Soil Nutrients, Bacteria Populations, and Veterinary Pharmaceuticals across a Backgrounding Beef Feedlot

Netthisinghe, A. M. P.; Cook, Kyle DeMeo; Rice, Charles W.; Gilfillen, R. A.; Sistani, K. R.

doi:10.2134/jeq2012.0203

Cited by 13 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 67 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Samples were taken at a soil depth of 0 to 15 cm by combining 15 soil samples from each plot. Composite samples were used to determine soil pH, dry weight, and nutrient analysis as previously described (Netthisinghe et al, 2013). Poultry litter consisting of a mixture of excreta, sawdust bedding, wasted feed, and feathers was obtained fresh from a broiler ( Gallus gallus domesticus ) house located in western Kentucky.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Detection of Pathogens, Indicators, and Antibiotic Resistance Genes after Land Application of Poultry Litter

2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Poultry litter (PL) is a by-product of broiler production. Most PL is land applied. Land-applied PL is a valuable nutrient source for crop production but can also be a route of environmental contamination with manure-borne bacteria. The objective of this study was to characterize the fate of pathogens, fecal indicator bacteria (FIB), and bacteria containing antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) after application of PL to soils under conventional till or no-till management. This 2-yr study was conducted in accordance with normal agricultural practices, and microbial populations were quantified using a combination of culture and quantitative, real-time polymerase chain reaction analysis. Initial concentrations of in PL were 5.4 ± 3.2 × 10 cells g PL; sp. was not detected in the PL but was enriched periodically from PL-amended soils. was detected in PL (1.5 ± 1.3 × 10 culturable or 1.5 ± 0.3 × 10 genes g) but was rarely detected in field soils, whereas enterococci (1.5 ± 0.5 × 10 cells g PL) were detected throughout the study. These results suggest that enterococci may be better FIB for field-applied PL. Concentrations of ARGs for sulfonamide, streptomycin, and tetracycline resistance increased up to 3.0 orders of magnitude after PL application and remained above background for up to 148 d. These data provide new knowledge about important microbial FIB, pathogens, and ARGs associated with PL application under realistic field-based conditions.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Detection of Pathogens, Indicators, and Antibiotic Resistance Genes after Land Application of Poultry Litter

2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This research was conducted at the Western Kentucky University Agricultural Research and Education Complex Site, Bowling Green, KY (36.92831° N, 86.46839° W). Based on the preliminary information of the site (Netthisinghe et al, 2013), this study focused on the feeder (FD) and grazing (GR) areas of the backgrounding feedlot. The FD area of the feedlot measured 2400 m 2 , and the GR area covered 21,900 m 2 .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both large and small intensive animal production sites have reported greater soil nutrient levels ( Jongbloed and Lenis, 1998) and microbial populations (Gerba and Smith, 2005). In a recent study, Netthisinghe et al (2013) identified feeder and nearby grazing locations within a small backgrounding beef feedlot containing elevated soil nutrients and high microbial populations. Soil nutrients in excess of plant demand can accelerate emissions, leaching, and surface runoff nutrient losses (Franzluebbers et al, 2000).…”

Section: Management Practices Affect Soil Nutrients and Bacterial Popmentioning

confidence: 99%

Management Practices Affect Soil Nutrients and Bacterial Populations in Backgrounding Beef Feedlot

Netthisinghe

Cook²,

Gilfillen

et al. 2015

J. Environ. Qual.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contaminants associated with manure in animal production sites are of significant concern. Unless properly managed, manure-derived soil nutrients in livestock production sites can deteriorate soil and water quality. This 3-yr study evaluated a soil nutrient management strategy with four sequentially imposed management practices: 12-mo backgrounding (BG), manure removal from the feeder area (FD), 12-mo destocking (DS), and 12-mo grass hay harvesting (H) in a small backgrounding feedlot. Resulting soil nutrient levels, total (), and N cycling bacterial ( and ) populations after each management practice in feedlot feeder and grazing (GR) areas and in crop grown at the control location (CT) were measured. Irrespective of management practice, FD contained greater soil nutrient concentrations than the GR and CT. Regardless of management practice, total bacteria cells (1.4 × 10 cells g soil) and nitrate reducers (5.2 × 10 cells g soil) were an order of magnitude higher in the FD than in the GR and CT, whereas nitrifying bacteria concentrations (1.4 × 10 cells g soil) were higher in the GR. Manure removal from the feeder area reduced M3-P (39%), total C (21%), total N (23%), NH-N (47%), and NO-N (93%) levels established in the FD during BG. Destocking lowered total C and N (45%) in the FD and NH-N (47%), NO-N (76%), and Zn (16%) in the GR. Hay harvesting reduced all soil nutrients in the FD and GR marginally. The management strategy has potential to lower soil nutrient concentrations, control soil nutrient buildup, and limit nutrient spread within the feedlot.

show abstract

“…Of the ingested minerals and antimicrobial compounds, significant amounts are excreted in manure (Levy, 1992; ASAE, 2005; Kumar et al, 2005). As a result, areas receiving heavy manure loads can have elevated soil nutrient levels (Dantzman et al, 1983) and residual antimicrobial concentrations (Netthisinghe et al, 2013). Of manure‐derived soil nutrients, P is identified as the major nutrient that affects water quality (Sharpley et al, 1994).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Due to partial absorbance in the ruminant body, a significant proportion of monensin can pass through to the environment. Netthisinghe et al (2013) reported 86.9 ng monensin g −1 in the feeder and adjacent soils on a semi‐intensive small beef backgrounding site. Evidence suggests that antimicrobial compound residues in soils can impose selective pressure on the resident flora, resulting in increases in bacteria carrying antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) and increasing the potential for ARGs to be horizontally transferred between soil bacterial community members (Xiong et al, 2015).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing Beef Backgrounding Residual Soil Contaminants by Alum and Biochar Amendments

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Heavy manure‐derived contamination of soils can make animal congregating areas nonpoint sources for environmental pollution. In situ soil stabilization is a cost‐effective management strategy with a focus on lowering contaminant availability and limiting release to the environment. Soil stabilizing amendments can help mitigate the negative environmental impacts of contaminated soils. In this 2‐yr study, we examined the effects of adding no amendment (control) or treating with alum [Al2 (SO4)3⋅18H2O] or biochar as soil amendments on Mehlich‐3 extractable soil P, Cu, and Zn contents, antimicrobial monensin concentrations, total bacteria (16S ribosomal RNA [rRNA] gene), antibiotic resistance genes (sul1 and ermB), and Class 1 integrons (intI1) in an abandoned beef backgrounding setting. The alum reduced soil P (1374 to 1060 mg kg−1), Cu (7.7 to 3.2 mg kg−1), and Zn (52.4 to 19.6 mg kg−1) contents. Both alum and biochar reduced monesin concentrations (1.8 to 0.7 and 2.1 to 1.1 ng g−1, respectively). All the treatments harbored consistent 16S rRNA concentrations (109 copies g−1) throughout. The ermB gene concentration (105 copies g−1) was lower than either the sul1 or the intI1 genes (106 copies g−1), regardless of treatments. However, concentrations of all genes in the soils of animal congregation areas were higher than those in background soils with the least animal impact. In contrast with the effect on other contaminants, the effect of soil amendments on bacteria with antibiotic resistance genes was not biologically significant. Future research should be directed toward evaluating effective alternative methods to mitigate these bacterial populations. Core Ideas The abandoned beef backgrounding soils contain high levels of residual contaminants. Alum effectively reduced environmentally significant soil nutrient concentrations. Both alum and biochar treatments lowered residual soil monensin concentrations. The amendment effects on antibiotic‐resistant genes were not biologically significant.

show abstract

Soil Nutrients, Bacteria Populations, and Veterinary Pharmaceuticals across a Backgrounding Beef Feedlot

Cited by 13 publications

References 67 publications

Detection of Pathogens, Indicators, and Antibiotic Resistance Genes after Land Application of Poultry Litter

Detection of Pathogens, Indicators, and Antibiotic Resistance Genes after Land Application of Poultry Litter

Management Practices Affect Soil Nutrients and Bacterial Populations in Backgrounding Beef Feedlot

Managing Beef Backgrounding Residual Soil Contaminants by Alum and Biochar Amendments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About