Liesbeth G. W. Van Damme
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Liesbeth G. W. Van Damme has a total of 13 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Frank Andre Maurice Tuyttens
Animal Sciences Unit, Flanders Research Institute for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (ILVO), Merelbeke-Melle, Belgium; Department of Veterinary and Biosciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Merelbeke-Melle, Belgium
4 shared publications - Bart Ampe
Animal Sciences Unit, Flanders Research Institute for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (ILVO), 9090 Melle, Belgium
3 shared publications - Anneleen Watteyn
Animal Sciences Unit, Flanders Research Institute for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (ILVO), 9090 Melle, Belgium
2 shared publications - Femke Delanglez
Animal Sciences Unit, Flanders Research Institute for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (ILVO), Melle, Belgium; Department of Veterinary and Biosciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Heidestraat 19, 9820 Merelbeke, Belgium
2 shared publications Ali Agus
Department of Animal Nutrition and Feed Science, Faculty of Animal Science, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Jalan Fauna No. 3, 55281, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
1 shared publication- Charlotte Vanden Hole
Laboratory of Applied Veterinary Morphology, Department of Veterinary Sciences, Faculty of Biomedical, Pharmaceutical and Veterinary Sciences, University of Antwerp, Wilrijk, Belgium
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 1 October 2025
- Published by Elsevier in Poultry Science
- Vol. 104 (12) , 105935
The right fit: A decision tree to select a protocol for assessing the welfare of laying hens
- 1 October 2025
- Published by Elsevier in Poultry Science
- Vol. 104 (12) , 105935
Open AccessThe right fit: A decision tree to select a protocol for assessing the welfare of laying hens
- Open Access
- 5 October 2024
- Published by MDPI AG in Veterinary Sciences
- Vol. 11 (10) , 475
How Do Flemish Laying Hen Farmers and Private Bird Keepers Comply with and Think about Measures to Control Avian Influenza?
Competent authorities of many countries, including Belgium, impose control measures (preventing wild bird access to feeders and water facilities, indoor confinement of captive birds, or fencing off outdoor ranges with nets) on professional and non-professional keepers of birds to prevent the spread of avian influenza (AI). Flemish laying hen farmers (FAR, n = 33) and private keepers of captive birds (PRI, n = 263) were surveyed about their opinion on and compliance with AI measures legally imposed during the most recent high-risk period before this survey in 2021. Participants answered questions on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = the worst, 3 = neutral, and 5 = the best). FAR indicated better compliance with the AI measures than PRI, except for net confinement. FAR indicated that they and other poultry farmers complied better with AI measures than PRI. Additionally, PRI indicated that they better complied than other PRI keepers. FAR regarded the AI measures as more effective than PRI. To prevent the spread of AI more effectively, national authorities could focus on information campaigns explaining to private bird keepers the need for the various control measures that they impose. If these campaigns fail, local authorities may need stricter enforcement or alternative ways to increase compliance.
- 5 October 2024
- Published by MDPI AG in Veterinary Sciences
- Vol. 11 (10) , 475
Open AccessHow Do Flemish Laying Hen Farmers and Private Bird Keepers Comply with and Think about Measures to Control Avian Influenza?
Competent authorities of many countries, including Belgium, impose control measures (preventing wild bird access to feeders and water facilities, indoor confinement of captive birds, or fencing off outdoor ranges with nets) on professional and non-professional keepers of birds to prevent the spread of avian influenza (AI). Flemish laying hen farmers (FAR, n = 33) and private keepers of captive birds (PRI, n = 263) were surveyed about their opinion on and compliance with AI measures legally imposed during the most recent high-risk period before this survey in 2021. Participants answered questions on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = the worst, 3 = neutral, and 5 = the best). FAR indicated better compliance with the AI measures than PRI, except for net confinement. FAR indicated that they and other poultry farmers complied better with AI measures than PRI. Additionally, PRI indicated that they better complied than other PRI keepers. FAR regarded the AI measures as more effective than PRI. To prevent the spread of AI more effectively, national authorities could focus on information campaigns explaining to private bird keepers the need for the various control measures that they impose. If these campaigns fail, local authorities may need stricter enforcement or alternative ways to increase compliance.
- Open Access
- 19 July 2024
- Published by MDPI AG in Preprints.org
How Do Flemish Laying Hen Farmers and Private Bird Keepers Comply with and Think about Measures to Control Avian Influenza?
Competent authorities of many countries, including Belgium, impose control measures (preventing wild bird access to feeders and water facilities, indoor confinement of captive birds, or fencing off outdoor ranges with nets) to professional and non-professional keepers of birds to prevent the spread of avian influenza (AI). Flemish laying hen farmers (FAR, n = 33) and private keepers of captive birds (PRI, n = 263) were surveyed about their opinion on, and compliance with, AI-measures legally imposed during the most recent high-risk period before this survey in 2021. Participants answered questions on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = the worst, 3 = neutral, and 5 = the best). FAR indicated better compliance with the AI-measures compared to PRI, except for confinement with nets. PRI and FAR perceived the level of compliance with AI-measures by other private bird keepers to be lower compared to themselves. FAR regarded the AI-measures as more effective than PRI. To prevent the spread of AI more effectively, national authorities could focus on information campaigns explaining to private bird keepers, in particular, the need for the various control measures that they impose, implement alternative control measures that have broader support or implement stricter enforcement of the control measures.
