J. Appl. Poult. Res.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

J APPL POULT RES 2008. 17:54-63. doi:10.3382/japr.2007-00014
© 2008 Poultry Science Association
This Article
Right arrow Summary Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Patterson, P. H.
Right arrow Articles by Topper, P. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Patterson, P. H.
Right arrow Articles by Topper, P. A.

Research Reports

The Potential for Plants to Trap Emissions from Farms with Laying Hens. 1. Ammonia

P. H. Patterson*,1, Adrizal{dagger}, R. M. Hulet*, R. M. Bates{ddagger}, D. A. Despot{ddagger}, E. F. Wheeler§ and P. A. Topper§

* Department of Poultry Science, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park 16802; {dagger} Faculty of Animal Husbandry, University of Jambi, Jambi 36361, Indonesia; {ddagger} Department of Horticulture, and § Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park 16802

Correspondence: 1 Corresponding author: php1{at}psu.edu


   SUMMARY
TOP
 SUMMARY
DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONS
 REFERENCES AND NOTES
 
The potential of vegetation to trap NH3 discharged from a layer house through the exhaust fans was evaluated at The Pennsylvania State University Poultry Education and Research Center in September 2005. Five tree species were planted in pot-in-pot containers in 5 rows downwind of the house fans and in 2 control rows upwind of the hen house. Each row included 1 plant (upwind) or 2 plants (downwind) per species per row. When measured with a photoacoustic NH3 detector at the same elevation as the fan (1.5 m), NH3 concentration decreased sharply with greater distance, from 51.54 ppm at 0 m (at the fan) to 1.89 ppm at 5.5 m (between row 2 and 3), 0.27 ppm at 10 m (after row 5), and 0 ppm at 50 m (control). This trend was also observed with the dosi-tubes and photoacoustic detector at the 0.3- and 3.0-m elevations. Significantly lower NH3 concentrations were recorded when the trees were present downwind of the fans compared with when the trees were removed (16.45 vs. 19.35 ppm), suggesting a portion of the atmospheric NH3 was being held by the plants. This was further supported by a marked decrease in foliar N status of the plants with greater distance from the source. Plant species also differed, with willow appearing to be the most responsive species and effective as an NH3 trap.

Key Words: plant • ammonia • foliage nitrogen • laying hen


   DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM
TOP
 SUMMARY
 DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM
MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONS
 REFERENCES AND NOTES
 
Concerns for the environment and the negative effect of poultry house NH3 on bird performance, their welfare [1, 2], and farm workers [3] have been acknowledged. Current dietary and in-house management strategies for poultry are aimed at keeping house NH3 concentrations below 25 ppm by reducing both NH3 generation and emission [3–5]. However, these strategies do not control all generation and volatilization of NH3 in the house and have no effect on dispersion of NH3, other noxious gases, and dust after being discharged through the exhaust fans. The global environmental effects of atmospheric NH3 include soil acidification, land N deposition, and eutrophication of fresh and saltwater ecosystems [6–9]. These effects are in part from NH3 losses from animal housing and land application of manure as a fertilizer [9, 10]. Furthermore, the sustainability of commercial poultry production may be in jeopardy as municipalities and township officials consider the nuisance complaints of neighbors living nearby the farms. These concerns are exacerbated by greater farm size and odorous emissions including NH3 [11–13].

In addition to its reactive and water-soluble properties, NH3 can also reach higher elevations in the atmosphere and blow with the wind before being deposited in rainfall [14]. On poultry farms, the speed of the exhaust fans [15] and climatic conditions, including air velocity, temperature, and RH, play significant roles on the NH3 concentration near the buildings.

The capacity of plants to absorb ambient NH3 through their stomata and assimilate this N into their tissues as amino acids and protein via the glutamine synthetase and glutamate synthase pathways [16, 17] indicates that planting trees around poultry sites might help reduce NH3 dispersion to the environment.

