Sensitivity of Soil Microbial Processes to Livestock Antimicrobials

Proceedings Home | W2W Home w2w17 logo

Purpose

Many of the antimicrobials administered to livestock are excreted in manure where they may undergo natural breakdown, become more tightly associated with the manure and soil, or become mobilized in wastewater/runoff. Both liquid and solid manure is usually applied to nearby crop fields as a manure fertilizer, recycling the nutrients in the manure. Public concerns about the overuse of antimicrobials leading to greater antibiotic resistance and potentially greater risk for human health have led to new regulations limiting the use of antimicrobials in animal production. However, there are several significant research questions that need to be explored in order to determine how important the links are between antimicrobial use in livestock production and increased antibiotic resistance in humans.

One important issue involves how important soil processes (decomposition, nutrient transformation, and gas emissions) could be altered by antimicrobial compounds in manures and wastewater. In a previous study at a cattle feedlot in central Nebraska, we found typical antimicrobial concentrations in feedlot runoff at low part per billion (ppb) levels and were detected infrequently (<20% of the time). One exception, monensin, was usually detected with an average concentration of 87 ppb and peak concentrations above 200 ppb. Adding complexity to this issue is that soils may experience a variety of conditions ranging from fully aerobic, to denitrifying (using nitrate as a terminal electron acceptor), to anaerobic, and a diverse variety of microbes may predominate in these various conditions. How might soil functions be affected under a range of conditions experiencing differing concentrations of antibiotic? Are there clear very high concentration thresholds that completel! y inhibit specific soil functions? The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of three common livestock antibiotics at multiple concentrations on decomposition, nutrient transformation, and gas production in pasture soil under aerobic, denitrifying, and anaerobic conditions.

What did we do?

A soil slurry incubation study was conducted with pasture soil where runoff from a nearby cattle feedlot was occasionally applied. Monensin, sulfamethazine, and lincomycin were amended (0, 5, 500, and 5000 ppb) to mason jars and serum bottles containing soil and simulated cattle feedlot runoff. The mason jars were flushed with air (aerobic) while serum bottles were flushed with nitrogen gas (anaerobic). Denitrifying conditions were established initially in a subset of anaerobic serum bottles which were supplemented with nitrate (100 mg NO3-N L-1). All antimicrobial amendments and conditions were replicated in triplicate and incubated at 20°C. Headspace gas composition and decomposition products were both measured using gas chromatography and monitored over several weeks.Table 1. Summary of the effects of various livestock antibiotics on decomposition under aerobic, anaerobic, and denitrifying conditions

What have we learned?

Soil processes were generally affected only at the highest antibiotic concentrations, which are 10x greater than observed levels in feedlot runoff. Furthermore, the effects on soil processes depended upon the antibiotic tested (Table 1). Monensin, a broad-range antimicrobial, had the greatest effect on a number of processes. At highest monensin concentrations tested (5000 ppb), both aerobic and anaerobic decomposition (including denitrification) were affected as shown by greater VFA concentrations and low to no gas production (CO2, N2O, and CH4). Even at 500 ppb, monensin had some effect—CO2, N2O, and CH4 gas production were reduced. Sulfamethazine at 5000 ppb inhibited full denitrification (no N2O produced), but there was no effect on other gases or VFA. At 500 ppb sulfamethazine, N2O production was reduced by half. Lincomycin’s only observable effect was lower (0.5x) N2O production at the 5000 ppb level under denitrification conditions.

These results show important soil processes can be blocked by high levels of antibiotics found in animal manures, but inhibition depends upon the antibiotic.  A general antimicrobial like monensin affected microbial processes far more than antimicrobials with a specific mode of action.  The highest antibiotic levels evaluated were 5 to 10 times higher than levels found in animal manures, so soils are likely not impacted under normal conditions where manures mixed and distributed into soils.  Antibiotic breakdown in the soil further helps reduce the potential for antibiotics to build up in the soils.

Future Plans

These incubations only assessed the effect of a one-time dose of antimicrobials. Future studies will examine how longer soil exposures affect soil processes. Additional studies will also compare how soils that have different manure exposure histories (cattle feedlot soil with heavy exposure versus protected prairie soils with very low manure exposure) would react to higher levels of antimicrobials.

Corresponding author, title, and affiliation

Dan Miller, Microbiologist, USDA-ARS

Corresponding author email

dan.miller@ars.usda.gov

Other authors

Matteo D’Alessio, Postdoctoral Researcher, Nebraska Water Center; Dan Snow, Director of Services, Water Sciences Laboratory

Additional information

151 Filley Hall, UNL East Campus, Lincoln, NE 68583

Ph: 402-472-0741

https://dl.sciencesocieties.org/publications/csa/pdfs/61/8/4?search-result=1

The authors are solely responsible for the content of these proceedings. The technical information does not necessarily reflect the official position of the sponsoring agencies or institutions represented by planning committee members, and inclusion and distribution herein does not constitute an endorsement of views expressed by the same. Printed materials included herein are not refereed publications. Citations should appear as follows. EXAMPLE: Authors. 2017. Title of presentation. Waste to Worth: Spreading Science and Solutions. Cary, NC. April 18-21, 2017. URL of this page. Accessed on: today’s date.

Manure & Soil Health: Roundtables to Advance our Understanding of the State of the Science

Farmers and ranchers are becoming increasingly aware of the importance of soil quality/health to the productivity and sustainability of their agricultural system. Research and field observations have demonstrated that carefully managed manure applications can contribute to improved soil quality with limited environmental and social risks. However, a comprehensive assemblage of outputs and conclusions from research studies, field trials, soil labs databases, and other sources has never been developed. Therefore, the purpose of the initiative, Manure & Soil Health: Understanding and Advancing the State of the Science, is to assemble current knowledge on this topic, make it available to those influencing manure and land management decisions, and use it to inform and facilitate future research and service needs. The intent of the roundtables is to improve our understanding of: current knowledge, critical and emerging issues for which there are knowledge gaps, and information needs of farmers and their advisors.

What’s A Roundtable?

The four, hour-long roundtables consisted of a panel discussion with experts who were asked to summarize their current understanding of topics. Each panel also included a practitioner who shared perspectives on critical information needs of farmers and advisors and field experiences relative to use of manure. Panels were moderated to encourage interaction with audience. Roundtable participants were invited to ask questions of panelists and share expertise and experience.

When Were The Roundtables Held?

Date/Time Topic Panel Experts

February 9, 2017

Manure and Soil Health Testing Bianca Moebius-Clune
Donna Brandt
Russell Dresbach
Geoff Ruth

February 16, 2017

Manure and Soil Biology Rhae Drijber
Michele Soupir
Dr. Jonathan Lundgren

February 23, 2017

Manure and Soil Erosion, Runoff, and Losses Nathan Nelson
John Gilley
Mike Kucera
Andy Scholting

March 9, 2017

Manure and Cover Crops Tim Harrigan
Barry Fisher
Heidi Johnson
Sarah Carlson

Pathways for Effective Manure Nutriment Management Information Sharing and Education Between Agriculture Professionals: A South Dakota Pilot Test


Why Look at Barriers in Nutrient Management Information Flow?

 

The issue of manure nutrient management has been the subject of controversy and new policies in recent years as the non-point source discharge of nutrients and bacteria is substantial if manure is not managed properly. Unfortunately, there are barriers between organizations and individuals that prevent the flow of important, timely information between audience types and limits the impact and usefulness of research results. These barriers may be in the form of institutional language differences, job descriptions, or a mismatch between information outputs and inputs.

What did we do?

A national team of researchers, Extension specialists, consultants and government staff developed a survey to quantify the role, programming, and barriers to information flow between organizations and individuals regarding manure nutrient management. The electronic survey was disseminated via cooperating agencies, organizations and personal contacts to technical service providers, producers, university personnel, regulatory personnel, private sales or service enterprises and other professionals who contribute to manure nutrient management in South Dakota. Respondents were asked to indicate the relevance of information sources (inputs), information products (outputs) and collaborators (links), as well as barriers to their use. The relevance selections were transformed into scalar data and an analysis of variance was performed on the average relevance scores to test for differences based on input/output/link type and organization type.

What have we learned?

There were 139 surveys started, and 80 surveys completed. Data from partially completed surveys were, however, included in the analysis. The main categories of self-identified respondents were NRCS (n=36), Producers (n=29), University personnel (n=15) and Regulatory personnel (n=9). The remaining categories respondents were grouped into an Other category (n=22). The average relevance score for each of the information sources, information products and collaborations listed in the survey were consistent (no significant difference between organization types). As sources of information, consultation, eXtension and field days were ranked most relevant, with classroom and social media being least relevant. Similarly, consultation, field days and eXtension were ranked the most relevant means of sharing information; social media was ranked least relevant. Barriers to information sources and products were specific to the activity or product. The select ion “No barriers to use” was not an indicator of relevance. All organization types deemed producers the most relevant collaborator, followed by state, university and federal agencies.

Future Plans

The South Dakota-based survey was a pilot test for a nationwide survey being conducted in 2015. From feedback and data review, the survey has been refined and shortened to elicit the key input, output and collaborator data. With the national data in hand later in 2015, the project team looks forward to linking information producers and users in effective pathways for manure nutrient management information transmission, and ultimately, adoption.

Authors

Erin Cortus, Assistant Professor and Environmental Quality Engineer at South Dakota State University erin.cortus@sdstate.edu

Nichole Embertson, Nutrient Management Specialist, Sustainable Livestock Production Program, Whatcom Conservation District; Jeffrey Jacquet, Assistant Professor, Sociology and Rural Studies, South Dakota State University

Additional information

Anyone interested in participating on the Pathways Project team are invited to contact Erin Cortus (erin.cortus@sdstate.edu) or Nichole Embertson (NEmbertson@whatcomcd.org).

Acknowledgements

The nationwide team who contribute to and guide the Pathways project are gratefully acknowledged. Funding provided through the South Dakota SARE Mini-Grant Program supported data collection and analysis for the survey pilot test.

The authors are solely responsible for the content of these proceedings. The technical information does not necessarily reflect the official position of the sponsoring agencies or institutions represented by planning committee members, and inclusion and distribution herein does not constitute an endorsement of views expressed by the same. Printed materials included herein are not refereed publications. Citations should appear as follows. EXAMPLE: Authors. 2015. Title of presentation. Waste to Worth: Spreading Science and Solutions. Seattle, WA. March 31-April 3, 2015. URL of this page. Accessed on: today’s date.

 

Measuring Nitrous Oxide and Methane Emissions from Feedyard Pen Surfaces; Experience with the NFT-NSS Chamber Technique

Why Study Nitrous Oxide and Methane at Cattle Feedyards?

Accurate estimation of greenhouse gas emissions, including nitrous oxide and methane, from open beef cattle feedlots is an increasing concern given the current and potential future reporting requirements for GHG emissions. Research measuring emission fluxes of GHGs from open beef cattle feedlots, however, has been very limited. Soil and environmental scientists have long used various chamber based techniques, particularly non-flow-through – non-steady-state (NFT-NSS) chambers for measuring soil fluxes. Adaptation of this technique to feedyards presents a series of challenges, including spatial variability, presence of animals, chamber base installation issues, gas sample collection and storage, concentration analysis range, and flux calculations.

What did we do? 

Following an extensive review of the literature on measuring emissions from cropping and pasture systems, it was decide to adopt non-flow-through – non-steady-state (NFT-NSS) chambers as the preferred measurement methodology. However, the use of these NFT-NSS chambers had to be adapted for use in conditions of beef cattle feedyards and open corral dairies.

What have we learned? 

Trials of various techniques for sealing the chamber to the manure surface including piling soil/manure around the chamber and various weighted skirts were trial, however no technique was as good at sealing the chamber as a metal ring driven 50-75 mm into the underlying substrate.

Chamber bases could potentially injure animal in the pen and/or animal could disturb the measurement installation, so measurements were only conducted in recently vacated pens.

Gas samples were drawn from a septa in the chamber cap using a 20 ml polyethylene syringe and immediately injected into a 12 ml evacuated exetainer vial for transport, storage and analysis. Trials of alternative vials led to sample loss and contamination issues.

Gas samples were analyzed using a gas chromatograph equipped with ECD, FID and TCD detectors for nitrous oxide, methane and carbon dioxide determination, respectively.

The metal rings or bases must be installed at least 24 and preferably 48 hours before measurements are commenced as the disturbance caused when installing the bases will result in a temporarily enhanced emission flux.

Ten, 20 cm dia chambers constructed from PVC pipe caps are deployed in a pen and yield a reasonable approximation of the average emission fluxes from the pen.

The range of gas concentrations measured in the chamber at the end of a 30 minute deployment was up to 2 orders of magnitude greater than that typically measured in cropping systems research. This required careful choice of calibration gas concentrations and calibration of the gas chromatograph. The response of the ECD detector used for determining N2O concentration may not be linear over the entire range experienced.

The rate of increase in concentration in the chamber is often curvilinear in form and a quadratic approach was adopted for determination of the flux rate.

Future Plans 

On-going studies are quantifying N2O and CH4 flux rates from pen surfaces in a cattle feedlots under varying seasonal conditions; further work is identifying contributing factors.

Authors

Kenneth D. Casey, Associate Professor at Texas A&M AgriLife Research, Amarillo TX kdcasey@ag.tamu.edu

Heidi M. Waldrip, Research Soil Scientist at USDA ARS CPRL, Bushland TX; Richard W. Todd, Research Soil Scientist at USDA ARS CPRL, Bushland TX; and N. Andy Cole, Research Soil Scientist at USDA ARS CPRL, Bushland TX;

Additional information 

For further information, contact Ken Casey, 806-677-5600

Acknowledgements

Research was partially funded from USDA NIFA Special Research Grants

The authors are solely responsible for the content of these proceedings. The technical information does not necessarily reflect the official position of the sponsoring agencies or institutions represented by planning committee members, and inclusion and distribution herein does not constitute an endorsement of views expressed by the same. Printed materials included herein are not refereed publications. Citations should appear as follows. EXAMPLE: Authors. 2015. Title of presentation. Waste to Worth: Spreading Science and Solutions. Seattle, WA. March 31-April 3, 2015. URL of this page. Accessed on: today’s date.

Relative Mineralization Rates of Manure and Effect on Corn Grain Yield and N Uptake


Why Is It Important to Study Availability of Manure Nitrogen?