- 19 July 2024
- Published by MDPI AG in Preprints.org
Open AccessHow Do Flemish Laying Hen Farmers and Private Bird Keepers Comply with and Think about Measures to Control Avian Influenza?
Competent authorities of many countries, including Belgium, impose control measures (preventing wild bird access to feeders and water facilities, indoor confinement of captive birds, or fencing off outdoor ranges with nets) to professional and non-professional keepers of birds to prevent the spread of avian influenza (AI). Flemish laying hen farmers (FAR, n = 33) and private keepers of captive birds (PRI, n = 263) were surveyed about their opinion on, and compliance with, AI-measures legally imposed during the most recent high-risk period before this survey in 2021. Participants answered questions on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = the worst, 3 = neutral, and 5 = the best). FAR indicated better compliance with the AI-measures compared to PRI, except for confinement with nets. PRI and FAR perceived the level of compliance with AI-measures by other private bird keepers to be lower compared to themselves. FAR regarded the AI-measures as more effective than PRI. To prevent the spread of AI more effectively, national authorities could focus on information campaigns explaining to private bird keepers, in particular, the need for the various control measures that they impose, implement alternative control measures that have broader support or implement stricter enforcement of the control measures.
- Open Access
- 31 March 2023
- Published by Universitat Politecnica de Valencia in World Rabbit Science
- Vol. 31 (1) , 47-55
Effect of group size and escape enrichment on reproductive performance of breeding does in part-time group housing
Societal demands for group housing of social farm animals such as rabbits are increasing due to animal welfare concerns. When breeding does are housed in groups, maternal protective behaviour negatively affects the reproductive performance of the does. In part-time group housing, does are housed in single-litter cages starting shortly before parturition until the first part of lactation and then group housed for the second part after their protective behaviour has diminished and the kits are more resilient. The aim of this study was to evaluate the reproductive performance of breeding does in a part-time group housing system with provision of escape enrichment and different group size (and concomitant different stocking density, as pen size remained unchanged). For each of the four consecutive reproductive cycles, 42 does with their kits switched at 22 d post-partum (pp) from single-litter to group housing for a total period of 13 d in pens of 200×102 cm by removing walls between four adjacent single-litter cages. Newly created group pens (N =12 pens per treatment) varied in group size, stocking density and enrichment: groups of either three or four does were divided over same-size pens with or without escape enrichment (2×2 factorial design). The escape enrichment was comprised of two sets of PVC pipes and two extra elevated platforms. Does were weighed and kits counted at parturition, after which kits were cross-fostered. Kits were counted and weighed again 22 and 35 d pp. Results for mean doe fertility (90.0%), number of kits (9.1 kits/litter) and kit weight (1037.3 g/kit) at weaning were comparable with professional farms using single-litter cages. No significant effects of group size and escape enrichment were found for any of the reproductive parameters. While housed in group, seven does were removed from the experiment, from which four does were severely injured. Post-grouping kit mortality was rather low (6.7%), but three kits were euthanised due to severe injuries. In conclusion, provision of escape enrichment and altered group size (and stocking density) had no profound effect on the reproductive performance of part-time group housed does.
- 31 March 2023
- Published by Universitat Politecnica de Valencia in World Rabbit Science
- Vol. 31 (1) , 47-55
Open AccessEffect of group size and escape enrichment on reproductive performance of breeding does in part-time group housing
Societal demands for group housing of social farm animals such as rabbits are increasing due to animal welfare concerns. When breeding does are housed in groups, maternal protective behaviour negatively affects the reproductive performance of the does. In part-time group housing, does are housed in single-litter cages starting shortly before parturition until the first part of lactation and then group housed for the second part after their protective behaviour has diminished and the kits are more resilient. The aim of this study was to evaluate the reproductive performance of breeding does in a part-time group housing system with provision of escape enrichment and different group size (and concomitant different stocking density, as pen size remained unchanged). For each of the four consecutive reproductive cycles, 42 does with their kits switched at 22 d post-partum (pp) from single-litter to group housing for a total period of 13 d in pens of 200×102 cm by removing walls between four adjacent single-litter cages. Newly created group pens (N =12 pens per treatment) varied in group size, stocking density and enrichment: groups of either three or four does were divided over same-size pens with or without escape enrichment (2×2 factorial design). The escape enrichment was comprised of two sets of PVC pipes and two extra elevated platforms. Does were weighed and kits counted at parturition, after which kits were cross-fostered. Kits were counted and weighed again 22 and 35 d pp. Results for mean doe fertility (90.0%), number of kits (9.1 kits/litter) and kit weight (1037.3 g/kit) at weaning were comparable with professional farms using single-litter cages. No significant effects of group size and escape enrichment were found for any of the reproductive parameters. While housed in group, seven does were removed from the experiment, from which four does were severely injured. Post-grouping kit mortality was rather low (6.7%), but three kits were euthanised due to severe injuries. In conclusion, provision of escape enrichment and altered group size (and stocking density) had no profound effect on the reproductive performance of part-time group housed does.