In a field study of commercial poultry farms in Pennsylvania from 2004 to 2005 [18], we observed not only greater foliar N between hybrid poplar and Norway spruce planted downwind (11.4 to 17.7 m) of the exhaust fans compared with control trees (≥48-m distance), but also species difference indicated (P = 0.07) greater foliage N concentrations in hybrid poplar than Norway spruce. Pitcairn et al. [19] also reported species and distribution changes of the native plant composition downwind of the fans from commercial poultry and livestock farms. They showed the abundant presence of nitrophilous land covering plant species (Deschampsia flexuosa, Holcus lanatus, Rubus idaeus, and Urtica dioica) close to the farm with more N-sensitive species (Oxalis acetosella, Galium odoratum, mosses, and ferns) at 300 m away from the fans.

Recently Malone et al. [11] reported lower NH3 concentrations (46%) on a roaster farm downwind of a vegetative buffer (16.8 m) comprised of bald cypress, Leyland cypress, and red cedar (7.6-m wide) when compared with concentrations measured near the tunnel fans (9.2 m). In a simulation study, Theobald [20] found that a tree belt of Scots pine planted downwind of an artificial NH3 source had the potential to recapture approximately 5 to 10% of the NH3 released and suggested that this value could be increased with a better vegetative belt design. However, neither of these studies could separate the potential benefit of the trees from the distance dilution from the NH3 source.

Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of different tree species planted in a pot-in-pot system at different distances downwind of the exhaust fans of a layer house to trap NH3-N. Also, this study sought to compare the effect of the trees vs. no trees in the pots over different distances from the NH3 source on atmospheric NH3 concentration.


   MATERIALS AND METHODS
TOP
 SUMMARY
 DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONS
 REFERENCES AND NOTES
 
Hen House
Atmospheric NH3 measurements and foliage samplings for N and DM determination were taken downwind of the fans and upwind (for control) from a layer house (Figure 1Go) at The Pennsylvania State University Poultry Education and Research Center, University Park. At the time of this study, the hen house had 600 twenty-week-old Single Comb White Leghorn laying hens (capacity, 3,000 hens) fed a standard layer diet. Seven uniformly placed air inlets along with four 61-cm exhaust fans and a controller based on temperature and static pressure at 13.75 Pa comprised the ventilation system of the house. Each fan had a connecting hood (Figure 2Go; 76 x 86 cm opening at a 15° angle) directing the discharged emissions to the ground outside of the house. These were not unlike the covered fan banks on commercial layer houses that light-trap the fans and direct exhaust air to the ground. All fans were set to run at the same revolutions per minute (2,500), and the air speed of the fans averaged 333 m/min [21] throughout the study with a calculated discharge of approximately 97 m3/min per fan.


Figure 1
View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Figure 1. Trees planted in the pot-in-pot system arranged in rows downwind of four 61-cm exhaust fans from the hen house. C = cage rows; F = fans; O = NH3 tanks; bold lines in front of the fans indicate the position of tree rows. Control trees (upwind, 50 m away from the fans) and a mobile weather station established 28 m southwest of the hen house are not shown.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (27K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Figure 2. Side view of the hen house showing a 61-cm exhaust fan with hood and pot-in-pot containers with trees [R1 to R5 = male-potted trees fitted into female pots in the ground arranged in rows 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5; trees actually vary in heights; the average heights of the trees at the beginning of NH3 measurements were 225 ± 28 cm (Canaan fir), 344 ± 65 cm (hackberry), 151 ± 12 cm (juniper), 137 ± 15 cm (lilac), and 216 ± 22 cm (willow)].