Application of fresh and composted manure as a fertilizer source in corn production has long been a useful practice in many sustainable crop production systems especially when phosphorus, and not nitrogen (N), is the primary nutrient of interest. But when manure is applied as the primary source of N, despite several agronomic advantages associated with manure use, there is a high risk of ground water pollution, and often times, would produce lower yields and grain protein than inorganic fertilizers. Nitrogen mineralization and availability from manure is difficult to predict. Therefore estimating the amount of crop N uptake that may be attributed to manure applied in the same year or to its residual impact, can be a useful approach towards quantifying a supplementary quantity of inorganic N fertilizer with the manure.

What did we do?

yield response to manureThis study measured in situ relative soil N mineralization rates (flux) during three growing seasons of continuous no-till (2013 and 2014) corn in Carrington, ND. We applied fresh (FM) and composted beef feedlot manure (CM) only once in spring 2012 at N rates of 90, 180, and 240lbs/A as FM, and 90 and 180lbs as CM. These rates were applied based on the calculation that 50% of N from FM and 25% of N from CM, would be available the first year. Other treatments were urea at 90, 150, 180, and 240lbs N/A, plus a check at 0lbs/A. In 2013 and 2014 urea was applied to respective plots, based on soil test, to raise the N levels to the respective 2012 N levels. We used the randomized complete block design with four replicates. Three replicates were used to measure soil N (NO3- + NH4+) mineralization rates bi-monthly with Plant Root Simulator probes (PRS™), from the urea fertilized and manured plots at the 0, 90 and 180lb levels at 4-6 leaf growth stage. Four pairs of PRS™ probes were buried in the top 6 inches near corn roots and replaced every two weeks for four sampling dates. We measured yields, protein content, and N uptake.

What have we learned?

N mineralized near corn roots, 2014Yields were generally low in all three years of this study, well below the average for this region. Bi-monthly N mineralization was significantly higher as N increases with urea as N source during the early sampling dates (Figures 2 and 3) and subsequently declined to similar levels as the manure treatments. It is therefore possible that the plants benefited from higher early uptake of N from urea up to the early stages of peak corn N uptake but not enough to produce significantly higher yields than the manure treatments. Analysis of variance showed no significant treatment effects for yields in 2012 (α = 0.05) but grain protein differences were significant. These differences were observed only between the check and 180 lbs N in 2012. The highest mean grain yield was recorded with the 90 lbs N treatment where, the residual soil N at planting was just 33 lbs. The protein level was also significantly higher than the check and CM plot that received 180 lbs N in 2012, and with a soil residual N prior to 2013 planting, at 35 lbs. Each year, grain yields responded positively to N rates (applied as urea) and residual N levels from FM but not with CM. Since corn was grown for three continuous years, unsurprisingly yields declined with years of production since N was not applied to the FM and CM treatments after first application in year one. Similarly, yield decline was observed with urea over the three years but not as steep as the FM and CM treatments. The FM at 240 lbs N, and urea at 180 and 240 lbs treatments produced significantly higher grain protein than the check in 2012 (data not shown). Lower N mineralization and very likely, lower N availability was observed with the CM treatments especially at 180 lbs N, which consistently scored the lowest mean yield and protein in 2013 and 2014. Grain yields were consistently higher at 90 lbs N than 180 lbs N with the CM treatment. N mineralized near corn roots, 2014Summer droughts of 2012 and 2013 at this site and possibly, factors associated with continuous corn production (e.g. disease, temporal N immobilization) compounded the effects of urea treatments even though N uptake was consistently higher with urea. Total N taken up in corn grains from the FM and CM treatments increased with N rates but decreased with time (Table 1). From this study, corn grains took up more N from the plots treated with FM than the CM over the three-year period of the study. Subsequent changes in soil conditions such as moisture, N leaching, temperature, can sometimes limit the efficiency of inorganic fertilizer uses, and favoring low cost alternative uses such as manure especially if the prevailing conditions enhance N mineralization from manure or soil organic matter. Based on N input plus soil N status at the beginning of planting every year, corn N uptake efficiency was in the order: Check>FM>CM>Urea, with efficiency decreasing at higher N rates. The minimum proportion of grain N uptake by any treatment to the single highest N uptake for any urea-N treatment (considered as a reference) in a given year, was 42% for the check in 2013.

soil nitrogen at planting and mean yearly uptake in corn grain

Future Plans

Relative contribution of nitrogen from the fresh and composted manure treatments and residual N will be used to estimate the percentage of N coming from these treatments over a three-year period. This will be used to establish new studies to assess different levels of fertilizer N to apply with manure to improve on the grain protein content and yields.

Authors

Jasper M Teboh, Soil Scientist, Carrington Research Extension Center, North Dakota State University Jasper.Teboh@ndsu.edu

Szilvia Zilahi-Sebess, and Ezra Aberle

Additional information

More detailed results from 2013 can be found in the North Dakota Corn Growers 2013 Annual Report at: www.ndcorn.org/uploads/useruploads/annual_report.pdf

Acknowledgements

North Dakota Corn Growers Association, Western Ag Innovations, Mr. Ron Wiederholt, Mr. Blaine G Schatz (Director, CREC)

The authors are solely responsible for the content of these proceedings. The technical information does not necessarily reflect the official position of the sponsoring agencies or institutions represented by planning committee members, and inclusion and distribution herein does not constitute an endorsement of views expressed by the same. Printed materials included herein are not refereed publications. Citations should appear as follows. EXAMPLE: Authors. 2015. Title of presentation. Waste to Worth: Spreading Science and Solutions. Seattle, WA. March 31-April 3, 2015. URL of this page. Accessed on: today’s date.

Swine Manure Application Method Impact on Soil Arthropods


Does Manure Application Impact Soil Arthropods? *

Soil arthropod populations and diversity provide an indication of the biological quality of soil, which can impact soil fertility. Arthropods include insects, crustaceans, arachnids, myriapods, and scorpions and nearly every soil is inhabited by many different arthropod species. Row-crop soils may contain several dozen species. One particular arthropod species, mites, can have a significant impact on nutrient release in soil. For this study, the impact of swine manure slurry applied via broadcast and injection at a rate designed to meet the agronomic nitrogen needs of corn was investigated to determine the manure application method impact on soil arthropod population and diversity.

What did we do?

Treatments include broadcasted swine slurry, injected swine slurry, and non-manured check plots with four replications per treatment. Plots have been monitored following manure application in June 2014 and will continue through June 2015. Soil samples were removed 4 d prior to manure application and at 1, 2, and 4 weeks and monthly thereafter from 0 to 8 inches on each plot. Arthropods were extracted by use of Burlese funnels and collected species are being sorted and characterized.

What have we learned?

Species characterization is on-going and will be summarized for presentation in the poster session at the conference.

Future Plans

Results of this work will allow us to better understand the impact of manure application on soil biological properties, a component in defining the overall fertility or “health” of soil.

Authors

Amy Millmier Schmidt, Assistant Professor and Livestock Bioenvironmental Engineer, University of Nebraska – Lincoln aschmidt@unl.edu

Nicole R. Schuster, Graduate Research Assistant, University of Nebraska – Lincoln; Julie Peterson, Assistant Professor and Entomologist, University of Nebraska – Lincoln

Additional information

Dr. Amy Millmier Schmidt; (402) 472-0877; aschmidt@unl.edu

Acknowledgements

We would like to recognize a number of individuals who assisted with soil sample collection, arthropod extractions, and other laboratory activities over the course of this project, including Keith Miller, Ethan Doyle, Mitch Goedeken, Eric Davis, Lucas Snethan, Kevan Reardon and Kayla Tierramar

The authors are solely responsible for the content of these proceedings. The technical information does not necessarily reflect the official position of the sponsoring agencies or institutions represented by planning committee members, and inclusion and distribution herein does not constitute an endorsement of views expressed by the same. Printed materials included herein are not refereed publications. Citations should appear as follows. EXAMPLE: Authors. 2015. Title of presentation. Waste to Worth: Spreading Science and Solutions. Seattle, WA. March 31-April 3, 2015. URL of this page. Accessed on: today’s date.

Analyses of Microbial Populations and Antibiotic Resistance Present in Stored Swine Manure from Underground Storage Pits

 

Why Study Antibiotic Resistance in Manure?

Antimicrobial compounds have been commonly used as feed additives for domestic animals to reduce infection and promote growth. Recent concerns have suggested such feeding practices may result in increased microbial resistance to antibiotics, which can have an impact on human health. As part of our research project we have been studying the commensal microbial populations present in stored swine manure and the swine GI tract. We have extended this work to include studies on the antibiotic resistance present in these populations.

What did we do?

Predominant microbial populations were identified by both pure culture isolations and direct 16S rDNA sequencing of total DNA from swine feces and stored manure samples. Antibiotic resistance was analyzed using similar pure culture isolation methods. Pure cultures were isolated following plating on anaerobic and aerobic media containing tetracycline, tylosin, or erythromycin. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analyses using primers based on a variety of antibiotic resistance genes was carries out with both pure culture isolates and total DNA from swine feces and stored manure.

What have we learned?

Results of pure culture isolation and direct 16S rDNA gene sequence analyses indicate that the bacterial populations of the swine GI tract (feces) and stored manure ecosystems are predominantly composed of anaerobic, low mole %G+C, Gram-positive bacteria, most of which represent novel genera and species. Results of antibiotic resistance gene PCR studies demonstrated the presence of a variety of tet (e.g., tetK, tetO) and erm (e.g., ermA, ermC) resistance gene classes in both anaerobic and aerobic pure cultures and total DNA from both swine feces and stored manure, as well as the identification of novel bacteria containing new resistance genes. Comparison of DNA sequences suggests that horizontal transfer of resistance genes between bacterial strains has also occurred. The data indicate that both the swine gastrointestinal (GI) tract and stored swine manure may serve as reservoirs of known and novel antibiotic resistant bacteria and resistan ce genes.

