Advertisement

Toxicology and Environmental Health Sciences

, Volume 11, Issue 4, pp 271–277 | Cite as

Development of Odorous Gases Reduction Agents Using Recombinant Yeast-Derived Extract

  • Bit-Na Kim
  • Ji-Young Ahn
  • Myeong-Seop Song
  • Hongik Kim
  • Ki Jong Yu
  • Sang Yong Kim
  • Ji-Hyang Wee
  • Yang-Hoon KimEmail author
  • Jiho MinEmail author
Original article
  • 3 Downloads

Abstract

Methods: First, the experiment was conducted on a lab-scale, treated with 1%, 2%, 5% and 10% extracts in manure, followed by reaction for 3 days. The concentrations of NH3, H2S and CH3SH were measured using a gas detector. A scale-up odor reduction experiment was then conducted in a swine house. Finally, the odor reduction effect was compared with the commercial product (M-product) for evaluation.

Results: As a result of comparing the ammonia gas reduction with respect to the concentration of the yeast-derived extract, it was confirmed that the reduction of ammonia was improved depending on the treated concentration in both samples of Yeast-W and Yeast-SS. The concentration of NH3, H2S, and CH3SH from swine house showed significant differences between that of manure from the control and extract treatment group, with Yeast-SS showing the highest efficacy. The reduction rate of Yeast-SS 1% treatment on NH3 was 46.7%, which appeared similar to that of 2% treatment of M-product. Also, the reduction rate of Yeast 2% treatment reached a maximum of 53.4%, which showed a high efficiency for the reduction of NH3. Conclusion: Yeast-SS is an effective odor removal agent even at low concentrations compared with other odor reducing agents, with potential applicability as an environmental improvement agent for managing odorous gas of swine manure.

Keywords

Odor NH3 H2CH3SH Yeast-derived extract 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was carried out with the support of ?Cooperative Research Program for agriculture Science & Technology Development (Project No: PJ01267701) Rural Development Administration, Republic of Korea.

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. 1.
    Allen, G. M. in Bats: biology, behavior, and folklore (Dover Publications, 2004).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Donham, K. J. The concentration of swine production: Effects on swine health, productivity, human health, and the environment. Vet. Clin. North Am. Food Anim. Pract.16, 559–597 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zhu, Y.-l. et al. Odor composition analysis and odor indicator selection during sewage sludge composting. J. Air Waste Manag. Assoc.66, 930–940 (2016).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rahman, S. & Borhan, M. Typical odor mitigation technologies for swine production facilities: A review. J. Civ. Environ. Eng. 2, 117 (2012).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kim, Y.-J., Ahmed, S. T., Islam, M. M. & Yang, C.-J. Evaluation of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens as manure additive for control of odorous gas emissions from pig slurry. Afr. J. Microbiol. Res.8, 2540–2546 (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    McCrory, D. & Hobbs, P. Additives to reduce ammonia and odor emissions from livestock wastes. J. Environ. Qual.30, 345–355 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zhu, J. A review of microbiology in swine manure odor control. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ.78, 93–106 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kang, K.-H., Kam, S.-K., Hu, C.-G. & Lee, M.-G. The effect of reduction of contaminants and odor according to the additives in the anaerobic maturation process of piggery slurry. J. Environ. Sci. Int.15, 169–175 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Edens, F. An alternative for antibiotic se in poultry: probiotics. Rev. Bras. Cienc. Avic.5, 75–97 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Line, J. E., Bailey, J. S., Cox, N. A., Stern, N. J. & Tompkins, T. Effect of yeast-supplemented feed on Salmonella and Campylobacter populations in broilers. Poultry Sci.77, 405–410 (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Roto, S. M., Rubinelli, P. M. & Ricke, S. C. An introduction to the avian gut microbiota and the effects of yeast-based prebiotic-type compounds as potential feed additives. Front Vet. Sci.2, 28 (2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Blanes-Vidal, V. et al. Characterization of odor released during handling of swine slurry: Part I. Relationship between odorants and perceived odor concentrations. Atmos. Environ.43, 2997–3005 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Blunden, J. & Aneja, V. P. Characterizing ammonia and hydrogen sulfide emissions from a swine waste treatment lagoon in North Carolina. Atmos. Environ.42, 3277–3290 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jo, S.-H. et al. Odor characterization from barns and slurry treatment facilities at a commercial swine facility in South Korea. Atmos. Environ.119, 339–347 (2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bruun, S., ten Hoeve, M. & Birkved, M. in Animal Manure Recycling 329–341 (Wiley, 2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chen, S.-J., Hsieh, L.-T., Hwang, W.-I., Xu, H.-C. & Kao, J.-H. Abatement of odor emissions from landfills using natural effective microorganism enzyme. Aerosol Air Qual. Res3, 87–99 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kim, D. et al. Effect of dietary yeast (Saccharomyces exiguus) on growth performance, Cecal microflora and fecal ammonia gas in broiler chickens. Korean J. Poult. Sci.34, 137–141 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Price, K. et al. Use of Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation product on growth performance and microbiota of weaned pigs during Salmonella infection. J. Anim. Sci88, 3896–3908 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Trevisi, P. et al. Comparison of three patterns of feed supplementation with live Saccharomyces cerevisiae yeast on postweaning diarrhea, health status, and blood metabolic profile of susceptible weaning pigs orally challenged with Escherichia coli F4ac. J. Anim. Sci.93, 2225–2233 (2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Uludag-Demirer, S., Demirer, G. N., Frear, C. & Chen, S. Anaerobic digestion of dairy manure with enhanced ammonia removal. J. Environ. Manage.86, 193–200 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yoon, D.-H., Kang, D.-W. & Nam, K.-W. The effect of yeast (Saccharomyces exiguus SJPAF1) on odor emission and contaminants reduction in piggery slurry. Korean J. Environ. Agric.28, 47–52 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Korean Society of Environmental Risk Assessment and Health Science and Springer 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bit-Na Kim
    • 1
  • Ji-Young Ahn
    • 2
  • Myeong-Seop Song
    • 3
  • Hongik Kim
    • 3
  • Ki Jong Yu
    • 2
  • Sang Yong Kim
    • 4
  • Ji-Hyang Wee
    • 4
  • Yang-Hoon Kim
    • 2
    Email author
  • Jiho Min
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Graduate School of Semiconductor and Chemical EngineeringJeonbuk National UniversityJeonjuRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.School of Biological SciencesChungbuk National UniversityCheongjuRepublic of Korea
  3. 3.R&D DivisionVITABIO, Inc.DaejeonRepublic of Korea
  4. 4.Department of Food Science and BiotechnologyShin Ansan UniversityAnsanRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations