







































 

 

 
1 

© 2023 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

Impact of led lighting color on productive and behavioral characteristics of the broiler 
chickens   

 

 

Albert R Reyad1 
Gala Abou Khadiga1 

 Alaa E Elkomy1,2+ 
Ibraheim M Abaza1 
Farid N K Soliman3 

 

1Faculty of Desert and Environmental Agriculture, Matrouh University, 
Matrouh, Egypt. 
1Email: albertromil80@gmail.com   
1Email: galal.aboukhadiga@mau.edu.eg  
1Email: ibrahimabaza@mau.edu.eg     
2Arid Lands Cultivation Research Institute, City of Scientific Research and 
Technology Application, Borg El-Arab, Egypt. 
1,2Email: alaa_elkomy@yahoo.com    
3Department of Animal and Poultry Production, Faculty of Agriculture, 
Alexandria University, Egypt. 
3Email: nassif08@yahoo.com  

 

 
(+ Corresponding author) 

 ABSTRACT 
 
Article History 
Received: 6 February 2023 
Revised: 12 April 2023 
Accepted: 28 April 2023  
Published: 9 May 2023 
 

Keywords 
Behavior 
Broiler 
LED 
Light color. 

 
The present study was conducted to investigate the effect of color (white and blue-
green) of LED lighting on the productive, carcass and behavior traits of Cobb broiler 
chickens. Total of 200 one- day-old unsexed chicks were used, and divided into two 
pens/groups (100 birds of each with 25 birds of each replicate), at stocking density of 
8.7 bird/ square meters. First pen used for LED white color and second pen for LED 
blue- green mix color light.  The results showed that the birds exposed to blue-green 
light had significant higher (P≤0.01) BW, DBWG and FC values of the whole 
experimental period compared to those exposed to white color.  However, the light 
color had no significant effect on FCR and MR measurements with average values 1.44 
and 0.50%, respectively. The birds exposed to blue-green light had significant higher 
pre-slaughter live BW and carcass weights (P≤0.01) compared to those exposed to 
white color. The birds exposed to blue-green light had higher insignificant dressing 
percentage compared to those exposed to white color. The weekly behavior results 
showed highly significant differences (P≤0.01) among weeks for aggressiveness and 
immobility activities, while it being insignificant for pecking activity. The correlation 
value between immobility and five-week BW of birds reared under blue-green light was 
the only significant value (0.42) among all studied values. In conclusion, the results 
indicated that Cobb broilers were calmer under blue-green light compared to those 
reared under white light, which contributed in more better performance traits. 
 

Contribution/Originality: Lighting plays an important role in the behavior and productivity of broiler chicks. 

LED bulbs are considered one of the modern lighting technologies, so this study was conducted to test the LED 

lighting lamps on the productivity of broiler chicks to improving productivity and saving the high cost of electrical 

energy when using ordinary lamps. 

 

1. INTRODUCTION 

The broiler production sector is characterized by a higher feed conversion rate comparison with other animals, 

where, each one kg of meat needs 2.0-2.5 kg feed, meanwhile, each one kg of red meat needs more than 7 Kg feed. 

Also, it has a higher economic return due to its short production cycle. The capital cycle of broiler production can 

be repeated seven times a year, and needs small area compared to other animals [1]. Moreover, the changing  

Animal Review 
2023 Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 1-11. 
ISSN(e): 2409-6490 
ISSN(p): 2412-3382 
DOI: 10.18488/92.v10i1.3360 
© 2023 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

 
 
 

 
 
 
 

 

 
 
 
 

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7203-7000
mailto:albertromil80@gmail.com
mailto:galal.aboukhadiga@mau.edu.eg
mailto:ibrahimabaza@mau.edu.eg
mailto:alaa_elkomy@yahoo.com
mailto:nassif08@yahoo.com
https://www.doi.org/10.18488/92.v10i1.3360


Animal Review, 2023, 10(1): 1-11 

 

 
2 

© 2023 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

patterns of human resource usage and food consumption have profoundly impacted the Earth’s biosphere, broiler 

chickens are one such distinctive signs of this impact. However, broiler chickens now unable to survive without 

human intervention [2]. 

Breeders must adopt new technologies to meet this demand that will enable them to increase production at 

lower cost and with minimal stress on the environment. Most of these production techniques focus on enhancing 

traditional inputs such as water, air, nutrients and housing. Lighting and its characteristics need further 

clarification as a contributing factor to broiler productivity. Factors involved in light management for poultry 

include light source, intensity, duration, uniformity, and wavelength/color [3]. Artificial light in broiler production 

has a role in improving immunity [4, 5]. Increasing the immune response can reduce the risks of diseases and the 

costs of their treatment, which is reflected in higher levels of survival and lower production costs, which supports 

profitability [6]. By choosing the optimal light source and taking advantage of the unique spectral requirements of 

poultry, it is possible to maximize growth and  efficiency, while, reducing stress and fostering ideal behavior [7]. 

Recently, light emitting diode (LED) lamps have been  interesting in poultry production sector because of 

their more durable, and retain the light intensity for considerably longer periods [8], high energy efficiency [9], 

long operating life, availabile in different wavelengths, low electricity consumption, provides adequate illumination, 

which, led to low rearing cost [10]. 

the present study was designed to investigate the effect of color (white and blue-green) of LED lighting on the 

productive, carcass and behavior traits of Cobb broiler chickens. 

 

2. MATERIAL AND METHODS 

2.1. Experimental Design and Management 

The present study was conducted at private farm in Marsa Matrouh city from 10 April to 14 May 2020. The 

aim of the study was to investigate the effect of color (white and blue-green) of LED lighting on the productive, 

carcass and behavior traits of Cobb broiler chickens. 

Total of 200 one- day-old unsexed broiler chicks (Cobb strain) were purchased from Al-watania Poultry 

Company. The average weight of the chick at one- day-old was 42 ± 3.00 grams. The experiment was conducted 

using two open pens; each has 3.3 × 3.5 × 3.10 m for length, width and height, respectively. Each pen divided to 

four compartments (replicates), with repeated measures of 1.75X1.65 m. for length and width, respectively. The 

birds were divided into two groups (100 birds of each), then divided to 4 subgroups/replicates (25 birds of each), at 

stocking density of 8.7 bird/ square meters. A 70 cm high guard wire was used to separate the four replicates within 

each pen. Light emitting diode (LED) lamps (nine watts and 900 lumen) were installed in both pens. First pen used 

for LED white color (650nm) light and another pen for LED blue- green mix color light (430-565nm). Lamps were 

distributed as the distance between the lamps is twice the distance between the lamp and the wall, to ensure 

uniformity of illumination intensity. The lighting intensity was 25 lux, measured by lux meter each week. The 

lamps were cleaned from dust weekly for maintaining the intensity of light. The birds have the same managerial 

procedures in both pens throughout the experimental period (34 days of age).  

 

2.2. Studied Traits 

Live body weight (BW) and body weight gain (BWG) (as g) (for each bird) were recorded weekly per each 

treatment group. Feed consumption (FC) (as g) and feed conversion ratio (FCR) (as g feed intake /g body weight 

gain) were recorded for each replicate of each treatment.  

Daily mortality of chicks (MR) was recorded and calculated as a percentage for both treatments for the whole 

experimental period. At the end of the experiment, five birds from each replicate of each treatment were randomly 

chosen, weighed individually and slaughtered with a sharp knife by cutting the jugular veins of the neck. Upon 

verification of complete bleeding, the feathers, viscera and other uneaten parts were removed and the carcass weight 



Animal Review, 2023, 10(1): 1-11 

 

 
3 

© 2023 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

of each bird measured. The dressing percentage expressed as carcass weight divided on live body weight was 

measured. Each carcass was cut into two parts (breast and thigh). The breast (half of the whole breast) and thigh 

(single thigh + drumstick) were weighed using a sensitive digital scale to the nearest 0.01 gram, and expressed as a 

relative to live body weight. Also, the gizzard, liver, heart and kidney were weighed, and expressed as a relative to 

live body weight. 

 

2.3. Behavior Traits 

Bird behavior was assessed on the basis of expression, where five birds were randomly selected from each 

replicate and painted black color on their backs weekly. The behavior of the birds was recorded using Samsung 

video camera with specifications: 

• Sensor type: complementary metal-oxide semiconductor (CMOS). 

• Video resolution: 1920×1080 pixels.  

• Video FPS: 30 fps (frames per second).  

The camera was placed at a height of 250cm to see the full pen. The registration of the behavior started on the 

fifth day. The behavior activities (immobility, aggressiveness and pecking) have been recorded as 

number/bird/hour for one hour each day between 10 pm to 11 pm.  

Aggressiveness:  Categorized as a bird attacking another bird, as well as pecking the feathers and bodies of other 

birds, and attempting to cause injuries [11, 12].  

Immobility: Categorized as a bird that transited from a state of movement to a state of sitting and stability, 

meaning that the bird does not eat, drink or perform any action or activity, and that behavior reflects comfort [11, 

13-15].  

Pecking: Categorized as a bird that pecking litter, walls, and equipment, not other bird [16]. 

 

2.4. Statistical Analysis 

In order to assess the effect of wavelengths of lighting on the performance of broiler chickens, data of all 

variables were subjected to analyses of variance (ANOVA)  using the general linear models (GLM) procedure [17]. 

Significant differences among means were evaluated using Duncan multiple range test [18]. In addition, simple 

correlation (Pearson) values were estimated [17] between behavior and performance traits. 

 

3. RESULT AND DISCUSSIONS 

3.1. Performance Traits 

At the end of the experimental period, the results of Table 1 showed significant effect between studied light 

treatments on five-week body weight (BW), daily body weight gain (DBWG), and feed consumption (FC) values, 

while it being in significant on feed conversion ratio (FCR) and mortality rate (MR) values.  

 

Table 1. Mean and standard error (µ±SE) of performance traits of cobb broiler strain exposed to different LDL colors during fattening period. 

Age (Week) 
Treatments 

Overall mean P-value 
White light Blue-green light 

5-wk BW 44.51  ±2177.20b 46.24  ±2317.97a 32.60   ± 2247.58 0.03** 

0-5wk DBWG 5.47 ± 61.01b 1.32  ±65.03a 0.93  ±63.02 0.03** 

0-5wk FC 3068.27b ± 3.28 3115.17a ± 3.57 3091.72 ± 3.23 0.00** 

0-5wk FCR 1.48 ± 0.03 1.40 ± 0.03 1.44 ± 0.02 0.11NS 

0-5wk MR 0.60 ± 0.24 0.40 ± 0.24 0.50 ± 0.17 0.37NS 
Note:  NS: Non significant, **: P<0.01, Mean values with different superscripts within a row differ significantly. 

 

The birds exposed to blue-green light had significant higher BW, DBWG and FC values of the whole 

experimental period at (2317.97, 65.03 and 3115.17g, respectively) compared to those exposed to white color 



Animal Review, 2023, 10(1): 1-11 

 

 
4 

© 2023 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

(2177.20, 61.01, 3068.27g, respectively).  However, the overall mean of FCR and MR values for both treatments 

were 1.44 and 0.50%, respectively.   

