BACKGROUND: Individuals engaged in work in intensive animal houses experience some of the highest rates of occupationally related respiratory symptoms. Organic dust and in particular endotoxin has been most closely associated with respiratory symptoms and lung function changes in workers. It has previously been shown that for intensive poultry operations, type of poultry housing [cage-housed (CH) versus floor-housed (FH)] can influence the levels of environmental contaminants. The goal of the study was to determine the differences in endotoxin and dust levels at different size fractions between CH and FH poultry operations. METHODS: Fifteen CH and 15 FH poultry operations were sampled for stationary measurements (area) of dust and associated endotoxin. Fractioned samples were collected utilizing Marple cascade impactors. Gravimetric and endotoxin analysis were conducted on each of the filters. RESULTS: When assessed by individual Marple stage, there was significantly greater airborne endotoxin concentration (endotoxin units per cubic meter) in the size fraction >9.8 μm for the FH operations whereas at the size fraction 1.6-3.5 μm, the CH operations had significantly greater airborne endotoxin concentration than the FH operations. Endotoxin concentration in the dust mass (endotoxin units per milligram) was significantly greater in the CH operations as compared to the FH operations for all size fractions >1.6 μm. As such, endotoxin in the respirable fraction accounted for 24% of the total endotoxin in the CH operations whereas it accounted for only 11% in the FH operations. There was significantly more dust in all size fractions in the FH operations as compared to the CH poultry operations. CONCLUSIONS: There is more endotoxin in the presence of significantly lower dust levels in the respirable particle size fractions in CH poultry operations as compared to the FH poultry operations. This difference in respirable endotoxin may be important in relation to the differential respiratory response experienced by CH and FH poultry operation workers.
BACKGROUND: Individuals engaged in work in intensive animal houses experience some of the highest rates of occupationally related respiratory symptoms. Organic dust and in particular endotoxin has been most closely associated with respiratory symptoms and lung function changes in workers. It has previously been shown that for intensive poultry operations, type of poultry housing [cage-housed (CH) versus floor-housed (FH)] can influence the levels of environmental contaminants. The goal of the study was to determine the differences in endotoxin and dust levels at different size fractions between CH and FH poultry operations. METHODS: Fifteen CH and 15 FH poultry operations were sampled for stationary measurements (area) of dust and associated endotoxin. Fractioned samples were collected utilizing Marple cascade impactors. Gravimetric and endotoxin analysis were conducted on each of the filters. RESULTS: When assessed by individual Marple stage, there was significantly greater airborne endotoxin concentration (endotoxin units per cubic meter) in the size fraction >9.8 μm for the FH operations whereas at the size fraction 1.6-3.5 μm, the CH operations had significantly greater airborne endotoxin concentration than the FH operations. Endotoxin concentration in the dust mass (endotoxin units per milligram) was significantly greater in the CH operations as compared to the FH operations for all size fractions >1.6 μm. As such, endotoxin in the respirable fraction accounted for 24% of the total endotoxin in the CH operations whereas it accounted for only 11% in the FH operations. There was significantly more dust in all size fractions in the FH operations as compared to the CH poultry operations. CONCLUSIONS: There is more endotoxin in the presence of significantly lower dust levels in the respirable particle size fractions in CH poultry operations as compared to the FH poultry operations. This difference in respirable endotoxin may be important in relation to the differential respiratory response experienced by CH and FH poultry operation workers.
Authors: Laura E Beane Freeman; Anneclaire J Deroos; Stella Koutros; Aaron Blair; Mary H Ward; Michael Alavanja; Jane A Hoppin Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2012-03-10 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Ioannis Basinas; Torben Sigsgaard; Hans Kromhout; Dick Heederik; Inge M Wouters; Vivi Schlünssen Journal: J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol Date: 2013-11-27 Impact factor: 5.563
Authors: Muhammad Zubair Shabbir; Tyler Malys; Yury V Ivanov; Jihye Park; Muhammad Abu Bakr Shabbir; Masood Rabbani; Tahir Yaqub; Eric Thomas Harvill Journal: Poult Sci Date: 2015-02-09 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Joshua W Schaeffer; Stephen Reynolds; Sheryl Magzamen; Amanda VanDyke; Neil R Gottel; Jack A Gilbert; Sarah M Owens; Jarrad T Hampton-Marcell; John Volckens Journal: Environ Sci Technol Date: 2017-05-25 Impact factor: 11.357
Authors: Myrna M T de Rooij; Dick J J Heederik; Erik J H M van Nunen; Isabella J van Schothorst; Catharina B M Maassen; Gerard Hoek; Inge M Wouters Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2018-01-11 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: Kirsty T T Kwok; Myrna M T de Rooij; Aniek B Messink; Inge M Wouters; Lidwien A M Smit; Matthew Cotten; Dick J J Heederik; Marion P G Koopmans; My V T Phan Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-09-29 Impact factor: 4.996