Defining dust particles in livestock facilities

Dust we can’t see — smaller than 2.5 microns, called PM 2.5 — can cause allergies and other respiratory problems. Dust particles inside livestock facilities can cause pulmonary problems for anyone who breathes it in, including the animals. A recent research project characterizes the dust particles found in poultry, dairy and swine facilities.

“In order to manage or regulate the dust, we first have to understand its characteristics,” says Richard Gates, University of Illinois biological engineering professor. “Until we have that, we can’t make models that describe the emission from a building, how much of it drops out within 100 yards of a building, and how much of it travels much further from the facility.”

Gates says dairy facilities are open and airy; hen facilities are recognized as dusty; and swine-finishing buildings, although not considered to be terribly dusty, are the worst overall in dust level.

“Of the three types of livestock buildings, swine facilities tip the scales in terms of having the highest amount of the dangerously small, PM 2.5-size particulate matter,” Gates says. “One of the major challenges in swine production is keeping them healthy without the use of antibiotics, and respiratory stress is one of the health issues.”

Ehab Mostafa, lead project researcher, collected and analyzed data at livestock facilities in Germany, which are comparable in terms of dust to U.S. facilities.

“Interestingly, the particles are not all spherical,” Gates says. “Without scientific ways to characterize their shapes, then every model that we use to predict how many there are and how to measure them and their fate is wrong — because the models have been assuming spherical particles.”

Gates says this research provides a scientific approach to characterizing these particles. The information will be used as input for models to discover the fate of the dust as it leaves the three different livestock buildings and its effect on the external environment.

The information will be compared to what we already have for health standards for humans and animals, Gates notes, like the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s eight-hour exposure limit for PM 2.5.

Source: University of Illinois

Beef cattle feed intake study could lead to more efficient breeds

A new study from the University of Illinois helps define how much cattle eat across different life stages and diet types, which will help with breeding more efficient animals.

“Grain intake in the feedlot is relatively easy to measure, and the industry now has a substantial number of feed intake records. But forage intake while a cow is grazing is extremely difficult to measure,” says Dan Shike, U of I associate professor of beef cattle nutrition in the Department of Animal Sciences. “We need to get a handle on that to really capture feed efficiency for the entire beef production system.”

Intake regulation varies depending on diet type, meaning a cow can fill up on forages before meeting her basic nutritional requirements. The same cow being fed grain in a controlled setting like a feedlot will likely meet those requirements on less feed. However, feed intake evaluations are typically done in the feedlot, potentially misrepresenting the efficiency of the animal over her lifespan.

“Prior to our study, there were limited data evaluating the relationship of intake on a grain diet with intake on a forage diet,” Shike explains. “If they are related, we may be able to use the intake data we have from the feedlot to extrapolate throughout the cow’s life.”

Shike and a team of collaborators from 11 institutions set out to determine if there was a relationship between feed efficiency in forage-fed cattle and in grain-fed cattle. Both heifers and steers were fed out of a GrowSafe system, which precisely tracks intake to individual animals, for 70 days.

“The study suggests that dry matter intake is repeatable across varying stages of maturity and diet types in cattle, and accurate feed efficiency measures can be obtained in either the growing or finishing period,” Shike says. “Our results show that measures of dry matter intake and feed intake in heifers are relevant, no matter what they were fed.”

The team also analyzed the data by breaking the intake evaluation period into smaller chunks. “We found that intake evaluation periods can be shortened from the standard 70 days. We’re not suggesting going clear down to seven or 14 days, but I think you could go from 70 to 42,” he says.

Having more information about feed intake can lead to a more economical operation, potentially reducing feed waste and increasing profits.

Source: University of Illinois

New bioenergy research center at U of I

The U.S. Department of Energy is funding a multimillion-dollar Bioenergy Research Center at the University of Illinois in Urbana-Champaign.

The Center for Advanced Bioenergy and Bioproducts Innovation (CABBI) is a collaboration between Illinois’ Institute for Sustainability, Energy and Environment (iSEE) and the Carl R. Woese Institute for Genomic Biology. Scientists from the College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences will lead two of the major research themes, including feedstock development and sustainability.

Evan H. DeLucia, the G. William Arends Professor of Plant Biology and Baum Family Director of iSEE, will serve as CABBI director.

“As the United States seeks energy independence, we need to look at the most efficient ways to grow, transform and market biofuels,” DeLucia says. “This grant is a game-changer, and CABBI will be at the forefront as we press toward a new biobased economy. Our center’s holistic approach will generate new products directly from biomass, reducing our nation’s dependence on fossil fuels and making us more secure.”

DeLucia says iSEE will coordinate and integrate fieldwork off campus, at the Illinois Energy Farm and at the nearly complete $32-million Integrated Bioprocessing Research Laboratory.

CABBI will develop new versions of miscanthus and other bioenergy feedstocks.

“We look forward to a day when we will have sustainable and economically sound production of fuels and chemicals from plants,” DeLucia says. “A vibrant bioeconomy based on plant products will enhance the economic and ecological resilience of U.S. agriculture.”

Read more about the CABBI project at the iSEE website. The $104 million center is pending congressional appropriation.

Source: University of Illinois