The findings of BW and DBWG are in agreement with the results of Mosa, et al. [19]; Senaratna, et al. [20] 

and Balabel, et al. [21] who found that blue – green light among other light colors showed to be enhancer for 

growth BW in their studies with Ross 308, Cobb and Cobb broiler chickens, respectively. Moreover, broilers 

chickens reared under blue and green monochromatic light experienced increased BW compared to broilers exposed 

to white or red light [22-25]. Moreover, Nelson, et al. [26] found that Ross 708 broilers reared under white LED 

supplemented with blue/green light had higher overall day 45 live body weight than birds reared under only white 

LED light.   

In contrast, the red light showed to has higher preference and improved BWG compared to green, blue and 

white color lights [27]. However, other studies have reported no effect of light wavelength on BW and BWG [28, 

29]. 

To better understand the increased growth of broilers reared under green light, Liu, et al. [30] found that 

satellite cell mitotic activity increased under green light compared to blue and red light. However, both blue and 

green lights had improved as insulin-like growth factor levels compared to red light. In respect of blue lighting, 

Asih, et al. [31] illustrated that it makes the broiler chicken quieter and have less activity after meal so the excess 

energy can be converted into feeding, hence enhance the growth rate.  

The present FC and FCR results are in consistent with several studies indicate that light wavelength seems to 

stimulate broiler growth without significant effects on total FCR [15, 28, 29, 32, 33].  In addition, Mohamed, et al. 

[25] showed that Avian 48 broiler chicks reread under green and blue lights has significant higher FC and lower 

FCR at 40 days of age compared to those reread under white color light. Also, Balabel, et al. [21] found that the 

total FC were significantly lower in blue and/or G-BL groups compared to white and green color groups (4676, 

4590g, 4830 and 4795g, respectively), with significant decreasing effect also on FCR values (1.82, 1.75, 2.38, 1.98, 

respectively).    

Melatonin hormone synthesized by the pineal gland, retina and gastrointestinal tract, whose main function is to 

determine the periodicity of FC, as well as to induce behaviors associated with the night- day cycle [34]. In 

addition, Asih, et al. [31] showed that broilers treated with the blue lighting for 24-hour or for 12-hour have 

significant longer feeding duration, lower feeding frequency, and lower FCR when compared to those of chickens 

with control lighting.  

The MR results of the present study confirms the previous finding of Rozenboim, et al. [35]; Cao, et al. [32] 

and Ke, et al. [33] who reported that blue light seems to stimulate broiler growth at the end of the production cycle 

without significant effects on mortality rate. Kasem [36] found that broiler Cobb chicks reared under mixed green-

blue and blue light has the lower mortality rate compared to white light group. 

 

Table 2. Mean and standard error (µ±SE) of carcass traits of Cobb broiler strain exposed to different LDL colors during fattening period. 

Age 
Treatments Overall 

mean 
P-value 

White light Blue-green light 

Body weight 77.75 ±2388.00b 54.87 ±2624.25a 50.63 ±2506.13 0.02** 

Carcass weight 60.47 ±1814.25b 41.05 ±2014.75a 39.48 ±1914.50 0.01** 

Dressing (%) 0.61±75.35 0.0.50±76.00 0.39±76.40 0.27NS 

Breast (%) 30.36   ± 0.60 30.26 ± 0.41 30.31 ± 0.36 0.79 NS 

Thigh (%) 19.21 ± 0.21 19.75 ± 0.39 19.48 ± 0.28 0.34 NS 

Liver (%) 2.55 ± 0.15 2.21   ± 0.08 2.38 ± 0.09 0.05* 

Gizzard (%) 1.86 ± 0.06 1.72 ± 0.05 1.79 ± 0.04 0.07 NS 

Heart (%) 0.48 ± 0.02 0.46 ± 0.02 0.47 ± 0.01 0.51 NS 

Kidney (%) 0.53a  ± 0.01 0.50b ± 0.01 0.52 ± 0.01 0.02** 
 Note:  NS: Non significant, *: P<0.05, **: P<0.01, a.b,c Mean values with different superscripts within a row differ significantly. 

 



Animal Review, 2023, 10(1): 1-11 

 

 
5 

© 2023 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

However, Balabel, et al. [21] found that mortality rate of Cobb broiler chicks has significant influence among 

light color treatments (5.00, 3.33, 3.33 and 1.67%   for white, green, blue and blue-green lighting, respectively). 

Abdel-Azeem and Borham [37] revealed that Ross- 308 broiler chickens exposed to LED-blue light or LED-green 

light during 7 to 35 days of age showed significant higher livability percentages than those exposed to other light 

colors (incandescent light, red, white and mixed LED lights) groups (95.12, 94.43, 86.59, 92.51, 88.50 and 89.20%, 

respectively).    

The findings of carcass weight and dressing percentages of Cobb broiler chickens (Table 2) showed significant 

differences between studied light treatments for pre-slaughter live BW and carcass weight values, however it being 

insignificant for dressing percentage values. The birds exposed to blue-green light had significant higher live BW 

and carcass weights (2624.25 and 2388.00g, respectively) compared to those exposed to white color (2014.75 and 

1814.25g, respectively). Regardless the insignificant differences for dressing percentages values, the birds exposed 

to blue-green light had higher dressing percentage compared to those exposed to white color (76.00 and 75.35%, 

respectively). The relative breast and thigh + drumstick weights of the Cobb broiler (Table 2) showed insignificant 

differences between studied light treatments for relative breast and thigh + drumstick weights values, with overall 

mean were 30.31 and 19.48%, respectively. The relative weights of liver, gizzard and heart weight of Cobb broiler 

chickens were insignificant between both studied lights, with overall mean were 2.38, 1.79 and 0.47%, respectively. 

However, the Cobb broiler chickens reared under white light has significant higher relative kidney weight 

compared to those reared under blue-green light (0.53 and 0.50%, respectively).  

The present results of dressing percentage values are consistent with the findings of Santana, et al. [28] and 

Olanrewaju, et al. [29] who reported no effect of light color on carcass yield at different slaughter ages. Moreover, 

Nelson, et al. [26] showed that straight run Ross 708 broilers reared under white LED supplemented with 

blue/green light had higher carcass yield more than birds reared under only white LED light. In addition, Sayin, et 

al. [38] explained that the broiler chicks raised under mixed blue and green lighting recorded a higher body weight 

than birds raised under monochromatic light (white, blue, green) at the age of 42 and 56 days. However, Cao, et al. 

[32] found a greater carcass yield for broiler chickens subjected to blue LED lighting.  

In contrast, Mosa, et al. [19] showed, regardless stocking density, that the carcass weight (1406.44g) and 

dressing percentage (74.16%) were significantly higher at 35th day in Ross 308 broilers exposed to Blue – Green 

mix light compared to other color treatments (white, red, blue and green lights). 

Mohamed, et al. [25] showed that Avian 48 broiler chicks reread under green and blue lights has significant 

higher dressing percentage at 40 days of age compared to those reread under white color light (75.10, 75.90 and 

71.30%, respectively). 

Divergence among our results to the literature findings could be related to genetic strain, age, management 

and environmental conditions. 

Similar to the present breast and thigh + drumstick weights results, Santana, et al. [28] found insignificant 

differences for cuts percentage (breast and thigh + drumstick) among light treatments (red-LED, blue-LED and 

fluorescent bulb) light. Also, the present results indicating that breast have highest portion among cuts up of broiler 

carcass, which are in line with all studies in that field. However, Cao, et al. [32] found a greater breast, and thigh 

yield for broiler chickens subjected to blue LED lighting. Liu, et al. [30] found that birds reared under green light 

had higher breast muscle weight than those reared under blue, red, and white light.  

The present organ results are in agreement with the findings of Mosa, et al. [19] who studied different light 

colors (red, blue, green and blue-green lights) and observed insignificant differences effect on relative liver and 

gizzard weights of Ross 308 broiler chicks at 35 days of age, while positive effect of heart percentage was recorded 

in broilers reared under green light (0.64%), with no effect for stocking density in that respect. However, Mohamed, 

et al. [25] showed that Avian 48 broiler chicks reread under green and blue lights has significant lower relative 



Animal Review, 2023, 10(1): 1-11 

 

 
6 

© 2023 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

liver weight at 40 days of age compared to those reread under white color light (0.960, 0.958and 1.24 %, 

respectively). 

The results of behavior activities of Cobb broiler strain (Table 3) showed highly significant differences for all 

studied behavior traits. The results observed significant lower aggressiveness and pecking activities, while 

significant higher immobility activity for chicks reared under mixed green – blue light color (12.64, 103.86 and 

170.07 number/bird/hour, respectively) compared to the corresponding values recoded for those reared under 

white light color (38.43, 464.29 and 113.79 number/bird/hour, respectively). 

 

Table 3. Mean and standard Error of some behavior activities (number/bird/hour) of Cobb broiler strain exposed to different LDL colors 
during fattening period. 

Activities Aggressiveness Immobility Pecking 

Treatments 
White 
Green- blue 

 

38.43a ± 5.81 

12.64b  ± 3.48 

 

113.79b ± 7.34 

170.07a ± 6.31 

 

464.29a ± 56.21 

103.86b ± 34.21 

P-value 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Overall average 25.54 ± 3.78 141.93 ± 6.12 284.07 ± 40.66 

Week intervals 
1st  
2nd  
3rd  
4th  
5th 

 

64.00a ± 12.54 

45.57b  ± 8.87 

22.57c ± 6.36 

10.43c ± 3.16 

7.40c ± 2.25 

 

89.00b  ± 14.53 

134.71a ± 12.49 

157.07a ± 14.87 

135.57a ± 10.21 

160.90a ± 7.99 

 

329.00 ± 133.06 

361.86 ± 89.18 

379.57 ± 98.88 

173.57 ± 54.41 

178.20 ± 82.35 

P-value 0.00 0.00 0.76 

Overall average 25.54 ± 3.78 141.93 ± 6.12 284.07 ± 40.66 
Note:  Means in the same column having different superscripts in certain effect are significantly different (P≤0.05). 

Aggressiveness: Categorized as a bird attacking another bird, as well as pecking the feathers and bodies of other birds, and attempting to cause injuries.  
Immobility: Categorized as a bird that transited from a state of movement to a state of sitting and stability. 
Pecking: Categorized as a bird that pecking litter, walls, and equipment, not other bird.  

 

The Cobb broiler chickens in the present study are significantly less active under mixed blue - green light 

compared to white light. These results are consistent with the findings of Cao, et al. [32]; Cao, et al. [22]; Liu, et 

al. [30]; Mendes, et al. [39]; Xie, et al. [40]; Senaratna, et al. [27]; Abu Tabeekh and Shawkat [11]; Hesham, et 

al. [15] and Mohamed, et al. [41] in their comparative studies of different light colors, who found that blue and/or 

green lights helped to regulate aggressiveness and other related behaviors, inducing calm broiler chickens, thereby 

providing optimum performance. Sultana, et al. [13] pointed out that the red and red-yellow light activates 

movements and fear response in broiler chicken, while blue and green/blue keep broilers calmer.  Kasem [36] 

showed that the rest and sleep time of Cobb chicks increase under mixed green blue and blue light color groups 

compared to white light group. Khaliq, et al. [42] revealed that birds reared under blue and green light were 

calmer and more relaxed while as those reared under red or yellow light exhibited aggressiveness. Abdel-Azeem 

and Borham [37] showed that Ross-308 broiler chickens were calmer under LED-blue light with 10 birds /m2 in 

broiler house which is preferable to other colors (red, green and white) and densities. Franco, et al. [43] also 

showed that broiler chickens at the age of 33 to 34 days spent more time resting under blue light.  

The results of weekly behavior activities (Table 3) showed highly significant differences among weeks for 

aggressiveness and immobility activities, while it being insignificant for pecking activity. Regardless the color of 

light, the current results showed that aggressive activity has descending manner with age (64.00, 45.57, 22.57, 

10.43 and 7.44 number/bird/hour for 1st, 2nd, 3th, 4th and 5th week, respectively). However, there is a swinging trend 

in immobility values with age activity, but in general it increases significantly, since the 1st week showed significant 

lesser ones. Regard to the pecking activity, although there are no significant differences among weeks, the fourth 

and fifth weeks are the least effective for this activity.  

Current behavioral results have found that Cobb broiler chickens become calm with the advance of age; these 

findings are in line, as has been shown in numerous previous studies [e.g., [44-48]] they reported that the broilers 



Animal Review, 2023, 10(1): 1-11 

 

 
7 

© 2023 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

have been found to become increasingly inactive with age.  Sultana, et al. [13] showed that age affected most 

behavioural patterns. The Ross×Ross 308 broiler chicks, regardless the color of lighting, recorded 31.07, 31.99, 

34.62, 38.75 and 40.56 minute/hour during for sitting and 28.94, 23.33, 26.99, 16.89and 11.89 n/bird/h for ground 

pecking during 1st, 2nd, 3th, 4th and 5th weeks of age, respectively. 

The rapid growth of broilers' breast muscles moves the center of body gravity forward and the legs outward, 

that produce a gait pattern  is probably inefficient and tiring [49]. In addition, broilers may find walking painful 

[50] because they are increasingly prone to leg disorders [51]. 

Differences among studies in this area have been reported to differences in breed, age, diet, feeding methods, 

litter, social rank, light (quality, intensity, photoperiod, and color), record method of observations, duration of 

exposure to light, flock size/stocking density, experiment procedures and so on. Also, morphological factors such as 

comb type, plumage pattern and color. Thus, the behavior of chickens is a function of interaction among genes, 

phenotypes, and the environment. 

 

Table 4. Phenotype correlation (Pearson) values between behavior traits and some performance traits of Cobb broiler strain 
reared under white and blue-green light. 

Treatments 
Behaviour 
activities 

Carcass 
weight 

Dressing 
percentage 

BW 
5wk 

DBWG 
0-5wk 

FC 
0-5wk 

FCR 
0-5wk 

White light 
Aggressiveness -0.288 -0.243 -0.024 -0.147 -0.280 0.116 

Immobility -0.201 0.085 0.350 0.101 0.079 -0.162 
Pecking -0.242 0.308 0.181 0.161 -0.144 -0.210 

Blue-green 
light 

Aggressiveness -0.077 -0.163 -0.214 -0.082 -0.190 0.039 
Immobility -0.032 -0.012 0.419* 0.159 0.008 -0.187 

Pecking -0.156 0.088 0.060 -0.011 -0.216 -0.054 
Note:  
 

*significant at (P≤0.05). 
Aggressiveness: Categorized as a bird attacking another bird, as well as pecking the feathers and bodies of other birds, and attempting to 
cause injuries.  
Immobility: Categorized as a bird that transited from a state of movement to a state of sitting and stability. 
Pecking: Categorized as a bird that pecking litter, walls, and equipment, not other bird. 

 

The results of phenotype correlation values (Table 4) between studied behavior traits and some performance 

traits of Cobb broiler strain reared under white and blue-green light, showed that all the correlation values of birds 

reared under white light has insignificant negative and positive values. The values of aggressiveness with all 

studied performance traits were negative, except with zero-five-week FCR it being positive. This result indicated 

that the increase of aggressiveness activity has insignificant reduction effect on all studied performance traits, 

whereas it increased zero-five-week FCR (positive value, 0.12).  In addition, the increase of immobility and pecking 

activities decreased zero-five-week FCR (negative values, -0.16 and -0.21, respectively). Also, both later activities 

have positive correlation values with five-week BW and zero-five-week DBWG traits. This result indicated that the 

increase of immobility and pecking activities increase these traits. 

On the other hand, the phenotype correlations of behavior traits and performance traits of birds reared under 

blue-green light has insignificant negative and positive values, except the correlation value between immobility 

activity and five-week BW trait it being significant (0.42). This result indicated that the increase of immobility 

activity increases significantly the five-week BW of the birds reared under blue-green light. Also, the behavior 

traits have the same trend of correlation values with zero-five-week FCR traits, which revealed that the increase of 

aggressiveness activity increase zero-five-week FCR (0.04), whereas the increase of immobility and pecking activity 

decrease zero-five-week FCR (-0.19 and -0.05, respectively). 

Most studies in literature were focused on feeding behavior traits and their relationship with live performance 

traits in broilers [e.g., [52-54]] and duck [55].  However, the results of phenotypic correlations in the present 

study support the previous finding of Hakan and Ali [56] who showed that shorter wavelength had positive effect 

on broiler performance compared to higher wavelength. Also, Tickle, et al. [57] found that locomotion is relatively 

energetically expensive in Cobb500 broilers. 



Animal Review, 2023, 10(1): 1-11 

 

 
8 

© 2023 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

4. CONCLUSION  

The present results indicated that Cobb broilers were calmer under blue-green light compared to those reared 

under white light, which contributed in better performance traits. This result encourages the use of mixed blue-

green lighting to raise broiler chicks in an appropriate environment and supports the welfare of birds. 

 

Funding: This study received no specific financial support.    
Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.  
Authors’ Contributions: All authors contributed equally to the conception and design of the study. 

 

REFERENCES 

[1] N. D. Wahyono and M. M. D. Utami, "A review of the poultry meat production industry for food safety in Indonesia," 

presented at the IOP Conference Series: Journal of Physics: Conference Series No. 953, 2018. 

[2] C. E. Bennett et al., "The broiler chicken as a signal of a human reconfigured biosphere," Royal Society Open Science, vol. 

5, no. 12, p. 180325, 2018.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.180325 

[3] H. Ç. Akyüz and E. Onbaşilar, "Light wavelength on different poultry species," World's Poultry Science Journal, vol. 74, 

no. 1, pp. 79-88, 2018.  https://doi.org/10.1017/s0043933917001076 

[4] H. Bayraktar, A. Altan, and C. Seremet, "The effects of spot lighting on broiler performance and welfare," Journal of 

Animal and Veterinary Advances, vol. 11, no. 8, pp. 1139-1144, 2012.  https://doi.org/10.3923/javaa.2012.1139.1144 

[5] R. Blatchford, G. Archer, and J. Mench, "Contrast in light intensity, rather than day length, influences the behavior 

and health of broiler chickens," Poultry Science, vol. 91, no. 8, pp. 1768-1774, 2012.  https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2011-

02051 

[6] H.-S. Seo et al., "Effects of various LED light colors on growth and immune response in broilers," The Journal of 

Poultry Science, vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 76-81, 2015.  https://doi.org/10.2141/jpsa.0150046 

[7] G. S. Archer, "Comparison of incandescent, CFL, LED and bird level LED lighting: Growth, fear and stress," 

International Journal of Poultry Science, vol. 14, no. 8, pp. 449-455, 2015.  https://doi.org/10.3923/ijps.2015.449.455 

[8] N. Khan and N. Abas, "Comparative study of energy saving light sources," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 

vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 296-309, 2011.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2010.07.072 

[9] B. Huber-Eicher, A. Suter, and P. Spring-Stähli, "Effects of colored light-emitting diode illumination on behavior and 

performance of laying hens," Poultry Science, vol. 92, no. 4, pp. 869-873, 2013.  https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2012-02679 

[10] A. G. Rogers, E. M. Pritchett, R. L. Alphin, E. M. Brannick, and E. R. Benson, "I. Evaluation of the impact of 

alternative light technology on male broiler chicken growth, feed conversion, and allometric characteristics," Poultry 

Science, vol. 94, no. 3, pp. 408-414, 2015.  https://doi.org/10.3382/ps/peu045 

[11] M. A. S. Abu Tabeekh and T. F. Shawkat, "Effect of light color and stocking density on some behavioral traits of 

broilers and layers," Journal of Agricultural Science and Soil Science, vol. 3, no. 9, pp. 122-130, 2015.  

[12] C. Nie, L. Ban, Z. Ning, and L. Qu, "Feather colour affects the aggressive behaviour of chickens with the same 

genotype on the dominant white (I) locus," Plos One, vol. 14, no. 5, p. e0215921, 2019.  

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215921 

[13] S. Sultana, M. R. Hassan, H. S. Choe, and K. S. Ryu, "The effect of monochromatic and mixed LED light colour on the 

behaviour and fear responses of broiler chicken," Avian Biology Research, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 207-214, 2013.  

https://doi.org/10.3184/175815513x13739879772128 

[14] N. Kim, S.-R. Lee, and S.-J. Lee, "Effects of light color on energy expenditure and behavior in broiler chickens," Asian-

Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, vol. 27, no. 7, pp. 1044-1049, 2014.  https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2012.12425 

[15] M. Hesham, A. El Shereen, and S. Enas, "Impact of different light colors in behavior, welfare parameters and growth 

performance of Fayoumi broiler chickens strain," Journal of the Hellenic Veterinary Medical Society, vol. 69, no. 2, pp. 951-

958, 2018.  https://doi.org/10.12681/jhvms.18017 

https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.180325
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0043933917001076
https://doi.org/10.3923/javaa.2012.1139.1144
https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2011-02051
https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2011-02051
https://doi.org/10.2141/jpsa.0150046
https://doi.org/10.3923/ijps.2015.449.455
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2010.07.072
https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2012-02679
https://doi.org/10.3382/ps/peu045
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215921
https://doi.org/10.3184/175815513x13739879772128
https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2012.12425
https://doi.org/10.12681/jhvms.18017


Animal Review, 2023, 10(1): 1-11 

 

 
9 

© 2023 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

[16] A. C. Lucena, H. Pandorfi, G. L. Almeida, C. Guiselini, J. E. Araújo, and T. P. D. S. Rodrigues, "Behavior of broilers 

subjected to different light spectra and illuminances," Brazilian Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Engineering, 

vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 415-421, 2020.  https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-1929/agriambi.v24n6p415-421 

[17] SPSS, IBM corp. Released 2016. IBM SPSS statistics for windows, version 20.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp, 2016. 

[18] D. B. Duncan, "Multiple range and multiple F-test," Biometrics, vol. 11, pp. 1-5, 1955.  

http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3001478 

[19] R. Mosa, R. Abbas, and M. Tabeekh, "An investigation on light color and stocking density on some productive 

performance of broilers," Basrah Journal of Veterinary Research, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 176-186, 2015.  

https://doi.org/10.33762/bvetr.2015.100463 

[20] D. Senaratna, T. Samarakone, and W. Gunawardena, "Red color light at different intensities affects the performance, 

behavioral activities and welfare of broilers," Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, vol. 29, no. 7, pp. 1052-1059, 

2016.  https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.15.0757 

[21] T. Balabel, R. Mohamed, and M. Saleh, "Using different light colors as a stress factor on broiler performance in 

Egypt," Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, vol. 11, no. 9, pp. 165-170, 2017.  

