Literature DB >> 25737567

Environmental assessment of three egg production systems--Part I: Monitoring system and indoor air quality.

Y Zhao1, T A Shepherd1, H Li2, H Xin3.   

Abstract

To compreSpecies">hensively assess conventional vs. some alternative laying-hen housing systems under U.S. production conditions, a multi-institute and multi-disciplinary project, known as the Coalition for Sustainable Egg Supply (CSES) study, was carried out at a commercial egg production farm in the Midwestern United States over two single-cycle production flocks. The housing systems studied include a conventional cage house (200,000 hen capacity), an aviary house (50,000 hen capacity), and an enriched colony house (50,000 hen capacity). As an integral part of the CSES project, continual environmental monitoring over a 27-month period described in this paper quantifies indoor gaseous and particulate matter concentrations, thermal environment, and building ventilation rate of each house. Results showed that similar indoor thermal environments in all three houses were maintained through ventilation management and environmental control. Gaseous and particulate matter concentrations of the enriched colony house were comparable with those of the conventional cage house. In comparison, the aviary house had poorer indoor air quality, especially in wintertime, resulting from the presence of floor litter (higher ammonia levels) and hens' activities (higher particulate matter levels) in it. Specifically, daily mean indoor ammonia concentrations had the 95% confidence interval values of 3.8 to 4.2 (overall mean of 4.0) ppm for the conventional cage house; 6.2 to 7.2 (overall mean of 6.7) ppm for the aviary house; and 2.7 to 3.0 (overall mean of 2.8) ppm for the enriched colony house. The 95% confidence interval (overall mean) values of daily mean indoor carbon dioxide concentrations were 1997 to 2170 (2083) ppm for the conventional cage house, 2367 to 2582 (2475) ppm for the aviary house, and 2124 to 2309 (2216) ppm for the enriched colony house. Daily mean indoor methane concentrations were similar for all three houses, with 95% confidence interval values of 11.1 to 11.9 (overall mean of 11.5) ppm. The 95% confidence interval values (overall mean) of daily mean PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations, in mg/m3, were, respectively, 0.57 to 0.61 (0.59) and 0.033 to 0.037 (0.035) for the conventional cage house, 3.61 to 4.29 (3.95) and 0.374 to 0.446 (0.410) for the aviary house, and 0.42 to 0.46 (0.44) and 0.054 to 0.059 (0.056) for the enriched colony house. Investigation of mitigation practices to improve indoor air quality of the litter-floor aviary housing system is warranted.
© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Poultry Science Association.

Entities:  

Keywords:  alternative hen housing; ammonia; greenhouse gas; indoor air quality; particulate matter

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25737567      PMCID: PMC4990888          DOI: 10.3382/ps/peu076

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Poult Sci        ISSN: 0032-5791            Impact factor:   3.352


  6 in total

1.  Concentrations and emission rates of aerial ammonia, nitrous oxide, methane, carbon dioxide, dust and endotoxin in UK broiler and layer houses.

Authors:  C M Wathes; M R Holden; R W Sneath; R P White; V R Phillips
Journal:  Br Poult Sci       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 2.095

2.  Quality-assured measurements of animal building emissions: particulate matter concentrations.

Authors:  Albert J Heber; Teng-Teeh Lim; Ji-Qin Ni; Pei-Chun Tao; Amy M Schmidt; Jacek A Koziel; Steven J Hoff; Larry D Jacobson; Yuanhui Zhang; Gerald B Baughman
Journal:  J Air Waste Manag Assoc       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 2.235

3.  Environmental assessment of three egg production systems--Part II. Ammonia, greenhouse gas, and particulate matter emissions.

Authors:  T A Shepherd; Y Zhao; H Li; J P Stinn; M D Hayes; H Xin
Journal:  Poult Sci       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 3.352

4.  Ammonia, dust and bacteria in welfare-oriented systems for laying hens.

Authors:  Sven Nimmermark; Vonne Lund; Gösta Gustafsson; Wijnand Eduard
Journal:  Ann Agric Environ Med       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 1.447

5.  Effect of type of aviary, manure and litter handling on the emission kinetics of ammonia from layer houses.

Authors:  P W Groot Koerkamp; R Bleijenberg
Journal:  Br Poult Sci       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 2.095

6.  Comparative evaluation of three egg production systems: Housing characteristics and management practices.

Authors:  Y Zhao; T A Shepherd; J C Swanson; J A Mench; D M Karcher; H Xin
Journal:  Poult Sci       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 3.352

  6 in total
  18 in total

1.  Ammonia production in poultry houses can affect health of humans, birds, and the environment-techniques for its reduction during poultry production.

Authors:  Sadia Naseem; Annie J King
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2018-04-28       Impact factor: 4.223

2.  Environmental assessment of three egg production systems--Part II. Ammonia, greenhouse gas, and particulate matter emissions.

Authors:  T A Shepherd; Y Zhao; H Li; J P Stinn; M D Hayes; H Xin
Journal:  Poult Sci       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 3.  Air Quality in Alternative Housing Systems may have an Impact on Laying Hen Welfare. Part II-Ammonia.

Authors:  Bruce David; Cecilie Mejdell; Virginie Michel; Vonne Lund; Randi Oppermann Moe
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2015-09-03       Impact factor: 2.752

Review 4.  Air Quality in Alternative Housing Systems May Have an Impact on Laying Hen Welfare. Part I-Dust.

Authors:  Bruce David; Randi Oppermann Moe; Virginie Michel; Vonne Lund; Cecilie Mejdell
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2015-07-09       Impact factor: 2.752

5.  Comparative evaluation of three egg production systems: Housing characteristics and management practices.

Authors:  Y Zhao; T A Shepherd; J C Swanson; J A Mench; D M Karcher; H Xin
Journal:  Poult Sci       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 3.352

6.  Influence of commercial laying hen housing systems on the incidence and identification of Salmonella and Campylobacter.

Authors:  D R Jones; J Guard; R K Gast; R J Buhr; P J Fedorka-Cray; Z Abdo; J R Plumblee; D V Bourassa; N A Cox; L L Rigsby; C I Robison; P Regmi; D M Karcher
Journal:  Poult Sci       Date:  2016-03-14       Impact factor: 3.352

7.  Microbiological impact of three commercial laying hen housing systems.

Authors:  D R Jones; N A Cox; J Guard; P J Fedorka-Cray; R J Buhr; R K Gast; Z Abdo; L L Rigsby; J R Plumblee; D M Karcher; C I Robison; R A Blatchford; M M Makagon
Journal:  Poult Sci       Date:  2014-12-05       Impact factor: 3.352

8.  Semiparametric Modeling of Daily Ammonia Levels in Naturally Ventilated Caged-Egg Facilities.

Authors:  Diana María Gutiérrez-Zapata; Luis Fernando Galeano-Vasco; Mario Fernando Cerón-Muñoz
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-01-26       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Sensitive and Selective NH₃ Monitoring at Room Temperature Using ZnO Ceramic Nanofibers Decorated with Poly(styrene sulfonate).

Authors:  Rafaela S Andre; Dongwook Kwak; Qiuchen Dong; Wei Zhong; Daniel S Correa; Luiz H C Mattoso; Yu Lei
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2018-04-01       Impact factor: 3.576

10.  A cross-sectional study on feather cover damage in Canadian laying hens in non-cage housing systems.

Authors:  Caitlin Decina; Olaf Berke; Nienke van Staaveren; Christine F Baes; Tina M Widowski; Alexandra Harlander-Matauschek
Journal:  BMC Vet Res       Date:  2019-12-03       Impact factor: 2.741

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.