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


     


J APPL POULT RES 2005. 14:289-295
© 2005 Poultry Science Association
This Article
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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Northcutt, J. K.
Right arrow Articles by Jones, D. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Northcutt, J. K.
Right arrow Articles by Jones, D. R.

Research Reports

Chemical Analyses of Commercial Shell Egg Wash Water

J. K. Northcutt, M. T. Musgrove and D. R. Jones

USDA Agricultural Research Service, Russell Research Center, PO Box 5677, Athens, Georgia 30604-5677

Correspondence: J. K. Northcutt, E-mail: jnorthcutt{at}saa.ars.usda.gov

Wash water was collected from the first (W1) and second (W2) egg washers in series in 3 different commercial facilities (plants X, Y, and Z) and evaluated for temperature, pH, chlorine, soluble iron (ferrous), total dissolved solids (TDS), total suspended solids (TSS), total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN), and chemical oxygen demand (COD). Temperature of W1 and W2 ranged from 39.7 to 44.1°C and was generally consistent within plants Y and Z. The pH of W1 and W2 varied from 10.0 to 11.4. Chlorine levels in wash water differed by 3- (W2) and 5-fold (W1) between the facilities. Average values of soluble iron W1 and W2 ranged from 0.3 to 1.6 mg/L. Highest values for TDS and TSS occurred in W1 (8,231 and 796 mg/L, respectively) as compared with W2 (3,564 and 429 mg/L, respectively). The TKN values for the wash water ranged from 81 to 302 mg/L, whereas COD values ranged from 1,765 to 7,300 mg/L. Data provided by the present study may be useful for identifying process deficiencies and minimizing organic and inorganic discharge loads in the waste stream.

Key Words: shell egg • egg washing • egg-processing wastewate




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Poult. Sci.Home page
M. T. Musgrove, J. K. Northcutt, D. R. Jones, N. A. Cox, and M. A. Harrison
Enterobacteriaceae and Related Organisms Isolated from Shell Eggs Collected During Commercial Processing
Poult. Sci., June 1, 2008; 87(6): 1211 - 1218.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Poult. Sci.Home page
M. T. Musgrove, D. R. Jones, J. K. Northcutt, N. A. Cox, M. A. Harrison, P. J. Fedorka-Cray, and S. R. Ladely
Antimicrobial resistance in Salmonella and Escherichia coli isolated from commercial shell eggs.
Poult. Sci., September 1, 2006; 85(9): 1665 - 1669.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Appl. Poult. Res.Home page
J. K. Northcutt and M. E. Berrang
Influence of a Chicken Transport Cage-Washing System on Wastewater Characteristics and Bacteria Recovery from Cage Flooring
J. Appl. Poult. Res., January 1, 2006; 15(3): 457 - 463.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2005 by the Poultry Science Association.