Literature DB >> 21869513

Swine odor analyzed by odor panels and chemical techniques.

Steven Trabue1, Brian Kerr, Bradley Bearson, Cherie Ziemer.   

Abstract

The National Research Council identified odors as a significant animal emission and highlighted the need to develop standardized protocols for sampling and analysis. The purpose of our study was to compare different odor sampling techniques for monitoring odors emitted from stored swine manure. In our study, odorous headspace air from swine manure holding tanks were analyzed by human panels and analytical techniques. Odorous air was analyzed by human panels using dynamic dilution olfactometry (DDO). Chemical analysis used acid traps for ammonia (NH₃), fluorescence for hydrogen sulfide (H₂S), and thermal desorption gas chromatography-mass spectrometry for volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Chemical analysis included the use of gas chromatography-olfactometry (GC-O) for determining key odorants. Chemical odorant concentrations were converted to odor activity values (OAVs) based on literature odor thresholds. The GC-O technique used was GC-SNIF. Dilution thresholds measured by different odor panels were significantly different by almost an order of magnitude even though the main odorous compound concentrations had not changed significantly. Only 5% of the key odorous VOCs total OAVs was recovered from the Tedlar bags used in DDO analysis. Ammonia was the only chemical odorant significantly correlated with DDO analysis in the fresh (1 wk) and aged manure. Chemical analysis showed that odor concentration stabilized after 5 to 7 wk and that HS was the most dominant odorant. In aged manure, neither volatile fatty acids (VFAs) nor HS was correlated with any other chemical odorant, but NH, phenols, and indoles were correlated, and phenols and indoles were highly correlated. Correlation of odorant concentration was closely associated with the origin of the odorant in the diet. Key odorants determined by chemical and GC-O included indoles, phenols, NH₃, and several VFAs (butanoic, 3-methylbutanoic, and pentanoic acids). by the American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21869513     DOI: 10.2134/jeq2010.0522

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Environ Qual        ISSN: 0047-2425            Impact factor:   2.751


  8 in total

1.  Isolation of Indole Utilizing Bacteria Arthrobacter sp. and Alcaligenes sp. From Livestock Waste.

Authors:  Minsu Kim; Jin-Hyung Lee; Eonmi Kim; Hyukjae Choi; Younghoon Kim; Jintae Lee
Journal:  Indian J Microbiol       Date:  2016-02-10       Impact factor: 2.461

2.  Microbial sulfate reduction by Desulfovibrio is an important source of hydrogen sulfide from a large swine finishing facility.

Authors:  Olga V Karnachuk; Igor I Rusanov; Inna A Panova; Mikhail A Grigoriev; Viacheslav S Zyusman; Elena A Latygolets; Maksat K Kadyrbaev; Eugeny V Gruzdev; Alexey V Beletsky; Andrey V Mardanov; Nikolai V Pimenov; Nikolai V Ravin
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-05-21       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  Perceived annoyance from environmental odors and association with atmospheric ammonia levels in non-urban residential communities: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Victoria Blanes-Vidal; Esmaeil S Nadimi; Thomas Ellermann; Helle V Andersen; Per Løfstrøm
Journal:  Environ Health       Date:  2012-04-18       Impact factor: 5.984

4.  Effect of Storage Period on the Changes of Odorous Compound Concentrations and Bacterial Ecology for Identifying the Cause of Odor Production from Pig Slurry.

Authors:  Ok Hwa Hwang; Sung Back Cho; Deug Woo Han; Sang Ryoung Lee; Jeong Hoon Kwag; Sung Kwon Park
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-09-19       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Sorptive process and breakthrough behavior of odorous volatile compounds on inert surfaces.

Authors:  Ezaz Ahmed; Jan E Szulejko; Adedeji A Adelodun; Satya Sundar Bhattacharya; Byong Hun Jeon; Sandeep Kumar; Ki-Hyun Kim
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-09-03       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Performance comparison of MOF and other sorbent materials in removing key odorants emitted from pigpen slurry.

Authors:  Ezaz Ahmed; Akash Deep; Eilhann E Kwon; Richard J C Brown; Ki-Hyun Kim
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-08-11       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Contribution of livestock H2S to total sulfur emissions in a region with intensive animal production.

Authors:  Anders Feilberg; Michael Jørgen Hansen; Dezhao Liu; Tavs Nyord
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2017-10-20       Impact factor: 14.919

8.  Biochemical Changes and Biological Origin of Key Odor Compound Generations in Pig Slurry during Indoor Storage Periods: A Pyrosequencing Approach.

Authors:  Yu Na Jang; Min Woong Jung
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2018-09-12       Impact factor: 3.411

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.