Free Standard AU & NZ Shipping For All Book Orders Over $80!
Register      Login
Animal Production Science Animal Production Science Society
Food, fibre and pharmaceuticals from animals
Shopping Cart: ( empty )
You are here: Home > Journals > AN > EA06110
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Contents Vol 48(5)

Association between pig activity and environmental factors in pig confinement buildings

Ki Youn Kim A , Han Jong Ko B , Hyeon Tae Kim B , Chi Nyon Kim C and Sang Hoon Byeon D E
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

A Institute of Industrial and Environmental Medicine, Hanyang University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

B Graduate School of Agriculture, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.

C Institute for Occupational Health, College of Medicine, Yonsei University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

D Department of Environmental Health, College of Health Sciences, Korea University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

E Corresponding author. Email: bsh@korhealth.ac.kr

Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 48(5) 680-686 https://doi.org/10.1071/EA06110
Submitted: 16 March 2006  Accepted: 24 May 2007   Published: 7 April 2008

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine the aerial contaminants affecting pig activity and evaluate the correlation between pig activity and aerial contaminants in a pig confinement building. This experiment was performed in a confinement growing and finishing room, and the data presented in this article was collected over a period of 50 days, with sampling every 2 days from June to September 2003. Air samples were taken in the middle of empty pens on both sides of the pig confinement building. In this study, we demonstrated statistically significant negative relationships between pig activity and temperature, relative humidity and ammonia, while total dust positively regressed with pig activity. Based on these experimental results, we reasoned that increases in temperature, hydrogen sulfide and ammonia in the pig building suppressed pig activity and that high levels of total dust in the pig building was attributable to increases in pig activity. The exposure limit values of aerial contaminants, such as particulate matter, gaseous compounds and airborne microorganisms related to the pigs’ health should be established in order to promote the performance and welfare of the pigs.

Additional keywords: airborne bacteria, airborne fungi, ammonia, dust, hydrogen sulfide.


References


Barber EM, Dawson JR, Battams VA, Nicol RAC (1991) Spatial variability of airborne and settled dust in a piggery. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 50, 107–127.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Cagienard A, Regula G, Danuser J (2005) The impact of different housing systems on health and welfare of grower and finisher pigs in Switzerland. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 68, 49–61.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS | PubMed | open url image1

Carpenter GA (1986) Dust in livestock buildings – review of some aspects. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 33, 227–241. open url image1

Crook B, Robertson JF, Glass SA, Botheroyd EM, Lacey J, Topping MD (1991) Airborne dust, ammonia, microorganisms, and antigens in pig confinement houses and the respiratory health of exposed farm workers. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal 52, 271–279.
|  CAS | PubMed |
open url image1

Curtis SE, Jensen AH, Simon J, Day DL (1974) Effects of aerial ammonia, hydrogen sulphide and swine-house dust, alone and combined, on swine health and performance. In ‘Proceedings of the 1st international livestock environment symposium of the ASAE’. pp. 209–210. (ASABE Publications: St Joseph, MI)

Day JEL, Spooler HAM, Burfoot A, Chamberlain HL, Edwards SA (2002) The separate and interactive effects of handling and environmental enrichment on the behaviour and welfare of growing pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 75, 177–192.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Donham KJ, Cumro D (1999) Setting maximum dust exposure levels for people and animals in livestock facilities. In ‘Dust control in animal production facilities. Proceedings of a congress in Aarhus, Denmark’. pp. 93–110. (Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Dept of Agricultural Engineering: Horsens, Denmark)

Donham KJ, Zavala DC, Merchant JA (1984) Acute effects of the work environment on pulmonary functions of swine confinement workers. American Journal of Industrial Medicine 5, 367–375.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS | PubMed | open url image1

Donham KJ, Scallon LJ, Popendorf W (1986) Characterization of dusts collected from swine confinement buildings. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal 47, 404–410.
|  CAS | PubMed |
open url image1

Galbraith H, Robertson AM (1971) ‘Effect of ventilation on the gas concentration in a part-stalled piggery.’ R & D Studies 1, Scottish Farm Buildings Investigation Unit. pp. 17–28. (Agriculture Extension Publications: Deanston, Scotland)

Gustafsson G (1999) Factors affecting the release and concentration of dust in pig houses. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 74, 379–390.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Kim KY, Ko HJ, Lee KJ, Park JB, Kim CN (2005) Temporal and spatial distributions of aerial contaminants in an enclosed pig building in winter. Environmental Research 99, 150–157.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS | PubMed | open url image1

Malayer JR, Brandt KE, Green ML, Kelly DT, Sutton AL, Diekman MA (1988) Influence of manure gases on the onset of puberty of replacement gilts. Animal Production 46, 277–282. open url image1

Morrison WD, Pirie PD, Perkins S, Braithwaite LA, Smith JH, Waterfall D, Doucett CM (1993) Gases and respirable dust in confinement buildings and the response of animals to such airborne contaminants. In ‘Proceedings of International Livestock Environment Symposium IV, Warwick, England, 6–9 July’. pp. 735–746. (ASAE)

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (1998) Sampling and characterization of bioaerosols. In ‘Manual of analytical method’. (Eds AJ Paul, MP Schafer) pp. 254–255. (NIOSH Publications: Cincinnati, OH)

Nicks B, Marlier D, Canart B (1993) Air pollution levels in pig houses. In ‘Proceedings of International Livestock Environment Symposium IV, Warwick, England, 6–9 July’. pp. 635–641. (ASAE)

Olson DK, Bark SM (1996) Health hazards affecting the animal confinement farm worker. American Association of Occupational Health Nurse Journal 44, 198–204.
|  CAS |
open url image1

Parbst KE, Keener KM, Heber AJ, Ni JQ (2000) Comparison between low-end discrete and high-end continuous measurements of air quality in swine buildings. Applied Engineering in Agriculture 16, 693–699. open url image1

Pederson S (1993) Time based variation in airborne dust in respect to animal activity. In ‘Proceedings of International Livestock Environment Symposium IV, Warwick, England, 6–9 July’. pp. 718–726. (ASAE)

Preller L (1995) Respiratory health effects of pig farmers: assessment of exposure and epidemiological studies of risk factors. PhD Thesis, Wageningen Agricultural University, The Netherlands.

Robertson JH, Frieben WR (1984) Microbial validation of ven filters. Biotechnology and Bioengineering 26, 828–835.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS | open url image1

SAS (2002) ‘SAS/STAT user’s guide.’ Rel. 6.03. (SAS Institute Inc.: Cary, NC)

Spoolder HAM, Edwards SA, Corning S (2000) Legislative methods for specifying stocking density and consequences for the welfare of finishing pigs. Livestock Production Science 64, 167–173.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Stombaugh DP, Teague HS, Roller WL (1969) Effects of atmospheric ammonia on the pig. Journal of Animal Science 28, 844–847.
|  CAS | PubMed |
open url image1

Thorne PS, Niekhaefer MS, Whitten P, Donham KJ (1992) Comparison of bioaerosol sampling methods in barns housing swine. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 58, 2543–2551.
|  CAS | PubMed |
open url image1

Wang X, Zhang Y, Riskowski GL, Ellis M (2002) Measurement and analysis of dust spatial distribution in a mechanically ventilated pig building. Biosystems Engineering 81, 225–236.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1