Managing Manure to Minimize Environmental Impact Or Bugs, Drugs, and Manure

Goal = Create Awareness not Controversy

Trained as Dairy Nutritionist Moved into whole farm nutrient management - Work both ends of the cow •

Potassium requirement of the early lactation cow

•

Impact of Balancing for Amino Acids on Milk Production and Environmental Impact Feed Management

A Key Ingredient in Livestock and Poultry Nutrient Management

Current Projects Relationship of manure application and tillage practices in shallow groundwater Nitrate levels. Removal of phosphorus from liquid dairy manure as struvite

Use of anaerobically digested dairy manure for grass and corn silage production Development of a decision aid tool for accounting of nutrients, gas production, nutrient removal, carbon credits for community ADs and ADs receiving Added feedstocks. (ADOPT) Characterization of air and odor issues and ADs

Feed Management

A Key Ingredient in Livestock and Poultry Nutrient Management

Struvite [MgNH4PO4.6(H2O)]

Take Home Messages Manure is a valuable source of nutrients for crop production, but can also be a source of pathogens which could raise bio-security and human health concerns Best management practices exist to minimize the impact of manure management on the environment Anaerobic digestion of manure reduces common pathogens in manure by at least 90% When land applied, anaerobically digested manure has significantly fewer bacteria, both initially and for weeks thereafter As more manure is moved off-farm for human crop production, greater attention needs to be given to insuring that the manure presents a low risk of contaminating food crops

Go to – http://www.extension.org/animal+manure+management

Microorganisms There are over 150 pathogens, or disease-causing microorganisms, in livestock manure which pose a risk to humans Some, such as E. coli O157:H7 and certain Campylobacter spp., are not pathogenic for the host species from which the manure originated but are for other species exposed to the manure containing the agent. Land application of dairy manure poses a risk to both humans and grazing animals as pathogens applied in manure are known to survive in soil long after application

Survival Times of Pathogens in Various Media (days) Microorganism

Slurry

Fecal Paddies

Soil

Water

Salmonella

250+

200+

150+

16

E.coli

300+

200+

200+

35

sp.

General maxima

1 year

Viruses, maxima

1 year

Protozoan cysts, maxima Helminth ova

180+

7 years

- Summarized in NRAES -147 – Waterborne Pathogens in Agricultural Watersheds

Pathogens & Indicator Organisms • Pathogens are present at low levels in the environment, water and foods – Even at low numbers, high risk involved – Difficult to detect – Example: E Coli O157:H7 has an infectious dose of only 1 – 10 cells

Figure 1 depicts the factors affecting the viability of pathogens along transport pathways. In general, cool temperatures, moist conditions, and lack of direct-sunlight promotes the survival of microorganisms; while UV light, drying conditions, and limited crop canopy promote die-off of microorganisms

Sunlight Ultraviolet Radiation

Precipitation

Waste Storage

Barnyard Runoff Storage System Leakage

Slope co Ru or nce nof Applied sh nt f: Waste

ee rat t f ed low

Drying Dilution

Seepage & Filtering Soil Type, water content & pH

Soil Bacteria Competition

Air Temperature Humidity Freeze-Thaw Cycle

Vegetative Cover Control Factors Adsorption (metals, disinfectants, antibiotics, pesticides)

Water Table

Soil Organic Matter Soil Aeration

The fate of antibiotics used at concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) has gained recent attention by the regulatory community

Watanabe et al. (2010) reported the occurrence of antibiotics in the environment on two dairies. Samples were collected at the points of use of antibiotics and subsequent points of manure handling. They observed that although antibiotics had been used for decades on these two dairy farms, the antibiotics seemed to be detected within farm boundaries

Resistance of bacteria to antibiotics continues to be a concern of medical health professionals and veterinarians alike. West et al., (2010) documented the presence of antibiotic resistant bacteria in samples from waterways in close proximity to waste-water treatment plants and CAFOs. From 830 environmental bacterial isolates, 77.1% were resistant to only ampicillin, while 21.2% were resistant to combinations of antibiotics including ampicillin (A), kanamycin (K), chlorotetracycline (C), oxytetracycline (O), and streptomycin (S).

Multi-drug-resistant bacteria were significantly more common at sites close to CAFO farms.

Numerous studies have documented the presence of hormones in manure and their subsequent fate when manure is stored in manure lagoons or applied to crop land The general concern is the endocrine disrupting properties that result for wildlife and aquatic life when these hormones or conjugates are transported to ground and surface water. Treatment of manure via anaerobic digestion or composting can decrease the amount of estrogens detected in manure

An excellent webcast for additional information related to the occurrence of antibiotics and hormones in water, and their fate, transport and best management practices (http://www.extension.org/pages/Antibiotics_and_Hormones:_Occurrence_ in_Water,_Fate_and_Transport,_and_Best_Management_Practices).

Management Practices for Pathogens Goals: Prevent/Reduce Organism Movement to Water & Facilitated Organism Die-off Mode of Action: Organism/Sediment Trapping-Biological Channel Vegetation (AC) (322) Conservation Cover (AC) (327) Critical Area Planting (AC) (342) Field Border (FT) (386) Filter Strip (AC) (393) Grassed Waterway (AC) (412) Heavy Use Area Protection (AC) (561) Pasture and Hay Planting (AC) (512) Prescribed Grazing (AC) (528A) Riparian Forest Buffer (AC) (391) Riparian Herbaceous Cover (AC) (390) Streambank and Shoreline Protection (FT) (580) Vegetative Barriers (FT) (601) Wetland Creation (AC) (658)

Mode of Action: Structure/Management Roof Runoff Management (NO.) (558) Waste Storage Facility (NO.) (313) Waste Utilization (AC) (633) Closure of Waste Impoundments (NO) (360) Composting Facility (NO.) (317) Manure Transfer (NO) (634) Waste Treatment Lagoon (NO.) (359)

Mode of Action: Organism/Sediment Trapping-Physical Anionic Polyacrylamide (PAM) Erosion Control (AC) (450)

Constructed Wetland (AC) (656) Contour Buffer Strips (332) Contour Farming (AC) (330) Contour Stripcropping (AC) (585) Controlled Drainage (AC) (335) Deep Tillage (AC) (324) Grazing Land Mechanical Treatment (AC) (548) Sediment Basin (NO.) (350) Stripcropping (AC), Field (586) Subsurface Drain (FT) (606) Surface Drainage (FT), Field Ditch (607) Surface Drainage (FT), Main or Lateral (608) Terrace (FT) (600) Water and Sediment Control Basin (NO.) (638)

Mode of Action: Reduced Direct Access and Subsequent Deposition Animal Trails and Walkways (AC) (575) Fence (FT) (382) Use Exclusion (AC) (472) Watering Facility (NO.) (614)

All dairies are required to have a nutrient management plan regardless of size of operation

Community Anaerobic Digester: Fate of Bacteria

Partnership for a Sustainable Future 

Qualco Energy:  Tulalip

Tribes of NW Washington  Northwest Chinook Recovery  Snohomish-Skykomish Agricultural Alliance 

Support environmental projects that maintain agricultural river corridors.  Shellfish  Fisheries  Culture

business

“ I have a responsibility to look out 7 to 10 generations”

Qualco Anaerobic Digester (AD) • Renewable Energy Production – Methane to Electricity

• Waste Management – Decreased Odor

• Pathogen Reduction • Nutrient Management

– Nutrient transformation – Cycle nutrients back to farm

• Value Added Products – Composted solids – Struvite

So what about bio-security? And Can ADs Reduce the Load of Bacteria Applied to Land ?

Provide protection of surface water quality?!

Organism Selection – Generic E. coli

• Indicator organism • High numbers dependably present in bovine fecal waste • Lower thermotolerance

– Salmonella and Mycobacterium avium ssp. paratuberculosis (MAP) • Obligate pathogens

• Important biosecurity agents • Common enough in dairy herds to have a good chance of finding them (at least in pre-digestion samples), • Environmentally resistant to a lesser (Salmonella) or greater (MAP) degree

– Enterococci

• Dependably present in bovine fecal waste • Higher thermotolerance • Don’t replicate in the environment

Relative Ranking of Bacteria for Hardiness Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis Enterococcus faecium Listeria spp. Salmonella enterica

E. Coli Campylobacter jejuni

Log Generic e-coli Bacteria 7

Log Generic e-coli Bacteria

6

5

F 4

3

2

F e c e s

1

0

F a r m F l o w

e

B e d d i n g

e d s t o c k s

32,359

R e c e i v e r

S

105

e

C

E f f l u e n t

p

a

L

l

i

f

q

B

u

a

i

r

d

n

AD S o l i d s

C o m p o s t

77

Log Enterococcus Bacteria 5

Log Enterococcus Bacteria

4.5

4

F

3.5

a

3

2.5

2

1.5

1

r F m e F c

l

e

o

s 0.5

w

8511

B e d d i n g

F e e d s

603

e E c f e f

t

i l

o

v

c k s

0

R

AD S o l

u

i

e

d

n r t

s

e

S e p L i q u i d

C a l f B a r n

50 C o m p o s t

Presence-absence of bacteria in pre- and post-AD materials Sampling Location

Campylobacter

Listeria

Mycobacterium paratuberculosis

Salmonella

On-farm Feces

56% (14/25)

12% (3/25)

84% (21/25)

44% (11/25)

Farm Flow

35% (9/26)

4% (1/26)

78% (21/27)

77% (20/26)

Bedding

0% (0/22)

0% (0/22)

9.5% (2/21)

27% (6/22)

Feedstocks

0% (0/4)

0% (0/4)

33% (0/6)

17% (1/6)*

Receiving Tank

28% (7/25)

0% (0/25)

63% (17/27)

89% (24/27)

Effluent after anaerobic digestion

28% (8/29)

7% (2/29)

71% (22/31)

90% (28/31)

AD Solids

0% (0/23)

9 % (2/23)

32% (8/25)

84% (21/25)

SepLiquid

7 % (3/43)

5 % (2/43)

54 % (24/44)

79% (35/44)

Compost

0% (0/20)

0% (0/20)

0% (0/19)

0% (0/20)

Calf Barn

50% (4/8)

0% (0/8)

33% (2/6)

50% (4/8)

Fecal Bacteria on Soil After Manure Application July 2009 Fecal Bacteria, log/100 gm soil

8.00 6,309,573

7.00 6.00

5.00

25,547

4.00

Broadcast - Post

3.00

Broadcast - Pre

2.00 1.00 0.00 0

5

10

15

20

Day After Manure Application

25

E. coli Bacteria on Soil after Manure E. coli Bacteria, log/100 gm soil

Application - July 2009 8

5,248,074

7 6 5 20,892

4

Broadcast Post

3

Broadcast Pre

2 1 0

0

5

10

15

20

Days After Manure Application

25

Take Home Message

As more manure is moved off-farm for human crop production, greater attention needs to be given to insuring that the manure presents a low risk of contaminating food crops

Frequency of Foodborne Illness in the United States per year • Total FBI • Hospitalizations • Deaths

76 million 325,000 5,000

Foodborne Pathogens & Produce • Produce outbreaks have increased • Most common pathogens: – E. coli O157:H7 – Norovirus – Salmonella

Higher Risk Produce • Root Crops & Leaf Crops where product touches the soil • 88% of produce-related outbreaks (Anderberg, 2007)

– – – – –

Lettuce & Leafy Greens Tomatoes Sprouts Green Onions Melons

The Silver Lining • Low pathogen prevalence on most foods • Produce – 1.6% of domestic produce harbors pathogens – 4.4% of imported produce harbors pathogens Janet Anderberg, 2007

E. coli O157:H7 infection occurrence

Estimated each year in the US: • 73,000 infections • 61 deaths • 3-5% with Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome (HUS) die

CDC, October 6, 2006

Survival of Escherichia coli O157:H7 in soil and on carrots and onions grown in fields treated with contaminated manure composts or irrigation water

Mahbub Islam, Michael P. Doyle, Sharad C. Phatak, Patricia Millner, and Xiuping Jiang Food Microbiology 22 (2005) 63-70

The Basic Question • If you use contaminated manures or irrigation water, what is the risk E.Coli O157:H7 surviving on your crops?

Control

Control

Poultry manure

Poultry manure

Dairy manure compost

Dairy manure compost

Alkaline stabilized dairy manure

Alkaline stabilized dairy manure

Contaminated irrigation water

Contaminated irrigation water

E. coli O157:H7 Inoculation • 3 composts: 107 cfu/g • Irrigation water: 105 cfu/ml

Application and planting • Compost mixed in with soil from plots at a rate of 2 tons/acre – Mixture applied over rows

• Carrots and onions direct seeded next day • Contaminated irrigation water hand sprayed 3 weeks after carrots and onions were seeded

Sampling • ~Once/ week for 29 weeks • 100 g soil from each plot near a plant – 1 inch deep from surface

• Randomly selected plant pulled (every three weeks) – Edible parts used for analysis

• All samples aseptically collected

Survival of E. coli O157:H7 in soil samples: carrots

Up to 196 d with dairy and poultry manure

□ No Compost ■ Poultry manure compost ▲ Dairy cattle manure compost ● Alkalinestabilized dairy cattle manure compost ○ Contaminated irrigation water

Survival of E. coli O157:H7 in soil samples: onions

□ No Compost ■ Poultry manure compost ▲ Dairy cattle manure compost ● Alkalinestabilized dairy cattle manure compost ○ Contaminated irrigation water

E. coli O157:H7 survival in soil • At least 154 d in all soil • 196 d in soil where carrots were grown and poultry or dairy compost was applied

E. coli O157:H7 counts on carrots 168 d □ No Compost ■ Poultry manure compost ▲ Dairy cattle manure compost ● Alkalinestabilized dairy cattle manure compost ○ Contaminated irrigation water

E. coli O157:H7 counts on onions

74 d

□ No Compost ■ Poultry manure compost ▲ Dairy cattle manure compost ● Alkalinestabilized dairy cattle manure compost ○ Contaminated irrigation water

E. coli O157:H7 survival on vegetables • 168 d on carrots (harvested on d 126) • 74 d on onions (harvested on d 140) • Cell numbers decreased, but more rapidly on onions

Time between application and harvest

• USDA National Organic Program • Minimum of 120 days • E. coli survived 168 d on carrots

Take-Home Messages • Untreated animal waste may be a source of pathogens • Proper composting can reduce risk of transmitting pathogens via manure • Absolute safety of compost or manure is impossible to demonstrate • Good planning, monitoring, and recordkeeping is essential to demonstrate reasonable precautions made to avoid contamination

Joe Harrison

[email protected]