| Literature DB >> 34946090 |
Haixia Ma1, Feier Li2, Evode Niyitanga3, Xicun Chai3, Shipeng Wang1, Yutao Liu3.
Abstract
Human living environments and health are seriously affected by the odor produced from fermentation of livestock and poultry manure. In order to reduce the odor pollution caused by livestock and poultry manure, efficient strains were screened and two methods were tried in this study. The orthogonal test design was used to analyze the gas produced by pig manure under different conditions of temperature, time, wheat straw doping amount and calcium carbonate doping amount. Then, according to ammonia, hydrogen sulfide and comprehensive odor removal effects, the high efficiency of deodorizing strains were screened. The results showed that pig manure produced the least odor when the temperature was 20 °C, added 0% calcium carbonate, 20% wheat straw and waited for 48 h. Three strains were screened to inhibit the odor production of pig manure: Paracoccus denitrificans, Bacillus licheniformis and Saccharomyces cerevisiae, showed that their highest removal rate of ammonia and hydrogen sulfide gas could reach 96.58% and 99.74% among them; while for three strains of end-control pig manure stench: Pichia kudriavzevii, P. denitrificans and Bacillus subtilis, the highest removal rate of ammonia and hydrogen sulfide gas reached 85.91% and 90.80% among them. This research provides bacteria resources as the high-efficiency deodorizing function for the source suppression and the end treatment of the odor gas of pig manure, which has high application value for the control of odor pollution.Entities:
Keywords: deodorization strains; end treatment; livestock and poultry manure; source suppression
Year: 2021 PMID: 34946090 PMCID: PMC8705919 DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms9122488
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microorganisms ISSN: 2076-2607
Physicochemical properties of materials.
| The Name of Material | TS (%) | VS (%) | ω (%) | C (%) | N (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| pig manure | 38.20 | 91.79 | 61.80 | 29.02 | 3.20 |
| wheat straw | 93.20 | 91.70 | 6.80 | 40.26 | 1.17 |
Note: C and N contents are the percentage of dry matter in raw materials.
Factors and levels of orthogonal experiment.
| Level | A/°C | B/% | C/% | D/h |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 20 | 0 | 0 | 48 |
| 2 | 35 | 0.5 | 15 | 96 |
| 3 | 45 | 1 | 20 | 144 |
Note: A, B, C and D respectively represent temperature, calcium carbonate doping amount, wheat straw doping amount and time, and the same below.
Figure 1Production regularity of malodorous gas of pig manure with different factors: (A) The production regularity of malodorous gas in pig manure at different times; (B) The rule of odor gas generation in pig manure with different calcium carbonate doping amounts; (C) Production rules of malodorous gases of pig manure at different temperatures; and (D) The rule of odor gas generation of pig manure with different wheat straw doping amounts. Different lowercase letters above the bars indicate significant differences (p < 0.05).
The results of the orthogonal experiment.
