Characterization of Dusts Collected from Swine Confinement Buildings

Abstract

As part of a project to evaluate health hazards for workers in swine confinement buildings, the air in 21 different buildings was sampled with 37 mm cassette filters with and without cyclone preselectors and with cascade impactors. Filter results yielded a mean total aerosol of 6.3 mg/m3, a mean respirable aerosol of 0.5 mg/m3; the geometric mean diameter was 2.9 microns. Cascade impactor measurements revealed a mean total aerosol of 7.6 mg/m3, a respirable aerosol of 2.5 mg/m3 and a mass median diameter of 9.6 microns. The two major constituents in these aerosols were grain particles and dried fecal matter. The grain particles were larger than fecal particles and proportionately more abundant in finishing buildings where 50 kg X 100 kg animals are housed. Therefore the respirable fraction was less in finishing buildings than in farrowing and nursery buildings. Culturing of settled dusts yielded six different mold species, with the highest counts for Verticillium sp. (5 X 10(2) cfu/mg dry dust) grown at 37 degrees C. Thermophilic Actinomycetes and both gram negative and gram positive bacteria were isolated. Azocasein proteinase activity was found in most dust samples analyzed. This dust had a protein content of about 23% and a mean adsorbed ammonia content of 0.4%.

Detection of Airborne Methicillin-ResistantStaphylococcus aureusInside and Downwind of a Swine Building, and in Animal Feed: Potential Occupational, Animal Health, and Environmental Implications

“…characterized the airborne dust particles in swine barns and determined that particles greater than 5 microns were primarily sourced from fecal material and particles less than 5 microns were sourced from fecal material and exfoliated epithelial cells (skin and gastrointestinal origin). 17 MRSA was detected inside the building primarily on particles greater than 5 microns, which suggests feed may be a source. Outside, MRSA was detected primarily on particles less than 5 microns, suggesting that the larger particles do not remain airborne, and/or that smaller, animal-sourced particles may also be important contamination sources.…”

Morphology, chemical composition, and bacterial concentration of airborne particulate matter in rabbit farms

“…Previous studies in pigs (Donham et al, 1986;Heber et al, 1988;Feddes et al, 1992) identified feed as predominant components in TSP and in particles larger than 10 µm in diameter. In poultry and pigs, Cambra-López et al (2011a) found a higher proportion of particles from faecal material in PM10 and PM2.5 than in our study.…”

“…The use of another stain different from iodine to differentiate between feed or faecal material such as undigested feed particles found in faeces could help in the identification of these PM components in the smaller size fractions when using LM. Nile blue sulphate stain has been used before for this purpose (Donham et al, 1986). Nevertheless, to overcome LM limitations, Averages within a row with different superscripts differ significantly (P<0.10).…”

“…The different components identified in PM were described in terms of their size and morphology. Iodine (dilution 1:10 of iodine in distilled water) was used to stain starch granules and identify feed particles, by directly pipetting 1 to 3 mL of dilution onto the filter, following Donham et al (1986). Quantitative analysis of the different components found in the airborne PM fractions was also performed.…”

“…Livestock houses are major sources of airborne particulate matter (PM), which can originate from several sources: manure, feed, feathers, skin and bedding (Donham et al, 1986;CambraLópez et al, 2011a). The heterogeneous nature of PM in livestock houses comprises particles of different morphology and chemical composition (Cambra-López et al, 2010).…”