[22] J. Cao et al., "Effect of combinations of monochromatic lights on growth and productive performance of broilers," 

Poultry Science, vol. 91, no. 12, pp. 3013-3018, 2012.  https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2012-02413 

[23] M. Kim et al., "Growth performance and hematological traits of broiler chickens reared under assorted monochromatic 

light sources," Poultry Science, vol. 92, no. 6, pp. 1461-1466, 2013.  https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2012-02945 

[24] M. R. Hassan, S. Sultana, H. S. Choe, and K. S. Ryu, "Effect of combinations of monochromatic LED light color on the 

performance and behavior of laying hens," The Journal of Poultry Science, vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 321-326, 2014.  

https://doi.org/10.2141/jpsa.0130105 

[25] R. Mohamed, S. El-Kholya, M. Shukry, S. El-Kassas, and N. El-Saidy, "Manipulation of broiler growth performance, 

physiological and fear responses using three monochromatic LED lights," Alexandria Journal of Veterinary Sciences, vol. 

53, no. 1, pp. 57-62, 2017.  https://doi.org/10.5455/ajvs.263048 

[26] J. R. Nelson, J. L. Bray, J. Delabbio, and G. S. Archer, "Light emitting diode (LED) color and broiler growth: Effect of 

supplementing blue/green LED to white LED light on broiler growth, stress, and welfare," Poultry Science, vol. 99, no. 

7, pp. 3519-3524, 2020.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2020.04.020 

[27] D. Senaratna, T. Samarakone, A. Madusanka, and W. Gunawardane, "Performance, behaviour and welfare aspects of 

broilers as affected by different colours of artificial light," Tropical Agricultural Research and Extension, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 

38-44, 2012.  https://doi.org/10.4038/tare.v14i2.4840 

[28] M. R. D. Santana, R. G. Garcia, I. D. A. Naas, I. C. Paz, F. R. Caldara, and B. Barreto, "Light emitting diode (LED) use 

in artificial lighting for broiler chicken production," Agricultural Engineering, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 422-427, 2014.  

https://doi.org/10.1590/s0100-69162014000300005 

[29] H. Olanrewaju, J. Purswell, S. Collier, and S. Branton, "Effects of color temperatures (Kelvin) of LED bulbs on blood 

physiological variables of broilers grown to heavy weights," Poultry Science, vol. 94, no. 8, pp. 1721-1728, 2015.  

https://doi.org/10.3382/ps/pev139 

[30] W. Liu, Z. Wang, and Y. Chen, "Effects of monochromatic light on developmental changes in satellite cell population 

of pectoral muscle in broilers during early posthatch period," The Anatomical Record: Advances in Integrative Anatomy and 

Evolutionary Biology, vol. 293, no. 8, pp. 1315-1324, 2010.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ar.21174 

[31] D. R. Asih, S. Harimurti, and W. Wihandoyo, "The effect of 12 and 24-hour blue lighting on performance and feeding 

behavior of broiler chickens," Livestock Newsletter, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 15-19, 2018.  

https://doi.org/10.21059/buletinpeternak.v42i1.25696 

[32] J. Cao, W. Liu, Z. Wang, D. Xie, L. Jia, and Y. Chen, "Green and blue monochromatic lights promote growth and 

development of broilers via stimulating testosterone secretion and myofiber growth," Journal of Applied Poultry 

Research, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 211-218, 2008.  https://doi.org/10.3382/japr.2007-00043 

https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-1929/agriambi.v24n6p415-421
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3001478
https://doi.org/10.33762/bvetr.2015.100463
https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.15.0757
https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2012-02413
https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2012-02945
https://doi.org/10.2141/jpsa.0130105
https://doi.org/10.5455/ajvs.263048
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2020.04.020
https://doi.org/10.4038/tare.v14i2.4840
https://doi.org/10.1590/s0100-69162014000300005
https://doi.org/10.3382/ps/pev139
https://doi.org/10.1002/ar.21174
https://doi.org/10.21059/buletinpeternak.v42i1.25696
https://doi.org/10.3382/japr.2007-00043


Animal Review, 2023, 10(1): 1-11 

 

 
10 

© 2023 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

[33] Y. Ke, W. Liu, Z. Wang, and Y. Chen, "Effects of monochromatic light on quality properties and antioxidation of meat 

in broilers," Poultry Science, vol. 90, no. 11, pp. 2632-2637, 2011.  https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2011-01523 

[34] H. Huang, Z. Wang, S.-J. Weng, X.-H. Sun, and X.-L. Yang, "Neuromodulatory role of melatonin in retinal 

information processing," Progress in Retinal and Eye Research, vol. 32, pp. 64-87, 2013.  

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.preteyeres.2012.07.003 

[35] I. Rozenboim et al., "The effect of a green and blue monochromatic light combination on broiler growth and 

development," Poultry Science, vol. 83, no. 5, pp. 842-845, 2004.  https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/83.5.842 

[36] M. M. S. Kasem, "Impact of light management on broilers behavior and performance," MSc. Thesis, Faculty of 

Veterinary Medicine, Kfr El-Sheikh University Egypt, 2017.  

[37] A. Abdel-Azeem and B. Borham, "Productive and physiological response of broiler chickens exposed to different 

colored light-emitting diode and reared under different stocking densities," Egyptian Poultry Science Journal, vol. 38, no. 

4, pp. 1243-1264, 2018.  https://doi.org/10.21608/epsj.2019.23694 

[38] Y. Sayin, O. Kaplan, E. Karaduman, D. Haqyar, and D. Narinç, "The effect of monochromatic, combined, and mixed 

light-emitting diode light regimes on growth traits, fear responses, and slaughter-carcass characteristics in broiler 

chickens," Tropical Animal Health and Production, vol. 54, no. 5, pp. 277-277, 2022.  https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-

1448612/v1 

[39] A. S. Mendes, R. Reffat, R. Restelatto, and S. J. Paixão, "Vision and lighting in modern poultry," Brazilian Journal of 

Agroscience, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 5-13, 2010.  

[40] D. Xie et al., "Effects of monochromatic light on mucosal mechanical and immunological barriers in the small intestine 

of broilers," Poultry Science, vol. 90, no. 12, pp. 2697-2704, 2011.  https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2011-01416 

[41] R. Mohamed et al., "Effect of different monochromatic LED light colour and intensity on growth performance, 

physiological response and fear reactions in broiler chicken," Italian Journal of Animal Science, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 1099-

1107, 2020.  https://doi.org/10.1080/1828051x.2020.1821802 

[42] T. Khaliq et al., "Behavioral study of broilers reared under different colours of light in the evening hours," Journal of 

Entomology and Zoology Studies, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 1624-1627, 2018.  

[43] B. R. Franco et al., "Light color and the commercial broiler: Effect on behavior, fear, and stress," Poultry Science, vol. 

101, no. 11, p. 102052, 2022.  

[44] D. Bizeray, C. Leterrier, P. Constantin, M. Picard, and J. Faure, "Sequential feeding can increase activity and improve 

gait score in meat-type chickens," Poultry Science, vol. 81, no. 12, pp. 1798-1806, 2002.  

https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/81.12.1798 

[45] D. Bizeray, C. Leterrier, P. Constantin, M. Picard, and J. Faure, "Early locomotor behaviour in genetic stocks of 

chickens with different growth rates," Applied Animal Behaviour Science, vol. 68, no. 3, pp. 231-242, 2000.  

https://doi.org/10.1016/s0168-1591(00)00105-2 

[46] T. Cornetto and I. Estevez, "Behavior of the domestic fowl in the presence of vertical panels," Poultry Science, vol. 80, 

no. 10, pp. 1455-1462, 2001.  https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/80.10.1455 

[47] S. Shields, J. Garner, and J. Mench, "Effect of sand and wood-shavings bedding on the behavior of broiler chickens," 

Poultry Science, vol. 84, no. 12, pp. 1816-1824, 2005.  https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/84.12.1816 

[48] H. H. Kristensen et al., "The behaviour of broiler chickens in different light sources and illuminances," Applied Animal 

Behaviour Science, vol. 103, no. 1-2, pp. 75-89, 2007.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2006.04.017 

[49] S. Corr, M. Gentle, C. McCorquodale, and D. Bennett, "The effect of morphology on walking ability in the modern 

broiler: A gait analysis study," Animal Welfare, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 159-171, 2003.  

https://doi.org/10.1017/s0962728600025616 

[50] T. Danbury, C. Weeks, A. Waterman‐Pearson, S. Kestin, and J. Chambers, "Self‐selection of the analgesic drug 

carprofen by lame broiler chickens," Veterinary Record, vol. 146, no. 11, pp. 307-311, 2000.  

https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2011-01523
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.preteyeres.2012.07.003
https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/83.5.842
https://doi.org/10.21608/epsj.2019.23694
https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1448612/v1
https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1448612/v1
https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2011-01416
https://doi.org/10.1080/1828051x.2020.1821802
https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/81.12.1798
https://doi.org/10.1016/s0168-1591(00)00105-2
https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/80.10.1455
https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/84.12.1816
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2006.04.017
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0962728600025616


Animal Review, 2023, 10(1): 1-11 

 

 
11 

© 2023 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

[51] J. A. Mench, "Leg problems. In measuring and auditing broiler welfare. C.A. Weeks and A. Butterworth ed." 

Wallingford, UK: CAB, 2004, pp. 3–17. 

[52] J. Howie, S. Avendano, B. Tolkamp, and I. Kyriazakis, "Genetic parameters of feeding behavior traits and their 

relationship with live performance traits in modern broiler lines," Poultry Science, vol. 90, no. 6, pp. 1197-1205, 2011.  

https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2010-01313 

[53] J. Teng et al., "Relationship between feeding behavior and production performance of broiler chickens based on 

automatic feeding system," Journal of South China Agricultural University, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 7-12, 2018.  

[54] W. Yan, C. Sun, C. Wen, C. Ji, D. Zhang, and N. Yang, "Relationships between feeding behaviors and performance 

traits in slow-growing yellow broilers," Poultry Science, vol. 98, no. 2, pp. 548-555, 2019.  

[55] T. Bley and W. Bessei, "Recording of individual feed intake and feeding behavior of Pekin ducks kept in groups," 

Poultry Science, vol. 87, no. 2, pp. 215-221, 2008.  

[56] B. Hakan and A. Ali, "Effects of light wavelength on broiler performance," Animal Production, vol. 46, pp. 22-32, 2005.  

[57] P. G. Tickle, J. R. Hutchinson, and J. R. Codd, "Energy allocation and behaviour in the growing broiler chicken," 

Scientific Reports, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 1-13, 2018.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

Views and opinions expressed in this article are the views and opinions of the author(s), Animal Review shall not be responsible or answerable for any loss, 
damage or liability etc. caused in relation to/arising out of the use of the content. 

 

https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2010-01313

