Control quail's (N = 21) and treated quail's (N = 22) activity budgets (mean rates ± SEM) during URNS procedure.

<p>Linear mixed model, *P<0.05, #P<0.08.</p

Spatial distribution in home-cage (% time in different cage zones – front, middle, rear, mean ± SEM) of control and treated quail, when an observer was present, seven weeks after the URNS procedure.

<p>Chi square tests compared the relative times spent in the three zones to chance for each group and Mann-Whitney U-tests compared proportions of time spent in each zone between control and treated quail: *P<0.05. Control quail: N = 21, treated quail: N = 22.</p

Percent of quail in moult in each group in relation to time.

<p>URNS3: end of procedure, URNS+X: X week(s) after the end of the procedure. * P<0.001 (Fisher exact test). Control quail: N = 19, treated quail: N = 22.</p

Body weight gain between weeks (mean in mm ± SEM).

<p>URNSX: increase between X-1 and X week(s) after the end of the URNS procedure. Control quail: N = 19, treated quail: N = 22. Post-hoc Tukey HSD tests: different letters means significant differences.</p

Feeding and drinking and being vigilant (% time, mean ± sem) for control and treated quail in the presence of the observer.

<p>Mann-Whitney U-tests, **P<0.01, *P<0.05. Control quail: N = 21, treated quail: N = 22.</p

Allocation of scores to morphological parameter observations (completely described by Tona et al. [41]).

<p>Allocation of scores to morphological parameter observations (completely described by Tona et al. <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0057670#pone.0057670-Lipar1" target="_blank">[41]</a>).</p

Number of fertile eggs and hatching success in control and experimental hens.

<p>Number of fertile eggs and hatching success in control and experimental hens.</p

Mean ± SEM mass of C30 and C21 chicks from days 1 to 20.

<p>Different letters indicate significant differences in post-hoc Fisher tests.</p

Mean ± SEM number of distress calls (a) and latency to ingest the novel food (b) during the first and second expositions to the novel food (C21 male chicks: N = 21; C21 female chicks: N = 26; C30 male chicks: N = 27; C30 female chicks: N = 21).

<p>Mean ± SEM number of distress calls (a) and latency to ingest the novel food (b) during the first and second expositions to the novel food (C21 male chicks: N = 21; C21 female chicks: N = 26; C30 male chicks: N = 27; C30 female chicks: N = 21).</p

Mean ± SEM internal temperature of control and experimental hens before and during the treatment.

<p>Mean ± SEM internal temperature of control and experimental hens before and during the treatment.</p