 
Source of Additional NH3
Because of low hen numbers at the time of the study compared with house capacity, additional anhydrous NH3 was released from two 150-L tanks into the inlet of each fan to increase the NH3 discharged. Each of the tanks was regulated at 1.79 kg/cm2, connected with a T-connector to 2 glass flow meters [22], and set to release NH3 at 1.5 L/min via a manifold of 0.64-cm polyvinyl chloride tubing with 5 evenly spaced holes for 8 h from 0800 to 1600 h on each day NH3 was measured. The exhaust manifold was mounted diagonally across each of the fan intakes at 30-cm distance from each fan. Therefore, each tank provided NH3 for 2 fans at the same rate. During the NH3 measurements, the building fresh air inlets left and right near the exhaust fans were closed, whereas the others remained under automatic control. This was to increase static pressure for the fans to discharge room air along with supplemental NH3 out of the layer house.

Pot-in-Pot Trees
Five rows of 10 holes (diameter: 51 cm) downwind of the exhaust fans and 2 reference control rows of 5 holes upwind of the hen house were dug in the ground 0.4 m and fitted with 76-L female pots. Five tree species [Canaan fir (Abies balsamea phanerolepis), hackberry (Celtis occidentalis), juniper (Juniperus communis), lilac (Syringa x prestoniae), and streamco willow (Salix purpurea)], originally purchased from 2001 to 2003 from a commercial nursery and grown at The Pennsylvania State University Landscape Management Research Center, were transplanted into 76-L male pots containing NX-6 pine bark media [23] in late summer 2004. All the male pots containing the media and trees were fitted into the 76-L female pots (Figure 2Go). This pot-in-pot system allowed us to remove all the trees from the exhaust field to measure NH3 emissions under the conditions with no trees present. The first row of trees was 3.5 m from the fans, and the distance between 2 rows was 1.5 m. Within a row, the distance between trees was 1.2 m. An additional 10 reference control trees were approximately 50 m away upwind from the fans (NH3 recorded at this site was not included in the data analysis, because NH3 was not measurable at this distance). There were 2 plants per species in each row downwind of the fans and 1 plant per species in each reference row upwind. All the pots were connected to a water line emitter, and the irrigation system was set to automatically water twice a day for 10 min or adjust as required. All plants were grown in this pot-in-pot system for a year. In early summer of 2005, each plant was given a 1-time dose (28.4 g) of Osmocote-Plus 15N-9P-12K controlled-release fertilizer [24]. At the beginning of NH3 measurements and foliage sampling (September 2005), the average height of each plant species was measured in centimeters: 225 ± 28, Canaan fir; 344 ± 65, hackberry; 151 ± 12, juniper; 137 ± 15 lilac; and 216 ± 22, willow, respectively.

Parameter Measurements
Ammonia measurements were conducted either with or without all trees present (except at 50-m distance where NH3 was only measured with the trees present). Measurements were taken for 2 consecutive days from 1000 to 1500 h in September 2005. In this way, NH3 was measured downwind of the fans at 0 m (on the hood surface of the fan), 5.5 m (between row 2 and 3), 10 m (after row 5), and 50 m (between control rows). Each measurement was made at 3 different elevations (0.3, 1.5, and 3.0 m). The 1.5-m height matched the height of the exhaust fans. The ambient NH3 concentration was measured with a photoacoustic NH3 detector capable of detecting NH3 at the parts per billion level [25]. Ten 30-s NH3 concentrations were recorded within 5 min at each location daily for 2 consecutive days. Also, passive dosi-tubes [26] were hung to measure a time-weighted average NH3 concentration at 1.5-m height above grade on a metal post at each location for 8 h/d from 0800 to 1600 h as a low-cost measure during the 2-d monitoring periods. The color change of the chemical indicator within the scaled dosi-tubes changed from blue to yellow and was divided by 8 h to get an average NH3 concentration in ppm. Wind speed and wind direction were monitored continuously and recorded by a portable weather station [27] set at 28 m southwest of the layer house. Temperature and RH were recorded among the trees using a data logger [28] hung at 1.5-m height and 6.5 m downwind of the exhaust fans.

Foliar tissue was sampled from each species only when the trees were in the pot-in-pot rows downwind of the fans. This was done at the end of the day after recording NH3 concentrations at approximately 1600 h. Foliar samples were sent to The Pennsylvania State University Agricultural Analytical Services Laboratory for total N and DM analysis. The DM of foliage was calculated from the difference of fresh and dry weight over the fresh weight and presented as a percentage value.

Experimental Design and Statistical Analysis
A completely randomized block design was applied in this study with the 4 fans considered as blocks. The mathematical model described below was used to analyze the NH3 concentration data, and a similar model with the substitution of the condition (C = with or without trees) by the plant species (S) was used to analyze plant foliar N and DM data:


Formula

where Xijklm = the value observed; µ = the overall mean; Ti = the ith day of NH3 measurement or foliage sampling; Fj = the jth fan; Dk = the kth distance; Cl = the lth condition; (D x C)kl = the distance by condition effect at the kth and the lth combination; and {varepsilon}ijklm = the residual error. For plant foliar N and DM data analysis, the (D x C)kl term was substituted with (D x S)kl. In addition to this adjustment, there were only 2 fans (instead of 4 fans as used in the NH3 data analysis) considered as blocks, because the sampling of plant foliage was taken downwind of the 2 pairs of fans, left (fans 1 and 2) and right (fans 3 and 4) of the layer house. Data were subjected to 2-way ANOVA using the GLM procedures of SAS followed by Bonferroni test [29] to distinguish the significance (P ≤ 0.05) among treatment means.


   RESULTS
TOP
 SUMMARY
 DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONS
 REFERENCES AND NOTES
 
Data on aerial climatic conditions during the NH3 measurements in the pot-in-pot study area are presented in Table 1Go. Some variations for all climatic parameters existed on a daily basis. Wind direction was variable regardless of the day or condition, with slow wind speeds averaging 6.1 ± 2.8 km/h with the trees in place to 9.4 ± 4.1 km/h with no trees in the pots.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 1. Microclimatic conditions (temperature, RH, wind speed, and wind direction) during the measurement of NH3 concentration downwind of the exhaust fans of the hen house under 2 conditions (trees vs. no trees)1
 
When the pot-in-pot study area was monitored with the photoacoustic NH3 detector, all the factors significantly affected NH3 concentrations at the 1.5-m elevation (P ≤ 0.05; Table 2Go). However, when the NH3 concentration was measured with the dosi-tubes, only a significant distance effect was measured (P ≤ 0.0001) with these instruments. At all 3 elevations (0.3, 1.5, and 3.0 m), NH3 concentrations were higher on first day vs. second day measurements with the photoacoustic detector. Fan had a significant but variable effect on NH3 concentration when measured at 1.5- (P ≤ 0.0001) and 3.0-m elevations (P ≤ 0.005). Distance from the fans had the most profound and highly significant (P ≤ 0.0001) effect on NH3 concentrations at all elevations measured with either the dosi-tubes or photo-acoustic detector. The highest concentration of NH3 was measured at the surface of the fans at the 1.5-m elevation with both the photoacoustic detector and dosi-tubes. Ammonia concentrations declined sharply thereafter with greater distance to 0 ppm by 50 m. Further indications of the importance of distance from the fans on NH3 levels were measured at the 0.3- and 3.0-m elevations where the concentrations at 5.5-m distance were from 6- to 14-fold greater than at 10 m.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 2. Ammonia concentrations measured downwind of four 61-cm exhaust fans1 of the hen house under 2 conditions (trees vs. no trees) at several distances (0, 5.5, 10, and 50 m) and at 3 different elevations (0.3, 1.5, and 3.0 m) on each distance
 
Another clear and significant trend from the study was lower concentrations of NH3 in the presence of the trees compared with when the trees were removed at both 1.5-m (16.45 vs.19.35 ppm) and 3.0-m elevations (0.65 vs. 0.94 ppm; data pooled from 2-d readings). The trend continued with the significant distance x condition interaction on NH3 concentration observed at the 1.5-m elevation. Also at the surface of the fans (0 m) and at the 5.5- and 10-m distances, NH3 concentrations were significantly reduced when trees were present compared with conditions when they were removed.

Plant foliar N concentration was significantly affected by all the factors, except the pooled days of measurement (Table 3Go). Foliar N was slightly greater downwind of the fans 1 and 2 vs. 3 and 4, respectively (2.52 vs. 2.42%) because of greater NH3 emissions measured at the fans at the 1.5-m elevation (Table 2Go). The foliar N concentration was greatest (2.91%) at 3.5 m beyond the fans and decreased further to 2.54% at 6.5 m (row 3), 2.36% at 9.5 m (row 5), and 2.07% at 50 m (control row). Willow foliage had the greatest N concentration (3.24%) followed by lilac (2.75%), hackberry (2.45%), and the 2 evergreens (juniper and the Canaan fir) with the same values (1.96%). The significant effect of distance on plant species observed in this study showed that willow was the most responsive to NH3 exposure. Willow also showed a 1.66-fold reduction in foliar N from 3.5- to 50-m distance compared with reductions of 1.44, 1.38, 1.26, and 1.18 for lilac, hackberry, Canaan fir, and juniper, respectively. Foliar DM levels were significantly influenced by both plant species and distance from the fans. However, DM levels did not correspond with the trends in foliar N concentration.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 3. Foliar N and DM concentration of 5 plant species sampled downwind of the 2 pairs of 61-cm exhaust fans of the hen house1
 

   DISCUSSION
TOP
 SUMMARY
 DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
CONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONS
 REFERENCES AND NOTES
 
The significant effect of the monitoring day on NH3 concentration downwind of the fans measured at all elevations with the photoacoustic detector clearly indicated the effect of microclimatic fluctuation around the farm. This is a challenge not only for researchers but more importantly on relations at the urban-rural interface and for regulatory measurements or assumptions. Higher wind speed, for instance (second > first day), most likely dispersed NH3, resulting in lower NH3 concentrations measured on d 2 relative to d 1. Wind direction might also influence NH3 concentration [11], but in the present study, it mostly blew toward the exhaust fans. Furthermore, lower RH could be a factor that would sustain NH3 around the discharge area before undergoing further chemical reactions [14, 30, 31], and lower temperatures would reduce NH3 volatilization [31, 32].

The average NH3 concentration from fans 1 and 2 (20.34 ppm) was greater than fans 3 and 4 (15.47 ppm). This appeared to influence the foliar N of the combined plant species with greater N levels near fans 1 and 2 (2.52) vs. fans 3 and 4 (2.42), indicating plants are a sensitive barometer of the atmospheric NH3.

In a 4-yr study by Malone et al. [11], summer NH3 comparisons between fan and trees (9.2 m) and downwind of the 3-tree rows (16.8 m) on a commercial roaster farm indicated a significant 46% NH3 reduction. Another study by Pitcairn et al. [19] considered NH3 concentrations near commercial livestock buildings and with the flora downwind of the fans in the United Kingdom and showed an exponential declining of NH3 concentrations with distance: 24 to 59 µg/m3 close to the buildings (0 to 50 m), 10 µg/m3 at 200 m, and 1.6 to 5 µg/m3 at 1-km distance. These and other studies that have hinted at the benefits of vegetation for improving air quality have been challenged by the confounding effect of distance from the NH3 source and the intervening vegetation effect on NH3 dilution.

Utilizing the pot-in-pot study design with the statistical model herein, it was possible to separate the effect of the distance vs. vegetation on NH3 dilution. In this study, NH3 measurement close to the fan resulted in the highest concentrations of NH3; however, by 5.5-m distance, NH3 levels had dropped exponentially (32-fold). Small but significant NH3 differences were again measured from 5.5 to 10 m at both the low (0.3 m) and high (3.0 m) elevations. Ammonia concentrations from 10 to 50 m downwind of the fans were nearly undetectable using either the dosi-tubes or photoacoustic detector.

Finally, the condition of the pot-in-pot study site significantly reduced NH3 levels with trees present vs. trees removed. Small but significant differences in NH3 concentration were measured at both the 1.5- and 3.0-m elevations because of the trees (P < 0.0018). Although these benefits are intuitive, they have not been previously demonstrated using an experimental design that could separate the confounding effects of distance and vegetation. Variations in NH3 concentrations near poultry and livestock facilities are dependent on distance, climatic conditions [31], and also the foliage biomass of plants in the area [30].

Daily climatic fluctuation downwind of the fans and around the trees during the present study was not sufficient nor long enough in duration (2 d) to significantly influence foliar N and DM concentration of the plants herein. However, the effect of the distance was clearly demonstrated in linear fashion with a one-third dilution of foliar N concentration from 3.5- to 50-m distance. Yin et al. [17] demonstrated how atmospheric NH3 can enter plants through foliar stomata and assimilate to plant tissues via the glutamine synthetase and glutamate synthase pathways. We have previously shown in both environmental chambers [33, 34] and field studies on commercial poultry farms [18, 35] the effect of atmospheric NH3 on foliar N concentration. Others have suggested some plants benefited from this kind of NH3-N exposure [19, 30, 36].

Species differences also prevailed in plant foliar N beyond the effect of distance, with the evergreens (Canaan fir and juniper) showing significantly lower tissue N than the deciduous hackberry, lilac, or willow. These species differences were also observed in our previous works [33–35] with evergreens. Particularly, the Norway spruce and red cedar had lower foliar N compared with other deciduous species despite NH3 exposure periods ranging from 6 wk to 2 yr [18, 33–35]. The role of plant traits such as leaf area, relative growth rate, and previous tissue N content on the uptake of N [30, 34] were likely factors influencing greater levels in the deciduous trees compared with the evergreens.


   CONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONS
TOP
 SUMMARY
 DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONS
REFERENCES AND NOTES
 

  1. Trees planted downwind of the exhaust fans of poultry houses can reduce aerial NH3 and under certain environmental conditions may benefit from NH3-N as indicated by their increased foliar N concentration.
  2. Under the present experimental conditions, at 5.5 m downwind of the fans, NH3 concentration declined sharply and was undetectable at 50 m regardless of the presence or absence of the trees.
  3. Willow was the most aggressive species among the plants at trapping NH3-N as indicated by its greater foliage N among the plant species evaluated herein. A mixed buffer of evergreen and deciduous species would be recommended for foliage biomass in all seasons in North America.


   ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
We would like to thank the farm technicians, staff, and students from the Department of Poultry Science for their assistance during data collection.


   REFERENCES AND NOTES
TOP
 SUMMARY
 DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONS
 REFERENCES AND NOTES
 

  1. Kristensen, H. H., L. R. Burgess, T. G. H. Demmers, and C. M. Wathes. 2000. The preferences of laying hens for different concentrations of atmospheric ammonia. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 68:307–318.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  2. Wathes, C. M., E. K. M. Jones, H. H. Kristensen, and H. H. McKeegan. 2004. Ammonia and poultry production: Biological responses, welfare, and environmental impact. Abstr. No. 1490 in Proc. XXII World’s Poult. Congr., Istanbul, Turkey. Bilimsel Tavukçuluk Dernegi, Ankara, Turkey.
  3. Donham, K. J., D. Cumro, and S. Reynolds. 2002. Synergistic effects of dust and ammonia on the occupational health effects of poultry production workers. J. Agromed. 8:57–76.[CrossRef][Medline]
  4. Miles, D. M., S. L. Branton, and B. D. Lott. 2004. Atmospheric ammonia is detrimental to the performance of modern commercial broilers. Poult. Sci. 83:1650–1654.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. National Chicken Council. 2005. Animal Welfare Guidelines and Audit Checklist. Natl. Chicken Counc., Washington, DC.
  6. Fangmeier, A., A. Hadwiger-Fangmeier, L. Van der Eerden, and H.-J. Jäger. 1994. Effects of atmospheric ammonia on vegetation - a review. Environ. Pollut. 86:43–82.[CrossRef][Medline]
  7. Van der Eerden, L. J. M., P. H. B. de Viser, and C. J. van Dijk. 1998. Risk of damage to crops in the direct neighborhood of ammonia sources. Environ. Pollut. 102:49–53.[CrossRef]
  8. Sutton, M. A., and D. Fowler. 2002. Introduction: Fluxes and impacts of atmospheric ammonia on national, landscape, and farm scales. Environ. Pollut. 119:7–8.[CrossRef][Medline]
  9. National Research Council. 2003. Air Emissions from Animal Feeding Operations: Current Knowledge, Future Needs. Natl. Acad. Press, Washington, DC.
  10. The United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2005. National Emissions Inventory (NEI) Air Pollutant Emissions Trends Data, 1970–2002. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/trends/index.html Accessed Dec. 2005.
  11. Malone, G., G. Van Wicklen, S. Collier, and D. Hansen. 2006. Efficacy of vegetative environmental buffers to capture emissions from tunnel ventilated poultry houses. Pages 875–878 in Proc. Workshop Agric. Air Qual.: State of the Science, Potomac, MD. North Carolina State Univ., Raleigh.
  12. Malone, B. 2004. Using trees to reduce dust and odor emissions from poultry farms. Pages 33–38 in Proc. Poult. Inf. Exch., Surfers Paradise, Queensland, Australia. Poult. Inf. Exch., Queensland, Australia.
  13. McGinn, S. M., H. H. Janzen, and T. Coates. 2003. Atmospheric pollutants and trace gases. J. Environ. Qual. 32:1173–1182.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Webb, J., B. Pain, and M. Sutton. 2002. Background to the problem of ammonia in the UK. Pages 6–13 in Ammonia in the UK. Dept. Environ. Food Rural Aff., London, UK.
  15. Seedorf, J., and J. Hartung. 2005. Emission of airborne particulates from animal production. http://www.agriculture.de/acms1/conf6/ws4dust.htm Accessed Aug. 2005.
  16. Wellburn, A. R. 1990. Why are atmospheric oxides of nitrogen usually phytotoxic and not alternative fertilizers? New Phytol. 115:395–429.[CrossRef]
  17. Yin, Z.-H., W. Kaiser, U. Heber, and J. A. Raven. 1998. Effects of gaseous ammonia on intracellular pH values in leaves of C3- and C4-plants. Atmos. Environ. 32:539–544.
  18. Patterson, P. H., Adrizal, R. M. Hulet, R. M. Bates, C. Myers, G. Martin, R. Shockey, and M. van der Grinten. 2007. Vegetative buffers for fan emissions from poultry farms. 1. Temperature and foliar nitrogen. J. Environ. Sci. Health B 42: (Accepted).