| Test | A | B | C | D | Empty Row | NH3/ | H2S/ | CH3SH/ppm | eVOC/ppm | OC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 68.94 | 19.60 | 33.70 | 89.90 | 5477.00 |
| 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 242.80 | 139.70 | 118.00 | 129.50 | 32,452.00 |
| 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 16.41 | 0.00 | 70.80 | 96.00 | 3431.00 |
| 4 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 418.40 | 99.50 | 4.95 | 41.13 | 17,946.00 |
| 5 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 396.70 | 103.70 | 4.42 | 43.26 | 17,995.00 |
| 6 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 431.30 | 77.09 | 3.37 | 40.82 | 14,564.00 |
| 7 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 16.62 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 41.52 | 24.30 |
| 8 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 140.00 | 22.40 | 1.74 | 45.65 | 4314.00 |
| 9 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 83.41 | 11.72 | 0.00 | 44.13 | 2959.00 |
| 10 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 103.20 | 3.94 | 1.09 | 50.18 | 893.60 |
| 11 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 187.90 | 14.69 | 2.89 | 44.61 | 2830.00 |
| 12 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 116.00 | 10.12 | 1.10 | 51.79 | 2045.00 |
| 13 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 38.99 | 0.00 | 0.47 | 45.17 | 88.01 |
| 14 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 35.94 | 0.63 | 0.44 | 44.78 | 80.69 |
| 15 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 34.93 | 0.00 | 0.28 | 44.04 | 67.84 |
| 16 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 991.10 | 177.70 | 0.00 | 51.44 | 41,352.00 |
| 17 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1072.00 | 192.60 | 0.00 | 61.23 | 30,571.00 |
| 18 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 801.30 | 191.60 | 1.96 | 64.58 | 41,632.00 |
| 19 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 874.50 | 4.97 | 18.30 | 64.06 | 3139.00 |
| 20 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 112.20 | 0.00 | 18.40 | 60.53 | 995.30 |
| 21 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 1141.00 | 183.80 | 18.50 | 76.90 | 28,259.00 |
| 22 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1135.00 | 192.10 | 18.20 | 74.07 | 38,635.00 |
| 23 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1140.00 | 183.30 | 18.30 | 77.46 | 39,727.00 |
| 24 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 1132.00 | 166.20 | 18.60 | 78.59 | 31,355.00 |
| 25 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 13.46 | 0.00 | 84.60 | 104.80 | 4120.00 |
| 26 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 12.94 | 0.00 | 96.10 | 112.20 | 4690.00 |
| 27 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 9.98 | 0.00 | 68.70 | 103.90 | 3317.00 |
Results of the significance test for range analysis.
| Evaluation Index | A | B | C | D | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NH3/ppm |
| 201.62 | 318.11 | 733.28 | 52.71 |
|
| 375.71 | 529.25 | 187.76 | 693.17 | |
|
| 619.01 | 348.98 | 275.29 | 450.46 | |
| R | 417.39 | 211.15 | 545.52 | 640.46 | |
| H2S/ppm |
| 52.63 | 41.87 | 139.34 | 17.77 |
|
| 63.62 | 92.50 | 34.34 | 112.47 | |
|
| 82.26 | 64.15 | 24.84 | 68.27 | |
| R | 29.63 | 50.63 | 114.51 | 94.70 | |
| CH3SH/ppm |
| 26.33 | 31.42 | 31.06 | 52.57 |
|
| 0.91 | 7.67 | 29.69 | 7.77 | |
|
| 39.97 | 28.12 | 6.46 | 6.88 | |
| R | 39.05 | 23.75 | 24.60 | 45.69 | |
| eVOC/ppm |
| 63.55 | 73.72 | 80.31 | 85.59 |
|
| 50.87 | 54.37 | 65.85 | 55.99 | |
|
| 83.61 | 69.94 | 51.86 | 56.44 | |
| R | 20.07 | 19.35 | 28.44 | 29.59 | |
| OC |
| 11,018.03 | 8835.77 | 29,403.56 | 5969.28 |
|
| 13,284.46 | 17,828.73 | 7600.07 | 21,828.14 | |
|
| 17,137.48 | 14,775.48 | 4436.35 | 13,642.54 | |
| R | 6119.44 | 8992.96 | 24,967.21 | 15,858.86 | |
Note: 1–3 respectively represent the average value of each factor at each level; R stands for range.
Figure 2The removal rate of malodorous gas by different bacterial liquids: (A) The removal rate of ammonia gas by different bacteria; (B) The removal rate of hydrogen sulfide gas by different bacterial liquids; (C) The removal rate of volatile gases by different bacterial liquids; and (D) The removal rate of different bacterial liquids on the integrated malodor concentration. Different lowercase letters above the bars indicate significant differences (p < 0.05).
Figure 3The removal rate of malodorous gas by different bacterial liquids: (A) The removal rate of ammonia gas by different bacteria; (B) The removal rate of hydrogen sulfide gas by different bacterial liquids; (C) The removal rate of volatile gases by different bacterial liquids; (D) The removal rate of different bacterial liquids on the integrated malodor concentration. Different lowercase letters above the bars indicate significant differences (p < 0.05).