between government, industry and academia. The deliberations aim to identify practical strategies that strengthen productivity, improve resilience and enhance the global competitiveness of India’s animal agriculture sector.

The inaugural session will be graced by Dr Muthukumarasamy B., Joint Secretary (NLM), Department of Animal Husbandry & Dairying, Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Government of India, as the Special Guest. The session will also feature addresses by CLFMA leadership and other distinguished dignitaries from government and industry. As part of the inaugural ceremony, CLFMA will present its annual Awards and Student Awards, followed by the launch of the CLFMA Souvenir and the CLFMA Survey Report. The session will conclude with a networking interaction among stakeholders from across the animal agriculture value chain.

The second day of the symposium will feature keynote addresses, expert presentations and panel discussions on some of the sector’s most pressing priorities. Sessions will cover government-industry collaboration, the application of Artificial Intelligence in animal agriculture, international trade, pet food, and the sector’s contribution to global food security. A dedicated panel discussion on “One Nation, One Voice” will bring together leading national industry associations to explore a more unified approach towards policy advocacy and sectoral development.

The symposium is expected to witness participation from senior officials of the Department of Animal Husbandry & Dairying, Government of India, representatives from national livestock and poultry associations, business leaders, researchers, academicians and international experts. The event will serve as an important forum for exchanging knowledge, sharing best practices and fostering partnerships that can support the long-term growth of India’s animal agriculture ecosystem.

Speaking ahead of the event, Mr Divya Kumar Gulati, Chairman, CLFMA of India, said, “India’s animal agriculture sector has become increasingly important to the country’s food security, rural economy and agricultural growth. As the sector continues to modernise, sustained collaboration between policymakers, industry, researchers and farmers will be critical to addressing emerging challenges and unlocking new opportunities. Through this year’s National Symposium, CLFMA aims to facilitate meaningful dialogue that encourages innovation, supports evidence-based policymaking and advances sustainable growth across the animal agriculture value chain.”

The 59th AGM and 67th National Symposium reaffirm CLFMA’s commitment to strengthening industry dialogue, promoting scientific and technological advancements, and supporting policy initiatives that contribute to the sustainable development of India’s animal agriculture sector.

About CLFMA of India

Founded in June 1967 as The Compound Feed Manufacturers Association, CLFMA of India is the apex body for the country’s livestock sector. It represents over 250 members across various sub-sectors, including feed manufacturing, poultry, dairy, aquaculture, animal nutrition, and veterinary services. CLFMA is recognised by Central and State Governments, livestock farmers, government agencies, agricultural universities, veterinary colleges, and national research institutes. As the voice of the Indian livestock industry, CLFMA advocates for sustainable growth, industry standards, and policy development, contributing significantly to the advancement of the animal protein value chain in India and internationally.

The post CLFMA of India : 59th AGM & 67th National Symposium on Advancing Sustainable Animal Agriculture appeared first on Poultry TRENDS.

The BATN Foundation (British American Tobacco Nigeria Foundation) and the Lagos State Government have launched the “Chicks to Plate” project, a poultry development initiative that will train 200 prospective and existing poultry farmers in modern poultry production, farm management and agribusiness. Forty participating layer farmers will also receive additional enterprise support to help expand their businesses.

Project objectives

Implemented in partnership with the Lagos State Agricultural Development Authority (LSADA), the initiative aims to:

• strengthen food production and food security in Lagos State;
• improve the productivity of poultry farmers;
• support agricultural livelihoods and economic opportunities.

The project comes as Lagos seeks to increase the proportion of food consumed in the state that is produced locally. According to Lagos State Commissioner for Agriculture and Food Systems, Abisola Olusanya, local food production is currently estimated at about 25%, with the state targeting an increase to 50%.

Training and technical content

The “Chicks to Plate” training workshop was held from 4 to 6 August 2026 at the LSADA facility in Oko-Oba, Agege, involving 200 farmers engaged in poultry production across Lagos State.

Participants received practical training covering:

• modern poultry production techniques;
• farm management and agribusiness;
• biosecurity practices aimed at supporting productivity and the resilience of poultry businesses.

In addition to the training, 40 layer farmers will receive enterprise support designed to help them expand their poultry businesses. The available reports do not provide sufficient detail to specify the exact nature of this support.

From “Fingerlings to Fork” to “Chicks to Plate”

“Chicks to Plate” represents the latest phase of an eight-year agricultural partnership between BATN Foundation and the Lagos State Government, which began in 2018 with the “Fingerlings to Fork” programme focused on aquaculture.

Between 2018 and 2025, “Fingerlings to Fork” trained 1,436 fish farmers in modern aquaculture, processing, packaging, export readiness and farm management. Participants also received productive assets, including fish-smoking kilns and tarpaulin ponds.

According to Lagos State officials, the experience gained through “Fingerlings to Fork” provided a basis for extending the partnership into poultry production. The new initiative maintains the broader focus on improving farmers’ productivity, incomes and participation in agricultural value chains.

Positions of institutions and the foundation

The Lagos State Commissioner for Agriculture and Food Systems, Abisola Olusanya, said poultry has the potential to improve access to animal protein, create employment opportunities and strengthen agricultural value chains.

Emmanuel Audu, Permanent Secretary at the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Systems, described “Chicks to Plate” as an extension of the partnership between the Lagos State Government and BATN Foundation. According to state officials, the experience from the “Fingerlings to Fork” programme helped provide the basis for expanding the collaboration into poultry production.

Oludare Odusanya, Executive Director of BATN Foundation, stressed that sustainable agricultural development requires more than training, arguing that farmers also need practical skills, tools and opportunities that can improve the commercial viability of their businesses.

LSADA Programme Manager Aderonke TojuTubi said the initiative would strengthen agricultural extension services by providing farmers with practical knowledge and modern production techniques.

Context and implications for the poultry sector

The initiative is part of Lagos State’s broader efforts to expand local agricultural production and improve food availability. According to state officials, poultry can contribute to this objective by increasing access to animal protein while creating employment opportunities and strengthening agricultural value chains.

Lagos is also seeking to reduce pressure associated with its dependence on food supplies from outside the state by increasing local production. The “Chicks to Plate” project therefore places poultry within the state’s wider strategy to strengthen agricultural production and food security.

The partnership between the Lagos State Government and BATN Foundation is consequently expanding from its earlier focus on aquaculture to poultry production, while maintaining its broader emphasis on farmer productivity, livelihoods and agricultural value-chain development.

Wholesale egg prices in Taiwan have reached their highest level in nearly two years after the Taipei Egg Traders Association announced a NT$3-per-jin increase.

The wholesale price has risen from NT$46 to NT$49 per jin, while the farm-gate price has increased from NT$36.5 to NT$39.5. In Taiwan, one jin is equivalent to 600 grams.

The price increase comes amid tighter egg supplies, with production affected by prolonged high temperatures, the molting of older laying hens and the ongoing replacement of flocks. Feed costs and adjustments to production capacity are also among the factors cited by Taiwan’s Ministry of Agriculture.

Daily egg production is currently estimated at around 123,000 cases, approximately 500 fewer than the previous week. Based on an average of about 200 eggs per case, the weekly reduction corresponds to roughly 100,000 fewer eggs per day.

Heat and flock replacement affect production

Prolonged hot weather has reduced laying performance and made flock management more difficult. At the same time, older laying hens are undergoing molting or being replaced, creating a temporary transition period before replacement hens reach productive age.

The resulting reduction in supply has been particularly noticeable for eggs that undergo grading and washing. Supplies of traditional loose eggs have been less affected.

Slightly stronger demand has also contributed to the recent price increase. The Taipei Egg Traders Association said that expectations of a possible typhoon had encouraged some consumers and businesses to purchase eggs in advance, adding to market pressure.

No nationwide shortage

Taiwan’s Ministry of Agriculture has stressed that the current situation does not amount to a nationwide egg shortage. Rather, supplies are tighter in some areas and for certain types of eggs.

The ministry has asked farmers to strengthen flock management and egg traders to improve distribution between regions. It is also working with industry organizations and local egg traders to help stabilize supplies.

The ministry has also pointed out that the color of an eggshell is determined primarily by the hen’s genetics and does not, by itself, indicate differences in nutritional value.

Supply expected to improve

Market participants expect egg supplies to gradually improve from around September as replacement laying hens enter production.

Until then, the availability of some graded and washed eggs may remain relatively tight, while prices could continue to fluctuate depending on production and demand.

The situation also highlights the challenges posed by high temperatures to Taiwan’s egg industry. Poultry farms have been encouraged to improve environmental management and adopt measures to reduce heat stress, including better ventilation and cooling systems.

Although egg prices have reached a two-year high, Taiwan’s authorities continue to characterize the situation as a temporary tightening of supply rather than a nationwide shortage. Conditions are expected to improve as replacement flocks enter production and the effects of the summer heat ease.

Bob Buresh, Ph.D., received the 2026 Poultry Science Association (PSA) Distinguished Poultry Industry Career Award, sponsored by the U.S. Poultry & Egg Association (USPOULTRY). The honor recognizes outstanding contributions by an industry leader. As the award sponsor, USPOULTRY also makes an annual contribution to the PSA Foundation in the recipient’s name.

“Dr. Buresh has devoted his career to advancing poultry nutrition while generously sharing his knowledge and leadership with our industry. His contributions have strengthened not only poultry production but also the organizations and professionals he has mentored along the way. We are pleased to recognize his remarkable career and lasting impact,” said Nath Morris, president of USPOULTRY.

After earning his bachelor’s and master’s degrees in Poultry Science from Clemson University, Dr. Buresh completed his Ph.D. in Poultry Nutrition at the University of Florida in 1985. His professional journey included roles with Purina Mills and Eastern Minerals, followed by 18 years as a broiler and breeder nutritionist at Tyson Foods and another 18 years with Novus International.

Throughout his career, Dr. Buresh has made significant contributions to the advancement of poultry nutrition through both scientific research and technical outreach. He has co-authored numerous peer-reviewed journal articles, technical publications and industry resources addressing broiler and breeder nutrition, trace mineral supplementation, feed efficiency, reproductive performance and practical nutritional strategies for commercial poultry production. His work has consistently bridged the gap between research and commercial application, providing poultry companies and nutritionists with science-based solutions that improve bird health, productivity and sustainability.

Beyond his professional career, Dr. Buresh has been an active mentor in the poultry industry, serving in leadership roles with the Southern Poultry Science Society, PSA, the World’s Poultry Science Association and the Pacific Egg & Poultry Association. He also held an appointment as an adjunct professor at Clemson University. Following his recent retirement from Novus International, Dr. Buresh has continued to support the poultry industry through leadership in professional associations and his consulting firm, Palmetto Poultry Nutrition.

Source: U.S. Poultry & Egg Association press release

Aviagen^® Türkiye, Middle East & Africa (TMEA) is celebrating a significant milestone with its long-standing distributor in Syria, Sayyad Poultry, which marks 30 years as an authorized distributor of the Ross^® 308. The anniversary reflects three decades of collaboration built on trust, resilience and a shared commitment to supporting the poultry industry in Syria.

Having entered the poultry industry in 1970 producing broiler chicks, Sayyad Poultry earned a strong reputation for quality and professionalism. By the late 1990s, that reputation led to an important milestone when the company received its first Ross 308 Grandparent (GP) shipment, establishing the formal relationship with Aviagen that continues today.

Over the past 30 years, Sayyad Poultry has played an important role in supplying highquality Ross 308 breeding stock to producers throughout Syria. Despite periods of economic uncertainty and regional conflict, the company has remained committed to maintaining high standards of flock health, biosecurity and customer support, helping poultry producers continue to succeed under challenging conditions.

“Our longstanding collaboration is a testament to the strength of our relationship and the shared values that have guided us throughout the years,” said Bulent Tanyildizi, Business Manager, Middle East & North Africa (MENA). “Their resilience, professionalism and unwavering commitment to supporting poultry producers, even during the most challenging circumstances, have made them an invaluable part of the

Aviagen family. We look forward to continuing our collaboration for many years to come.”

The Ross 308 has played an important role in that relationship, delivering consistent performance that has supported Sayyad Poultry’s growth and success. Renowned for delivering reliable results under demanding regional conditions, the Ross 308 has enabled the company to expand from broiler production into GP and parent stock (PS) operations, while continuing to provide customers with confidence in their flock performance.

One of Sayyad Poultry’s proudest achievements has been maintaining disease-free, flocks and high standards of biosecurity throughout periods of regional instability, while rebuilding and expanding its operations to meet the country’s growing parent stock requirements. Throughout the changing needs of the poultry industry, Sayyad Poultry has remained focused on delivering reliable genetics while supporting food security and the long-term success of its customers.

Reflecting on the milestone, Ghaleb Sayyad, Owner, Sayyad Poultry commented: “For the past 30 years, the Ross 308 has been the backbone of our business. Its consistent performance and Aviagen’s ongoing support have given us the confidence to grow, even during the most challenging times. Together, we have supplied outstanding genetics, supported our customers and contributed to strengthening Syria’s poultry industry. We are proud of what we have achieved together and look forward to building on this success.”

Looking ahead, Sayyad Poultry continues to invest in expanding its infrastructure to meet increasing demand for parent stock while strengthening its contribution to national food security. The company is also extending its distribution activities into Lebanon, alongside continued investment in new facilities to support sustainable long-term growth.

As Aviagen and Sayyad Poultry celebrate this important anniversary, their relationship stands as a testament to the value of trusted collaboration, resilient operations and a shared commitment to helping poultry producers succeed. Together, both organizations remain focused on delivering high-quality genetics, expertise and customer support that will continue to support Syria’s poultry industry for generations to come.

Infectious bursal disease virus (IBDV) has evolved to include multiple phylogenetic clusters, including variants with different antigenic looks.

When variant strains, such as AL2, or emerging variants, such as the Del-E subtypes similar to China variant SHG19 (A2dB1), break through expected protection, not only can an IBD challenge hit early, but it may also affect how well birds respond to other health challenges.

As veterinarians consider vaccination strategies against these emerging IBDV variant strains, it’s important to keep a clear goal in mind: provide every chick the strongest possible immune start while keeping pace with a changing virus.

Complex and changing IBDV landscape

In cooperation with Zoetis Diagnostics Services, technical service colleagues regularly conduct bursal surveillance programs with customers to determine IBDV strains present in flocks, in order to help inform vaccination programming decisions. Consolidated results from these surveillance efforts also provide insight into the complex IBDV landscape in the field.

Figure 1.

Phylogenetic analyses conducted by Zoetis categorized IBDV into six general clusters (Figure 1). The Classic cluster is made up mostly of the Faragher insert contained in most rHVT-IBD vaccines but also contains live vaccine strains and Winterfield-2512.¹

The Group-6 cluster, named after the many IBDVs sharing the same restriction enzyme pattern, contains the most extensive branching.¹

There are two Del-E clusters: The prototype cluster and another cluster containing the 254S→N mutation. Over half of the Del-E 254N cluster also contains 299S, making them 98% identical to the SHG19 China variant that has spread to much of Southeast Asia, Western Canada (BC/Del-E) and, more recently, the Middle East.¹

The Del-E prototype cluster represents about 10% of all sequences mapped in the US.²

The Variant Other cluster notably includes viruses from Pennsylvania that are also most prevalent in Eastern Canada and closely related to South Africa variant 05SA8.¹

Del-E and AL2 viruses are identical everywhere except in Peak B, where they differ in three positions. These differences in the immune-dominant hydrophilic Peak B region most likely allowed AL2 to become the predominant variant since the turn of the century. Group-6 IBDVs differ from Del-E in one to four positions in Peak B.¹

Matching vaccine type, timing to IBDV variant

Live IBD vaccines can help protect chicks by stimulating immunity against IBDV as maternal antibodies decline. They can also serve as strategic boosters and help block early field infections. Recombinant vaccines can help provide a consistent “cushion” of active immunity, delay field infections and reduce the bursal atrophy that occurs when field viruses do infect.

A study tested three vaccination strategies given by subcutaneous administration at hatch:³

1. Recombinant vaccine (Poulvac^® Procerta^® HVT-IBD)
2. Live vaccine
3. Combination of both vaccines

Specific-pathogen-free (SPF) chickens were vaccinated and then exposed to AL2 or a Novel SHG-19-like variant IBDV.³

After challenge, all three vaccination methods provided strong protection, with 90% to 97% protection against AL2 and 87% to 100% protection against the SHG-19-like variant. Birds that were not vaccinated showed severe bursal damage from the virus.³

Although the live vaccine alone may not work as well in chicks with high levels of maternal antibodies, the study demonstrates how valuable live IBD vaccine administration can be for protecting chicks starting with marginal antibody levels. Live vaccination is thus useful to fill the protection gap before significant immunity from recombinant vaccine is attained.³

Live vaccine can protect susceptible birds (low maternal antibodies) quickly and reduce early variant IBDV replication, while recombinant HVT-IBD immunity is not affected by maternal antibodies but takes longer to kick in. Live vaccine plus recombinant IBD is a complementary hatchery strategy to help control both early and late IBDV infections.³

Additionally, a series of leghorn challenge studies showed the cushioning effect of Procerta HVT-IBD when birds were challenged with AL2 or the SHG-19-like Del-E subtype at either 3 or 4 weeks of age. Vaccination with the recombinant vaccine provided a cushioning effect against AL2 through 35 days and against the SHG-19-like Del-E subtype through 29 days.⁴ (Figure 2)

When vaccination programs for IBDV are developed and timed based on active surveillance programs, they can support the chick’s immune foundation, care for flock health from day one and be adjusted appropriately as the field challenge changes.

Figure 2.

IBDV programming best practices

• Know local field pressure through diagnostics and surveillance programs and stay alert to emerging variant types. With multiple types of IBDV in the field, it is important to choose a vaccine that provides protection against the most dominant variants in your area. Taking a “set it and forget it” approach may miss the mark on the level of protection needed over successive flocks in an operation.
• Choose a vaccine program strategically. Distinct vaccine options — recombinant vaccines, immune complex vaccines and live vaccines — may complement each other to achieve IBDV management goals.
• Monitor protection levels and adjust breeder, hatchery or field vaccination programs to close gaps. With information from active bursal surveillance programs, an IBDV vaccination strategy can be developed using all the available tools to help minimize the severity of an IBDV challenge and limit immune suppression.

References

1. Yu P-H, Cookson K, Schaeffer J. Phylogenetic analysis of over 1,000 IBDV sequences of VP2 from commercial chicken flocks since 2009 and a comparison of key mutations shared with reference strains. International Poultry Science Forum 2025.
2. Cookson K, Alig B, Jordan B, Schlenker J, Yu P-H. Phylogenetic analysis of over 1,000 IBDVs from North American chicken flocks since 2009 and how today’s commercial killed vaccines protect against IBDVs in each major cluster. World Poultry Congress 2026.
3. Data on file, Study No. RM-OQO-KC8330, Zoetis Inc.
4. Cookson K, Alig B, Yu P-H, Jordan B. A comparison of uninfected vs. IBDV challenged bursa sizes at several different ages from broilers and leghorns from at least 8 challenge studies. AAAP 2026.

All trademarks are the property of Zoetis Services LLC or a related company or a licensor unless otherwise noted.

The post Changing IBDV landscape warrants vaccine programming reset appeared first on Modern Poultry.

Broiler breeder fertility has been declining over the past decade, raising concerns about both productivity and the long-term sustainability of the industry. At the 2025 Poultry Science Association annual meeting, Marcela Quino, a graduate student at Auburn University, presented her research examining how time of day, rooster competition and behavior influence mating success and fertility during the early production period.

“Hatchability, fertility, chick viability and production efficiency have been declining,” she said. Past research focused on physical and physiological traits such as rooster body condition, sperm quality and body weight. Quino’s research examined behavior.

“One of our study objectives was to identify daily patterns in mating interactions and attempts and their evolution with age to evaluate mating behavior. We also sought to assess the relationship between fertility and mating attempts,” Quino explained.

Why behavior matters

According to Quino, mating behavior is influenced by several social and environmental factors. “It is believed that if a rooster is more dominant, it’s more likely to have more mating interactions,” she noted.

Courtship behavior also plays a role in whether hens accept a mating attempt. And male-male competition can increase aggression and disrupt successful copulation.

Another key factor is timing. Birds naturally regulate their activities to a 24-hour biological rhythm. However, the behavior of commercial broiler breeders is affected by lighting control.

“Knowing the timing of some behaviors is really important so that we can enhance the birds’ reproductive efficiency,” Quino said.

Study design

The study involved 472 broiler breeders, including 64 Ross 44 roosters and 480 Ross 308 hens. Roosters were placed into one of two treatments starting at 20 weeks of age:

• With competition: four roosters housed together with 36 hens (1:9 ratio)
• Without competition: single roosters housed with nine hens

Behavior was recorded during the early egg-production period at 25 and 30 weeks of age, with lighting from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. and feeding at 8 a.m.

Mating attempts were classified as successful when cloacal contact was achieved and unsuccessful if cloacal contact was not visible. Fertility was measured weekly using egg breakout at day 3 of incubation.

Mating success

Quino found that roosters housed with other males had a high incidence of unsuccessful attempts, even as the total number of mating attempts increased. However, successful matings remained consistent regardless of competition.

Age also played a role. Younger roosters at 25 weeks showed more unsuccessful attempts than those at 30 weeks. Quino suggested this was because the younger males lacked experience and were simply habituating to the hens. Older, more sexually mature roosters showed “more expected strategies of courtship due to their experience,” she said.

Timing makes a difference

One of the more producer-relevant findings in Quino’s research was how mating behavior changed throughout the day. Her study revealed fewer mating attempts and lower success during midday and two clear peaks in mating activity: early morning and late evening.

“We had peak total mating interactions at 7 a.m. and 7 p.m.,” Quino said. However, success differed between those windows. Early morning showed higher mating activity but also more unsuccessful attempts. In contrast, the most effective period occurred in the evening. “We had a peak of successful attempts at 7 p.m. with fewer failures compared to the morning.”

Linking mating behavior to fertility

The study also examined how mating behavior translated into actual fertility. “We observed a moderate negative correlation between fertility and unsuccessful attempts and a moderate positive correlation between fertility and successful attempts,” Quino noted.

She also explained that reproductive success has both pre- and post-copulatory components. “With more cloacal contact, fertilization success was increased. When cloacal contact did not occur, we saw that the eggs were less fertile,” she said.

Practical takeaways

In conclusion, Quino emphasized that management decisions can influence mating success. “Although competition increased mating activity, it didn’t translate to more success.”

Timing, however, mattered greatly. “The late-evening period emerged as an important window for successful attempts, making it a potential focus for breeder management strategies.”

The results also indicate that experience matters. “The consistent success and declining lack of success of roosters with age suggests a potential role of experience and learning on mating interactions,” Quino said.

Looking ahead, she said that her future research will focus on hen receptiveness, courtship behaviors and how rooster interference affects mating outcomes.

For producers, Quino’s work revealed that when and how birds mate can be just as important as how they are fed or physically managed, and that small adjustments to the timing of light periods and the age of birds can increase fertility.

The post Broiler breeder behavior impacts mating and fertility appeared first on Modern Poultry.

Introduction

Egg quality is a critical indicator of poultry welfare and consumer trust. Mislabeling of housing systems—such as cage, barn, free‑range, or organic—represents a growing food fraud concern. Machine learning (ML) offers a robust solution by analyzing egg quality parameters to authenticate production systems. Recent studies highlight the potential of ML models to classify eggs with high accuracy, ensuring transparency in the poultry industry¹.

Egg quality parameters as predictors

Egg quality encompasses shell strength, yolk composition, albumen height, and chemical markers. These parameters vary significantly depending on the housing system, influenced by factors such as diet, stress, and environmental conditions. For instance, free‑range hens often produce eggs with higher yolk pigmentation and stronger shells compared to caged hens. By quantifying these differences, ML algorithms can establish predictive models that distinguish housing systems with remarkable precision².

Machine learning models in authentication

Support Vector Machines (SVM), Random Forests, and Neural Networks are among the most effective ML techniques applied to egg authentication. A large‑scale study analyzing over 4,000 egg yolks using ^1H NMR spectroscopy demonstrated that SVM achieved 98.5% cross‑validation accuracy, outperforming other models. This highlights the suitability of ML for complex classification tasks where subtle biochemical differences must be detected.

Integration of spectroscopy and isotope analysis

Beyond traditional egg quality metrics, advanced methods such as nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) and stable isotope analysis have been integrated with ML. These techniques capture chemical fingerprints of eggs that reflect housing conditions and feed composition. Seasonal variations, which can complicate authentication, are effectively addressed by combining isotope data with ML classifiers, ensuring consistent accuracy across production cycles ³.

Implications for food fraud prevention

The application of ML in egg authentication has direct implications for combating food fraud. Supermarket testing revealed that only 62.8% of eggs matched their labeled housing system, underscoring the prevalence of mislabeling. ML‑based verification systems could be implemented at production and retail levels to safeguard consumer trust and regulatory compliance. This approach also supports traceability initiatives within sustainable agriculture frameworks.

Conclusion

Machine learning provides a powerful tool for authenticating laying hen housing systems through egg quality parameters. By integrating biochemical data, spectroscopy, and isotope analysis, ML models achieve high classification accuracy, offering a scalable solution to food fraud. Future research should focus on expanding datasets across breeds and regions, ensuring global applicability of these models. Ultimately, ML‑driven authentication strengthens transparency, enhances consumer confidence, and promotes ethical poultry production.

References:

1. Research note: A machine learning approach for authentication of laying hen housing systems based on egg quality parameters (2026).
2. Authentication of Laying Hen Housing Systems Based on Egg Yolk Using 1H NMR Spectroscopy and Machine Learning (2024).
3. Egg authentication under seasonal variation using stable isotope analysis combined with machine learning classification (2025).

The European Feed Manufacturers’ Federation (FEFAC) and the Brazilian Feed Industry Association (Sindirações) have signed a Memorandum of Understanding to deepen cooperation between the European and Brazilian feed sectors. Through the agreement, FEFAC and Sindirações will focus on areas of common interest: feed safety, animal health & welfare, biosecurity, international feed and food standards, sustainable feed production and regulatory developments affecting the sector.

A key element of the Memorandum of Understanding will be the exchange of regulatory developments and relevant expertise, helping both organisations to follow respective legislative initiatives in areas such as feed legislation, feed ingredient approvals, labelling requirements and maximum residue levels. The agreement also covers cooperation in the context of global organisations such as Codex, WOAH (World Organisation for Animal Health) and the WTO to promote science-based international standards. The dialogue on sustainable production will cover topics such as responsible sourcing and the environmental footprint of feedstuffs. The cooperation will look to facilitate implementation of the EU–Mercosur Partnership Agreement and Interim Trade Agreement, which entered into provisional application on 1 May 2026, to contribute to relevant EU-Brazil and EU-Mercosur stakeholder dialogue on trade of feed ingredientssuch as soy products, feed grains, co-products from biofuel productions and essential feed additives.

“We welcome this reinforced partnership between FEFAC and Sindirações, which strengthens cooperation between two important compound feed-producing regions exploring the opportunities which can deliver mutual benefit to our respective members. Brazil represents a region of great significance in global feed production and trade with feed ingredients.
It is fundamental to maintain market access to ensure EU feed security and a competitive and sustainable livestock production in Europe. Jointly ensuring both European and Brazilian feed production can thrive,” said FEFAC President Nicolas Coudry-Mesny. 

“The European Union plays a pivotal role in the global production and trade of feed and feedstuffs. Preserving market access is essential to safeguarding the EU’s feed supply while supporting competitive and sustainable livestock production across Europe. Through close cooperation, Europe and Brazil can foster the continued growth and resilience of their feed industries,” stated Sindirações President Roberto Ignacio Betancourt.

The agreement was signed in the margins of the 19th International Feed Regulators Meeting (IFRM), organised by the International Feed Industry Federation (IFIF) in cooperation with the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO), which gathered feed regulators and industry representatives from around the world.

Source: FEFAC press release

The 2026 USPOULTRY Environmental Management Seminar, taking place Sept. 17-18 in Destin, Fla., will bring together environmental professionals from across the poultry industry to explore the latest regulatory developments, sustainability initiatives and environmental management strategies. Sessions will cover regulatory updates, optimizing dissolved air flotation systems, the future of land application, anaerobic digesters, PFAS response and advanced wastewater treatment technologies for nutrient removal and system recovery.

Attendees will also gain practical insights into energy efficiency, water reduction and reuse, recyclable packaging, social responsibility audits and environmental stewardship through presentations from Clean Water Award-winning facilities and virtual plant tours. An interactive discussion with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will provide attendees the opportunity to discuss current priorities and emerging environmental issues.

“We’re in business with our neighbors and it’s up to us to stay informed and be good stewards of the resources we use. Environmental regulations, sustainability expectations and operational challenges continue to evolve, making it more important than ever for industry professionals to stay informed. This seminar provides attendees with practical solutions, valuable peer-to-peer discussions and direct access to industry experts and regulators, equipping them with the knowledge they can immediately apply at their facilities,” said Bobby Weeks, senior environmental manager at Wayne-Sanderson Farms and planning committee chair.

The 2026 planning committee comprises Michele Boney, West Liberty Foods; Dr. Brian Kiepper, University of Georgia; Austin Pajda, Amick Farms LLC; Alex Sullivan, Fieldale Farms Corporation; Stephen James, Pilgrim’s; Joe Miller, Rose Acre Farms Inc.; Neal Powell, Perdue Farms; and Bobby Weeks, Wayne-Sanderson Farms and planning committee chair.

Source: U.S. Poultry & Egg Association press release

10 to 13 November 2026 in Hanover, Germany – Guiding Theme: “Intelligence in Animal Farming” – Extensive Networking Opportunities and Events – Premiere of DLG-VetCon – Young Farmers Party Takes Place in Hall 2 for the First Time – www.eurotier.com

10 to 13 November 2026 in Hanover, Germany – Guiding Theme: “Intelligence in Animal Farming” – Extensive Networking Opportunities and Events – Premiere of DLG-VetCon – Young Farmers Party Takes Place in Hall 2 for the First Time – www.eurotier.com 

As the world’s leading trade fair for professional animal farming and livestock management, EuroTier 2026, 10-13 November, offers an extensive programme of conferences, specialist events and networking opportunities for livestock professionals from around the world. Highlights include the International Cattle & Pig Event, the International Farmers Day and the new DLG-VetCon 2026. Organizer DLG (German Agricultural Society) expects around 2,100 exhibitors from more than 50 countries to attend the exhibition in Hanover, Germany. 

Under the guiding theme “Intelligence in Animal Farming”, trade visitors can explore over four days how intelligent solutions are shaping the future of livestock production. The exhibition covers all major livestock sectors, including pigs, cattle, poultry, horses, sheep and goats.

Dialogue with leading experts and decision-makers from across the industry is another key attraction. To encourage this exchange, EuroTier 2026 offers a comprehensive programme of events, conferences and networking opportunities.

International Poultry Day
Monday, 9 November 2026

The programme begins on 9 November, the day before the exhibition opens. The International Poultry Day brings together poultry professionals from around the world to discuss current developments and challenges within the sector.

Topics include animal welfare, nutrition, animal health, sustainability and market perspectives. Experts from science, practice and industry will present innovations and solutions for sustainable poultry production.

International Farmers Day and International Cattle & Pig Event
Wednesday, 11 November 2026

Wednesday, 11 November offers extensive opportunities for international networking and professional exchange with the International Farmers Day taking place on this day.

In 2026, the spotlight countries are the United Kingdom, Ireland and Poland. Presentations, panel discussions and networking sessions will provide insights into markets, strategies and innovations in these important agricultural nations.

The International Cattle & Pig Event concentrates current topics in cattle and pig farming on one common platform. International experts from politics, practice, science and business will present trends, developments and best-practice examples while discussing solutions for sustainable, animal-friendly and economically viable livestock production.

International visitors will also once again find the International Visitors’ Lounge in Hall 13.

Female Agri Fellows Networking Event and Women in Ag Award Ceremony
Wednesday, 11 November 2026, 16:00-18:00, DLG Stand, Hall 13

This Female Agri Fellow Networking Event and Women in Ag Award Ceremony celebrate women in agriculture while creating space for connection, exchange and inspiration. Both events take place at the DLG stand in Hall 13.

During the Female Agri Fellows Networking Event, women from across the agricultural and food industries will come together in an inspiring environment to network, share experiences and learn from one another, from start-up founders to business leaders from family farms.

A special highlight is the presentation of the Women in Ag Award from 16:00 to 17:00. This international award recognizes outstanding women from around the world, honouring their achievements and contributions to agriculture.

Open Agri Influencer Meet-up
Wednesday, 11 November and Thursday, 12 November 2026, 13:00-14:00, DLG Stand, Hall 13

The DLG Agri Influencer Team invites everyone active in agricultural social media to join this informal networking event.

Without a formal agenda, participants can meet over a drink, exchange ideas and connect with fellow content creators and social media professionals. The goal is to foster networking and collaboration among stakeholders in agricultural communication and content creation. The events take place at the DLG stand in Hall 13.

DLG-VetCon 2026: Professional Conference for Large-Animal and Herd Veterinarians

Thursday, 12 November and Friday, 13 November 2026, Above Hall 19, First Floor, Conference Room

DLG-VetCon, powered by EuroTier, is a new international forum for large-animal veterinarians.

Combining professional development, networking and innovation, the conference creates an ideal environment for knowledge exchange in an international setting. Through its close integration with EuroTier, participants benefit from unique synergies including access to market leaders in livestock technology and animal nutrition, leading farmers and producers, as well as the latest industry trends and technologies.

Young Professionals Day and Young Farmers Party
Thursday, 12 November 2026, DLG Stand, Hall 13

The Young Professionals Day is the meeting place for young farmers, engineers and scientists.

A compact programme of presentations, discussions and interactive activities at the DLG stand offers opportunities to expand knowledge, establish professional contacts and exchange ideas with peers.

The highlight of the day is the legendary Young Farmers Party, which will this year be held in Hall 2 of the Hanover Exhibition Grounds. More space, more participants and more opportunities: with up to 3,500 guests, digital features and a completely new atmosphere, the Young Farmers Party is expected to be larger than ever before.

Science Campus: Platform for Science, Research and Careers
Hall 13

The Science Campus in Hall 13 offers insights into the work of leading research institutes, universities and technical colleges and serves as a hub for everyone interested in shaping the future of science and research.

Visitors can explore: Study programs and career opportunities: Information on degree programs and educational institutions.

Science and Innovation: Presentations of current research findings and technological developments.

Networking and Exchange: Opportunities to connect with experts, share ideas and discuss innovation.

Agrifood Start-ups: Cultivating the Future of Farming

The EuroTier Start-up area is the central platform for visionary ideas and groundbreaking technologies in the agriculture and food sectors.

Located in Hall 25, innovative start-ups meet a global network of investors, established industry leaders and decision-makers. The aim is to provide today’s pioneers with a stage on which to showcase solutions that will help shape a sustainable, efficient and future-oriented agriculture sector.

Source: DLG press release

Feed production and processing capacity

Alongside production expansion, the government plans to increase feed manufacturing capacity to 3.3 million tonnes, recognising feed availability as a key factor for the sector’s continued growth.

Processing infrastructure is also set to be upgraded. Uzbekistan aims to raise the share of poultry processed in modern slaughter facilities from the current 20% to 50%, a move intended to improve efficiency, product quality and food safety standards.

The government has also emphasised that expanding poultry production is intended to improve the availability and affordability of poultry products for domestic consumers.

Digital technologies for poultry farming

The development programme places considerable emphasis on digitalisation. Authorities plan to introduce the Smart Fermer platform, an artificial intelligence-based management system designed to support livestock producers through digital animal identification, veterinary services, feeding management, pasture monitoring and access to government support schemes.

Although designed for the livestock sector as a whole, the platform could also support poultry enterprises through improved digital management and traceability as digital technologies become more widely adopted.

Poultry development within a broader livestock strategy

The poultry investment programme forms part of a wider national livestock development plan covering the period 2026–2028. During a government meeting chaired by President Mirziyoyev, officials outlined plans for 802 new livestock projects, the rehabilitation of 103 inactive farms, and total livestock investments of US$463 million. The strategy also includes the establishment of 16 specialised livestock districts to support breeding and production activities.

The broader strategy includes measures to improve animal genetics through artificial insemination and embryo transfer, expand breeding programmes, strengthen veterinary services and establish the Uzbekistan Livestock Breeders Association.

These initiatives complement the objectives set out in Presidential Resolution PP-179, adopted in May 2026, which established national targets for expanding livestock production, improving breeding quality and increasing feed crop cultivation by 2028.

Focus on implementation

President Mirziyoyev instructed officials to assess the economic viability of the proposed projects, ensure that financing is used for its intended purposes and introduce digital systems for monitoring implementation and improving accountability.

While the announced figures represent government targets rather than completed achievements, the programme signals Uzbekistan’s intention to accelerate the modernisation of its poultry industry through investment in production capacity, feed manufacturing, processing infrastructure and digital technologies.

EDINBURGH, Scotland. – Aviagen^® South Africa officially celebrated the opening of its expanded facilities at Schikfontein Farm in Heidelberg, marking a significant milestone in the company’s continued investment in South Africa and its commitment to strengthening the country’s poultry sector.

The event brought together more than 30 guests, including customers, industry colleagues and government representatives. Among those in attendance were Aviagen South Africa’s distributors – Astral Foods (Ross Poultry Breeders), Arbor Acres South Africa and Rainbow Chickens – underscoring the strong relationships that continue to drive the growth and resilience of South Africa’s poultry industry.

Guests were welcomed by Duard Kleynhans, General Manager, Aviagen South Africa, followed by an opening address from Sergio Illán, President, Aviagen TMEA, before officially opening the facility and touring the expanded operations.

During his speech, Sergio acknowledged Aviagen South Africa’s customers and industry colleagues for the trust they have placed in the business for many years. He highlighted that while the industry has demonstrated remarkable resilience despite disease challenges, rising production costs and global market pressures, continued success will depend on ongoing investment, innovation and collaboration.

Duard highlighted that the expansion reflects Aviagen’s long-term commitment to South Africa and the customers it serves: “This opening represents much more than an expansion of our facilities. It reflects our long-term commitment to supporting our customers with reliable supply, world-class genetics and the expertise they need to grow their businesses. By investing in our facilities, our people and our capabilities, we are strengthening our ability to support sustainable poultry production and contribute to food security across South Africa.”

Representatives from Aviagen South Africa’s distributors also welcomed the investment.

“This investment demonstrates confidence in the future of South African agriculture and reinforces the importance of continued investment in local production, biosecurity and innovation. As a long-standing customer, we value Aviagen South Africa’s commitment to strengthening local breeding capacity and supporting a sustainable and resilient poultry industry,” shared Robert Roszkopf, Managing Director, Agriculture, Astral Foods.

Arno van der Nat, General Manager, Arbor Acres South Africa added: “The level of thought and planning that has gone into the design of these new facilities reflects Aviagen’s long-term commitment to the South African market. This investment provides an important foundation for the continued growth, resilience and sustainability of our poultry industry.”

“The scale of investment, technological sophistication and attention to detail evident throughout the new facilities are truly impressive. Aviagen has created a world-class operation that combines high standards of biosecurity, animal welfare and responsible breeding practices. These facilities strengthen the South African poultry value chain and reinforces the country’s ability to sustainably meet the growing demand for high-quality poultry,” commented Mbusi Dlamini, Breed & Agriculture Director, Rainbow Chickens.

Composting is a biological process that transforms organic materials such as manure, food waste and animal mortalities into a nutrient-rich soil amendment. On the outside, composting may appear like a simple process. However, successful composting depends on careful management of several factors, including, but not limited to, carbon, porosity and moisture.

Among these, temperature is perhaps the most crucial indicator of compost activity; we’ll look at why later in the article. A compost thermometer is a simple yet effective tool to monitor temperature and make informed management decisions.

Why compost temperature matters

You may find yourself asking, “Why does temperature matter in composting?” Temperature is an indicator of compost activity, telling you how well the bacteria inside the compost are performing.

As microorganisms break down organic matter, they generate heat as a byproduct of metabolism. When conditions are favorable, this heat builds up, raising the compost pile’s internal temperature.

Monitoring this temperature helps determine if the composting process is progressing efficiently. High temperatures indicate microbial activity and matter breakdown, extremely high temperatures indicate a potential fire hazard and low temperatures indicate that something is inhibiting the composting process.

For these reasons, compost temperatures must be maintained within an optimal range: about 120˚ F to 140˚ F (49˚ C to 60˚ C). This is the range at which organic matter breakdown is most efficient.

Compost thermometers

So, how do you know the temperature of the compost? You need a compost thermometer. Compost thermometers are designed to measure internal compost pile temperatures. Most compost thermometers consist of a long probe, 18 to 36 inches long, attached to a dial or digital display, with the very tip of the thermometer being the actual probe that measures temperature. This design allows users to measure temperatures deep within the pile without disturbing it.

Using a compost thermometer is incredibly simple. The probe should be inserted into the compost pile at a height and angle that reach the center of the pile, where temperatures are typically highest. Care should be taken to avoid accidentally putting the thermometer into the base, where temperatures will be low.

Compost piles go through several phases of activity: heating, cooling and curing. Without a thermometer to measure temperatures, there is no way of telling what phase a pile is in.

Temperature readings, when properly interpreted, can give valuable insight into compost conditions and overall performance. When temperatures rise into the thermophilic range, microbial activity is strong and decomposition is proceeding efficiently. Sustaining temperatures in this range is crucial for effective pathogen reduction.

If temperature never increases, increases slowly or stops increasing before reaching the thermophilic range, this indicates potential problems, such as improper moisture content, nutrient imbalance or poor aeration. Fortunately, these problems are fixable. But if you don’t measure temperature, you will have no way of knowing if there is a problem and what that problem might be.

Temperature trends

Temperature trends are equally as important as high or low temperatures. A decline in temperature after a thermophilic period indicates that readily available materials and oxygen have been consumed and that turning is needed to reinvigorate the process. Temperature trends are critical to the overall composting process and the final product, but that information would not be available without monitoring temperature.

Temperature monitoring is important when composting materials that may contain pathogens, such as manure, poultry litter and carcasses. Many state and federal guidelines specify exact temperatures and times that must be met to be considered safe. Without a compost thermometer, you would never know.

Not only is it crucial to have a compost thermometer and use it correctly, but it must also be calibrated regularly to ensure accuracy. Fortunately, calibration is quick and simple, requiring only a container, ice and water. The University of Arkansas poultry science Extension team has a quick instructional video on how to perform a calibration.

A compost thermometer is a simple, low-cost tool that provides valuable insight into the performance of a compost pile. Regular temperature monitoring and response to temperature changes give producers the opportunity to improve compost performance, enhance end-product quality and help control pathogens. Consistent use of temperature data supports sound decision-making and helps achieve reliable and repeatable compost outcomes across a wide range of operations.

The post Using compost thermometers to improve compost efficiency, safety appeared first on Modern Poultry.

Egypt is intensifying efforts to expand poultry and egg exports into Sub-Saharan Africa, with Uganda emerging as a key partner in a broader strategy to turn domestic oversupply into export growth. The move comes as Egypt’s poultry sector reports self-sufficiency and an exportable surplus, prompting renewed efforts to open new overseas markets.

Food Business MEA reported that Egypt is targeting Sub-Saharan Africa to widen exports of poultry and eggs. That reporting is consistent with recent official and sector-level developments, including a high-level Egyptian-Ugandan meeting in Cairo on 27 July 2026, where agriculture ministers discussed opening the Ugandan market to Egyptian poultry and egg products.

Export ambitions built on surplus

The export push reflects industry claims that Egypt’s domestic poultry and egg production now exceeds local demand. In January 2026, the General Union of Egyptian Poultry Producers said the country had reached full self-sufficiency in poultry meat and table eggs, with a production surplus of more than 20% available for export.

Earlier reports also indicated that the Ministry of Agriculture was working with the sector to open new overseas markets and reduce pressure from excess supply. According to earlier reporting by Al-Ahram Weekly, around 40 Egyptian companies export poultry products to approximately 20 countries across the Arab world, Asia and Africa, suggesting that Egypt has already established an international export base.

Uganda as a strategic gateway

Uganda appears to be more than just a potential customer. During the 27 July talks in Cairo, Egyptian Agriculture Minister Alaa Farouk and his Ugandan counterpart Frank Kagyigyi Tumwebaze discussed broader cooperation in agriculture, livestock and fisheries, while also addressing the possibility of opening the Ugandan market to Egyptian poultry and egg shipments.

The discussions also highlighted Egypt’s poultry production facilities operating under WOAH-standard compartmentalisation, including compartments that Egypt has self-declared as free from highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) in accordance with WOAH guidelines. Egyptian officials also emphasised the country’s certified production facilities, laboratory capabilities and research centres, together with their readiness to provide technical support, biosecurity expertise and veterinary inspection services. Such animal health assurances are an important component of market access requirements alongside commercial and logistical considerations.

Beyond trade: veterinary and technical cooperation

The Egypt-Uganda relationship is also developing on the animal health front. New Vision reported that Tumwebaze’s visit included discussions on veterinary vaccine production, while other reports indicated that the two sides reviewed cooperation on the annual supply of around 10 million doses of foot-and-mouth disease vaccine to Uganda.

The discussions point to a broader bilateral agenda: Egypt is seeking not only to expand exports of poultry and eggs but also to strengthen its role as a technical partner in livestock health and agricultural production systems. For Uganda, the partnership could provide access to veterinary expertise, vaccines and opportunities for further agricultural investment and capacity building.

See also:

Ghana eyes Egyptian know‑how to cut poultry imports and boost local production

In his presentation at the 2026 International Poultry Scientific Forum, De Freitas Ribeiro noted that “the starter phase is especially important because birds are still establishing metabolic and structured systems.”

The research team evaluated the effects of feeding broiler breeders a starter diet for 4 or 6 weeks on reproduction and investigated the role of targeted body weight, which is “known to play a major role in breeder reproductive efficiency,” De Freitas Ribeiro explained.

The study’s hypothesis was that different starter phase durations, in combination with different targeted body weights, “could influence reproductive parameters…such as fertility, hatchability and embryo development,” he said.

The key takeaway was that a 6-week starter diet, compared with a 4-week starter diet, was associated with higher embryo mortality, independent of targeted body weight.

Study design

The researchers examined two targeted body weight profiles (high and low) and two starter phase durations (4 weeks and 6 weeks). The birds received either starter diets or grower or developer diets.

Feed was allocated to control body weight.

In one dark house, 1,600 day-old Cobb commercial broiler breeders were placed in 16 pens and 288 day-old Cobb males were placed in 16 other pens. Each set of 16 pens was divided into 4 groups, each receiving a different treatment.

Lighting was set at 8 hours until 21 weeks of age, then increased to 14 hours with increments to peak according to egg production.

At 22 weeks the breeders were also transferred to the laying house, where seven roosters each were placed in 72 pens.

During incubation, eggs were collected three times a day. Incubation occurred every other week between weeks 25 and 40 for a total of nine times. The eggs were turned four times per hour at first, then every half hour, and every hour for 7 to 14 days, with no turning after day 14.

The eggs were then transferred to a hatchery at 18 days and stored at 57^o  F (14^o C) for 1 to 4 days before being set. Only clean, defect-free eggs were used.

Longer starter phase harmful

The study evaluated fertility, hatchability, hatch of fertile and embryo mortality with the 4- and 6-week starter diets.

De Freitas Ribeiro first noted that “fertility was overall excellent in this study and above the standard” for Cobbs. However, the hens on the 4-week starter phase diet fared better in all categories than those on the 6-week starter diet:

• Average fertility (99.41% versus 98.02%)
• Average hatchability (93.94% versus 92.20%)
• Hatch of fertile (95.15% versus 94.13%).

Hens on the 4-week starter phase also had fewer embryo mortalities on days 1 through 3 (3.31%) versus birds on the 6-week diet (4.23%).

These findings suggest “that changes occurring during early pullet development can have long-term consequences expressed during incubation,” De Freitas Ribeiro believed.

Target body weight, however, “did not significantly influence fertility, hatchability, hatch of fertile or embryo mortality” for either group, he said.

In sum, extending the starter phase to 6 weeks reduced fertility and hatchability and increased embryo mortalities, compared to the 4-week starter phase. Targeted body weight, however, had no measurable effect on reproductive performance.

The post Starter phase length can affect breeder fertility, hatchability appeared first on Modern Poultry.

The Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) has turned over an Egg Layer Production project with chicken shed materials and marketing assistance to the Tomitom Farmers Agrarian Reform Cooperative (Tomfarco) in Ipil, Zamboanga Sibugay, under the government’s Partnership Against Hunger and Poverty (PAHP) programme. The initiative was formally handed over on July 30, 2026, as part of efforts to build sustainable livelihood opportunities for agrarian reform beneficiaries.

According to the original report, the project includes 192 ready-to-lay chickens, chicken shed materials and marketing assistance to support the cooperative’s egg production enterprise. DAR officials said the project is intended to strengthen the cooperative, improve members’ income opportunities and pave the way for additional support from partner agencies.

The PAHP programme is a convergence initiative involving government agencies that aims to reduce poverty, mitigate hunger and improve food security. In this case, DAR presented the layer project not only as a poultry-based source of income but also as a way to support organised rural communities through enterprise development and collective management.

Similar layer chicken projects implemented by DAR in other parts of the Philippines have likewise aimed to provide cooperatives with an additional source of income through egg production, supported by training, market linkages and institutional assistance.

DAR officials urged Tomfarco members to manage the project responsibly and to maintain financial discipline, active participation and shared commitment. Cooperative leaders and local officials, in turn, expressed support for the initiative and said close community monitoring would be important to ensure its sustainability over time.

More broadly, poultry-based livelihood projects continue to be promoted by Philippine government agencies as a way to improve food security and diversify farmers’ income sources, reinforcing the role of small-scale poultry enterprises in supporting rural livelihoods and local food production.

Australia’s free-range egg sector is facing fresh scrutiny as authorities and industry weigh how to protect poultry from H5 avian influenza without misleading consumers about production systems.

The core problem is straightforward: free-range systems depend on outdoor access, but that same exposure can increase contact with wild birds, one of the principal recognised pathways for avian influenza introduction into poultry flocks. Recent Australian guidance has therefore prioritised biosecurity, even if that means hens are temporarily kept indoors.

Biosecurity first

According to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), producers who temporarily move hens indoors for biosecurity reasons are currently not being targeted for enforcement action over free-range labelling. The regulator has made clear that this is a temporary enforcement approach, and where hens are required to be housed under official state directions or recommendations issued in response to an avian influenza outbreak, the enforcement period would generally be limited to up to 90 days, or until those measures are lifted.

That position reflects the coordinated approach adopted by Australian authorities, veterinary services and the poultry industry to reduce the risk of virus introduction. Australian veterinary and industry sources have been urging producers to minimise contact between poultry and wild birds, particularly in free-range systems where such exposure can be more difficult to control.

Why free-range is under pressure

The concern is not theoretical. A 2019 modelling study found that shifting 25% of conventional indoor chicken farms to free-range production would increase the risk of a highly pathogenic avian influenza outbreak by 6–7%. The same study also showed that relatively small biosecurity improvements, such as limiting wild bird access to feed and sheds, could offset much of that additional risk.

A later overview of avian influenza in Australian poultry reached a similar conclusion, noting that the country’s risk profile is influenced by factors including the expansion of free-range production, the ecology of wild waterfowl and on-farm biosecurity practices.

A consumer issue as well

The bird flu debate is not only a disease-control issue; it is also a labelling issue. In Australia, free-range eggs are expected to come from hens with meaningful and regular outdoor access during daylight, at a stocking density of 10,000 hens or fewer per hectare, with that density displayed on the egg carton.

If hens must be housed for an extended period, producers face a difficult choice between maintaining strict disease control and preserving the marketing claim that many consumers associate with outdoor access and higher animal welfare standards. That is why the ACCC’s temporary enforcement approach is significant: it gives farms flexibility to respond to a biosecurity emergency without immediately facing enforcement action over their free-range claims.

What this means for the sector

For now, there is no evidence that Australia’s commercial poultry supply has been severely disrupted by H5N1. However, the current situation illustrates how quickly a major outbreak could place pressure on both production and consumer confidence, especially in a market where free-range eggs account for a large share of consumer purchases.

Industry voices quoted by SBS say the sector has been preparing for this risk for years, while acknowledging that prolonged housing measures could reduce the availability of free-range eggs for as long as the disease threat remains elevated.

The government of Goa has established the Goa State Poultry Development Corporation Ltd., a new public company tasked with promoting, organising and supporting the development of the state’s poultry sector. The move is part of a broader strategy to strengthen local poultry production, improve market organisation and support a more structured and efficient value chain.

According to the information available, the corporation is expected to play a key role in implementing the state’s poultry development policy by supporting initiatives related to production, biosecurity, farmer awareness and the overall organisation of the poultry value chain. While the detailed scope of its operational responsibilities has not yet been fully outlined, the corporation is intended to contribute to the development and oversight of the sector.

The decision comes at a time when Goa continues to rely heavily on poultry supplies from other Indian states, a situation that the government has identified as a constraint on the long-term development and self-sufficiency of the local poultry industry. Strengthening domestic production is therefore one of the central objectives of the new initiative.

The new corporation could become an important tool for the development of Goa’s poultry industry. Beyond supporting production, it may help reduce dependence on poultry supplies from outside the state, improve the availability of locally produced poultry products and create a stronger institutional framework for the sector’s long-term growth.

From an industry perspective, the move is notable because it introduces a dedicated public body focused on poultry development and sector coordination. By supporting biosecurity initiatives, value chain organisation and the implementation of state poultry policies, the corporation could contribute to greater stability and more strategic planning for the industry.

For the wider Indian poultry industry, Goa’s initiative offers an interesting example of how public intervention can be used to strengthen and better organise the sector. The key question now is whether the new corporation will be be able to translate its objectives into tangible improvements in production, efficiency and market stability.

South Korea is set to import about 210 million table eggs from the United States and Thailand in July and August as the country works to stabilise supplies ahead of the September Chuseok holiday. The move comes after highly pathogenic avian influenza significantly reduced layer numbers and pushed domestic output below the level needed to balance demand.

According to the original report, the government is allocating about $67 million to cover transportation, repackaging and other import-related costs. The bulk of the eggs will be sourced from approved U.S. suppliers, with imports restricted to disease-free regions and subject to Korean food-safety approval.

The supply gap reflects the impact of earlier avian influenza losses. RFD News reported that 11.3 million laying hens were culled starting in November 2025, while daily production remained around 46 million to 47 million eggs, below the roughly 50 million needed to keep the market in balance. Retail prices have also remained firm, adding pressure on consumers and food-service demand.

The Korean market has already relied on imports to support supply in 2026. The country brought in 16.5 million eggs during the first half of the year, including around 775 metric tons from the United States, underscoring how trade has become an important buffer when domestic production is disrupted.

For U.S. exporters, the shortfall opens a commercial window, but access depends on disease status, importer approval and registration requirements. As the Reuters and other reports show, South Korea has repeatedly turned to imports during bird flu-related shortages, making biosecurity and market access critical for future sales.

The PSA Annual Meeting 2026 and the World Poultry Congress (WPC) 2026 together created an unprecedented eight-day hub of poultry science in Toronto, highlighting cutting-edge research in genetics, nutrition, welfare, sustainability, and biosecurity. Both events reinforced the sector’s commitment to innovation and global food security.

PSA Annual Meeting 2026: cutting-edge research

Precision nutrition and gut health

One of the standout presentations at the PSA Annual Meeting was on enzyme supplementation and microbiome modulation. Researchers demonstrated that targeted enzyme blends improved feed efficiency by up to 7% while reducing nitrogen excretion, offering both economic and environmental benefits. Another session highlighted benzoic acid and essential oils in breeder hens, showing improved hatchability and chick quality, a breakthrough for hatchery management¹.

Biosecurity advances

A keynote on avian influenza preparedness introduced next-generation vaccines capable of faster strain adaptation. This research emphasized the need for integrated surveillance systems to mitigate Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) risks.

Take-home message

The PSA meeting reinforced that precision feeding and biosecurity innovation are central to reducing antibiotic dependence and safeguarding flock health.

World Poultry Congress 2026: global innovations

Genomics and disease resistance

A keynote titled “From Indigenous Resilience to Genomic Innovation” showcased how genomic tools are being applied to breed poultry resilient to endemic diseases in Africa, bridging traditional knowledge with biotechnology.

Welfare and sustainability

Sessions on slow-growth broilers and lighting systems revealed welfare improvements without compromising productivity. Another highlight was holistic nutritional strategies to alleviate heat stress, crucial for climate resilience in tropical regions².

AI and predictive tools

AI applications were presented for in ovo sexing and hatchery management, reducing waste and improving efficiency. Predictive modeling tools for flock health were also demonstrated, marking a shift toward data-driven poultry farming.

Nutrition breakthroughs

Mixed science researchers presented findings on reducing crude protein diets in laying hens while maintaining egg weight, a strategy that lowers environmental impact without sacrificing production.

Take-home message

The WPC emphasized that genomics, AI, and sustainable nutrition are redefining poultry science, with global collaboration driving resilience against climate and disease pressures.

Conclusion

The PSA Annual Meeting and WPC 2026 together delivered actionable breakthroughs: precision nutrition strategies, biosecurity innovations, genomic resilience, AI-driven management, and sustainable feeding approaches. These findings provide clear take-home messages for industry professionals: reduce antibiotic reliance, prepare for emerging diseases, adopt climate-resilient practices, and leverage technology for efficiency and welfare.

References

1. 2026 PSA Annual Meeting
2. World’s Poultry Congress

Introduction

Chickens are highly motivated to peck, forage, and explore their environment. Providing opportunities for birds to express these motivated behaviors, is a key component of animal welfare, and edible enrichments can be an effective way to encourage engagement with the environment.

Edible enrichments are materials that birds can peck, manipulate, consume or forage from. Unlike traditional feed, they are intended to promote natural behavior rather than to meet nutritional requirements.¹ Peck stones, insect larvae and bales have attracted interest because they encourage exploratory and foraging behavior and may be viable to incorporate into commercial production systems.

Why use edible enrichments?

The ancestors of modern chickens are foragers, and commercial housing systems may limit the opportunities for foraging behavior. Feed is readily available, but the environment may lack suitable foraging substrates.¹

Edible enrichments help address this challenge by encouraging birds to spend time interacting with their surroundings. Potential benefits include:

• Increased activity and environmental engagement
• Greater expression of foraging behavior
• Reduced boredom and frustration
• Diverting pecking behavior away from flock mates
• Increased environmental complexity

Types of edible enrichment

Peck stones

Peck stones, also referred to as mineral blocks or pecking blocks, are compressed products designed to provide birds with an outlet for pecking behavior. They are typically made from minerals and other feed-grade ingredients bound together into a hard structure that requires repeated pecking to break apart (Figure 1). Pecking is one of the most frequently performed behaviors in chickens and peck stones may deter inter-bird pecking in layers² and broilers.³ Birds naturally investigate objects and peck stones provide a durable target that can satisfy this motivation (Figure 2). Peck stones also promote foraging, dustbathing and comfort behaviors.³

To maximize effectiveness, peck stones should be distributed in locations that are easily accessible to birds and to maintain uniform flock distribution. Producers should also monitor wear and consumption rates as some flocks may show more interest than others and it may depend on age^4,5 strain,⁴ housing conditions and availability of other enrichments.

Figure 1: Commercial laying hens in cages used mineral-based peck block enrichment
Credit: Dr. Ana Rentsch

Insect larvae

Insect larvae, like black soldier fly larvae and mealworms actively stimulate foraging behavior.^6-8 When scattered in the litter or dispensed through enrichment devices, birds must search, peck, and compete to locate them.⁶ This closely resembles natural foraging activities. Because birds actively search for larvae, this form of enrichment may be useful for stimulating movement and encouraging the use of different areas within a barn.

Insect larvae may be more expensive than other edible enrichments. Producers should also consider how larvae are distributed, scattering them widely will promote foraging and reduce competition or prevent birds from congregating.

Hay bales

Hay bales are more commonly used in broiler or cage-free operations due to their size. They provide both a physical structure for perching⁹ and an edible material that can be pecked, pulled apart and consumed.^2,10 The fibrous nature of hay bales encourages prolonged interaction.

Bales should be free from mold, excessive dust, or contaminants. As the bale gets broken down, material may become integrated with the litter. While this stimulates additional foraging behavior, litter quality may be altered and should be monitored. Because hay bales occupy floor space, placement should be considered to ensure accessibility to the enrichment while maintaining normal bird movement.

AT A GLANCE!

 

Peck stones

Best for: Durable pecking outlet

• Long lasting and durable
• Easy to place
• Low maintenance
• Encourages pecking and foraging behavior

Figure 2: Mineral based (left) and grain based (right) peck stones
Credit: Dr. Ana Rentsch

Insect larvae

Best for: Promoting foraging

• Stimulates searching and foraging behaviors
• Encourages movement and activity
• Short term engagement

Figure 3: Dried black soldier fly larvae
Credit: Lets Fly (letsflyfood unsplash)

Hay bales

Best for: Dual purpose use

• Edible and structural enrichment
• Long lasting and durable
• Encourages pecking, pulling, and exploration

Figure 4: Laying hen on a bale of hay
Credit: Eric Daoust (dazto unsplash)

Science backed facts!

Edible enrichments may benefit more than behavior. In one study, hens provided with peck stones and hay bale enrichment had less plumage and skin damage compared with hens housed without enrichment² in addition to decreased beak length,^2,5 suggesting enrichments can support both welfare and improve feather condition.

Some hens are consistent peck block users while others rarely interact with them. Pecking blocks are used more in the afternoon, during the time of eggshell formation¹¹ and birds with existing keel bone fractures show greater use of pecking blocks.¹² This suggests that hens may selectively use these enrichments when mineral demands are higher.

Hay bales: a playground that becomes a rest stop. Studies have found that birds with access to hay bales spend more time exploring,¹⁰ perching and dustbathing, while also showing less gentle feather pecking.⁹ As birds age, they tend to peck at the bales less and use them more as resting areas.¹⁰

Few enrichments capture a bird’s attention like insects. Studies have found that mealworms and black soldier fly larvae increase scratching, litter pecking and foraging activity,^6,8 with some birds displaying “worm running” behavior that is more rarely observed in unenriched flocks.⁶ However, these bursts of activity are often short-lived, occurring primarily immediately after larvae are provided.⁶ Engagement in insect enrichment may vary depending on time of day and broilers may engage less than layers.¹³

Black soldier fly larvae may do more than feed curiosity. Studies have reported reduced feather pecking,⁸ lower fearfulness toward novel objects⁸ and increased comfort behaviors such as preening, wing flapping, and allopreening in birds provided larvae.⁷ In some breeds, larvae enrichment has also been associated with improved body weight and egg production.⁷

Important considerations

Biosecurity: Enrichment bales can improve welfare but may increase pathogen exposure due to contamination from wildlife if improperly sourced or managed.¹⁴

Insect larvae may harbor parasites: Insect use requires consideration of biosecurity, feed safety, storage conditions, and economic feasibility. Feeding untreated larvae may risk disease transmission between insects, animals and humans.¹⁵

Accessibility: Large enrichments may take up floor space and enough should be provided so that all birds can interact without crowding or competition for the resource.^14,16

Litter quality: Enrichments can affect litter quality by changing bird activity and distribution. While foraging and scratching may improve litter aeration and add litter material as bales break down,¹⁴ hay and straw bales can also accumulate moisture and fecal material if not managed properly.

Summary

• Edible enrichments promote motivated behaviors such as pecking, foraging and exploration.
• Biosecurity, litter quality, accessibility and cost should be considered before implementation.
• When managed appropriately, edible enrichments can be a tool for supporting poultry

References

1. Quino, M.A.; Baker-Cook, B. Targeting Frustration: A Review on Reducing Abnormal Behaviors in Broiler Breeders via Environmental Enrichment. Frontiers in Ethology 2026, 4, 1717389, doi:10.3389/FETHO.2025.1717389.
2. Schreiter, R.; Damme, K.; Klunker, M.; Raoult, C.; von Borell, E.; Freick, M. Effects of Edible Environmental Enrichments during the Rearing and Laying Periods in a Littered Aviary—Part 1: Integument Condition in Pullets and Laying Hens. Poult. Sci. 2020, 99, 5184–5196, doi:10.1016/j.psj.2020.07.013.
3. Guy, J.H.; Wright, A.N. British Poultry Science Effect of Enrichment with Pecka-Blocks^TM on the Behaviour and Feather Condition of Commercially-Reared Broilers. Br. Poult. Sci. 2010, 44, 29–30, doi:10.1080/713655280.
4. Schreiter, R.; Damme, K.; Freick, M. Edible Environmental Enrichments in Littered Housing Systems: Do Their Effects on Integument Condition Differ Between Commercial Laying Hen Strains? Animals 2020, Vol. 10, Page 2434 2020, 10, 2434, doi:10.3390/ANI10122434.
5. Baker, P.E.; Nicol, C.J.; Weeks, C.A. The Effect of Hard Pecking Enrichment during Rear on Feather Cover, Feather Pecking Behaviour and Beak Length in Beak-Trimmed and Intact-Beak Laying Hen Pullets. Animals 2022, Vol. 12, Page 674 2022, 12, 674, doi:10.3390/ANI12060674.
6. Pichova, K.; Nordgreen, J.; Leterrier, C.; Kostal, L.; Moe, R.O. The Effects of Food-Related Environmental Complexity on Litter Directed Behaviour, Fear and Exploration of Novel Stimuli in Young Broiler Chickens. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2016, 174, 83–89, doi:10.1016/J.APPLANIM.2015.11.007.
7. Bellezza Oddon, S.; Biasato, I.; Ferrocino, I.; Imarisio, A.; Renna, M.; Caimi, C.; Gariglio, M.; Dabbou, S.; Pipan, M.; Dekleva, D.; et al. Live Black Soldier Fly Larvae as Environmental Enrichment for Native Chickens: Implications for Bird Performance, Welfare, and Excreta Microbiota. animal 2024, 18, 101341, doi:10.1016/J.ANIMAL.2024.101341.
8. Tahamtani, F.M.; Kittelsen, K.; Vasdal, G.; Tahamtani, F.M.; Kittelsen, K.; Vasdal, G. Dried Black Soldier Fly Larvae (Hermetia Illucens) as Environmental Enrichment for Laying Hens – a Full-Scale Commercial Study. J. Insects Food Feed 2025, 11, 2617–2631, doi:10.1163/23524588-BJA10220.
9. Daigle, C.L.; Rodenburg, T.B.; Bolhuis, J.E.; Swanson, J.C.; Siegford, J.M. Use of Dynamic and Rewarding Environmental Enrichment to Alleviate Feather Pecking in Non-Cage Laying Hens. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2014, 161, 75–85, doi:10.1016/J.APPLANIM.2014.10.001.
10. Da Silva, M.I.L.; De Lima Almeida Paz, I.C.; Jacinto, A.S.; Filho, M.A.N.; De Oliveira, A.B.S.; Dos Santos, I.G.A.; Dos Santos Mota, F.; Caldara, F.R.; Jacobs, L. Providing Environmental Enrichments Can Reduce Subclinical Spondylolisthesis Prevalence without Affecting Performance in Broiler Chickens. PLoS One 2023, 18, e0284087, doi:10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0284087.
11. McAuley, M.; Caston, L.J.; Widowski, T.M. Laying Hens Prefer Softer over Harder Mineral-Based Pecking Stones and Peck Them More at the End of the Light Period. Poult. Sci. 2025, 104, 104575, doi:10.1016/J.PSJ.2024.104575.
12. Ehigbor, T.F.; Edwards, A.M.; Rentsch, A.K.; Kiarie, E.G.; Harlander, A.; Widowski, T.M. Pecking Block Use at Individual Level Is Associated with Improved Eggshell Quality and Keel Fractures in Laying Hens. Poult. Sci. 2025, 104, 105716, doi:10.1016/J.PSJ.2025.105716.
13. Wood, B.; Rufener, C.; Makagon, M.M.; Blatchford, R.A. The Utility of Scatter Feeding as Enrichment: Do Broiler Chickens Engage with Scatter–Fed Items? Animals 2021, 11, 3478, doi:10.3390/ANI11123478.
14. Riber, A.B.; Van De Weerd, H.A.; De Jong, I.C.; Steenfeldt, S. Review of Environmental Enrichment for Broiler Chickens. Poult. Sci. 2018, 97, 378–396, doi:10.3382/PS/PEX344.
15. Müller, A.; Wiedmer, S.; Kurth, M. Risk Evaluation of Passive Transmission of Animal Parasites by Feeding of Black Soldier Fly (Hermetia Illucens) Larvae and Prepupae. J. Food Prot. 2019, 82, 948–954, doi:10.4315/0362-028X.JFP-18-484.
16. Xu, D.; Shu, G.; Liu, Y.; Qin, P.; Zheng, Y.; Tian, Y.; Zhao, X.; Du, X. Farm Environmental Enrichments Improve the Welfare of Layer Chicks and Pullets: A Comprehensive Review. Animals 2022, Vol. 12, Page 2610 2022, 12, 2610, doi:10.3390/ANI12192610.

To view all issues of Poultry Press, click here.

Editor’s note: Content on Modern Poultry’s Industry Insights pages is provided and/or commissioned by our sponsors, who assume full responsibility for its accuracy and compliance.

The post Edible enrichments for commercial poultry appeared first on Modern Poultry.

ILT is a serious respiratory disease that typically peaks in the colder months, causing mortality spikes. It affects both broilers and broiler breeders, though the effects are more severe in broilers. Biosecurity interventions help reduce outbreaks, but vaccination is standard practice in regions where the risk of ILT is endemic.

Producers have vaccine choices

Live ILT CEO vaccines are commonly used to curb mortality during outbreaks. However, prevention strategies have begun to rely on recombinant HVT-ILT vaccines at the hatchery.

In high-challenge areas, the use of a CEO or tissue culture origin (TCO) ILT vaccine has been added to the recombinant ILT vaccination program. Live vaccine choices are often dictated by biosecurity and vaccine regulations across the US, with some states restricting the use of ILT CEO vaccines due to potential increased virulence in flocks and adverse bird reactions.¹

“The aim is to mitigate issues with ILT in flocks over time,” said Alexandra Reilley, PhD, MS, of Merck Animal Health. “ILT CEO vaccines are good at reducing virus shedding and symptoms, but they can cause post-vaccinal reactions and regain virulence if not properly administered to the birds.

“If administration of the ILT CEO vaccine does not achieve complete coverage, birds can experience rolling respiratory reactions, which can be very aggressive,” she explained.  “Using a recombinant ILT vaccine as the program foundation becomes more important if live vaccines are included for additional protection.”

Testing broiler performance under challenge

Gel drop administration of the ILT CEO vaccine at day of age has seen increased use in the industry in recent years as a method to improve early coverage of chicks against ILT challenge in the field. However, questions have been raised about the effectiveness of this method of vaccination with ILT CEO in birds this early.

A study led by Reilley aimed to put the dual ILT vaccination program to the test. Her team used five groups of broiler chicks:²

1. Vaccinated with Innovax®-ILT-IBD in ovo, challenged
2. Vaccinated with gel drop live ILT CEO vaccine at day of age, challenged
3. Vaccinated with Innovax-ILT-IBD in ovo and live ILT CEO vaccine gel drop, challenged
4. Unvaccinated, challenged
5. Unvaccinated, unchallenged

Birds were challenged at 30 days of age with Genotype VI strain ILT virus, via ocular and nasal routes.  Seven days post-challenge, they assessed clinical signs, survival, body weight and body weight gain.

Dual vaccination program cuts clinical signs

The researchers found that birds vaccinated with the ILT CEO vaccine via the gel drop method alone had severe clinical signs at 6 to 10 days post-vaccination and experienced 20% mortality.

In comparison, the vaccinated group receiving only the Innovax-ILT-IBD vaccine showed no clinical signs, as expected. The dual vaccination approach (Innovax-ILT-IBD + ILT CEO gel drop) had mild to moderate signs. Neither the Innovax-ILT-IBD group nor the dual vaccination group had any mortality.

The dual vaccination program resulted in the lowest viral load among challenged groups at 3 and 5 days post-challenge. This vaccination program also had the highest body weight gain over the course of the study.

The reliability of the Innovax-ILT-IBD vaccine comes from its high stability and consistent titers, Reilley noted, as well as the fact that full immunity is achieved by 28 days, complementing the earlier immunity from the ILT CEO vaccine, creating a more diverse immune response.

“Using Innovax-ILT-IBD vaccines, you can reduce respiratory issues related to the post-vaccination reactions observed with ILT CEO vaccines,” she said. “Those reactions are costly, so reducing their severity can help support flock performance.

“The gel drop method has been adopted as a way to strengthen early protection,” Reilley said. “What this study suggests is that timing and program design matter.

“When the recombinant vaccine is used as the foundation, and the ILT CEO vaccine is layered on, we saw less severe post-vaccination reactions while maintaining protection under challenge. That balance is important from a performance standpoint.”

1 García M. 2017. Current and future vaccines and vaccination strategies against infectious laryngotracheitis (ILT) respiratory disease of poultry. Vet Microbiol. 206:157–62.
2 Mendoza-Reilley A, Zamora A, Paudel R, Ellington C, Maekawa D, Alvarado IR, Garcia M. Infectious laryngotracheitis control: Assessment of a rHVT-ILT vaccine administered alone or in combination with a CEO vaccine. 2025. XXIII WVPA Congress, Malaysia.

Editor’s note: Content on Modern Poultry’s Industry Insights pages is provided and/or commissioned by our sponsors, who assume full responsibility for its accuracy and compliance.

The post Research shows recombinant HVT vaccines in broiler flocks can curb post-vaccination reactions in dual ILT strategies appeared first on Modern Poultry.

The ECOWAS Bank for Investment and Development (EBID) has signed a $10.04 million financing agreement with G Farms Limited to support the company’s expansion in The Gambia, with a strong focus on the poultry sector. The investment is intended to strengthen production capacity across key agricultural value chains, especially table eggs, broiler meat, and day-old chicks.

According to EBID, the project will increase the laying hen flock from 120,000 to 500,000 birds, raise broiler output from 651,146 to more than 3.2 million birds, and expand day-old chick production from 3.3 million to 5.5 million units by 2035. These targets underline the scale of the company’s growth ambitions and the strategic importance of poultry in the country’s food supply system.

A major component of the project is feed manufacturing, with production capacity set to reach 10 tonnes per hour. For the poultry sector, this is a crucial element, as feed costs remain one of the main drivers of production efficiency and profitability. Greater local feed capacity can also help improve supply stability and reduce reliance on imported inputs.

The investment is not limited to poultry. G Farms Ltd also plans to expand its dairy operations, increasing its cattle herd from 110 to 2,500 head. This reflects a broader agribusiness strategy aimed at building integrated and more resilient food production systems in the country.

For EBID, the deal forms part of its wider strategy to promote agricultural modernization, economic diversification, and sustainable development in West Africa. For The Gambia, it could support local food production, generate employment, and reduce import dependence, while creating a stronger base for the long-term development of the poultry industry.

The ICAR–AICRP on Poultry Breeding, under the Directorate of Research at Assam Veterinary and Fishery University (AVFU), has organised a poultry vaccination and awareness programme in Jagra Model Village, Nalbari district, to promote scientific poultry farming and disease prevention. According to the original report, the initiative trained around 250 poultry farmers and vaccinated nearly 5,000 birds against Ranikhet, also known as Newcastle disease.

The campaign was carried out in collaboration with the Institute of Veterinary Biologicals, the State Veterinary Dispensary at Jagra and the Anajori Development Society. Farmers also received free medicines, multivitamins, mineral mixtures and nutritional supplements as part of the programme, which aimed to reduce disease-related losses and improve poultry productivity in rural areas.

The awareness drive focused on practical vaccination techniques, recommended vaccination schedules and general poultry health management. Organisers said the event was designed not only to strengthen farm-level disease prevention, but also to support rural livelihoods through better flock health and improved production efficiency.

The Institute of Veterinary Biologicals, based in Guwahati, is the state facility responsible for producing several veterinary vaccines, including vaccines used in poultry against Ranikhet disease and fowl pox. The research framework behind the campaign is also linked to the AICRP on Poultry Breeding, a long-running ICAR-supported project active in Assam’s poultry sector.

Introduction: the 2050 protein challenge

Global demand for animal protein is projected to rise by more than 70% by 2050, driven by population growth and urbanization. Poultry, as a relatively efficient protein source, will play a central role in meeting this demand. However, sustainability challenges—environmental impact, resource efficiency, and animal welfare—must be addressed to ensure resilience. Recent reviews emphasize the need for integrated nutritional and environmental strategies to balance productivity with ecological responsibility¹.

Nutritional innovation for sustainable growth

Feed formulation is a critical driver of sustainability. Traditional reliance on soybean meal (SBM) contributes to deforestation and high carbon footprints. Studies highlight the potential of alternative protein sources such as insect meal, algae, and agro-industrial by-products, which can reduce SBM dependence by 20–40% while maintaining bird performance. Optimized carbohydrate utilization and microbial management further enhance feed efficiency, lowering nitrogen excretion and greenhouse gas emissions.

Circular resource management

Circular economy principles are increasingly applied to poultry systems. Manure valorization into biofertilizers, renewable energy adoption, and water recycling are proven strategies to reduce waste and emissions. Life cycle assessment (LCA) studies confirm that combining feed innovations with environmental management yields greater reductions in carbon footprint than isolated measures. This integrated approach aligns poultry production with climate-smart agriculture goals².

Digital and biotechnological frontiers

Emerging digital tools and biotechnology are reshaping sustainability pathways. Precision feeding systems, sensor-based monitoring, and AI-driven resource optimization improve efficiency and reduce environmental burdens. Biotechnology advances, such as nanomaterial-based feed additives and microbial engineering, open new frontiers for sustainable protein production. These innovations support the transition toward a circular bioeconomy, where poultry production contributes to broader food system resilience³.

Policy and global collaboration

Scientific progress must be reinforced by policy frameworks and international collaboration. Regulatory incentives for renewable energy, sustainable feed adoption, and waste valorization are essential. Moreover, global partnerships—linking academia, industry, and governments—can accelerate the scaling of innovations. Evidence suggests that region-specific sustainability plans, supported by digital technologies, will be crucial to adapt strategies to local contexts while meeting global protein needs.

Conclusion

Advancing sustainability in poultry production requires a multi-dimensional strategy: nutritional innovation, circular resource management, digital integration, and supportive policy frameworks. By aligning these elements, the poultry industry can meet the projected 2050 protein demand while minimizing environmental impact. The convergence of science, technology, and governance offers a pathway toward resilient, climate-smart poultry systems that safeguard both food security and ecological integrity.

References:

1. Nutritional, microbial and environmental perspectives in sustainable broiler production (2026).
2. Sustainable Poultry Production Through Novel Nutrition and Circular Resource Management (2026).
3. Digital innovation integration into biotechnology for development of sustainable protein frontiers for poultry nutrition in a circular bioeconomy (2026).

The post VAL-CO: Coming Soon appeared first on Modern Poultry.

With increasing pressure to reduce antibiotic use and rising ambient temperatures, new research from North-West University (NWU) in South Africa highlights a promising nutritional strategy: the combined use of probiotics and stimbiotics in broiler diets to support performance and resilience to heat stress.

The study, conducted by Ramokone Millicent Mokonyama as part of her master’s programme at NWU, evaluated whether this combination could represent an alternative to conventional antibiotic growth promoters (AGP) in broilers. The work examined not only growth and feed conversion, but also meat quality, health indicators, bone characteristics and behavioural responses under cyclic heat stress conditions.

Experimental design and dietary treatments

In total, 600 broiler chicks were assigned to five dietary treatments over a six-week production cycle. The experimental layout included: a negative control without AGP, a positive control with conventional AGP, a diet supplemented with probiotics only, a diet with stimbiotics only and a diet with the combination of probiotics and stimbiotics. Birds were managed under a protocol that included controlled periods of cyclic heat stress to simulate realistic field conditions, allowing researchers to assess the effectiveness of antibiotic-based and antibiotic-free feeding strategies before and during heat stress exposure.

Growth performance and early-stage advantages

In the early rearing phase, broilers fed either probiotics alone or the probiotics–stimbiotics combination showed higher growth rates than the other groups. Importantly, these early advantages did not compromise overall performance: over the full six-week production cycle, the combination of probiotics and stimbiotics maintained overall productivity and feed efficiency comparable to those of birds receiving AGP, even under cyclic heat stress. These findings suggest that this strategy can sustain production while reducing reliance on antibiotic growth promoters.

Meat quality, bone characteristics and blood profile

One of the main concerns when replacing AGP is the potential impact on carcass composition, meat quality and physiological status. In Mokonyama’s work, the inclusion of probiotics and stimbiotics did not adversely affect carcass traits, bone characteristics or blood biochemical parameters. In addition, birds receiving stimbiotics exhibited lower cholesterol and triglyceride levels under thermoneutral sampling conditions than AGP-fed broilers, suggesting favourable effects on lipid metabolism. The dietary treatments also influenced antioxidant characteristics of the meat, with probiotic- and stimbiotic-fed birds showing improved antioxidant capacity in specific assays.

Behaviour and heat adaptation

The diets also influenced bird behaviour during periods of elevated temperature. Broilers fed probiotics and stimbiotics showed differences in certain behaviours, including time spent resting, seeking cooler areas and feeding patterns during the hottest hours of the day. These behavioural changes suggest adaptive responses to cyclic heat stress, while the birds did not exhibit signs of severe thermal distress. Overall, the results indicate that combining the two additives may help support the physiological and behavioural responses of broilers exposed to heat stress.

Towards antibiotic-free and more climate-resilient production

The findings suggest that probiotics and stimbiotics can act in a complementary way within feeding programmes aimed at reducing antimicrobial use while maintaining productive performance under challenging environmental conditions. The absence of adverse effects on growth, health, carcass traits and meat quality, together with favourable changes in lipid profile and antioxidant characteristics, makes this nutritional strategy particularly relevant as heat stress becomes more frequent under changing climatic conditions.

The inclusion of probiotics and stimbiotics in broiler diets may enable producers to maintain production performance, help birds cope with increasingly frequent heat stress events and contribute to more responsible poultry production. This work places Mokonyama and the NWU research team among the groups investigating functional feed additives as potential alternatives to antibiotic growth promoters, with the aim of supporting productivity and physiological adaptation in modern broiler production systems.

See also:

Summer heat stress is detrimental to broiler chickens

USPOULTRY’s 2026 Women’s Leadership Conference will focus on topics that address the challenges women face in the workplace and the skills necessary for professional growth. The program was developed by a team of professional women at various levels of management who understand these challenges. This year’s conference will be held Aug. 20-21, at the Hilton Sandestin Beach Golf Resort & Spa in Destin, Fla.

“The planning committee looked inward at what we face as women in the workforce, and we were able to provide timely and relevant topics for this year’s conference. The agenda offers many areas to help empower women to become successful leaders, as well as expand their professional achievements,” said Emily Crawford, associate director at Cobb-Vantress Inc., and program planning committee chair.

Session topics include Smart Risks and Successful Negotiations; Leading High-Performance Teams to Help Avoid Burnout/Setting Boundaries; Successes, Setbacks and Comebacks; Building Personal Brand and Reputation; Be an AI Champion; the Importance of Women in Ag; and Powered by Happy: Balancing Your Life While Boosting Your Career.

The 2026 Women’s Leadership Conference planning committee includes Kenyell Carson, Pilgrim’s; Emily Crawford, Cobb-Vantress Inc., and planning committee chair; Kelly Davis, Aviagen Inc.; Jaimee Handsborough, Soules Foods; Gracie Heinen, Fieldale Farms Corporation; Alicia Helle, Cooper Farms; Hannah Jolly, Koch Foods, and Lisa Noffsinger, Mississippi State University.

To register for the Women’s Leadership Conference and to view the full agenda, click here or visit www.uspoultry.org.

Source: U.S. Poultry & Egg Association press release

According to Mark Jackwood, PhD, a consultant for Ceva Animal Health and one of the world’s leading IBV researchers, that’s not a sign that vaccination has failed. It’s simply the nature of the virus.

“IBV is constantly evolving,” Jackwood said. “As long as the virus is replicating, genetic change is occurring.”

The question isn’t whether new variants will emerge, but how quickly. Scientific evidence suggests that the answer depends on how effectively producers can limit viral replication in commercial flocks — a factor that may influence not only disease control today but the emergence of future variants as well.

That may sound like a subtle distinction, but it has important implications for how the industry approaches infectious bronchitis control. Although vaccines remain the cornerstone of prevention, Jackwood said their value extends beyond reducing clinical disease and production losses. Effective vaccination also helps slow the emergence of future variants by reducing opportunities for the virus to replicate and evolve.

A costly and persistent challenge

IBV remains one of the most economically important viral diseases affecting poultry worldwide. The avian coronavirus primarily targets the respiratory tract, causing signs such as coughing, gasping and tracheal rales, but its impact can extend well beyond respiratory disease.

Depending on the strain involved, IBV may affect the kidneys, reproductive tract and overall flock performance. In laying hens, infections can lead to drops in egg production, poor shell quality and reduced egg quality. Some strains can damage the kidneys, while infection of young pullets may permanently damage the developing oviduct, resulting in so-called false layers.

“The virus affects much more than the respiratory system,” Jackwood said. “The production losses associated with IBV can be substantial, particularly when secondary bacterial infections become involved.”

Those losses may include poorer feed conversion, reduced weight gain, increased condemnations at processing and lower reproductive performance. In severe outbreaks, the economic consequences can quickly become significant.

Yet what makes IBV particularly challenging isn’t simply the damage it causes. It’s the virus’s remarkable ability to change.

Why IBV keeps changing

Like other coronaviruses, IBV carries its genetic information as RNA rather than DNA. Every time the virus replicates, it must copy that genetic material. The enzyme responsible for making those copies is prone to mistakes, creating mutations throughout the viral genome.

“Those mistakes generate genetic diversity,” Jackwood explained. “Most of the time, the mutations don’t matter. But occasionally, one mutation provides an advantage that allows the virus to survive or spread more effectively.”

Over time, those accumulated mutations can produce meaningful changes in the virus. This process, known as genetic drift, is responsible for the emergence of most new IBV variants.

Many of those changes occur in the spike protein, the structure the virus uses to attach to and enter host cells. The spike protein is also a primary target of the bird’s immune response.

“When mutations occur in key regions of the spike protein, the immune system may recognize the virus differently,” Jackwood said. “That’s how new antigenic variants emerge.”

IBV can also evolve through recombination, a process in which two different virus strains infect the same cell and exchange genetic material. Although recombination has contributed to the appearance of some new variants, Jackwood said most significant IBV types arise through the steady accumulation of mutations over time.

“The challenge is that IBV replicates extraordinarily efficiently. A single infected bird can transmit the virus to many others, creating countless opportunities for additional mutations to occur,” Jackwood said. “The more replication you have, the more opportunities the virus has to change.”

An unexpected role for vaccination

That relationship between replication and evolution has led researchers to think differently about vaccination.

For years, poultry health professionals viewed vaccination primarily as a way to prevent disease. Although that remains true, Jackwood said vaccination can also influence how quickly new variants emerge.

The reason lies in a concept that can be difficult for producers to fully appreciate: IBV vaccination does not produce sterile immunity.

“Even when birds are very well protected, field virus can still infect and replicate at low levels,” Jackwood said. “Vaccination dramatically reduces replication and transmission, but it doesn’t eliminate them entirely.”

At first glance, that may sound discouraging. But in reality, it highlights why strong vaccination programs remain so important.

When a flock is well protected, virus replication is greatly reduced. Fewer infected cells mean fewer opportunities for mutations to occur, fewer opportunities for transmission and a lower chance for the virus to spread through the population.

“In a fully protected flock, you’re slowing the virus down,” Jackwood said. “You’re reducing the amount of replication that’s occurring and reducing the opportunities for new variants to emerge.”

Partial protection ‘worst-case scenario’

Interestingly, research suggests that the greatest evolutionary pressure may occur not in fully susceptible flocks or fully protected flocks, but somewhere in between.

According to Jackwood, partially protected populations can create conditions that favor the selection of viral variants capable of escaping existing immunity.

“The worst scenario for the emergence of new variants is often partial protection,” he said. “The virus is under pressure to survive, but it’s still able to replicate. That combination can favor the selection of viruses with advantageous mutations.”

That doesn’t mean vaccination causes new variants. Rather, it underscores the importance of achieving consistent, high-quality protection throughout the flock.

“The goal is to reduce replication as much as possible,” Jackwood said. “The more effectively you control the virus, the fewer opportunities it has to evolve.”

Staying ahead of a moving target

Because IBV continues to evolve, vaccination alone is not enough. Producers also need a clear understanding of which virus types are circulating in their region and how those viruses are changing over time.

Modern molecular diagnostic tools have transformed the industry’s ability to monitor IBV. Tests such as reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and sequencing can rapidly identify circulating strains and help veterinarians determine whether existing vaccination programs remain appropriate.

“Surveillance is critical because it tells us what’s happening in the field,” Jackwood said. “You can’t make informed vaccination decisions if you don’t know which viruses are circulating.”

For Jackwood, that combination of surveillance and effective vaccination is central to Ceva’s approach to infectious bronchitis control. Through its Ibron® portfolio, the company emphasizes using surveillance data to help veterinarians tailor vaccination programs to local IBV challenges as the virus continues to evolve.

That information becomes increasingly valuable as the virus continues to evolve. Although researchers have made tremendous progress in understanding IBV, Jackwood believes producers should expect change to remain a constant feature of the disease.

“This virus isn’t standing still,” he said. “New variants will continue to emerge because that’s what RNA viruses do.”

The good news is that producers are not powerless against that process. Effective vaccination, strong biosecurity and ongoing surveillance can all help reduce viral replication and limit opportunities for change.

“We may never completely stop IBV evolution,” Jackwood said. “But by reducing replication and transmission, we can slow it down and stay ahead of the next challenge.”

Want to learn more?

Explore Ceva’s Infectious Bronchitis Knowledge Hub for additional technical resources, practical guidance and expert insights on infectious bronchitis vaccination. 

Editor’s note: Content on Modern Poultry’s Industry Insights pages is provided and/or commissioned by our sponsors, who assume full responsibility for its accuracy and compliance.

The post Why new IBV variants keep emerging — and what producers can do about it appeared first on Modern Poultry.

“Based on previous research, we hypothesized that both slow- and fast-growing strains would have improved mobility and footpad conditions in the silvopasture environment compared to the indoor environment,” reported Athena He-DeMontaron, graduate student, North Carolina State University (NCSU), who is advised by Allison Pullin, PhD.

However, the results showed that, compared with the fast-growing strain, the slow-growing strain produced lower footpad scores, translating to healthier footpads in the indoor environment. Additionally, the slow-growing strain had better mobility than the fast-growing strain in both environments.

He-DeMontaron discussed the research and mixed results at the 2025 Poultry Science Association annual meeting.

Monitoring gait, footpad health

Researchers used 500 SASSO broilers for the slow-growing strain and 500 Ross 708 broilers for the fast-growing strain. SASSO birds were raised to 56 days of age and the Ross 708 birds to 42 days of age.

The NCSU chicken education unit was used for the indoor conventional environment. A local farm provided a silvopasture environment with daytime access to trees and grass.

Both locations housed 50 birds per pen and five pens per breed. All pens had two drinkers, two feeders and the same amount of indoor space, 188 square inches per bird. The silvopasture pens had an additional 288 square inches of space outdoors per bird.

The research team conducted gait scoring at 41 and 42 days of age using a 3-point scale from the National Chicken Council Welfare Guidelines. Birds were walked for 5 feet and mobility scored: 0 (normal), 1 and 2.

Footpad scoring was performed during processing after feather plucking and also used a 3-point scale from the welfare council. Normal footpads scored 0. Footpads with less than 50% lesions were 1, and footpads with more than 50% lesions were 2.

SASSO gait, footpad scores best

“We were examining genetic strain, rearing location and the interaction between the two,” He-DeMontaron reported. “For gait, rearing location did not affect the percentage of broilers within any gait-score category, so I will discuss how each score differed by strain.

“Regardless of location, the SASSOs demonstrated overall better mobility than the Rosses,” she continued. “More SASSOs were able to walk balanced for 5 feet, while more Rosses had abnormal gait scores of 1.” An abnormal gait must be uneven, awkward steps for 5 feet.

Footpad scores revealed more differences between strains. The SASSOs exhibited three times as many normal footpads as Ross 708 birds.

“There was an interaction between strain and rearing location for the footpad score of 1,” He-DeMontaron said. “SASSOs reared indoors had the lowest prevalence of score 1, while SASSOs reared outdoors had similarly high prevalences as the fast-growing Rosses in both environments.”

She noted that the outdoor unit was hit by a tropical storm that produced 12 to 14 inches of rain.

“Footpad dermatitis was exacerbated by the weather and negatively impacted our birds,” she explained. “Mitigating ground moisture in outdoor environments definitely warrants further investigation.”

Genetic strain effects

The results of this research show that genetic strain was the main predictor of walking ability. The fast-growing Rosses were more susceptible to lameness and gait issues than the slow-growing SASSOs, which showed improved gait in both outdoor and indoor environments.

“Contrary to our original hypothesis, rearing location did not affect mobility,” He-DeMontaron said. “Although previous literature has reported that improvements in walking ability were associated with silvopasture, that was not the case in this study.”

The post Genetic strain affects mobility, footpad health in silvopasture and conventional production appeared first on Modern Poultry.

The use of exogenous enzymes in broiler nutrition is a well‑established strategy to enhance feed efficiency, reduce production costs, and mitigate the environmental impact of poultry systems. Phytases, carbohydrases, and proteases contribute to increasing nutrient availability and digestibility, counteracting the anti‑nutritional effects of plant‑based feed ingredients and supporting the productive performance of broiler chickens.

Introduction

In recent decades, broiler nutrition has seen a substantial increase in the use of exogenous enzymes aimed at improving feed efficiency, reducing production costs, and limiting environmental impact. Market analyses indicate that more than 45% of poultry feeds now incorporate enzymatic additives, with forecasts predicting continued growth driven by the widespread inclusion of phytases, carbohydrases, and proteases in feed formulations. Beyond productive outcomes, enzyme supplementation provides benefits to the intestinal microbiota and reduces nutrient excretion, underscoring its central role in the sustainability of the entire poultry sector.

The enzymes most commonly used in broiler feeding include phytases, carbohydrases (arabinoxylans, β‑mannans, and β‑glucans), and proteases. Each of these categories performs specific, often complementary, functions that enhance nutrient availability and digestion.

Phytases

Phytase is the most widely used enzyme in broiler feed. Its catalytic action involves the hydrolysis of phytic acid, the main storage form of phosphorus in plant-derived ingredients, which is poorly bioavailable to monogastric animals due to their limited endogenous phytase activity. The inclusion of phytase in the diet enables the release of bound phosphorus, as well as complexed calcium, trace minerals, and amino acids, thereby reducing the need for supplementation with inorganic mineral sources and markedly decreasing fecal phosphorus excretion. Currently, phytases account for more than 39% of the global feed enzyme market, representing the dominant segment in both volume and economic value; their adoption continues to expand owing to their substantial productive, economic, and environmental benefits. At high inclusion levels, phytase supplementation can restore productive and physiological parameters in broilers fed low‑phosphorus diets, achieving performance comparable to that obtained with nutritionally adequate formulations, while simultaneously improving feed efficiency and significantly reducing the environmental impact associated with phosphorus emissions.

Carbohydrases

Carbohydrases represent a key class of exogenous enzymes used for the degradation of non‑starch polysaccharides (NSPs), such as arabinoxylans, β‑mannans, and β‑glucans, which are structural components of the cell walls of plant‑derived feed ingredients. In broiler chickens, these NSP exert anti‑nutritional effects by increasing intestinal viscosity and limiting the activity of digestive enzymes, ultimately reducing nutrient digestion and absorption. The inclusion of exogenous carbohydrases helps decrease intestinal viscosity, improve nutrient availability and absorption, increase metabolizable energy, and favorably modulate the intestinal microbiota.

Among the most widely used carbohydrases, xylanases are particularly effective in degrading arabinoxylans. These enzymes, produced mainly by fungi and bacteria (e.g., Aspergillus spp. and Bacillus spp.), promote the hydrolysis of insoluble fiber present in cereals such as wheat, barley, and rye. The chemical structure of arabinoxylans has been shown to vary considerably among cereal species and even among varieties within the same species, influencing the response to xylanase supplementation and the extent of intestinal viscosity reduction. The degradation of NSP improves energy digestibility, limits undesirable fermentative processes, and reduces the risk of proliferation of intestinal pathogens associated with high digesta viscosity. Numerous studies have also demonstrated that xylanase supplementation can improve feed efficiency even under reduced dietary energy levels. In trials conducted on Cobb 500 broilers, diets formulated with lower metabolizable energy resulted in impaired productive performance; however, the inclusion of xylanase derived from Bacillus subtilis partially compensated for the energy reduction, improving growth and feed conversion ratio (FCR) during the final stages of the production cycle.

β‑Mannanase, although less widely used than xylanase, plays an important role in the degradation of mannans and galactomannans, non‑starch polysaccharides primarily found in legumes (soybean, pea, guar) and in various plant by‑products used in poultry feeding. These compounds, part of the hemicellulosic fraction of cell walls, exert marked anti‑nutritional effects in broilers by increasing intestinal viscosity, reducing nutrient digestibility, and interfering with protein utilization. A distinctive feature of β‑mannans is their ability to non-specifically stimulate the intestinal immune system by mimicking pathogen‑associated molecular patterns, triggering an unnecessary inflammatory response. This immune activation entails an energetic cost that diverts resources away from growth and tissue accretion, thereby impairing feed efficiency. The inclusion of exogenous β‑mannanase enables the hydrolysis of mannans, reducing intestinal viscosity and mitigating the anti‑nutritional effects of these polysaccharides. Numerous studies have shown that β‑mannanase supplementation improves crude protein and metabolizable energy digestibility, reduces unnecessary immune activation, and enhances growth and FCR, particularly in diets containing high levels of legumes or by‑products rich in galactomannans.

β‑Glucanases constitute another nutritionally relevant class of carbohydrases in broiler diets, especially when barley and oats are included. These enzymes specifically hydrolyze β‑glucans, non‑starch polysaccharides composed of glucose units linked by β‑1,3 and β‑1,4 bonds, located in the cell walls of plant ingredients. β‑Glucans also exert strong anti‑nutritional effects by increasing intestinal viscosity, slowing digesta transit, and impairing the interaction between nutrients and digestive enzymes. High intestinal viscosity particularly interferes with lipid emulsification, hindering the action of bile salts and pancreatic lipases and reducing the formation of micelles required for fatty acid absorption. These alterations promote conditions conducive to dysbiosis, with increased proliferation of undesirable microbes and reduced absorption of energy and nutrients. The inclusion of exogenous β‑glucanases enables the breakdown of high‑molecular‑weight β‑glucans into shorter, more soluble fractions, resulting in a significant reduction in intestinal viscosity. This leads to improved energy and lipid digestibility, as well as enhanced feed efficiency and growth performance. Numerous studies have shown that the effects of β‑glucanases are particularly pronounced in high‑barley diets and that, when used in combination with other carbohydrases, they contribute to a synergistic reduction in intestinal viscosity and optimization of nutrient utilization, supporting intestinal health and microbiota stability in broilers.

Overall, the use of carbohydrases represents a targeted nutritional strategy to optimize the utilization of alternative feed ingredients and improve the productive and physiological efficiency of broilers, particularly in feeding systems oriented toward cost reduction and the use of ingredients with high compositional variability.

Proteases

Proteases are exogenous enzymes responsible for the hydrolysis of proteins, with significant effects on the release of digestible amino acids and on the reduction of protein‑based anti‑nutritional factors present in plant feed ingredients, such as trypsin and chymotrypsin inhibitors, lectins, and antigenic proteins, which can impair protein digestion and stimulate intestinal inflammatory responses. In broiler chickens, dietary inclusion of proteases improves protein digestion by facilitating the action of endogenous proteases, reducing the amount of undigested protein reaching the distal intestinal tract, and increasing the ileal availability of essential amino acids. The use of proteases is particularly advantageous in formulations characterized by reduced dietary protein or amino acid levels, as well as in the presence of alternative protein sources to soybean meal, which are often associated with greater compositional variability and lower digestibility. In such contexts, protease supplementation helps release essential amino acids and maintain adequate productive performance, while also contributing to cost reduction through more efficient feed formulation. Furthermore, recent evidence indicates that protease supplementation may exert positive effects on meat quality parameters, improving technological traits such as water‑holding capacity and pH stability in the pectoralis major muscle. These effects contribute to better final product quality and greater carcass uniformity.

Conclusions

In conclusion, the use of exogenous enzymes in broiler diets enhances digestive efficiency and nutrient utilization by counteracting the anti‑nutritional factors present in plant‑based feed ingredients. Phytases, carbohydrases, and proteases exert complementary actions that support productive performance and intestinal health, contributing to the environmental sustainability of poultry production systems.

GLP-1 medications and artificial intelligence (AI) are rapidly impacting the way Americans plan meals, shop for groceries and consume fresh chicken, according to new consumer research presented today at the 2026 Chicken Marketing Summit.

The study, commissioned by the National Chicken Council (NCC) and WATT Global Media and conducted online by Circana in June 2026, surveyed 535 U.S. consumers (ages 18-67) who purchase fresh chicken. The research explored how evolving health priorities, emerging technologies and changing dietary guidance are influencing today’s protein purchases.

“Chicken is uniquely positioned to meet consumers where they are — whether they’re managing a health goal, short on time or looking for AI-powered meal inspiration,” said Tom Super, spokesman for the National Chicken Council. “This research reinforces why chicken remains America’s protein of choice.”

GLP-1 medications are reshaping eating habits

One of the study’s most significant findings is the rapid rise of GLP-1 medication use. Twenty-seven percent of respondents said they or someone in their household has used a GLP-1 medication, more than double the level reported two years ago.

Those consumers reported substantial changes in their eating habits. They are snacking less, eating out less frequently and drinking less alcohol while increasing consumption of poultry, fruits and vegetables.

The research also found consumers are responding to updated dietary guidance by purchasing more fresh foods and ingredients for cooking from scratch while reducing purchases of heavily processed products.

“Health and wellness priorities are reshaping consumer behavior in meaningful ways,” said Erkin Peksoz, Principal, Protein Practice at Circana. “As consumers become more intentional about what they eat, fresh chicken is well-positioned as a nutritious, versatile protein that aligns with these evolving preferences.”

AI moves from novelty to everyday kitchen tool

Artificial intelligence has quickly become part of consumers’ food routines.

More than half of fresh chicken buyers now use AI for recipes and meal inspiration, while approximately one-third use it for meal planning or grocery shopping. Usage increased dramatically across every category compared with last year’s survey, with younger consumers continuing to lead adoption.

The findings suggest AI is becoming an increasingly important touchpoint in how consumers discover recipes, make purchasing decisions and prepare meals at home.

Fresh chicken aligns with changing consumer priorities

The study found that 64% of respondents believe fresh meat is the best source of protein, up from last year’s survey.

Consumers also expressed a willingness to pay more for production attributes that reinforce quality and trust. Free-range, antibiotic-free and locally sourced chicken ranked highest among the product claims shoppers value, with Millennials showing the strongest willingness to pay premiums.

Even as consumers become more focused on health, convenience continues to influence purchasing decisions. Fast preparation time remains the top meal-preparation priority, and six in 10 consumers purchase groceries online or through a mobile app at least monthly.

Together, the findings illustrate how changing health priorities, emerging technologies and evolving shopping behaviors are reshaping the fresh chicken marketplace and creating new considerations for producers, retailers and marketers.

Funding for the study was provided by Elanco Animal Health, National Chicken Council and WATT Global Media.

A full copy of the presentation is available here.

Source: National Chicken Council press release

Today’s livestock farms operate in an increasingly complex environment. Labour shortages, rising energy costs, stricter environmental requirements, animal welfare expectations and the rapid development of digital technologies affect all sectors. While production systems differ, many of the solutions being developed for dairy, pig and cattle farming are also highly relevant for poultry businesses.

EuroTier’s strength lies in this cross-sector exchange. Visitors can explore innovations in automation, sensor technology, robotics, ventilation, feeding systems, energy management and data-driven decision-making. Advances developed for one livestock sector often inspire solutions in another. In particular, topics such as biosecurity, emission reduction, animal health monitoring and resource efficiency are becoming increasingly interconnected across animal production. In addition, the co-located EnergyDecentral exhibition provides valuable insights into renewable energy generation, energy storage and integrated on-farm energy concepts that can help livestock businesses improve profitability and resilience.

Across 13 halls, under the guiding theme “Intelligence in Animal Farming”, more than 2,100 exhibitors from over 50 countries are expected to present technologies and services designed to improve productivity, sustainability and animal welfare. Poultry professionals will find dedicated poultry content, including the DLG Expert Stage Poultry and the Spotlight Emission Reduction in Pig and Poultry Farming, but they can also benefit from exploring innovations and management concepts from other sectors.

Beyond technology, EuroTier remains one of the most important international networking platforms for livestock professionals. Farmers, researchers, veterinarians, consultants and industry representatives from around the world come together to discuss practical solutions and future developments. Events such as the International Poultry Day, DLG-VetCon and numerous international networking formats provide opportunities to exchange ideas and build new partnerships.

For poultry producers, EuroTier is therefore more than a poultry exhibition. It is a unique opportunity to gain fresh perspectives from across animal agriculture and discover innovations that can help build more efficient, resilient and sustainable farming businesses for the future.

https://www.eurotier.com/en/

The post EuroTier 2026: What Poultry Producers Can Learn from Other Livestock Sectors appeared first on Poultry TRENDS.

New Zealand is set to tighten farm-level preparedness for highly pathogenic avian influenza, with regulations that would require commercial poultry operators to develop and implement formal biosecurity plans to manage the risk of H5N1. The proposed framework is part of a wider government strategy to reduce the impact of a possible outbreak on poultry production, animal health and food supply.

Under regulations approved by Cabinet, commercial poultry operators with more than 100 birds will be required to develop, register and implement farm biosecurity plans for avian disease, covering measures such as disease prevention, depopulation, disposal, cleaning and disinfection, record-keeping, auditing and compliance requirements. The regulations will make farm biosecurity a legal requirement rather than a voluntary industry practice.

The Ministry for Primary Industries says the framework has been developed in close cooperation with the poultry industry, which entered into a Government Industry Agreement with the government in 2025 to prepare for and respond to exotic poultry diseases, including H5N1. MPI also notes that rigorous on-farm biosecurity remains the best way to protect individual farms from infection, especially through measures that limit contact with wild birds and strengthen hygiene, access control and containment.

The move comes after New Zealand confirmed its first detection of H5N1 clade 2.3.4.4b in a brown skua on 15 July 2026. While no infections have been reported in commercial poultry, officials expect the virus to become established in wild bird populations, making stronger farm biosecurity an important safeguard for the poultry sector.

The Global Plan of Action is a voluntary, non-binding and country-driven framework intended to help governments and stakeholders address the economic, social and environmental dimensions of livestock production. It is structured around four priority areas: food security, nutrition and healthy diets; better livelihoods and inclusive economic growth; animal health through a One Health approach; and the sustainable use of natural resources, climate action and biodiversity.

The framework is intended to support the livestock sector as demand for animal products continues to grow while addressing challenges including zoonotic diseases, antimicrobial resistance, biodiversity loss, greenhouse gas emissions, and soil and water pollution.

Overall, the plan sets out 17 strategic priorities and 85 actions spanning the entire livestock value chain. These include measures to improve feed and feed resource management, strengthen animal disease prevention and control, promote responsible antimicrobial use through good management practices, enhance animal welfare, reduce food loss and waste, improve market access for livestock producers, and support the sustainable management of rangelands and pasturelands.

Many of these actions are directly relevant to poultry production, particularly those related to feed management, food safety, animal health, antimicrobial stewardship and animal welfare.

FAO is encouraging Member countries to develop or adapt national plans of action that reflect their own contexts, needs and priorities. The organisation will support implementation through technical assistance where appropriate, while the FAO Sub-Committee on Livestock will periodically review progress and make recommendations.

The Global Plan of Action was developed following a request from FAO Members at the 2024 Session of the FAO Sub-Committee on Livestock and was prepared in consultation with Member countries over the past two years.

The 2026 USPOULTRY Hatchery-Breeder Clinic brought together poultry industry professionals to explore the latest advances in breeder management, hatchery performance and flock health. The program featured presentations on leadership and operational excellence, breeder nutrition, hatchery performance indicators and the evolving U.S. experience with avian metapneumovirus (aMPV). Speakers shared practical strategies to strengthen flock health, optimize breeder and hatchery management, and improve production performance.

Bill Griffith, chief operating officer at Peco Foods, discussed the critical connection between leadership and operational excellence, emphasizing that long-term organizational success depends on balancing strong leadership with disciplined processes. He highlighted that effective leaders inspire and influence through clear communication, accountability, emotional intelligence and vision, while operational excellence focuses on improving efficiency, reducing waste and delivering consistent results. Griffith also stressed the importance of empowering employees, using data to guide decisions, fostering cross-functional collaboration, and embracing continuous improvement to overcome challenges and drive sustainable growth.

Noting the importance of combining sound nutrition with effective feeding management to optimize broiler breeder performance, Dr. Benton Hudson, poultry nutritionist at CSA Animal Nutrition, emphasized that breeder success depends on much more than feed formulation, highlighting the critical roles of feed delivery, distribution, access, equipment, bird behavior and overall flock management. Hudson remarked that closely observing birds, adapting feeding practices as genetics evolve and fostering strong collaboration among nutrition, feed mill and production teams are essential to maintaining breeder health, fertility and productivity.

Tommy Lively, director of hatcheries technical support at Pilgrim’s, highlighted the key performance indicators that drive hatchery success, emphasizing that closely monitoring eggshell temperature, moisture loss and chick temperatures is essential for maximizing hatchability and chick quality. He explained that maintaining optimal incubation conditions throughout the process helps reduce embryonic mortality, cull chicks and post-hatch health issues, while preventive maintenance, ventilation, sanitation and equipment performance remain the foundation of consistent hatchery operations.

As part of his update on the U.S. experience with aMPV, Dr. Brian Jordan, director of technical services at Zoetis, noted that Type A continues to spread more rapidly than Type B and may eventually become the predominant strain. He explained that the disease affects poultry species differently, with turkeys experiencing the greatest impact, and discussed the industry’s evolving vaccination strategies as producers gain more field experience. He stated that continued research and experience will help refine vaccine protocols and improve disease management as the industry continues to better understand aMPV.

Source: USPOULTRY press release

Botswana has marked a new milestone for its poultry sector with the official launch of a regular weekly export programme supplying 90,000 hatching eggs to Mozambique. The initiative represents the country’s first regular commercial export programme for hatching eggs to its neighbouring market and supports the government’s strategy to expand agricultural exports and regional poultry trade.

The launch ceremony took place on 22 July 2026 and was attended by the Minister of Lands and Agriculture, Dr Edwin Gorataone Dikoloti, together with Ross Breeders Botswana Managing Director Allen Bradford. The initiative was presented as an important achievement for Botswana’s poultry industry and a sign of the sector’s growing capacity to supply high-quality poultry genetics to regional markets.

Economic and employment impact

According to Minister Dikoloti, the project has created around 370 direct jobs, contributing to local income generation and broader economic activity. He said the programme demonstrates the value of collaboration between the private sector and government policies aimed at supporting investment, business growth and market expansion.

The weekly export programme is also expected to generate wider economic activity across the poultry value chain. By establishing a regular export flow, the initiative supports Botswana’s efforts to expand its regional poultry exports and develop new agricultural markets.

Ross Breeders’ production capacity

Bradford said the hatching eggs are produced at the company’s breeder farm in Artesia, where three breeder production sites are currently in operation. He stated that each site has the capacity to accommodate approximately 31,000 breeder hens.

Bradford also said that two additional breeder production sites are under development, which are expected to further expand the company’s production capacity in the coming years.

Under the new programme, Ross Breeders will supply 90,000 hatching eggs per week to Mozambique. According to the company, the expansion of breeder production capacity is intended to support future growth in export volumes.

Policy support and sector diversification

During the launch ceremony, Minister Dikoloti said the Ministry of Lands and Agriculture will continue working to improve market access, certification procedures and veterinary services in support of agricultural exports. He also encouraged farmers, entrepreneurs and aspiring agribusiness owners to take advantage of ministry programmes designed to help expand production and develop commercially viable enterprises.

The minister also highlighted the importance of diversifying Botswana’s livestock sector, noting that BMC refers to the Botswana Meat Commission, not the “Botswana Beef Commission.” He stressed that, alongside the country’s cattle industry, greater investment in poultry, goat and sheep production will strengthen food security, increase rural incomes and reduce reliance on a single agricultural subsector.

Regional significance

The launch of this regular weekly hatching egg export programme reflects Botswana’s broader strategy to build a more diversified and competitive agricultural economy. The initiative follows the country’s recent achievement of self-sufficiency in chicken meat and table eggs and aligns with government efforts to expand regional agricultural exports.

With government support, private-sector investment and a focus on quality production, Botswana is continuing its efforts to expand agricultural exports and diversify its livestock sector. For Ross Breeders Botswana, the programme expands the company’s export activities within Southern Africa, while for the country it represents another step in implementing its strategy to diversify agricultural production, increase regional trade and support long-term growth across the poultry sector.

Highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) continues to pose a structural threat to the U.S. poultry industry, causing billions of dollars in economic losses, production disruptions and increased costs along the supply chain. Alongside biosecurity measures and vaccination strategies, there is growing interest in approaches that leverage the host’s genetic response to reduce the impact of influenza viruses.

A $300,000 ROAR grant for H5N1 and H7N9

The Foundation for Food & Agriculture Research (FFAR), in collaboration with Iowa State University and the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), has awarded $300,000 through the Rapid Outcomes from Agricultural Research (ROAR) program. The goal is to identify genetic factors in birds that modulate the host response to H5N1 and H7N9 viruses, helping to unravel the molecular mechanisms involved in the response to infection and to pinpoint potential targets for future control strategies.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih+2

Although global attention is currently focused primarily on H5N1, H7N9 also remains an avian influenza virus of particular scientific interest due to its zoonotic potential and is being studied to better understand the mechanisms of the host immune response.

FFAR, USDA and protecting profitability

The project falls under FFAR’s research priority area “Increasing Profitability of Farmers and Ranchers,” which aims to develop innovative tools to protect poultry production in both the short and long term. Established under the 2014 Farm Bill, FFAR builds public–private partnerships to fund high‑impact research on key agri‑food challenges, matching federal funds with private investment through programs such as ROAR, designed to rapidly support research projects addressing emerging issues in the agricultural sector.

Scientific focus: host genes and immune response

The project, led by Joaquín Caceres, assistant professor in the Department of Veterinary Microbiology and Preventive Medicine at Iowa State University’s College of Veterinary Medicine, uses advanced genomic tools and experimental models to study how birds respond to H5N1 and H7N9 infections. The team aims to identify genes and molecular pathways involved in the host response to infection, with the goal of improving our understanding of the mechanisms that determine susceptibility or resilience to influenza viruses. Over time, the knowledge generated may contribute to the development of new control strategies, including genetic selection of more resilient animals and, more broadly, the identification of potential targets for future therapeutic or vaccine applications.pubmed.

Resilience and resistance: insights from the literature

A recent review by the USDA‑ARS group distinguishes between genetic “resilience” and “resistance”: resilient animals can become infected but limit clinical severity and recover more quickly, whereas resistant animals impede virus entry or replication, significantly reducing infectivity and transmission. Among the most studied host genes are ANP32A, an essential cofactor for influenza polymerase; SLC35A1, involved in the synthesis of sialic‑acid–containing receptors; and the innate immune receptors TLR3 and TLR7. The Mx (myxovirus resistance) gene has also been proposed as a possible antiviral factor, although its protective role in chickens remains debated in the scientific literature. Another key point of interest is RIG‑I, an important sensor of antiviral immunity present in several avian species, such as ducks, but absent in the domestic chicken, a feature that may contribute to inter‑species differences in susceptibility to influenza viruses.

Genetic approaches for greater resilience to avian influenza

A further review authored by CSIRO researchers highlights how the development of chicken lines resilient to avian influenza is emerging as a promising long‑term management strategy, complementary to vaccination and biosecurity. The authors emphasize the potential of intracellular restriction factors, large‑scale genomic screening to identify new candidate genes, and proof‑of‑concept studies based on transgenesis and gene editing to modify antiviral genes without compromising production performance.

From the lab to commercial genetics

A dedicated review on commercial genetic selection for disease resistance shows how poultry breeding companies are increasingly integrating tools such as genome‑wide association studies (GWAS), molecular markers and genomic selection to improve animal resilience and robustness, thereby reducing reliance on pharmaceutical treatments. The application of gene editing to avian influenza—for example through modifications of ANP32A aimed at weakening its interaction with viral polymerase—remains confined to experimental research and is not yet used in commercial populations, due both to high development costs and to regulatory and consumer‑acceptance challenges.

Implications for HPAI control

The research line supported by FFAR aims to expand the “toolbox” available for HPAI control by complementing virus‑directed strategies, such as vaccines and biosecurity, with host‑directed approaches grounded in an understanding of the host’s genetic mechanisms. Because host genetic factors are generally more stable than influenza virus genomes, such approaches could offer new opportunities to strengthen the resilience of poultry production systems.

Looking ahead, the identification of genetic markers associated with improved control of infection and reduced viral shedding could be integrated into selection programs for major commercial lines, contributing to the development of more resilient flocks and greater stability across the global poultry value chain.

With El Niño now established in the equatorial Pacific, attention is increasingly focused on the world’s major grain and oilseed producing regions. According to RaboResearch, there is an 81% probability that the current event will strengthen into a very strong El Niño, raising fresh uncertainty over crop production in several key exporting countries during the 2026/27 season.

That does not automatically translate into lower harvests or higher feed costs. One of the report’s central messages is that El Niño does not produce the same outcome every time. Its influence is based on historical weather patterns rather than fixed predictions, and the timing and location of weather anomalies ultimately determine the impact on agricultural production.

For feed markets, the picture is therefore far from one-sided.

In South America, Argentina is among the countries that could benefit from improved rainfall. Better soil moisture would support the production of corn, soybeans and winter wheat, while parts of the southern United States are also expected to experience favourable growing conditions. Stronger harvests in those regions could help offset weaker production elsewhere if weather conditions deteriorate in other exporting countries.

Australia presents a different risk. Historically, El Niño has been associated with hotter and drier conditions across much of the country’s eastern and central grain belt, where wheat, barley and canola are grown. Crops entered the current season in generally favourable condition following near-normal winter rainfall, but RaboResearch notes that the timing of any shift towards drier weather will be critical as harvest approaches. For international feed markets, Australia matters well beyond its own borders, as it remains one of the world’s leading wheat exporters.

Brazil offers perhaps the clearest reminder that El Niño rarely produces uniform outcomes. Southern soybean-producing states often receive more rainfall during El Niño years, although excessive precipitation can disrupt field operations, delay harvest and reduce grain quality. Further north, conditions tend to move in the opposite direction. Central, northern and northeastern producing regions are more likely to experience below-average rainfall, increasing production risks if dry conditions persist. The report also points to another potential consequence: lower water levels in the Amazon Basin could restrict barge traffic, increasing grain transport costs along Brazil’s northern export corridors.

Elsewhere, weaker monsoon conditions could create additional pressure on crop production in parts of Asia, including corn. Even so, RaboResearch notes that substantial grain reserves held by countries such as India and China reduce the likelihood that moderate production losses would immediately trigger a sharp increase in import demand.

Although cereals and oilseeds remain the main focus for poultry producers, the report highlights one market where El Niño is already having a measurable effect. Warmer waters off the Peruvian coast have disrupted the country’s anchovy fishery, sharply reducing the availability of fish meal and fish oil. Prices have reacted accordingly. While these ingredients play a much larger role in aquaculture than in commercial poultry diets, the development illustrates how quickly weather-related disruptions can spread through global feed ingredient markets.

For the poultry sector, the most important developments will be those affecting the production of feed ingredients in the world’s major exporting regions. The extent of any impact on feed ingredient markets will ultimately depend on when—and where—the effects of El Niño materialise across the world’s main producing areas during the remainder of the 2026/27 production cycle.

Source: www.rabobank.com

Mathis outlined three primary approaches to control — anticoccidial drugs, vaccines and phytogenics — emphasizing that each plays a distinct role in improving performance, reducing mortality and maintaining flock uniformity.

Why subclinical coccidiosis still matters

Coccidiosis is fundamentally a disease of intestinal damage, disrupting digestion and nutrient absorption and reducing performance. Even low-level infections can carry measurable economic consequences, particularly when they occur later in the grow-out.

Research has shown that even mild infections can impair nutrient absorption and reduce weight gain, reinforcing the importance of consistent control throughout the production cycle.

Among the major Eimeria species, E. maxima stands out as especially important. Its location in the mid-intestine, deeper tissue damage and associated mucus production make it a key contributor to necrotic enteritis by creating a favorable environment for Clostridium perfringens.

No new drugs on the horizon

One of the clearest realities facing the industry is the lack of new anticoccidial drugs.

Mathis said the industry should not expect any new standalone anticoccidial drugs in the foreseeable future.

That leaves producers relying on the same core set of tools — reinforcing the need to use them more strategically.

Ionophores, synthetic anticoccidials still anchor control

Despite changes in production systems, anticoccidial drugs remain foundational. Ionophores continue to provide a balance of direct parasite control and controlled cycling that allows immunity to develop, making them one of the most practical and economical approaches available.

Synthetic anticoccidials offer strong, broad-spectrum activity across multiple life stages of the parasite. Their potency makes them valuable in high-challenge situations but also underscores the need for careful use to avoid accelerating resistance.

Together, these products remain central to control programs, even as their role evolves within more integrated strategies.

Vaccination continues to expand

Vaccination has become an increasingly important tool, particularly in systems reducing antibiotic use. By providing early, controlled exposure, vaccines stimulate immunity that protects birds later in the grow-out.

Mathis noted that vaccination offers an important advantage in resistance management. It does not drive resistance and can help shift coccidial populations toward more drug-sensitive strains while building strong immunity by 28 to 35 days of age.

Bio-shuttle programs bridge the gap

Bio-shuttle programs combine vaccination with targeted anticoccidial use to manage peak infection pressure. By modulating coccidial cycling at critical points, these programs reduce the severity of infection without compromising immunity.

In research trials, this approach improved feed conversion and weight gain, highlighting the practical value of combining strategies rather than relying on a single tool.

Phytogenics play a supporting role

Interest in phytogenics — including saponins, essential oils and tannins — continues to grow, particularly in no-antibiotics-ever programs. Although these products cannot provide significant anticoccidial or antibacterial effects, they can improve immunity development and reduce intestinal inflammation. Thus, their role is supportive rather than primary.

“They shouldn’t be used as a sole program… they are better as a support role for drugs and for vaccines,” Mathis said.

Research has shown that saponins and polyphenols can modulate inflammation and immunity development, reduce lesion severity and improve nutrient digestibility. When used alongside ionophores or vaccines, they can contribute to improved feed conversion and overall performance.

Not all alternatives behave the same

One key challenge with phytogenics is variability. Differences in source material, processing and formulation can lead to inconsistent results.

Mathis cautioned that higher inclusion levels of some phytogenic products can reduce feed intake and negatively impact performance if not managed carefully.

That variability makes careful product selection and program integration essential, particularly when used alongside vaccination.

Integration is the future

If the first webinar in the series emphasized preserving anticoccidials through rotation, this session underscored a complementary reality: long-term success depends on how well those tools are combined.

Drugs provide consistency and strong control. Vaccines build immunity and help shift sensitivity. Phytogenics support gut health and modulate immunity.

“We can manage coccidiosis, but we need to utilize all the tools we have — drugs, vaccines and alternatives,” Mathis said.

This article is based on the second session in Phibro Academy’s three-part webinar series, “Coccidiosis tools and strategies.” To access the full webinar series, click here.

The post Getting more from today’s coccidiosis control tools appeared first on Modern Poultry.

21-22 April 2027, Congress Center Hamburg (CCH), Germany – International DLG conference and business platform for the feed and food systems of the future – Exhibitors and sponsors can now register: Exhibitor and sponsor registration

The Inhouse Farming Feed & Food Convention 2027 has opened registration for exhibitors and sponsoring partners. Taking place on 21 and 22 April 2027 at the Congress Center Hamburg (CCH), the international event, organized by the DLG (German Agricultural Society), will bring together companies, start-ups, research institutions and decision-makers. Under the theme “Driving Innovation across the Agrifood System,” the convention will explore innovations and business opportunities shaping the future of feed and food production.

The exhibition accompanying the convention offers companies and organizations a highly targeted platform to showcase solutions, technologies and services within the context of a high-level conference program, while providing direct access to international stakeholders from across the agrifood value chain.

At the event, exhibiting companies will be positioned as drivers of innovation, covering topics ranging from agricultural raw materials and production technologies to food processing, market development and regulatory frameworks. Participation opportunities include exhibition space, sponsorship packages and customized formats integrated into the convention environment.

The exhibition is closely linked to the convention program, both physically and conceptually. “As all delegates meet up in the exhibition area during networking breaks and on their way to sessions, this space creates valuable opportunities for exhibitors to connect with decision-makers from agriculture, food and feed production, processing industries, technology suppliers, research institutions and trade organizations,” says Yuliya Bondarenko, Project Manager of the Inhouse Farming Feed & Food Convention, DLG

Covering the entire agrifood value chain

The two-day conference program comprises 18 themed sessions across three parallel blocks, complemented by plenary sessions that feature international keynote speakers. Topics will address the full spectrum of future feed and food systems:

• Raw Materials: Agricultural raw material sources for feed and food production, vertical farming, alternative protein sources, aquaculture, algae and novel biomass sources.
• Technologies: Fermentation and biotechnology, automation, sensors and artificial intelligence (AI), indoor and vertical farming, insect farming and cellular agriculture.
• Processing: Industrial scaling, integration of novel production systems and high-value crops.
• Markets: Novel foods, food safety, business models, financing, sustainability, environmental, social and governance (ESG) considerations, and regulatory frameworks.

Further sessions will focus on technologies such as fermentation, biotechnology, automation, artificial intelligence, sensor systems, indoor and vertical farming, insect farming and cellular agriculture. Additional program points will explore industrial scaling, the integration of new production systems, high-value crops, novel foods, food safety, business models, financing, sustainability and regulatory developments.

The program will feature a new Startup Award as well as interactive networking formats, including innovation pitches, technology tours and matchmaking sessions. These elements actively connect exhibitors with industry partners, investors and potential customers while fostering knowledge exchange and business development.

“The convention is specifically designed to create opportunities for networking across the agrifood sector. Topic-focused networking lounges, an international networking evening, and startup and innovation pitch sessions followed by investor and partner matchmaking make the convention a key meeting point for the global agrifood community,” says Bondarenko.

Registration now open

Companies, startups and institutions can now register for participation in the exhibition and secure a range of sponsorship opportunities. Further information on exhibition packages, sponsorship options and participation formats is available at: Exhibiting & Sponsorship – Inhouse Farming

www.inhouse-farming.com/en/feed-food-convention/exhibiting-sponsorship

Source: DLG (German Agricultural Society) press release

In March 2025, egg prices reached an all-time high of $6.23 per dozen due to the ongoing highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) outbreak. By March 2026, the poultry industry had made progress in replacing lost flocks, although HPAI outbreaks still occurred regularly.

With egg prices now closer to normal, news media attention is focused elsewhere. However, we must not forget the toll that HPAI continues to take on producers’ mental health.

HPAI devastation continues

A look at USDA’s website that tracks HPAI detections (Confirmed Pathogenic Avian Flu in Commercial & Backyard Flocks | APHIS) indicates that commercial broiler, turkey, table-egg, duck, pullet and breeder flocks, along with backyard flocks, live-bird markets and upland game-bird flocks have all been recently affected. Even with heightened biosecurity, no flock is totally safe, and over 205 million birds have been affected since the outbreak began on February 8, 2022.

The constant concern of an HPAI outbreak has been an issue for every poultry producer (commercial, backyard and game bird) for over 4 years now, with no end in sight. In addition, in March 2024, HPAI was diagnosed in dairy cattle, spreading to 1,088 confirmed cases in 19 states.

Livestock farming was never easy, and HPAI adds to the mental health stress that producers live with every day.

Rural mental health challenges

Livestock operations are typically located in rural agricultural areas that often have a shortage of health care professionals, especially those capable of treating mental health disorders. This shortage makes it difficult for farmers to find a practitioner to address mental health challenges, including suicidal concerns.

It’s important to note that there are differences between people who grow up on a farm and those who grow up in town.

I grew up on a small farm in west central Arkansas. Town, for us, was a small rural community (population ~3,200 folks back then) about 5 miles to the northwest. Many of us who grew up on farms or in isolated rural areas tend to have — how shall I tactfully put this — unique demographic characteristics; distinctive, culturally related behaviors; and health disparities different from our townsfolk cousins.

Hard day’s work

It has been my observation that this disparity between country and city has only widened over the years. Poultry and dairy farming is difficult work that is 24/7/365, and most folks today aren’t interested in working a schedule with long hours, harsh environments, tough working conditions and low pay. As a result, there is a large immigrant workforce in the US that performs much of the hard manual labor on farms, fields, orchards, etc. Mental health concerns and treatment options are an even bigger issue for this migrant workforce.

Farmers are known for not complaining when it comes to aches and pains, especially when the aches and pains are mental. Personally, I tend to think this is even more pronounced in the immigrant workforce population. Farming is physically demanding, emotionally taxing and, depending on circumstances, terribly isolated and occasionally lonely. Farm life is often hard, even harder when you’re tired and lonely.

Throw in extreme weather, labor shortages, volatile markets and the stress of running a farm, and you have one of the most high-pressure and dangerous jobs in existence. No wonder studies indicate that farmer suicide rates are two to five times higher than the national average,^1,2 and mental health concerns like anxiety, financial worry, depression and burnout are so common in this demographic.

Who’s farming now?

Even though the average age of rural farmers is 58.1 years old,³ I don’t think that farmer suicide and mental health concerns are issues only for old white guys. Although male, Caucasian farmers make up most folks in farming in the US, the demographics of farmers are changing as more women, people of color, new farmers and younger individuals are increasingly represented in the workforce.^4,5

Case in point: 36% of all farm producers are female, 56% of all farms have at least one female decision maker, 11% of farmers are veterans and 25% are new farmers.⁶

I’m the first to praise life in rural America. However, speaking from experience, it can be lonely, secluded, isolated, detached and forlorn. Again, farmers are strongly reluctant to seek mental health care. Fear of stigma and discrimination is a significant consideration, as small rural communities offer little chance to keep private things private.^7,8 As so eloquently described in the lyrics to “Midnight Girl/Sunset Town,” “everyone knows when the neighbors cough” in these small, tight-knit communities.

In addition, most farmers have a tough persona and do not see mental health concerns as issues requiring outside assistance but more as a matter to endure and tough out on their own.

The ongoing HPAI outbreak means that increasing numbers of farmers and poultry company executives are facing difficult and overwhelming decisions about where to go from here after an HPAI break. But just because these decisions become more common as the outbreak drags on, it doesn’t lessen the mental anguish folks feel or the attention they may need.

Catch more flies with honey

At the nagging insistence of the assistant dean of what was then the College of Agriculture and Home Economics at the University of Arkansas, I took a human relations course in my last semester as an undergraduate. It was far from my favorite class but, in hindsight, one of the most valuable.

Why ask, pray tell?  Because we learned “human relations”: how to “relate” with “humans” (particularly in difficult situations), think before you speak, put yourself in someone else’s place and consider what someone may be going through. The class taught the value and the need of empathy, sensitivity, compassion, consideration, kindness, sympathy and tenderness for others, subjects not typically on the mind of the average 22-year-old.

I learned that you catch more flies with honey than you do vinegar. I always try to remember that, especially when dealing with folks in a tough spot.

That being said, a human relations class can teach you how to recognize when someone may be in trouble, but I’m not sure it can teach you how to respond. You may not know that until you are in the moment, and then you may just have to wing it and do the best you can. Each of us handles adversity differently, but I’m proof that the more you do it, the better you get at it.

Poultry growers dealing with an HPAI outbreak (or other disasters like a tornado, flood, hurricane, etc.) are in a tough spot physically, but the mental stress can be even more challenging and devastating. Those of us on the outside looking in must always be aware of this.

Be mindful of the pain and struggles these growers are dealing with and recognize the importance of “human relations.” Understand how valuable a little kindness and consideration can be to someone going through a hard time, even if it’s just holding someone’s hand at a kitchen table or sitting on a pickup tailgate listening to someone let off a little steam. It’s not always important what you say or do; simply being there, and caring enough to be there, is enough.

Peaches and barn cats

I offer a nugget of wisdom here that I can’t take credit for, but I do find valuable in dealing with HPAI. Donnie Smith, former president and CEO of Tyson Foods, has a unique perspective on corporate structure. I use that same unique outlook in everyday life to set my own moral compass and maintain my mental health.

Instead of seeing typical corporate pyramid structures with the stars at the top, Smith sees peach trees. And who are the stars on a peach tree? That’s right — the peaches. Smith sees himself at the bottom of the tree, as the roots that bring in resources and provide stability, support and structure for the stars.

Why will this same philosophy not work with everyday mental health? Farmers are a close, small, tight-knit community, much like peaches on a tree. If we all made it a priority to nourish and provide resources, stability, structure and direction to those peaches, couldn’t we lessen many of the mental health challenges facing rural America? The sooner the better. Otherwise, to paraphrase Cormac McCarthy, “By the time you figure it out, it will be too late.”

We will still be dealing with HPAI into the foreseeable future, but even if your flock is affected, don’t let that lead to mental despair or something worse. Don’t think that there isn’t anyone who will understand or listen, because there is.

Personally, I’ve had many long, weighty and meaningful conversations with a menagerie of barn cats over the years, and every cat has listened to what I had to say. An upside to these conversations is that you get to do most of the talking.

There’s nothing wrong with asking for help or offering help if you’re concerned about a friend or neighbor. If the stress of HPAI or even everyday farm chores is affecting your happiness or mental state, I humbly ask you to please consider talking things over with someone (or your barn cat). There are plenty of folks, including the suicide prevention hotline, 988. Plus, I have connections with a few barn cats that will listen to you.

But don’t wait too long to do it! I was not the biggest fan of the Coen brothers’ 2010 remake of “True Grit,” but it has grown on me over the years. The older version of Mattie has a final line that I think is appropriate here: “Time just gets away from us.” That is truer than most folks realize until it is too late.

Keep that in mind, friends, and remember that those of us in rural America can use all the peaches we can get!

References

1. Ringgenberg W, Peek‐Asa C, Donham K, Ramirez M. Trends and characteristics of occupational suicide and homicide in farmers and agriculture workers, 1992–2010. J Rural Health. 2018;34(3):246-253. doi:10.1111/jrh.12245.
2. Steelesmith DL, Fontanella CA, Campo JV, Bridge JA, Warren KL, Root ED. Contextual factors associated with county-level suicide rates in the United States, 1999 to 2016. JAMA Network Open. 2019;2(9):E1910936.
3. USDA-NASS. USDA releases 2022 Census of Agriculture data. News release. 2024. Available at: USDA releases 2022 Census of Agriculture data. Accessed: March 19, 2026.
4. Steelesmith DL, Fontanella CA, Campo JV, Bridge JA, Warren KL, Root ED. Contextual factors associated with
5. Reed DB, Claunch DT. Risk for depressive symptoms and suicide among U.S. primary farmers and family members: a systematic literature review. Workplace Health Saf. 2020;68(5):216507991988894-248. doi:10.1177/2165079919888940.
6. Ibid
7. Judd F, Jackson H, Fraser C, Murray G, Robins G, Komiti A. Understanding suicide in Australian farmers. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2006;41(1):1-10. doi:10.1007/s00127-005-0007-1.
8. Bjornestad A, Brown L, Weidauer L. The relationship between social support and depressive symptoms in midwestern farmers. J Rural Mental Health. 2019;43(4):109-117.

The post Peaches, honey and barn cats: Tackling HPAI mental health challenges appeared first on Modern Poultry.

Indonesia is continuing to explore export opportunities for poultry products in China and the Middle East, aiming to broaden market access, absorb domestic surplus, and support poultry farmers’ incomes. Deputy Agriculture Minister Sudaryono said the government is pursuing export expansion as part of efforts to strengthen the poultry sector and respond to growing global food demand.

The effort is part of a broader strategy to strengthen Indonesia’s poultry sector, which has already begun shipping products to overseas markets. In March 2026, the Agriculture Ministry dispatched 545 tons of poultry and poultry products to Singapore, Japan, and Timor-Leste, with a reported value of Rp18.2 billion.

Target markets and policy goals

According to the reports, China and the Middle East are being treated as priority destinations for Indonesian poultry exports because they offer significant market potential and could help ease pressure from domestic oversupply. The government sees export expansion as a way to create additional demand for domestic poultry production.

China is especially important because of its scale and demand for animal protein, while Middle Eastern markets remain attractive as the government looks to diversify export destinations. At the same time, the available evidence shows that Indonesia’s export base is still developing, with current shipments remaining modest in volume.

A sector in expansion

The export push follows other government initiatives aimed at supporting the agricultural sector and research-based innovation. ANTARA has also reported that the Agriculture Ministry and BRIN have strengthened cooperation on agricultural research and innovation to support food security and downstream development.

For poultry producers, access to new markets could help stabilize domestic prices and improve farm profitability over time. In the longer term, exports to China and the Middle East may become an important pillar of Indonesia’s international poultry growth strategy, although the market-opening process is still underway.

Brazil is the world’s largest soybean producer and exporter, making developments in its crop outlook particularly relevant for the global feed industry, where soybean meal remains one of the main protein sources used in poultry diets.

RaboResearch says the economic environment has become less supportive of rapid expansion. Lower soybean prices, tighter margins, higher financing costs, more restrictive credit conditions and uncertainty surrounding input markets have all weighed on investment decisions. Instead of expanding acreage, producers are increasingly focused on preserving cash, improving efficiency and managing risk.

The tighter financial environment is also increasing the amount of agricultural land being offered for sale or lease as some producers look to improve liquidity and rebalance their finances. According to the report, this is likely to slow further expansion through pasture conversion while encouraging more intensive use of land already in production.

The report does not suggest that Brazil’s soybean sector is entering a period of contraction. Planted area is forecast to remain close to current levels, while the 2026/27 crop is projected at 178 million metric tons. The slight decline from the record harvest achieved in 2025/26 reflects a return to more typical yield levels rather than a reduction in cultivated area.

Future production growth is expected to come from productivity gains, wider adoption of double-cropping systems and incremental improvements in operational efficiency. Rather than relying on new land, Brazil’s soybean industry is expected to produce more from farmland that is already under cultivation.

Because Brazil accounts for a substantial share of global soybean production and exports, a slower pace of output growth could contribute to a more balanced global supply and demand environment while influencing international trade flows. RaboResearch nevertheless expects the country to remain the world’s leading soybean exporter.

The outlook remains subject to weather risks. The current forecast does not include potential production losses associated with a possible El Niño event during the second half of 2026. Should adverse weather affect yields in key producing regions, the report says international soybean prices could come under upward pressure during the 2026/27 marketing year.

Thierry Binde leads a data training for Field Service Representatives.

Earl Pearce meets with a Field Service Officer during a farmer visit in Zambia.

The post The Infrastructure Behind Ten Years of Impact appeared first on World Poultry Foundation.

Summer heat stress severely harms broiler chickens, impairing production performance, gut health, immune function, and meat quality.

The article examines physiological effects (panting, reduced feed intake, metabolic changes), worsened by relative humidity and stocking density, with annual U.S. losses of $128-165 million.

The effects of heat stress resulting from high environmental temperatures continue to threaten poultry production in the United States and around the globe. Heat stress (HS) is a condition in which animals are unable to dissipate excess heat in their bodies to the surrounding environment, resulting in an increase in body temperature (Sugiharto, 2020). Poultry are homoeothermic; however, modern-day broiler and layer chickens are highly susceptible to HS due to their inefficiency in dissipating heat from their bodies because of feather cover and the lack of sweat glands. During HS, the heat load is higher than the chickens’ ability to regulate it. As a result, this can disturb normal physiological functioning, affect metabolism and cause behavioral changes, respiratory alkalosis and immune issues in poultry. These adverse effects can reduce nutrient absorption and energy metabolism, consequently reducing production and causing economic losses (Mangan and Siwek, 2024).

Heat stress can be described as acute (short and sudden periods of extremely high temperatures) or chronic (extended periods of increased environmental temperatures) (Kpomasse et al., 2021). Both types can lead to serious physiological problems, immune suppression and gut microbial imbalance (Sohail et al., 2012; Lara and Rostagno, 2013; Attia et al., 2018; Chang et al., 2020; Wasti et al., 2021). Because birds lack sweat glands, they resort to reducing their physical and behavioral activities (less walking, increased resting, wing spreading and dustbathing), reducing feed intake to reduce heat production as well as increasing their panting and water consumption to dissipate heat loss by evaporation (Renaudeau et al., 2012).

These detrimental effects reduce production performance, health and food safety, subsequently causing high morbidity, mortality and consequently leading to economic losses. It is reported that in the United States, an estimated $128 to $165 million is lost annually by the poultry industry due to heat stress effects (St-Pierre et al., 2003; He et al., 2018; Kim et al., 2021), making it essential to find mitigatory strategies that will help ameliorate the detrimental effects of heat stress.

Heat stress factors to consider

Climate factors

Seasonal variations in poultry production occur in relation to the cyclical changes and fluctuations in the output of poultry over different seasons of the year. Seasons characterized by high temperatures (late spring, summer, early fall) present a series of obstacles for poultry growers. Lara and Rostagno (2013) discussed many of the consequences resulting from HS, including diminished meat quality, poor feed efficiency, altered behavior and increased mortality. Heat stress further compounds the variety of problems that poultry growers must overcome (Apalowo et al., 2024). Lin et al. (2005) emphasized that broilers exhibit increased water usage to adapt to elevated temperatures. Genetic aspects of heat tolerance introduce an additional level of intricacy, necessitating meticulous breeding programs and selection processes to improve overall resistance to HS (Lara and Rostagno, 2013). Broiler production is significantly impacted by seasonal HS, which adversely affects health, performance and economic outcomes. Therefore, it is critical that integrators and growers implement comprehensive management strategies, wise selection of genetic stock and advanced ventilation/cooling systems (adequate wind speed, sprinkler cooling, evaporative cool cells) to ensure sustainability and profitability of broiler production.

Temperature plays a major role in flock performance. Birds are homeothermic animals, possessing the capability to regulate their internal body temperature within a relatively constant range. The ability to regulate temperature occurs quite effectively when the birds are kept within a thermoneutral zone, ranging from 21 to 28 °C (~70 to 82 °F) (Soliman and Safwat, 2020), allowing them to maintain a stable internal temperature. A fluctuation in the environmental temperature above the upper limits of the thermoneutral zone leads to heat stress (Purswell et al., 2012), which affects the overall performance of the bird and can result in mortality. Due to their genetic potential for a high level of production, fast-growing broilers with a substantial body weight are extremely susceptible to HS when environmental temperatures exceed the bird’s thermoneutral zone. While in the absence of fully developed thermoregulatory organs, neonatal chicks are vulnerable to cold stress. The optimal temperatures at which the bird can function most effectively are determined by its age, body weight, housing system, feeding level, relative humidity, air velocity and overall health (Olanrewaju et al., 2010). Chickens in high ambient temperature situations have greater energy requirements than those under thermoneutral conditions.

Relative humidity plays a key role in mortality losses during high environmental temperature periods. It is not high temperature alone that kills chickens in summer. It is the lethal combination of high temperatures and high humidity. Chickens can tolerate some fairly high temperatures if the humidity can be maintained at or below 70 percent. Heat dissipation is an additional aspect of heat management that is subject to the influence of several variables, in addition to heat production. Evaporative heat dissipation is a critical mechanism significantly influenced by the relative humidity of the surrounding environment (Apalowo et al., 2024).

Elevated humidity reduces evaporative heat loss. The effect of humidity on the thermal regulation response of broilers is affected by the age of the birds and air temperature (Lin et al., 2005). To optimize the thermal comfort and well-being of broilers under a variety of climatic situations, it is critical to control these climate variables.

Management factors

The adverse effects of heat stress on poultry production are a global concern. Chickens are particularly susceptible to environmental heat stress, owing to their physiological characteristics, which include a lack of sweat glands, panting to lose body heat and metabolic heat loads associated with rapid growth (Chowdhury et al., 2012; Vandana et al., 2021). While temperature has been the focus of most studies, both temperature and relative humidity of the in-house environment are major factors that cause thermal stress (Zhou et al., 2019).

Housing. Proper management of poultry housing is critical in reducing heat stress. Previous research has highlighted the importance of ensuring adequate temperature regulation and ventilation controls in environmentally-controlled housing for preventing HS (Saeed et al., 2019; Rostagno, 2020). There are multiple factors (outside conditions, stocking density and heat produced by the birds, internal environment, the roof and the degree of insulation, the process of fecal matter biodegradation, etc.) that contribute to the overall HS load on chickens, which is reflected in the internal environment of the poultry house. Addressing these factors to the extent possible is critical for maintaining a healthy environment for the birds and avoiding heat stress-related problems, particularly in near-market-age flocks. Achieving effective HS management in poultry production requires examination of the various heat generation sources present in the broiler house, as well as development of solutions to alleviate the detrimental effects these sources have on the birds (sprinklers, cool cell pads, fans and tunnel ventilation are common methods to reduce heat stress).

Water. It is critical to take into consideration the availability, temperature and quality of water when growing broilers, especially when HS is a factor. Water that contains harmful bacteria or other contaminants can affect the digestive system and weaken the immune system (Martinez et al., 2021). Birds drink more water when they are hot as a natural cooling mechanism, but any contaminants in the water might worsen health conditions and lower productivity. An increase in water temperature in the drinker lines may occur because of HS and high ambient temperatures (Yahav, 2009). Hot water in the drinker lines can cause birds to drink less water, which can make them even more dehydrated and increase the adverse effects of HS (Wilson and Edwards, 1952). Sufficient water is necessary for broilers to regulate their body temperature and keep their physiological functions operating smoothly. Lack of water intake because of HS can make it harder for nutrients to be absorbed, which can affect growth and performance. During periods of heat stress, it is vital to have an adequate water supply for drinking and cooling use and control the temperature of drinking water to offset detrimental HS impacts.

Welfare. Heat stress has detrimental effects on the welfare of broiler chickens. Heat stress can be divided into two categories depending on the duration and intensity of the stressor. Acute HS refers to a sudden increase in temperature and humidity over a short period of time while chronic HS occurs when there is a sustained period of high temperature and humidity. In poultry, HS can range from 27 C to 38 C (~81 F to 100 F) for one to 24 hours (acute), seven days (moderate), and more than seven days (chronic) (Vandana et al., 2021). Poultry are most susceptible to HS because of their inability to dissipate heat due to the presence of feathers and the lack of sweat glands (Zhang et al., 2017). Multiple studies have shown that HS can negatively affect the health, physiology and efficiency of broilers (Quinteiro-Filho et al., 2012; Hosseini-Vashan et al., 2020; Hu et al., 2022; Sun et al., 2023), laying hens (Deng et al., 2012), ducks (Oluwagbenga et al., 2022; Ma et al., 2014) and turkeys (Farghly et al., 2017). Broiler stocking density is often reduced throughout the warmer months to lessen HS and prevent overcrowding. Research has indicated that broilers are more likely to experience the effects of HS due to overcrowding, including decreased digestion and absorption, mucosal injury and compromised intestinal processes (Li et al., 2019). Intestinal mucosal injury in broilers is closely linked to the increase in corticosterone, which is caused by stress connected to high stocking density, including factors like competition for feed and water space, elevated ambient house temperature and increased litter moisture and ammonia levels (Law et al., 2019).

Meat quality

The broiler industry faces a serious challenge from HS each summer, which increases production costs and can severely damage the meat quality due to poultry’s susceptibility to heat because of their rapid metabolic rate and high growth potential (Nawaz et al., 2021). Metabolic changes occur in broilers reared in a HS environment, causing a considerable decrease in breast muscle size (Nawaz et al., 2021). In addition, HS is also responsible for the reduction in the protein content of muscles (Zhang et al., 2012). Both acute and chronic HS may cause a sharp decline in the metabolism of broilers, which in turn will induce serious complications regarding growth and performance, such as a change in meat color, a decline in muscle pH, water-holding capacity and juiciness of chicken meat (Song and King, 2015; Gonzalez-Rivas et al., 2020). Numerous studies have revealed that high ambient temperature causes oxidative stress by producing reactive oxygen species (ROS, Reactive Oxygen Species). These ROS have severe implications on skeletal muscle development, as they are responsible for lipid peroxidation in muscles (Altan et al., 2003; Kumar, 2012). Thus, understanding the underlying mechanisms, the causes and the effects of HS and strategies that can be put into place to control its effects can be beneficial in addressing global food insecurity issues. Figure 1 illustrates the physiological, metabolic and genetic changes amid HS and its relation to meat production and quality in chicken.

Heat stress can impact meat production in multiple ways (Nawaz et al., 2021) including:

• Reduction in feed intake and poor weight gain
• Increase in fat and reduction in protein contents of poultry meat
• Excessive production of ROS impairs meat quality
• Acidosis lowers water-holding capacity and damages meat texture
• Thyroid hormone imbalance under HS impairs skeletal muscle development
• Drip loss
• Development of pale, soft, and exudative meat
• Production of protein carbonyls

Heat stress is becoming more challenging for the poultry industry to overcome. Genotype selection in broilers for higher growth rates to meet the ever-increasing food requirement has made broilers increasingly vulnerable to HS. It is increasingly difficult for modern broilers to withstand HS, resulting in substantial economic losses to the industry, triggering increasing food security issues. Genetic selection for heat tolerance in poultry will be critical to addressing the negative implications of HS.

Effects of heat stress on gut health and the immune system

Gut health plays a vital role in ensuring efficient digestion and absorption of feed, water and electrolyte balance as well as in immune system development (Rostagno, 2020). Heat stress can alter the gut microbiota, therefore, leading to gut dysbiosis (an imbalance of the types of organisms present in the gut) and subsequently affects gut barrier functions (Brugaletta et al., 2022). Multiple studies have demonstrated the effects of HS on the gut microbiota composition and health of birds (Ringseis and Eder, 2022). The precise mechanisms underlying the effects of HS on the structure and function of the gut microbiota remain elusive (Kers et al., 2018), however, it is well-known that the intestinal tract is extremely sensitive to HS and all other forms of stress (Slawinska et al., 2019). Poultry production requires the birds to have an efficiently functioning intestinal tract because the intestinal tract greatly affects the birds’ overall well-being and productivity (Kadykalo et al., 2018). The integrity of the intestinal barrier is compromised by HS, leading to an increase in intestinal permeability.

Alhenaky et al. (2017) indicated that an increase in permeability and localized inflammation along the small intestine are significant consequences of HS on the intestinal barrier. Heat stress causes morphological alterations and mucosal damage in the intestines of chickens because it reduces blood flow, nutrient and oxygen availability, and feed intake (Quinteiro-Filho et al., 2017).

Knowing how HS impacts the immune response in chickens is the subject of much research. Multiple studies have shown that HS weakens the immune system of both broilers and laying hens (Apalowo et al., 2024). As previously mentioned, when birds experience severe heat stress, their bodies produce more ROS, which causes oxidative stress. Reactive oxygen species overproduction causes oxidative stress by taxing the bird’s immune system to the breaking point. The immune system responds by producing heat shock proteins (HSP). These HSP aid in the correct folding of other proteins, stop misfolded proteins from clumping together, and speed up the breakdown of damaged proteins, and they are necessary for cell production (Apalowo et al., 2024). The primary function of these HSP is to allow cells to deal with and recover from stress.

Concentrations of HSP tend to rise when HS is applied to broilers and laying hens. This suggests that their cells are responding by reducing the harmful effects of ROS (Prieto and Campo, 2010).

Future directions

Extensive research across numerous studies consistently demonstrates that HS negatively impacts various aspects of poultry production, including production performance. The poultry sector’s transition towards environmental sustainability and resource-efficient practices highlights the role that precision livestock farming (PLF, Precision Livestock Farming) practices will play in the future.

Resolving HS issues in broiler production in the future will require combining intelligent sensors and real-time data analytics along with other PLF practices that optimize environmental conditions for the comfort and performance of broilers. Environmental stewardship and sustainable practices are evolving as guiding principles of poultry production going forward. The environmental well-being and longevity of broiler production are enhanced by the implementation of sustainable measures such as optimized feed formulas and waste management systems (Boliko, 2019). In addition, future research into more climate-resilient genetics and more water-efficient broilers must continue and even increase. Addressing HS in poultry today requires a multifaceted, complex approach and is a journey that, from this point forward, will be built on precision agriculture techniques, genetic selection and sustainable practices.

References are available on request

By courtesy of The University of Tennessee Institute of Agriculture and UT Extension

The Turkey Industry Annual Report, which gathers perspectives from producers and veterinarians working in the US industry, ranked aMPV, lack of efficacious drugs and HPAI as the top three management concerns among 39 reported issues.[1] It marks the second year that aMPV has been highlighted as a top issue for the industry, after previously being the lowest-ranked concern.

A joint response to standout disease

Report author Steven Clark, DVM, veterinary technical service manager, turkeys, for Huvepharma, said he was not surprised by the trends, which reflect the significant disease pressures facing producers.

“aMPV continues to stand out not only for its clinical impact, but also for the speed of emergence and geographic spread, reinforcing the need for coordinated industry response,” Clark explained.

He said USDA approval for the emergency import of live vaccines used in Europe to tackle the disease was “amazing,” noting it bypassed the usual system, whereby products must be US-manufactured – a process that can often take 4 to 5 years.

“That was a substantial change and an important listen from USDA. It also required everybody to collaborate. It’s a big positive,” he said.

No change on new drugs, HPAI

The lack of drugs troubles the industry, and the report underscores that bacterial challenges are the issue prompting producers and veterinarians to seek a broader toolbox.

“The industry recognizes that the number of approved and available efficacious drugs is limited and is asking for the FDA to support and encourage poultry-labeled drug development and approvals,” Clark said.

Now in its fifth year, the US HPAI outbreak continues to affect turkey producers, with some having to undergo the strain of multiple depopulations as part of the government’s stamping-out policy. While vaccines remain under discussion, “we don’t see anything in the short term suggesting that those would be available for the industry,” Clark said.

Reovirus on the rise

Reovirus also ranked highly in the survey, with turkey reovirus digital flexor tendon rupture and turkey hepatitis reovirus appearing high on the list of the turkey industry’s worries. Clark noted that the virus could also be implicated in the more general category of “leg problems,” which ranked eighth in the survey.

“The pathogen continues to move, change and adapt in our industry and continues to cause health and welfare issues, with no approved vaccines available,” Clark said.

“Not only did it change and become adapted to the tendons, but after a while, we found that it was showing up as liver disease or hepatitis. Now, we’ve also had some recent diagnoses of reovirus that have been isolated in the brain.”

Reovirus problems are spread by contaminated farms and flocks, as well as by infected breeders and the number of poults and eggs moved around the country, Clark said. Limited turkey-specific diagnostics also make outbreaks more difficult to diagnose and control.

The report also showed that clostridial dermatitis and colibacillosis continue to be significant contributors to morbidity and production loss, although rankings shifted slightly year to year. Meanwhile, respiratory diseases made up five of the industry’s top 10 concerns.

“Overall, the findings highlight a continued shift toward respiratory and complex, multifactorial disease challenges, alongside ongoing gaps in available control tools,” explained Clark.

Collaboration key, but questions remain

Clark said the aim of the report is to guide research priorities, field strategies and industry dialogue, while supporting alignment across production, academia and regulators.

“It’s encouraging to see how the survey continues to support shared understanding and collaboration, especially during evolving health challenges. It’s an honor to be able to help by communicating that,” he said.

Looking ahead to next year, Clark expects to see movement on US-designed and manufactured vaccines against aMPV, as well as greater clarity for the turkey industry around HPAI.

“The industry needs more assistance and direction, particularly on the ability to effectively use vaccines,” he added. “Other questions are emerging about how sustainable the government’s HPAI stamp-out policy is. There’s still got to be some discussion on that.”

1 Clark, S., Froebel, L., Cremers, C., 2025. 2025 Turkey Industry Annual Report—Current Health Issues Facing the US Turkey Industry.

Editor’s note: Content on Modern Poultry’s Industry Insights pages is provided and/or commissioned by our sponsors, who assume full responsibility for its accuracy and compliance.

The post aMPV, HPAI and lack of drug options top turkey industry concerns appeared first on Modern Poultry.

Brazil faces the risk of a suspension of EU meat and poultry shipments if compliance with the bloc’s antimicrobial import requirements is not demonstrated by the 3 September 2026 deadline. On one side, the country is tightening export controls to show full compliance with EU antimicrobial rules; on the other, officials and industry stakeholders are debating whether restrictions on some feed additives, including ionophores such as monensin, could facilitate compliance discussions with the EU.

According to RaboResearch, the EU has already tightened its stance: as of January 28, 2022, antimicrobials may not be used for growth promotion or production enhancement in food-producing animals, and Brazil must prove compliance if it wants to remain eligible to export. Brazil has aligned more closely with EU rules in recent years, including a 2020 ban on several antimicrobials used as growth promoters and a broader April 2026 ban on the use of antimicrobials for that purpose. However, analysts say the challenge remains the ability to provide the level of auditability, traceability and documentary evidence expected by EU authorities.

The immediate response has been administrative. A July 1 circular from Brazil’s Agriculture Ministry requires EU-authorized facilities to use auditable control systems, maintain traceability, and keep documentary evidence proving that EU-bound batches meet bloc requirements. Reuters likewise reported that Brazil has adjusted export controls for meat and derivatives to avoid a suspension of shipments to the EU starting in September.

Rabobank warns that the possible fallout would be significant on both sides. The EU is Brazil’s second-largest beef market and its largest chicken market, importing about 211,000 tons of chicken and 92,000 tons of beef from Brazil, roughly 25% of total imports in both categories. If imports were suspended, EU beef and poultry prices would likely rise, while Brazilian exporters would face downward pressure at home and would need to redirect volumes to markets such as the UK, Mexico, the Middle East and Asia.

The broader feed-additive debate adds another layer. Brazilian producers warn that a nationwide restriction could raise costs and hurt competitiveness, especially in beef exports to China, where Brazil sold nearly 1.7 million tons worth about US$8.8 billion in 2025, compared with about 128,000 tons worth roughly US$1 billion to the EU. Fourteen livestock organizations have already urged the government not to impose a sweeping rule just to satisfy a single export market.

Finance professionals from across the poultry and egg industry gathered at the 2026 USPOULTRY Financial Management Seminar to gain insights into the leadership, economic and market trends shaping the future of the business. The program emphasized the evolving role of finance as a strategic driver of organizational success while examining market conditions, trade developments, and the long-term outlook for animal protein.

Kevin McDaniel, president and CEO of Wayne-Sanderson Farms, presented “A CEO’s Leadership Perspective of Poultry Financial Management,” emphasizing that finance should serve as a strategic partner rather than a back-office function, with a responsibility to help shape organizational strategy and influence decisions at every level. He encouraged finance professionals to provide clear, timely, decision-oriented insights, focus on the information that matters most and translate complex data into actionable recommendations. McDaniel stressed the importance of leadership through accountability, ownership of performance and forecasting, disciplined financial stewardship and complete transparency. Ultimately, he noted that finance plays a critical role in an organization’s success, emphasizing that sound judgment, courage and confident leadership are just as important as technical financial analysis.

An overview of U.S. trade and market trends was provided by Greg Tyler, president and CEO of the USA Poultry & Egg Export Council. Highlighting record broiler production in 2025, growing domestic demand for poultry protein and evolving global export opportunities despite softer overall export volumes, Tyler discussed increasing competition from global producers, expanding opportunities in key export markets and the potential trade implications of highly pathogenic avian influenza vaccination policies. He also addressed geopolitical risks, noting that disruptions to global shipping and fertilizer supplies could increase feed costs and impact poultry trade.

Christine McCracken, executive director of Animal Protein at Rabobank, examined the key factors shaping current and future animal protein markets, highlighting that changing consumer demand is expected to have the greatest near-term impact alongside modest production growth, persistent biosecurity risks and a more cautious investment environment. McCracken noted historically tight U.S. beef supplies driven by the smallest cattle herd in decades, while chicken production is expected to see modest growth and pork production remains relatively steady despite projected global declines in 2026. Looking toward 2030, she emphasized strong long-term global protein demand, with poultry and seafood leading volume growth, continued advances in technology and innovation improving efficiency, shifting trade patterns as China expands its role as a poultry exporter and ongoing influences from animal health, demographics, dietary trends and sustainability on the future of the protein industry.

USPOULTRY is registered with the National Association of State Boards of Accountancy as a sponsor of continuing professional education on the National Registry of CPE Sponsors. Up to 12 CPE credits may be awarded to seminar attendees. State boards of accountancy have final authority on the acceptance of individual courses for CPE credit.

Source: USPOULTRY press release

A seasonal drop in temperatures is putting pressure on egg production in Tanzania’s Iringa Region, with prices rising in several local markets. According to The Citizen, colder weather has reduced laying performance, tightening supply and pushing up both wholesale and retail prices.

The article points to a clear seasonal pattern: as temperatures fall, egg output declines and market availability becomes more limited. Local poultry farmers have reported lower production during the colder months, particularly where housing conditions, nutrition and flock management are not fully adapted to seasonal weather changes.

The price impact is evident in local markets. A tray of eggs is selling at higher-than-normal levels, while individual eggs are reaching 400–500 Tanzanian shillings each. The increase reflects the reduction in local egg supply caused by the seasonal decline in production.

For the poultry sector, the case illustrates how seasonal weather can influence egg production, particularly in systems with limited climate control. It also highlights the importance of adapting housing, nutrition and flock management practices to help reduce production losses during colder periods.

The company’s latest filing follows its successful listing on the Pakistan Stock Exchange (PSX) Main Board on May 8, 2026, after raising PKR 956 million in its initial public offering at a strike price of PKR 18 per share. PSX said the IPO was oversubscribed 5.2 times in the book-building phase, reflecting strong investor interest.

Expansion plan

According to the company’s announcement, the expansion programme includes rearing an additional flock of 100,000 layer birds, which is expected to start commercial egg production in November 2026. The company had already outlined IPO-funded growth plans in its prospectus, including investment in a liquid egg pasteurisation plant and poultry capacity expansion.

The additional flock is expected to increase egg production capacity once the birds reach laying maturity. once the birds reach laying maturity. Earlier pre-IPO reporting also described Wahdat as a vertically integrated layer-egg business with a strong presence in Pakistan’s packaged and enriched egg segment.

IPO background

The IPO received regulatory approval from the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) in April 2026, with PSX later confirming the listing and the final offer structure. PSX’s listing notice said trading began on the Main Board on May 8, 2026, with the company quoted in the Food & Personal Care Products sector. The exchange also stated that the company is considered Shariah compliant under the KMI All Share Islamic Index screening criteria.

Company profile

PSX’s company profile shows that Wahdat Poultry Farm was incorporated in Pakistan in 2019 and later converted into a public unlisted company in December 2025 before its market debut. Its principal activity includes poultry layer farming, egg and feed processing, marketing, branding, distribution, and related import-export business. The company operates under the “Farm Fresh Eggs” brand, which was highlighted in pre-listing investor materials and related coverage.

Why it matters

The new flock and value-added processing plans suggest Wahdat Poultry is trying to move beyond commodity egg production and strengthen margins through processed egg products. For Pakistan’s poultry sector, the listing is notable because it brings a vertically integrated layer business to the public market and signals investor appetite for agribusiness growth stories.

By the time the H5N1 D1.1 genotype was first detected in the Pacific Flyway during the autumn of 2024, it had probably already been circulating in North American wild birds before it was identified through routine surveillance. 

That is the conclusion of a new study published in Emerging Infectious Diseases, in which researchers reconstructed the early expansion of the virus using genomic data from wild birds across the United States. Their findings suggest that D1.1 became established during the summer of 2024 before it was identified through routine surveillance.  

D1.1 subsequently became the predominant clade 2.3.4.4b genotype detected in wild birds and domestic poultry in the United States. The genotype has also been responsible for several confirmed human infections in the country, including a fatal case reported in Louisiana.  

To investigate how the genotype emerged, the researchers combined wildlife surveillance carried out in Arizona with publicly available H5N1 genome sequences from across the United States. Their analyses estimated that the common ancestor of the circulating D1.1 viruses dates to late June or mid-July 2024, while divergence from its closest known ancestor likely occurred several months earlier. According to the authors, this timeline is consistent with a period of undetected circulation before the virus entered routine surveillance.

The genomic reconstruction also provides a clearer picture of how the virus spread across North America. Rather than moving directly between distant regions, D1.1 appears to have expanded mainly between neighbouring migratory bird flyways. The Pacific Flyway showed patterns consistent with an early source of viral expansion, followed by movement into the Central and Mississippi flyways before the genotype reached the Atlantic Flyway later in the 2024 autumn migration season. The analyses found only limited support for direct exchange between the Pacific and Atlantic flyways.  

The authors caution that flyways should not be interpreted as transmission routes in themselves. Instead, they provide a geographical framework for describing broad patterns of virus movement. Migration, surveillance intensity and sampling all contribute to the distribution observed in genomic datasets. Even so, the analyses consistently showed stronger links between neighbouring flyways than between those separated by greater distances.  

Wildlife surveillance in Arizona provided additional evidence consistent with the broader genomic reconstruction. H5N1-positive birds included several raptor species, among them great horned owls, barn owls and red-tailed hawks. Although incomplete genome coverage prevented definitive genotype assignment, the available sequence data placed these viruses within the same haemagglutinin lineage as D1.1.  

The researchers also examined mutations in the haemagglutinin (HA) protein. None of the Arizona samples carried the Q226L substitution, a mutation that experimental studies have associated with altered binding to human-type receptors. Nevertheless, the authors emphasise that continued genomic surveillance remains essential to detect genetic changes that could influence the biological characteristics of emerging H5N1 viruses.  

Beyond reconstructing the emergence of a single genotype, the study highlights a broader surveillance challenge. New HPAI variants may circulate for a period before they are recognised through routine monitoring. The authors conclude that earlier genomic surveillance, faster sequencing and closer integration of wildlife, poultry and mammalian surveillance within a One Health framework could improve the early detection of newly emerging H5N1 genotypes.  

Source: Scotch M., Faleye T.O.C., Urquidez-Negrete A., Varsani A., Fan A., Justice-Allen A. Rapid Expansion of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza A(H5N1) Clade 2.3.4.4b Genotype D1.1 Virus across Flyway Regions, North America, Fall 2024. Emerging Infectious Diseases, Vol. 32, No. 8, August 2026. 

To find answers, Justin Lowery, MS, and a team of researchers from North Carolina State University conducted a broiler research trial. The trial compared the impact of conventional and silvopasture production systems on the cecal microbiota of slow- and fast-growing broilers.

The results indicated that both genetics and environment shape the ceca of broilers.

“This means producers must carefully choose breeds that are most suited for specific environments,” Lowery said. “If you want a bird that performs very well in an outside environment, you need to pick that breed and vice versa for inside production.”

Lowery discussed his research at the 2025 Poultry Science Association annual meeting.

Measuring cecal content

“We hypothesized that we would see differences in the ceca between the slow-growing SASSO and fast-growing Ross 708 broilers and between floor-pen and silvopasture systems,” Lowery said.

The trial involved 500 SASSO broilers and 500 Ross 708 broilers placed separately in traditional floor-pen production and silvopasture environments. The silvopasture provided access to trees, grass and housing.

The Ross 708 birds were grown to 42 days of age, and the slower-growing SASSO birds grew to 56 days of age.

The cecal contents were aseptically collected at processing (after feather picking) from 10 birds per treatment, for a total of 40 birds. The ceca collections were stored in liquid hydrogen until microbiota analysis using 16S ribosomal RNA amplicon sequencing and other test methods.

The microbial analysis included determining alpha and beta diversity. Alpha diversity is the diversity of species within a sample, while beta diversity indicates how microbial communities differ between samples.

The researchers also examined evenness, which describes the distribution and relative abundance of species within a sample.

Microbiome diversity compared

“We saw higher overall evenness in cecal microbiota in the Sasso broilers than in the Ross birds,” said Lowery, adding, “There was also a trend toward higher microbiome evenness in floor pens than in silvopasture.

“We found a significant difference between microbial communities,” he continued. “What this shows is a more even distribution of microbes in the gut with a floor-pen system. Where there is a floor pen, birds don’t have outside access, so they aren’t getting many microbes into the gut. Additionally, SASSOs can maintain a more even distribution of microbes in the gut.”

Regarding beta diversity, the researchers observed that silvopasture birds exhibited more distinct microbial groups than birds on floor pens, regardless of broiler strain.

This was also true for breeds, with SASSO broilers displaying more microbial diversity than Ross 708 birds.

Match breed to rearing method

Altogether, trial results indicate that rearing slow-growing broilers in outdoor environments results in low microbial evenness and more distinct microbial groups than fast-growing broilers in floor pens.

“Silvopasture broilers have a more varied diet due to foraging outside and developing more dominant taxa in the gut from exposure to various microbes,” Lowery said.

“As trends continue toward alternative rearing environments, bird choice for each environment will become increasingly important,” he added. “Birds will need the ability to cope with a fluid environmental microbial load.

“If you want a bird to perform well in an outside environment, you need to pick a bird that can handle it,” Lowery concluded.

The post Genetics, environment shape broiler cecal microbiota appeared first on Modern Poultry.

• On Friday 9 October, the world will celebrate the 30th anniversary of World Egg Day.
• This year’s theme, ‘Protein that Powers and Protects’, highlights how the high-quality protein and vital nutrients found in eggs power the body and protect overall health.
• Since 1996, #WorldEggDay has been celebrated in many unique, innovative and exciting ways across the globe.

World Egg Day 2026 will be celebrated around the world on Friday 9 October. This will be its 30^th anniversary and the theme ‘Protein that Powers and Protects’ emphasises how the high-quality protein found in eggs supports health and wellbeing at every stage of life.

“Since 1996, World Egg Day has been celebrated by people, organisations and communities across the globe. Although it has grown in size and reach each year, its mission remains the same – to celebrate the fantastic benefits of the humble but mighty egg,” says Julian Madeley, Director General of the World Egg Organisation (WEO).

He adds, “This year the focus is on the high-quality protein found in eggs and how they help to power the body and protect overall health. As a key contributor to physical and cognitive development, it is vital that high-quality protein is accessible to the entire global population. That is what makes eggs so special – they are a source of essential nutrients and one of the highest-quality proteins that can be produced and enjoyed all around the world!”

WEO are also delighted to introduce ‘Eggwin’ – the official mascot for World Egg Day 2026. He will help communicate the value of egg protein in a way that appeals to audiences of all ages.

World Egg Day takes place every year on the second Friday of October. Last year saw over 100 countries worldwide celebrate, with many in-person events including a record-breaking omelette, meal donations, and competitive egg-based cooking.

To support the egg industry with celebrating, WEO has created an interactive toolkit. This includes the theme and key messages, social media graphics, GIFs, a 30^th anniversary video and inspiration from 2025’s activities.

All World Egg Day resources can be accessed on the WEO website: https://www.worldeggorganisation.com/our-work/world-egg-day/

Source: World Egg Organisation press release

Large poultry farms across the European Union are now subject to tighter environmental controls under the revised Industrial Emissions Directive (IED 2.0, Directive (EU) 2024/1785), which entered into force in August 2024. The updated law, which covers around 75,000 large industrial installations and intensive livestock farms in the EU, remains the main EU instrument to limit air, water and soil pollution and to drive greater efficiency in the use of energy and raw materials.

The revision aims to align industrial and livestock activities with the European Green Deal and the “zero pollution” ambition, by significantly cutting emissions of fine particulate matter, nitrogen oxides, non‑methane volatile organic compounds, ammonia and methane by 2050 compared to 2020 levels. According to the European Commission, full implementation of IED 2.0 ould reduce emissions of several key air pollutants by up to 40% by mid‑century, with stricter control of intensive pig and poultry production playing an important role in this reduction.

Scope and thresholds for poultry production

Under the revised directive, the coverage of intensive pig and poultry farms is extended and strengthened, while the focus remains on the largest and most polluting operators. For poultry, the political agreement endorsed by Parliament and Council sets livestock‑unit‑based thresholds that determine which farms fall within the scope of the directive. In practical terms, this means that the rules apply to large poultry units such as:

• broiler farms with more than 280 livestock units (LSU), roughly equivalent to 40,000 birds;

• laying hen farms with more than 300 LSU, corresponding to about 21,400 layers;

• mixed pig–poultry farms above 380 LSU in total.europarl.europa+1

Extensive and organic systems, as well as farms where animals are kept outdoors for a significant part of the year, are generally excluded from the IED regime and continue to be regulated under other EU and national environmental and animal production rules. The Commission emphasises that expanding coverage to a greater share of intensive pig and poultry units is “key to reducing nitrogen pollution” from agriculture.

Permitting, BAT requirements and implementation timeline

Poultry farms falling within the scope of IED 2.0 will be required to operate according to best available techniques (BAT), a well‑established concept already applied to other industrial sectors. This involves implementing technical and management measures to reduce emissions to air, water and land, improve manure and litter handling, limit odour, and increase efficiency in water, energy and resource use.

The revised directive streamlines permitting for covered livestock operations by introducing, for many cases, a lighter electronic registration regime instead of complex individual permits, while maintaining stringent environmental performance and emission monitoring requirements. National authorities are granted stronger powers to suspend non‑compliant operations and must impose dissuasive penalties, with fines reaching at least 3% of an operator’s EU turnover for the most serious infringements.

Legally, the directive entered into force in August 2024, and member states now have 22 months to transpose it into national law. Once transposed, national authorities will need to update or issue environmental permits in line with the new standards, with a gradual implementation that is expected to bring the largest intensive poultry units into full compliance between the early 2030s and 2032, in line with the revision cycles of sector‑specific BAT conclusions.

Transparency, citizen rights and the Industrial Emissions Portal

IED 2.0 also marks a step change in how citizens are protected from pollution generated by covered installations, including large poultry farms. For the first time in EU environmental law, individuals are explicitly granted the right to seek compensation for health damage caused by illegal pollution from regulated activities. At the same time, the transformation of the European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register into a new EU Industrial Emissions Portal will provide more comprehensive information on permits, emissions and environmental performance for each installation.

According to the European Parliament, the new rules are expected to deliver significant health and environmental benefits by improving public participation in permitting procedures and strengthening access to justice in cases of non‑compliance. Emission and performance data will be reported and published progressively, with the first data flows to the new portal expected from 2028 onwards.

Criticism and next steps: cattle farms still outside the scope

Despite the broader coverage of intensive pig and poultry farms, the revised directive has been criticised by NGOs and environmental groups for failing to more comprehensively address emissions from cattle farming, which remains outside the scope of IED 2.0. Initial proposals to include large cattle units were dropped during the negotiations, and the final text only commits the Commission to assess by 31 December 2026 whether further action on livestock emissions, including from cattle, is needed.

For the poultry sector, the main challenge will be to meet these more stringent environmental requirements while preserving economic viability and competitiveness, in a context of rising public scrutiny of animal production systems and growing demands for transparency along the supply chain. The regulatory framework set by IED 2.0 is a key milestone in this transition, pushing large operators to adopt more efficient and less polluting technologies and management practices, while leaving a significant share of EU livestock production – particularly extensive cattle systems and small‑scale poultry units – outside the directive’s industrial scope.

Australia has reported its first detection of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) H5N1 in a resident native bird species after the virus was identified in a greater crested tern (Thalasseus bergii) found near Robe, on South Australia’s Limestone Coast. 

The detection was announced by the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF), which described it as “a concerning development” because it is the first confirmed H5N1 detection involving a resident native bird species. Previous detections in Australia had been recorded in migratory seabirds. 

The latest DAFF update brings the total number of confirmed or presumed positive H5N1 detections to 14. All have involved wild seabirds, with the greater crested tern remaining the only resident Australian bird species found to be infected. 

Despite the latest finding, Australian authorities said there is no evidence of HPAI H5N1 in commercial poultry, and no unusual mass mortality events have been reported in wild birds linked to the current detections. 

Biosecurity authorities are continuing surveillance of wild bird populations, particularly in coastal areas, while urging poultry producers to maintain strict biosecurity measures and report any signs of disease without delay. 

According to DAFF, the current risk to the general public remains low.

Source: www.agriculture.gov.au 

See also:

Avian flu reaches all continents: Australia confirms second H5N1 case in wildlife

Australian poultry industry steps up H5N1 preparedness after seabird detections

Types A and B of aMPV, which affect both chickens and turkeys, have been spreading in the US since 2023, predominantly affecting the eastern states. An outbreak of type A was first detected in Mississippi in February 2025.

Previous research has pointed to a high prevalence in aMPV of diverse bacterial infections  and from unusual infection sites. This prompted a research team led by Autumn Gregg, DVM, a poultry resident at Mississippi State University, to investigate the infections appearing in the outbreak.

Gregg presented the study results at the 2026 International Poultry Science Forum.

E. coli dominates; other threats lurk

The research team examined 68 cases from broilers and broiler breeders submitted to the university’s laboratory. They confirmed aMPV using PCR, which detects genetic material, and ELISA testing, which detects proteins. The researchers then swabbed lesions at necropsy for bacteria and used mass spectrometry, a rapid and sensitive technique, to identify the species found.

They found secondary bacterial coinfections in 58 of the cases. There were 177 individual bacterial isolates, with Escherichia coli accounting for 116, or over 65%, of them. Gregg noted that this dominance was “not a big surprise,” given E. coli’s common association with aMPV.

Enterococcus cecorum was the second most seen, occurring in 15 cases. Gallibacterium anatis, Staphylococcus aureus, S. agnetis, S. chromogenes, Salmonella spp. and Pasteurella multocida were also isolated in numerous cases.

Salmonella coinfections cause concern

Gregg pointed to the significance of three types of Salmonella of public health concern that her team isolated in the study: Infantis, Enteritidis and Kentucky.

“It’s important to remember the immunosuppressant effect of aMPV and the effect that that can have on public health when we send these birds for processing,” she said.

Disease links to infection sites

The research team observed severe signs of disease in the study, including respiratory and neurological symptoms. Some signs differed between broilers and broiler breeders, with neurological presentations more common in broiler breeders. Lesions also differed, with yolk peritonitis being the most common in broiler breeders and leg lesions being the most common in broilers.

Broilers also had higher mortality rates than the broiler breeders.

Given the range of clinical findings, where the positive samples were swabbed from in the birds’ bodies provided food for thought, Gregg noted.

“We isolated E. coli and G. anatis from the brain, head bone and subcutaneous tissue. Although we can’t confirm this, we think that this is a major contributing factor to all the neurological signs that we were observing in the broiler breeders.”

Gregg also drew attention to the isolates of S. agnetis from the innermost layer of the skin and from the ovaries of birds, and of S. chromogenes in the same skin tissue.

“When bacteria are isolated from these locations, we traditionally think of these as being less pathogenic or things we don’t have to worry about as much. But in some cases, these were the primary isolates that we had from those birds, so they could be causing the clinical signs of severe disease. This is concerning, and it shifted our thinking about these bacteria,” she said.

Thinking beyond the obvious

The study suggested that producers would be wise to put aside preconceptions about tackling aMPV outbreaks, Gregg explained.

“Both common and emerging bacteria were isolated from birds infected with aMPV, so it’s important to remember that when treating these birds, we’re not just dealing with E. coli. We may have a lot of other bacteria present as well, which can complicate treatment,” she added.

The post Diverse secondary infections complicate Mississippi’s avian metapneumovirus picture appeared first on Modern Poultry.

MPI and the Department of Conservation (DOC) have activated enhanced surveillance and response arrangements, asking the public to report clusters of three or more sick or dead birds or marine mammals through the national exotic pest and disease hotline. Prior to this first confirmed case, DOC had already announced a precautionary vaccination programme against H5N1 for some of New Zealand’s most threatened birds, triggered by detections of the same virus in migratory seabirds in Australia.

The vaccination campaign focuses on around 300 core breeding birds from several critically endangered species, including iconic endemics such as kākāpō and takahē, to reduce the risk that an H5N1 incursion could wipe out small, vulnerable populations. Authorities emphasise that vaccination is being used as a targeted conservation tool for selected captive or intensively managed populations, not as a broad measure for wild birds or commercial flocks.

Since 2020, a variant of H5N1 belonging to clade 2.3.4.4b has caused unprecedented mortality in wild birds and repeated outbreaks in poultry across Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Americas, with spread to all seven continents following the first detections in Australia in 2026. The World Health Organization notes that human infections with H5N1 remain rare and are typically linked to close contact with infected birds or contaminated environments; the virus does not currently exhibit sustained human-to-human transmission, although sporadic zoonotic cases continue to be reported.

According to WHO, sporadic human infections with H5N1 continue to be reported, mainly following close contact with infected birds or contaminated environments. Sustained human-to-human transmission has not been observed. New Zealand officials have echoed this stance, saying the country’s geographic isolation bought time to prepare but that the arrival of H5N1 in a migratory seabird confirms it was “a matter of time”, and reinforcing that interagency plans across biosecurity, conservation and health sectors are in place.

The U.S. Poultry & Egg Association (USPOULTRY) is now accepting nominations for the 2027 Family Farm Environmental Excellence Award. This award recognizes family farmers who demonstrate exceptional environmental stewardship in poultry and egg production. Eligible nominees include family-owned poultry growers or egg producers who supply products to a USPOULTRY member or are independent producers that are USPOULTRY members. The deadline for nominations is Oct. 23.

In January 2026, the award was presented to five distinguished family farms in various regions of the country. Additionally, an award was presented to a State Poultry Association nominee. The winners were Will Anderson of Quad A Farms in Register, Ga., nominated by Claxton Poultry Farms; Sammy and Lorraine Hoover of Oak Ridge Farms in Versailles, Mo. Nominated by Cargill; The Kreider Family of Kreider Farms in Manheim, Penn.; and Steve and Crysti Hopkins of Riverview Farms in Louisa, Va., nominated by Cargill. Rick and Beth Weaver of B&R Poultry in Barclay, Md., nominated by the Delmarva Chicken Association, were the State Poultry Association winners.

Additionally, one family was recognized as a State Poultry Association Nomination finalist – Earl “Sonny” Woolf of Woolf Farms in Mayfield, Ky., nominated by the Kentucky Poultry Association.

Nominations for the 2027 award can be submitted by USPOULTRY members, affiliated state poultry associations, or individually by poultry and egg producers that raise poultry or produce eggs for   USPOULTRY members. Each integrator or egg processor may nominate two growers or producers per processing facility in each state where they operate. Previous winners must wait three years before reapplying.

“Poultry growers and egg producers keep environmental stewardship on their farms at the forefront of their sustainability efforts. The dedication embodied by our award winners is worthy of celebration,” said Bill Griffith, Peco Foods and USPOULTRY chair.

Finalists from each region will receive a trip that includes travel expenses and hotel accommodations for two nights to attend the 2027 International Poultry Expo, part of the International Production & Processing Expo (IPPE), in Atlanta, Ga. Winners and finalists will also receive a Family Farm Environmental Excellence Award sign to display on their farm, recognizing their accomplishment.

Regional winners will be announced at a special ceremony during the Animal Agriculture Sustainability Summit, held in conjunction with IPPE, on Jan. 26, 2027. Each regional winner will receive a $1,000 cash award and will be featured on USPOULTRY’s website, with the Association assisting in promoting the award in local, regional and national media.

The application and competition details are available on the USPOULTRY website at https://www.uspoultry.org/programs/environment/ffee-award/. You can also view some of the past Family Farm Environmental Excellence Award winners here.

For more information on the 2027 Family Farm Environmental Excellence Award competition, contact Paul Bredwell at pbredwell@uspoultry.org or by telephone at 678.514.1973.

Source: U.S. Poultry & Egg Association press release

Ghana’s “Nkoko Nkitinkiti” poultry revitalisation programme is a flagship intervention under the Feed Ghana agenda, designed to boost domestic poultry production and gradually reduce the country’s reliance on imported frozen chicken. Government communications describe the initiative as a livelihoods and food‑security measure: birds, starter feed and basic technical support are distributed to households and small farmers, with the aim of increasing egg and meat output, creating income opportunities and strengthening the local value chain.

Officials, including the Minister for Food and Agriculture Eric Opoku, have presented the first, household‑focused phase as broadly successful. In their narrative, strong uptake by beneficiaries and higher domestic supply have contributed to lower poultry prices in some markets and have laid the foundation for a second phase centred on larger commercial operations, which should further support job creation and import substitution. Projections linked to the programme suggest that, if fully implemented, it could cut the poultry import bill and generate savings in foreign exchange over time.

Industry stakeholders, however, offer a more cautious reading of early results. The Poultry Farmers Association of Ghana acknowledges the programme’s potential but warns that lower prices may also reflect weak demand and marketing challenges, rather than clear improvements in productivity or structural growth. The Association reports that in some communities birds distributed to households have been consumed rather than reared and reinvested, which they interpret as a sign that not all beneficiaries were adequately selected or prepared for poultry production. In this perspective, assumptions that every household is willing and able to keep poultry risk diluting the programme’s impact if they are not matched by training, follow‑up and realistic assessments of capacity.

Critical voices also focus on implementation gaps across different regions. Ranking Member on Parliament’s Food, Agriculture and Cocoa Affairs Committee, Dr. Isaac Yaw Opoku, has pointed to constituencies where the programme appears to be barely visible or not yet operational, and to cases in which beneficiaries received very few birds. He argues that before expanding Nkoko Nkitinkiti, government should undertake a structured review of the first phase, comparing planned targets and actual distributions, examining local variations and clarifying to what extent the initiative is influencing production volumes and trade flows in practice.

These differing perspectives converge on one key point: the strategic rationale for strengthening domestic poultry is widely shared, but the effectiveness of Nkoko Nkitinkiti will depend on how well design and implementation are aligned with field realities. A more targeted selection of beneficiaries, stronger technical training and public communication, and closer integration between household producers, commercial farms, processors and markets appear central to translating the programme’s ambitions into measurable and sustainable outcomes for Ghana’s poultry sector.

Wadi Group successfully held its 12^th Wadi Poultry Academy, bringing together poultry professionals and industry experts for four days of intensive learning, collaboration and professional development. Held from 11-14 May, the Academy continued Wadi Group’s long-standing commitment to advancing poultry knowledge and supporting the sustainable growth of Egypt’s poultry industry.  Through the continued collaboration between Wadi Group and Aviagen, participants gained access to both local expertise and global best practices covering the latest developments in poultry production, flock management, biosecurity, nutrition, quality assurance and performance optimization of their Ross^® 308 flocks.

As Aviagen^®’s Ross distributor in Egypt, Wadi Group has worked closely with Aviagen for decades to support poultry producers with world-class genetics, expertise and customer support. The Wadi Poultry Academy has become a cornerstone of this shared commitment, creating opportunities for current and future industry professionals to learn from experienced practitioners and leading experts while supporting succession planning and equipping the next generation with the knowledge and skills needed to drive the industry’s future success.

Puzant Dakessian, CEO, Poultry Sector, Wadi Group opened the event, reaffirming Wadi’s belief that education remains one of the strongest drivers of industry progress. He also highlighted Wadi’s ongoing growth plans despite the challenges facing the global poultry sector.

Since it was established, the Wadi Poultry Academy has evolved into one of the region’s most respected poultry education initiatives. The Academy reflects Wadi Group’s broader mission of fostering continuous learning, strengthening customer relationships and supporting the long-term success of the poultry sector.

The event concluded with a closing ceremony and certificate presentation recognizing participants’ commitment to professional development and industry excellence.

As Wadi Group looks toward the future, the company remains dedicated to sharing knowledge, promoting innovation and empowering poultry professionals with the tools needed to succeed in an increasingly dynamic industry.

“The success of the Wadi Poultry Academy reflects the strengt6h of our collaboration with Aviagen and our shared belief that education is essential for the future of poultry production. By bringing together global expertise and local experience, we are helping poultry professionals develop the knowledge and skills needed to meet the challenges of a rapidly evolving industry”, commented Puzant.

Kayhan Gursel, Senior Commercial Manager, TMENA, added, “The Wadi Poultry Academy has become an outstanding example of how collaboration and knowledge sharing can help drive industry progress. We are proud to continue working alongside Wadi Group to support poultry producers throughout Egypt and the wider region.”

Source: Aviagen press release

Avian cholera remains a significant threat to poultry and wild bird populations. Effective control relies on biosecurity, surveillance and appropriate carcass management measures.

Definition and causative agent

Avian cholera is caused by Pasteurella multocida, a bacterium that induces acute septicemia in birds. It affects domestic poultry and wild waterfowl, often leading to sudden, high mortality events. The pathogen’s persistence in soil and water makes eradication difficult, and migratory birds act as reservoirs, spreading infection across regions.

Pasteurella multocida: the pathogen behind avian cholera

Pasteurella multocida is a Gram-negative, non-motile coccobacillus belonging to the family Pasteurellaceae. It is widely recognized as an opportunistic pathogen in multiple animal species, including poultry, cattle, swine, and companion animals. In birds, it is the causative agent of avian cholera, producing acute septicemia that often results in sudden death.

Biological characteristics

• Morphology: Small, encapsulated bacterium that stains bipolar with Giemsa or Wright’s stain.
• Virulence factors: Capsule, lipopolysaccharides, and various toxins that enhance immune evasion and tissue damage.
• Survival: Can persist in soil and water for weeks, facilitating environmental transmission.

Symptoms and transmission routes

• Clinical signs: sudden death, depression, anorexia, ruffled feathers, cyanosis of combs/wattles.
• Transmission: direct bird-to-bird contact, contaminated feed/water, and exposure to infected carcasses.
• Reservoirs: migratory waterfowl are critical in maintaining and spreading the pathogen.

Control measures

Biosecurity

• Restrict farm access and disinfect vehicles/equipment.
• Provide clean feed and water.
• Quarantine new or returning birds before flock integration.

Surveillance

• Monitor mortality patterns and conduct bacteriological testing.
• Report outbreaks promptly to veterinary authorities.
• Extend surveillance to wild bird populations.

Carcass management

• Incineration or deep burial away from water sources.
• Avoid open disposal to prevent spreading to scavengers and wild birds.

Broader implications

Avian cholera outbreaks cause serious economic losses in poultry production, including trade restrictions and reduced food security. In wildlife, mass die-offs disrupt ecosystems and increase risks of cross-species transmission. The persistence of outbreaks in 2026 underscores the need for integrated control strategies combining farm-level biosecurity, regional surveillance, and wildlife health monitoring.

In summary, avian cholera continues to challenge poultry producers and conservationists worldwide. The most effective strategies remain biosecurity, surveillance, and carcass disposal, supported by international cooperation and a One Health approach that recognizes the interconnectedness of animal, human, and environmental health.

References

Merck Veterinary Manual. Fowl Cholera.

WOAH. Manual of Diagnostic Tests and Vaccines for Terrestrial Animals – Fowl Cholera

USGS. Avian Cholera in Wild Birds.

New artificial intelligence (AI)-based tools could help poultry producers detect Salmonella more quickly using smartphone images and bird activity patterns, according to a newly published study conducted at the University of Georgia. The project was funded by the USPOULTRY Foundation to advance innovative solutions for poultry health and food safety. The research is part of the Association’s comprehensive research program, which encompasses all phases of poultry and egg production and processing, and is made possible in part through proceeds from the International Poultry Expo, part of the International Production & Processing Expo.

Project # F-114: Salmonella detector: a mobile application for on-site broiler Salmonella infection diagnosis

(Dr. Guoming, Li, Department of Poultry Science and Institute for Artificial Intelligence, University of Georgia, Athens, Ga.)

A research team led by Dr. Guoming Li explored whether AI and computer vision technologies could provide a faster, more practical approach to monitoring Salmonella in poultry flocks. The project had two primary objectives. First, the team developed and evaluated an AI system capable of predicting the presence of Salmonella using smartphone images of poultry feces. Second, researchers investigated whether changes in bird activity and daily movement patterns, known as the Broiler Activity Index, could serve as early indicators of Salmonella infection.

The findings demonstrate the potential for AI and computer vision to provide rapid, low-cost tools for monitoring Salmonella on poultry farms, offering producers new opportunities to strengthen flock health management and biosecurity.

The research summary can be found on the USPOULTRY website. Information on other Association research may also be obtained by visiting the USPOULTRY website.

Source: U.S. Poultry & Egg Association press release

India’s poultry sector stands at a defining inflexion point. Powered by robust macroeconomic tailwinds, a young and aspirational population, and rapidly evolving consumer preferences, the industry is poised to double its scale within a decade. Yet, capturing this opportunity demands a fundamental reimagining, away from commodity-driven, price-competitive models toward technology-enabled, brand-differentiated, and sustainability-compliant enterprises.

This article synthesises the key themes presented by the author at the VIV Workshop (April 2026): India’s growth trajectory, global market dynamics, shifting consumer behaviours, digital and sustainable innovations, decommodification strategies, the 5C framework for global competitiveness, and the imperative of collaborative ecosystem building.

SECTION 1 | INDIA’S ECONOMIC GROWTH STORY

India has emerged as one of the most dynamic economies of the 21st century. Between 2014 and 2024, the country sustained an average GDP growth rate of 7.6% (excluding the COVID-19 contraction of −6.6% in FY21), firmly establishing itself as the world’s fastest-growing major economy. The V-shaped recovery — with 8.7% growth in FY22 — underscored the structural resilience of the Indian economy. By 2025, India’s GDP crossed USD 4.15 trillion, making it the fourth-largest economy globally, with a stated national target of USD 5 trillion by 2027–28.

For agribusiness and the poultry sector in particular, these macroeconomic fundamentals are not merely statistical headlines; they are the bedrock of a multi-decade demand expansion story. Six drivers converge to make India poultry’s single largest opportunity:

• A population of 1.45 billion — the world’s second-largest consumer market
• Rising disposable incomes, with per capita income at ₹1.97 lakh (FY24, nominal)
• Urbanisation at 36% and climbing at over 1% per annum
• A dietary shift toward protein-rich foods across all age groups
• A young demographic profile, with 65% of the population under 35 years of age
• Projected agri-food sector CAGR of 8–9% through 2025–30

“The question is no longer whether Indian poultry will grow — it is whether India’s poultry businesses are prepared to capture that growth.”

SECTION 2 | GLOBAL & INDIAN POULTRY MARKET

The global poultry market, valued at approximately USD 490 billion in 2024, is projected to grow at a CAGR of 8.2% through 2030. Global broiler meat production stands at 130 million metric tonnes (MMT), while global egg production reaches 83 MMT annually.

India’s Market Position
India occupies a position of growing strategic significance in global poultry:

• Ranked 4th globally in broiler meat production
• Ranked 3rd globally in egg production
• The domestic poultry industry is valued at over USD 27 billion, projected to reach USD 34 billion by 2030
• Annual capacity: over 6,500 million birds slaughtered, 42,000+ registered hatcheries, and 50 million+ livelihoods supported
• 10-year egg export CAGR: from 210,000 MT (2015–16) to 452,000 MT (2024–25), with export value growing from USD 62M to USD 168M

India currently ranks fifth globally in egg exports, with key markets in the Gulf and Southeast Asia. The Netherlands, Turkey, and Poland lead the global export rankings, but India’s cost competitiveness and scale position it for a rapid ascent — particularly as geopolitical shifts redirect trade flows across the Middle East.

Section 3  |  CONSUMPTION PATTERNS & THE NEW INDIAN CONSUMER

India’s per capita poultry consumption tells a story of significant opportunity. At 6.2 kg per person per year, India remains approximately 2.5 times below the world average of 15 kg. This is not a sign of market saturation — it is a measure of addressable headroom. China bridged a comparable gap within 15 years; India is narrowing the gap at approximately 0.4 kg per year, and on its current trajectory, could reach 10 kg per capita by 2035, effectively doubling the market.

Similarly, per capita egg consumption grew at approximately 5% CAGR over 14 years. India’s national target of 180 eggs per capita by 2030 (DAHD) would require annual production of 260 billion eggs — necessitating a 30%+ capacity addition across the value chain.

The Six Drivers of Consumer Behaviour Shift

Six structural forces are reshaping the demand landscape for poultry products in India:

• Urbanisation: Urban consumers spend 3x more on poultry than rural counterparts. Nuclear families prefer convenience formats, and quick commerce platforms (Blinkit, Swiggy Instamart) are driving impulse purchase behaviour.
• Health Consciousness: Protein awareness surged 40% post-COVID. Poultry, perceived as lean protein, is benefiting from a decisive shift away from red meat. Demand for antibiotic-free (ABF) and cage-free products is growing rapidly.
• Rising Incomes: India’s middle class is expected to double by 2030. Willingness to pay premium for safe, branded poultry is increasing, with per capita food spend rising 8–10% annually.
• Digital Commerce: The online meat category grew 4x post-2020. D2C brands such as Licious and FreshToHome are scaling, with social media actively influencing protein diet choices.
• Ready-to-Cook / Ready-to-Eat: Marinated and value-added formats are growing at 20%+ CAGR, driven by busy urban households and the QSR boom (McDonald’s, KFC, Popeyes).
• Sustainability Concern: Gen Z consumers demand ethical sourcing and transparent supply chains. Organic and free-range products command a 40–60% price premium, with packaging and traceability becoming active purchase criteria.

The India 1 / 2 / 3 Consumer Segmentation Framework

A structured approach to consumer segmentation is essential for any serious market participant. The three-tier India 1/2/3 framework maps poultry demand across distinct consumer strata:

The strategic implication is clear: India 1 drives margin through premiumisation; India 2 drives volume through branded affordability; India 3 represents the opportunity for low-cost nutritional access at scale. A winning poultry enterprise must design differentiated product lines for all three strata — simultaneously.

SECTION 4 | DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY, SUSTAINABILITY & ESG

Digital Technology & Automation

The convergence of IoT, artificial intelligence, and automation is fundamentally restructuring the economics of poultry farming. Smart shed management systems — combining environmental sensors, automated feeding and drinking lines, and real-time health monitoring — are delivering measurable performance improvements:

Blockchain-based farm-to-fork traceability is transitioning from a differentiator to a prerequisite for institutional buyers and export markets. AI-driven disease prediction models are enabling early intervention, dramatically reducing flock losses. Robotics in processing is improving throughput consistency and food safety compliance.

Sustainability & ESG Imperatives

Sustainability in poultry operations is no longer a corporate social responsibility (CSR) exercise — it is a market access and cost management imperative. The following table maps key ESG issues, their priority levels, and their business rationale for Indian poultry operators:

SECTION 5 | DECOMMODIFICATION & GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS

The Value Ladder: From Commodity to Experience

The single most important strategic transition for Indian poultry businesses is decommodification. Commodity pricing — driven by live bird transactions, unnamed farm output, and wet market sales — destroys value and compresses margins to the bone. The escape route is a deliberate, upward migration along the value ladder:

The shift from commodity to experience is not merely cosmetic — it involves rethinking the entire business model: from price-per-kg to value-per-meal, from nameless farm output to QR-traceable farm-to-fork stories, from wet market transactions to subscription-based D2C relationships.

The 5C Framework for Global Competitiveness

For businesses aspiring to compete in global markets, the 5C Framework provides a strategic roadmap. Winning on all five dimensions is not a choice — it is the minimum requirement for enduring global market presence:

“Mastering the 5Cs is not a choice — it is the minimum requirement for enduring global market presence.”

SECTION 6 | COLLABORATION OVER COMPETITION

One of the most counterintuitive — yet empirically well-supported — insights for the Indian poultry sector concerns the limits of competitive rivalry. Pure competition, characterised by price wars and fragmented ecosystems, systematically weakens the industry’s collective capacity to grow, innovate, and withstand systemic shocks.

The costs of unchecked competition are measurable and severe: price-driven rivalry erodes reinvestment capacity; parallel infrastructure inflates operational costs through resource duplication; fragmented R&D prevents any single player from absorbing the full cost of technology adoption; incompatible cold chains block traceability at scale; and when disease outbreaks (such as Avian Influenza) demand coordinated industry responses, siloed players cannot mount effective collective action.

The Strategic Balance Imperative

The answer is not the absence of competition — it is strategic balance. The principle is straightforward:

• Compete where differentiation matters: quality, innovation, brand, and consumer experience.
• Collaborate where collective progress creates value: biosecurity protocols, cold chain infrastructure, industry standards, and policy advocacy.
• Share infrastructure where it makes strategic sense: cluster-based development, shared logistics hubs, joint cold storage facilities.
• Co-invest in public goods: R&D, veterinary and technical training, industry-wide data platforms.
• Advocate collectively: for export policy, farmer welfare schemes, and regulatory harmonisation with global standards.

“Compete where differentiation matters; collaborate where collective progress creates value.”

India’s aspiration to become a global poultry export powerhouse will not be realised by individual enterprise heroics. It will be built through ecosystem leadership — the ability of diverse sector participants to create shared infrastructure, shared standards, and shared ambition.

CONCLUSION | KEY TAKEAWAYS

The reimagining of Indian poultry is not a singular event — it is an ongoing strategic transformation. Six themes crystallise the imperative for the next generation of poultry leaders:

“The future of Indian poultry belongs to those who think like technologists, act like entrepreneurs, and build like ecosystem leaders.”

More about the Author: Click here

The post Reimagining Poultry: Technology, Sustainability & Next-Generation Business Models appeared first on Poultry TRENDS.

The Philippines has reported a new outbreak of highly pathogenic H5N1 bird flu among backyard birds in Oriental Mindoro, according to the World Organisation for Animal Health and Reuters. The event was detected in a flock of 39 birds in the town of Capalan, as reported by WOAH through the Philippine authorities.

The case is relevant for the poultry sector because backyard flocks often sit at the interface between domestic birds, wildlife, and informal movement of animals, making surveillance and containment more difficult. So far, the available reports only confirm the outbreak notification and do not indicate any spillover to commercial farms or any human infections linked to this event.

From a public health perspective, the situation does not change the broader global risk profile, but it does reinforce the need for monitoring and biosecurity. WHO notes that avian influenza viruses do not spread easily from person to person, although they can cause severe disease and continue to require close surveillance. FAO likewise describes avian influenza as a highly contagious disease with zoonotic potential, underscoring the importance of rapid reporting and preventive control.

This outbreak adds to the continuing circulation of avian influenza in different regions of the world. For producers and veterinarians, the key message is that backyard holdings remain a sensitive point in early detection and disease control, especially where biosecurity is inconsistent. Rapid notification, movement controls, and separation between backyard and commercial poultry systems remain the most important practical measures.

For the poultry industry, the new policy marks an important shift. Alongside measures to improve disease preparedness and support investment, the Commission has confirmed that targeted revisions of animal welfare legislation for laying hens and broilers will be prepared on the basis of scientific evidence, with appropriate transition periods and financial support.

The Commission acknowledges the economic importance of livestock production across the European Union. The sector accounts for around 40% of the EU’s agricultural added value, generates approximately €400 billion in annual turnover and provides employment for about 7 million people on 4 million farms. At the same time, it recognises that producers are operating in an increasingly challenging environment, shaped by rising production costs, animal disease outbreaks, changing market conditions and growing expectations regarding environmental performance and animal welfare.

A central element of the strategy is improving preparedness for future crises. The Commission plans to strengthen risk-management tools, explore new insurance and reinsurance schemes, and help Member States improve disease prevention, early detection and response. Investments to increase climate resilience and reduce dependence on imported inputs also form part of the package.

Improving competitiveness is another key objective. The Commission intends to facilitate investment in innovation, circular economy initiatives and biomass valorisation, while exploring ways to improve access to finance, including support for the transition to cage-free systems. It also plans to strengthen international competitiveness through greater reciprocity in trade, better alignment of production standards where appropriate, and expanded agri-food diplomacy to create new market opportunities.

The sustainability chapter adopts a tailored approach that reflects the diversity of European livestock systems. Alongside future revisions of animal welfare legislation for laying hens, broilers and pigs, the Commission will develop harmonised methods for calculating farm-level livestock emissions, promote better nutrient management and encourage more efficient use of natural resources.

The strategy also highlights the importance of maintaining livestock production across Europe’s rural regions. Planned initiatives include support for locally integrated livestock value chains, measures for vulnerable farming areas and the development of a roadmap for low-capacity and mobile slaughterhouses aimed at reducing animal transport while strengthening regional economies.

Another objective is to increase the visibility of European livestock production. The Commission intends to reinforce EU origin labelling, introduce a European Excellence scheme recognising higher production standards and sustainability, and further promote EU livestock products through dedicated promotion policies and quality schemes.

Alongside the Livestock Strategy, the Commission has introduced a Protein Action Plan to strengthen Europe’s self-sufficiency in feed protein. In 2025, only 25% of the protein derived from oilseeds and protein crops used in the EU originated from European production. The objective is to increase this share to 35% by 2035 by supporting protein crop cultivation, encouraging innovation and strengthening links between food, feed, energy and industrial value chains.

The package has been welcomed by the European Association of Poultry Processors and Poultry Trade (AVEC), which described it as an important change in the way livestock is viewed within EU policy.

According to Birthe Steenberg, AVEC Secretary General, the new approach recognises livestock not only for its production but also for its contribution to food security, resilience and Europe’s strategic autonomy. The association also welcomed the stronger emphasis on disease prevention through surveillance, vaccination, regionalisation and improved early-warning systems, together with the Commission’s commitment to simplify legislation, strengthen circularity and reinforce origin labelling and reciprocity in international trade.

At the same time, AVEC stressed that implementation will determine the strategy’s success. While supporting the Commission’s intention to present targeted revisions of animal welfare legislation for laying hens and broilers by the end of 2026, the association emphasised that future requirements should be based on sound science, robust impact assessments, workable transition periods and financial support that enables producers to invest.

Among the measures AVEC considers particularly important for the poultry meat sector are EU/non-EU origin labelling for products containing poultry meat, simplified permitting procedures, stronger biosecurity and vaccination policies, and genuine reciprocity for imported products.

For the poultry sector, the publication of the strategy marks the beginning rather than the end of the process. Its practical impact will depend on how the proposed measures are translated into legislation, funding and practical support over the coming years. AVEC has made clear that science-based policymaking, workable legislation and fair competition will be essential if the strategy is to deliver lasting benefits for European poultry producers.

During his presentation at the 2025 Poultry Science Association annual meeting, he emphasized that a three-pronged approach is needed alongside a vaccine program to address HPAI, including biosecurity, surveillance and stamping out.

He pointed out that not all HPAI viruses are the same. There are three virus lineages that have persisted in certain regions.

Global control of HPAI has relied on three core strategies:

• Biosecurity to keep the virus out of naïve flocks and contain it if infection occurs.
• Surveillance to determine the infection status of flocks and support a country’s disease-free status.
• Stamping out, which includes a suite of processes: diagnosis, quarantine with movement controls, population disposal, cleaning and disinfection, and repopulation.

“These strategies work very, very effectively,” Swayne explained, citing a recent US outbreak that was quickly stopped using these methods alone.

However, the challenge today comes from certain strains that spill over from wild birds into poultry populations. Adding a layer of complication, these viruses have become more infectious at lower doses, especially in ducks and turkeys. “Susceptibility is species dependent and dose connected, with ducks requiring the lowest amount of virus to become infected,” Swayne said.

This increased transmissibility explains why traditional control methods sometimes struggle and why vaccinations are used when elimination is difficult.

Vaccination against HPAI

Swayne pointed out that vaccination works primarily by reducing transmission, not by completely blocking infection in every case.

When transmission drops below a critical level, outbreaks decline, Swayne explained. “Vaccination decreases the number of susceptible individuals, slowing and reducing the spread,” Swayne said.

“And if poultry get that infection, they shed a lot less virus, reducing farm contamination, exposure and, therefore, infections. Additionally, you have the prevention of disease and death in poultry. This reduces environmental contamination, reduces transmission within a premises and reduces spread between the barns.  Vaccinations maintain growers’ livelihoods and food security for consumers,” he explained.

Debunking common vaccination myths

Swayne addressed four misconceptions about HPAI vaccination:

Myth #1: There are no effective vaccines for US poultry.
Swayne noted that five licensed vaccines have demonstrated protection against the current HPAI strains.

Myth #2: Vaccination leads to widespread silent infections.
“With good batches of vaccines, silent infections are rare in properly vaccinated poultry,” he said.

Myth #3: Vaccines must provide sterilizing immunity.
Swayne noted that some have said sterilizing immunity is a myth perpetuated by some experimental studies that are improperly conducted and interpreted.

Myth #4: All poultry should be vaccinated.
“That’s definitely a myth,” he emphasized. Vaccination should be risk-based, targeting the most susceptible species, production types and geographic areas.

Global use of vaccination

Primarily to protect food supplies and reduce human exposure, global HPAI vaccine use is common in countries where HPAI has become endemic, including China, Egypt, Indonesia and Vietnam.

Swayne noted that France is the first high-income country to implement large-scale vaccination that is focused on ducks. “After vaccinating more than 140 million birds annually, France saw a 95% reduction in HPAI cases, dropping from hundreds of outbreaks to just 10 in one season. Most infections occurred in birds that were not fully vaccinated.”

Surveillance essential

He emphasized that vaccination does not replace surveillance. “Effective programs rely on risk-based monitoring, especially testing dead or sick birds. Random sampling of healthy, vaccinated flocks often fails because immunity can mask infection.”

Swayne cautioned that some advanced surveillance tools, such as DIVA (differentiating infected from vaccinated animals) testing, have shown “very limited value” and can be costly and confusing without follow-up testing.

Final takeaway

Vaccination is not a silver bullet, but when used correctly, it is a powerful addition to HPAI control, Swayne emphasized. Successfully combating HPAI depends on high-quality vaccines, proper dosing, ongoing monitoring and strong surveillance systems. As he noted, vaccination works best as part of a control system, not as a replacement for biosecurity or surveillance.

The post Swayne: HPAI vaccination is effective but not a silver bullet appeared first on Modern Poultry.

The European Feed Manufacturers’ Federation (FEFAC) welcomes the European Commission’s adoption of the EU Protein Plan and the EU Livestock Strategy, as well as the very detailed and concrete actions list, describing the package as a timely and constructive response to the strategic vulnerabilities facing Europe’s feed and food chains. The Protein Plan, which has the most focus on feed, sets out a community-wide benchmark to lift the share of EU-grown oilseeds and protein crops used in domestic feed to 35% by 2035, up from around a quarter today, alongside measures to support farmers, strengthen protein crop value chains and diversify import sources. FEFAC notes that the sector’s exposure runs wider than protein crops alone, as Europe remains even more import-dependent on essential feed additives such as vitamins and amino acids, with a small number of non-EU suppliers accounting for an outsized share of global capacity.

The adoption of the European Commission Action Plans takes place in the background of field visits hosted jointly by FEFAC, FEFANA, DVT and EUROFAC on 6 July, during which European Commissioner for Agriculture & Food, Mr Christophe Hansen, toured two feed industry sites: the DSM-Firmenich vitamin production facility in Grenzach (Germany) and the LORIAL feed mill in Molsheim (France). The visit gave the Commissioner a first-hand view of both the industrial complexity of feed additive production and the practical steps the sector is already taking to diversify protein sourcing through amino acid-based formulation. The DSM-Firmenich’s vitamin production visit underscores why feed additive supply deserves the same strategic attention as protein crops, while LORIAL’s amino acid-based feed formulation shows how reformulation can already reduce dependence on imported soy without compromising animal nutrition or farmer competitiveness.

“We strongly welcome the launch of the EU Protein Plan and support the development of the new EU Livestock Strategy. EU feed manufacturers have long been committed to making the best possible use of locally available vegetable protein sources. At the same time, we must recognise that the EU will continue to rely on imports of high-protein soy from third countries in the years ahead. It is therefore essential to maintain the production of biodiesel and bioethanol, as these sectors provide valuable high-protein vegetable feed co-products, including rapeseed meal, sunflower meal, maize products and other cereal-based feed materials. Feed suppliers are key drivers of both the competitiveness and sustainability of Europe’s livestock sector, and we welcome targeted measures in the future Livestock Strategy that encourage farmers to adopt low-footprint, circular feed solutions.”

Looking ahead, FEFAC reiterates its readiness to contribute to the implementation of the Protein Plan and the Livestock Strategy, including through the forthcoming EU protein dialogues with Member States, and to support the research, innovation and investment needed to scale up EU-sourced feed inputs across both supply and demand.

Source: FEFAC press release

Among the 32 Innov’Space Award winners, several technologies are either specifically developed for poultry production or have applications in poultry farming alongside other livestock sectors. Together, they reflect current priorities in egg production, farm automation, biosecurity, nutrition and flock management.

One of the innovations developed specifically for egg production is Ovoclear, which received a one-star Innov’Space Award for Vencomatic. Integrated directly into the egg handling line, the automated system removes feathers from eggs after leak detection, replacing a task that has traditionally been carried out manually. According to the company, Ovoclear removes up to 90% of feathers, reduces conveyor belt interference by at least 80% and processes up to 45,000 table or hatching eggs per hour, helping increase the proportion of first-grade eggs while reducing manual labour.

Automation is also at the centre of Sharky 430, the one-star award-winning innovation from Big Dutchman. Developed for rearing and laying aviary systems, the autonomous cleaning robot is designed to clean multiple tiers, nests and troughs without the need for guide rails. Powered by batteries, it can operate continuously, including overnight, while programmable cleaning cycles and remote status notifications support routine hygiene management.

The jury also recognised Roll-Bouch, developed by MCJ Innov, with a one-star award. Designed for poultry farms, the electrically powered wheelbarrow distributes straw pellets during litter renewal through an adjustable dispensing system. Its gravity-fed hopper is designed to empty completely without manual intervention, helping reduce the physical workload associated with re-bedding poultry houses.

Another poultry-specific innovation receiving a one-star award is Securitor Flash from CCPA Groupe. Administered through drinking water, the liquid nutritional solution combines aromatic compounds with garlic essential oil to support digestive balance by acting on communication mechanisms within the intestinal microbiota involved in the organisation of bacterial communities and biofilm formation. According to the company, trials conducted under laboratory conditions and on commercial farms demonstrated improvements in final body weight and feed conversion ratio, with up to a 10% increase in margin per bird.

The official Innov’Space selection also includes AviPro™ Salmonella Duo from Elanco, recognised by the jury as a new vaccination solution for poultry.

Several additional award-winning technologies have broader applications across livestock production while also being relevant to poultry farming.

Among them, AGRIPROTECH received a two-star Innov’Space Award for LazerTrac® LZT1000-S, an autonomous laser bird deterrent system equipped with artificial intelligence. Combining a 4K camera with AI-based bird and wildlife recognition, the system identifies target species and automatically adapts laser movements according to observed behaviour. With an operating range exceeding 400 metres, it is designed for long-term bird deterrence across large outdoor areas.

Biosecurity is represented by SANIHOUSE, a one-star award-winning system developed by Maison Bleue and Innovlap. The insulated facility simplifies fallen stock management through automated gates and a motorised platform that transfers rendering bins between the farm and collection areas without requiring collection vehicles to enter the farm perimeter, facilitating compliance with health regulations while simplifying deadstock management.

Foodbasket7, developed by IFIP, is another award-winning innovation with relevance across animal production sectors. The free web-based platform evaluates both the nutritional quality and the environmental impact of complete weekly diets by assessing nutrient intake alongside indicators such as greenhouse gas emissions, water consumption and land use. Rather than evaluating individual foods, it analyses the balance of an entire diet and provides a scientific framework for assessing the contribution of animal-derived foods to healthy, diverse and sustainable diets.

According to Didier Lucas, Chairman of SPACE, the diversity of the award-winning innovations reflects both the variety of exhibitors and the industry’s capacity for innovation. Across all livestock sectors, the 2026 awards highlight three major trends: the growing integration of digital technologies and artificial intelligence, continued advances in agricultural machinery, and increasing attention to animal health and biosecurity.

Visitors will have the opportunity to discover all the Innov’Space 2026 award-winning innovations during SPACE, which will take place in Rennes, France, from 15 to 17 September 2026.

Russia’s poultry industry is facing growing economic pressure as producers contend with rising production costs, expensive financing and changing market dynamics, prompting many companies to focus on efficiency rather than expansion.

Industry experts say profitability has weakened compared with previous years, reflecting higher expenses for feed, logistics, fuel, veterinary measures and debt servicing. Although estimates of average sector profitability vary and are not confirmed by official statistics, analysts broadly agree that financial conditions have become more challenging for poultry producers.

Several of Russia’s largest poultry companies have implemented cost-control measures. Public financial statements show that some businesses have reduced capital expenditure or introduced efficiency programmes in response to the more difficult operating environment.

For example, Cherkizovo Group reported efforts to optimize commercial and administrative costs while also reducing investment spending. At the same time, the company reported improved adjusted EBITDA and stronger profitability during the first quarter of 2026.

Financial statements from Agrocomplex N.I. Tkachev also indicate a significant deterioration in financial performance. The company attributed its net loss primarily to higher interest expenses and lower agricultural yields, while reporting reductions in both workforce and capital investments.

Russia’s Ministry of Agriculture has maintained that domestic poultry production remains sufficient to meet demand in the country’s internal market.

Another factor influencing the market has been the increase in poultry imports from China. According to official Chinese customs data, exports of poultry meat to Russia increased significantly during the first quarter of 2026 compared with the same period a year earlier. Industry analysts believe these additional supplies have contributed to stronger competition in some market segments, particularly for poultry meat used in further processing, although the extent of their impact on domestic prices is difficult to quantify independently.

Russian veterinary authorities also introduced temporary restrictions on imports from two Chinese poultry processing plants after identifying sanitary compliance issues, demonstrating continued regulatory oversight of imported products.

Official statistics from Rosstat indicate that Russian poultry production declined during the first five months of 2026 compared with the same period in 2025. The decrease suggests that producers have become more cautious amid weaker margins and higher operating costs.

Looking ahead, industry observers expect market conditions to stabilize gradually during the second half of 2026 rather than recover rapidly. Future performance will likely depend on several factors, including feed costs, financing conditions and the industry’s ability to prevent outbreaks of avian influenza through continued biosecurity measures.

Zoetis has received European Commission marketing authorization for Poulvac Procerta HVT-ND, a recombinant vector vaccine for chickens designed to help protect against Newcastle disease and Marek’s disease. The vaccine can be administered in ovo or by subcutaneous injection at hatch, offering protection in a single dose.

According to the company, the EU decision comes at a time when Newcastle disease remains a significant threat to poultry production across the bloc, with recent confirmed outbreaks reported in several European countries. Zoetis also said the authorization expands its Poulvac Procerta portfolio, following earlier EU approvals for HVT-IBD and HVT-IBD-ND.

Poulvac Procerta HVT-ND uses turkey herpesvirus (HVT) as its vector and is indicated for active immunization of one-day-old chicks and 18- to 19-day-old embryonated chicken eggs. The company says the vaccine is already approved in more than 35 markets worldwide.

For European poultry producers, the authorization adds another preventive tool in the fight against two economically important diseases, in a context where vaccination and biosecurity remain central to flock health management.

Accra is exploring cooperation with Egypt to strengthen its poultry value chain as part of a broader strategy to reduce dependence on frozen chicken imports and build domestic self‑sufficiency.

Ghana is stepping up efforts to reduce its heavy reliance on imported poultry by exploring technical and investment cooperation with Egypt, a key producer with a more advanced and integrated poultry value chain. This move fits into Accra’s broader agenda to replace food imports with local production capacity and improve national food security.

Frozen chicken imports currently supply the bulk of Ghana’s poultry market, with estimates indicating that domestic producers cover only a small fraction of national demand. Local stakeholders have warned that cheap imported poultry is undermining the competitiveness of Ghanaian farms and processing plants, squeezing margins and discouraging investment along the value chain. For the government, reversing this trend has become a priority within wider agricultural and industrial policies.

To close the gap, Ghana needs a substantial increase in domestic poultry output, accompanied by stronger feed production, hatchery capacity, animal health services and processing infrastructure. Policy discussions and sector assessments suggest that only a multiple‑fold expansion of local production will allow the country to displace imports in a meaningful way. That requires not only public support programmes, but also access to technology, capital and regional partnerships.

In this context, cooperation with Egypt is seen as a strategic option. Egyptian operators and institutions can offer experience in intensive poultry production, feed milling, genetics, veterinary services and downstream processing. Partnerships may cover joint ventures in production and slaughtering plants, investment in feed mills, knowledge transfer on biosecurity and productivity, and the development of intra‑African trade frameworks under the AfCFTA. While details of any formal agreements remain under discussion, Accra signals that it is keen to tap into regional know‑how rather than relying predominantly on imports from outside the continent.

The poultry drive builds on existing initiatives that seek to strengthen domestic agrifood systems more broadly. Programmes aimed at supporting small and medium‑scale farmers through access to birds, feed, training and finance are being deployed to increase local supply, especially in rural areas. International partners are also backing Ghana’s efforts through technical assistance, targeted investments and support to value‑chain development in feed and livestock.

For Ghana’s poultry sector, deeper cooperation with Egypt and other regional partners could mark a shift from a market dominated by imported frozen chicken to a more balanced structure where local producers capture a larger share of value added. The outcome will depend on the effective implementation of policies, the mobilization of private investment and the ability of Ghanaian farms and processors to scale up competitively while maintaining standards of quality, safety and biosecurity.

The One Health approach, which encompasses human, animal and environmental health, is well-suited to address a disease issue such as HPAI. “It is a way of looking at things that’s more system-based,” said Meghan Davis, DVM, PhD, associate professor at John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and Engineering, adding that “Systems are dynamic, changing over time.”

Systems within One Health are rooted in partner engagement and transdisciplinary science. “That means veterinarians are working with producers, virologists, economists, engineers and architects, etc.,” she explained in her presentation at the 2025 Poultry Science Association annual meeting.

A dairy veterinarian by training, Davis works at a National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health-funded (NIOSH) Total Worker Health Center. She conducted a scientific and policy analysis to evaluate the interconnectedness of the US poultry and dairy sectors, applying the One Health approach related to HPAI.

“We wanted to look at virus transmission risks and mitigation strategies related to workers, consumers and the public,” she pointed out.

Davis has also worked with the National Academy of Sciences to prevent spillover events, putting her in the thick of the HPAI dairy issue.

Diverse virus, diverse industries

The H5N1 influenza virus, which causes HPAI, is diverse. Although it initially hit domestic poultry, additional concern centered on potential reservoirs and future movement. “We had an unprecedented 175 million birds affected, but what concerns me most about H5N1 is its staying power and what it means in terms of forecasting,” Davis said. “We need to understand the local ecology but also how that interfaces with the ecology of wild animals.”

Due to exposure from migrating birds, H5N1 infections in poultry and other animals tend to occur in seasonal waves. “It’s important to consider the geographic proximity and what that means in terms of environmental exposure and other animals that can be affected,” she said.

Among the challenges posed by recent infections is that the dairy industry is structured differently from the poultry industry, with dairy much less integrated. “So, for 25,000 farms, you have 25,000 decision-makers,” Davis noted. “Because many are family farms, multiple people contribute to the final outcome.”

Dairies vary in size and design, and although there are regional clusters, production is spread out. “Dairy farms have very different biosecurity commitments than our poultry farms,” she added. “Even with a barn, the cows will have contact with wild birds, cats and rodents.”

Non-human vectors

Rodents are a common concern on farms and have been implicated as spillover species for many pathogens. “We have identified H5N1-positive mice on or in proximity of poultry and dairy farms,” Davis said. “What we don’t know is whether they are a reservoir, meaning if they could serve as a host to expose other animals.”

Cats, whether feral or companion, are another avenue that needs more clarity. In a California case, cows were showing mild symptoms of an infection, but cats were dying. “When cats get H5N1, it results in severe neurological disease, and that can signal there’s something else going on,” she said. “A cat with neurological symptoms that tests negative for rabies needs to be tested for H5N1.”

Davis pointed to a dairy worker who changed clothes at home, where the family’s cat rolled around in the clothes and contracted H5N1. “This leads to a public-engagement piece that we need to consider because people love their pets and they don’t want their cats getting sick,” she added.

Along with birds, more answers are needed to determine whether cats on farms, other mammals and rodents play a role in virus exposure and the related control strategies.

Human exposure

Humans are primarily affected through occupational contact, with more dairy workers than poultry workers infected, Davis noted. Working around a dairy cow’s udder presents the potential for splash exposure. “The virus gets on the worker’s hands, they put their hands to their face and it could lead to conjunctivitis, which we’ve seen quite a bit.”

For poultry workers, respiratory symptoms are more common. “We know the virus is in the feathers, feces and dust,” she added. “Birds move around, kick up the dust and expose the workers.”

The type and use of ventilation systems, as well as the way barns are engineered, play a role. Davis cited a poultry barn operating at high ventilation levels during depopulation, exposing workers to H5N1. Some workers were wearing personal protection equipment (PPE), some were not.

“PPE is a big challenge and something we need to think about moving forward,” she said. “Masks, face shields and goggles can be very uncomfortable. If PPE is not comfortable or doesn’t let you do your job, you’re less likely to use it.”

Knowing how to effectively communicate and engage the farm’s workforce is critical. Depending on the workers’ ethnic and language composition, handing them a pamphlet won’t cut it. “You have to engage with the workers, so they understand how to protect themselves and their families and pets,” Davis said. “You don’t want them to transmit the virus to another farm or into the community, because the virus’s ability to reassort is a big concern.”

Not all virus genotypes are the same. While the B3.13 genotype initially challenged workers, the D1.1 genotype emerged, causing more severe human cases and poultry losses. “An Ohio poultry worker was hospitalized with D1.1, and there was a Canadian with no known poultry contact but located in an area with positive-D1.1 farms,” she noted, adding that “there are also risks with backyard poultry flocks.”

There’s a revolving door of dairy cows moving between the US and Canada, Davis pointed out. “We like to sell and trade cows.”

Raw milk can expose the public to H5N1, she added. The virus can survive in meat and eggs, but the exposure risk is more limited. What people feed their pets can further extend the virus’s reach.

Surveillance challenges

Surveillance is key to knowing where the virus is and preventing further exposure to other farms and people. The two basic methods include active and passive surveillance.

Passive surveillance systems continuously collect data to identify where the virus is located. For humans, the CDC has handled this during flu season, testing respiratory samples and sewer effluent. Davis pointed out that this program has ended for H5N1.

For animals, the veterinarian is on the frontline reporting suspect cases. But that’s primarily for domestic animals. “We want to be able to do more remote sensing of the virus in waterfowl, to know where they’re going,” she added.

Active surveillance involves collecting samples from workers, animals, facilities and the environment. It often follows a positive case or detection. Although H5N1-infected birds get quite sick, cows present more of a detection challenge.

That’s what has prompted active surveillance through the national milk-testing strategy for bulk milk, as well as some carcass testing. “This allows us to pool big samples and then go back to individual dairies to see which farm could be infected,” Davis said.

Rural healthcare limitations present a surveillance gap on the human side. “If a worker is sick, are they going to a doctor? Will they be part of the influenza surveillance system?” Davis asked. “Probably not.

“We need to build collaborative systems that don’t rely on them coming to healthcare.” One way may be to set up passive surveillance to monitor dairy waste, she added.

A critical step moving forward is better data sharing on the animal side, including companion animals. Davis again pointed to a California outbreak that began despite a mandatory testing program. While some cows appeared sick, the cats were dying.

Actions to take

On the farm, Davis recommends starting with basic biosecurity steps for poultry and dairy personnel. Two such steps are to change clothes before leaving work and shower into and out of the facility.

“I come back to NIOSH and the hierarchy of controls, which is systemic thinking,” she said. “Identify where to put your money and effort for the most effective biosecurity strategies.” For example, make PPE readily available and train workers in its use. But be aware that they may not wear it correctly every time, and identify other biosecurity options.

One such option is to establish a workflow so that workers move from the lowest- to higher-risk areas. “Engage the workforce so that they are part of the solution to address H5N1,” Davis said.

Davis’s long-term goal is to have the poultry and dairy industries re-engineer facilities to better protect workers and animals.

More communication and data sharing across animal and human sectors must be a priority. “We need to think about different kinds of groups that need to be involved,” she said. “The One Health concept is a shared responsibility to address emerging challenges, and we lack that now.”

Veterinarians, of course, are on the frontlines. But the lingering question is, do we have veterinarians in all the right places? “We have a lot of veterinary-care deserts, especially in poorer areas,” Davis noted.

Bottomline, she emphasized the need for better control and mitigation strategies moving forward, because both cows and birds can be virus factories.

The post One Health approach to address HPAI in poultry, dairy and humans appeared first on Modern Poultry.

Heat stress is one of the most persistent and economically significant challenges facing commercial poultry production, particularly in locations characterized by high temperatures and humidity. Heat-stressed birds will have a poorer feed conversion ratio, decreased body weight gains and higher mortality, resulting in less income for the farmer.

Although it is often associated with hot weather, heat stress is more accurately described as an imbalance between the heat a bird produces internally and its ability to dissipate the heat to the surrounding environment. Effective management depends on recognizing this relationship and designing housing and management practices that prioritize heat removal.

Modern poultry are highly efficient at converting feed into productivity, but this efficiency results in substantial metabolic heat production. Unfortunately, only a portion of dietary energy supports growth and maintenance — generally about 35% to 40% — while the remaining 60% to 65% is metabolic heat that must be removed from the bird’s body to maintain normal physiological function.

This reality makes heat dissipation, rather than lowering air temperature, the key to keeping birds cool. Heat dissipation is a significant challenge in poultry house management, especially in warm weather.

Heat loss mechanisms, challenges

Birds rely on two primary mechanisms to lose heat: sensible and latent heat loss. Sensible heat loss occurs when heat is transferred from the bird to the surrounding air, while latent heat loss occurs through evaporation, primarily via panting. Under optimal conditions, these processes allow birds to maintain a stable internal body temperature within the thermal neutral zone. In other words, the bird is giving off as much heat as it is producing and can maintain a normal body temperature.

When environmental conditions, air temperature or humidity increase, the effectiveness of the heat loss mechanisms is lost, and birds begin to accumulate heat, resulting in physiological heat stress. Panting is often the first visible indicator of this condition, as the bird is switching from sensible to latent heat loss mechanisms. Even when environmental conditions improve and panting subsides, it may take several hours for a bird’s core body temperature to return to normal, emphasizing the importance of proactive rather than reactive management.

Humidity plays a critical role in determining how effectively birds can dissipate heat. Elevated relative humidity reduces the efficiency of latent heat loss, making panting less effective and increasing the risk of heat stress even at moderate temperatures. The interaction between temperature and humidity is particularly important when using evaporative cooling systems.

Although these systems can reduce air temperature, they simultaneously increase humidity. For each 1°F reduction in temperature achieved through evaporative cooling, relative humidity may increase by approximately 2.5%. If not carefully managed, this trade-off can create conditions that are more dangerous than hot air alone. Therefore, using evaporative cooling pads during times of high relative humidity will just add more humidity to the air and have a potentially greater negative impact than not using the pads and relying on wind speed.

Water consumption further complicates the heat stress challenge. Poultry will consume twice as much water as feed under normal conditions. Heat-stressed birds, however, will consume 3 to 4 times as much water. At the same time, evaporative cooling pads will be under maximum usage. Having a water source and system that can handle this added stress is crucial.

Ultimately, high air speed is the most effective tool for managing heat stress in commercial poultry houses. Air movement enhances convective heat loss by removing heat from the bird’s surface and preventing the buildup of warm, humid air around the body. Tunnel ventilation systems are used to achieve high airspeeds, creating this wind-chill effect that significantly reduces the temperature felt by the birds. Evaporative cooling systems should be used strategically and sparingly, with careful attention to their impact on humidity.

Observation remains an essential management tool. Bird distribution within the house provides immediate feedback on environmental conditions, as birds will naturally seek areas that offer greater comfort. Uneven distribution often indicates problems with airflow, temperature gradients or equipment performance.

Summary

Heat stress in modern commercial poultry production is a complex issue driven by the interactions between metabolic heat production, environmental temperature, relative humidity and management practices. The most effective strategies focus on maximizing heat removal through wind speed, with judicious use of evaporative cooling systems. By understanding and applying these principles, producers can reduce losses, maintain performance and improve animal welfare during periods of elevated heat.

The post Managing heat stress in commercial poultry operations: principles and practical strategies appeared first on Modern Poultry.

Kenya – Avipro, the Hubbard Efficiency Plus distributor in East Africa, and Hubbard were pleased to co-organise the first “Avipro Hubbard Conference” at the Pullman hotel in Nairobi, Kenya on June 11 and 12, 2026.

The Avipro and Hubbard teams successfully hosted customers and experts from more than 10 different African countries to celebrate the growing success of the Hubbard Efficiency Plus in the region.

Following the words of welcome by Denis Claude Pilot and Bruno Briand, Frédéric Bardothier  took the opportunity to introduce his team to the many attendees and provided insight into Avipro’s operations in Nakuru, Kenya. Bruno Briand presented Hubbard’s operational excellence across the entire broiler breeding value chain.

“This conference was designed to bring together our customers from across Africa, to share experiences, discuss the challenges ahead, and identify the key drivers that will support the sustainable growth of our industry”, said Frédéric Bardothier.

“Through continued investment in breeding and close collaboration with our customers in the field, we aim to support the development of a more efficient and sustainable poultry sector in Africa,” added Bruno Briand.

Over the course of two days, experts shared the performance of the Hubbard Efficiency Plus in the region, insights into African market dynamics, and highlighted the opportunities, emerging trends, and challenges in the African poultry value chain. Victor Lesigne (Hubbard Senior Technical Manager MEA), Baptiste Nevejans (Hubbard Technical Manager East Africa), and Dr. David van Grieken (Hubbard Animal Health Director) discussed innovative techniques and their applications to increase farmers’ resilience against external challenges.

External speakers included Paul Lapy of NTD France, on the practical solutions concerning poultry housing in Africa; Dr. Herman Bosman of the Poultry Practice, who spoke about feeding strategies for broilers and biosecurity challenges; Nan-Dirk Mulder from Rabobank (on line) on poultry economics and market dynamics in Africa; John Jakobsson of AgDevCO, on investing in the poultry value chain in Africa; and David Speller from Optifarm on the farming of tomorrow.

The event also provided a buoyant platform for networking, enabling participants to exchange experiences and best practices. Ultimately, these two days gave the opportunity to further strengthen and deepen the collaboration between Avipro and Hubbard with their customers and offered them the impetus to shape a resilient African broiler value chain.

The next event is scheduled for 2028. The countdown has begun!

Source: Hubbard press release

Sri Lankan poultry producer New Anthoney’s Farms has entered into a partnership with the University of Peradeniya to independently verify its antibiotic-free chicken production. Under a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), the University’s Food Safety and Quality Assurance Laboratory (FSQAL) will conduct laboratory testing to confirm the absence of antibiotic residues in the company’s poultry products.

The FSQAL laboratory is accredited to ISO/IEC 17025, the international standard for testing and calibration laboratories. According to the agreement, the laboratory will perform independent analyses of product samples, providing third-party verification of the company’s production claims.

The initiative comes amid growing global efforts to address antimicrobial resistance (AMR), which the World Health Organization (WHO) has identified as one of the most significant threats to public health. The inappropriate use of antibiotics in both human medicine and animal agriculture contributes to the emergence and spread of antimicrobial-resistant bacteria. According to a landmark study published in The Lancet, antimicrobial resistance was directly responsible for an estimated 1.27 million deaths worldwide in 2019 and was associated with nearly 5 million deaths.

The issue is also receiving increasing attention in Sri Lanka. Research conducted in commercial poultry farms in the Kurunegala district found widespread antimicrobial use and identified high levels of resistance to several commonly used antibiotic classes, including tetracyclines and fluoroquinolones. The findings highlight the importance of strengthening antimicrobial stewardship and biosecurity measures throughout the poultry sector.

New Anthoney’s states that its production system does not rely on antibiotics, instead emphasizing biosecurity, flock management and preventive health practices. The collaboration with the University of Peradeniya is intended to provide independent verification of these claims through regular laboratory testing.

The company also describes itself as Sri Lanka’s only producer of fully antibiotic-free chicken. However, this claim could not be independently verified through publicly available certification schemes or industry-wide assessments and should therefore be regarded as a company statement rather than an independently established fact.

Similarly, the company’s proposal to introduce a national “No Antibiotics Ever” standard reflects its own policy position and has not been adopted as a regulatory requirement in Sri Lanka.

The partnership nevertheless reflects a broader trend within the poultry industry toward reducing antibiotic use and increasing transparency through independent verification, in line with international efforts to combat antimicrobial resistance while maintaining animal health and food safety.

Emergency and laboratory monitoring

Diagnosis and viral analysis

Transmission and biosafety

Vaccination: the next frontier

International award honors outstanding agricultural content creators on social media – Farmers from around the world invited to apply until 30 August 2026 – Winners to be recognized at EuroTier 2026 in Hanover, Germany.

The DLG (German Agricultural Society) has opened applications for the DLG Agri Influencer Award 2026, an international competition that recognizes professional farmers who communicate agriculture through social media in an authentic, engaging and impactful way. Farmers representing livestock, arable and horticultural enterprises can apply until 30 August 2026. DLG will present the awards during EuroTier 2026, the world’s leading trade fair for professional animal farming and livestock management, taking place from 10 to 13 November 2026 in Hanover, Germany.

Since its launch in 2022, the award has attracted participants from across the agricultural world. Previous finalists and winners have represented a wide range of farming sectors and countries, including Argentina, Germany, Ghana, Poland, Slovenia, Spain, Switzerland, Turkey, the U.S. and the United Kingdom highlighting the increasingly international nature of agricultural communication on social media. Their channels demonstrate how farmers use digital platforms to share knowledge, increase transparency and build trust in modern agriculture.

Showcasing agriculture beyond the farm gate

Through social media, the farming professionals offer authentic insights into modern farming, taking their audiences into fields, livestock buildings and tractor cabs while explaining agricultural practices and often engaging in an open dialogue with the public. With the DLG Agri Influencer Award, DLG not only recognizes these efforts, but also supports agricultural communicators in their work and encourages more farmers to engage in digital communication. As a non-profit organization dedicated to advancing knowledge exchange and innovation in agriculture, DLG also views the award as an opportunity to strengthen dialogue between farming and society.

“No two days in farming are the same. Farmers are constantly adapting to weather conditions, market developments, new technologies and changing societal expectations. The best DLG agri influencers capture this reality and share it with audiences around the world. Their content not only showcases agriculture but also builds trust and encourages dialogue,” says Theresa Günther, Project Manager of the DLG Agri Influencer Award, and Social Media Manager at DLG.

Two award categories are presented:

DLG Best Agri Influencer International

DLG Best Agri Influencer in German

The international category is open to farmers, farms and agricultural businesses that regularly publish agricultural content in languages other than German. The German-language category recognizes creators who produce agricultural content in German.

Applicants must be actively involved in agriculture, operate their own social media channels and have a minimum of 1,000 followers.

DLG selects one winner in each of the two categories and also honors second- and third-place finalists.

What winners receive

DLG will be inviting the winners to Hanover, Germany, for the award ceremony during the Young Farmers’ Party at EuroTier 2026 on 12 November. The organization covers travel expenses. and admission to EuroTier and the Young Farmers’ Party.

In addition to the award, winners become part of the extensive media and public relations activities surrounding the award, giving them additional visibility among agricultural professionals, media representatives and the wider public.

How the jury assesses applications

An independent international jury appointed by DLG evaluates all submissions. The panel brings together respected agricultural advisors, practitioners, communication specialists and media professionals from different countries.

The jury looks for authentic and engaging agricultural communication that provides meaningful insights into modern farming. In its assessment, the jury considers the range and relevance of the topics covered, the creativity and quality of the content, the creator’s visible commitment to agriculture, and the ability to communicate effectively with online communities. Particular attention is paid to how applicants engage with followers, encourage dialogue and represent the diversity of modern agriculture.

Apply by 30 August 2026

Applications for the DLG Agri Influencer Award 2026 remain open until 30 August 2026.

Further information and the online application form are available at:

www.dlg.org/landwirtschaft/awards/dlg-agri-influencer-award

Source: DLGAgri press release

Kogut presented his thoughts on gut health, intestinal integrity and biomarkers during the 2025 Poultry Science Association annual meeting.

“Birds have been selected for their ability to grow,” he said. “When we’re talking about a healthy bird, we’re talking about how close to that potential the bird has come.”

Gut health is crucial, Kogut noted, because it determines a bird’s ability to reach its genetic potential.

Gut ecosystem

Kogut emphasized that the gut must be viewed as a complete ecosystem that includes both the microbiota and the bird itself, not just bacteria.

“When we’re talking about the gut, we really need to talk about both systems together — the host and the microbiota,” he said.

The host side includes epithelial cells, immune cells, mucus layers and the enteric nervous system. These layers work together to regulate digestion, nutrient absorption, immune tolerance and protection against pathogens.

Kogut pointed out that different regions of the gut have distinct roles. The upper gut, including the duodenum and jejunum, is where most digestion and nutrient absorption occur, despite having relatively low microbial populations. The lower gut contains far more bacteria, but immune activity there is reduced.

“This is the ecosystem under homeostatic conditions,” he said.

Inflammation comes first

Kogut stressed that microbe disruption doesn’t occur on its own.

“Dysbiosis, by definition, is the disruption of the population of microbes. But it doesn’t occur if you don’t have a dysfunctional change in the intestine itself.”

In other words, inflammation comes first. And he emphasized, “dysbiosis almost never induces inflammation. Rather, inflammation induces dysbiosis.” When inflammation damages epithelial cells and tight junctions, the gut barrier weakens, allowing bacteria to leak from the intestine. This can lead to “leaky gut.”

“When you have bacterial translocation, obviously you are now going to stimulate the immune system,” he explained. Once bacteria enter circulation, they can contribute to systemic problems, including joint and leg issues.

Fiber’s role in the gut

Kogut noted that dietary fiber plays a significant role in gut integrity, but quality matters. He compared the positive and negative effects of dietary fiber on intestinal integrity.

He contrasted beneficial fiber with poorly fermentable or highly viscous fiber sources, explaining that high-quality fiber can:

• Stimulate gut development
• Improve intestinal structure and function
• Provide substrate for beneficial microbes

In contrast, poor-quality fiber can:

• Increase digesta viscosity
• Slow feed passage
• Reduce nutrient absorption
• Trigger inflammation and leaky gut

In some cases, poor fiber quality has also been linked to gizzard erosion, further compounding digestive challenges.

Measuring gut health

Because gut health is directly tied to performance, producers often ask Kogut how to objectively measure it.

Kogut’s recent research may have the answers. He examined the potential of biomarkers as tools to detect intestinal inflammation before performance losses occur. Historically, he explained, studies relied on invasive methods such as histology or gene expression, which require euthanizing birds. He noted that these approaches are impractical for field use and often lack baseline reference values, making interpretation difficult.

Kogut’s approach focused on noninvasive markers that are measurable in feces or blood.

Noninvasive indicators

Kogut examined birds fed high levels of rice bran to induce chronic, diet-driven inflammation and observed birds with no visible disease or performance loss. “The kicker was there was no gross pathology,” he said. But despite this, biomarkers revealed ongoing inflammation.

Kogut said the most promising non-invasive indicators included:

• Calprotectin, a marker of innate immune activation
• Lipocalin, an acute-phase inflammatory protein
• Hypoxia-inducible factors, which reflect metabolic stress

“Calprotectin is the No. 1 marker for inflammatory bowel disease in humans due to its sensitivity and non-invasive nature,” Kogut explained.

Interestingly, Kogut’s research showed that these biomarkers increased before observable performance problems, suggesting they could serve as early warning signals in broiler flocks.

Chronic inflammation unnoticed

Kogut highlighted that chronic gut inflammation often goes unnoticed because it doesn’t resemble acute disease.

He pointed out that early inflammation involves macrophage-driven responses but over time shifts to T-cell–driven responses, with different cytokines becoming active as time passes. “These are not cytokines you normally see. The cytokines IL-1 beta and TNF are no longer involved when it comes to chronic inflammation.”

This response shift helps explain why flocks can appear healthy while efficiency quietly declines.

Looking ahead

Although the results of his research are promising, Kogut cautioned that more data are needed. “We have measured 200 birds. There is not enough data generated yet that we can say that these are definitive biomarkers.”

He also emphasized that establishing normal ranges for biomarkers is important and requires larger datasets. “We think we can get there. It’s just a matter of doing experiments to develop that range,” he said.

For producers, the message is clear: Gut health isn’t about avoiding disease alone. It’s about maintaining intestinal balance, preventing silent inflammation and keeping birds on track to reach their genetic potential.

Biomarkers may soon give producers tools to detect problems before performance drops, turning gut health from a buzzword into a measurable management strategy.

The post Kogut: What ‘gut health’ really means for broiler performance appeared first on Modern Poultry.

Late spring and early summer are good times to take a fresh look at infectious bursal disease (IBD) vaccination strategies. Re-evaluating your approach can help support more consistent bird performance and strengthen immunity across flocks.

Today’s poultry operations have many tools to address disease pressure, but relying too heavily on any one vaccination approach can lead to diminishing returns over time.

In IBD programs, for example, staying on the same vector-vaccine program year after year may create conditions in which a field-virus challenge breaks through earlier over successive flocks. As poultry veterinarians evaluate seasonal vaccination strategies, a rotation to an immune-complex vaccine for IBD is worth considering as a complement to a vector vaccination program.

This type of rotation is a strategic effort to use live vaccines in a way that may help disrupt field-virus pressure, restore disease control and support overall flock health.

Displacing wild-type IBD

For IBD, the live immune-complex vaccine Poulvac® Bursaplex® has been shown to help block and displace wild-type variant viruses,¹ thereby reducing field challenge and helping position vector vaccines to regain efficacy when reintroduced into the vaccine rotation.^2,3

Timing is critical. The first 3 weeks post-hatch are a key risk window for IBD infection. IBD protection starts with hyper-immunizing breeder hens to provide robust maternal antibodies, while strategically vaccinating broiler chicks — including in ovo — can provide complementary protection during this early challenge window.

Poultry complexes that have relied heavily on herpesvirus of turkey (HVT)-vectored IBD vaccines have seen their variant challenge window shift progressively earlier over time.⁴ When that happens, there is greater potential for immune suppression before vectored vaccines elicit protection in young broilers. That can create conditions for other diseases, such as inclusion body hepatitis (IBH), to gain a foothold. IBH is a notable cause of broiler mortality during the first 3 to 4 weeks of life.

A field trial evaluated the effectiveness of the live immune-complex vaccine, Poulvac Bursaplex, in a commercial broiler complex facing a high-variant IBDV challenge.⁵ Investigators assessed bursal surveys and flock-level performance measures to evaluate vaccine effectiveness.

Relative to pre-vaccination performance, flocks in the study that were vaccinated with Poulvac Bursaplex improved in every measured performance category:⁶

• 15 points of bodyweight
• 6 points of adjusted feed-conversion ratio
• 4% livability
• 13% condemnations
• 7 cents per pound bodyweight decrease in live cost

Although this complex benefited significantly from the switch to an immune-complex vaccine, each complex may experience its own results after introducing Poulvac Bursaplex.

In the field trial, once Poulvac Bursaplex was introduced into the vaccine program, the complex reported immediate improvements in bursal health, bird health and performance, and a reported reduction in IBH-associated mortality.

Seasonal use of Poulvac Bursaplex has been associated with “crowding out” field-virus types over time, with fewer wild types present and a later challenge window after annual use of the immune-complex vaccine.⁷ In turn, that shift may help vectored IBD vaccines perform better in the future by reducing early field challenge. A major purpose of immune-complex vaccines is to reset challenge-virus pressure year after year and decrease pressure on future vaccine programs.

Developing a rotational IBD vaccine program that includes both immune-complex and HVT-vectored vaccines has shown benefits by helping protect against and reduce persistent variant IBD challenges in the field.⁸

Holistic view of vaccine selection

A holistic understanding of field-virus challenge can help shape vaccine-program recommendations and provide insight into the likely impact of implementing a new program, regardless of disease challenge.

For IBD, active bursal-surveillance programs using bursa boards and bursal surveys can help monitor which IBDV strains are present in a complex and the ages at which those strains are challenging birds. Knowing when a challenge is breaking through has important implications for broiler health programs, as well as breeder programs.

Additional diagnostic tools, including polymerase chain reaction and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays, can help determine which viral strains are present in a flock. That information can help poultry veterinarians select vaccines that better match the field challenge and help flocks reach their performance potential.

References

1. Muniz EC, Verdi R, Jackwood DJ, et al. Molecular epidemiologic survey of infectious bursal disease viruses in broiler farms raised under different vaccination programs. J Appl Poult Res. 2018;27:253-261.
2. Ibid.
3. Ashraf S, Abdel-Alim G, Al-Natour MQ, Saif YM. Interference between mild and pathogenic strains of infectious bursal disease virus in chickens. Avian Dis. 2005;49:99-103.
4. Shepherd E, Cummings T, Jordan B, Cookson K. Field experiences with a live immune-complex IBD vaccine in broilers in the Southeast USA. In: Proceedings, International Poultry Science Forum, 2026.
5. Ibid.
6. Ibid.
7. Muniz EC, Verdi R, Jackwood DJ, et al. Molecular epidemiologic survey
8. Shepherd E, Cummings T, Jordan B, Cookson K. Field experiences with a live immune-complex

The post Resetting the field challenge with a strategic IBD vaccination approach appeared first on Modern Poultry.

Aviagen^® is pleased to announce the next step in a long-standing collaboration with valued Ross^® distributor Nippon Chunky, a subsidiary of Marubeni Corporation’s Food and Agribusiness division in Japan. For nearly 60 years, Nippon Chunky has been the exclusive provider of Aviagen’s Ross brand of broiler breeding stock in Japan and is an established and respected presence in the country’s poultry industry.

Effective July 1, 2026, Aviagen has acquired a 66% controlling interest in Nippon Chunky, reinforcing the close ties between the two companies and supporting the ongoing development of Japan’s poultry sector. Marubeni will remain a 34% shareholder and continue to participate actively in the management of the business. As part of Aviagen Asia, Nippon Chunky will continue operating under its existing leadership and identity.

The investment reflects decades of close collaboration and mutual respect between the companies and their focus on supporting poultry producers, advancing innovation and promoting sustainability and animal welfare.

“Nippon Chunky has earned an excellent reputation through its dedication to customers, deep local relationships, and industry knowledge. Over many years, they have played an important role in the development of the Ross brand in Japan. We look forward to building on that success together. This agreement reinforces our continued focus on the Japanese market and the customers we serve,” commented Aviagen CEO Jan Henriksen.

“I am confident the partnership with Aviagen will further strengthen the foundation that Nippon Chunky has built over the years,” added Mr. Masaya Shiraishi, Meat Department General Manager, Marubeni Corporation. “We will continue to strive to develop the Japanese broiler industry even further with Aviagen through a stable supply of high-quality breeding chicks.”

Source: Aviagen press release

Today, July 6, we celebrate World Zoonoses Day, dedicated to reminding us how closely animal and human health are connected. This observance recalls Louis Pasteur’s first rabies vaccination in 1885 and highlights the One Health principle, which is crucial to preventing diseases transmitted between animals and people.

The role of livestock farms

In the poultry and livestock sectors, zoonoses represent a concrete risk for public health as well as for production continuity and trust along the entire value chain. Well-known examples include avian influenza, salmonellosis and psittacosis, which can spread through infected animals, excretions, contaminated environments or improperly handled food products.

For this reason, prevention at farm level is the first health barrier: restricting access, applying strict biosecurity measures, sanitizing hands and equipment, using dedicated devices, and promptly monitoring any symptoms in the animals are essential steps to reduce the risk of infection.

Health control and the value chain

Health control does not protect only animals, it also safeguards workers, consumers and businesses. Zoonotic diseases can have major economic consequences, affecting productivity, management costs, the availability of animal proteins and the reputation of the whole supply chain.

In this context, veterinary surveillance, early diagnosis and rapid reporting of suspected cases become strategic tools. Training of staff and proper management of materials, vehicles and visitors also help break the chain of transmission and strengthen the resilience of the entire production system.

A shared commitment

Preventing zoonoses requires continuous cooperation between farmers, veterinarians, health authorities and supply chain operators. Investing in biosecurity, animal welfare and epidemiological monitoring means protecting public health and ensuring continuity in a sector that is essential for food security.

On this day, the message is clear: the health of livestock farms is a decisive component of public health, and prevention remains the most effective measure to protect people, animals and value chains.

International technical program and new formats

Among the new highlights at EuroTier are the EuroTier Milky Way, DLG-VetCon, the Innovation Boulevard and the Forage Days. These formats will explore key livestock topics in depth, combining expert insights with practical exhibits. Together with the extensive exhibition, the technical program ensures that EuroTier offers a comprehensive overview of cutting-edge innovations as well as established technologies for efficient, sustainable and animal-friendly livestock production.

DLG Spotlights: Experiencing innovation in practice

 
The DLG Spotlights offer visitors the opportunity to experience innovations in practical application. The Barn Robot Event will showcase state-of-the-art solutions for automated milking, focusing on the conversion of conventional milking parlours to robotic systems, new-build concepts and milking solutions for large dairy herds.
 
Further highlights include technologies for reducing emissions in livestock farming and the TopTierTreff (“Top Genetics”) , the international meeting place for breeding companies and breeding organizations presenting live dairy and beef cattle.
 
With the new Innovation Boulevard, exhibitors will, for the first time, be able to present their officially recognized innovations, submitted and recognized as world premieres in advance. The last event saw over 210 registered world premieres.
 
Another new feature is the DLG Spotlight “Forage Production”. Companies will demonstrate how smart farming technologies are transforming forage production and how forage quality can be optimized from harvest through to silage. The new Forage Days on 12 and 13 November will complement the program. The DLG Expert Stage Cattle will focus specifically on demand-oriented feeding strategies for ruminants.
 
Another highlight will be the Horse Theme Day on Thursday, 12 November 2026, featuring expert presentations and guided tours of exhibitors specializing in equine technologies and services.
 
Additional impulses will be provided by the Start-up Area, showcasing innovative technologies, and the Science Campus, where research findings and job offerings will be presented.

Technical program and international exchange

The EuroTier 2026 technical program will be presented on a total of nine expert stages and will include lectures, panel discussions and networking formats covering all relevant sectors of livestock farming, as well as topics from EuroTier’s partner events:
 
DLG Expert Stage Cattle (Hall 12)

DLG Expert Stage Pig (Hall 17)

DLG Expert Stage Poultry (Hall 17)

DLG Expert Stage Barn Robot Event and Direct Marketing (Hall 13)

DLG Expert Stage Biosecurity and Feed Safety (Hall 21)

DLG Expert Stage Intelligence in Animal Farming (Hall 13)

DLG Studio Stage (Hall 13)

DLG Expert Stage EnergyDecentral (Hall 25)

DLG Expert Stage Inhouse Farming (Hall 25)
 
EuroTier’s international importance is further reflected in a wide range of networking opportunities and international events. The International Poultry Conference will take place on 9 November 2026. On 11 November 2026, the International Farmers Day, focusing on Ireland, Poland and the United Kingdom will be held alongside the International Cattle & Pig Event.
 
The Young Professionals Day on 12 November 2026 is designed specifically for the next generation of industry professionals. Also taking place at the EuroTier venue from 12 to 13 November 2026, DLG-VetCon will be launched as a new international forum for veterinarians. Program highlights include keynote speeches by internationally renowned experts, in-depth workshops, guided innovation-focused tours of the exhibition, a foyer exhibition and networking opportunities for professional exchange. Tickets are now available at the early-bird rate. The program will be complemented by additional networking formats, including the Female Agri Fellows Networking Event.

EuroTier App: Digital support for visitors

The EuroTier app provides visitors with a digital tool that significantly simplifies planning and navigating the exhibition. The app, which will be available for download during the summer, offers an interactive hall plan, targeted exhibitor and product searches, and up-to-date information on program sessions and events. Users can also create personal favorites lists and build their own customized trade fair agenda.

Getting to EuroTier 2026

Good flight connections to Hanover ensure that international visitors can easily reach EuroTier. Once in Hanover, visitors can easily reach the exhibition grounds from Hanover Central Station via tram line 8 and the additional line E, both of which provide direct access to the North Entrance. Alternatively, the S4 commuter rail line connects to Hanover Messe/Laatzen station. During EuroTier, numerous long-distance and regional trains will also stop directly at Hanover Messe/Laatzen station, from where West Entrance 1 can be reached within a few minutes via the Skywalk.
 
Travel by car is equally convenient. The exhibition grounds are well connected to the motorway network, clearly signposted and offer ample parking facilities.

Source: EuroTier press release

Researchers at Bangladesh Agricultural University (BAU) have developed a new chicken subtype that produces colored meat after 15 years of continuous research, according to university officials. The new line is described as fast-growing, with meat texture similar to native chicken but with a reddish color, and it has been developed with both consumer demand and farm profitability in mind.

The research was carried out by the Poultry Science Department under the Livestock and Dairy Development Project (LDDP). Professor Dr Bazlur Rahman Mollah, who led the team, said the subtype was created through preservation, selection and crossbreeding of different parent lines, with the goal of building a stable commercial line for local production.

A seminar held on Tuesday formally presented the final results of the project, with BAU Vice-Chancellor Professor Dr A K Fazlul Haque Bhuiyan, Poultry Science Department Head Professor Dr Md Shawkat Ali and other officials in attendance. University officials said the project reflects a long-term effort to develop poultry genetics suited to local needs and market preferences.

According to Dr Mollah, the team focused mainly on a sex-linked white line with homozygosity improved to between 89% and 93.11%, a level considered important for establishing a consistent commercial line. The researchers also developed a simple PCR method to detect deletion in the SOX-10 gene, which determines feather color and is expected to support future breeding programs.

The team said some parent lines of the subtype produced up to 205 eggs in 62 weeks. They also reported that the day-old chick weight of the new hybrid line was around 38 grams, compared with 26–28 grams for conventional Sonali chickens, and noted that a one-gram increase in day-old chick weight can translate into about 50 grams of additional final market weight.

The birds can reportedly reach around 950 grams within 45 days. Researchers said this performance, combined with improved growth rate, feed conversion efficiency and lower mortality, could help increase farmers’ profits if the birds are produced and managed properly at scale.

One of the project’s main features was direct technology transfer at field level. Instead of relying only on training centers, the research team provided hands-on support in villages to cluster-based groups of 15 to 25 women farmers, with regular technical guidance, timely vaccination and health monitoring.

Field results showed strong improvements where farmers received chicks together with technical support, and many farmers reportedly now keep the birds for 10 to 12 weeks rather than the planned 50 days because of market demand. The birds are being sold at prices of up to Tk 700 per kilogram, allowing farmers to earn higher returns.

On food safety concerns, Dr Mollah said laboratory tests in Dhaka found no antibiotic residues in the meat. He also clarified that the goal is not to market the birds as native chicken, but to create a distinct branded colored-meat product with stronger taste, nutritional value and safety assurance.

Vice-Chancellor Professor Dr Fazlul Haque Bhuiyan stressed that innovation must reach farmers’ doorsteps, not remain in laboratories. He said the project’s core philosophy is to increase farmer income and expand safe animal protein production in Bangladesh, and he also called for the early reopening of the university’s livestock faculty sales centre so research products can be sold directly to the public at affordable prices.

The final presentation was attended by faculty members, researchers and poultry-sector entrepreneurs, and dishes prepared from the newly developed chicken were also served.

Poultry producers in England can now apply for funded biosecurity reviews through the Animal Health and Welfare Pathway (AHWP), following the opening of applications on 2 June 2026.

The funding covers veterinary biosecurity reviews carried out on farm as part of the AHWP. According to the National Farmers’ Union (NFU), the scheme was developed following discussions involving government officials, industry stakeholders and NFU representatives, who have been working on poultry biosecurity proposals for more than a year.

NFU Poultry Board Chair Will Raw said the reviews provide an opportunity for producers to assess farm biosecurity with veterinary input at a time when avian influenza continues to pose a risk to the poultry sector.

The scheme is available to a wider range of poultry enterprises than previous AHWP funding measures. Eligible sectors include laying hens, broilers, breeders and pullets, as well as turkeys, ducks and geese.

The NFU said it had worked to extend eligibility beyond the poultry categories traditionally covered by AHWP funding.

Questions remain regarding the eligibility thresholds for participation. The NFU said it continues to discuss the issue with Defra and has argued that producers with bird numbers below the current thresholds could also benefit from access to biosecurity reviews. Defra has agreed to keep the eligibility criteria under review.

The union also welcomed what it described as a simplified application process. According to poultry producer David Brass, applicants need to provide their CPH number, SBI number and poultry register number before arranging a veterinary visit. Producers who complete a review can receive £430 from Defra towards the cost of the visit.

The NFU said the timing of the scheme allows producers to plan veterinary biosecurity reviews ahead of the autumn period, when the risk of avian influenza typically increases.

Source: UK Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (Defra), ‘Poultry Biosecurity Review funding: guidance for poultry keepers and vets

EuroTier 2026, the world’s leading trade fair for livestock professionals, will showcase practical solutions that support the sector’s next stage of growth while helping producers address these challenges. Key trends include biosecurity, feeding efficiency, automation and improved housing systems, offering valuable insights for modern poultry operations around the world.

A global platform for poultry innovation

As poultry production continues to grow worldwide, the sector is benefiting from strong consumer demand, ongoing innovation and increasing efficiency across international markets. Against this dynamic backdrop, EuroTier 2026, taking place from 10 to 13 November in Hanover, Germany, provides a global platform where poultry technologies and production concepts from different regions can be compared and evaluated under practical conditions.

With more than 2,100 exhibitors across 13 halls, the indoor air-conditioned exhibition brings together the entire livestock value chain, including pig and cattle, and offers a comprehensive overview of current developments. Poultry is a central part of this, with a wide range of innovations in housing, feeding, automation and health management expected to be presented.

EuroTier also continues to attract strong international participation, including visitor groups from Asia such as Indonesia and Malaysia, underlining the growing importance of global exchange in livestock production.

Industry drivers shaping technology trends

Across global poultry production systems, several important factors are accelerating technological development. These include the need to further improve animal health and welfare, reduce antibiotic use and emissions, and manage feed and energy costs more efficiently. Feed efficiency remains especially important, as feed accounts for a major share of production costs, making feed optimisation a central priority for producers worldwide.

At the same time, disease risks such as avian influenza continue to influence production strategies in many regions. As a result, biosecurity, feeding efficiency and production management are becoming increasingly interconnected areas of innovation. These developments will also be highlighted at the upcoming International Poultry Conference on 9 November in Hanover, where experts will discuss major trends, innovation drivers and current challenges in the global poultry sector.

Animal health and biosecurity at the centre

Improving animal health remains one of the most important drivers of innovation in poultry production. Advances in vaccination, in particular, are helping to improve both disease control and animal handling. New systems allow vaccines to be applied more precisely and efficiently, contributing to better health outcomes and supporting longer production cycles. This is becoming increasingly relevant, for example, as laying hens are kept for extended periods in order to improve overall efficiency.

One example of this trend is the Vaccybot from Agri Advanced Technologies, a fully automated poultry vaccination system that combines advanced camera technology with robotic precision to administer multiple vaccines accurately. This can help improve vaccination quality while reducing stress for the animals and labour requirements on the farm.

Another important technology trend is the growing use of digital flock monitoring for the early detection of health issues and behavioural abnormalities. Combining sensor technology, data analytics and computer vision, these systems can continuously track parameters such as activity levels, feed and water intake, movement patterns and barn conditions. This helps identify deviations from normal flock behaviour at an early stage, enabling faster responses and supporting animal health, biosecurity and overall production management.

Hygiene also plays a central role, particularly in hatcheries. Innovations in egg disinfection, including advanced sterilisation technologies, are helping to improve chick health while reducing the need for chemical disinfectants.

Automation, labour and feeding innovation

Automation is becoming a core component of modern poultry production, helping to improve consistency, reduce labour requirements and increase overall efficiency. In housing systems, automated solutions are supporting daily management tasks such as cleaning, monitoring and environmental control, while advanced robotic systems can help maintain hygiene standards even in complex aviary structures.

At the same time, feeding systems are becoming more precise and increasingly data-driven. Solutions that use real-time data to support more targeted feeding strategies are gaining attention, helping producers to align feed delivery more closely with animal needs, flock performance and changing production conditions. New concepts also seek to combine efficiency with animal-oriented management, for example through systems that provide protein-rich live larvae and encourage natural behaviour.

Beyond the barn, automation is also advancing in slaughter and processing, where robotics and digital control systems are helping to improve workflow efficiency, consistency and labour utilisation. Taken together, these developments show how automation is becoming increasingly integrated across the poultry value chain, from on-farm management to downstream processing.

Evolving housing systems and animal welfare

Animal welfare continues to shape the development of poultry housing systems. One important trend is the move towards longer production cycles, supported by improved health management and breeding strategies. There is also growing interest in systems that allow birds to be kept with intact beaks while maintaining high welfare standards.

At the same time, innovative housing systems are being developed to reduce stress and improve overall system efficiency. Integrated concepts, in which birds remain in a single system from hatching throughout the production period, are gaining attention. These systems reduce the need for transport and adaptation, helping to lower stress levels and support better animal welfare. In addition, smaller design improvements, such as ergonomically optimised perches, show how even incremental innovations can contribute to both animal welfare and production performance.

A broader structural trend, particularly relevant in international markets, is the gradual shift from cage-based systems to free-range and alternative housing systems, reflecting evolving regulatory frameworks and changing market expectations.

Sustainability and efficiency

Sustainability is becoming an increasingly important factor in poultry production, bringing together economic and environmental considerations. Producers are working to reduce emissions, optimise resource use and manage energy consumption more efficiently. Feed efficiency plays a major role in this context. Improving feed conversion, along with the exploration of alternative feed components, are among the key strategies for reducing both costs and environmental impact.

As feed resources become more constrained globally, technologies that improve feed utilisation are gaining further importance. At the same time, many innovations are aimed at improving overall system efficiency, integrating production processes and reducing reliance on external inputs such as antibiotics or chemical treatments.

Water management and climate resilience are also moving further up the agenda in poultry production. In many regions, producers are increasingly focusing on technologies and management strategies that help improve water efficiency, safeguard water quality and strengthen resilience to more frequent heat periods. In particular, heat stress is becoming a growing concern, as it can affect animal welfare, feed intake, productivity and overall flock performance. As a result, ventilation, cooling, sensor-based climate control and adapted housing concepts are gaining importance as part of integrated approaches to more resilient and resource-efficient poultry production.

From trend to practical application

A defining feature of EuroTier is its focus on practical, farm-ready solutions. The technologies presented are not theoretical concepts, but advanced innovations that are already available on the market or are expected to be launched shortly.

For poultry professionals, this provides an opportunity to assess how new technologies can be integrated into their own operations. The exhibition enables direct comparison of different approaches, helping decision-makers identify solutions best suited to their specific production conditions.

For international visitors, EuroTier offers clear added value as a platform where technologies from different regions can be evaluated in a practical context.

Outlook

The future development of poultry production will continue to be shaped by resilience, biosecurity, efficiency and sustainability. At the same time, the sector’s growth momentum is expected to remain strong, supported by rising global demand and continued innovation. The trends observed in recent years, particularly in animal health, feeding systems, automation and housing, are therefore likely to remain central to the sector’s development.

EuroTier 2026 will provide a comprehensive overview of these developments and offer insights into how the poultry industry can turn growth opportunities into practical progress.

Readers of Poultry TRENDS are warmly invited to visit EuroTier 2026. For further information on visiting the exhibition or joining international visitor programmes, please contact Angelina Laas (DLG) at a.laas@dlg.org or visit www.eurotier.com.

The post Poultry Technology Trends 2026: From Biosecurity to Automation at EuroTier trade fair appeared first on Poultry TRENDS.

Aviagen^® TMEA (Türkiye, Middle East and Africa) is marking a new chapter in its regional leadership as Sergio Illán succeeds Tom Exley as President of Aviagen TMEA following Tom’s retirement after a distinguished career in the poultry industry.

During his leadership, Tom played a key role in strengthening collaboration across the TMEA region, bringing together teams, distributors and customers while fostering a strong sense of unity and shared purpose across continents, cultures and markets. His open and approachable leadership style helped deepen trusted relationships throughout the region and reinforced Aviagen’s reputation as a reliable, long-term presence in the industry.

Tom also guided the region through periods of global challenge with a strong focus on resilience, supporting robust supply networks and helping customers navigate an evolving industry landscape with confidence. Under his leadership, TMEA continued to support sustainable poultry production and food security initiatives aimed at meeting growing demand for affordable, high-quality protein. Following the completion of the leadership transition on 1 July, Tom will continue to support the business in an advisory capacity before retiring on 30 October 2026.

“Leading the TMEA region has been an incredibly rewarding experience, and I am proud of what we have achieved together over the years. What stands out most to me are the relationships we have built across our teams, customers and distributors, and the shared commitment to supporting the future of poultry production throughout the region. I leave knowing the business is in very capable hands with Sergio and look forward to seeing the TMEA region grow and succeed in the future,” commented Tom.

As the region enters its next chapter, Aviagen welcomes Sergio Illán as the new President of Aviagen TMEA.

Sergio brings extensive experience within the Aviagen business, most recently serving as General Manager of Aviagen SAU in Spain. He holds a degree in Veterinary Medicine from the Universitat Autónoma of Barcelona, an MSc in Pig Production from the University of Aberdeen and an Executive MBA from ESADE Business School.

Prior to joining Aviagen, Sergio built broad experience across the Spanish agricultural sector in nutrition, production and commercial roles. Throughout his career, he has worked across multiple livestock sectors, supporting operational development, customer service and business growth in international markets.

Known for his focus on operational excellence, sustainability and customer relationships, Sergio will lead the TMEA region into its next phase of growth and development.

Sergio added:“I am honored to take on this new role and continue building on the strong foundation that Tom has established across the region. The region is experiencing strong underlying drivers – population growth, urbanization, and rising incomes – all of which are fueling demand for affordable, high-quality protein. I look forward to working closely with our teams and customers to continue delivering innovation, performance and long-term success.”

Enteric bacterial pathogens such as Salmonella spp. and avian pathogenic Escherichia coli (APEC) continue to be major health challenges in the poultry industry. These infections in poultry lead to poor gut health, reduced feed efficiency, slower growth and increased morbidity and mortality, directly affecting overall productivity.

The situation is further complicated by the rising prevalence of antimicrobial resistance, which can reduce the effectiveness of commonly used antibiotics for disease control and treatment in poultry. When treatments become less effective, infections can last longer, leading to poor flock performance, higher production losses and an increased risk of disease spread. As a result, researchers are increasingly exploring sustainable alternatives that can control harmful bacteria while maintaining bird health and productivity.^1,2

Potential of bacteriophages

Bacteriophages (or phages), which literally means ‘bacteria eaters,’ are viruses that selectively target and infect bacteria. They are widely distributed in the environment, including soil and water, and are considered the most abundant biological entities on Earth. One of the most attractive qualities of bacteriophages is their high specificity to destroy only the targeted bacteria. Importantly, bacteriophages are generally considered safe for humans and animals.³

Because of these properties, bacteriophages have gained increasing attention as a potential alternative to antibiotics for controlling bacterial pathogens in poultry production. However, the successful application of bacteriophages requires a better understanding of their effects on animal growth and productivity, as any reduction in performance could outweigh the benefits of pathogen control.

Additionally, optimizing delivery methods and evaluating the long-term effects of bacteriophages on animal health and gut microbiome composition are essential for understanding the effectiveness and practicality of phage-based interventions in poultry production.

Study design

With growing interest in bacteriophages as alternatives to antibiotics, we sought to determine whether dietary phage supplementation could influence broiler growth, gut microbial communities and immune response to phages. To address this question, we conducted three experiments:

Experiment #1

We divided 170 one-day-old broiler chickens into five treatment groups:

1. Control group: No Salmonella gallinarum challenge and no phage treatment
2. Challenge control group: S. Gallinarum challenged, no phage treatment
3. Microencapsulated phage cocktail group: S. Gallinarum challenged, treated with microencapsulated phages
4. Unencapsulated phage cocktail group: S. Gallinarum challenged, treated with unencapsulated phages
5. Mixture of microencapsulated and unencapsulated phage cocktail group: S. Gallinarum challenged, treated with a mixture of microencapsulated and unencapsulated phages

We collected cecal samples before and after bacterial challenge and phage treatment via oral gavage to evaluate changes in the gut microbiome composition.

Experiment #2

In this experiment, we divided 104 one-day-old broiler chickens into four treatment groups:

1. Control group: No APEC challenge and no treatment
2. Challenge control group: APEC-challenged, no treatment
3. Phage-only group:  No APEC challenge, phage cocktail only
4. Phage-treated group: APEC-challenged, received a mixture of microencapsulated and unencapsulated phages

We collected cecal samples before and after bacterial challenge and phage treatment via oral gavage to evaluate changes in the gut microbiome.

Experiment #3

We used 108 one-day-old broiler chickens in a randomized block design and assigned them to four dietary treatments:

1. Control diet: No phage supplementation
2. Placebo group: Sodium alginate beads with lysogeny broth
3. Salmonella phage group: Diet supplemented with Salmonella Gallinarum phages
4. APEC phage group: Diet supplemented with APEC phages

We recorded body weight at weekly intervals (days 7, 14, 21, 28 and 35) and measured feed intake to calculate growth performance parameters, including average daily gain and feed conversion ratio. We also collected blood samples at the same time points to check for antibody production against phages.

Effects on gut microbiome

The gut microbiome plays a critical role in digestion, nutrient utilization and disease resistance. Maintaining a healthy balance of intestinal bacteria is essential for bird health and performance.

Our microbiome analysis revealed that phage treatments (Salmonella Gallinarum or APEC phages) primarily reduced targeted bacterial pathogens while leaving the overall gut microbial community largely unaffected. This finding is important because it indicates that phages can selectively control harmful bacteria without disrupting the normal bacterial populations that contribute to gut health.

We also observed a slight increase in beneficial bacterial genera, including Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium. These bacteria are commonly associated with improved intestinal health, better production and nutrient utilization.⁴

Performance, immune response

Our results showed that dietary phage supplementation improved broiler performance throughout the production cycle (7 to 35 days). Birds receiving phage-supplemented diets had better average daily gain and body weight gain compared to birds that did not receive phages.

These findings suggest that phages can support productivity while helping maintain a healthy intestinal environment. Improved growth performance is particularly important as producers seek alternatives that can enhance efficiency without relying heavily on antibiotics.

One concern surrounding long-term phage use is whether birds might develop an immune response against the phages, reducing their effectiveness over time. In our study, repeated exposure to phages (days 7 to 14 and 21 to 28) during the production period did not trigger measurable phage-specific antibody responses, suggesting that phages can be used during a typical broiler grow-out cycle without losing effectiveness due to immune system interference.⁴

Implications for poultry production

Bacteriophages offer a promising tool to help poultry producers manage bacterial pathogens while supporting bird performance and gut health. Our results demonstrate that phages selectively target harmful bacteria while preserving beneficial microbial populations in the intestine, making them a promising option to reduce antibiotic use while maintaining productivity in commercial poultry production.

Looking ahead, phages may become an important addition to integrated disease-control strategies in modern poultry production. As research continues, phages have the potential to provide producers with a practical and sustainable approach to managing bacterial pathogens, supporting gut health and improving bird performance, while helping reduce reliance on antibiotics.

References

1. Van Boeckel, T. P. et al. Global trends in antimicrobial resistance in animals in low- and middle-income countries. Science 365, eaaw1944 (2019).
2. Abbas, R. Z., Alsayeqh, A. F. & Aqib, A. I. Role of Bacteriophages for optimized health and production of poultry. Animals 12, 3378 (2022).
3. Abd-El Wahab, A. et al. An overview of the use of bacteriophages in the poultry industry: Successes, challenges, and possibilities for overcoming breakdowns. Frontiers in Microbiology Volume 14-2023, (2023).
4. Nazir, I. et al. Assessing the impact of phage therapy on growth performance, microbiome and phage specific immune response in chickens. Scientific Reports https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-45338-y (2026) doi:10.1038/s41598-026-45338-y.

Editor’s note: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.

The post Bacteriophages demonstrate potential to improve growth performance, immune response and gut health in chickens appeared first on Modern Poultry.

The heatwave affecting France has caused the death of hundreds of thousands of birds on farms, putting significant strain on carcass collection services. In the hardest-hit areas, temperatures have exceeded 40°C.

According to Yann Nedelec, president of the French association ANVOL, at least several hundred thousand birds have died, both in indoor and outdoor systems, although it is still too early to provide a definitive estimate. The Chambers of Agriculture of Brittany and Pays de la Loire have reported “massive” mortality events in the two regions, which together account for nearly 60% of France’s poultry population. France is the third-largest poultry producer in the European Union, after Poland and Spain.

Among the affected farmers is Clément Blanchard, in Pays de la Loire, who reported losing around 700 chickens in just a few days, compared to a normal mortality of one or two animals per day. “Animals suffer enormously from the heat and, at times like these, mortality increases abnormally,” he said.

Stéphane Delapré, a farmer from Beauvoir-sur-Mer, reported losing about half of the 17,600 chickens on his farm during the day of June 22, describing the event as unprecedented in his 42 years of activity.

The high number of carcasses has overwhelmed collection services. For this reason, French authorities have exceptionally authorized on-farm burial of dead animals. Farmers have also been advised to spread sawdust or wood shavings over the carcasses to absorb liquids.

As veterinarian Dominique Balloy pointed out, poultry do not have sweat glands and dissipate heat by breathing through their beaks. As temperatures rise, their respiratory rate increases, making these animals particularly sensitive to heat.

The heatwave is also affecting dairy cattle farms. According to reports from western France, high temperatures are reducing feed intake, increasing water requirements, and leading to a drop in milk production of between 15% and 20%.

Nepal is facing growing concerns over the spread of avian influenza, with outbreaks reported across the Kathmandu Valley and increasing scrutiny over containment measures in both commercial and public settings.

Recent cases of bird flu have been confirmed in multiple locations within the valley, prompting authorities to implement culling operations and tighten biosecurity controls. According to official reports, more than 600,000 poultry birds have been culled nationwide in an effort to contain the virus. The outbreaks have affected commercial farms as well as smaller poultry holdings, raising concerns about the effectiveness of surveillance and early detection systems.

The Kathmandu Valley, a densely populated region and a key hub for poultry consumption and trade, has emerged as a focal point of the crisis. Veterinary services have been mobilized to monitor the situation, while restrictions on the movement of poultry and related products have been introduced in affected areas. Despite these measures, the recurrence of outbreaks suggests persistent gaps in farm-level biosecurity and disease reporting.

Additional controversy has arisen around Nepal’s Central Zoo in Lalitpur, where bird flu cases were detected among captive birds. The zoo’s response has come under criticism from experts and animal health observers, who have questioned whether appropriate containment protocols were followed. Concerns have been raised regarding delayed action, alleged delays in reporting and implementing containment measures, and the potential risk of transmission to other animals.

The situation has highlighted broader structural challenges in Nepal’s animal health system, including limited resources, coordination issues between authorities, and the need for stronger preparedness strategies. Experts warn that without consistent enforcement of biosecurity measures and improved surveillance, the country may continue to face recurring outbreaks.

Authorities are urging farmers to adopt stricter hygiene practices, limit farm access, and report any signs of disease promptly. Public awareness campaigns are also being reinforced to reduce the risk of transmission and ensure safe handling of poultry products.

While no major human health impacts have been reported so far, officials remain on alert, emphasizing the importance of rapid response and inter-agency coordination to prevent further spread of the virus.

See also: Avian influenza spreads across Nepal’s poultry sector

In nature, fear protects animals from danger. In commercial settings, domestic laying hens are shielded from most fear-inducing stimuli, such as predators and unfamiliar situations. Therefore, fear serves as an aversive experience for the hens themselves and leads to undesired behaviors for producers.

Fear tests can provide information on how hens perceive their environment, allowing farmers and researchers to better understand these animals and provide the proper management to improve their welfare (see Poultry Press Vol. 33). This article discusses what we know about fear and its impact on laying hen behavior and welfare.

What is Fear?

Fear is a negative emotional state. In the wild, the aversive experience of fear prepares an animal to respond to perceived dangers by either engaging or escaping (fight or flight response) (Carli & Farabollini, 2022). While domesticated animals tend to show a reduced fear response due to selection for tameness, they can still experience fear similar to their wild ancestors (Jensen et al., 2005).

Even though domestic laying hens are protected from predation, they can still perceive humans or objects in the environment as dangers (Ferreira et al., 2025). The experience of fear is negative and although fear can still help birds respond to perceived threats in their environment, frequent or intense fear in captivity can reduce welfare and create management problems. Being fearful can also lead to behavioral issues that harm individual hens or their flock mates. For example, injurious feather pecking is associated with fearfulness. Chicks that are more fearful are slower to explore a novel environment or a novel object and more likely to develop injurious feather pecking as adults (Jensen et al., 2005; Rodenburg et al., 2004).

Fearful hens are also prone to panic and will try to escape or move away from the perceived danger. During escape attempts, fractures can happen when the hens collide with structures in their housing system or each other. This can be especially dangerous when the birds are housed in large flocks. When fear triggers the movement of a large flock, smothering can occur due to piling of the startled hens (Barrett et al., 2014; Gray et al., 2020). For more information about piling and smothering, see PEC Vol. 30. Lastly, experiencing fear can increase distress in laying hens, which can impact their growth, production and mortality (Barnett et al., 1994; Cockrem, 2007).

Development and Early Life Experience

Since the late 1950s, behavioral researchers have been studying the development of the fear response in laying hens. Tonic immobility (a fear response where the bird lies stationary; Figure 1), can be induced in chicks as early as 1-day post-hatch, which implies that fear is innate (Andrew & Brennan, 1983; Jaynes, 1958; Salzen, 1963; 1966).

Figure 1: Laying hen pullet in tonic immobility at 4 weeks old. Photo credit: Cloude Shao.

The fear response is also shaped by the environment. For example, a hen’s fear response can be reduced over time if exposed repeatedly to a fear-inducing stimulus, such as loud noise. This process is called habituation and has been observed in both layers and broilers (Ratner & Thompson, 1960; Jones, 1977; Jackson et al., 2025).

Strain Differences

Domestication has generally resulted in reduced fear in laying hens. If physically restrained by a rope around their feet, the ancestral red junglefowl will engage in more active fear responses than domestic hens, such as increased pecking at the restraining rope and vocalizing more (Schütz et al., 2001).

Fear responses are influenced by genetics. In general, white-feathered strains display more fear-related behavior than brown-feathered strains. White-feathered birds will remain in tonic immobility for longer periods of time (Albentosa et al., 2003), flee from an approaching human sooner, and take longer to approach a novel object or emerge from a shelter (Nelson et al., 2020). Overall, white and brown-feathered layers seem to adopt differing strategies in response to threats. Brown layers engage in more active responses, such as fighting back or attempting to escape, while white layers engage in more passive responses, such as freezing or remaining in tonic immobility longer (Brown et al., 2022).

There are also differences within similarly colored strains. For example, Tetra layers, a brown-feathered hen, will develop a progressively shorter tonic immobility response over time, but ISA Browns will not (Hocking et al., 2001).

Individual Differences

Differences in fear responses can also be observed at the individual level (Figure 2). During field observations on free-range farms, some hens ran away from an aerial predator while others approached and attacked. There were even instances of hens approaching the bird of prey (coming within 1 meter) and foraging nearby while it was consuming the kill (Bestman & Bikker-Ouwejan, 2020).

Figure 2: Laying hen pullets demonstrate an avoidance of humans from an early age. Strain and individual differences shape the fear response. Photo credit: Ruth Demree.

In standardized fear tests like the tonic immobility test, individual hens will differ in their response, and these differences persist over time. Further, an individual’s response to tonic immobility tests is associated with other behavioral responses, such as their response when isolated from the flock. This indicates that individual hens differ in their coping strategies (Ghareeb & Bohm, 2008), which has management implications.

Strategies to Reduce Fear

Fear behavior can be reduced in a domestic environment. Several strategies for reducing fear are listed below. As fear can be influenced by environment, individuals, and genetics generally, reduction often requires a combination of strategies.

Early-life environment:

• Provide environmental complexity from an early age, such as environmental enrichment, perches, dustbathing and foraging areas.
• Maintain a predictable routine to encourage habituation.

Stockmanship:

• Maintain a calm demeanor when engaging with the hens.
• Limit the use of physical restraint.
• Use panels to guide/separate hens without chasing them.

Housing Design:

• Provide a consistent environment, for instance by minimizing loud noises, avoiding drastic lighting changes, and by knocking or calling before entry.
• Be aware of potential risk factors within enclosures. For example, multi-tier aviary structures can be the source of collisions, leading to injury.

Strain selection:

• Work with breeder companies to find the right strain and temperament for your housing and management style.

Summary

• Laying hens can experience fear from an early age.
• Fear negatively affects hen welfare.
• Early life experience, strain, and individual differences impact the development of fear in laying hens.
• Fear behavior can be reduced, but often requires a multi-pronged strategy.

References

Albentosa, M. J., Kjaer, J. B., & Nicol, C. J. (2003). Strain and age differences in behaviour, fear response and pecking tendency in laying hens. British Poultry Science, 44(3), 333–344. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071660310001598085

Barnett, J. L., Hemsworth, P. H., Hennessy, D. P., McCallum, T. H., & Newman, E. A. (1994). The effects of modifying the amount of human contact on behavioural, physiological and production responses of laying hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 41(1), 87–100. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-1591(94)90054-X

Barrett, J., Rayner, A. C., Gill, R., Willings, T. H., & Bright, A. (2014). Smothering in UK free‐range flocks. Part 1: Incidence, location, timing and management. Veterinary Record, 175(1), 19–19. https://doi.org/10.1136/vr.102327

Bestman, M., Verwer, C., Van Niekerk, T., Leenstra, F., Reuvekamp, B., Amsler-Kepalaite, Z., & Maurer, V. (2019). Factors related to free-range use in commercial laying hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 214, 57–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2019.02.015

Brown, A. A., Sobotik, E. B., House, G. M., Nelson, J. R., & Archer, G. S. (2022). Differences in fear response strategy and stress susceptibility amongst four different commercial layer strains reared cage free. Frontiers in Physiology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2022.943471

Carli, G., & Farabollini, F. (2022). Introduction to defensive behavior in vertebrates. In Progress in Brain Research (Vol. 271, Issue 1, pp. 37–49). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.pbr.2022.02.002

Cockrem, J. F. (2007). Stress, corticosterone responses and avian personalities. Journal of Ornithology, 148(S2), 169–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10336-007-0175-8

Ferreira, V. H. B., Lansade, L., & Calandreau, L. (2025). How do domestic chickens perceive humans—And why does it matter? World’s Poultry Science Journal, 0(0), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/00439339.2025.2597741

Ghareeb, K., & Bohm, J. (2008). Fear Behaviour, Ease of Capture and PerformanceTraits of Growing Meat Type Chickens. International Journal of Poultry Science, 7(12), 1185–1189. https://doi.org/10.3923/ijps.2008.1185.1189

Gray, H., Davies, R., Bright, A., Rayner, A., & Asher, L. (2020). Why Do Hens Pile? Hypothesizing the Causes and Consequences. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 7, 616836. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2020.616836

Hocking, P. M., Channing, C. E., Waddington, D., & Jones, R. B. (2001). Age-related changes in fear, sociality and pecking behaviours in two strains of laying hen. British Poultry Science, 42(4), 414–423. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071660120070686

Jackson, A., Quino, M., Gautam, A., Gilpin, M., Still, K., Landers, D., & Baker-Cook, B. (2025). The impact of multiple exposures and movement on the fear response of poultry. Poultry Science, 104(1), 104594. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2024.104594

Jensen, P., Keeling, L., Schütz, K., Andersson, L., Mormède, P., Brändström, H., Forkman, B., Kerje, S., Fredriksson, R., Ohlsson, C., Larsson, S., Mallmin, H., & Kindmark, A. (2005). Feather pecking in chickens is genetically related to behavioural and developmental traits. Physiology & Behavior, 86(1–2), 52–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2005.06.029

Jones, R. B. (1977). Repeated exposure of the domestic chick to a novel environment: Effects on behavioural responses. Behavioural Processes, 2(2), 163–173. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0376-6357(77)90018-3

Nelson, J. R., Settar, P., Berger, E., Wolc, A., O’Sullivan, N., & Archer, G. S. (2020). Brown and white egg-layer strain differences in fearfulness and stress measures. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 231, 105087. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2020.105087

Ratner, S. C. (1967). Annelids and Learning: A Critical Review. In W. C. Corning & S. C. Ratner (Eds.), Chemistry of Learning (pp. 391–406). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-6565-3_24

Rodenburg, T. B., Buitenhuis, A. J., Ask, B., Uitdehaag, K. A., Koene, P., Van Der Poel, J. J., Van Arendonk, J. A. M., & Bovenhuis, H. (2004). Genetic and Phenotypic Correlations Between Feather Pecking and Open-Field Response in Laying Hens at Two Different Ages. Behavior Genetics, 34(4), 407–415. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BEGE.0000023646.46940.2d

Schütz, K. E., Forkman, B., & Jensen, P. (2001). Domestication effects on foraging strategy, social behaviour and different fear responses: A comparison between the red junglefowl (Gallus gallus) and a modern layer strain. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 74(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(01)00156-3

To view all issues of Poultry Press, click here.

Editor’s note: Content on Modern Poultry’s Industry Insights pages is provided and/or commissioned by our sponsors, who assume full responsibility for its accuracy and compliance.

The post Fear in laying hens: causes, consequences and management strategies appeared first on Modern Poultry.

VIV Africa, part of the VIV Worldwide portfolio organized by VNU Europe, today opened visitor registration for its 2026 edition, to be held on 7–8 October at the Kigali Convention Centre (KCC) in Kigali, Rwanda, with the Leadership Conference taking one day before the official exhibition on 6 October. Now in its fifth edition, VIV Africa has grown from the well-established Poultry Africa into the leading Feed to Food platform for Sub-Saharan Africa, and industry professionals from across the region are invited to register now for free entry.

Spanning 1,650 sqm of exhibition space, VIV Africa 2026 will bring together over 150 exhibitors covering the complete animal protein supply chain across five key sectors: Farm Production, Feed Ingredients & Additives, Feed & Grain Technology, Processing, and Animal Health. With a strong focus on poultry layers and broilers, the show also features a dedicated Dairy Pavilion reflecting its continued focus into broader agrifood sectors. The show expects to welcome 2000 visitors from across the region, including Rwanda, Kenya, Nigeria, Tanzania, Ethiopia, South Africa, Cameroon, and Sudan, as well as international visitors from around the world.

“VIV Africa has become a meeting point where the region’s animal protein industry comes to make real decisions, not just window-shop,” says Natalie Taylor, Project Manager for VIV Africa. “Sub-Saharan Africa is one of the fastest-growing markets for animal protein in the world, and the businesses that get this region right today will be the ones leading it tomorrow. Our job is to make sure that when international suppliers and local producers are ready to do business, VIV Africa is where that happens. Every edition, we see more serious buyers, more depth in the exhibitor line-up, and more deals struck on the show floor — and 2026 is set to be our biggest step yet.”

Why Attend VIV Africa

VIV Africa is designed to turn a three-day visit into measurable business outcomes. The show opens with a high-level Leadership Conference on October 6—one day before the official exhibitions starts—bringing together an international line-up of experts to unpack the trends, challenges, and opportunities shaping poultry, agriculture, and dairy across the continent. For a fee of 140 USD, the Leadership Conference is a must for decision-makers who want the bigger picture before hitting the show floor. The two-day exhibition that follows after (October 7-8) is free entry for those with valid registrations.

The Hosted Buyer Program is also open for senior decision-makers and qualified buyers from across the animal protein value chain. This is a curated opportunity to connect with leading exhibitors and receive a tailored experience of scheduled introductions, exclusive networking opportunities, premium event access, and dedicated support throughout their visit to VIV Africa 2026.

Certain qualifications for the program include: key decision-makers with significant purchasing authority and strategic buying responsibility within their organization, including company owners, directors, or heads of procurement; buyers representing organizations with a clear budget and timeline for purchasing within the next 12 months; and senior technical or operational leads with direct influence over supplier selection.

Register Now for VIV Africa 2026

Visitor registration for VIV Africa 2026 is open now at www.vivafrica.nl. Registering in advance secures a free badge, avoids queues onsite, and gives early access to the exhibitor list and full onsite program — helping visitors plan their visit in Kigali before they even arrive.

Source: VIV worldwide press release

Romanian poultry producer Holding Familia Safir has completed the acquisition of poultry production sites in Tătărăști and Parincea, in Bacău county, as well as Simila-Zorleni in Vaslui county, in a transaction worth EUR 16.5 million, excluding VAT. The deal marks a significant step in the company’s strategy to expand its production capacity and strengthen its long-term growth in the Romanian poultry sector.

The transaction was finalized through Sagem, part of the Familia Safir group, and includes land, buildings, facilities and equipment previously used for poultry farming activities. According to local reports, the acquisition is expected to increase the company’s production by around 39%, supporting a broader expansion plan focused on efficiency and scale.

Holding Familia Safir said the investment is part of a wider effort to reinforce its integrated business model and respond to rising market demand. The group has been building on its long-standing presence in the Romanian meat industry, with recent moves aimed at improving production capacity, product range and operational resilience.

By expanding its production assets, Familia Safir aims to strengthen its production capacity and further consolidate its integrated poultry business in eastern Romania.

During the reporting period, 154 HPAI A(H5N1) outbreaks were reported in poultry across 12 European countries. Poland accounted for 102 of these outbreaks, representing 66% of the total. The 102 affected establishments in Poland involved more than 5.7 million birds, representing 88% of the 6.53 million birds recorded in HPAI-affected poultry establishments across Europe during the reporting period.

According to the report, HPAI transmission persisted locally in Poland through multiple primary introductions and secondary spread between poultry flocks, making the country the main hotspot for poultry outbreaks in Europe during the spring. While overall HPAI activity declined compared with the winter months, virus circulation continued to be sustained in Poland.

Additional epidemiological information was available for 97 of the 102 outbreaks. These occurred mainly in commercial turkey, laying hen, breeder chicken and duck farms, with smaller numbers of outbreaks reported in broilers, geese and mixed-purpose poultry establishments. Indirect contact with wild birds was identified as the most likely source of introduction in 57 outbreaks, while indirect contact with poultry was considered the probable source in another 20 cases. Direct contact with wild birds was reported in one outbreak, and the source of introduction remained unknown in 19 outbreaks. Mortality was reported in 92 of the 97 investigated outbreaks.

The report notes that most outbreaks were recorded in the Mazowieckie, Wielkopolskie and Warmińsko-Mazurskie regions. Only seven of the 97 establishments for which additional information was available had outdoor access, while the remaining farms operated without outdoor access.

Across Europe, the overall number of HPAI outbreaks in poultry declined during the reporting period compared with the winter season. However, Poland continued to account for the largest share of outbreaks, underlining the importance of maintaining strict biosecurity and surveillance in areas with sustained virus circulation.

Also read: Avian influenza activity declines across Europe as spring ends

France lowers HPAI risk level and lifts nationwide poultry housing measures

First European detection of H9N2 clade G5.5 reported in Hungarian broiler farms

According to the report, poultry production expanded by more than 5% year-on-year during the first quarter of 2026 in many major markets. China, the European Union, South Africa, the Philippines and Brazil were among the main contributors to this growth. Poultry meat also continues to benefit from a favourable price position relative to beef, supporting an ongoing shift towards chicken consumption.

Despite the positive outlook, Rabobank notes that weaker economic conditions and increasing price sensitivity among consumers could weigh on demand, particularly in lower-income markets in southern Asia and parts of Africa.

The report also highlights a growing shift towards local production as more countries adopt food security strategies aimed at reducing dependence on imports. This trend is becoming increasingly evident across parts of Africa, the Middle East and Southeast Asia. China is identified as a notable example, having transitioned from the world’s largest chicken importer to a significant net exporter.

Global poultry trade nevertheless remained resilient during the first quarter of 2026, growing by 3.5% year-on-year despite ongoing geopolitical tensions. Trade flows to Gulf markets remained resilient, supported by key exporting countries and regional trade hubs, including Brazil, Ukraine, Türkiye, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Oman.

Rabobank also notes that the interim agreement between the United States and Iran, which extends the ceasefire and supports the reopening of commercial traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, could reduce short-term risks for energy and shipping markets while supporting trade in poultry products and feed ingredients.

Looking ahead, the report identifies several factors that could influence market conditions, including geopolitical uncertainty, the potential effects of El Niño and a tight global breeding stock market. It also notes that the potential removal of Brazilian poultry products from EU imports could reshape international trade flows, pushing EU prices higher, Brazilian prices lower and increasing imports from alternative suppliers such as Thailand and China.

Against this backdrop, Rabobank concludes that maintaining market balance will require disciplined production planning and a continued focus on operational excellence as the poultry industry operates in an increasingly uncertain and volatile market environment.

The USDA semi-annual report on EU poultry forecasts growth in chicken meat production for 2026. It highlights production gains amid easing disease pressures and steady demand.

Production growth

EU chicken meat production is projected at 12.25 million metric tons (MT) in 2026, up from 12.09 MT in 2025 and 11.73 MT in 2024 (Table 1). This uptick stems from robust domestic demand, fewer high-pathogenicity avian influenza (HPAI) outbreaks, and lower energy and feed prices supporting producers’ income, especially in top producers Poland, that holds over 22% of total EU output despite health challenges.

Environmental caps limit gains in the Netherlands, Belgium, and Germany via nitrogen emission rules.

Rising consumption

Domestic consumption climbs 1.4% to 11.235 MT in 2026, fueled by retail and HRI (hotels, restaurants, institutions) sectors. Chicken’s appeal as an affordable, healthy, versatile protein persists over red meats, aligning with long-term trends in price sensitivity and wellness. HRI demand particularly lifts per-capita intake across the EU.

Trade dynamics

Imports edge up 1% to 760,000 MT in 2026 after a 5.4% growth in 2025, driven by HRI needs. The UK remains top supplier but faces post-Brexit checks and imports declined by 8% in 2025; Ukraine stabilizes at 136,000 MT under revised DCFTA (Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement) quotas from October 2025, curbing sensitive products. Thailand (+16%) and China (+36%, over 55,000 MT for Asian HRI) gain share thanks to lower competition from Ukraine, while Brazil hits EU quota limits.

Lower-priced Ukrainian chicken meat and ongoing HPAI and ND outbreaks may continue to restrain EU exports, while lower production costs support competitiveness.

In 2026 exports are expected to rise by 2% to 1.775 MT, rebounding from 2025’s 2% dip due to HPAI/ND curbs. Losses in Vietnam (-14%) and Saudi Arabia (-21%) are offset by gains in Ghana (+15%), DR Congo (+23%), and Philippines (+65%). The UK leads markets; low costs could boost dark meat competitiveness in sub-Saharan Africa.

The EU has recently finalized and rolled out several free trade agreements (FTAs) that include concessions on livestock products. First of all, Mercosur, for whom negotiations wrapped up in December 2024, leading to formal signatures in January 2026 in Asunción, Paraguay, by representatives from the EU and the Mercosur countries (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay). The deal splits into an Interim Trade Agreement covering trade and investment, plus a broader Partnership Agreement. It features strong bilateral safeguard clauses to shield EU agriculture from market disruptions, with the European Parliament approving rules in February 2026 that allow tariff suspensions if sensitive product imports rise more than 5% above a three-year average. Duties will phase out gradually on 91% of EU exports to Mercosur and 92% of their exports to the EU, though the agreement is now under legal review by the European Court of Justice at Parliament’s request to check treaty compatibility.

For Ukraine, the EU offered temporary trade liberalization through Autonomous Trade Measures (ATMs) from June 2022 until June 2025. After that, relations reverted to the original 2014 DCFTA under Regulation 1132/2025, reimposing quotas on Ukrainian agricultural goods until late October. The revised DCFTA then took effect on October 29, 2025 (Regulation 2025/2199), expanding mutual market access beyond 2014 levels while capping EU imports of sensitive products compared to the ATM period. It adds a new safeguard mechanism and aligns Ukrainian production standards with EU rules.

Key EU policies

CAP simplification (May 2025) simplify administrative burdens and environmental requirements linked to eco-payments, effective 2026. Omnibus food safety law (December 2025) includes provisions requiring imported products to meet EU environmental, food safety, and animal welfare standards, in line with the “mirror clause” approach.

On the trade front, significant shifts are underway: the revised Ukraine DCFTA introduces caps on sensitive imports, while the Mercosur deal (formally signed in January 2026) includes agricultural safeguards like tariff suspensions if imports exceed 5%. Meanwhile, EUDR deforestation rules have been delayed until December 30, 2026, with simplifications for EU operators.

Sector implications

The report points to continued growth in 2026 for EU poultry, with export growth of around 2% and production growth of 1.3%. Poland remains the leading producer, although disease and environmental constraints persist in parts of the EU.

Source

European Union: Poultry and Products Semi-annual, USDA Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS).
https://apps.fas.usda.gov/newgainapi/api/Report/DownloadReportByFileName?fileName=Poultry%20and%20Products%20Semi-annual_Paris_European%20Union_E42026-0019.pdf