Salmonella and Fecal Indicator Bacteria Survival in Soils Amended with Poultry Manure Claire E
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Digital Repository @ Iowa State University Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering Publications 2-2018 Salmonella and Fecal Indicator Bacteria Survival in Soils Amended with Poultry Manure Claire E. Hruby Iowa State University Michelle L. Soupir Iowa State University, [email protected] Thomas B. Moorman United States Department of Agriculture Carl H. Pederson Iowa State University, [email protected] Rameshwar S. Kanwar Iowa State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/abe_eng_pubs Part of the Agricultural Science Commons, Bioresource and Agricultural Engineering Commons, and the Food Science Commons The ompc lete bibliographic information for this item can be found at https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ abe_eng_pubs/868. For information on how to cite this item, please visit http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ howtocite.html. This Article 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]. Salmonella and Fecal Indicator Bacteria Survival in Soils Amended with Poultry Manure Abstract Minimizing the risks associated with manure-borne pathogenic microorganisms requires an understanding of microbial survival under realistic field conditions. The bjo ective of this 3-year study was to assess the fate of Salmonella (SALM) and fecal indicator bacteria (FIB), E. coli (EC) and enterococci (ENT), in glacial till- derived soils, after application of poultry manure (PM) to cornfields under chisel-plowed (CP) or no-till (NT) management. From 2010 to 2012, soil samples were obtained each spring at 0–15- and 15–30-cm depths, to determine whether over-wintering of target bacteria had occurred. Sampling was followed by application of PM at low (PM1) and high (PM2) rates, based on nitrogen application goals. In 2012, soil samples were collected 21, 42, and 158 days after manure application (DAM), to assess the effects of time, application rates, and tillage on frequency of detection and concentrations of target bacteria. Despite dry conditions, all three target organisms were detected 158 DAM in 2012, and detection of these organisms in spring soil samples from manured plots in 2011 and 2012, nearly a full year after PM application, suggests that these organisms can persist in the soil environment long after application. The highest SALM concentration (790 cfu/g dry weight) and detection rate (25%) was found in PM2 plots 42 DAM. SALM were detected more frequently in CP plots (20%) compared to NT plots (5%). In contrast, tillage practices had no apparent effect on EC or ENT survival, as indicated by both soil, and decay rates estimated from tile-water bacteria concentrations. Decay rate constants (μ) ranged from 0.044 to 0.065 day−1 for EC and 0.010 to 0.054 day−1 for ENT. Keywords Salmonella, Fecal indicator bacteria, Tillage, Poultry manure, Soil Disciplines Agricultural Science | Bioresource and Agricultural Engineering | Food Science Comments This article is published as Hruby, Claire E., Michelle L. Soupir, Thomas B. Moorman, Carl Pederson, and Ramesh Kanwar. "Salmonella and Fecal Indicator Bacteria Survival in Soils Amended with Poultry Manure." Water, Air, & Soil Pollution 229, no. 2 (2018): 32. doi: 10.1007/s11270-017-3667-z. Posted with permission. Rights Works produced by employees of the U.S. Government as part of their official duties are not copyrighted within the U.S. The onc tent of this document is not copyrighted. This article is available at Iowa State University Digital Repository: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/abe_eng_pubs/868 Water Air Soil Pollut (2018) 229:32 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-017-3667-z Salmonella and Fecal Indicator Bacteria Survival in Soils Amended with Poultry Manure Claire E. Hruby & Michelle L. Soupir & Thomas B. Moorman & Carl Pederson & Ramesh Kanwar Received: 20 February 2017 /Accepted: 13 December 2017 # Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018 Abstract Minimizing the risks associated with manure- target bacteria had occurred. Sampling was followed borne pathogenic microorganisms requires an under- by application of PM at low (PM1) and high (PM2) standing of microbial survival under realistic field con- rates, based on nitrogen application goals. In 2012, soil ditions. The objective of this 3-year study was to assess samples were collected 21, 42, and 158 days after ma- the fate of Salmonella (SALM) and fecal indicator bac- nure application (DAM), to assess the effects of time, teria (FIB), E. coli (EC) and enterococci (ENT), in application rates, and tillage on frequency of detection glacial till-derived soils, after application of poultry and concentrations of target bacteria. Despite dry con- manure (PM) to cornfields under chisel-plowed (CP) ditions, all three target organisms were detected 158 or no-till (NT) management. From 2010 to 2012, soil DAM in 2012, and detection of these organisms in samples were obtained each spring at 0–15- and 15–30- spring soil samples from manured plots in 2011 and cm depths, to determine whether over-wintering of 2012, nearly a full year after PM application, suggests that these organisms can persist in the soil environment long after application. The highest SALM concentration Electronic supplementary material The online version of this (790 cfu/g dry weight) and detection rate (25%) was article (https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-017-3667-z) contains found in PM2 plots 42 DAM. SALM were detected supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. more frequently in CP plots (20%) compared to NT C. E. Hruby plots (5%). In contrast, tillage practices had no apparent Department of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering, Iowa effect on EC or ENT survival, as indicated by both soil, State University, Ames, IA 50011, USA and decay rates estimated from tile-water bacteria con- μ * centrations. Decay rate constants ( ) ranged from 0.044 M. L. Soupir ( ) −1 −1 Department of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering, Iowa to 0.065 day for EC and 0.010 to 0.054 day for ENT. State University, 3358 Elings Hall, Ames, IA 50011, USA e-mail: [email protected] Keywords Salmonella . Fecal indicator bacteria . T. B. Moorman Tillage . Poultry manure . Soil National Laboratory for Agriculture and the Environment, USDA ARS, 2110 University Boulevard, Ames, IA 50011, USA C. Pederson 1 Introduction Department of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering, Iowa State University, 4306B Elings Hall, Ames, IA 50011, USA Salmonellosis affects 1.2 million Americans annually R. Kanwar (Scallan et al. 2011), with tens of millions of cases world- Department of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering, Iowa wide each year (WHO 2013). Infections can be caused by State University, 2212 NSRIC, Ames, IA 50011, USA consumption of contaminated seafood, meat, eggs, dairy, 32 Page 2 of 14 Water Air Soil Pollut (2018) 229:32 juice, fresh produce, or water (Dale et al. 2010;FDA source and local environmental conditions (Payment and 2012). Quality control plans, mandatory testing of eggs, Locas 2011). In aquatic environments, SALM has been and hazard analysis at critical control points (HACCP) are detected when FIB are absent or present at low concen- used to reduce the spread of Salmonella in the Unites trations (Morinigo et al. 1990;Poloetal.1998, 1999). States (US). Despite these efforts, persistence of Salmonel- Numerous laboratory studies have been conducted to la (SALM) in the farm environment continues to be a assess the potential for survival of SALM, and other concern for dairy, livestock and poultry operations, and bacteria, in manure-amended soils. Key factors shown growers of vegetables and leafy greens (CDC 2010; to impact bacterial survival include temperature, soil Jacobsen and Bech 2012; Berghaus et al. 2013). Addition- type, soil moisture, nutrient availability, and protection ally, the risk of transport of manure-derived bacteria to from UVexposure (Zibilske and Weaver 1978; Chandler surface and groundwater resources is a concern worldwide and Craven 1980; Crane and Moore 1986;Guanand (Unc and Goss 2004;Daleetal.2010;WHO2012; Holley 2003;Holleyetal.2006; You et al. 2006; Lang USEPA 2013). and Smith 2007; Garcia et al. 2010). Bacterial survival in Iowa is the leading producer of eggs in the US and is soils is also dependent on interactions with plants and also a major producer of broiler chickens (UDSA-NASS plant roots, protozoan predators, and native microbial 2014). Poultry manure (PM) from confinement opera- communities (Jiang et al. 2002;Brandletal.2005;You tions is typically stockpiled and applied in the spring or et al. 2006;vanElsasetal.2007;Garciaetal.2010; fall to provide nutrients necessary for production of corn Ibekwe et al. 2010; Liang et al. 2011; Rothrock et al. (Zea mays L.)(MooreJr.1998;Sharpleyetal.1997;Jn- 2012;Farhangietal.2013; Erickson et al. 2014). Baptiste et al. 2013). Along with beneficial nutrients, PM With such a wide range of complex interactions occur- commonly contains Salmonella (SALM) and other en- ring in natural settings, it is especially important to collect teric pathogens, (Kraft et al. 1969; Rodriguez et al. field data from a variety of locations under a range of 2006), which can be transported between farms and to climate conditions. In addition, various common agricul- water resources. In this region of the US, a majority of tural practices, such as storage practices, method of appli- the soils are derived from sediments deposited during the cation, timing of application, and tillage practices, have Pleistocene glacial period (Brady 1984),andasmuchas been shown to impact bacterial survival and must be 50% of the agricultural fields have had subsurface drain- considered (Hutchison et al. 2004b; Arrus et al.