EPA-600/2-76-292
December 1976
Environmental Protection Technology Series
MANURE HARVESTING PRACTICES: Effects on
Waste Characteristics and Runoff
Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Ada, Oklahoma 74820
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into five series. These five broad
categories were established to facilitate further development and application of
environmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The five series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
This report has been assigned to the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
TECHNOLOGY series. This series describes research performed to develop and
demonstrate instrumentation, equipment, and methodology to repair or prevent
environmental degradation from point and non-point sources of pollution. This
work provides the new or improved technology required for the control and
treatment of pollution sources to meet environmental quality standards.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
EPA-600/2-76-292
December 1976
MANURE HARVESTING PRACTICES: EFFECTS ON
WASTE CHARACTERISTICS AND RUNOFF
By
Ralph W. Hansen
Judson M. Harper
Marvin L. Stone
Gerald M. Ward
Ricky A. Kidd
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, Colorado 80523
Grant No. R-803378
Project Officer
S. C. Yin
Source Management Branch
Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory
Ada, Oklahoma 74820
ROBERT S. KERR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
ADA, OKLAHOMA 74820
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research
Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and approved for publication.
Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and
policies of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade
names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
ii
-------
ABSTRACT
Decomposition of manure occurs through biological action and spontaneous
chemical reactions. These processes are affected by microclimates surround-
ing the manure, the chemical composition of the manure and the microbio-
logical populations existing in the manure. Initial chemical and bio-
logical compositions of manure are a function of the animal's feed, age and
other factors. For a given manure the microclimate then controls
decomposition.
To develop a basis for better manure harvesting management practices a
combined field and laboratory study was conducted. The field studies were
located on a commercial beef feedlot in northeastern Colorado.
The effect of management practices on manure qualities and runoff
pollution potential was compared on three feedlot pens with fully surfaced,
partially surfaced and unsurfaced conditions. Effects of cleaning practices
on .the surfaced and dirt pens with variable harvesting schedules were
compared.
Average N, P and K elements were present in a ratio of approximately
4:1:2 providing 46 Ibs N, 11 Ibs P and 27 Ibs K per ton of dry manure.
For recycling purposes ash is an important fraction of manure and can be
reduced by use of hard surfaced pens. Ash content averaged 36.2% with a
range from 30.7% to 42.9%. Fiber and lignin in manure are directly related
to the fiber content of the ration. Increased fiber and decreased protein in
the ration reduces the ash concentration in the manure, although the increase
in fiber caused a reduction in nitrogen.
During periods of high temperature more frequent harvesting will
minimize ash and fiber concentrations and reduce ammonia losses.
The decomposition rates of manure were studied in the laboratory in a
controlled temperature-humidity chamber to incubate the manure at constant
temperature and moisture levels. During incubation the chemical and
iii
-------
physical properties were monitored. The effect of the decomposition of the
manure was greatest on its viscosity and squeezability. The viscosity of a
slurry of manure incubated at 70% moisture content and 120°F doubled in a ten-
day period. The manure's squeezability decreased 6% in the same period. In
contrast, the bulk density and particle size remained the same.
Hard surfacing and more frequent cleaning schedules will be a departure
from more conventional feedpen management methods. In conjunction with the
use of new manure harvesting techniques, there will be an effect on feedlot
runoff pollution potential. Surfaced feedlot areas have a larger percentage
of the precipitation in runoff with a higher concentration of pollutants.
Since animal densities can be increased on surfaced pens, the pollution
potential on a per animal basis is no more serious than for unsurfaced pens.
iv
-------
CONTENTS
Sections
I Conclusions
II Recommendations
III Introduction
IV Project Facilities
V Summary of Previous Manure Decomposition Research
VI Laboratory Study on Effect of Environment on Manure
Quality
VII Field Study on Effect of Environment and Management on
Manure Quality
VIII Runoff Characterization
IX Glossary
X Appendices
1
3
5
13
15
31
45
74
92
95
-------
FIGURES
No. Page
1 Ceres Ecology Corporation Manure Fractionation Process 10
Schematic
2 Total Solids Reduction Rate vs. Detention Time Calculated 19
from Different Sources
3 Ammonia Nitrogen Content of Manure Aged at 120°F and 70% 36
Moisture Content
4 Ash Content of Manure Aged at 120°F and 70% Moisture 37
Content
5 Fiber Content of Manure Aged at 120°F and 70% Moisture 38
Content
6 pH of Beef Feces Aged at 120°F and 70% Moisture Content 40
vs. Time
7 Viscosity Constant of Beef Feces Aged at 120°F vs. Time 41
8 Squeezability of Manure Aged at 120°F and 70% Moisture 42
Content
9 Time-Runoff Rate Relationship for Test Run 2 81
10 Rainfall-Runoff Relationships for Beef Cattle Feedlots 85
vi
-------
TABLES
No. Page
1 Performance of Anaerobic Liquid Manure Treatment Techniques 17
2 Performance of Aerobic Liquid Manure Treatment Techniques 20
3 Performance of Manure Composting 22
4 Chemical Properties of Beef Cattle Wastes 25
5 Composition of Rations Fed to Cattle in Corrals Where 46
Manure Samples Were Collected
6 Nitrogen Comparison 50
7 Total Nitrogen in Water by Kjeldahl Method Modified to 52
Include Nitrate
8 Comparison of Standard Kjeldahl and Kjeldahl Modified to 53
Include Nitrates
9 Reproducibility of Analytical Methods 57
10 Overall Averages of Manure Constituents 59
11 Overall Average by Location in the Feedpen 60
12 Correlation Matrixes of All Variables 62
13 Multiple Regression Coefficients and Their Respective 64
Multiple Correlation Coefficients
14 Mean Concentration of Phosphorus, Potassium, Calcium and 67
Sodium in Manure Samples by Locations in Pens
15 Concentration of Lead (Pb) and Cadmium (Cd) in Randomly 68
Selected Manure Sample
16 Solvent Extractable Lipid From Manure Samples 70
17 Summary of Stocking Rates for Open Feedlots 76
18 Independent Variables for Runoff Study 77
19 Dependent Variables for Runoff Quality and Quantity 78
Determinations
20 Pre-Storm Feedlot Surface Conditions 82
21 Surface Comparisons Using Averages of Collected Data 88
vii
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Many people contributed to this project and their help is sincerely
appreciated. The cooperation of those associated with The Ceres Land Company,
Sterling Feedlots, and Ceres Ecology Corporation is gratefully acknowledged.
A special thanks to Mr. Clay Lambeth and his staff for their help in making
arrangements for the use of the feedlot facilities involved with this pro-
ject and their patient acceptance of the inconvenience which occurred in
connection with the operation of the project. Appreciation is also expressed
for their help with record keeping and other assistance.
Several research assistants, graduate research assistants and temporary
employees helped with the installation of equipment, collection of samples
and data, and the analyses of samples in the laboratory.
viii
-------
SECTION I
CONCLUSIONS
Recycling of manure emphasizes the importance of management practices
to optimize the recovery of useful components in the manure.
Ash and acid detergent fiber (ADF) are major chemical constituents in
manure. The rate of increase of both was found with higher temperatures and
moistures. Ammonia nitrogen is lost in warm and wet conditions. The increase
in ash is accompanied by a decrease in organic matter.
To minimize losses, shorter manure harvesting periods are suggested
during seasons with high temperature, and particularly when accompanied by
high moisture conditions, at least monthly manure collection would be
recommended.
The viscosity of a manure slurry will increase with time and the
squeezability will decrease. Viscosity changes may have a significant effect
on manure reuse. Any process that uses slurried manure could develop large
increases in viscosity over relatively short periods of storage (10 days),
complicating handling and processing.
The primary fertilizer elements, N, P and K, were present in a ratio of
approximately 4:1:2 which would provide a generally useful fertilizer. The
average quantity per ton of dry manure was 46 Ibs N, 11 Ibs P and 27 Ibs K.
An average of 40 Ibs Ca per ton dry manure was found. This could be of value
on some soils.
The fibrous components of manure are closely related to the crude fiber
content of the ration. Feeding operations utilizing high roughage rations
will produce manure with constituents suitable for methane gas production.
Surfaced feedlot pens will facilitate frequent harvesting of the manure
and reduce maintenance problems. Surfaced areas will, however, have a higher
potential for pollution from increased runoff of higher concentration when
rainfall occurs. Since animal densities can be increased in surfaced pens,
1
-------
the pollution potential on a per animal basis is no more serious than for
unsurfaced pens.
-------
SECTION II
RECOMMENDATIONS
The decomposition of manure is most rapid during periods of high tem-
perature and high moisture. Significant changes in the constituents will
occur. If the manure is being utilized for recycling purposes, consideration
should be given to more frequent cleaning under these conditions.
A general recommendation can be made, that for most purposes, the har-
vesting schedule should be no longer than one month during hot, wet weather
to minimize the losses. Each installation should be considered individually,
however, and the harvesting schedule based on local conditions, value of the
manure components, cost of more frequent harvesting and increased return from
following these practices.
As characteristics of feedlot wastes vary widely, any use, including
land application rates, should be based upon laboratory analysis from in^
dividual feedlots. If such is not available, a recommended value for feedlot
manure from Colorado feedlots is an N:P:K ratio of 4:1:2 with a dry ton of
manure providing 46 Ibs N, 11 Ibs P and 27 Ibs K. While this study did not
include any work on the availability of the nutrients, it is assumed the
recommendations of other investigators would apply; namely, the first year
feedlot manure is applied to the land, apply at twice the rate necessary to
meet nitrogen fertilizer recommendations. Apply at the rate needed to meet
nitrogen requirements in subsequent years.
The current value of manure as a resource for further processing or re-
cycling generally does not warrant very sophisticated quality analysis and
control; however, as it becomes more valuable, there will be opportunity to
fit certain utilization processes to individual feedlot operations for maximum
use. For example, high roughage feeding operations will provide a manure with
a carbon constituent that might best be used for pyrolysis processes which
can utilize this characteristic.
3
-------
Surfaced feedpens will be essential for harvesting manure for most pur-
poses. Ash content is normally high and is seriously increased by contami-
nation from dirt in unsurfaced pens.
To offset the additional cost for surfacing, the density of animals
should be increased. The optimum density for localized conditions is
unknown; however, experience with full confinement systems would indicate
that densities around 50 sq ft per animal should be adequate for surfaced
feedpens and possibly could be reduced below this figure.
-------
SECTION III
INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
The recycling of beef feces is being done for various purposes at
several installations throughout the country. Recycled manure can be pro-
cessed for feed material, used as a raw material for the production of gas,
oil, methane, synthesis gas, protein, or pyrolyzed to reclaim useahle
constituents.
In harvesting manure for these purposes, little is known about the ef-
fects of environment and management practices on the manure's physical, bio-
logical and nutritional properties. Several things may happen to manure
Frecks and Gilbertson have shown the effects of ration on physical
after it is deposited on the feedlot surface.
Frecks and Gilbertson have shown the ef:
properties of manure. Their work does not contain any information on the
2
effects of aging or changes in the environment on the manure. Shaw and Boyd
have characterized viscosity of manure but not with respect to age. They
found slurries from different locations acted as a pseudoplastic. This study
characterized viscosity as a function of moisture content and bedding type.
3
Sobel has characterized animal wastes as to density, particle size, settle-
able and dissolved solids and settling rate. These studies provide the basic
techniques for conducting analysis on manure.
Manure from feedlots represents a useful resource that when properly
processed can be utilized rather than wasted. The components of manure repre-
sent materials useful as reclaimable feed or the base material for the pro-
duction of energy and other resources.
The increased interest in utilizing manure as a fertilizer, fuel and
feed source has focused attention upon manure qualities. The reuse of manure
emphasizes the need for proper management of the manure to retain its
utilizable components. Many components of manure can be lost or reduced
5
-------
through decomposition on the feedlot surface and during storage. McCalla
found losses of up to 90% of the nitrogen in manure while the manure was
left on the feedlot surface. Data are needed that can be used as a basis to
determine the best manure management harvesting practices. Component losses
may then be reduced to a minimum in harvesting practices used to produce
optimal manure utilization techniques.
Decomposition of manure occurs through enzymatic biological action and
spontaneous chemical reactions. These processes are affected by the micro-
climate surrounding the manure, the chemical composition of the manure and the
microbiological populations existing in the manure. The initial chemical and
biological composition of manure is a function of the animal's feed, age and
other factors. For a given manure, the microclimate then controls decom-
position.
UTILIZATION OF MANURE
Manure has long been used as a fertilizer. The recent fertilizer short-
ages have emphasized the necessity of preserving the nutritional qualities of
manure for plant production. Graber gives the fertilizer ingredients of
typical beef feedlot manure from one ton at 40% moisture as 10 Ibs N, 5 Ibs
P205 and 10 Ibs K20.
Manure as a Fuel
Halligan and Sweazy report the B.T.U. rating of beef feedlot manure as
high as 6,500 B.T.U. per pound or 13 x 10 B.T.U. per ton (D.M.B.). There are
three means of utilizing manure as a fuel: direct combustion, substrate for
methane production, and production of synthetic fuel.
Direct combustion is possible only when the moisture content of the
manure is sufficiently low (<25%) to sustain combustion. "Trash" type fur-
naces and air pollution equipment are required. The ash has value as a
fertilizer since only nitrogen and humus are lost in the combustion.
Manure used as a substrate for methane generation must be diluted to 5%
solids and held at a temperature of 110-114°F for 15-30 day detentions. A
3
100-head herd would require 5,000-6,000 ft of fermentation tanks. This
3 3
system would produce about 4,000 ft of low value (500 B.T.U./ft ) gas per
day. A lagoon is required to handle the sludge since only 50% of the solids
would be converted to gas (Fairbank ).
-------
Q
Walawender states of the three technologies contemplated for synthetic
fuel production, liquefaction, hydrogasification, and pyrolysis for syn-
thesis gas, the latter is generally agreed to be the most promising.
Pyrolysis requires high temperature heating and high pressure in the
absence of air to produce a variety of products, including CO, CCL, CH, and
V
Manure as a Livestock Feed
Manure has a relatively large potential value as livestock feed and has
spawned a variety of handling and processing techniques.
Use of manure as feed requires satisfaction of several subcriteria:
1. Manure contains residues of potentially harmful substances (heavy
metals, antibiotics and pesticides) and residues of indigestible
materials (lignin and mineral matter, amounting to 20-40% of the
total) which would rapidly accumulate in recycling to prevent its
use as a feed. This accumulation cycle must be broken. There are
three ways:
A. Dispersion to animals other than those producing manure;
B. Dilution through using only a fraction of the manure as feed
and disposal of the balance, and
C. Extraction and disposal of these residues as a continuous
"blow down" feature of the process.
2. Manure can contain pathogens, and safety against infection can
only be assured through continuous thermal and/or chemical
processing.
3. The feed products must be palatable to livestock and possess good
"shelf life" in storage and in the feed bunk.
4. Since on-farm livestock will typically not consume all the manure-
derived feeds produced, it is necessary that at least a fraction be
in the form of readily transportable and marketable products if all
the manure is to be utilized.
There are four basic technologies:
1. Whole manure drying;
2. The wastelage system;
3. Fractionation with partial recovery, and
4. Fractionation with full recovery.
7
-------
Whole Manure Drying
In the arid areas of the world, air-dried manure has been directly used
in feed rations. Since there is no pathogen control, this is not a feasible
technology.
Dried poultry waste (DPW) is dried with a rotary drier and used as a
feed. Particle temperatures in drying do not typically attain pasteurization
levels. The very dry state of the feed inhibits biological activity and no
cases of infection have been reported to date.
The Wastelage System
O
The wastelage system (Anthony ) consists of blending 40% wet (70-80%
moisture) manure with dry standard feed ingredients and then ensiling the
mixture for over 10 days detention. Preferably fermentation takes place in a
top loading, bottom unloading airtight silo to insure uniform fermentation.
The pH drops to near 4.0. This acidic state, while not theoretically suf-
ficient to insure destruction of all possible pathogens, certainly destroys
most and inhibits biological activity throughout the feed cycle. Excellent
feed results with cattle have been obtained using wastelage. This system
utilizes only about 25% of the manure produced and does not present an
opportunity for utilization for all the manure produced.
Fractionation with Partial Recovery
In these systems manure is washed and settled and one or the other
fraction is refed.
At Illinois University (Harmon et al. ), swine manure is treated in an
oxidation ditch and the protein-containing water is fed to swine as drinking
water. While excellent feed results have been obtained, it is hard to
visualize biological control in this wet, basic medium. Research is pro-
viding further evaluation of this technique.
Corral Industries of Phoenix, Arizona (Gross ) manufactures a system for
screening dilute solutions of manure and then pressing and chemically
sterilizing the fibrous fraction for cattle feed as a roughage replacer in
the ration. The liquid fraction is then pumped to lagoons for eventual dis-
posal on fields as a fertilizer.
-------
12
Ceres Ecology Corporation (Seckler ) manufactures a similar system
consisting of the Cl line of Figure 1 for use in small to medium size live-
stock operations. The value of the roughage feed produced in these systems
is about equal to that of low to medium grade corn silage.
Fractionation with Full Recovery
13
Feed Cycling Company of Blyth, California (Senior ) has developed a
system for extracting sand from beef feedlot manure and ending with a feed
product (82% of the input) in a dry pelleted form containing about 20% crude
protein, 39% cellulose and lignin, and 14% ash. The system entails a brine
discharge into salt beds.
Ceres Ecology Corporation, in cooperation with W. Brady Anthony and the
Auburn Research Foundation, has developed a system which is designed to pro-
duce different feeds for ruminant and monogastric animals (Figure 1). "Cl"
(20-40% of input, D.M.B.) consists of the grain and fiber particles in manure.
It is either fermented into a silage product for feeding feedlot cattle or
dried, blended and pelleted for range cattle. "C2" (40%) is a dry pelleted
product containing 27-30% crude protein, 4% fat, and 25% ash. This product
is fermented in the liquid phase to encourage production of "single-cell
protein." "C3" (20-40%) is a compost-like material suitable as a soil
conditioner of about the same value as manure.
14
Hamilton Standard Corporation (Turk ), in conjunction with the Northern
Regional Research Laboratory (U.S.D.A.), has proposed a joint methane-protein
system. We do not have sufficient information to evaluate this proposal other
than to observe that methane production would increase costs of feed pro-
duction over systems using other fuel sources and that these high costs of
methane generation would not likely be overcome by cost saving and/or added
production value in protein production.
General Electric Corporation is also working on a protein fermentation
system about which we have little information (Anonymous ).
SCOPE
Manure from feedlots represents a useful resource that, when properly
processed, can be utilized rather than wasted. The components of manure
-------
Manure
SLURRY/
FERMENTATION
TANK
LI QUID/SOLID
SEPARATOR
Water
Recycle
Steam
Water
I
Solid
Particles
PRESS
Protein
Slurry
CENTRIFUGE
SILO
C I
J * (SILAGE)
C I
"(RANGE CUBES)
C3
.(GARDEN FERTILIZER/
SOIL CONDITIONER)
Water
EVAPORATOR
PASTEURIZE
(30% Protein Feed)
Steam
Figure 1. Ceres Ecology Corporation manure fractionation process schematic
-------
represent materials useful as reclaimable feed or the base material for the
production of energy and other resources.
This study was undertaken to determine the effects of a controlled
environment and constant management factors on the feed value and physical
characteristics of manure. Included were the effects of time, temperature,
humidity, rainfall, depth, ration and compaction of the feed value, chemical
composition, particle size distribution, moisture content, viscosity of slurry
and squeezability.
In conjunction with the use of new harvesting techniques, the effects on
runoff pollution and odor potential of the feedlots were also studied to
determine the effects of hard surfacing and more frequent cleaning schedules
in comparison with conventional facilities and methods.
OBJECTIVES
The objectives of the project were:
1. To review existing literature on the effects of management on manure
quality as related to the utility of manure as fertilizer and the
basic digestibility of cattle rations.
2. To determine the effects on quantity and quality of runoff from
feedlots operated for manure harvesting as compared to conventional
dirt lot operations.
3. To determine the effect of environment and management practices on
the nutritional, biological and physical properties of manure.
4. To develop a manure management program to obtain maximum value from
harvested manure to maximize the utilizable components.
11
-------
REFERENCES
1. Frecks, G. A. and C. B. Gilbertson. 1973. The Effect of Ration on the
Engineering Properties of Beef Cattle Manure. ASAE Paper No. 73-422.
St. Joseph, MI.
2. Shaw, R. H. and J. S. Boyd. 1968. Effects of Manure Characteristics
and Shape of Tank on Agitation in Liquid Manure Tanks. ASAE Paper No.
68-931. St. Joseph, MI.
3. Sobel. A. T. 1966. Physical Properties of Animal Manures Associated
with Handling. In: National Symposium on Animal Waste Management.
ASAE Publ. No. SP-0366. St. Joseph, MI. p. 27-32.
4. McCalla, T. M., L. R. Fridrick, and G. L. Palmer. 1970. Manure Decom-
position and Fate of Breakdown Products in the Soil. In: Agricultural
Practices and Water Quality. Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA.
p. 241-255.
5. Graber, Richard. 1974. Agricultural Animals and the Environment.
Feedlot Waste Management Reg. Ext. Project. Oklahoma State University,
Stillwater, OK.
6. Halligan, J. E. and R. M. Sweazy. 1972. Thermochemical Evaluation of
Animal Waste Conversion Processes. AICHE Annual Meeting.
7- Fairbank, W. C. 1974. Fuel from Feces? The Dairyman, p. 8-11. May.
8. Walawender, W. P., L. T. Fau, C. R. Engler, and L. E. Erickson. 1973.
Feedlot Manure and Other Agricultural Wastes for Future Materials and
Energy Resources. Institute for Systems Design and Optimization, Kansas
State University, Manhattan, KS. July.
9. Anthony, W. B. 1971. Cattle Manure as Feed for Cattle. In: Pro-
ceedings of International Symposium on Livestock Wastes, p. 293-296.
10. Harmon, B. G., D. L. Day, A. H. Jensen, and D. H. Baker. 1972. Nut-
ritive Value of Aerobically Sustained Swine Excrement. Journal of
Animal Science. 34:403-407.
11. Gross, C. 1975. Feed Reclamation. Calf News. p. 36-37. February.
12. Seckler, David. 1975. The Cereco Process. Ceres Ecology Corporation,
Denver, CO.
13. Senior, F. C. 1975. The Feed Recycle Process. In: Proceedings of
Uses of Agricultural Wastes Symposium. Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada.
November, p. 12-36.
14. Turk, M. 1972. Production of Power Fuel by Anaerobic Digestion of
Feedlot Waste. U.S.D.A. CRIS No. 0022215. p. 1.
15. Anonymous. 1972. This Plant Will Convert Waste Into Protein. Feedlot
Management. 14:70-71. May.
-------
SECTION IV
PROJECT FACILITIES
GENERAL
The field work for this project was conducted at The Ceres Land Company,
Sterling Feedlot, located in Logan County approximately one mile northeast of
Sterling, Colorado.
The physical plant of The Ceres Land Company, Sterling Feedlot, is
approximately 106 acres in a basically agricultural area. The feedlot area
slopes generally to the northeast towards the west bank of the South Platte
River. A drainage plan has been developed for the confinement area consisting
of a network of ditches, trenches and retention ponds for the collection and
confinement of surface drainage.
The Ceres Ecology Corporation, in conjunction with The Ceres Land
Company, has developed a system to recycle manure by processing it for reuse
as a feed material. The field research was conducted in cooperation with
their facilities.
Feedlot Pens
The Ceres Land Company feedlots were originally used as unsurfaced pens
with approximately 10-foot concrete aprons extending back from the feed
bunks, located along the front side of the pens. The surface of the pens
slopes away from the feed bunks with runoff water carried across into
drainage channels.
To facilitate collection and cleaning for recycling, some of the pens
have been concrete surfaced over most of the pen area and some pens have
been surfaced over approximately one-half the pen depth or approximately 70
feet back from the feed bunks.
Three pens were selected for use in this project. These consisted of an
13
-------
2
unsurfaced pen of approximately 64,000 ft in area, a partially surfaced pen
2 2
of 78,000 ft and a fully surfaced pen of 68,250 ft in area.
Manure Removal from Pens
The manure was removed from the unsurfaced and partially surfaced pens
by the schedule normally used by the feedlot for cleaning pens. This is
generally done when the stock in the pens is removed and before they are re-
filled. This allows for the accumulation and build up of approximately four
months of manure.
The manure from the surfaced pen was used for recycling through the pro-
cessing plant and followed a frequent cleaning schedule. The maximum time
between cleanings was about two weeks with more frequent cleaning generally
occurring.
Manure samples were taken from the front, center, and back of each of
these pens for analysis.
The runoff quality and quantity studies were made on these pen surfaces
plus some additional pens with comparable features but providing additional
variations in the manure pack.
LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS
The simulation study with controlled environment to determine the effect
of various factors on the manure was conducted in a controlled environment
chamber with programmed temperature and humidity control at the Agricultural
Engineering Research Center.
ANALYTICAL SERVICES
The Animal Sciences Department provided laboratory space and equipment
to provide analysis for chemical and nutritional properties of manure samples.
Off-campus analytical services were used for some of the more specialized
analyses that it was not practical to perform in the Department.
14
-------
SECTION V
SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS MANURE DECOMPOSITION RESEARCH
Manure is produced by beef cattle at an average rate of 5.7 dry Ibs per
day per 1000 Ibs animal weight (Whetstone et al. ). Using the latest
U.S.D.A. statistics, this means in the United States beef cattle produce 80
million dry pounds of manure per day (U.S.D.A. ). Beef cattle manure
averages 15-20% crude protein on a dry basis. Therefore at least 12 million
pounds of crude protein are deposited per day on feedlots. On an annual basis
the protein left in this manure is three times the protein produced in wheat
in the United States (calculated from U.S.D.A. statistics ). Manure also
has substantial fertilizer value. The nitrogen produced in cattle manure
annually is equivalent to one-third of the commercial nitrogen applied in
the United States .
Bacterial decomposition of manure can cause losses of up to 90% of its
18
nitrogen as it lies on the feedlot (Gilbertson et al. ). This substantial
loss is important in the efficient utilization of manure as a protein source
or as a nitrogen fertilizer. The information now available on decomposition
rates of manure consists only of several studies where decomposed manure was
analyzed. More extensive information is available on decomposition rates of
manure in lagoon treatment facilities. There is a need therefore to quantify
bacterial decomposition of manure on feedlots so more effective management
techniques can be applied to its harvest and, consequently, the manure
resource can be better utilized.
LITERATURE REVIEW
An extensive amount of literature is available in the general category
of animal waste management; yet on the specific topic of decomposition of
manure in the feedlot, little is available. This literature review is
15
-------
intended to bring together the reports dealing with decomposition of manure
and some of the literature on the characteristics of manure.
DECOMPOSITION OF MANURE
Conclusive data on the decomposition of manure during storage was com-
19
piled! in the 1900's. A. D. Hall reported work from five sources indicating
that from 33% to 38% of the total nitrogen in manures was lost during storage
in stalls and later in piles. Successful attempts were made in this era to
"rot" manure and actually increase nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium concen-
20
trations while reducing the weight of manure by 16% to 20% (Aikman ) . About
21
this same time Shutte recognized that the loss of nitrogen during the
"rotting" of barnyard manure was an expensive process, for as much as 76% of
the- available fertilizer nitrogen was lost, even when leaching was prevented.
During the late 1950's and early 1960's commercial fertilizers had come
into extensive use and the interest in manure was primarily in disposal
techniques. Work presented on treatment techniques that rely mainly on de-
composition can be divided into three categories:
1. Anaerobic liquid manure treatment;
2. Aerobic liquid manure treatment, and
3. Composting of manure in its natural state.
Anaerobic Liquid Manure Treatment
22
Hart and Turner did one of the earlier basic studies on animal wastes
and: anaerobic digestion. They found that 30% to 50% of the total solids in
poultry manure was lost due to decomposition in a period of slightly over two
years. They also found that 31% to 65% of the volatile solids of the same
23
manure was lost in the same period. Agnew and Loehr worked with beef cattle
manure and found similar reductions in total solids, 30% to 55% depending on
the loading rate. They listed a ten-day detention time, which is much shorter
than that reported by Hart and Turner. The discrepancy in decomposition rates
is accounted for in the fact that Loehr and Agnew used a high temperature
(35°C) compared to the ambient temperature unmixed digestion used by Hart
and Turner.
Swine wastes hawe been treated by anaerobic digestion and considerable
literature has been compiled on the technique. In some studies decomposition
24
raties have been presented. Schmid and Lipper found in a laboratory study
16
-------
they could achieve a 33% reduction in total solids in a 20-day period with a
35°C reactor temperature. They also showed the effect of temperature with a
duplicate system running at 20°C, which achieved only a 20% reduction in
25
total solids. Willrich compiled data on a field anaerobic digester where
he was able to measure solids accumulation in the system and therefore total
solids reduction by bacterial action. Eis reactor was at ambient temperature
during the spring season in Ames, Iowa. The total solids reduction was 28%
over a 54-day detention time.
The performances of the four studies mentioned are summarized in Table 1.
The results show that the lab studies had much higher efficiencies than field
studies. The decomposition rates of the studies with long detention times
may not be as important as most of the decomposition appears to occur in the
first ten days and the rate decreases from there on.
Table 1. PERFORMANCE OF ANAEROBIC LIQUID
MANURE TREATMENT TECHNIQUES
Manure
type
Poultry
Beef
cattle
Swine
Swine
Swine
Type
of
study
Field
Lab
Lab
Lab
Field
Temperature
Ambient, cen-
tral Calif. ,
all seasons
35°C
35°C
20°C
Ambient,
Detention
time
2 years
10 days
20 days
20 days
54 days
Total
solids
reduction
30 to 50%
30 to 55%
33%
20%
28%
Total
solids
reduction
rate
.06%/day
4.2 %/day
1.65%/day
1.0 %/day
.51%/day
Source
Hart &
Turner22
Agnew &
Loehr23
Schmid &
Lipper2^
Schmid &
Lipper
Willrich25
spring,
Ames, IA
17
-------
Aerobic Liquid Manure Treatment
Considerable literature is available on the design, operation and treat-
ment efficiencies of aerobic liquid manure treatment systems. The specific
techniques used vary in the method of introducing air into the manure slurry
but when operating will have similar characteristics. The literature pre-
sented in this review report data on the amount of decomposition that occurred
with time and are not categorized by techniques of aeration.
2fi
Moore et_ all. reported on the operation of a field oxidation ditch.
They calculated the reduction in total solids in the lagoon by recording
influent concentration and effluent concentration and measuring sediment
27
after draining the lagoon. Hegg and Larson reported a solids balance for
the same lagoon three years later in a similar study. The first study
achieved more total decomposition, but a lower rate of decomposition. This
was possible through a longer mean detention time and indicates that the rate
of decomposition was slowing down. The observation that decomposition rate is
inversely proportional to detention time can be made on all the data found and
is illustrated in Figure 2.
The high decomposition rates may not be due totally to detention time
since laboratory studies used the shortest detention times and would be more
efficient than their field counterparts.
Table 2 summarizes the studies found reporting a total solids reduction
by aerobic treatment of liquid wastes. Two of these studies were made in the
28
laboratory. Bloodgood and Robson have shown the effects of temperature on
the rates of decomposition of liquid dairy manure. They found that in-
creasing the temperature increased the rate of solid reduction. They also
found that the total nitrogen may be reduced by as much as 50% in a 14-day
period, but generally the nitrogen concentration is higher in the residue
29
after fermentation. Vickers and Genetelli , also using laboratory equipment,
reported high solids reduction in a short time. Their work was with poultry
manure and they were concerned with pollution potential, disregarding other
nutrients.
Two field studies involving the aerobic treatment of liquid poultry
30
manure and decomposition amounts were reported. Ludington ^t_ a^. reported
the characteristics of a pilot scale oxidation ditch. They found a 53% re-
duction in total solids in the 137-day mean detention time. They also found
that 31% of the total nitrogen had been lost in the same period and the
18
-------
rt
o
H
4J
O
O
a)
6 4-
5 4-
4 4-
(U
* 3
2 +
1 4-
Vickers and Genetelli
29
Bloodgood and Robson
and Larson
27
28
Moore et al.
26
Ludington et al
^"
30
Miner
32
1 ,
100
1
260
300
400
1
500
Time (days)
Figure 2. Total solids reduction rate vs. detention time
calculated from different sources
19
-------
Table 2. PERFORMANCE OF AEROBIC LIQUID
MANURE TREATMENT TECHNIQUES
Manure
type
Poultry
Dairy
cattle
Dairy
cattle
Beef
cattle
Beef
cattle
Poultry
Poultry
Type
of
study
Lab
Lab
Lab
Field
Field
Field
Field
Temperature
20°C
4°C
24°C
Ambient,
summer ,
MN
Ambient,
summer,
MN
Ambient,
summer ,
NY
Ambient,
poultry
house,
20°C
Mean
detention
time
10 days
14 days
14 days
42 daysb
23 daysb
137 days
211 days
Total
solids
reduction
53%
17%a
34%a
50%
39%
53%
43%
Total
solids
reduction
rate
5.3 %/day
1.2 %/day
2.4 %/day
1.2 %/day
,
1.7 %/day
0.38%/day
0.20%/day
Source
Vickers &
Genetelli29
Bloodgood fie
Robson28
Bloodgood &
Robson28
Moore et
_al.26
Hegg &
Larson
Ludington
et al.30
Stewart &
o -I
Mcllwain31
All
Field Ambient
years 60 to 70% 0.00%/day Miner
32
3Calculated from volatile solids reduction assuming the reported value of
83.5% total volatile solids.
One-half the total operating time was used since the system was batch type
with continuous loading.
20
-------
nitrogen concentration in the ditch had increased during the experiment. A
31
similar study done by Stewart and licllwain " showed a lower decomposition
rate for a longer detention time, but a much higher nitrogen loss of 61% to
67%.
The decomposition of organic protein in aerobic liquid manure treatment
32
was summarized (Miner ). He suggested, as was observed here, that decom-
position rates in lagoons are greatly reduced after 30 days. He also sub-
mitted that in one-and-a-half to two years 60% to 70% of the total solids
may be decomposed. It is obvious that even if nitrogen concentration in
manure increases slightly a 60% to 70% loss of this resource is expensive.
Composting of Manure
Composting is self heating thermophylic aerobic decomposition of an
organic substance. A significant amount of attention has been given to the
composting of agricultural wastes. The process has the capability of yield-
ing a stable, somewhat odorless end product from agricultural wastes (Willson
*3O Q / OC O £l O "7 OO
and Hummel ; Wells et al. ; Martin et al. ; Willson ; Howes and Miner ).
Four studies were presented from which total solids reduction rate can
be calculated. These include Willson , Caller and Davey , Wells et al.
39
and Toth and Gold , These results are shown in Table 3. The reduction rates
are relatively high. This may be due to the high temperatures (120 to 160°F)
O /r O Q Q C
encountered in composting (Willson ; Caller and Davey ; Martin et al. ;
Wells £t _al.34; Toth and Gold39 and Miner32).
Several other observations have been made with respect to decomposition
during composting. Volume reductions of 50% have been reported in 30- to 90-
36 35
day periods (Willson and Martin et al. ). Some researchers have reported
the nitrogen content was slightly enhanced while others report nitrogen losses
(Caller and Davey and Wells et al. ). Willson and Hummel reported in-
creases of nitrate levels in composted dairy manure. Changes in pH have also
been reported and generally have been found to decrease slightly initially and
thereafter increase from pH 6 to pH 8.5 in approximately three days (Martin
35 38
et al. and Caller and Davey ).
21
-------
Tatle 3. PERFORMANCE OF MANURE COMPOSTING
Manure
type
Dairy
cattle
Poultry
and
sawdust
General
Beef
cattle
Detention
time
33 days
4 days
48-84 days
10 days
Total
solids
reduction
55%
20%a
32-48%b
20%
Total
solids
reduction
rate
1.67%/day
5.0 %/day
0.50%/day
2.0 %/day
Source
Willson36
Caller &
Davey38
Toth & Gold
Wells et al
39
34
Average of values given.
On a basis of 80% organic matter in manure.
DECOMPOSITION OF MANURE IN THE FEEDLOT
Some studies have been performed that relate directly to decomposition of
whole undiluted manure in storages and on the feedlot surfaces. The element
common to all these studies is that the manure was analyzed because it might
be later utilized as a plant or animal food. For this reason, nitrogen was
analyzed in some form or another in every study and will be reviewed here as
an indicator of decomposition.
Waksman40, in his book on humus, summarized work by Egorov and by Konig
indicating decomposed horse manure had a higher protein concentration than the
fresh manure. This was attributed to microbial syntheses of protein using
non-protein nitrogen as a source. These statements should be viewed in con-
text since the total quantity of nitrogen was found to decrease. Also pre-
sent was a table indicating the effect of moisture content on the loss of
solids during decomposition. The results indicated that increasing the
moisture content from 30% to 50% increased the decomposition rate, but any
further moisture increase had little effect.
22
-------
Percent of Dry Material Lost as a Result
of Decomposition of Horse Manure
Percent
moisture 30 50 70
Percent reduction
in dry matter 38.5 48.2 47.8
41 18
McCalla et al. and Gilbertson et al. reported laboratory and field
studies that deal with decomposition of beef cattle manure in the feedlot.
They found, in laboratory studies, up to 90% of the nitrogen in the manure
was lost in three weeks. This may have occurred because urine was added to
the manure daily and was volatilized as ammonia. The ammonia concentration
41
was found to be high in the manure and the pH was also high (McCalla et al. ).
In four months of decomposition in the laboratory 50% of the volatile solids
of the manure was lost.
Results found in field studies were similar to the lab results by
McCalla et al. and Gilbertson et al. . Twenty-five to 75% of the nitrogen
deposited on the feedlot was lost. The nitrogen removed was 10% to 25%
18
ammonia. Nitrates made up an insignificant fraction (Gilbertson et_ al_. ).
42
A laboratory study done by Chang and Johanson has shown that substan-
tial solids are lost during decomposition of dairy wastes. Over a ten-week
period 25% to 30% of the total solids was lost. Total nitrogen was also
monitored and was found to be lost at about the same percentages as solids.
This resulted in no change in the concentration of nitrogen in the manure.
Their data also suggested that little change in fixed solids occurred over
the period, though variation was high.
Some studies have been done on the decomposition of poultry manure
(Flegal et al. and Gilbertson et al. ). Though there are basic differences
between poultry wastes and beef wastes, the decomposition that occurs pro-
duces similar products in both types of wastes. One-third of the nitrogen in
44
poultry wastes exists in the form of uric acid (Fontenot et al. ). Burnett
45
and Dondero have shown that 90% of the uric acid is converted to ammonia
during seven days of decomposition. The pH rose rapidly during decomposition,
from 7.5 to 9.0, because of high ammonia concentrations. These results com-
46
pare favorably with work done by Stewart with urine from beef cattle. In
Stewart's study, urine was added to dry soil regularly and ammonia evolution
was measured. He found that 90% of the nitrogen added by the urine was lost
23
-------
continuously after steady state was reached. Another study on the decom-
/ O
position of poultry wastes was by Flegal ejt al. . They found that in the
storage of poultry wastes only small amounts of crude protein were lost in
a month of storage. Some of the discrepancy found may be due to the fact that
the manure was fresh and wet and the ammonia produced remained in the manure.
A study by Morrison et al. on decomposition of beef cattle wastes con-
cerns the microbial properties of decomposition. They suggested that decom-
position of feedlot manure may be altered by residual antibiotics in the
manure. Since antibiotics are more persistent in cooler temperatures, decom-
position of manure in winter may be reduced. The various studies presented
here and others indicate that decomposition of manure is complex and not well
understood.
CHARACTERISTICS OF BEEF CATTLE WASTE
The characteristics of undecomposed beef cattle wastes are important in
considering their decomposition rates. This information provides not only an
initial starting point from which changes in characteristics occur, but also
an insight into the type of decomposition that may occur. The type of charac-
teristics reported also provide indicators for measuring the changes that
occur.
Characteristics of beef wastes can be divided into three categories:
physical, chemical and microbiological characteristics. Chemical charac-
teristics seem to be most widely reported, possibly because of their major
importance to the reuse of the wastes. Table 4 is a collection of common
chemical characteristics reported. Of all the constituents reported, nitrogen
content is important to nearly every reuse that might be made of manure.
Phosphorus, potassium and sulphur are important fertilizer constituents.
Sulphur, as an impurity, is also important when manure is to be burned or
pyrolyzed. Volatile solids are a measure of the organic matter contained in
the manure.
Some chemical characteristics associated with use of manure as a feed are
48 49
reported. Loehr and Clawson report manure can contain 1.7% to 2.7% fat
49
on a dry basis. Clawson also reports that manure may contain 32% crude
fiber and 42% acid detergent fiber; the lower crude fiber due to alkaline
soluble lignin being removed (Ward ).
24
-------
Table 4. CHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF BEEF CATTLE WASTES
Chemical Properties
% of dry solids
5
Volatile
N P K S solids
3.5 0.52 2.3
3.5 1.0 2.3 0.39
3.7 1.1
3.7 0.46 2.5
7.2
3.5 1.0 2.3 0.43
1.9 1.2 2.0
7.9 1.2
2.5
90
88
80
87
76
82
85
Water Dry
content, solids
% of wet production,
weight Ibs/day Source
Salter54
80 Benne55
9.5-11.4 Taiganidies5
84 10.3 Taiganidies57
3.6 Witzel53
80 Loehr48
85 McCalla41
CO
83 7.9 Taiganidies
PI 49
Clawson
Number of Values Reported
27 6
4.2 0.92 2.2 0.41
Mean
84 82
8.54
Some interest in physical properties of manure has developed in recent
years. Properties associated with handling and with drying have been reported.
Houkom et al. reported thermal characteristics and bulk density at different
moisture contents. They found that bulk density decreased with decreasing
moisture content from the 85% moisture content level. They also found that
thermal diffusivity is nearly independent of moisture content.
52
Frecks and Gilbertson reported physical properties of beef cattle
manure at two different rations. They reported properties including bulk
density and particle size distribution. They found bulk density to be inde-
pendent of the ration fed. The particles in feces from animals fed high con-
centration ration were finer than those from feces of animals fed high
roughage ration.
25
-------
Microbial properties of beef cattle wastes have been reported. Of impor-
tance to this study are data describing the types and relative magnitude of
32
organisms that exist (Miner ) . Miner reported that 1/4 to 1/3 of the fecal
53
organic matter of ruminants is in the form of microorganisms. Witzel re-
ported that by microscopic count (includes viable and non-viable organisms)
0.25 to 2 billion bacterial cells per gram exist in cattle manure. He also
found that 2% to 9% of these cells were viable aerobic bacteria. McCalla et
41
al. found 0.18 billion bacteria per ml of a 5% solids manure slurry and only
0.1 million fungi. Of the bacteria 0.3 million were found to be viable
anaerobic organisms. These data must be taken in light of a conclusion made
32
by Miner ; that the organisms appearing in the wastes are largely influenced
by the composition of the feed and the interactions of the microorganisms
present with the feed.
26
-------
REFERENCES
16. Whetstone, G. A., H. W. Parker, and D. M. Wells. 1974. Study of Cur-
rent and Proposed Practices in Animal Waste Management. EPA Publ. No.
430/9-74-003. EPA, Washington, DC.
17. Agricultural Statistics. 1973. U.S.D.A. U.S. Government Printing
Office.
18. Gilbertson, C. B., T. M. McCalla, J. R. Ellis, and W. R. Woods. 1971.
Characteristics of Manure Accumulations Removed from Outdoor Feedlots.
In: Livestock Waste Management and Pollution Abatement. ASAE, St.
Joseph, MI. p. 56-59.
19. Hall, A. D. 1910. Fertilizers and Manures. E. P. Button & Co., NY.
20. Aikman, C. M. 1894. Manures and the Principles of Manuring. William
Blackwood & Sons, Edinburg and London.
21. Shutte, Frank T. 1898. The Preservation of Barnyard Manure. In: Re-
port of Minister of Agriculture, Canadian Experiment Farm.
22. Hart, W. A. and M. E. Turner. 1965. Lagoons for Livestock Manure.
Water Pollution Control Federation Journal. 37(11):1578-1596.
Washington, DC.
23. Agnew, R. W. and R. C. Loehr. 1966. A Study of Cattle Manure Treatment
Techniques. In: Management of Farm Animal Wastes. Proceedings of the
National Symposium on Animal Waste Management. ASAE, St. Joseph, MI.
p. 81-84.
24. Schmid, L. A. and R. I. Lipper. 1969. Swine Wastes, Characterization
and Anaerobic Digestion. In: Animal Waste Management. Proceedings of
the Cornell University Conference on Animal Waste Management. New York
State College of Agriculture and Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.
p. 50-57.
25. Willrich, T. L. 1966. Primary Treatment of Swine Wastes by Lagooning.
In: Management of Farm Animal Wastes. Proceedings of the National
Symposium on Animal Waste Management. ASAE, St. Joseph, MI. p. 70-74.
26. Moore, J. A., R. E. Larson, and E. R. Allred. 1969. Study of the Use of
the Oxidation Ditch to Stabilize Beef Animal Manures in Cold Climate.
In: Animal Waste Management. Proceedings of the Cornell University
Conference on Animal Waste Management. New York State College of Agri-
culture and Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. p. 172-177.
27. Hegg, R. D. and R. E. Larson. 1972. Solids Balance in a Beef Cattle
Oxidation Ditch. In: Waste Management Research. Proceedings of the
1972 Cornell Agricultural Waste Management Conference. Cornell
University and EPA, Ithaca, NY and Washington, DC. p. 555-562.
27
-------
28. Bloodgood, D. E. and C. M. Robson. 1969. Aerobic Storage of Dairy
Cattle Manure. In: Animal Waste Management. Cornell University Con-
ference on Animal Waste Management. New York State College of Agri-
culture and Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. p. 76-80.
29. Vickers, A. F. and E. J. Genetelli. 1969. Design Parameters for the
Stabilization of Highly Organic Manure Slurries by Aeration. In:
Animal Waste Management. Proceedings of the Cornell University Con-
ference on Animal Waste Management. Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.
p. 37-49.
30. Ludington, D. C., A. T. Sobel, R. C. Loehr, and A. G. Hashimoto. 1972.
Pilot Plant Comparison of Liquid and Dry Waste Management Systems for
Poultry Manure. In: Waste Management Research. Proceedings of the 1972
Cornell Agricultural Waste Management Conference. Cornell University and
EPA, Ithaca, NY and Washington, DC. p. 569-580.
31. Stewart, T. A. and R. Mcllwain. 1971. Aerobic Storage of Poultry
Manure. In: Livestock Waste Management and Pollution Abatement.
ASAE, St. Joseph, MI. p. 261-262.
32. Miner, J. R. (Ed.). 1971. Farm Animal Waste Management. Iowa State
University, Ames, IA.
33. Wlllson, G. B. and J. W. Hummel. 1972. Aeration Rates for Rapid Com-
posting of Dairy Manure. In: Waste Management Research. Proceedings
of the 1972 Cornell Agricultural Waste Management Conference. Cornell
University, Ithaca, NY. p. 145-158.
34. Wells, D. M., R. C. Albin, W. Grub, and R. Z. Wheaton. 1969. Aerobic
Decomposition of Solid Wastes from Cattle Feedlots. In: Animal Waste
Management. Proceedings of the Cornell University Conference on Animal
Waste Management. Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. p. 58-62.
35. Martin, J. H., M. Decker, and K. C. Das. 1972. Windrow Composting of
Swine Wastes. In: Waste Management Research. Proceedings of the 1972
Cornell Agricultural Waste Management Conference. Cornell University
and EPA, Ithaca, NY and Washington, DC. p. 159-172.
36. Willson, G. B. 1971. Composting Dairy Cow Wastes. In: Livestock
Waste Management and Pollution Waste Abatement. ASAE, St. Joseph, MI.
p. 163-165.
37. Howes, J. R. 1966. On-Site Composting of Poultry Manure. In: Manage-
ment of Farm Animal Wastes. Proceedings of the National Symposium on
Animal Waste Management. ASAE, St. Joseph, MI. p. 68-69.
38. Caller, W. S. and C. B. Davey. 1971. High Rate Poultry Composting with
Sawdust. In: Livestock Waste Management and Pollution Abatement. ASAE,
St. Joseph, MI. p. 159-162.
28
-------
39. Toth, S. J. and B. Gold. 1971. Composting. In: Agricultural Wastes:
Principles and Guidelines for Practical Solutions. Proceedings of the
Cornell University Conference on Agricultural Waste Management. New
York State College and Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. p. 115-120.
40. Waksman, S. A. 1938. Humus. The Williams & Wilkins Co., Baltimore, MD.
41. McCalla, T. M., L. R. Frederick, and G. L. Palmer. 1970. Manure Decom-
position and Fate of Breakdown Products in the Soil. In: Agricultural
Practices and Water Quality. Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA.
p. 241-255.
42. Chang, A. C. and J. B. Johanson. 1975. Decomposition of Dairy Cattle
Wastes Deposited on Simulated Corral Surfaces. ASAE Paper No. 75-4029.
St. Joseph, MI.
43. Flegal, D. J., C. C. Sheppard, and D. A. Dorn. 1972. The Effects of
Continuous Recycling and Storage on Nutrient Quality of Dehydrated
Poultry Waste. In: Waste Management Research. Proceedings of the 1972
Cornell Agricultural Waste Management Conference. Cornell University
and EPA, Ithaca, NY and Washington, DC. p. 295-300.
44. Fontenot, A. N., Bhattacharya, C. L. Drake, and W. H. McClure. 1966.
Value of Broiler Litter as Feed for Ruminants. In: Management of Farm
Animal Wastes. Proceedings of the National Symposium on Animal Waste
Management. ASAE, St. Joseph, MI. p. 105-108.
45. Burnett, W. E. and N. C. Dondero. 1969. Microbiological and Chemical
Changes in Poultry Manure Associated with Decomposition and Odor Gene-
ration. In: Animal Waste Management. Cornell University Conference on
Animal Waste Management. New York State College of Agriculture and
Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. p. 105-108.
46. Stewart, B. A. 1970. Volatilization and Nitrification of Nitrogen from
Urine Under Simulated Cattle Feedlot Conditions. Environmental Science
and Technology 4:7.
47. Morrison, S. M., D. W. Grant, M. P. Nevins, and K. Elmund. 1969. Role
of Excreted Antibiotic in Modifying Microbial Decomposition of Feedlot
Waste. In: Animal Waste Management. Cornell University Conference on
Animal Waste Management. New York State College of Agriculture and
Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. p. 336-339.
48. Loehr, R. C. 1968. Pollution Implications of Animal Wastes A For-
ward Oriented Review. EPA Water Pollution Control Research Series
13040-07/68. Republished 1973, EPA.
49. Clawson, W. J. 1971. Economies of Recovery and Distribution of Animal
Wastes. Journal of Animal Science. 32:816-820.
50. Ward, G. M. 1974. Personal Communication.
51. Houkom, R. L., A. F. Butchbaker, and G. H. Brusewitz. 1972. Thermal
Properties of Beef Manure. ASAE Paper No. 72-316. St. Joseph, MI.
29
-------
52. Frecks, G. A. and C. B. Gilbertson. 1973. The Effect of Ration on the
Engineering Properties of Beef Cattle Manure. ASAE Paper No. 73-422.
St. Joseph, MI.
53. Witzel, S. A., E. McCoy, L. B. Polkowski, D. J. Atfoe, and M. S. Nichols.
1966. Physical, Chemical and Bacteriological Properties of Farm Wastes.
In: Management of Farm Animal Wastes. Proceedings of the National
Symposium on Animal Waste Management. ASAE, St. Joseph, MI. p. 10-14.
54. Salter, R. N. and C. J. Schollenberger. 1939. Farm Manure. Ohio
Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin #605, Wooster, OH.
55. Benne, E. J., C. R. Hoglund, F. D. Longnecker, and R. L. Cook. 1961.
Animal Manures What Are They Worth Today? Circular #231, Cooperative
Extension Service, Michigan State University Experiment Station, East
Lansing, MI.
56. Taiganidies, E. P. 1964. Disposal of Animal Wastes. In: Proceedings
of the 19th Industrial Waste Conference. Purdue Engineering Extension
Series 117- Lafayette, IN. p. 281-290.
57. Taiganidies, E. P. 1964. Properties of Farm Animal Excreta. ASAE
Paper No. 64-315. St. Joseph, MI.
58. Taiganidies, E. P- and R. L. Stroshine. 1971. Impact of Farm Animal
Production and Processing on the Total Environment. In: Livestock
Waste Management and Pollution Abatement. ASAE, St. Joseph, MI.
p. 95-98.
30
-------
SECTION VI
LABORATORY STUDY ON EFFECT OF ENVIRONMENT ON MANURE QUALITY
GENERAL
Decomposition rates of feedlot wastes have been measured in the field by
taking samples over a period of time. This method lacks the flexibility to
control environmental conditions. Not only must the wastes be studied over
different seasons, transient environmental conditions exist during the
ageing. For these reasons a complete field study becomes long and complex.
More importantly the effects of environmental parameters are difficult to
ascertain. In the laboratory an experiment can be organized where important
environmental parameters may be controlled independently. For these reasons
a laboratory study was undertaken to determine some of the effects of environ-
ment on the decomposition rates of the feedlot wastes.
Decomposition of beef cattle wastes occurs mainly through bacterial
action. The factors affecting the decomposition of these wastes are the same
factors that affect the growth rates of bacteria. These factors may be
divided into three categories:
1. Suitability of the substrate used by the bacteria;
2. The external environment, and
3. The type of bacterial population present.
The factors that compose these conditions are the independent parameters that
need to be examined in studying the decomposition of feedlot wastes.
The composition of the wastes, since they are food for the bacteria, are
important to growth rates. Composition may be affected by environment or by
bacterial action. Water content of manure is a composition parameter which
is decreased through drying on the feedlot surface. Change in this parameter
occurs mainly as a direct result of the surrounding environment. For this
reason and because bacterial growth is dependent on it, water content was
chosen as one of the independent variables for this study. Other
31
-------
compositional parameters change more slowly and are affected mainly by
bacterial action. For this reason the initial values of these variables
are mainly dependent on the particular sample taken. To limit the number of
independent variables, a sample representative of average beef cattle wastes
was taken. This sample was large and well mixed so that all manure used in
this portion of the study would have a relatively constant initial composition.
The type of bacterial population present in the manure is mainly a
property of the particular sample of manure. This parameter is therefore
fixed as are the other compositional variables.
The external environment of the manure in the feedlot influences the
decomposition rate. The temperature of the manure, as affected by its
environment, influences bacterial growth rates. For this reason temperature
was chosen as an independent parameter. The effect of bacteria-killing
radiation was neglected since it influences only the surface of the manure,
and the surface is only a small portion of the total volume.
The external environment includes variables that influence the com-
position of the wastes directly. These include humidity and oxygen content
of the air. Humidity affects the water content and is fixed at equilibrium
values for water contents modeled. The oxygen content and other components in
the air should be similar to feedlot conditions in order to achieve realistic
decomposition rates and were assumed to be so in the laboratory air. The
physical density of the manure must also be maintained similar to feedlot
conditions to provide similar diffusion rates. The density was controlled by
compacting the manure as much as possible to simulate feedlot conditions.
The three major independent variables considered are then temperature of
the manure, moisture content of the manure, and time. Levels of the tem-
perature and moisture were set at values similar to field conditions. The
temperature levels chosen were 120°F, 80°F and 40°F. Since little bacterial
action occurs below 40°F, lower temperatures were not selected.
Moisture content levels were set at 70%, 50% and 30%. These levels were
selected since they are levels at which decomposition would be expected in
the field.
Three levels of temperature and moisture content yield nine different
cases to examine with respect to time. Manure for the 120°F and 80°F levels
was sampled every other day for ten days, yielding six samples including the
initial sample. Manure for the 40°F level was sampled every other day for
32
-------
the first four days and every other day for the 16th through the 20th days,
yielding six samples for each case. The longer period of time was used for
the 40°F level because a slow decomposition rate was expected.
Methods of measuring decomposition were based on the manure's expected
reuse. Decomposition can be viewed in the case of feedlot manure as break-
down and loss of utilizable components. Therefore, the type of use planned
for the manure will determine the components measured to monitor decomposition.
Physical and chemical properties were measured and monitored. The
physical properties included viscosity, squeezability and odor. The chemical
properties included total nitrogen, protein nitrogen, pH, acid detergent
fiber (ADF), ash and dry matter. These parameters may be used to describe
manure's potential as a feed, fertilizer and fuel.
PROCEDURES AND EQUIPMENT
The methods used throughout this study can be divided into four
categories:
1. Collection and preparation of manure;
2. Ageing the manure:
3. Analysis of the manure, and
4. Analysis of the data.
In collection and preparation of the manure, approximately 175 pounds of
fresh manure was gathered. The manure was collected from animals of various
ages on standard feedlot rations. The manure was collected during a one-day
period as the fresh manure was deposited on the feedlot.
After collection the manure was placed in a single batch and well mixed.
The manure was then spread on a plastic surface in the shade. A one-half inch
layer of the manure was formed and stirred regularly. The manure samples
were removed when desired moisture content was reached. The 70% moisture
content level was reached within two hours, and the 50% level was reached in
12 hours. The 30% moisture level was reached within 40 hours. The average
temperature for the period was near 75°F, and the relative humidity was very
low.
After the samples were collected at the various moisture content levels,
they were immediately frozen in galvanized pans that would be used later to
age the manure. The manure was stored after freezing in sealed plastic bags
and stored at 0°F temperature.
33
-------
As the samples were used, they were removed from cold storage and thawed
at room temperature for 12 hours.
Ageing of the manure was done in the galvanized pans in a controlled
temperature humidity chamber. After thawing, they were brought to the proper
temperature. The initial sample for analyses was taken after the batch
reached the proper temperature. The humidity of the chamber was set at a
value that would maintain the proper moisture content in the samples. Samples
for analyses were taken on the schedule mentioned previously. A two-quart
volume was taken at each sampling. The sample was divided in half and one
part frozen and stored at 0°F for chemical analysis. The other half of the
sample was used for analysis of physical properties and the analysis was done
immediately after collection.
Three physical properties were measured on the manure samples: bulk
density, viscosity, squeezability and odor. Viscosity was measured on a 15%
solids slurry of the manure at a temperature of 26°C. A Brookfield RVT vis-
cometer was used with a No. 3 spindle to measure viscosity. This viscometer
rotates a spindle in the manure and measures the resulting torque which can
be related to viscosity. Shear rate is then directly proportional to spindle
speed. The power law was used to model viscosity which was measured at
different spindle speeds. The resulting model is:
y = K(SS)n
where: K,n = constants
y = viscosity in centipoise
SS = spindle speed.
Squeezability was performed to evaluate the amount of liquid that could
be pressed from a 15% solids slurry of the samples. A potato ricer was used
as the press. The ricer used had a 3 inch diameter piston and cup. The cup
was perforated with 3/16 inch holes. A 400 g portion of a 15% solids slurry
was placed in the ricer and pressed, then stirred until liquid stopped passing
the press.
Odor on the samples was noted before performing any of the analysis, but
after the sample had been cooled or warmed to room temperature. A note of
intensity and of the characteristics of the odor was recorded.
34
-------
The methods of chemical analysis used in this portion of the study were
the same as used in the field study and can be found in that Section.
The data, except for odor, were analyzed statistically. A two-way
analysis of variance was performed with respect to temperature and moisture
content, with time included as a covariance. Variables that had significant
effects were analyzed further for rate of change for each parameter for each
temperature and moisture combination. The rates of change for each parameter
were compared.
Regression coefficients were computed for each temperature and moisture
content combination. This meant that each parameter's rate of change was
found for each temperature moisture content combination. A weighted least
squares analysis was used and yielded a slope (b) that was assumed to be
normally distributed. An F ratio test was then used to test the following
hypotheses:
1. That the slope for each temperature (adjusted for moisture content)
was the same.
2. That the slope for each moisture content (adjusted for temperature)
was the same.
3. That the interaction of temperature and moisture content causes a
difference in the slopes.
RESULTS
Significant changes with respect to time were observed in five para-
meters. Chemical parameters undergoing changes were ammonia, ADF and ash,
and physical properties undergoing changes were viscosity and squeezability.
Of the chemical parameters, ammonia underwent the greatest overall change
with respect to time, a decrease of 35%. This is relatively unimportant,
however, as ammonia is only 3% to 4% of the total nitrogen and 0.05% to 0.1%
of the total dry matter. The greatest change in ammonia occurred at a
temperature of 120°F (48.8°C) and 70% moisture content as shown in Figure 3.
The change in ADF and ash was significant, but experienced a smaller
change on a percentage basis than ammonia. Ash content increased 4% overall
with a mean content of 25.6% of the dry matter. Figure 4 illustrates the
change in ash at 120°F (48.8°C) and 70% moisture content. ADF increased 3%
with a mean content of 34.1% of the dry matter. The change that occurred at
120°F (48.8°C) can be seen in Figure 5.
35
-------
fr
Q
0.15
Temperature 120°F
Moisture Content 70%
o>
4J
0.10
c
0)
00
O
4-1
H
!5
cd
H
c
O
0.05
0.0
10
Age (Days)
Figure 3. Ammonia nitrogen content of manure aged at
120°F and 70% moisture content
36
-------
28
27
t-l
-------
S-i
a)
4J
0)
J3
H
40
39
38
37
36
35
34
33
Temperature 120°F
Moisture Content 70%
Age (Days)
8
10
Figure 5. Fiber content of manure aged at
120°F and 7Q% moisture content
38
-------
No significant linear trends with time were found in pp., but a pattern
in its change occurred. During the 120°F (48.8°C) and 80°F (26.7°C) tests,
pH dropped for the first several days, then slowly increased for the duration
of the test as shown in Figure 6. This pattern was also observed to correlate
with changes in the odor of the manure. During the first several days, a
strong silage odor developed and thereafter that odor decreased and was re-
placed with a strong moldy odor. Mold-like growths were observed throughout
the manure during the latter periods of these tests.
Viscosity of the aged manure slurry increased with time. These changes
in viscosity can be portrayed as a change in the constant in the viscosity
model with time. During the ten- and 20-day tests the overall change was an
increase of 50%. Significant differences were found in rates of change of
this constant with different treatments. Higher rates of change were
associated with higher moisture contents and temperatures. Figure 7 illus-
trates the absolute value of the viscosity constant for different moisture
contents aged at 120°F (48.8°C). The viscosity constant is the actual
viscosity of the manure at a particular spindle speed of one on the
viscometer.
Squeezability exhibited a 4% overall decrease with time, with a mean of
74% passing through the press. The greatest change in squeezability occurred
during the 120°F (48.8°C) and 70% moisture content tests as shown in Figure 8.
These changes appeared to be negatively correlated with viscosity. An in-
crease in viscosity would be expected to decrease the amount passing through
the press and decrease squeezability.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
The statistical analysis of the regression coefficients indicated that
the rate of change of five of the eight dependent variables was affected by
the independent variables. The unaffected chemical concentrations in the
samples were total and protein nitrogen. Rates of change of squeezability
were also found to be the same for the different temperature and moisture
levels. This occurred though some change could be seen in the previous
analysis. The conclusion is therefore that though change in squeezability
occurs the different levels of moisture and temperature did not significantly
affect these changes.
39
-------
6.5
6.0
Temperature 120°F
Moisture Content 70%
0)
S-i
a
53
I
U-4
o
5.5
5.0
10
Age (Days)
Figure 6. pH of beef feces aged at 120°F and
70% moisture content vs. time
40
-------
0)
CO
H
O
O.
C
01
O
C
cd
4-1
co
C
o
O
4-1
H
CO
o
o
CO
16,000
14,000
-V 70% Moisture Content
-O 50% Moisture Content
-O 30% Moisture Content
Age (Days)
Figure 7. Viscosity constant of beef feces aged
at 120°F vs. time
41
-------
N
0)
0)
cr
84
82
80
7H
/0
76
74
Temperature 120°F
Moisture Content 70%
Age (Days)
Figure 8. Squeezability of manure aged at
120°F and 70% moisture content
10
42
-------
Moisture content and temperature did affect the rate of change of the
viscosity constant and exponent, ammonia, ADF and ash. The rate of change of
the viscosity constant was found to be increased by higher moisture contents
in the ageing manure. The interaction between moisture content and tem-
perature also influenced the rates of change of the viscosity constant. The
rate of change of the viscosity exponent was influenced slightly by the inter-
action of moisture content and temperature. This was caused by one point of
the rate of changes and is suspect. There is 7.6% probability that the
interaction is not significant.
Ammonia was found to be decreasing at all levels except at the lowest
moisture content and highest temperature. Ammonia's rate of change was found
to be affected by temperature and by moisture content. Higher temperatures
and higher moisture contents seemed to cause greater negative rates of change.
At the 30% level of moisture content very small rates of changes were observed
at all levels of temperature. The greatest change in odor and appearance of
the manure occurred at the higher levels of temperature and moisture content
causing greater changes in the manure's chemical properties to be expected
here.
Rates of change of ADF were found to be significantly affected by tem-
perature. The rate of increase of ADF was found to increase with temperature.
There was 99% probability that the effects were significant. The increases in
rates of concentration increase may be due to increasing losses of other
components in the manure.
The rate of change of ash increase in the manure was increased by tem-
perature. The probability that there was no significant difference between
the rates at different temperatures was 0.07%. The interaction of temperature
and moisture content was significant at the 4% level. Ash content may be
increased by bacterial decomposition, but even so in some cases it is used
as a stable component to base other concentrations on. If this was done the
nitrogen components, which showed no change in concentration, would be
actually decreasing in total quantities. This effect may be one of the most
important changes in the manure.
CONCLUSIONS
Decomposition of manure does not affect the concentrations of total and
protein nitrogen in manure, but reuse may be affected by increases in ash and
43
-------
resultant salt concentration increases. Ammonia nitrogen is lost in warm and
wet conditions. Management of the feedlot to keep manure dry during hot
weather may retard ammonia loss.
Ash and ADF are major chemical constituents in manure. The increase in
ash means conversely a decrease in organic matter and suggests shorter har-
vesting periods, since the 4% increase in this study occurred in ten to 20
days. Increases in fiber concentrations may be important to reuse, and har-
vesting schedules may be adjusted for the different seasonal temperatures.
Viscosity changes may have a significant effect on manure reuse. Any
process that uses slurried manure could develop large increases in viscosity
over relatively short periods of storage. To maintain a lower viscosity,
shorter harvesting periods may be used, while keeping the manure as dry as
possible.
44
-------
SECTION VII
FIELD STUDY ON EFFECT OF ENVIRONMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF MANURE QUALITY
INTRODUCTION
A major objective of the study was to determine the effects of environ-
ment, ration and management on manure quality. This objective can be divided
into several areas, the principal ones being the environment of surface that
the manure lies on, decomposition of the manure and the ration of the animals
that produce the manure.
The type of surface that the manure lies on is a by-product of recycling
of the manure. The concrete surfaces are used to facilitate efficient manure
harvesting. In most other cases a soil surface is used. In this study one
pen was nearly all soil with the exception of a short concrete apron next to
the bunk. Both of the other pens used had 70 foot wide concrete aprons next
to the bunk. One of these two pens had the manure harvested frequently.
Decomposition of the manure on the feedlot surface causes changes in
manure quality. Decomposition is affected by the temperature and moisture
content of manure, aside from the other properties of the manure itself. The
temperature of the environment and the moisture content of the manure were
monitored. The amount of precipitation and the time it occurred were also
recorded.
The ration of the animals that produced manure on the feedlots is im-
portant in determining the quality of the manure. In feedlots it is customary
to start lighter cattle as they enter the feedlot on a ration containing a
large amount of forage in the form of silage and/or hay and then increase the
amount of grain (i.e. corn) in the ration in a series of ration changes over
a period of 30 to 50 days. The practice at the Ceres Land Company feedlot
is to use a five step change in rations. The composition of these five
rations is shown in Table 5 together with an experimental ration (No. 6)
containing a large amount of Cereco silage, a product produced by Ceres
45
-------
Ecology Corporation from feedlot manure. Cereco silage has a chemical
composition similar to corn silage.
Table 5. COMPOSITION OF RATIONS FED TO CATTLE IN CORRALS
WHERE MANURE SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED
Components
Corn silage
Alfalfa hay
Cracked corn
Molasses
Q
Starter supplement
Finishing supplement
Cereco silage
Crude protein, %
Crude fiber, %
1
826
570
478
56
70
12.8
19.3
Starter supplement contained 14
Finishing supplement
contained
2
1464
106
340
40
50
11
16
Ration number
3456
(pounds per ton of feed)
1310 830 662
46 58 32 400
546 988 1186
44 56 60 60
54 68 60 60
1480
.0 10.7 11.0 10.8 13.1
.4 12.6 8.3 6.5 27.0
.4% crude protein.
27.8%
crude protein.
It was anticipated that there would be a correlation between the crude
fiber content of rations and the fiber components of the manure samples
analyzed. Analyses on feed samples included crude fiber while manure samples
were analyzed for the more specific fiber components, cellulose, hemi-
cellulose and lignin, as determined by the ADF and NDF methods. It is
apparent from Table 5 that there was a large variation in crude fiber content
of the rations from 6.5% to 27.0%.
A relation between crude protein of ration and the nitrogen content of
manure would be expected if there were much variation in ration content of
protein, but this is not usually the case. The protein content is higher for
46
-------
lighter, younger animals at the beginning of the feeding period, but it can
be seen in Table 5 that the protein content varied only from 10.7% to 13.1%.
The quality of manure on the feedlot surface was monitored to determine
what changes were occurring. The manure quality was recorded in terms of
chemical properties which include parameters describing manure's value as a
feed, fertilizer and fuel.
METHODS AND PROCEDURES
The methods used to accomplish the objectives of this portion of the
study can be divided into four categories:
1. Sample collection;
2. Weather data collection;
3. Sample analysis, and
4. Analysis of results.
Samples were collected from nine locations, three locations in three
pens. A sample was collected near the bunk, near the center and near the
2
back of each pen. Each sample was made of a composite collected in a 10 ft
area in the same general locations throughout the study. The manure pack was
dug to the manure surface interface so that samples reflect the quality of
the consolidated manure pack and not recent buildup. These samples differ
from the manure normally scraped from pens, which usually contain more soil-
manure material. After collection samples were placed in a polyethylene
bag and transported to the laboratory and immediately refrigerated.
Weather Data Collection
A weather data collection station was set up at the Ceres feedlots. On
a regular basis temperature, relative humidity, precipitation and average
wind speed were recorded. Unsuccessful attempts were made to continuously
measure solar radiation and evaporation potential. A United States Weather
Bureau data collection station existed within five miles at the Great Western
Sugar Company's plant. The data from this station were obtained, compared
and used to fill any blanks in temperature records.
Temperature and humidity were recorded on a hygrothermograph. Regular
measurements of temperature and humidity were made with a sling psychrometer
47
-------
to serve as a basis for calibration of the recorders. Precipitation was
collected in a standard 6 inch rain gauge.
GENERAL LABORATORY PROCEDURES
Preparation of Samples
Mix wet sample thoroughly. Remove one to two pounds and place in
drying pan. Dry in 65° oven (drying room) for 48 hours. Remove and let air
equilibrate for 48 hours.
Grind in Wiley mill to pass through 1 mm screen.
1. pE Read from wet sample with standard pH meter. (May add dis-
tilled H20 as needed.)
2. Dry matter Weigh wet sample (about 20 grams) into dry matter tin
and place in 105°C oven for 48 hours. Remove and place in
desiccator for 30 minutes to cool. Weigh.
Calculations: % Dry Matter = g* &*"> I *" * 100
Wet (grams) - Tare
Nitrogen Fractions
1. Nitrogen determination (total nitrogen)
Use the Micro-Kjeldahl procedure according to method outlined by
Laitinen, H. A. and W. E. Harris, Chemical Analysis, Second Edition,
197559.
2. Protein nitrogen determination
Weigh 0.1 to 0.2 grams (dry) sample into test tube. Add 2.5 ml of
30% trichloroacetic acid (TCA) solution. Mix thoroughly with
Vortex mixer. Let stand for one hour with occasional mixing. Cen-
trifuge for 15 minutes. Decant supernant. Wash precipitate with
distilled H^O. Centrifuge. Decant supernant. Transfer pre-
cipitate into Kjeldahl flask using distilled H20. Follow Micro-
Kjeldahl procedure .
3. Determination of ammonia
Ammonia, nitrate and nitrite were determined using steam dis-
tillation methods as outlined by Bremner, J. M. and D. R. Keeny,
0
48
Anal. Chem. Acta 32:485-495 (1965)60. (This method is used
-------
routinely by the Nitrogen Laboratory of the Agricultural Research
Service, U.S.D.A., Fort Collins, CO.)
4. Determination of amino acid nitrogen
Weighed samples were introduced into acid-washed pyrex tubes with
1 ml constant boiling 6N HCl. Using an oxygen-gas flame, a con-
striction was formed one- third of the way from the top of the tube.
The tube was sealed. Hydrolysis occurred in an 110°C oven for 24
hours. The HCl was evaporated under vacuum. The sample was re-
constituted with pH 2.2 sodium citrate buffer to achieve approxi-
mately a 0.05 to 0.10 ymole amount of each amino acid. Analysis
was performed on 1 ml using a single column, accelerated method of
Spackman et al.
5. Urea-Nitrogen by urease v
A. Weigh out approximately 0.1 g of sample into Kjeldahl flask.
B. Add 20 ml distilled H«0 and sufficient urease (based on form
and concentration of urease solution) . We used a liquid form
containing 75 mg/ml to react with 100? of the sample based on
sample weight. Allow to set at room temperature (22 °C) for
20 minutes and steam distill immediately for 10 minutes. Catch
distillate in boric acid (20 g/1) and 2 drops indicator
solution (methyl red, methylene blue) (make sure condenser tip
is below surface of boric acid- indicator solution) . Titrate
with dilute HCl.
C. Run a blank (sample but no urease) with each duplicate set of
samples and make correction for the blank.
D. Calculate mg urea/g sample desired as follows:
, , 60.0559 / ,
mg N/g sample x = mg urea/g sample
NITROGEN FRACTIONS
Samples were routinely analyzed for total nitrogen, protein nitrogen as
indicated by trichloroacetic acid precipitation and ammonia. Non-protein
Since no information was available for urea N determination in feedlot
manure, this procedure was developed after personal consultation with Dr.
Gestur Johnson of the Colorado State University Biochemistry Department.
49
-------
nitrogen was also calculated from the difference between total nitrogen and
protein nitrogen. There is no rapid chemical method for determination of
true protein while amino acid analyses are expensive. The conventional
method is to estimate true protein in a variety of products as the nitrogen
precipitable by specific acids. The most commonly used is trichloroacetic
acid, although tungstic acid is also extensively used. A recent paper com-
pared trichloroacetic (TCA), tungstic, perchloric and picric acid for pre-
fi?
cipitation of microbial protein from rumen fluid (Barr et al. ) . Tri-
chloroacetic acid proved to be the most effective. This result is relevant
to our work, as a majority of the nitrogen in fecal material is microbial,
£*\ si
according to Mason . Knight , however, showed tungstic acid to be some-
what more efficient than TCA for microbial protein precipitation.
In order to evaluate the estimates of protein by TCA and tungstic acid
precipitation, we made a few comparisons of these estimates with amino acid
nitrogen determinations. Amino acid determinations were made on three sam-
ples of manure and two samples of a manure-derived product (C-ll) . The data
presented in Table 6 indicates that amino acid N was slightly less than pro-
tein estimates by TCA or tungstic acid. Tryptophan, however, was not in-
cluded because this requires a separate determination for this one amino acid.
TCA precipitate tended to be slightly higher than tungstic acid estimates but
not significantly so.
Table 6. NITROGEN COMPARISON (mg N/g)
Sample
CII (4/8)
CII (6/16)
Sample No. 8
Sample No. 114
Sample No. 153
Kj eldahl-N
41.42
43.56
15.57
21.48
18.28
TCA-N
21.10
23.60
9.89
13.66
10.76
Tungstic
acid-N
18.56
20.16
9.41
10.90
9.61
Q
Amino
acid-N
21.80
23.88
8.01
9.67
9.46
Tryptophan is not included in the amino acid analysis.
50
-------
Nitrate-Nitrogen Analysis
Nitrate-nitrogen levels in feedlot manure were investigated on ten sam-
ples randomly selected for analysis. Initial test consisted of a Kjeldahl
procedure modified to include nitrate-nitrogen and no significant amounts of
nitrate-nitrogen were produced. These results seemed to warrant a more sen-
sitive test which was carried out by the U.S.D.A. Agricultural Research
Center under direction of Dr. Lynn Porter and Dr. Fred Norstadt using a
Technicon Auto-Analyzer II. Duplicate samples were taken, and extraction of
nitrate-nitrogen involved two different procedures: one using an Ag-SO,-
CuSO, complex and the other simple distilled ELO extraction. Analyses from
both extraction procedures were similar (Table 7). Expressed in ppm the
BLO extracted samples showed a high of 2.4 and low of 0.74 ppm. Similarly
the Ag-SO.-CuSO, extraction showed 2.3 to 0.3 ppm of nitrate-nitrogen. Nit-
rate-nitrogen in feedlot manure appears to be very low, averaging 1.44 ppm.
This is a very small percentage of the non-protein nitrogen (Total N-TCA-N)
in these samples. NPN averaged about 10 mg of N per gram of dry sample and
NEL-N about 1 mg-N while 1 ppm of NO--N is equivalent to only 0.001 mg of
NO,-N per gram of sample.
Procedure (Jackson )
1. Weigh 5 grams of sample into a 125 ml flask and add 50 ml of
extracting solution (dilute 20 ml of IN CuSO^ and 100 ml 0.6%
Ag.SO, to 1 liter).
2. Stopper the flask and shake on a wrist-action shaker for 10
minutes.
3. Stop the shaker, add O.OSg Ca(OH)2, and then shake 5 more minutes.
4. Stop the shaker, add 0.2g MgCO«, and then shake 5 more minutes.
5. Filter the solution through Whatman No. 42 filter paper.
6. Filtrate was analyzed for nitrate-nitrogen using the Technicon
Auto-Analyzer II.
Results from this procedure are shown in Table 7.
This procedure was repeated with a duplicate sample using 50 ml of dis-
tilled ELO as extracting solution in step 1.
51
-------
Table 7. TOTAL NITROGEN IN WATER BY KJELDAHL
METHOD MODIFIED TO INCLUDE NITRATE
Sample
8
30
56
101
114
142
153
181
195
204
H20 Extraction,
ppm
2.4
1.48
1.4
2.16
1.72
1.16
0.74
0.8
1.7
1.06
Average 1.46 ppm
Nitrate-nitrogen
AgoSO^CuSO^
extraction, ppm
2.3
1.5
1.4
1.56
2.3
0.9
0.3
0.8
1.9
1.1
Average 1.41 ppm
Procedure (Bremner )
1. Weigh 0.1 to 0.2 grams of sample into a clean 100 ml Kjeldahl flask.
2. Add 60 ml digestion acid (dissolve 10 grams of salicylic acid in
600 ml concentrated H,,SO,), stopper the flask and allow to stand
overnight.
3. Add 0.5 grams of NaS_0_ 5H-0 using a long stem funnel. Add 2
boiling chips.
4. Heat cautiously at low heat on the digestion rack until frothing
has ceased.
5. Cool the flask and add 2.2 grams of Kjeldahl catalyst (refer to
Kjeldahl procedure) and digest the contents of the flask on the
*Results from this procedure were compared to values for standard Kjeldahl
and results are shown in Table 8.
52
-------
Table 8. COMPARISON OF STANDARD KJELDAHL AND KJELDAHL
MODIFIED TO INCLUDE NITRATES
Sample
8
30
56
101
114
142
153
181
195
204
Standard
Kjeldahl,
Tng N/g
15.53
23.60
20.46
23.22
20.05
29.65
18.99
22.90
31.63
23.32
Kjeldahl modified
to include nitrates,
mg N/g
16.00
22.75
21.10
22.60
21.48
30.98
18.28
23.23
31.66
24.89
digestion rack for 3 hours, swirling intermittently to wash down any
particles that stick to the sides of the flask.
6. Cool and add 25 ml of distilled F-20.
7. Distill according to Kjeldahl procedure.
ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES FOR FIBER FRACTIONS
Neutral-detergent (cell-wall)
1. Weigh 0.1 to 0.2 gram of air-dried sample ground to pass 1 mm or
equivalent into a beaker of the refluxing apparatus.
2. Add in order, 50 ml cold (room temperature) neutral-detergent
solution, 1 ml decahydronaphthalene, and 0.3 gram sodium sulfite
with a calibrated scoop. Heat to boiling in 5 to 10 minutes.
Reduce heat as boiling begins, to avoid foaming. Adjust boiling to
an even level and reflux for 60 minutes, timed from onset of
boiling.
53
-------
3. Place previously tared Gooch crucibles on filter manifold. Swirl
beaker to suspend solids, and fill crucible. Do not admit vacuum
until after crucible has been filled. Use low vacuum at first and
increase it only as more force is needed. Rinse sample into cru-
cible with minimum of hot (90° to 100°C) water. Remove vacuum,
break up mat, and fill crucible with hot water. Filter liquid and
repeat washing procedure.
4. Wash twice with acetone in same manner and suck dry. Dry crucibles
at 100°C for 8 hours or overnight and weigh.
5. Report yield of recovered neutral-detergent fiber as percent of
cell-wall constituents. Estimate cell soluble material by sub-
tracting this value from 100.
Acid-detergent Fiber
1. Weigh 0.2 to 0.3 grams air-dried sample ground to pass 20- to 30-
mesh (1mm) screen or the approximate equivalent of wet material
into a beaker suitable for refluxing.
2. Add 50 ml cold (room temperature) acid-detergent solution and 1 ml
decahydronaphthalene. Heat to boiling in 5 to 10 minutes. Reduce
heat as boiling begins, to avoid foaming. Reflux 60 minutes from
onset of boiling; adjust boiling to a slow, even level.
3. Filter on a previously tared Gooch crucible, which is set on the
filter manifold; use light suction. Break up the filtered mat with
a rod and wash twice with hot water (90° to 100°C). Rinse sides of
the crucible in the same manner.
4. Repeat wash with acetone until it- removes no more color; break up
all lumps so that the solvent comes into contact with all particles
of fiber.
5. Dry crucible at 100°C for 8 hours or overnight and weigh.
6. Calculate acid-detergent fiber:
(W - WJ (100)/S = ADF
o t
where: W - weight of oven-dried crucible including fiber
o
W = tared weight of oven-dried crucible
S = oven-dried sample weight.
54
-------
Acid-detergent Lignin
1. Prepare the acid-detergent fiber.
2. Add to a crucible the acid-detergent fiber. Cover the contents of
the crucible with cooled (15°C), 72% H2SO, and stir with a glass
rod to a smooth paste, breaking all lumps. Fill crucible about
half full with acid and stir. Let glass rod remain in crucible;
refill with 72% H2SO^ and stir at hourly intervals as acid drains
away. Crucibles do not need to be kept full at all times. Three
additions suffice. Keep crucible at 20° to 23°C. After 3 hours,
filter off as much acid as possible with vacuum; then wash contents
with hot water until free from acid. Rinse and remove stirring rod,
3. Dry crucible at 100°C and weigh.
4. Ignite crucible in a muffle furnace at 450°C for 8 hours, and then
cool and weigh.
5. Calculate acid-detergent lignin:
(L x 100)/S = acid-detergent lignin
where: L = loss upon ignition after 72% H~SO, treatment
S = oven-dried sample weight.
Analytical methods for the fiber fraction followed closely those out-
lined in the publication: Forage Fiber Analysis
These analytical procedures also allow calculations of additional com-
ponents as follows:
Insoluble ash (ash insoluble in acid detergent) can be determined by
recording the ash resulting from the ashing step in the lignin procedure.
Cellulose = ADF - (Lignin + Insoluble ash)
Hemicellulose (N-uncorrected) = NDF - ADF
Methods for Mineral Analyses
Ash determination was made by ignition in a muffle furnace at 650°C for
8 hours or overnight.
Calcium, sodium and potassium were determined by atomic absorption on
wet ashed sample by methods as outlined by Instrumental Methods for Analysis
of Soils and Plant Tissue .
55
-------
Phosphorous determination was by the method as outlined in Soil Clinical
Analysis
Mercury and cadmium method Samples were plasma ashed. The ash was
taken up in HC1. The HC1 extract is evaluated by atomic absorption spec-
troscopy by flameless excitation with carbon rods.
PRELIMINARY STUDY OF ANALYTICAL METHODS
A series of four replicate determinations was made at the beginning of
the research project in order to evaluate the reproducibility for each method.
The results of this investigation are shown in Table 9 and indicate that ash
determinations were the most reproducible, followed by Kjeldahl nitrogen.
Lignin determinations resulted in the greatest error as a percentage but this
was due to the fact that lignin represents a much smaller percentage of the
sample.
Routine analyses were performed on duplicate samples and if the dif-
ference between samples was greater than 7% the analysis was repeated. As a
result, it was necessary to repeat many lignin samples.
Data Analysis
The data collected in the field study included 139 samples of manure.
Eighty-four samples had complete chemical analyses and all 139 had all
analyses except lignin and ADF insoluble ash. Some samples had mineral
and heavy metal analyses. The data that made up the independent variables in-
cluded the protein and fiber content of the ration, the mean temperature for
the period before sample collection, precipitation and location in the pen of
the sampling, since these were the properties expected to be most closely
related and affected by environmental conditions.
A statistical analysis was performed on the data in order to relate the
independent variables, such as location in pen, mean temperature and chemical
properties of the ration, to the chemical properties of the manure. A mul-
tiple regression analysis was used which revealed any important linear
relationships. The squared values of the independent variables were also
tested to reveal any relationships with the dependent variables. The
statistical analyses were also run on an ash-free basis since error due to
sand and dirt, a major part of the ash fraction, could be eliminated.
56
-------
Table 9. REPRODOCIBILITY OF ANALYTICAL MFTHODS
Cn
Sample
No.
12A
B
C
D
13A
B
C
D
14A
B
C
D
15A
B
C
D
16A
B
C
D
17A
B
C
D
ISA
B
C
D
Kjeldahl-N
Max. Z
differ-
ing N/g ence
21.98
21.67 4.23
21.05
21.16
31.08
29.85 3.96
30.28
30.14
30.35
30.94 2.26
30.43
30.24
19.63
19.85 2.59
19.56
20.08
22.71
23.22 4.58
23.69
23.80
27.08
25.45 6.09
25.43
25.82
21.99
21.58 3.41
21.89
21.24
TCA ppt-S
Max. Z
differ-
g N/g ence
12.63
12.10 7.35
13.06
12.73
17.05
17.69 9.50
16.82
16.01
18.86
18.19 3.96
18.94
18.24
11.84
11.52 2.95
11.65
11.87
14.33
14.88 7.66
14.70
13.74
16.57
16.18 7.54
15.59
15.32
14.61
14.67 6.34
13.74
14.45
Aomonla
Max. Z
differ-
g H/g ence
2.59
2.56 3.47
2.50
2.52
5.13
4.88 8.10
5.31
5.21
4.92
4.93 2.96
5.06
4.91
2.63
2.76 4.71
2.71
2.63
3.56
3.69 4.88
3.59
3.51
3.31
3.43 6.71
3.20
3.43
3.17
3.04 6.94
3.01
2.95
Ash
Max. Z
Z differ-
Ash ence
40.9
40.1 2.7
39.9
39.8
22.6
22.6 1.7
23.0
22.7
23.8
24.0 1.7
23.6
23.9
45.4
46.7 4.2
47.4
47.0
36.4
37.5 3.7
36.5
37.8
30.0
30.7 3.2
31.0
30.5
41.6
40.9 1.7
41.3
41.1
ADF
Max. Z
Z dlffer-
ADF ence
43.1
41.4 5.69
43.9
42.0
24.5
22.8 9.39
24.5
22.2
24.7
23.6 5.22
24.9
24.4
43.9
44.9 2.66
45.1
44.4
36.0
37.3 3.49
37.0
37.1
29.4
27.7 8.28
29.1
30.2
35.2
36.9 6. 88
37.8
37.4
NDF
Max. Z
Z differ-
NDF ence
48.5
47.1 4.46
48.1
49.3
34.0
35.4 5.08
34.0
33.6
34.1
36.0 7.84
35.1
37.0
47.3
47.5 3.86
48.4
49.2
39.2
39.0 7.55
39.6
42.4
37.4
37.2 8.60
37.5
40.7
44.2
43.0 5.B4
44.5
41.9
Llgnln
Max. Z
Z dlffer-
Lignln ence
6.8
6.0 11.76
6.2
6.4
3.2
3.2 15.79
3.3
3.8
3.7
4.2 17.78
4.4
4.5
3.5
3.9 17.95
3.9
3.2
2.4 8.00
2.3
2.5
3.0
3.1 14.81
2.7
3.1
3.8
3.0 25.00
4.0
3.1
-------
me effect of precipitation on the sanpies was not analyzed by
statistical analysis but by inspection. The precipitation was expected to
affect only the moisture content and the ash content due to mixing with raid.
RESULTS
The average composition for all manure sables is presented in Table 10,
representing 139 samples (only 83 samples vere analyzed for lignin and in-
soluble ash) collected over a period of one year fron three locations in the
feedlot and representing six different rations. The data presented here are
probably the best averages that one could have for the composition of manure
collected from Colorado feedlots. The analyses are also presented on an ash-
free basis because ash represents such a large percentage of the samples on
a dry weight basis. The overall average for ash was 37.14% and according to
location in the corrals ranged from an average of 30.7% to 42.9%. The sam-
pling was made above the obvious soil interface as compared to mechanical
scraping which always collects more soil and thus more ash.
All components are expressed as a percentage of dry matter because the
dry matter content of samples varied with rainfall and temperature. The
overall dry matter percentage was 58.8% and it is interesting that the stan-
dard error of this mean was only 1.72, which was no greater than the
variation for other organic constituents. As expected, the samples from near
the bunk were higher in moisture than those at the rear of the pens.
The analyses presented in Table 11 on dry matter basis are the most re-
presentative value for the description of manure that might be harvested
from feedlots. However, for comparison of the organic components of manure
as harvested, it is probably best to make comparisons on the ash-free dry
matter basis and so emphasis will be placed on these values.
Total nitrogen in all samples averaged 3.67% and protein nitrogen as
estimated by trichloroacetic acid (TCA) precipitation was 2.35. Ash-free
data indicate a slight decrease in the rear of pens in total nitrogen, non-
protein nitrogen and ammonia nitrogen, but not TCA-nitrogen, probably in-
dicating some loss of ammonia nitrogen under drier conditions. For all
samples, true protein nitrogen represented 65% of all the nitrogen and most
/^O
of the true protein is probably microbial (Mason ). Non-protein nitrogen
then represented 35% of the nitrogen and only about one-half was due to
58
-------
Ul
VO
2.32
0.48
3.67
0.38
Table 10. OVERALL AVERAGES OF MANURE CONSTITUENTS'
%
Kjeldahl
total
nitrogen
TCA
true
protein
nitrogen NH_-N
%
Dry % %
pH matter Ash ADF
%b
, Hemi-
% % cellu-
NDF Lignin lose
ADF
insol-
uble
ash
Cellu-
lose15
Overall Averages of Manure Constituents (% dry matter)
1.47 0.31 7.09 58.96 37.14 37.98 45.92 5.31 7.72*
0.25 0.15 0.07 1.72 1.01 0.94 0.78
Overall Averages of Manure Constituents Ash Free (% of dry matter)
2.35 0.47 7.09 58.96 45.68 55.22 8.58 9.54
0.19
0.21
0.07
1.72
1.68
1.4
0.49
Values below means are standard errors of the mean.
Represents only 83 samples.
21.73b 9.63b
0.98
-------
Table 11. OVERALL AVERAGE BY LOCATION IN THE FEEDPEN (% Dry Matter)
Dry
Location pH matter
% True
Total protein
nitrogen , nitrogen
Kleldahl TCA
% Non- Hemi- %
NHg-N protein cellu- Cellu-
nitrogen lose lose
All Samples (dry
Bunk 7.05 53.21
Center 7.15 63.51
Back 7.07 60.49
Bunk
Center
Back
2.61 1.62
2.28 1.46
2.07 1.34
All Samples
3.75 2.34
3.64 2.35
3.60 2.36
0.37
0.29
0.27
(ash-free
0.52
0.44
0.46
Lignin Ash ADF NDF
matter)
0.99
0.82
0.74
dry
0.99
0.82
0.74
7.62 28.28
8.82 31.79
7.43 34.32
matter)
10.86
14.15
12.38
5.25 30.66 33.67 41.42
5.26 37.96 38.34 47.15
5.41 42.90 43.08 49.46
__ __
-------
ammonia nitrogen. About one-fourth as indicated in the methods section, may
have been due to urea as indicated by a few samples. The remaining non-
protein-nitrogen source is unidentified. The average pH for all samples was
7.34 with little real variation by location.
The fiber components, hemicellulose and cellulose, derived from neutral
detergent (NDF) and acid detergent fiber (ADF), can be calculated only on an
ash-free basis because there is a large component of acid detergent insoluble
ash in the ADF fraction. The calculation of hemicellulose may include a
small amount of insoluble nitrogen. The overall average for NDF was 55.2%
which represents the percentage of cell-wall material found in the samples.
If nitrogen of 3.67 is calculated as protein (X6.25), this would represent
22.9% of the organic fraction. This would be an overestimate of nitrogenous
compounds, of course. The lipid content was estimated to be 5% to 7% (Table
16, under lipid analysis). The sum of cell-wall constituents, soluble nit-
rogenous compounds and lipids would include 80% to 85% of the organic con-
stituents. The remainder would presumably be soluble carbohydrate material.
The principal significance of this is that it would be a poor substrate to
support microbial growth except for those species capable of utilizing
cellulose and hemicellulose, but degradation of these compounds is relatively
very slow, compared to soluble carbohydrates.
It is worthy to note that the average lignin value of 8.6% is relatively
low and results from feeding mostly high concentrate rations containing only
small amounts of lignin. Manure samples from cattle fed starter rations high
in forage were significantly higher in lignin.
Correlations Between Components
A complete correlation matrix of components is presented in Table 12 on
a dry matter and an ash-free basis. Some of these correlations have no bio-
logical significance but the correlations between dry matter, pH and nutrient
components would be of interest. However, none of those relations that might
be expected to be important (i.e., pH and total N, ammonia N) showed a
correlation coefficient not appreciably different from zero.
Interrelation Between Components (Multiple Regressions)
In order to study the interrelationship of the chemical components
61
-------
Table 12. CORRELATION MATRIXES OF ALL VARIABLES
to
Variable
number
12345
Correlation Matrix of Variables
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1.000 -0.377 -0.337 -0.217 -0.006
1.000 0.851 0.841 -0.072
1.000 0.555 0.046
1.000 -0.108
1.000
Correlation Matrix of Variables
1.000 -0.377 -0.337 -0.217 -0.006
1.000 0.851 0.841 -0.072
1.000 0.555 0.046
1.000 -0.108
1.000
__ _ _
0
-0
-0
-0
0
1
6
7
8
9
10
(dry matter)
.224
.129
.179
.102
.165
.000
(ash-free
0
-0
-0
-0
0
1
.224
.129
.179
.102
.165
.000
0
-0
-0
-0
-0
0
1
dry
-0
0
0
0
0
-0
1
.410
.834
.868
.598
.109
.262
.000
0
-0
-0
-0
-0
-0
0
1
.241
.770
.710
.644
.033
.002
.776
.000
0
-0
-0
-0
0
0
0
0
1
.332
.923
.757
.880
.089
.170
.803
.793
.000
0
-0
-0
-0
-0
-0
0
0
0
1
.049
.239
.113
.340
.273
.201
.121
.230
.289
.000
matter)
.410
.834
.868
.598
.109
.262
.000
0
-0
-0
-0
-0
0
-0
1
.276
.781
.744
.616
.070
.011
.852
.000
0
-0
-0
-0
0
0
-0
0
1
.363
.902
.781
.797
.018
.166
.887
.830
.000
0
-0
-0
-0
-0
-0
-0
0
0
1
.162
.482
.385
.479
.230
.058
.444
.478
.521
.000
-------
Legend of Variables for Table 12
Variable
number Variables
1 Location of sample
2 Kjeldahl (total nitrogen)
3 TCA (nitrogen in true proteins)
4 MgO (NH~-nitrogen)
5 pH
6 Dry matter
7 Ash
8 Acid detergent fiber
9 Neutral detergent fiber
10 Lignin
analyzed, the data were subjected to a multiple regression analysis. Each of
the chemical components of manure was studied for its relation to the crude
protein and crude fiber content of the ration fed the cattle, the influence
of mean daily temperature and location of place where the sample was collected
in the pen (i.e., near the bunk, center or rear on a soil surface). Com-
parisons are presented for samples as collected and on an ash-free basis
because ash represented such a large and variable fraction of the manure
2
samples. Those relations that were important as indicated by the R (which
indicates the percentage of the variance explained by the parameter(s) in-
cluded in the regression equation) are presented in Table 13.
Comparison on Ash Basis
The total nitrogen content of manure was related to crude protein of the
diet, ambient temperature and location in the pen. The combination of these
factors accounted for 31% of the variance in total nitrogen. The indication
that nitrogen in manure declines with crude protein (nitrogen) in the feed
seems strange but can perhaps be explained in terms of microbial metabolism
63
-------
Table 13. MULTIPLE REGRESSION COEFFICIENTS AND THEIR
RESPECTIVE MULTIPLE CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS
As Received Basis
Regression
Crude.
protein
Total Nb -1.77
Protein Nb -0.440
Ammonia N
ADF
NDF
Lignin
pH -
Dry matter
Ash 6.17
Crude
fiber
-0.14
0.708
0.687
0.09
-0.224
-0.719
coefficients
Tem-
perature
0.052
-0.03
-0.0773
0.61
0.158
a
Location
-2.80
-1.48
-0.46
3.12
3.35
3.71
6.52
R2
0.31
0.21
0.41
0.34
0.63
0.11
0.21
0.36
0.33
Ash-Free Basis
i
Regression coefficients R*"
Crude Crude Tern-
protein fiber perature
-0.267
0.292
-0.19 -0.05
0.983
0.957 0.269
0.233
Location
0.16
0.07
0.38
5.11 0.34
5.67 0.57
0.17
Location was coded as: 1 - Bunk, 2 - Center of pen, and 3 - Back of pen.
Nitrogen contents are given in the equations presented as Mg/g dry matter, which is 10 times the percent
N on a dry matter basis.
-------
in the rumen and cecum. The same factors accounted for 21% of the variance
in protein (TCA) nitrogen. Ammonia-N variance, on the other hand, of 41% is
explained by a combination of temperature, location and crude fiber content
of the ration. The relation with crude fiber of the ration is difficult to
explain. Samples declined in all nitrogen from front to rear of the pens.
The fibrous components of manure, ADF, NDF and lignin, were related to
the crude fiber content of the ration, as would be expected. NDF is a measure
of plant cell-wall material and ADF of the plant cell-wall constituents,
cellulose and lignin. NDF minus ADF represents essentially hemicellulose.
Hemicellulose is a term for a diverse group of non-cellulose, carbohydrate
polymers of which pentosans are probably the most important. Cellulose and
hemicellulose, but not lignin, are degraded by fecal bacteria under anaerobic
conditions. Degradation can continue in the manure so long as conditions of
temperature, moisture and anaerobiosis are adequate. As the percentage of
NDF and ADF increase, the percentage of components soluble in these reagents
increase and these soluble components are those most readily degraded by
bacteria. Only 11% of the variance in lignin was associated with the factors
that were studied.
The pH of samples was associated with crude fiber of the ration and tem-
perature. The pH was also related quadratically to temperature and crude
fiber. A high crude fiber content probably means less soluble carbohydrates
which are the source of organic acid. However, a decrease in temperature was
associated with an increase in ammonia which should involve an increase in pH.
Dry matter of manure was related to temperature and location in the pen;
the combination accounted for 36% of the variability. The location at the
rear of the pen allows more time for drainage into the soil. The ash was
strongly associated with location, slightly related to crude fiber and tem-
perature but closely related to the crude protein content of the ration for
reasons that cannot be explained.
Comparison of Ash-Free Basis
It is apparent from Table 13 that making these same calculations on an
2
ash-free basis did not improve the R values as anticipated; in fact, in
2
general the R is less although not significantly so than when compared with
the original sample. Although an ash-free expression is desirable for
65
-------
comparison of the chemical or nutritive properties, the calculation would
not be expected to change the correlations although actual numbers in the
regression equations would change.
Mineral Analysis
A total of 63 samples were analyzed for P, K, Ca and Na by the Colorado
State University Soil Testing Laboratory by the methods described above. The
results are summarized in Table 14, together with the value for total nit-
rogen in the same sample since N, P and K are elements of greatest interest
when manure is considered for fertilizer. The concentration of N, P, K and
Na were slightly higher in samples collected near the feedbunk and pro-
gressively lower at the center and rear of the pen, while Ca concentrations
did not fit this pattern. The differences, however, are not statistically
significant, as indicated by the magnitude of the standard deviations, even
though the trend indicated is what would be hypothesized on the assumption
that samples toward the rear of the pen would contain more soil in which the
concentration of elements (i.e., Fe, Al) would dilute the concentration of
the elements discussed here. The results presented differ some from the
fiR
limited data available for comparison (Azevedo and Stout and Ede and
Branson ), but conditions of collection, ageing, weathering, etc., were not
uniform.
Trace Element Analyses
Nine samples were selected at random and analyzed for lead (Pb) and
cadmium (Cd). The results are presented in Table 15. Westing and
Brandenberg reported an average for Pb of 12.7 and 0.61 for cadmium in
feedlot manure. Samples containing 8.5 ppm and 5.5 ppm of cadmium might be
of concern, but those particular samples were both collected near the feed-
bunk, yet represented two different rations, and we have no explanation for
these higher levels.
Twenty samples have been submitted for analysis by X-ray diffraction
analysis to the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, Livermore, CA. A study has
been completed to determine the effect of processing by lyophilization, oven
drying and ashing. The dry sample produced similar results to the freeze-
dried sample except for considerable loss of bromine which was not of great
66
-------
Table 14. MEAN CONCENTRATION OF PHOSPHORUS, POTASSIUM,
CALCIUM AND SODIUM IN MANURE SAMPLES BY LOCATION IN PENS
(% of dry weight of samples)
No. of
samples N P K Ca Na
Near the Feedbunk
22 2.63 (0.45)a 0.58 (0.11) 1.60 (0.30) 1.77 (0.24) 0.58 (0.08)
Center of Pen
21 2.23 (0.58) 0.52 (0.12) 1.19 (0.32) 1.91 (0.44) 0.46 (0.12)
Rear of Pen
20 2.02 (0.56) 0.50 (0.13) 1.24 (0.29) 1.98 (0.23) 0.48 (0.13)
Mean of All Samples
63 2.29 (0.50) 0.54 (0.12) 1.35 (0.30) 1.88 (0.31 0.51 (0.10)
a
Standard deviation of the means.
interest. Mean values from preliminary analyses indicated the following in
mg/kg (ppm): Mn 131, Fe 2736, Cu 35, Zn 92, Br 35, Rb 24, Sr 114, Zr 84 and
Pb 19. Analyses have not been completed but results are expected soon.
Interpretations of Mineral Analyses
The primary fertilizer elements, N, P and K, were present in a ratio of
about 4:1:2 which would provide a generally useful fertilizer. The average
quantity per ton of dry manure would be 46 Ibs N, 11 Ibs P and 27 Ibs K. The
concentration of Ca at 40 pounds per ton is not of interest for application
to the arid soils of the West but would be in the humid areas of the country.
The Na concentration varied little between samples, probably indicating a
rather constant Na intake by the cattle. Na, as a possible pollutant at 20
pounds per ton, is also to be considered.
Although the ash content of manure varied from 30.7% to 42.9% of the dry
matter, the concentration of the elements shown in Table 15 varied much less.
This probably means that those elements arising from feed are present in a
rather constant proportion while those making up the gross ash fraction
67
-------
Table 15. CONCENTRATION OF LEAD (Pb) AND CADMIUM (Cd)
IN RANDOMLY SELECTED MANURE SAMPLE (pprc)
Sample No.
8
14
23
32
41
42
56
63
65
71
76
103
Pb
3.0
1.5
1.5
2.2
0.7
0.7
2.2
2.2
2.2
3.0
2.2
1.5
Cd
<0.5
1.5
5.5
1.0
1.0
2.0
2.5
>8.5
3.0
1.5
2.0
1.5
Sample No .
114
118
121
132
136
145
150
153
163
172
176
184
Pb
2.2
1.5
3.0
2.2
3.0
2.2
0.7
1.5
2.2
1.5
1.5
1.5
Cd
1.5
1.0
4.0
0.5
0.5
<0.5
0.5
0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
represent variable fractions of soil minerals (i.e., silicon and aluminum,
which were not determined). Chlorides are important anions which were not in-
cluded in the analyses.
LIPID ANALYSIS
Lip id analysis was not included in the protocol for this experiment be-
cause it was known that the lipid content would be low and of diverse chemical
composition, representing as it does either indigestible non-fat lipids from
forage or from cattle fed high concentrate rations. The lipids are primarily
metabolic fecal fat originating from the bile to a large extent.
Twelve samples of manure were selected at random and two lipid analyses
were determined using the Bailey-Walker extraction equipment. In the first
analysis a chloroform-methanol (2 to 1 v/v) solvent was used. This solvent
extracts the more water soluble phospholipid fractions in addition to other
68
-------
lipids. In the second analysis hexane was used as the solvent. Results of
both solvents are presented in Table 16. The chloroform-methanol solvent in-
dicated an average lipid content of 7.07% with a range of 4.29% to 9.64%
while the hexane solvent indicated an average lipid content of 4.98%, with a
range of 2.83% to 6.15%. These levels are much higher than those found by
71 72
Lucas et al- or by Ward for fresh steer feces and higher than found by
73
Johnson for scraped feedlot manure. No explanations are apparent to ex-
plain these levels higher than previously reported.
WEATHER AND COMPOSITION
Some changes in manure properties were observed to be related to rainfall.
During two consecutive sampling periods (days 228 and 241), 5.2 in. of pre-
cipitation were received. A decrease in dry matter in the manure would be
expected and was observed. Ash content might be expected to increase due to
more mixing with soil but was observed in only one case. Ash content in-
creased in one position where water stood in the pen for two weeks. Manure
from this position was charcoal-like and contained large amounts of soil.
Cellulose and non-protein nitrogen were the only other variables to show
obvious changes. Cellulose content was increased during these wet periods
and non-protein nitrogen was decreased.
CONCLUSIONS
Ash represents a large percentage of the composition of all manure sam-
ples. Overall average was 36.2% with a range from 30.7% to 42.9%. Ash
content was lowest on surfaced areas of pens.
The total nitrogen content of the manure was related to the crude pro-
tein content of the diet, ambient temperature and location in the pen. The
combination of these factors accounted for 31% of the variance in nitrogen.
The primary fertilizer elements, N, P and K, were present in a ratio of
about 4:1:2 which would provide a generally useful fertilizer. The average
quantity per ton of dry manure would be 46 Ibs N, 11 Ibs P and 27 Ibs K. A
concentration of 40 pounds Ca per ton would be of value in some types of soil.
Little variation was found in the Na concentration, and its relationship
to other mineral elements was nearly constant. The average quantity of 20
69
-------
Table 16. SOLVENT EXTRACTABLE LIPID FROM MANURE SAMPLES
Sample No.
8
42
65
76
114
121
132
153
163
176
181
184
Total average
Chloroform-
methanol
solvent,
% lipid of
dry matter
6.02
7.94
7.01
6.06
7.46
9.64
7.56
6.89
8.38
4.29
7.84
5.70
7.07%
Fexane
solvent,
% lipid of
dry matter
5.04
5.68
5.38
4.47
4.50
6.15
5.38
6.13
4.80
2.83
5.20
4.24
4.98%
pounds Na per ton of dry manure should be considered in regard to accumulation
with continuous applications of manure for fertilizer.
The fibrous components of manure, ADF, NDF and lignin, are related to
the crude fiber content of the ration. NDF is a measure of plant cell-wall
material and ADF of thesplant cell-wall constituents, cellulose and lignin.
NDF minus ADF represents essentially hemicellulose, a diverse group of non-
cellulose, carbohydrate polymers. NDF value for overall manure constituents
averaged 45.92% of dry matter.
Cellulose and hemicellulose are degraded very slowly by fecal bacteria
under anaerobic conditions; therefore, the fibrous components are important
if the manure is to be used for methane gas production.
70
-------
High temperatures result in an increased ash and fiber concentration
and a decreased ammonia concentration; therefore, more frequent harvesting is
recommended during periods of high temperatures (summer).
RECOMMENDATIONS
The ash content in manure used for recycling represents unusable
material; therefore, a low ash content is desirable. The ash content con-
tributed by dirt mixed into the manure can be reduced by utilizing surfaced
pens. Ash content in manure from surfaced pens should be approximately two-
thirds of that found in good unsurfaced pens.
Recycling manure for protein recovery will be most successful on sur-
faced areas next to feedbunks where high concentrate rations are used.
Average fertilizer contents for feedlot manures from typical operations
under Colorado conditions are: 46 Ibs N, 11 Ibs P and 27 Ibs K per dry ton.
Methane gas production or pyrolysis will utilize the carbon components
in manure from rations containing high crude fiber contents.
More frequent cleaning is recommended during the summer months to re-
duce losses from decomposition and reduce excessive buildup of ash. High
moisture together with high temperatures will result in most rapid decom-
position. Similar losses will occur in stockpiles of wet manure.
Collection periods of no more than one month are recommended under these
conditions for recycling purposes.
71
-------
REFERENCES
59. Laitinen, H. A. and W. E. Harris. 1960. Chemical Analysis. Second
Edition. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
60. Bremner, J. M. and D. R. Keeny. 1965. Steam Distillation Methods for
Determination of Ammonium Nitrate-Nitrite. Anal. Chem. Acta.
32:485-495.
61. Spackman, D. H., W. H. Stein, and S. Moore. 1958. Automatic Recording
Apparatus for Use in the Chromatography of Amino Acids. Anal. Chem.
30:1190.
62. Barr, G. W., E. E. Bartley, and R. M. Meyer. 1975. Feed Processing:
VIII. Estimating Microbial Protein in Rumen Fluid with Precipitating
Agents or in Incubated Moistures of Uncooked Grain plus Urea or Starea
with Differential Centrifugation. J. Dairy Sci. 58:1308.
63. Mason, V. D. 1969. Some Observations on the Distribution and Origin of
Nitrogen in Sheep Feces. J. Agric. Sci. Camb. 73:99.
64. Knight, W. N. 1971. An Evaluation of Intraruminal Urea Infusion for
Growing Lambs. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Illinois.
65. Jackson, M. L. 1958. Soil Clinical Analysis. Prentice Hall, Englewood,
NY. p. 151-154.
66. Goering, H. K. and P. J. Soest. 1970. Forage Fiber Analysis (Ap-
paratus, Reagents, Procedures and Some Applications). Agric. Handbook
No. 379, ARS-U.S.D.A. December.
67. Walsh, L. M. (Ed.). 1971. Calcium, Sodium, and Potassium Determined by
Atomic Absorption on Wet Ashed Sample by Methods as Outlined in Instru-
mental Methods for Analysis of Soils and Plant Tissue. Soil Sci. Soc.
of Am., Inc. Madison, WI. p. 29-33.
68. Azevedo, J. and P. R. Stout. 1974. Farm Animal Manures: An Overview
of Their Role in the Agricultural Environment. California Agric. Expt.
Station Extension Service Manual 44.
69. Ede, Leslie L. and R. L. Branson. 1973. Palo Verde Valley Manures,
Their Chemical Composition and Fertilizer Value. Agric. Extension,
University of California, Riverside County. December.
70. Westing, T. W. and B. Brandenberg. 1974. Beef Feedlot Waste in Beef
Cattle. Processing and Management of Agricultural Wastes. Conference
on Processing and Management of Agricultural Wastes. Rochester, NY.
March 25-27.
71. Lucas, D. M., J. P. Fontenot, and K. E. Webb, Jr. Composition and
Digestibility of Cattle Fecal Waste. Journal of Animal Sci. 41:5:1480-
1486.
72
-------
72. Ward, G. M. 1974. Personal Communication.
73. Johnson, R. R. 1972. Digestibility of Feedlot Waste. Oklahoma State
University Agric. Expt. Station Misc. Publ. No. 87-
73
-------
SECTION VIII
RUNOFF CHARACTERIZATION
GENERAL
Hard surfacing and more frequent cleaning schedules will be a departure
from more conventional feedpen management methods. In conjunction with the
use of new manure harvesting techniques, there will be an effect on feedlot
runoff pollution potential.
This study was made to determine whether these changes are positive or
negative, in terms of pollution abatement, including a determination of the
effects frequent feedpen cleaning and the surfacing of the feedlot floor have
on the pollution potential of the feedlot runoff.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The major pollution problem presented by a feedlot is the rainfall, or
other precipitation, which comes in contact with the manure, then runs off
carrying high concentrations of oxygen-demanding.materials, solids, nut-
rients and disease organisms into surface waters and sometimes leaching into
the ground water.
In past studies temperature, the moisture content of the manure mantle
before a storm, the rainfall intensity and duration, and physical feedpen
characteristics (pen floor base, surface, etc.) have been found to influence
the quality of the runoff. It has been found warmer temperatures are accom-
74
panied by higher organic matter concentrations in the runoff. Miner
suggests the increased solubility, or rate of solubility, of the soluble
solids in warmer water may be the reason.
Initial moisture content of the manure pack (i.e., the percent of water
contained in the manure per unit weight prior to a storm) has been indicated
as being important in runoff characteristics. Dry manure surfaces generally
74
-------
have more surface storage available to store precipitation than do wet
manure mantles. Also, wet manure packs hold high concentrations of dis-
solved organic matter at the onset of rainfall. Management, especially in
arid locations, can to some extent control the moisture level of the feedlot
surface by varying the stocking rate.
Rainwater from a low intensity, long duration rainfall has a long period
of contact with the manure and thus carries a high concentration of organic
matter and nitrogen when it does run off. With heavier rainfalls, the water
starts to run off sooner and does not have as much time to dissolve material
on the feedpen surface.
The thickness of a manure pack is a function of management practices. A
thick manure pack, while containing more water per unit area than a shallow
pack, may have more storage capacity available than do the thinner packs.
This is possible because the volume of manure on the feedlot surface is more
when the manure mantle is deep (e.g., a 4-inch manure mantle has twice the
volume of a 2-inch manure mantle). Therefore, even with the concentration of
dissolved organic matter present in a thick manure pack, the thick manure
pack may offer less pollution problem than a thin pack for some rainfall
occurrences. The infiltration rate of the manure and the anticipated rainfall
intensity would need to be considered to determine the optimum manure mantle
depth for minimizing pollution.
Flat feedlot surfaces allow a longer time for the rainwater to be in
contact with the manure before running off the feedpen surface. Consequently,
the runoff tends to contain higher concentrations of dissolved materials than
runoff from steeper lots. On the other hand, assuming no indentations in the
surface, runoff from steeper lots will have a greater velocity and will
contain more suspended solids.
Studies by Wells e* al. indicate ration to have very little effect on
the concentration of runoff. Depending on the factors involved, between one-
third and one-half of all moisture falling on a feedlot eventually leaves as
runoff. In the process, one to six percent of the material deposited on
the feedpen floor leaves with the runoff. The composition of the manure it-
self then is reflected in the runoff. The manure, however, is dependent on
the ration fed the beef animal, which means the ration also is reflected in
the runoff contents.
75
-------
Pen surfaces can be either unsurfaced, partially surfaced or totally sur-
faced. Advantages and disadvantages exist for each of these pen surfaces,
depending upon site specific conditions. Since the main concerns in this
study are the effects of frequent manure harvesting on the feedlot pollution
potential, the positive and negative aspects will be discussed with this in
mind. To guard against ground water contamination and mixing of soil with
the manure, Shuyler et^ al_. suggest three to four inches of the manure
should be left on the floor of a dirt feedpen. This requires careful re-
moval of the waste.
As seen from Table 17, concrete or surfaced pens allow higher stocking
rates. Solid wastes may be removed from the concrete floor without concern
for ground water contamination or sloppy pen conditions. Another advantage
is the reduction of runoff from the surfaced feedlots on a per animal basis,
a result of the higher stocking densities.
The above discussion presents some of the variables affecting feedlot
runoff quantity and quality. The variables must be considered collectively
when trying to make determinations of runoff pollution potential, even though
the main concern is the depth of the manure mantle and the kind of surface
used for the feedlot floor. These independent variables considered in this
study are summarized in Table 18.
Table 17. SUMMARY OF STOCKING RATES FOR OPEN FEEDLOTS76
Lot Surface Stocking Rate
Unsurfaced
Dirt, medium textured soil 200-300 sq ft/animal
Dirt, poor drainage on heavy soil 300-400 sq ft/animal
Partially surfaced
Concrete slab in front of feedbunk 100-150 sq ft/animal
Surfaced
Concrete 50-70 sq ft/animal
76
-------
Table 18. INDEPENDENT VARIABLES FOR RUNOFF STUDY
Alphanumer ic
Variable
Rainfall intensity, cm/hr ARI
Surface type, (1 = concrete; 2 = dirt) ST
Surface slope, percent SS
Manure mantle depth, cm DMM
Initial moisture content, percent (wet basis) BMC
Ration, (concentrate to roughage ratio) R
Time , hour T
Total rainfall, cm TR
TESTING CONSIDERATIONS
Following the establishment of the factors which affect feedlot runoff
pollution potential, it must be determined what effects are of concern on
the resultant pollution potential. The important factors related to runoff
quality have been determined, to a large extent, by previous water quality
analysts. Pollutants entering a body of water affect water quality and its
usefulness.
In determining the quantity of runoff coming off a feedpen area, the
variables of concern are empirically established. The volume of feedlot run-
off from individual rainfall events must be known for proper sizing of
facilities. The principal factors of concern include:
1. The amount of rainfall stored before runoff occurs;
2. The rate at which collection and retention facilities must handle
the runoff , and
3. Total volume of runoff to expect from a feedlot area.
The dependent variables to be considered are summarized in Table 19.
PROCEDURES AND EQUIPMENT
The project plan included a quantitative and qualitative determination of
feedlot runoff as experienced with the type of conditions and management used
77
-------
Table 19. DEPENDENT VARIABLES FOR RUNOFF QUALITY AND QUANTITY DETERMINATIONS
Alphanumeric
Variable symbol
Biochemical oxygen demand, mg/1 BOD
Chemical oxygen demand, mg/1 COD
Settleable solids, rol/1 SSLDS
Volatile solids, mg/1 VSLDS
Inorganic solids, mg/1 ASH
Total alkalinity, mg/lCaC03 ALKLN
pH PR
Time to runoff, hour TRF
Accumulated rainfall to runoff, cm ARRF
Runoff rate, cm/hr RFR
Accumulated runoff, cm ARF
Resulting runoff, percent RRF
with frequent manure harvesting. Data to predict runoff quality and quantity
were to be obtained from a combination of data from natural precipitation and
simulated rainfall.
Runoff measurement flumes and weather data recording equipment were
installed in the three pens used in the study.
Runoff from natural precipitation occurred from only one storm event;
therefore, no usable data were obtained from the natural precipitation and
only that from the simulated rainfall were usable for analysis.
Rain Simulation Equipment
The field equipment used for rain simulation in the runoff studies con-
sisted of the artificial rainfall equipment and the Sample and runoff col-
lection unit. It included a trailer-mounted pressure pump, recirculation
pump and tank, sprinkler unit and collection apparatus.
78
-------
The sprinkler head was partially shielded so water would be sprayed
out for only part of the sprinkler rotation. The water collected within the
shielded portion of the sprinkler's rotation was pumped back to the recir-
culation tank. Valving was such that any desired pressure could be maintained
at the sprinkler nozzles. The intensity of the simulated rainfall could be
varied by changing nozzles on the head, pressure and sprinkler head
rotation speed.
Runoff Collection
The test plot was separated from the rest of the feedpen floor by 10 cm
(4 in.) sheet metal boundaries. The plot had dimensions of 1.2m X 2.4m (A ft
X 8 ft) with the length being parallel to the slope of the feedpen floor and
with the direction of spray from the sprinkler head.
At the lower end of the plot, runoff water was funneled into a col-
lection tank of known dimensions. Samples for water quality determinations
could be collected before the runoff was drained into the tank. Runoff was
retained in the tank to determine the volume of runoff occurring from the
rainfall event. The depth of runoff collected with respect to time was re-
corded by a Stevens water level recorder. Knowing the cross-sectional area
of the collection tank and the depth of the water collected, the quantity of
runoff was determined.
Runoff Quality Analysis
Samples of 2.1 litre were collected for water quality analysis. The
first sample of the test run was taken when there was visual sign of runoff.
The second sample was taken approximately 0.5 hr after the start of runoff.
The third, fourth and fifth samples were collected at 1.5, 3.5 and 5.5 hr
intervals after the start of runoff, respectively, or the final sample just
prior to the end of the rainfall event.
To preserve samples for laboratory analysis, they were placed in an ice
bath immediately after collection. To further preserve the samples for COD
analysis, 5 ml of concentrated sulfuric acid was added to the 250 ml samples.
Laboratory analysis was done on all samples less than 35 hours after col-
lection. At the laboratory, the samples were warmed to room temperature
79
-------
before analyses were conducted. Standard methods were followed for all water
quality analysis.
Nine test runs were conducted. Four of these were on concrete surfaces.
For each test run on a concrete surface there was a corresponding run on a
dirt surface. A series of tests were selected to correspond to rainfall
events with low, medium and high intensities on both concrete and dirt feed-
lots and for thin and thick manure mantles. Tests were conducted on concrete
with thin (<2.0 cm or 1.3 in.) manure packs and dirt surfaces with thicker
(4.3 cm or 1.7 in.) manure packs. Included in the testing scheme were pre-
wetting runs on the concrete and dirt surfaces to simulate two-day rainfall
events. Further specifics are listed in Table 20.
ANALYSIS AND RESULTS
A computer program (STAT38R) in the statistics file at the Colorado State
University Computer Center was used to run regression analysis on the data
collected. This program computes a sequence of multiple linear regression
equations in a forward stepwise manner. At each step, one variable is added
to or deleted from the regression equation. The variable added is the one
which makes the greatest reduction in the error sum of squares. Also, it is
the variable which has highest partial correlation with the dependent
variable partialed on the variables which have already been added.
Data reduction and analysis were also done by making visual interpre-
tations of the raw data and averages of collected data. The following are
statistical and visual interpretations of data obtained from the simulated
rainfall tests.
Runoff Rate (RFR)
The dependence of the runoff rate upon the intensity of the rainfall
which is being applied is shown in Equation 1 of Appendix B. The linear re-
gression equation does not indicate a point at which the runoff rate will
approach the rainfall intensity. It is known, however, that there is such a
point at which time the feedlot floor is saturated and the water intake rate
is negligible. If runoff rate versus time is plotted for a particular run,
as shown in Figure 9, this is demonstrated. The rate of runoff starts low
and approaches the rainfall intensity asymptotically.
80
-------
oo
a
o
-------
Table 20. PRE-STORM FEEDLOT SURFACE CONDITIONS
ARI,
cm/hr
ST
SS,
%
DMM,
cm
BMC,
%
R
Location
Run 1 4.2 Concrete 1.7 1.8
Run 2 2.2
Run 7 3.7
Run 8 0.4
Run 9 2.8
Dirt
Dirt
0.8 2.3
Run 3 1.9 Concrete 2.7 1.3
Run 4 0.4 Concrete 0.5 1.3
Run 5 2.8 Concrete 0.5 2.0
Run 6 1.9 Dirt 2.5 4.3
1.6 4.3
Dirt 2.0 4.3
Dirt 2.0 4.3
12.0 5.25
7.3
5.4
61.2
22.4
15.0
24.6
58.9
5.25
3.31
10.9 3.31
3.31
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
On edge of concrete apron:
approx. 20 ft from waterer
and 70 ft from feedbunk
Approx. 40 ft from waterer
and 40 ft from feedbunk
Edge of concrete apron,
20 ft from waterer and 70
ft from feedbunk
Edge of concrete apron,
20 ft from waterer and 70
ft from feedbunk
Same plot as Run 4
70 ft from waterer and 40
ft from feedbunk
50 ft from waterer and 40
ft from feedbunk
20 ft from waterer and 50
ft from feedbunk
Same plot as Run 8
Test Runs 5 and 9 were conducted the day after the feedpen surfaces were
wetted by Runs 4 and 8, respectively. With the exclusion of Test Runs 5 and
9, the manure mantle was dry, hard packed and smooth prior to the rainfall
event. Tests Runs 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 were conducted at a Sterling, Colorado,
feedlot and Runs 6, 7, 8 and 9 were conducted at a feedlot in the Fort
Collins, Colorado, area.
Time to Runoff (TRF)
The time to runoff decreases with an increase in rainfall intensity, sur-
face slope and the initial moisture content of the manure mantle, according to
statistical regression analysis (Equation 2, Appendix B). The more the rain-
fall rate exceeds the intake rate of the manure mantle the faster water will
accumulate on the surface. When the surface storage is filled, runoff begins.
As the surface slope is increased, there is a corresponding increase in the
gravitational force component which is pulling the water down the feedlot sur-
face. A high initial moisture content is indicative of decreased storage
capacity and is accompanied by a slower water intake rate.
82
-------
Accumulated Rainfall to Runoff (ARRF)
The amount of rainfall which is accumulated before runoff begins is an
indication of the surface storage available. Empirically, surface storage
is known to be dependent upon the surface slope (for a smooth surface),
initial moisture content, water intake rate and the capacity for puddling on
the feedpen surface. Of the data collected, the initial moisture content had
the highest correlation with the accumulated rainfall to runoff of any of the
independent variables.
Accumulated Runoff (ARF)
The quantity of runoff expected from a feedlot increases with respect to
the total rainfall applied and the runoff rate (see Equation 3, Appendix B).
The amount of water which runs off a surface is naturally dependent upon the
amount of water supplied for runoff. This supply is derived from two
sources:
1. The total quantity applied, and
2. The degree to which the application rate (it has been determined
above, the runoff rate is dependent upon the rainfall intensity)
exceeds the intake rate of the surface.
This second phenomenon is also reflected in the time to runoff and the
accumulated rainfall to runoff.
77 78 79
Other researchers ' ' have developed equations relating the expected
80
runoff only with the depth of rain applied. Kreis et_ al. developed the
equation for unsurfaced feedlots:
RU = 0.500 RA - 0.124
where: RU = runoff
RA = rainfall
The Soil Conservation Service has suggested an equation for determining the
volume of runoff from a feedlot surface. This equation is:
(P - 0.352)2
Q ~ P + 1.41
where: Q = runoff
P = precipitation
83
-------
In Figure 10 these two curves and a third one, resulting from data collected
in these tests, are plotted. The data points obtained from six of the test
runs conducted are also indicated, for reference. The third equation plotted
is:
ARF = 0.33 TR - 0.20
where: ARF = runoff
TR = total rainfall
From Figure 10 the Soil Conservation Service equation gave the highest
estimate of the runoff quantity with all data points lying on or below the
Soil Conservation Service prediction.
*
Settleable Solids (SSLDS)
The settleable solids content appears to be primarily a function of the
initial moisture content of the manure mantle and the depth of the manure
mantle. As noted above in the background information, thick manure packs
usually have a higher moisture content than do the thinner packs, and high
moisture content manure holds high concentrations of dissolved organic matter
at the onset of rainfall. Therefore, it would seem the moisture content of
the manure mantle is the determining factor in regard to the settleable
solids content of the feedlot runoff. The initial moisture content had the
highest correlation of the independent variables.
Volatile Solids (VSLDS)
The volatile solids content shows high correlation with the surface type
of the feedlot and/or the depth of manure mantle. Due to the testing scheme
these two variables cannot be necessarily separated. The effects ration,
surface type, depth of manure mantle and runoff rate have on the volatile
solids is reflected in Equation 5 of Appendix B. According to stepwise
regression analysis, surface type and runoff rate had dominant effects, with
the ration showing only a slight effect on the volatile solids content. The
depth of the manure mantle did not enter the regression equation but did have
an appreciable correlation with volatile solids. It is logical to expect the
volatile solids to increase with high concentrate rations, because concen-
trates have more nutrients and less minerals than do the roughs^s. Faster
84
-------
oo
Ul
6
o
I
8.00
7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
Test Equation
Soil Conservation Service Equation
80
Equation by Kreis et al.
i i i i i i i i i i i i
i i i
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00 11.00 12.00
Rainfall, cm
Figure 10. Rainfall-runoff relationships for beef cattle feedlots
-------
runoff rates do not provide time for the organic matter to be dissolved and
transported; therefore, the volatile solids content is lower in high velocity
runoff.
Inorganic Solids (ASH)
Stepwise regression analysis indicates increases in the depth of the
manure mantle and the runoff rate decreases the inorganic solids content of
the runoff. The ash content tends to increase with higher initial moisture
contents of the manure pack. The depth of the manure mantle is indicated as
being the predominant factor (see Equation 6, Appendix B) . If the manure
pack is thick, there will be less mixing of the underlying soil with the
manure. In the case of thin manure packs,, dirt will be mixed with the manure,
introducing more silicates and minerals into the manure mantle. Initial
moisture content and runoff rate coming into the regression equation are
reflective of the time available to dissolve the solids and carry them off
the feedlot surface.
Total Alkalinity (ALKLN)
Methyl orange, with a color change at pH 4.6, was used to determine the
total alkalinity of the runoff samples collected. Increases in the depth of
the manure mantle and the runoff rate were inversely related to the alkalinity
for the tests conducted. A high initial moisture content of the manure pack
increases the alkalinity of the runoff (see Equation 7, Appendix B) . A thick
manure pack provides the possibility of salts leaching downward. A high mois-
ture content will dissolve more of the salts present in the manure pack.
Fast runoff rates limit the time the water and 'salts are in contact, thus
restricting time for the salts to be dissolved and carried away in the runoff
water. Also, if the runoff rate is high, there will be more water present
(see above discussion on runoff rate) to dilute the runoff to a pH nearer
neutral .
The data indicate lower pH values on the pens which had the higher con-
centrate rations fed in them. This is indicative of the acids present in the
concentrate feeds and those acids produced by the biological breakdown of the
-------
high protein manure. pH also increases with depth of the manure mantle.
Again, deeper manure packs have higher moisture contents and, therefore,
higher dissolved salt concentration.
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD)
The BOD on the pens where a high concentrate ration was fed was five
times greater, on the average, than those values obtained from the low con-
centrate, high roughage ration pens. Ration had the highest correlation with
BOD followed closely hy the depth of manure mantle and the initial moisture
content. Increases in the latter two resulted in lower BOD.
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)
From information collected, concrete surfaces produce high COD loads
coming off a feedlot. Slow runoff rates also produce high COD loads. Faster
runoff rates carry low concentrations of dissolved solids (see discussions on
volatile and inorganic solids), resulting in lower oxygen demands per unit
volume of runoff. Stepwise regression analysis (see Equation 8, Appendix B)
indicates ration to have a limited effect on the COD.
It may be noted from Table 21 that all tests conducted on the concrete
and dirt surfaces had approximately the same initial conditions. The dif-
ferences were with regard to the depths of manure mantles on the feedpen
floors and the rations being fed to the cattle in these pens. Since the re-
spective depths of the manure mantles are those which would normally be ex-
pected for clean concrete or dirt feedlot surfaces, the pollution charac-
teristics may be compared on a clean-pen basis. Rations fed to the beef
cattle are varied throughout the growing period of the animals, starting
with a high roughage, low concentrate ration and gradually changing to a low
roughage, high concentrate ration.
Referring to Table 21 for comparison information, the storage capacities
of the two surface types are reflected in the data obtained for time to run-
off, accumulated rainfall to runoff, runoff rate and resulting runoff. The
lower values for time to runoff and accumulated rainfall to runoff for the
concrete versus dirt surfaces indicate less initial surface storage for the
concrete surfaces. The high runoff rate and resulting runoff values indicate
this trend to continue throughout a rainfall event.
87
-------
Table 21. SURFACE COMPARISONS USING AVERAGES OF COLLECTED DATA
Rainfall intensity, cm/hr
Surface slope, %
Manure mantle depth, cm
Initial moisture content, %
Ration, concentrate: roughage
Time to runoff , hour
Accumulated rainfall to runoff, cm
Runoff rate, cm/hr
Accumulated runoff, cm
Resulting runoff, %
Settleable solids, ml/1
Volatile solids, mg/1
Inorganic solids, mg/1
Alkalinity, mg/lCaC03
pH
BOD, mg/1
COD, mg/1
aOnly Test Runs 1, 3, 4, 6, 7 and 9 were cited.
Concrete
2.3
1.4
1.6
22.4
3.80
1.25
1.2
1.4a
2.0a
45a
3.70
3.80
5.67
851
7.37
1020
6186
Dirt
2.6
1.7
3.8
25.9
1.50
1.96
1.5
i.oa
2.2a
30a
1.81
1.06
2.56
452
8.07
434
1301
The runoff quality data indicate the runoff from concrete surfaced feed-
pens to have higher concentrations of pollutants than does the dirt feedpen
runoff. This higher pollution potential of concrete versus dirt feedlots is
even more serious when considering 1.5 times more runoff may occur from the
concrete surfaces than from the dirt feedlot surfaces. However, considering
up to four times as many beef cattle may be confined on a concrete surface as
compared to dirt surfaces (Table 17), concrete surfaced feedlots may provide
fewer pollutants than dirt feedlots.
88
-------
CONCLUSIONS
Surfaced feedlot pens have less storage capacity for accumulated rainfall
than do unsurfaced pens. Therefore, initial runoff will begin sooner and a
large percentage of the precipitation will run off the surfaced areas. Since
surfaced areas are generally cleaned more frequently, the storage capacity for
rainfall is further reduced. Volatile solids, inorganic solids, alkalinity
and COD are all affected by runoff rate.
The concentration of pollutants is generally higher in the runoff from
surfaced pen areas than from the unsurfaced pen areas. Suspended materials,
especially, are more prone to wash off the surfaced areas and be carried
along by the higher velocities found on the surfaced areas. Dissolved organic
materials are generally lower from the surfaced areas, since initial runoff
is sooner and less time is provided for dissolving material in the runoff.
Rations have a significant effect on the pollution potential of the run-
off. Runoff from pens being fed high concentrate rations will have higher
concentrations of volatile solids and a higher COD load.
While surfaced feedlot pen areas will have more runoff with more concen-
trated pollution potential than do unsurfaced pens, the difference can be
offset on a per animal basis by increased animal densities.
Runoff collection and treatment facilities for surfaced feedlot areas
will require capacities to handle more volume and higher pollution concen-
trations than unsurfaced areas. Frequent cleaning will increase both
requirements.
The Soil Conservation Service prediction equation can be relied upon to
give an adequate working estimate of the quantity of runoff which will accrue
from a rainfall event.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The runoff collection and treatment facilities for surfaced feedlot
areas should provide for handling higher volumes with more concentrated
pollution than is required for unsurfaced feedlot pen areas. The difference
increases with steeper slopes and more frequent cleaning.
To reduce the runoff volume on a per animal basis, the density of animals
on surfaced pens should be increased to utilize the advantages provided by the
surfacing and more frequent cleaning.
89
-------
In this study, the ratio of concentrates to roughage in the ration was
a major factor in the pollution concentration of the runoff. Therefore,
high concentrate rations fed in frequently cleaned, surfaced pens, should
be recognized as a possible source of high pollution potential.
This study indicated rations have more influence on the pollution con-
centration of the runoff than previous investigators have reported. Ad-
ditional study is needed, emphasizing the role rations have on the quality
of the runoff from both surfaced and unsurfaced feedlot pens.
90
-------
REFERENCES
74. Miner, J. R. (Ed.). 1971. Farm Animal-Waste Management. North Cen-
tral Regional Publ. No. 206. Iowa Agric. Expt. Station Spec. Report 67-
75. Wells, D. M. , E. A. Coleman, W. Grub, R. C. Albin, and G. F. Meenaghan.
1970. Characteristics of Wastes from Southwestern Cattle Feedlots. EPA
Report 13040DEM07/70. Texas Tech. University.
76. Shuyler, L. R., D. A. Farmer, R. D. Kreis, and M. E. Hula. 1973.
Environment Protecting Concepts of Beef Cattle Feedlot Wastes Manage-
ment. National Animal Feedlot Wastes Research Program. Robert S. Kerr
Environmental Research Laboratory, Ada, OK.
77. Clark, R. N., C. B. Gilbertson, and H. R. Duke. 1975. Quantity and
Quality of Beef Feedyard Runoff in the Great Plains. In: Proceedings,
3rd International Symposium on Livestock Wastes, p. 429-431.
78. Jex, E. M. 1969. Cattle Feedlot Waste Characteristics. Master's
Thesis. Colorado State University.
79. Norton, T. E. 1969. Cattle Feedlot Water Quality Hydrology. Master's
Thesis. Colorado State University.
80. Kreis, R. D., M. R. Scalf, and J. F. McNabb. 1972. Characteristics of
Rainfall Runoff from a Beef Cattle Feedlot. EPA-RS-72-061. Robert S.
Kerr Water Research Center, Ada, OK.
91
-------
SECTION IX
GLOSSARY
81
All definitions are taken from the 1974 Agricultural Engineers Yearbook
Alkalinity The capacity of water to neutralize acids, a property imparted
by the water's content of carbonates, bicarbonates, hydroxides, and occasion-
ally berates, silicates, and phosphates. It is expressed in milligrams per
litre of equivalent calcium carbonate.
Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) The quantity of oxygen used in the bio-
chemical oxidation of organic matter in a specified time, at a specified
temperature, and under specified conditions. A standard test used in assess-
ing wastewater strength.
Chemical oxygen demand (COD) A measure of the oxygen-consuming capacity of
inorganic and organic matter present in water or wastewater. It is expressed
as the amount of oxygen consumed from a chemical oxidant in a specified test.
It does not differentiate between stable and unstable organic matter and thus
does not necessarily correlate with biochemical oxygen demand. Also known as
OC and DOC, oxygen consumed and dichromate oxygen consumed, respectively.
Contamination Any introduction into water (air or soil) of microorganisms,
chemicals, wastes, or wastewater in a concentration that makes the water (air
or soil) unfit for its intended use.
Infiltration rate (1) The rate at which water enters the soil or other
porous material under a given condition. (2) The rate at which infiltration
takes place, expressed as depth of water per unit time, usually in inches or
cm per hour.
Leaching (1) The removal of soluble constituents from soils or other
material by water. (2) The removal of salts and alkali from soils by abun-
dant irrigation combined with drainage. (3) The disposal of a liquid through
92
-------
a nonwatertight artificial structure, conduit, or porous material by down-
ward or lateral drainage, or both, into the surrounding permeable soil.
Manure The fecal and urinary defecations of livestock and poultry. Manure
may often contain some spilled feed, bedding or litter.
Organic matter Chemical substances of animal or vegetable origin, or more
correctly, of basically carbon structures, comprising compounds consisting of
hydrocarbons and their derivatives.
pH The reciprocal to the logarithm of the hydrogen-ion concentration. The
concentration is the weight of hydrogen-ions, in grams, per litre of solution.
Neutral water, for example, has a pH value of 7 and a hydrogen-ion concen-
tration of 10" .
Percolation rate The rate of movement of water under hydrostatic pressure
through the interstices of the rock or soil, except movement through large
openings such as caves.
Permeability The property of a material which permits appreciable movement
of water through it when saturated and actuated by hydrostatic pressure of the
magnitude normally encountered in natural subsurface water.
Pollution The presence in a body of water (or soil or air) of material in
such quantities that it impairs the water's usefulness or renders it offensive
to the senses of sight, taste, or smell. Contamination may accompany
pollution. In general, a public-health hazard is created, but, in some in-
stances, only economy of aesthetics are involved as when waste salt brines
contaminate surface waters or when foul odors pollute the air.
Sediment (1) Any material carried in suspension by water which will ulti-
mately settle to the bottom after the water loses velocity. (2) Fine water-
borne matter deposited or accumulated in beds.
Settleable solids (1) That matter in wastewater which will not stay in sus-
pension during a preselected settling period, such as one hour, but either
settles to the bottom or floats to the top. (2) In the Imhoff cone test, the
volume of matter that settles to the bottom of the cone in one hour.
Solids content The residue remaining when the water is evaporated away
from a sample of water, sewage, other liquids, or semi-solid masses of
material and the residue is then dried at a specified temperature, usually
103°C.
Volatile solids The quantity of solids in water, wastewater, or other
liquids lost in ignition of the dry solids at 600°C.
93
-------
REFERENCES
81. Agricultural Engineers Yearbook. 1974. Uniform Terminology for Rural
Waste Management, p. 462-464.
94
-------
SECTION X
APPENDICES
Page
A. Summary of Field Data on Effect of Environment on Manure 96
Quality
B. Summary of Multiple Linear Regression Equations Obtained 101
C. Mean, Minimum and Maximum Values for Collected Data 102
D. Composite Data Sheet 103
95
-------
APPENDIX A
SUMMARY OF FIELD DATA ON EFFECT OF ENVIRONMENT ON MANURE QUALITY
VO
in»HL tCA NH-N NPN MfMi- TFLL
M M 1 rF.LI.
?.O3 1 .*j4 .4? l.?P 9.14 ?8.T«
?.17 l.fcf .« 1.S7 11.47 ?'-.ft7
P.^4 i.ft-'i .'; 1.10 >-.ni 10. ow
?.3f> l.Si .1? l.?4 h.87 H.ft-t
?.74 1.*:' .3" 1.08 10.0ft P'J.R?
?.ftf 1.'J4 .?7 .74 H.SJ 17.1ft
2.J4 I.Sc .37 l.?6 6.09 14. SO
?.«n l.*C .27. l.?o ft. IS in. ft?
?.«4 l.ta .<;4 l.?ft 6.ftn 9.84
3.19 1.94 .4« l.?4 9.90 ft. 07
».?! l.^« .Sf. l.?S 9.14 10.7S
?..')' 1 .*< .4' 1 .) | «.?0 9.H7
?.7ft l.-r .4"= .u* ft. HO ft. SO
?.7i 1.'.' .6- !.'» t.ft" /.-"<
?.1o '.'> ..!' ."1 H.90 7.4?
?.?7 \.':r. .V . fS 4.-4.0 11.4?
?.1T l.Jfc .?f .HS 6.70 8.««
>.\\ \.f' .?r .M4 S.ftS 1?.!^
?.'.« l.js .31 1.14 A. ft) T7.67
?.P? 1.11 .^? l.'l ft.ftl 4S.OS
?.'? 1.4: .?./ ,ul h.f-4 T^.lft
?.P1 1.0" .)"- 1.1« S.?? «1.7«
?.'" I.1:'- .?" .ftS 4.7S 17.ftS
?.«! |.j; .?S .ft-V H.3ft 40.1?
?.->» l.l? .2- 1.?' 7.M*. 19.90
?.''* !.««: . >a .«! 4.9S ft. H)
f>.l" l.jo .3 7.10
?.?ft '.'./ .4? .«? 10. i s in.n?
>.''> >..j-- .4; i.na s.?o 11. ns
l.°s l.ir^ .? .ftO S.?n 4. "S
l.*| 1.04 .?= .S7 S.ftn 4.81
LlTiNIM
-o.nn
-n.nn
-n.on
- 0 . (1 1)
-n.no
-O.on
-n.on
5.1ft
S.76
«.00
l.sn
?.40
7.?n
7.4(1
*.MO
4.40
S.")0
«-.40
-n.on
-n.nn
-n.oo
-n.on
-n.on
-o.oo
-0.no
ft.?4
.ft/-
">.40
l.?n
J-.SO
7. H.I
ft. 40
A9H
-n.oo
-n.nn
-n.oo
-n.oo
-n.iin
-n.no
-n.nn
18. H7
1ft. sn
11.01
ft. IS
1 1 .63
11.10
14. H?
1 7.4ft
1«.'I8
??.<?
?4.0S
-0.00
-n.on
-n.nn
-n.no
-o.oo
-o.on
-".on
.-".l 1
,M.»?
«?.?n
?o.71
?4.'»S
?7.9S
lft.77
PM
6.S7
7.1H
h.?ft
6.01
ft.S?
h.»0
ft. 49
7. OK
S.°0
7. a?
7. MO
p. on
7. OS
ft. 61
ft.?n
rt.;>p
M.ftO
-.TO
6.41
ft.SQ
ft. 4ft
f,.0/.
ft.?0
ft. IS
...1.1
ft. 10
S.'.S
7.l-a
7. SI
7.«-H
7.41
7.?7
ASH
?ft.97
?S.84
10. h)
u.in
?S.S9
1P..18
in. 19
30.00
i?.',?
?6.ftO
?1 .60
??.SO
?S.40
?6.ftO
MI. 80
1?.SO
\ 1.40
40. ?0
19.41
4ft. 84
18. IS
47.ftS
H.ftS
4?.9S
44.97
4?. .as
47.04
sr,.?n
40.00
17.80
41). HO
SO. 00
D»Y
MATTF,H
.79.0?
7S.70
4S.(44
77.40
78.40
?4.70
6?.ft(J
66.^0
?9.ftO
6H.OO
41 .SO
S4.70
.14. SO
33. HO
11.70
M.'-O
?9.00
11 .MO
81. ?.0
8S..11
Sft.97
73.01
81.76
17.10
69. ?0
91. in
19.40
ftft.OO
S7.0Q
48.40
SB. 40
S4.60
CHUDF
PKOTEIN
1.77
1.77
1.77
1.77
1.77
1.77
1.77
1.77
?..0ft
1.74
1.74
1.74
1.74
1.74
1.77
1.77
1.7ft
r ."ft
1.77
1 .77
1.7V
1 .77
1.77
1.77
1.77
1.77
2.0ft
1.74
1.74
1.74
1.74
1.77
CRUHF
FIHF.P
8.37
ft.?.7
8.?7
8.?7
8.?7
fl.?7
fl.?7
8.?7
19. ?9
6.48
6.48
6.48
6.48
6.4«
W.?7
n.?7
16.44
1 9 . f 9
«.?7
ft.r 7
fl.?7
8.?7
8.?7
».?7
? .7-1
«.;7
19. ?9
ft.4H
6.48
6.48
6.48
8.?7
MFAN DAY
TFMP
7S.60 31?.
71.60 ?9H.
77.40 ?m.
6ft. C0 ?6H.
ftl.10 ?S4.
Sft.sn ?4i.
SS.ftO /??H.
5?. SO ?13.
1S.i,n 199.
39. »0 17ft.
17. UO 1ft?.
?ft.ftn UH.
10.40 114.
1Q.40 1 <<..
31.00 1?0.
?4.in inf.
?l.sn 93.
3-«.7n -^.
7s.*n .sn ?n.
3S.4n 1-19.
1-5. ao 17ft.
17.90 1ft?.
?8.ftn 14H.
19.40 134.
n.oo l?n.
PFN/
incAT
I"!
1«1
1«1
1"!
18)
181
181
1«>1
181
1«1
l«1
1«1
1^1
1"!
I'M
1"!
I'M
I'M
1"?
18?
10?
I"?
l«?
1»?
JB?
I""1
in?
IB?
IP?
1C?
1"?
l«?
-------
'LO*^L
N
1.6 =
1 .06
?.*£.
?,10
?.6I
?.?7
?.PP
?.10
?.='
?.n*.
1 .7?
?.51
?.6?
?.6T
?.n
?.oo
l.p*-
].*.*.
3.ns
?.".
3.1 1
3."'.
p.qa
3.1 n
?.f-"
J-.7-V
?.*!
2.6?
3.67
3.?i
3. is
?."«
3."6
T--A
K
l.Jl
1.3-
1.3*
1.1 =
1 .SI
1.3-
1 .67
!.»'
i .<.;
1.<:P
1.17
1.7C
l.Sl
l.tc
i .:)'
1 .6?
1.2-
1 .('.
1 .8^
i .'><;
1 ."»C
i .f-,
1 .3'.
i .*.'
1 .7:
i ."-;
i .(--
1 .6;
'.lo
1 .>-'
1.71
1 ."->-
1 .tc
.;h..N NPM MFMI- TFLL
3 CFLI
.1C «"»6 11.70 17.P6
.1 = .*.! 5.10 9.76
.1C 1.3g 10.09 14.41
.?<= .99 6.?? 61.14
. 3C .''0 3.11 61.67
.24 .96 b.17 61.63
,?6 .P6 1.19 10.1'-
.?<. .75 6.6*. 63. MS
.3* l.oi 7.?', 17.77
.?F .78 6.17 10. ?6
. ?C .^5 ?.60 6.9S
.6" . 7S 5.60 10. IP
.6-; .4) «.s? x.po
.6= .7H .70 11. SO
.?= ."0 «.?1 S.?6
.3f .*7 R.OO 6.1i3
.31 .*-6 10.00 11.41
,\c .66 10. '.0 11 .«',
.3S 1.17 10.40 ?S.H?
.2^ .«4 -V.MS ;>7.n?
.?* I.?? 10. 7S ?S.]H
.6' I./-7 ^.S7 ?'I.SH
.6; 1.^6 7.?0 1?.?"
.'c 1.1.7 10. so ?'../!
.63 ."7 h.?6 0.11
./,= l.?6 l.r,r> Ui.Sh
.6T 1.0] 16.76 1?.?6
.':6 .44 ?.0li 16.0?
.5= 1.3? 6.PO R.6P
,*-6 1 . <1 1 O.?0 6.00
.T 1.6S 7.''0 10. S3
.*,- I.?H io.no s.i*-
.s) i.is ii.no 9.11
Lir.hjM
6.hO
6.70
-0.00
-0.00
-0.00
-0.00
-0.00
-o.no
-o.oo
3.56
9.6*,
6. SO
l.*-0
t . 10
7. '10
P.rtO
1.40
c.?n
-0.00
-o.oo
-0.00
-0.00
-o.oo
- n . o n
-".so
* ,9H
6.?0
1.10
5. no
6.00
?.30
6.60
"?.60
APF
SSH
1 7.*.6
?P.16
-0.00
-0.00
-o.no
-0,00
-o.no
-o.no
-o.no
?9.3f,
3?.S9
17.??
?7. 10
??.no
?6.S6
??.47
?6.19
?1.6S
-o.oo
-o.oo
-o.oo
-O.IH)
-o.oo
-0.00
17.6?
?1 .Of,
1?.96
16. 9R
8.9?
8. SO
". 57
8.66
1 1.09
PH
7.37
M. IP.
h.SS
6.?->
6 . 6 II
6.6H
6.15
6.10
S.S 7
6.75
6.1'
7.11
7.70
7.SH
7.5)
6.67
H.I 1
H.I?
6.10
7.11
6.60
-,.'M
S.06
s.--,n
*..<>6
S.'JO
7.M6
7.--. I
7.11
6.71
7.40
7.71
7.°?
ASH
39.80
IP. 00
14.69
14.50
14.61
66.11
60.90
60.70
16.96
63.53
S7.1?
36.00
61 ,?0
3?. 60
3'). 70
16. ?0
61 .60
3rt.?0
!«.??
]H.?8
??.S9
??.60
?S.PH
?« . m
?4.?3
61 .7?
10.60
12.50
19.10
?0.60
?1 .00
19.00
22.70
D»Y
MATTtW
31.10
S3.?0
78.?)
79.16
67.*.P
71.73
83. 8S
3?. 70
65.10
P.O. 60
19.^0
66.30
5?. SO
53.00
S) .60
60.60
38.60
13.80
65.76
75.39
75.6*,
7'i. 16
30.40
67.00
70.60
31 .60
60. PO
6?. SO
66. ?0
69.60
51.00
66.10
63.00
C«UDF
PkOTElN
1.77
1.76
1.77
1.77
1 .77
1.77
1 .77
1.77
1.77
1.77
?.06
1 .76
1.76
1 .76
1 .76
1.77
1.77
1.7*.
1.71
1.71
1.77
I .77
1.77
1 .77
1.76
1.77
1.7*-
1.76
1 .76
1 .76
1.76
1.76
1.76
CrtUCF
FIHF.O
8.27
16.66
8.?7
fl.?7
8.P7
fl.27
8.?7
fl.?7
8.?7
8,?7
19. ?4
6.68
6.68
6.6H
6.68
8.?.'
8.27
16.66
12.56
12. ^6
8.?7
S.?7
8.?7
P.?7
6.6H
8.?7
16.66
6.68
6.68
6.68
6. 68
6.68
6.68
MFAN
TFMP
26.10
?1 .50
75.60
73.*-0
77.60
66.50
61 .10
58. SO
SS.frO
5?. 50
IS. 60
39. »i\
17.90
?8.*-n
19.60
31.00
?6.10
?1.«0
7s.*-n
7l.*-n
6 fi . S 0
6) . 10
58. SO
ss.*,n
5?. 50
IS. 60
39.no
?8.60
14.60
33.00
?6.10
21.50
33.70
nAr
106.
'ii.
J12.
?9>-.
?«.'.
26".
?S6.
?61.
??".
?13.
194.
176.
I*-?.
16".
136.
l?n.
106.
43.
31?.
?4H.
?6H.
?S6.
?61.
??H.
?1 1.
144.
1 76.
16H.
136.
1?0.
10*-.
43.
86.
PF"/
LOfST
IP?
1=?
Ml
|B1
1" 1
183
IPI
181
101
183
]«i
)«3
1"!
Ml
1"!
1"!
)"1
1" 1
171
1 71
1 7)
1 71
17]
1 7)
171
1 7)
17)
171
171
1 71
171
171
171
-------
"JFl *«*!. Tr* »:>--N NPM MI-MI- CfLL LlfiNlN
i ' > rn \
l.?C \.bf- ,!>' l.SO 1<'.OM ?6.M -0
'.7? ?.0i .]<: .AS ll.'-ij ?9.a? -0
*.ns ).7e .3* l.?7 13. ?4 ?S.si -n
?..»«- 1.7r .>; 1.1* 17. 7^ ?6.91 -n
?.->Q !.«.; .34 .»7 9.04 UI.S6 -0
?.*» 1.5) .34 1.17 7.H7 TA.11 -o
?.S3 1.2Q ,2S l.?6 8.6S 4.01 S
3. 1* I.HI .S4 1.13 S.10 10.7'. <}
2. IS 1.37 .17 .7rt 6.00 -32.60 7
?.ao 1.67 ,=T ).?! 10.TO 0.99 1
3.*4 s.f.P .73 1.46 9. no 7.11 7
3.1° 1 .*>? .*4 l.?l 10.^0 10.43 4
3.?? l.fr* .6f I.I/ U.OO 10. AS 3
3.17 1.6* .7r l.m 13. PO 7.7? 4
?.9«. l.i* .ST 1.11 10.60 9.64 4
VO ?.«>9 1.7? .3= .97 10.97 13. IS -0
00
?.70 !.< = . | - .7S 13. «S 30.10 -0
?.e<; 1.4 = .3-. HI * ).<7 .3C |.n 7. A; 1S.S7 -0
?.->4 ).:<; .31 .OS r.?B «.)! 4
l.-t- 1.?* .33 ."-> .SO ').*() V
?.16 1.31 .17 .«S S.H" 14. S? ?
1 .<.» 1.1- .'«| .MI s.m in. '.i i
?.40 I.ti .!<= .-6 ?.*0 (,.^0 7
>."7 l.6c .e,. ,.?, Q.nn ,..?, ^
?." 1.3" .cl 1.03 9.40 4.1? ?
?.0
S.«l ?9.?4 ?6
7.10 42.30 86
7.06 .3?. 40 63
fl.?0 19.60 S7
7.04 ?n.ao 63
8.13 ]8.?fl 4?
-4.01 20.40 47
H.11 23.80 S3
6.7? <>a.?9 90
b.OS 39.0? 72
6.|rt (4.?^ 63
6.13 46.1? 41
6.1^. 40.97 67
6. SO 44.30 79
s.oi sn.:»? .17
7.S? 4'-..?.0 77
1,1,1 M.;>n 71
6.0( 1/.HO S)
6. SO ?/.40 S4
7.413 4U..30 SI
7.?? 46.70 SS
8.1? ?H.60 S]
7.6H MS.S? 9)
7.8S 3S.98 R9
7.10 43.«1 64
.SI
,3S
.6?
.OS
.SO
.10
.SO
.?0
.90
.90
.so
.30
.00
.80
.20
.08
.09
.SB
.10
.10
.90
.SO
.20
.?n
.?o
,,'n
.90
.HO
.20
.S8
.SS
.2?
t'h
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
CRUGF
MFAN f>AY PF*i/
nit IN > im w it
.71
.71
.77
.77
.77
.77
.74
.76
.74
.74
.74
.74
.74
.74
.74
.71
.71
.77
.77
.77
.77
.74
.77
.76
.74
.74
.74
.74
.74
.74
.77
.77
.77
12. "=A
12. = 6
8.27
J.27
8.27
rt.27
6.4ft
16.44
6.48
6.48
6.41
6.48
6.4H
6.48
6.48
12. S6
8.?7
a.?. 7
8.27
H.^7
6.48
*.?7
16.44
6.4*
6.4H
f-,4-*
6.48
6.4M
6.4^
8.?7
8.37
7S
73
66
61
58
SS
5?
.19
28
10
31
?4
21
21
3 1
7S
71
66
61
S8
SS
S?
3S
v>
?><
1 >
3»
24
33
?1
7S
73
HP
.«>0 312.
,f,Q <>?».
.SO ?I3.
.40 r-»9.
.00 176.
,<-n (i«H.
.40 1 ><..
..)0 1 '11.
.10 106.
.70 ««..
.sn 01.
.60 .\\f.
.60 29C.
IOCAI
17?
17?
17?
17?
17?
1 7?
17?
17?
17?
1 7?
17?
1 7?
17?
17?
1 7?
173
171
1 71
171
171
173
1 71
173
1 ' <
1"
171
1 71
1 71
171
r,S)
SSI
8.27 77.40 ?*3. ^.Sl
-------
KJFLOAt-L fi-A
r t
?.nc i
?.?i 1
1.75 1
]." 1
1 . Q n 1
?« 1 4 )
2« ln 1
?.lc 1
2.^ 1
a.n i
?.?> 1
?.17 1
?.!< I
1.7? 1
I."-" 1
VO ].A3 1
v£)
1.4«. 1
1 .57 1
l."7 1
l.H 1
1 .70 1
?.!' 1
1 ."
?.?1 1
?.'? 1
1 . " ' 1
P.'-.' 1
1.47 1
.7<.
.CM
.on
.A]
l.?7
.fM
.7'
.A =
.=7
.2?
.7<
.SP
. 1C
.sr
.? =
.33
.<'.
.71
,3<:
,c\
,ue
,a-
.*'
.0-
1-
. !'
.<'
.I'
,S7
.-;
.41
.^
..««
,.-J
.46
.-:>
.<«7
.9 =
*;t--N UPM NF.MI- CFLL LI AN IN AHF
> rFI.I ASH
.ps .^n 7.?i 41. nil -tt.
.»<= .'.s <,.7<; *i.?s -n.
.0'. .0^ 11.11 40,0'' -0.
.11 .I*, 7.A7 1?,11 9.
.07 .'I .3.«n 13.17 *.
.(i- .10 7.4n iQ.on «.
.0? .s? 11. ?n ?o.?9 s.
.?i .«n i.6;? 17, ?n ?.
.31 1.04 4.40 =i,90 7.
.?<; .«s 4. *n ^.11 A.
.4f .Qf< 4.nn ft. 40 1.
.3* .CM h.io o.ni ?.
,T7 .1*. in.f-A, i-j.?^ -n.
.(;- .37 10.3? 47.01 -0.
.n« ,vi s.i'-. ss.7^ -i).
.0.1 .]M 4. no ^n.3»< -0.
.n* .^i n,"/^ ^4,L;4 -n.
.0? .in i?.l«i ^p.?s -o.
.n/, .(,/. -t.oi M.»H K.
.0'. .-" «.7n I^.KA f-.
7.1 m 1/-.4I. 7.
.ir .«;* 7. -an if-. r.^ 4.
.J, .if. 1.... 14. '.^
.->., .f.f, S.7n 7,7(1 7.
.?(, . tn h. An ^ , n<. 7 .
.OS .40 *«.(in B. 1 7 -.
. 1} .'»1 >J. .
.0= .13 13. ?i 40., in -n.
.nc- .fiA . '7 '-.J. 37 -n.
.0" . 1 n -.Q! 7) .iv) -1).
..1 . .17 .A3 '.a,' II -0.
.n- .11 4.H AU. >-.« -n.
.06 .3' ".S9 l.ut) 9.
no -n.nn
no -n.nn
nn -d.f'd
-i', ^^.7?
-A ^0.77
nn IM.PO
no 1 ft . ? 1
70 ?7.10
00 ?4.?0
hfl ?-^.OQ
-.0 ?').?0
411 ?S.19
no -n.nn
no -o.no
n n -n.nn
no -o.no
nn -n.no
no -o.no
fi. -«-.7S
^ ?4.»=?
-'II ?7.l-4
40 ?3..AS
x-n «7.1S
7(1 ??.fcO
/>0 ??.t'h
nn l| .ml
»n IS.^J?
n n -n.nn
no -n.nn
nn -A.IMI
(in -O.i'O
n n -n.nn
7? 4=..!?
PH ASH
7.4'; 14
7,'Ci IS
7. A,I 40
A.*? V-
7.49 44
M.4B 30
8.14 ?S
7.S7 41
h.77 33
ft. 37 3«
7.7? 4?
7.01 37
7.^? 3b
7.7) 47
7. Ml S»<
7..^ 4«
/.43 44
>-.sn d?
7.11 <*
7,'l-t (W
w..n.) 'Hi
7.->n
.A. mi 14
A.I? Mt
7.7? 41
7.»>S 10
7. SO Sll
r-.4ll 74
7 . 1 n A?
...10 74
7. hi 79
8.07 S9
.S?
.1H
.HS
.00
.99
.A.O
.90
.flO
.10
.00
.00
.00
.4S
.4S
.^s
.?3
.?S
.A7
.01
.'"0
.90
.'0
,?0
.so
.00
. AO
,«4
.4?
.04
.?*
.1?
.^,4
MATTFK
79.43
HKOTf IN
1.77
C^UCF. MFAHJ PAY
FIHFP TFMP
fl.?7 A«,.i;n >AM.
A?. SO 1.77 rt,
?4,30
A3. 10
35. HO
40.10
32.40
S7.SO
37. ?0
30 17C.
?.
?.
2.
1.
2.
1.
1 .
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
f.
"3.
?7 61.10 ?s<4 .
?7 S8.sn ?«i.
n i s ? . & o x> i j .
01 3s.4n ms.
(il vi. «n i/f.
ni 37. &n IA?.
01 ?.<.AO 1..-.
?9 1 9. Art I 34 .
?7 ll.nn I.'O.
?o ?4.m int.
48 31. 7n »/..
?7 7S.An .u^.
?7 71. An ?.)*.
?7 77.40 ->H3.
?7 Af.^0 S*».
?7 A.1 .30 ?S<«.
01 S?.SO ?13.
PF»l/
ss?
-------
H*
O
0
* IFLTAI-t TT» NH-K
K: K )
?. 1 1 1 '' .0=
1.79 1.49 .0*
l.»* !.'« .0=
j .70 1 .0* .?<.
>. 17. 1.-,? .??
2.'1 !.»' .?*
l.»l i.sq . ft*
?.?? !.<><< .1C
M"M MpM|« rp'I.L
LIfiNiM AHF PM ASH n»v
fFLI SSH
.47 l?.)n 17.
M 10.50 39.
.'.o =,./! )«.
.I'll 7.?H ',.
.7ft ft.?n 10.
.?? 9.?n 17.
.74 ft. HO 1?.
7S in.Bh n.
40 '<.**n 1ft.
?H 4.^0 ??.
^s i. 10 i«.
74 ".no ?i.
si fi.on 14.
in s.fto ??.
fts T.SO ?o.
B9 /.S4 11.47
7ft <1.0? 3ft.. 10
..? 7.74 1?.70
r.] ft.H^ 1S.?n
04 h.A? 11. HO
so 7.«? 19. nn
ftS 7.9P 41. ?0
MATTE.H
PS.90
BS.10
s9!?o
47. ?0
44.00
1?.30
4S.PO
CWuOF
PKOTt IN
?
?
?
2
f
1
?
1
.09
.09
.n9
.09
.Oft
.77
.Oft
.74
CRUCF
FIBER
?7.01
27.01
?7.01
27.01
19. ?4
fl.?7
19. ?9
6.4R
MFAN DAY
PF"/
TFMP LOC«T
3S
39
37
14
.1.1
?4
31
.40 14^.
.00 17fi.
. >j p 1 f, f .
.40 IT..
.00 1?0.
.in inf.
.70 fl.4.
SSI
SSI
SS.l
SSI
SST
SSI
SSI
SSI
-------
APPENDIX B
SUMMARY OF MULTIPLE LINEAR REGRESSION EQUATIONS OBTAINED
Equation 1:
RFR =
Equation 2:
TRF =
Equation 3:
ARF =
Equation 4:
ARF =
Equation 5:
VSLDS
Equation 6:
ASH =
Equation 7:
ALKLN
Equation 8:
RFR = 0.10 + 0.38 ARI R2 = 0.54
TRF = 4.79 - 1.51 ARI - 1.09 SS - 0.01 BMC R2 - 1.00
ARF = -0.04 + 0.18 TR + 0.98 RFR R2 = 0.80
ARF = 0.76 + 0.22 TR R2 = 0.47
VSLDS = 5.78 - 2.26 ST + 0.32 R - 1.78 RFR R2 = 0.74
ASH = 8.35 - 3.88 DMM + 0.03 BMC - 1.78 RFR R2 = 0.81
ALKLN = 1134.13 - 527.98 DMM + 8.55 BMC - 248.63 RFR R2 = 0.81
COD = 10,218.61 - 4252.01 ST + 402.41 R - 2563.05 RFR R2 = 0.74
101
-------
APPENDIX C
MEAN, MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM VALUES FOR COLLECTED DATA
Variable
Time to runoff, hour
Accumulated rainfall to runoff, cm
Resulting runoff, percent
Settleable solids, ml/1
Volatile solids, mg/1
Inorganic solids, mg/1
Alkalinity, mg/lCaC03
pH
BOD, mg/1
COD, mg/1
aExtrapolated values for Test Run 8.
Mean
1.6
1.54
36.
2.71
2.20
3.85
615.
7.78
481.
3326.
Minimum
0.2
0.51
16.
0.15
0.33
0.54
194.
7.10
60.
494.
Maximum
8.0a
3. S53
59.
17.00
6.44
8.61
1236.
8.70
1720.
1122.
102
-------
o
CH
APPENDIX D
COMPOSITE DATA SHEET
Sample
number
Run 1
8-19-1
8-19-2
8-19-3
Run 2
8-26-1
8-26-2
8-26-3
8-26-4
8-26-5
Run 3
8-27-1
8-27-2
8-27-3
Run 4
9-6-1
9-6-2
Run 5
9-7-1
9-7-2
9-7-3
Run 6
10-9-1
10-9-2
10-9-3
10-9-4
Run 7
10-12-1
10-12-2
10-12-3
10-12-4
Run 8
Run 9
10-16-1
10-16-2
Avg.
rainfall
Inten-
sity, Surface
cm/hr true
4*2 Concrete
2.2 Dirt
1.9 Concrete
0.4 Concrete
2.8 Concrete
1.9 Dirt
3.7 Dirt
0.4 Dirt
2.8 Dirt
Initial Ration,
Manure mole- concen-
Surface mantle ture trate:
alope, depth, content, rough-
« en t aee
1.7 1.8 12.0 5.25
0.8 2.3 7.3 5.25
2.7 1.3 5.4 3.31
0.5 1.3 10.9 3.31
0.5 2.0 61.2 3.31
2.5 4.3 22.4 0.25
1.6 4.3 15.0 0.25
2.0 4.3 24.6 0.25
2.0 4.3 58.9 0.25
Runoff
rate,
cm/hr
0.1
2.8
2.6
0.6
1.9
3.4
2.2
2.2
0.4
1.4
1.9
0.1
0.2
0.0
3.0
3.1
0.3
0.9
1.1
1.0
0.4
0.9
0.5
1.4
0.4
0.6
Total
rain-
fall,
en
7.6
11.7
3.9
2.1
5.8
7.6
11.9
2.5
Tine to
Time, runoff,
hr hr
0.
1.
1.
5. 0.3
0.
0.9
1.9
3.9
5.4
2.0 0.6
0.7
1.1
2.0
6.0 3.9
4.4
5.6
2.1 0.2
0.2
0.7
2.0
4.0 0.7
0.8
1.3
2.3
4.0
0.7
1.2
2.1
3.0
6.0 8.0b
0.3
0.9
Accumu-
lated
rain- Accumu-
fall to Runoff lated
runoff, rate, runoff.
0.0
1.6
3.4
0.9 2.8 14.2
0.1
0.8
3.4
8.5
14.0
1.3 1.6 2.3
0.2
0.6
2.3
1.5 0.2 0.3
0.1
0.2
0.6 2.6 5.0
0.0
1.1
4.6
1.7 1.0 3.1
0.1
0.5
1.5
3.1
0.1
0.4
1.8
2.0
3.4b 0.0 0.0
0.0
0.6
Result-
ing
runoff,
Z
45
121
59
16
85
42
21
0
34
Settle-
able
aollda,
ml/1
8.60
2.70
1.12
0.90
1.55
1.25
1.20
1.23'
1.10
1.95
2.05
1.40
2.30
11.10
6.60
4.30
0.20
0.95
0.13
0.18
0.40
0.65
0.15
0.90
17.00
0.45
Volatile
aollds,
M/l
6.44
3.85
1.99
2.16
0.69
1.36
1.41
1.70
1.74
3.87
5.17
4.76
J.85
5.58
3.15
1.97
C.89
0.73
0.86
0.46
0.44
0.40
0.33
C.34
2.34
1.74
Inor-
ganic
sollda
M/l
8.61
5.16
3.65
3.88
4.31
2.98
3.41
3.67
3.77
5.44
6.79
6.46
6.54
6.96
4.53
3.62
2.85
2.48
3.12
1.33
0.85
0.63
0.59
0.54
3.21
4.61
Alka-
, Unity,
nc/lCaCOi
1003
727
595
643
549
517
568
621
565
755
843
988
1004
1236
864
640
298
316
324
284
220
208
200
194
890
948
BOD,
oH nx/1
7.15 626
7.50 596
7.50 750
7.40 1148
7.50 840
7.57 628
7.40 880
7.33 1100
7.50 848
7.40 1580°
7.18 1720°
7.10 --
7.30
7.45 --
7.55 ~
7.62
7.90 100
8.00 112
8.15 148
8.30 112
8.70 140
8.70 123°
8.70 80
8.60 60
8.42 520
8.40 520
Average value.
Final
mois-
ture
COD, content,
n«/l *
59.3
9407
5156
3188
57.0
2130
1564
1036
1504
2912
64.2
2150
5550
8870
67.6
7324
7216
67.6
10P10
5312
2783
51.7
751
544
665
574
64.9
1122
1064
785
494
57.2
2044
2337
Extrapolated value*.
cHelghted 'average value.
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT
(Please read Instructions on the reverse
DATA
before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-600/2-76-292
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
MANURE HARVESTING PRACTICES: EFFECTS ON WASTE
CHARACTERISTICS AND RUNOFF
5. REPORT DATE
December 1976 issuing date
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
R. W. Hansen, J. M. Harper, M. L. Stone, G. M. Ward
and R. A. Kidd
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, Colorado 80523
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
1HB617
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
R-803378
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Lab,
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Ada. Oklahoma 74820
- Ada, OK
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final 10/1/74 - 12/31/75
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/15
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
To develop a basis for better manure harvesting management practices a combined
field and laboratory study was conducted.
The effect of management practices on manure qualities and runoff pollution poten-
tial were compared on three feedlot pens with fully surfaced, partially surfaced and
unsurfaced conditions.
Average N, P and K elements were present in a ratio of approximately 4:1:2 provid-
ing 46 Ibs N, 11 Ibs P and 27 Ibs K per ton of dry manure.
For recycling purposes ash is an important fraction of manure and can be reduced by
use of hard surfaced pens. Ash content averaged 36.2%. Fiber and lignin in manure
are directly related to the fiber content of the ration.
The effect of decomposition of the manure was greatest on its viscosity and squeez-
ability. Bulk density and particle size remained the same.
Surfaced feedlot areas have a larger percentage of precipitation in runoff with
higher concentrations of pollutants. Increased animal densities on surfaced pens
will offset the difference with non-surfaced pens and can result in a lower per-
animal pollution potential from runoff.
7.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATI Field/Group
Wastes
Manure
Agricultural wastes
Effluents
Pollution
Waste disposal
Waste treatment
Beef cattle
Runoff
Processing
Fertilizer
Recycling
Manure harvesting
Waste characteristics
Refeeding
02/03
02/05
8. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release Unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
112
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
104
ftU&GOVERIMBn'PRINTING OFFICE! 1977-757-056/5502
------- |