Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 252

1.

Environmental impacts and sustainability of egg production systems.

Xin H, Gates RS, Green AR, Mitloehner FM, Moore PA Jr, Wathes CM.

Poult Sci. 2011 Jan;90(1):263-77. doi: 10.3382/ps.2010-00877. Review.

PMID:
21177468
2.

Environmental assessment of three egg production systems--Part II. Ammonia, greenhouse gas, and particulate matter emissions.

Shepherd TA, Zhao Y, Li H, Stinn JP, Hayes MD, Xin H.

Poult Sci. 2015 Mar;94(3):534-43. doi: 10.3382/ps/peu075.

3.

Economic and market issues on the sustainability of egg production in the United States: analysis of alternative production systems.

Sumner DA, Gow H, Hayes D, Matthews W, Norwood B, Rosen-Molina JT, Thurman W.

Poult Sci. 2011 Jan;90(1):241-50. doi: 10.3382/ps.2010-00822.

PMID:
21177466
4.

Sustainability of egg production in the United States--the policy and market context.

Mench JA, Sumner DA, Rosen-Molina JT.

Poult Sci. 2011 Jan;90(1):229-40. doi: 10.3382/ps.2010-00844.

PMID:
21177465
5.

Environmental assessment of three egg production systems--Part I: Monitoring system and indoor air quality.

Zhao Y, Shepherd TA, Li H, Xin H.

Poult Sci. 2015 Mar;94(3):518-33. doi: 10.3382/ps/peu076.

6.

Nutrient flow and distribution in conventional cage, enriched colony, and aviary layer houses.

Lin XJ, Zhang R, Jiang S, Elmashad HM, Mitloehner F.

Poult Sci. 2016 Jan;95(1):213-24. doi: 10.3382/ps/pev307. Epub 2015 Dec 1.

PMID:
26628346
7.

Prevention and control of losses of gaseous nitrogen compounds in livestock operations: a review.

Jongebreur AA, Monteny GJ.

ScientificWorldJournal. 2001 Nov 27;1 Suppl 2:844-51.

8.

Environmental assessment of three egg production systems - Part III: Airborne bacteria concentrations and emissions.

Zhao Y, Zhao D, Ma H, Liu K, Atilgan A, Xin H.

Poult Sci. 2016 Jul 1;95(7):1473-81. doi: 10.3382/ps/pew053. Epub 2016 Mar 18.

PMID:
26994201
9.

Management to reduce nitrogen losses in animal production.

Rotz CA.

J Anim Sci. 2004;82 E-Suppl:E119-137. Review.

10.

Impact of commercial housing systems and nutrient and energy intake on laying hen performance and egg quality parameters.

Karcher DM, Jones DR, Abdo Z, Zhao Y, Shepherd TA, Xin H.

Poult Sci. 2015 Mar;94(3):485-501. doi: 10.3382/ps/peu078. Epub 2015 Jan 28.

11.

Production performance and egg quality of four strains of laying hens kept in conventional cages and floor pens.

Singh R, Cheng KM, Silversides FG.

Poult Sci. 2009 Feb;88(2):256-64. doi: 10.3382/ps.2008-00237.

PMID:
19151338
12.

Bacteriological contamination, dirt, and cracks of eggshells in furnished cages and noncage systems for laying hens: an international on-farm comparison.

De Reu K, Rodenburg TB, Grijspeerdt K, Messens W, Heyndrickx M, Tuyttens FA, Sonck B, Zoons J, Herman L.

Poult Sci. 2009 Nov;88(11):2442-8. doi: 10.3382/ps.2009-00097.

PMID:
19834098
13.

Reducing ammonia emissions from laying-hen houses through dietary manipulation.

Li H, Xin H, Burns RT, Roberts SA, Li S, Kliebenstein J, Bregendahl K.

J Air Waste Manag Assoc. 2012 Feb;62(2):160-9.

PMID:
22442932
14.

The impact of different housing systems on egg safety and quality.

Holt PS, Davies RH, Dewulf J, Gast RK, Huwe JK, Jones DR, Waltman D, Willian KR.

Poult Sci. 2011 Jan;90(1):251-62. doi: 10.3382/ps.2010-00794.

PMID:
21177467
15.

Microbiological impact of three commercial laying hen housing systems.

Jones DR, Cox NA, Guard J, Fedorka-Cray PJ, Buhr RJ, Gast RK, Abdo Z, Rigsby LL, Plumblee JR, Karcher DM, Robison CI, Blatchford RA, Makagon MM.

Poult Sci. 2015 Mar;94(3):544-51. doi: 10.3382/ps/peu010. Epub 2014 Dec 5.

16.

Carbon footprint and ammonia emissions of California beef production systems.

Stackhouse-Lawson KR, Rotz CA, Oltjen JW, Mitloehner FM.

J Anim Sci. 2012 Dec;90(12):4641-55. doi: 10.2527/jas.2011-4653. Epub 2012 Sep 5.

17.

Survey of egg producers on the introduction of alternative housing systems for laying hens in Flanders, Belgium.

Tuyttens FA, Sonck B, Staes M, Van Gansbeke S, Van den Bogaert T, Ampe B.

Poult Sci. 2011 Apr;90(4):941-50. doi: 10.3382/ps.2010-01122.

PMID:
21406383
18.

Production performance and nitrogen flow of Shaver White layers housed in enriched or conventional cage systems.

Neijat M, House JD, Guenter W, Kebreab E.

Poult Sci. 2011 Mar;90(3):543-54. doi: 10.3382/ps.2010-01069.

PMID:
21325224
19.

Introduction--the Socially Sustainable Egg Production project.

Swanson JC, Mench JA, Thompson PB.

Poult Sci. 2011 Jan;90(1):227-8. doi: 10.3382/ps.2010-01266.

PMID:
21177464
20.

The effect of cage and house design on egg production and egg weight of White Leghorn hens: an epidemiological study.

Garner JP, Kiess AS, Mench JA, Newberry RC, Hester PY.

Poult Sci. 2012 Jul;91(7):1522-35. doi: 10.3382/ps.2011-01969.

PMID:
22700495

Supplemental Content

Support Center