  19. Pitcairn, C. E. R., I. D. Leith, L. J. Sheppard, M. A. Sutton, D. Fowler, R. C. Munro, S. Tang, and D. Wilson. 1998. The relationship between nitrogen deposition, species composition, and foliar nitrogen concentrations in woodland flora in the vicinity of livestock farms. Environ. Pollut. 102:41–48.[CrossRef]
  20. Theobald, M. 2004. Farm woodlands and ammonia. Factsheet, 20th February 2004. Center for Ecology and Hydrology. Natl. Environ. Res. Counc., Edinburgh, UK.
  21. The air speed was an average measured at 9 locations around the fan face using a thermo-anemometer no. 451112, Extech Instruments, Taipei, Taiwan.
  22. Cole-Parmer Instrument Co., Vernon Hills, IL.
  23. Frey Bros., Reading, PA.
  24. No. 90326, Scotts-Sierra Horticultural Products Co., Marysville, OH.
  25. Photoacoustic multigas monitor, Model 1412, IN-NOVA AirTech Instruments, Ballerup, Denmark. Ammonia range 0.00 to 1,000 ppm. An internally Teflon-coated 31-cm tubing equipped with 47-mm polycarbonate cassette (no. 1119, Pall Gelman Laboratory, Ann Arbor, MI) and a 20-to 25-µm filter paper (no. 41, Whatman International Ltd., Maidstone, UK) on its air inlet end from each location was connected to a manifold and a vacuum pump (VFA-24-BV, Dwyer Instruments Inc., Michigan City, IN). The pump ran at the rate of 10 L/min. All the air sample lines were continuously purged throughout the pump outlet ports venting via 0.31-cm tubing to a location of 18 m away from the fans except when a line was connected to the NH3 detector unit for NH3 reading.
  26. No. 3D, Gastec Corp., Fukaya, Japan. Ammonia range 0 to 500 ppm.
  27. Model RJ 1412 HPL Type 4X, Robroy Industries, Belding, MI
  28. HOBO pro series (H08-032-08), Onset Computer, Bourne, MA.
  29. SAS Institute. 1999. SAS User’s Guide: Statistics. Version 8 ed. SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NC.
  30. Krupa, S. V. 2003. Effects of atmospheric ammonia (NH3) on terrestrial vegetation: A review. Environ. Pollut. 124:179–221.[CrossRef][Medline]
  31. Siefert, R. L., J. R. Scudlark, A. G. Potter, K. A. Simonsen, and K. B. Savidge. 2004. Characterization of atmospheric ammonia emissions from a commercial chicken house on the Delmarva Peninsula. Environ. Sci. Technol. 38:2769–2778.[Medline]
  32. Koerkamp, P. W. G. G. 1998. Review on emissions of ammonia from housing systems for laying hens in relation to sources, processes, building design, and manure handling. J. Agric. Eng. Res. 59:73–87.
  33. Adrizal, P. H. Patterson, R. M. Hulet, and R. M. Bates. 2006. Growth and foliar nitrogen status of four plant species exposed to atmospheric ammonia. J. Environ. Sci. Health B 41:1001–1018.[CrossRef][Medline]
  34. Adrizal, P. H. Patterson, R. M. Hulet, and R. M. Bates. 2006. Foliar nitrogen status and growth of plants exposed to atmospheric ammonia (NH3). Pages 442–452 in Proc. Workshop Agric. Air Qual.: State of the Science, Potomac, MD. North Carolina State Univ., Raleigh.
  35. Patterson, P. H., Adrizal, R. M. Hulet, R. M. Bates, C. Myers, G. Martin, R. Shockey, M. van der Grinten, and J. R. Thompson. 2008. Vegetative buffers for fan emissions from poultry farms. 2. Ammonia, dust, and foliar nitrogen. J. Environ. Sci. Health B 43. (In press)
  36. Theobald, M. R., C. Milford, K. J. Hargreaves, L. J. Sheppard, E. Nemitz, Y. S. Tang, V. R. Phillips, R. Sneath, L. McCartney, F. J. Harvey, I. D. Leith, J. N. Cape, D. Fowler, and M. A. Sutton. 2001. Potential for ammonia recapture by farm woodlands: Design and application of a new experimental facility. Pages 791–801 in Proc. 2nd. Int. Nitrogen Conf., Potomac, MD.




This Article
Right arrow Summary Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Patterson, P. H.
Right arrow Articles by Topper, P. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Patterson, P. H.
Right arrow Articles by Topper, P. A.

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS