DOCSLIB.ORG

Impact of Short-Term Storage on the Quantity of Extended-Spectrum Beta-Lactamase–Producing Escherichia Coli in Broiler Litter Under Practical Conditions

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Impact of Short-Term Storage on the Quantity of Extended-Spectrum Beta-Lactamase–Producing Escherichia Coli in Broiler Litter Under Practical Conditions View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Institutional Repository of the Freie Universität Berlin Impact of short-term storage on the quantity of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase–producing Escherichia coli in broiler litter under practical conditions Paul Siller,*,1 Katrin Daehre,*,y Nadine Thiel,z Ulrich Nubel,€ z,x,# and Uwe Roesler* *Institute for Animal Hygiene and Environmental Health, Freie Universit€at Berlin, Berlin, Germany; yDepartment of Food, Feed and Commodities, Federal Office of Consumer Protection and Food Safety, Berlin, Germany; zDepartment of Microbial Genome Research, Leibniz Institute DSMZ-German Collection of Miroorganisms and Cell Cultures, Braunschweig, Germany; xBraunschweig Integrated Center of Systems Biology (BRICS), Technical Uni- versity, Braunschweig, Germany; and #German Center for Infection Research (DZIF), Partner site Hannover-Braunschweig, Germany ABSTRACT Applying broiler litter containing until 72 h and qualitatively until the end of the trial in extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)–producing winter. In summer detection was possible quantitatively Escherichia coli (E. coli) to arable land poses a potential up to 36 h and qualitatively until 72 h. For surface litter risk for humans to get colonized by contact with samples a qualitative detection of ESBL-producing E. contaminated soil or vegetables. Therefore, an inactiva- coli was possible in all samples taken in both trials. In the tion of these bacteria before land application of litter is deep samples a significant decrease in the bacterial crucial. We performed 2 short-term litter storage trials counts of over 2 Log10 was observed for total E. coli in the (one in summer and winter, respectively), each covering winter and for total E. coli and enterococci in the sum- a time span of 5 D to investigate the effectiveness of this mer. Genetic differences of the isolates analyzed by WGS method for inactivation of ESBL-producing E. coli in did not correlate with survival advantage. In conclusion, chicken litter. Surface and deep litter samples were taken short-term storage of chicken litter stacked in heaps is a from a stacked, ESBL-positive chicken litter heap in useful tool for the reduction of bacterial counts including triplicates in close sampling intervals at the beginning ESBL-producing E. coli. However, incomplete inactiva- and daily for the last 3 D of the experiments. Samples tion was observed at the surface of the heap and at low were analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively for ambient temperatures. Therefore, an extension of the ESBL-producing E. coli, total E. coli, and enterococci. storage period in winter as well as turning of the heap to Selected isolates were further characterized by whole- provide aerobic composting conditions should be genome sequencing (WGS). In the depth of the heap considered if working and storage capacities are available ESBL-producing E. coli were detected quantitatively on the farms. Key words: antibiotic resistance, ESBL, E. coli, broiler litter, environment 2020 Poultry Science 99:2125–2135 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2019.11.043 INTRODUCTION of antibiotic properties. Cephalosporins of the third and fourth generation have a broad-spectrum activity Extended-spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBL) are en- against Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria and zymes occurring in Enterobacteriaceae. Their ability to are often used for the treatment of infections in intensive hydrolyze the b-lactam ring of a variety of b-lactam an- care units. The emergence of resistance against these tibiotics including extended-spectrum cephalosporins of drugs limits therapeutic options (Remschmidt et al., the third and fourth generation leads to an inactivation 2017). ESBL-producing Escherichia coli (E. coli) are commonly found in broiler production with a prevalence Ó 2019 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of Poultry Science of up to 100% in fattening farms (Dierikx et al., 2010, Association Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 2013; Laube et al., 2013; Blaak et al., 2015; Hering license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). et al., 2016; Daehre et al., 2018). Furthermore, ESBL- Received September 30, 2019. Accepted November 14, 2019. producing E. coli have been detected in the vicinity of 1Corresponding author: [email protected] broiler barns, and an airborne and waterborne 2125 2126 SILLER ET AL. dissemination have been described (Laube et al., 2014; June. The time span between the screening and the litter Blaak et al., 2015). In Germany, 600 million broiler storage trial was 2 wk for the winter trial and 1 wk for chickens were slaughtered in 2017 (Statistisches the summer trial. Bundesamt, 2017) contributing to the 1.1 million metric In all barns, 1.5 kg/m2 of wood pellets were used as tons of poultry litter that are spread to arable land in bedding material. The litter (approximately 15 metric Germany annually (Statistisches Bundesamt, 2016). tons for each trial) was removed from the barns with a This presents a possible important emission source of front-end loader and piled up on a concrete surface behind resistant bacteria from the barns to the environment. the barn directly after the chickens were housed out. Blaak et al. (2015) reported that ESBL-producing E. Storing the litter behind the barns for several days is coli were found in the soil at a distance of 1-5 m of litter not unusual in broiler production. Although on the farm storage areas with up to 2.0 ! 104 cfu/kg. Additionally, where the trials were performed, the litter is removed as it was shown that ESBL-producing E. coli can be trans- fast as possible if working capacities are available. Under ferred from animal husbandry to soil and are able to sur- suitable conditions, it is used directly for fertilization or vive on the fields for at least 1 y (Hartmann et al., 2012). otherwise transported to further storage areas. A cross-transmission of ESBL-producing E. coli and mo- The first samples were taken immediately after the bile genetic elements encoding for the production of litter heap was stacked. For both trials, the litter heaps ESBL between animals, including chickens, humans, were sampled at 6 points in time: 12 h, 24 h, 36 h, 48 h, and the environment is hypothesized (Leverstein-van 72 h, and 96 h after storage begin. We expected a faster Hall et al., 2011; Huijbers et al., 2014). The spread of reduction of the bacterial counts in the summer because litter containing ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae of the higher ambient temperatures. Hence, in the summer to the environment poses a potential risk for humans trial, additional samplings were performed at 1 h, 3 h, and to be colonized with these bacteria after contact with 6 h after the begin of storage. At each point in time, 3 sur- contaminated soils or via contaminated vegetables. face and 3 deep samples were taken from the litter heap. Hence, inactivation of these resistant bacteria before For the surface litter samples, approximately 50 g of land application is crucial. litter from the heap’s surface were collected in sterile Storing the litter in piles after removal from the barns 120 mL specimen containers (VWR, Radnor, PA) could be a useful and cost efficient tool for the reduction For the deep litter samples, custom-built steel sample of resistant bacteria in litter. Studies that investigated containers were used. These containers are cylindrical, the reduction of nonresistant E. coli in chicken litter 9.9 cm long, have a diameter of 4.4 cm, and drill holes by storage (anaerobic conditions) and composting with a diameter of 7 mm, ensuring the same environ- (active aeration) under practical conditions were per- mental conditions in the sampling container and the sur- formed previously (Erickson et al., 2010; Wilkinson rounding litter heap. These sterilized containers were et al., 2011). Considering practicability and economic filled with litter from the heap and were placed in the sustainability short-term storage of litter presents the litter heap at a depth of 50 to 55 cm at the start of the most advantageous method of litter treatment. The experiment. Wires were attached to the containers decline of ESBL-producing E. coli in chicken litter under allowing quick retraction and sample collection at each field conditions has not been investigated so far. For a point in time. more detailed assessment of bacterial inactivation in The ALMEMO 2490 device (AHLBORN, ZA9020-FS short-term chicken litter storage, concentrations of and FH A696-GF1 Holzkirchen, Germany) was used to nonresistant E. coli and enterococci were additionally record temperature and moisture at each sampling monitored in this study. Enterococci are approved spot immediately after sampling. gram-positive indicator microorganisms present in feces The weather data for the trial periods were obtained and have a higher tenacity compared to E. coli. Two from the closest weather station located approximately short-term storage trials each covering a time span of 20 km from the sampling site (Archive of the German 5 D were performed. One trial was performed in the sum- Meteorological Office) mer (summer trial) and one in the winter (winter trial) to explore climatic influences on the decline of these pH Value Analysis bacteria. The pH value was measured for all litter samples. fi MATERIALS AND METHODS Samples were diluted with puri ed water at a ratio of 1:10 and homogenized for 30 s with a vortex mixer. Experimental Design The pH value was measured with the handheld measure- ment instrument AL10 (AQUALYTIC, Dortmund, An initial screening of 40 different barns of a large Germany). broiler farm in Germany was performed to select barns with high quantities of ESBL-producing E. coli in the Microbiological Analyses litter.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Poultry Litter/Manure Management Practices in Intensively Managed Poultry Farms in Portharcourt
    IOSR Journal of Agriculture and Veterinary Science (IOSR-JAVS) e-ISSN: 2319-2380, p-ISSN: 2319-2372. Volume 8, Issue 3 Ver. II (Mar. 2015), PP 53-58 www.iosrjournals.org Poultry Litter/Manure Management Practices in Intensively Managed Poultry Farms in Portharcourt Ekenma Kalu Department Of Veterinary Public Health And Preventive Medicine. Micheal Okpara University Of Agriculture, Umudike. Abstract: The investigation to determine the different litter/manure management practices of poultry farmers was carried out in Port Harcourt urban area. A well structured questionnaire was administered to 30 randomly selected poultry farmers in the study area by one on one interview and observation of the environment. The results revealed that poultry farming is on the increase. Majority of these farmer’s management practices showed that they have little knowledge about proper disposal of litter/manure resulting from their farm operations. 53.3% sell their waste immediately after clearing their farms while 43.3% store them for later use and 3.4% applied theirs directly to nearby farm lands. During the period of study, 96.7 % of the farmers had not heard of manure treatment before disposal while 3.3% have heard of it but did not practice it. It was also noted that improper handling of poultry production from start to finish could lead to environmental hazards. Keywords: Intensively managed, Poultry farms, Litter/manure, Port Harcourt. I. Introduction Poultry is one of the most developed animal industries in Nigeria. Historically, the growth of poultry industry began as a result of its high level of energy and protein, rapid turnover rate and short incubation period (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Air Quality and Odor (H)
    Please note that this document has been reformatted and the electronic version may visually appear different than the original printed version. All the content has remained the same, except that the Tables of Contents of certain chapters have been simplified to make all chapters uniform and that the portions of certain chapters relating to comments from the GEIS Citizens Advisory Committee and responses to those comments have been deleted. Generic Environmental Impact Statement on Animal Agriculture: A Summary of the Literature Related to Air Quality and Odor (H) Prepared for the Environmental Quality Board Prepared by: Larry D. Jacobson, Roger Moon, Jose Bicudo, Kevin Janni, Sally Noll, Dept. of Animal Science, University of Minnesota, Gerald Shurson, Dept. of Animal Science, University of Minnesota, Jun Zhu, David Schmidt, Charles McGinley, Engineer, McGinley and Associates, Philip Goodrich, Richard Nicolai, Charles Clanton, Kenneth Davis, Lisa Brosseau, Jill Bruns, Public Health Nurse, Renville County, Minnesota, Carlos Pijoan, Veterinary Medicine, University of Minnesota, Thomas Blaha, Veterinary Medicine, University of Minnesota Beverly Durgan, UM Project Leader, Associate Dean for Research, COAFES Kathryn Draeger, UM Project Manager, Environmental Ground Inc. Unless otherwise noted all of the team members are associated with the University of Minnesota, College of Agriculture, Food, and Environmental Sciences. H-i MH ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY BOARD September, 1999 To Interested Minnesotans: The GEIS on Animal Agriculture is a statewide study authorized and funded by the 1998 Minnesota Legislature and ordered by the EQB. The Legislature directs the EQB to “. .examine the long-term effects of the livestock industry as it exists and as it is changing on the economy, environment and way of life of Minnesota and its citizens.” The intent of the GEIS is twofold: 1) to provide balanced, objective information on the effects of animal agriculture to future policymakers; and 2) to provide recommendations on future options for animal agriculture in the state.
    [Show full text]
  • Air Emissions from Animal Feeding Operations: Current Knowledge, Future Needs
    PREPUBLICATION COPY ADVANCE COPY Not for public Release Before 3:00 pm, EST, Thursday, December 12, 2002 Final Report Air Emissions from Animal Feeding Operations: Current Knowledge, Future Needs This prepublication version of Air Emissions from Animal Feeding Operations: Current Knowledge, Future Needs has been provided to the public to facilitate timely access to the committee’s findings. Although the substance of the report is final, minor editorial changes may be made throughout the text and citations will be checked prior to publication. The final report is anticipated to be available in February 2003. PREPUBLICATION COPY Final Report Air Emissions from Animal Feeding Operations: Current Knowledge, Future Needs This prepublication version of Air Emissions from Animal Feeding Operations: Current Knowledge, Future Needs has been provided to the public to facilitate timely access to the committee’s findings. Although the substance of the report is final, minor editorial changes may be made throughout the text and citations will be checked prior to publication. The final report is anticipated to be available in February 2003. Ad Hoc Committee on Air Emissions from Animal Feeding Operations Committee on Animal Nutrition Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology Division on Earth and Life Studies THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine.
    [Show full text]
  • How Safe Is Chicken Litter for Land Application As an Organic Fertilizer?: a Review
    International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health Review How Safe is Chicken Litter for Land Application as an Organic Fertilizer?: A Review Margaret Kyakuwaire 1,2,*, Giregon Olupot 2, Alice Amoding 2, Peter Nkedi-Kizza 3 and Twaha Ateenyi Basamba 2 1 Department of Agriculture, Kyambogo University, P.O. Box 1, Kyambogo, Kampala 759125, Uganda 2 Department of Agricultural Production, School of Agricultural Sciences, College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Makerere University, P.O. Box 7062, Kampala 759125, Uganda; [email protected] (G.O.); [email protected] (A.A.); [email protected] (T.A.B.) 3 Department of Soil and Water Sciences, University of Florida, 2181 McCarty Hall, P.O. Box 110290, Gainesville, FL 32601-0290, USA; kizza@ufl.edu * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 2 August 2019; Accepted: 26 August 2019; Published: 20 September 2019 Abstract: Chicken litter application on land as an organic fertilizer is the cheapest and most environmentally safe method of disposing of the volume generated from the rapidly expanding poultry industry worldwide. However, little is known about the safety of chicken litter for land application and general release into the environment. Bridging this knowledge gap is crucial for maximizing the benefits of chicken litter as an organic fertilizer and mitigating negative impacts on human and environmental health. The key safety concerns of chicken litter are its contamination with pathogens, including bacteria, fungi, helminthes, parasitic protozoa, and viruses; antibiotics and antibiotic-resistant genes; growth hormones such as egg and meat boosters; heavy metals; and pesticides. Despite the paucity of literature about chicken litter safety for land application, the existing information was scattered and disjointed in various sources, thus making them not easily accessible and difficult to interpret.
    [Show full text]
  • Air Quality and Emissions from Livestock and Poultry Production/Waste Management Systems Kenneth D
    Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering Publications 2006 Air Quality and Emissions from Livestock and Poultry Production/Waste Management Systems Kenneth D. Casey University of Kentucky José R. Bicudo CH2M Hill Canada Ltd. David R. Schmidt University of Minnesota–Twin Cities Anshu Singh University of Kentucky Susan W. Gay Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/abe_eng_pubs Part of the Agriculture Commons, and the Bioresource and Agricultural Engineering Commons The ompc lete bibliographic information for this item can be found at http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ abe_eng_pubs/361. For information on how to cite this item, please visit http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ howtocite.html. This Book Chapter is brought to you for free and open access by the Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering Publications by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Air Quality and Emissions from Livestock and Poultry Production/Waste Management Systems Abstract The bjo ective of this paper is to summarize the available literature on the concentrations and emissions of odor, ammonia, nitrous oxide, hydrogen sulfide, methane, non-methane volatile organic carbon, dust, and microbial and endotoxin aerosols from livestock and poultry buildings and manure management systems (storage and treatment units). Animal production operations are a source of numerous airborne contaminants including gases, odor, dust, and microorganisms. Gases and odors are generated from livestock and poultry manure decomposition (1) shortly after it is produced, (2) during storage and treatment, and (3) during land application.
    [Show full text]
  • Stability and Maturity of Different Poultry Manures and Potential Utilization for Horticultural Production
    Environment and Pollution; Vol. 7, No. 2; 2018 ISSN 1927-0909 E-ISSN 1927-0917 Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education Stability and Maturity of Different Poultry Manures and Potential Utilization for Horticultural Production Mebelo Mataa1, Namakau Manzi1 & Kalaluka Munyinda1 1 School of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Plant Sciences, University of Zambia, P.O. Box 32379, Lusaka, Zambia Correspondence: Mebelo Mataa, School of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Plant Sciences, University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia. E-mail: [email protected] Received: February 26, 2018 Accepted: March 14, 2018 Online Published: July 16, 2018 doi:10.5539/ep.v7n2p1 URL: https://doi.org/10.5539/ep.v7n2p1 Abstract This study evaluated stability, maturity and the efficacy of different poultry litter for possible use in container plant production. Three types of poultry manure- Battery cage (BC), Deep litter (DL) and Free range (FR) were used, with Kraal manure (KM) as a comparison. The experiment was set up as a Split- split design with 6 replications. Composting period was main plot, poultry manure type the split plot and mixing ratio as the split- split plot. The litter was mixed with garden soil in 2 ratios (3:1 and 1:1 soil: manure ratio) and tested for up to 12 weeks. Rape (Brassica napus) was used as a bioassay for maturity, which was determined at 1 month, 2 months and 3 months. The pH declined slightly from 7 to about 6 for all treatments except for the kraal manure. Respiration trends were similar to electrical conductivity. Within 2 weeks of curing the respiration rate for all manures declined to below 4 mg CO2- C/ kg.
    [Show full text]
  • COMPOST {Built .. Up) LITTER CHICKEN HOUSES
    RESEARCH BULLETIN 843 OCTOBER 1959 The use of COMPOST {Built .. up) LITTER lll CHICKEN HOUSES D. C. KENNARD - V. D. CHAMBERLIN -E. N. MOORE A. R. WINTER Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station Wooster, Ohio CONTENTS * * * Introduction _ ---- _- ___ - ----------------------------------- 3 What is Compost (built-up) Litter------------------------- 3 Objectives ______________ ----------------------------- 4 Sanitary Value of Compost Litter----------------------------- 4 For Starting and Growing Chickens----------------------- 4 Immunity Against Coccidiosis ----------------------- 4 Control of Losses Due to Parasites-------------------- 11 Destruction of Salmonella Bacteria-------------------- 13 For Pullet Layers __________________ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 13 Nutritional Value of Compost Litter ____ ---- __ - _- ____ -- __ -- _ _ _ _ 14 Early Studies ____________________ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 14 Riboflavin in Compost Litter----------------------------- 15 Vitamin B12 (APF) Factor)------------------------------- 15 Growth of Chickens-------------------------------- 15 Hatchability of Eggs------------------------------- 19 Unknown Growth Factors------------------------------- 21 Protein-sparing Effect _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 21 Economic Value of Compost Litter---------------------------- 21 Saving of Labor-------------------------------------- 21 Saving of Litter _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 22 Warmer House _ _ _ _ _ _
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Air Quality Impacts Resulting from Particle Emissions from Poultry Farms
    Environment Defra Review of Air Quality Impacts Resulting from Particle Emissions from Poultry Farms Environment Defra Prepared by: .................Checked by: ................. Sam Pollard Gareth Collins Principal Environmental Scientist Technical Director Approved by: ...................... Michele Hackman Technical Director Review of Air Quality Impacts Resulting from Particle Emissions from Poultry Farms Rev No Comments Checked Approved Date by by 1 Draft for Bureau Veritas Comment GMC MPH July 2011 2 Revised to incorporate initial comments from Bureau Veritas GMC MPH July 2011 3 Revised to incorporate additional comments from Bureau Veritas GMC MPH September 2011 4 Revised to incorporate additional comments from Bureau Veritas GMC MPH September 2012 5 Final version GMC MPH October 2012 6 Final version incorporating BV amendments YV* YB* November 2012 * YV (Yasmin Vawda – Bureau Veritas), YB (Yvonne Brown – Bureau Veritas) 9th & 10th Floors, Sunley House, 4 Bedford Park, CR0 2AP Telephone: 020 8639 3500 Website: http://www.aecom.com Job No 60190372 Reference SJP Date Created November 2012 This document has been prepared by AECOM Limited for the sole use of our client (the “Client”) and in accordance with generally accepted consultancy principles, the budget for fees and the terms of reference agreed between AECOM Limited and the Client. Any information provided by third parties and referred to herein has not been checked or verified by AECOM Limited, unless otherwise expressly stated in the document. No third party may rely upon this document without the prior and express written agreement of AECOM Limited. f:\projects\environmental services - laqm services lot 1\laqm poultry farms\pm emissions from poultry farms 26112.doc Table of Contents 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Short Communication Evaluation of Microbial Contamination of Feces
    Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia © 2016 Sociedade Brasileira de Zootecnia ISSN 1806-9290 R. Bras. Zootec., 45(4):190-194, 2016 www.sbz.org.br Short Communication Evaluation of microbial contamination of feces and soil on a laying-hen farm depending on sampling site and season Beata Trawińska1, Anna Chmielowiec-Korzeniowska1, Bożena Nowakowicz-Dębek1, Leszek Tymczyna1, Teresa Bombik2, Magdalena Pyrz1, Monika Tymczyna-Sobotka3 1 University of Life Sciences in Lublin, Department of Animal and Environmental Hygiene, Lublin, Poland. 2 University of Natural Sciences and Humanities in Siedlce, Department of Reproduction and Animal Hygiene, Siedlce, Poland. 3 Medical University of Lublin, Department of Jaw Orthopaedics, Lublin, Poland. ABSTRACT - The objective of the present study was to evaluate soil collected from a laying-hen farm and bird manure according to the season of the year and sampling site. Soil samples were taken at the poultry facility wall and at the distances of 15 m and 45 m from the building. Bird feces samples were collected inside the poultry house at the entrance and at ¼ and ½ length of the building. Soil and bird feces samples were evaluated by bacteriological qualitative and quantitative analyses. The largest bacterial load was determined in the samples taken at the poultry facility wall in December/January. Soil microbial contamination degree was low. The highest bacterial count in bird manure was found in the samples collected at ½ length of the hen house at the end of December/January. The qualitative study of bird feces showed the presence of E. coli bacteria all through the research period and Enterobacter spp. in the samples taken from July until September.
    [Show full text]
  • Microbial Contamination of Poultry Litter During Fattening Period
    Biotechnology in Animal Husbandry 35 (3), 253-265 , 2019 ISSN 1450-9156 Publisher: Institute for Animal Husbandry, Belgrade-Zemun UDC 636.083.1'636.5 https://doi.org/10.2298/BAH1903253M MICROBIAL CONTAMINATION OF POULTRY LITTER DURING FATTENING PERIOD Dubravka Milanov1, Slobodan Knežević1, Suzana Vidaković1, Marko Pajić1, Milica Živkov-Baloš1, Nevenka Aleksić2 1 Scientific Veterinary Institute ‘Novi Sad’, Rumenački put 20, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia 3University of Belgrade, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Bul. oslobodjenja 18, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia Corresponding author: Nevenka Aleksić, [email protected] Original scientific paper Abstract: The results of the research into the microbiological contamination of litter used by broiler chickens are presented. Litter samples were taken prior to the introduction of chicks (day 0) and in 7-day intervals until the end of the fattening period. The total numbers of aerobic mesophilic microorganisms, yeasts, moulds and Clostridium perfringens spores, and the presence of bacteria of the Salmonella genus were determined. The total microbial count in newly laid th litter was 7 log10 CFU/g, which increased to 9 log10 CFU/g by the 4 week. However, at the end of the 5th week, it was at the same level as in newly laid litter. C. perfringens spores, presumably originating from chicks’ faeces, were first detected on day 7. In the next 7 days their number increased, reaching 3-4 log10 CFU/g, and remained at approximately same levels until the end of the research. The initial mould contamination was 5-6 log10 CFU/g. However, from day 21 moulds were not isolated, but only yeasts of the Saccharomyces genus.
    [Show full text]
  • FACTORY FARMING from a Report by Michael W
    FACTORY FARMING From a report by Michael W. Fox, D.Sc., Ph.D., B.Vet. Med., M.R.C.V.S. Director, Institute for the Study of Animal Problems Published by The Humane Society of the United States 2100 L Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20037 ©1980, The Humane Society of the United States Introduction .............. · · · · · · · · · .. · · .2 Table of Contents Defining the Systems ..................... 3 The Factory Farm ........................6 Productivity vs. Animal Suffering ......... 10 Regulation of Farm Animal Welfare .......26 Checklist of Humane Concerns ............ 29 Human Health Concerns ................. 32 Solutions and Resolutions ................33 Tables Table 1 - Factory Farming at a Glance ..... 24 Table 2 - Eating Humanely .............. 37 1 Introduction Cattle, sheep, and pigs are the domesticated It is easy to follow the pattern of how the Defining the descendants of wild animals, and man's earli­ various factory farming systems came about. est relationship with their ancestors was as a Extensive, free-range conditions were first Systems hunter. Then, as agriculture began to evolve, replaced by semi-intensive conditions of rais­ our forefathers caught and tamed �hese ani­ ing livestock in enclosed pastures or fields. mals. Generally, the animals were allowed to Next, with increasing land costs dictating a roam free, but were tended by a herdsman more frugal use of arable land, animals were who lived among the flocks. The dog, and removed from the land to intensive confine­ later the horse, also played a vital role in ment systems ... more animals crammed into helping the herdsman protect and husband his less space. livestock. Most cattle and sheep are still raised for Because of man's close association and de­ part of their lives under extensive, free­ pendence upon domesticated animals, espe­ ranging conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Southern Denmark Environmental Technology For
    University of Southern Denmark Environmental technology for treatment and management of Bio-waste Sommer, Sven G.; Christensen, Knud Villy; Jensen, Lars S. Published in: Environmental Technology for Treatment and Management of Bio-waste Publication date: 2008 Document version: Final published version Document license: Unspecified Citation for pulished version (APA): Sommer, S. G., Christensen, K. V., & Jensen, L. S. (2008). Environmental technology for treatment and management of Bio-waste. In S. G. Sommer (Ed.), Environmental Technology for Treatment and Management of Bio-waste (1 ed., Vol. 1, pp. 1-104). Syddansk Universitet. Go to publication entry in University of Southern Denmark's Research Portal Terms of use This work is brought to you by the University of Southern Denmark. Unless otherwise specified it has been shared according to the terms for self-archiving. If no other license is stated, these terms apply: • You may download this work for personal use only. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying this open access version If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details and we will investigate your claim. Please direct all enquiries to [email protected] Download date: 08. Oct. 2021 Environmental Technology for Treatment and Management of Bio-waste Compendium written by Sven G. Sommer and Knud Villy Christensen, University of Southern Denmark, Faculty of Engineering, Institute of Chemical Engineering, Biotechnology and Environmental Engineering & Lars Stoumann Jensen, University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Life Science, Plant and Soil Science Laboratory, Department of Agriculture & Ecology 2010 Gylleseparering - Kemira Miljø A/S FarmTest 2010 2 Foreword There are several reasons for studying environmentally friendly technologies for managing animal manure efficiently and in a sustainable manner.
    [Show full text]