Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences

  • 제32권5호
  • /
  • Pages.742-747
  • /
  • 2019
  • /
  • 1011-2367(pISSN)
  • /
  • 1976-5517(eISSN)
아세아태평양축산학회 (Asian Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Indoor distribution characteristics of airborne bacteria in pig buildings as influenced by season and housing type

  • Kim, Ki Youn (Department of Safety Engineering, Seoul National University of Science & Technology) ;
  • Ko, Han Jong (Department of Agricultural Sciences, Korea National Open University)
  • 투고 : 2018.05.31
  • 심사 : 2018.07.31
  • 발행 : 2019.05.01
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Objective: A concentration of airborne bacteria generated from swine houses is recognized to be relatively higher than other work places and it is essential to optimally manage it to prevent farmers' respiratory diseases. This study was conducted to assess the distribution characteristics of airborne bacteria in swine houses located at South Korea. Methods: A total 27 pig buildings of the enclosed type operated with mechanical ventilation system by a side wall fan and deep-pit manure system with slats were surveyed. Air samples were collected at 1.0 m above the middle floor in pig housing room. A six-stage viable particulate cascade impactor was used to identify the distribution of the sizes of particles in diameter. Results: Seasonal mean levels of airborne bacteria in the housing rooms of gestation/farrowing pigs, nursery pigs and growing/fattening pigs were 3,428(${\pm}1,244$) colony forming unit $(cfu)/m^3$, $8,325({\pm}3,209)cfu/m$, and $13,254({\pm}6,108)cfu/m^3$ for spring; $9,824({\pm}2,157)cfu/m^3$, $18,254({\pm}5,166)cfu/m^3$, and $24,088({\pm}9,274)cfu/m^3$ for summer; $1,707({\pm}957)cfu/m^3$, $4,258({\pm}1,438)cfu/m^3$, and $8,254({\pm}2,416)cfu/m^3$ for autumn; and $2,322({\pm}1,352)cfu/m^3$, $6,124({\pm}1,527)cfu/m^3$ and $12,470({\pm}4,869)cfu/m^3$ for winter, respectively. Conclusion: Concentrations of airborne bacteria according to pig housing type were highest in growing/fattening housing room followed by nursery housing room and gestation/farrowing housing room. In terms of seasonal aspect, the pig building showed the highest levels of airborne bacteria in summer followed by spring, winter and autumn. The respirable airborne bacteria which are ranged between 0.6 and $4.7{\mu}m$ accounted for approximately 60% compared to total airborne bacteria regardless of pig housing type.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Aarnink AJA, van der Berg AJ, Keen A, Hoeksman P, Verstegen MWA. Effect of slatted floor area on ammonia emission and on the excretory and lying behavior of growing pigs. J Agric Eng Res 1996;64:299-310. https://doi.org/10.1006/jaer.1996.0071
  2. Mpendulo CT, Hlatini VA, Ncobela CN, Chimonyo M. Effect of fibrous diets on chemical composition and odours from pig slurry. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci. 2018;31:1833-9. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.16.0126
  3. Chang CW, Chung H, Huang CF, Su HJJ. Exposure assessment to airborne endotoxin, dust, ammonia, hydrogen sulfide and carbon dioxide in open style swine houses. Ann Occup Hyg 2001;45:457-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-4878(00)00081-8
  4. Crook B, Robertson JF, Glass SA, et al. Airborne dust, ammonia, microorganisms, and antigens in pig confinement houses and the respiratory health of exposed farm workers. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 1991;52:271-9. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298669191364721
  5. Donham KJ, Merchant JA, Lassie D, Popendorf WJ, Burmeister LF. Preventing respiratory disease in swine confinement workers:intervention through applied epidemiology, education, and consultation. Am J Ind Med 1990;18:241-61. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.4700180303
  6. Whyte RT. Aerial pollutants and the health of poultry farmers. World's Poult Sci J 1993;49:139-56. https://doi.org/10.1079/WPS19930012
  7. Pearson CC, Sharples TJ. Airborne dust concentrations in livestock buildings and the effect of feed. J Agric Eng Res 1995;60:145-54. https://doi.org/10.1006/jaer.1995.1008
  8. Olson DK, Bark SM. Health hazards affecting the animal confinement farm worker. Am Assoc Occup Health Nur J 1996;44:198-204.
  9. Clark S, Rylander R, Larsson L. Airborne bacteria, endotoxin and fungi in dust in poultry and swine confinement buildings. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 1983;44:537-41. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298668391405265
  10. Griffiths WD, Decosemo GAL. Assessment of bioaerosols: a critical review. J Aerosol Sci 1994;25:1425-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-8502(94)90218-6
  11. Duchaine C, Grimard Y, Cormier Y. Influence of building maintenance, environmental factors, and seasons on airborne contaminants of swine confinement buildings. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 2000;61:56-63. https://doi.org/10.1202/0002-8894(2000)061<0056:IOBMEF>2.0.CO;2
  12. Seedorf J, Hartung J, Schroder M, et al. Concentrations and emissions of airborne endotoxins and microorganisms in livestock buildings in Northern Europe. J Agric Eng Res 1998;70:97-109. https://doi.org/10.1006/jaer.1997.0281
  13. Elliott LF, McCalla TM, Deshazer JA. Bacteria in the air of housed swine units. Appl Environ Microbiol 1976;32:270-3. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.32.2.270-273.1976
  14. Cormier Y, Tremblay G, Meriaux A, Brochu G, Lavoie J. Airborne microbial contents in two types of swine confinement buildings in Quebec. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 1990;51:304-9. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298669091369709
  15. Heederik D, Brouwer R, Biersteker K, Boleij JSM. Relationship of airborne endotoxins and bacteria levels in pig farms with the lung function and respiratory symptoms of farmers. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 1991;62:595-601. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00381114
  16. Thorne PS, Niekhaefer MS, Whitten P, Donham KJ. Comparison of bioaerosol sampling methods in barns housing swine. Appl Environ Microbiol 1992;58:2543-51. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.58.8.2543-2551.1992
  17. Nicks B, Marlier D, Canart B. Air pollution levels in pig houses. Proceedings of International Livestock Environment Symposium IV, Warwick, England, 6-9 July, 1993. ASAE.
  18. Dutkiewicz J, Pomorski ZJH, Sitkowska J, et al. Airborne microorganisms and endotoxin in animal houses. Grana 1994;33:85-90. https://doi.org/10.1080/00173139409427837
  19. Predicala BZ, Urban JE, Maghirang RG, Jerez SB, Goodband RD. Assessment of bioaerosols in swine barns by filtration and impaction. Curr Microbiol 2002;44:136-40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00284-001-0064-y
  20. Kim KY, Ko HJ, Kim HT, Kim CN, Kim YS. Assessment of airborne bacteria and fungi in pig buildings in Korea. Biosyst Eng 2008;99:565-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2007.12.006
  21. Kim YS, Lee EG, Yup MJ, Kim KY. Distribution and classification of indoor concentration of microorganisms in public buildings. Kor J Environ Health Sci 2002;28:85-92.
  22. Lee CR, Kim KY, Kim CN, Park DU, Roh JH. Investigation of concentrations and correlations of airborne microbes and environmental factors in the general hospital. J Kor Soc Occup Environ Hyg 2005;15:45-51.
  23. Park JB, Kim KY, Jang GY, Kim CN, Lee KJ. Size distributions and concentration of airborne fungi in the public buildings. Kor J Environ Health Sci 2006;32:36-45.
  24. Kim KY, Jeong YI, Kim CN, Won JU, Roh JH. Distribution of airborne microorganisms in the feedstuff manufacture factory. J Kor Soc Occup Environ Hyg 2007;17:335-42.

피인용 문헌

  1. Bioaerosol measurements over a fattening period in a pig barn focused on the presence of Staphylococcus spp. vol.37, pp.1, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10453-020-09658-4
  2. Evaluation of the microbiome composition in particulate matter inside and outside of pig houses vol.63, pp.3, 2019, https://doi.org/10.5187/jast.2021.e52
  3. Deciphering of microbial diversity and antibiotic resistome of bioaerosols in swine confinement buildings vol.781, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147056
  4. Characterisation of engineered water nanostructures (EWNS) and evaluation of their efficacy in inactivating Escherichia coli at conditions relevant to livestock operations vol.212, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2021.11.003