Future Plans

We are interested in developing methods to reduce antibiotic resistance in the swine GI tract and stored manure, and to determine if antibiotic resistance genes present in these ecosystems can be transferred to bacteria that may affect human health (e.g., E. coli, Salmonella, Campylobacter).

Authors

Terence R. Whitehead, Research Microbiologist, USDA-ARS- National Center for Agricultural Utililzation Research, Peoria, IL 61604 terry.whitehead@ars.usda.gov

Michael A. Cotta, USDA-ARS-National Center for Agricultural Utilization Research, Peoria, IL 61604

Additional information

Terence R. Whitehead, NCAUR, 1815 N. University St., Peoria, IL 61615 309-681-6272

USDA-ARS-NCAUR-Bioenergy Research Unit: http://ars.usda.gov/main/site_main.htm?modecode=50-10-05-20

Cotta, M.A., Whitehead, T.R., and Zeltwanger, R.L. Isolation, Characterization, and Comparison of Bacteria from Swine Faeces and Manure Storage Pits. (2003) Env. Microbiol. 5:737-745. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1467-2920.2003.00467.x/pdf

Whittle, G., Whitehead, T.R., Hamburger, N., Shoemaker, N.B., Cotta, M.A., and Salyers, A.A. Identification of a new ribosomal protection type of tetracycline resistance gene, tet(36), from swine manure pits . (2003) Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 69:4151-4158. http://aem.asm.org/content/69/7/4151.full

Cotta, M.A., Whitehead, T.R., Falsen, E., Moore, E. and Lawson, P.A. Robinsonella peoriae gen.nov., sp. nov., isolated from a swine-manure storage pit and a human clinical source. (2009) Int. J. System. Evol. Microbiol. 59:150-155. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19126740/

Whitehead, T.R. and Cotta, M.A. Stored Swine Manure and Swine Feces as Reservoirs of Antibiotic Resistance Genes. (2013) Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 56:264-267. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/enhanced/doi/10.1111/lam.12043/

The authors are solely responsible for the content of these proceedings. The technical information does not necessarily reflect the official position of the sponsoring agencies or institutions represented by planning committee members, and inclusion and distribution herein does not constitute an endorsement of views expressed by the same. Printed materials included herein are not refereed publications. Citations should appear as follows. EXAMPLE: Authors. 2015. Title of presentation. Waste to Worth: Spreading Science and Solutions. Seattle, WA. March 31-April 3, 2015. URL of this page. Accessed on: today’s date.

Electrolysis of Swine Manure Effluents Using Three Different Electrodes FE-FE, AL-AL, and FE-AL

Purpose

The main objective of this research was to investigate the electrochemical oxidation of swine manure effluent obtained from a primary lagoon for reducing organic and inorganic pollutants.

What did we do?        

Liquid swine manure effluent was collected and treated with three different electrodes (Fe-Fe, Al-Al, and Fe-Al) with three electric current levels (500, 1000, and 2000 mA). The electrochemical cell consisted of two parallel rectangular plates (90 mm × 25 mm × 1.5 mm) of iron (Fe-Fe), aluminum (Al-Al), and iron-aluminum (Fe-Al, later on described as hybrid) electrodes; immersed in a beaker with 550 mL swine effluents, and powered by a direct current (DC) supply (Figure 1). All studies were conducted in batches at room temperature.

Figure 1. photographic view of electrolysis system with floating scum

What have we learned?

In general, removal efficiencies increased with increasing current densities and electrolysis times for electrodes evaluated. Aluminum electrodes (Al-Al) outperformed iron (Fe-Fe) and hybrid electrodes (Al-Fe) in removing total phosphorus (TP) at all current density levels tested. At higher current density (21 mA cm-2), Fe-Al electrodes had shown better TP removal efficiency than other electrodes within 1200 s of treatment initiation, but at lower current densities (5 and 10 mA cm-2) Al-Al electrodes outperformed the other electrodes for TP removal. TP removal progressed overtime and maximum TP removal occurred within 1800 s from the start of each experiment. Overall, Al-Al electrodes resulted in better TP removal over all current densities during the experimental period. Overall, use of hybrid electrodes resulted in better chemical oxygen demand (COD) removal. For the same treatment times (1200 s) at higher current density (21 mA cm-2), hybri d electrodes removed about 100% COD, which are about 1.9 and 1.3 times higher than those of aluminum and iron electrodes, respectively. Iron electrodes showed the highest removal efficiency (85%) for total organic carbon (TOC) at 21 mA cm-2 current density and 1200 s treatment time.

In this study, Fe-Fe electrodes at 10 and 21 mA cm-2 current densities, removed higher TOC (17 to 85% and 51 to 100%, respectively) than those of Fe-Al (9 to 73% and 44 to 84%, respectively) and Al-Al electrodes (9 to 67% and 14 to 70%, respectively). On the contrary, Al-Al electrodes removed higher TOC (10 to 69%) than those of Fe-Fe and Fe-Al electrodes at lower current density (5 mA cm-2) for all treatment times (600 to 3600s). The performance of Fe-Fe and Fe-Al electrodes at 5 mA cm-2 current density were close (~ 6 to 50%) for all treatment times. The high removal efficiency for TOC (85%) was achieved at 1800 s treatment time at 21 mA cm-2 current density with Fe-Fe electrodes.

The removal efficiencies of TP, COD, and TOC were positively correlated with increasing treatment times and three levels of current densities (5, 10, and 21 mA cm-2) and treatment times for each electrode type. Removal efficiencies of TP for all three electrodes (Fe-Fe, Fe-Al, and Al-Al) were similar (90 to 100%) at 21 mA cm-2 current densities for a 1200 s treatment time. Removal efficiencies of TP during 1800 s treatment time for all three electrodes at 21 mA cm-2 current density were about 100%. The TP removal efficiency with Al-Al electrodes was about 100% at 1800 s treatment time for all three levels of applied current densities. Even at lower current density (5 mA cm-2), removal efficiencies of TP with Al-Al electrodes was higher than those of Fe-Fe and Fe-Al electrodes.

Overall, lower specific electrical energy consumptions (SEECs) per kg of pollutants (TP, COD, and TOC) were estimated for the aluminum electrodes than the other electrodes combination. Based on this lab study, it can be concluded that depending on the target pollutants, an appropriate current density and electrode type may be applied to obtain the maximal removal of a pollutant.

Future Plans  

This study was a lab scale study. In the future, a pilot scale study will be conducted with different additives and electrode types.

Authors

Shafiqur Rahman, Associate Professor, Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering, North Dakota State University Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering, North Dakota State University s.rahman@ndsu.edu

M. S. Borhan, Research Specialist, Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering, North Dakota State University

Additional information             

http://thescipub.com/abstract/10.3844/ajabssp.2014.490.502

Acknowledgements      

Financial support from North Dakota Pork Council and State Board of Agricultural Research and Education (SBARE)are gratefully acknowledged. The authors also acknowledge Swine Research Center of North Dakota State University for supplying swine effluents for this study.

The authors are solely responsible for the content of these proceedings. The technical information does not necessarily reflect the official position of the sponsoring agencies or institutions represented by planning committee members, and inclusion and distribution herein does not constitute an endorsement of views expressed by the same. Printed materials included herein are not refereed publications. Citations should appear as follows. EXAMPLE: Authors. 2015. Title of presentation. Waste to Worth: Spreading Science and Solutions. Seattle, WA. March 31-April 3, 2015. URL of this page. Accessed on: today’s date.

How much of the nitrogen contained in dairy ration components is partitioned into milk, manure, crops and environmental N loss?

Purpose

Of the total nitrogen (N) consumed by dairy cows on confinement farms (cows fed in barns), a general range of 20% to 35% is secreted in milk and the remaining N is excreted in manure. The N contained in manure is either recycled through crops after field application, or lost to the environment. To better understand the synergistic nature of feed N and manure N management and environmental N loss from dairy farms, a series of cow, laboratory and field experiments (Figure 1) was undertaken to quantify the relative amounts of N contained in individual ration components that are secreted in milk, excreted in urine and feces, taken up by crops after manure application to soil, and lost as ammonia (NH3) and nitrous oxide (N2O) from dairy barns and soils.

What did we do?

Alfalfa silage, corn silage, corn grain and soybeans were enriched in the field with the stable isotope 15N. Each 15N-enriched component was then fed individually (soybeans were solvent-extracted and the resultant soybean meal was fed) to twelve mid-lactation cows (3 cows per 15N-enriched ration component) as part of a total mixed ration (TMR). The masses of milk, urine and feces produced by each cow were recorded and sampled during the 4 day 15N feeding period, and for 3 days thereafter. This presentation will provide information on the 15N enrichment level of each ration component, the relative amount of each consumed component’s 15N that was secreted in milk and excreted in feces and urine. We will also present the results of a field trial that measured the relative contribution of each ration component’s manure N to corn N uptake during the first and second year after manure application. We will end with explanation of some of the experimental procedures we will use for measuring gaseous N losses after manure applications to barn floors and soils.

Fig. 1. 15N labeling of dairy ration components, milk, urine and feces, and use of 15N-labeled manure to study N transformations

What have we learned?

Here we present some preliminary information on 15N labeling of ration components, the TMR that was fed, and some animal responses. Concentrations of fiber, total N and 15N in the ration components are provided in Table 1.

Table. 1. Concentrations of neutral detergent fiber (NDF), total N (TN) and 15N in ration components fed to dairy cows

Highest 15N incorporation was achieved with corn (silage and grain) and lowest with alfalfa and soybean. This was due to 15N dilution by the atmospherically-fixed N by these legumes. The methods we used to ensile the 15N-enriched corn and alfalfa, the milling of 15N-enriched corn grain and the extraction of 15N-enriched soybeans to produce soybean meal did not appear to impact TMR intake, milk production or N excretion by dairy cows, as indicated by the narrow range (and non-significant differences among TMR containing the 15N-enriched components) in dry matter intake, N intake, milk production, dietary N use efficiency (relative amount of N intake secreted as milk N) and N excretion in urine, urea and feces (Table 2).

Table. 2. Range dry matter intake (DMI), N intake (NI), milk production, dietary N use efficiency (DNUE) and N excretion by 12 cows fed rations containing 15N-enriched components

Future Plans

Feces and urine from each 15N enriched ration component will be applied to laboratory emission chambers that simulate barn floors and field soil surfaces, and 15NH3, 15NH4 15NO3 and 15N2O will be measured. Manure-soil incubations, greenhouse and field trials are underway to determine each ration N component contribution to crop N uptake.

Authors

J. Mark Powell, Soil Scientist, USDA-ARS US Dairy Forage Research Center mark.powell@ars.usda.gov

Tiago Barros, Marina Danes, Matias A. Aguerre and Michel A. Wattiaux Dep. Dairy Sci., University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin USA

 

The authors are solely responsible for the content of these proceedings. The technical information does not necessarily reflect the official position of the sponsoring agencies or institutions represented by planning committee members, and inclusion and distribution herein does not constitute an endorsement of views expressed by the same. Printed materials included herein are not refereed publications. Citations should appear as follows. EXAMPLE: Authors. 2015. Title of presentation. Waste to Worth: Spreading Science and Solutions. Seattle, WA. March 31-April 3, 2015. URL of this page. Accessed on: today’s date.

Impact of Manure Incorporation on Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Semi-Arid Regions


Purpose

Gaseous emissions from animal feeding operations (AFOs) can create adverse impacts ranging from short-term local effects on air quality, to long-term effects due to greenhouse gas generation. This study evaluates gaseous emissions from manure application with differing times to incorporation. The purpose of the study is to identify ways to improve manure management and land application BMPs in semi-arid regions with a high soil pH.

What did we do?

Manure application and incorporation methods were evaluated in a field setting on a soil with high pH. Scraped dairy manure was surface applied at a rate of 50 tons/acre to a Millville silt loam. Incorporation events occurred immediately, 24hrs after application, 72 hrs after application, and no incorporation. Gaseous emissions were monitored using a closed dynamic chamber with a Fourier Transformed Infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy gas analyzer, which is capable of monitoring 15-pre-programmed gases simultaneously including ammonia, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, oxides of nitrogen, and volatile organic compounds. Emissions were monitored for 15 days.

What have we learned?

Emissions for methane (CH4) and ammonia (NH3) stopped when the manure was incorporated. For methane, 33% of the emissions occurred within the first 24 hours, 61% within the first 72 hrs. For ammonia, 50% of the emissions occurred within the first 24 hours, 88% within the first 72 hours. Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions were reduced, but continued at a baseline level after incorporation. Immediate incorporation reduced total CO2 emissions for the 15 days by approximately 50%. Incorporation within 24 hours and 72 hours, reduced total CO2 emissions for the 15 days by 40% and 18%, respectively. Based on this data, incorporation greatly reduces NH3, CH4, and CO2 emissions. Rapid incorporation is needed to have a meaningful impact on NH3 and CH4 emissions. Best management practices should emphasize the need for immediate incorporation.

(Click to enlarge the graphs below).

Cumulative emissions summary: ammonia, carbon dioxide, and methane

Future Plans  

Examine the impact of tannins on gaseous emissions.

Authors   

Rhonda Miller, Ph.D.; Agricultural Systems Technology and Education Dept.; Utah State University rhonda.miller@usu.edu

Pakorn Sutitarnnontr, Ph.D.; South Florida Water Management District; Naples, FL Markus Tuller, Ph.D.; Soil, Water, and Environmental Science Dept.; University of Arizona Jim Walworth, Ph.D.; Soil, Water, and Environmental Science Dept.; University of Ar

Additional Information

Sutitarnnonntr, P., E. Hu, R. Miller, M. Tuller, and S. B. Jones. 2013. Measurement Accuracy of a Multiplexed Portable FTIR- Surface Chamber System for Estimating Gas Emissions. ASABE 2013 Paper and Presentation No. 131620669. St. Joseph, MI: American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers.

Website: http://agwastemanagement.usu.edu

Acknowledgements      

The authors gratefully acknowledge support from a USDA-CSREES AFRI Air Quality Program Grant #2010-85112-50524.

The authors are solely responsible for the content of these proceedings. The technical information does not necessarily reflect the official position of the sponsoring agencies or institutions represented by planning committee members, and inclusion and distribution herein does not constitute an endorsement of views expressed by the same. Printed materials included herein are not refereed publications. Citations should appear as follows. EXAMPLE: Authors. 2015. Title of presentation. Waste to Worth: Spreading Science and Solutions. Seattle, WA. March 31-April 3, 2015. URL of this page. Accessed on: today’s date.