Assessment of Soil and Groundwater Contamination at Two Animal Carcass Disposal Sites

가축 사체 매몰지 주변 토양 및 지하수의 오염도 평가

  • Kim, Kye-Hoon (Department of Environmental Horticulture, The University of Seoul) ;
  • Kim, Kwon-Rae (Division of Environmental Science and Ecological Engineering, Korea University) ;
  • Kim, Hyuck-Soo (Department of Environmental Horticulture, The University of Seoul) ;
  • Lee, Goon-Taek (National Instrumentation Center for Environmental Management, Seoul National University) ;
  • Lee, Keun-Hwa (Department of Microbiology and The Environmental Health Center, School of Medicine, Jeju National University)
  • 김계훈 (서울시립대학교 환경원예학과) ;
  • 김권래 (고려대학교 생명과학대학 환경생태공학부) ;
  • 김혁수 (서울시립대학교 환경원예학과) ;
  • 이군택 (서울대학교 농생명과학공동기기원) ;
  • 이근화 (제주대학교 의과대학 미생물학교실, 환경보건센터 (환경부지정))
  • Received : 2010.06.01
  • Accepted : 2010.06.12
  • Published : 2010.06.30

Abstract

Outbreak of contagious diseases to livestock animals is becoming prevalent worldwide and consequently, tremendous numbers of the infected or culled stocks are buried on the ground as the most common disposal method. The buried animals can generate a wide range of detrimental components such as leachate, nutrient salts, and pathogenic bacteria, consequently contaminating the surround environment. This implies that regular investigations are required to monitor any possible detrimental environmental aspect occurred around burial sites. Therefore, the current study was conducted to investigate whether the soil and groundwater nearby the burial sites had been contaminated by the substances originated from the burial sites, which can be applied for the establishment of the ideal burial site construction design and post management scheme. For this, two different burial sites located in Cheonan and Pyeongtaek were selected. Cheonan and Pyeongtaek sites were constructed in 2004 and 2008, respectively and both contained dead poultry infected by avian influenza (AI). Soil and groundwater samples were collected around the sites followed by determination of the nutrient concentrations and bacteria (Salmonella, Camphylobacter, and Bacillus) existence in both soil and groundwater. Some of the soil samples showed higher EC, $NH_4$-N, $NO_3$-N concentration compared to those of the background (control) soils. Also the concentration of $NH_4$-N in some of the groundwater samples appeared to exceed the USEPA guideline value for drinking water (10 mg $L^{-1}$). These results indicated that the soil and groundwater were influenced by the burial site originated nutrients. In the soil, Bacillus was isolated in most soil samples while there were no detections of Salmonella and Camplylobacter. Due to the Bacillus existing mainly as a spore in the soils, it was considered that the frequent detection of Bacillus in the soil samples was attributed to the nutrients originated from the burial sites.

Keywords

References

  1. 농림부, 2004. 구제역 긴급행동지침.
  2. 농림부, 2007. 가금인플루엔자 긴급행동지침.
  3. 농림수산식품부, 2010a. 가축전염병예방법.
  4. 농립수산식품부. 2010b. 가축전염병예방법 시행규칙.
  5. 환경부. 2008a. 환경부 보도자료: AI 매몰지의 체계적 환경관리 방안 마련 및 장마철 대비 사후관리 강화.
  6. 환경부. 2008b. 지하수의 수질보전 등에 관한 규칙.
  7. Davies, R.H. and C. Wray. 1996. Seasonal variations in the isolation of Salmonella typhimurium, Salmonella enterilidis, Bacillus cereus and Clostridium perfrilngens from environmental samples. J. Vet. Med. B 43: 119-127.
  8. Det Norske Veritas. 2003. Independent environmental and publie hcalth risk assessment of DEFRA Foot and Mouth Disease disposal site (No. 20073900). Oslo, Norway.
  9. Glanville, T.D. 1993. Groundwater impacts of on farm livestock burial. IGWA Quarterly 4:21-22 .
  10. Glanville, T.D. 2000. Impact of livestock burial on shallow groundwater quality. Paper presented at ASAE Mid-Central Meeting, St. Joseph, Mo, USA.
  11. Lane, D. J. 1991. 16S/23S rRNA sequencing, p. 115-175 . In E. Stackebrant and M. Goodfellow (ed.) Nucleic acid techniques in bacterial systematics. John Wiley & Sons Ltd., London, United Kingdom.
  12. Murray, P.R., K.S. Rosenthal, and M.A Pfaller. 2009. Medical Microbiology, 6th ed. Mosby Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
  13. National Agricultural Biosecurity Center, Kansas State University. 2004. Carcass Disposal: A comprehensive Review. Manhattan, Kansas, USA.
  14. NIAST. 2000. Methods of soil and crop plant analysis. National Institute of Agricultural Science and Technology, Suwon, Korea.
  15. Ollis, G. 2002. Pre-selecting mass carcass disposal sites. Government of Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development, Alberta, Canada.
  16. Ritter, W.F. and A.E.M. Chimside. 1995. Impact of dead bird disposal pits on groundwater quality on the Delmarva peninsula. Bioresour. Technol 53:105-111. https://doi.org/10.1016/0960-8524(95)00057-L
  17. Sparks, D.L. 1996. Methods of soil analysis (Part 3). Chemical methods. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Book Series No. 5. Madison, WI, USA.
  18. Suzuki, M.T. and S.J. Giovannoni. 1996. Bias caused by template annealing in the amplification of mixtures of 16S rRNA genes by PCR. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 62: 625-630.
  19. Turnbull, P. 2001. Guidelines for the surveillance and control of anthrax in humans and animals, 3rd Edition (Rep. No. WHO/EMC/ZDI/98.6). World Health Organization, Switzerland.
  20. UK Environment Agency. 2001. The environmental impact of the foot and mouth disease outbreak: an interim assessmcnt. Rotherham, United Kingdom .
  21. United Kingdom Department of Health. 2003. Foot and Mouth Disease. London, United Kingdom.
  22. U.S. EPA, 2000. Profile of Agricultural Livestock Production Industry. Washington, D.C., USA.
  23. USDA, NRCS. 2003. Natural resources conservation service conservation practice standard. Animal mortality facility code316. USDA, NRCS, MN, USA.
  24. USDA, NRCS and Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board. 2002. Catastrophic animal mortality management (burial mcthod) technical guidance. TX, USA.
  25. World Organisation for Animal Health (OlE). 2008. OlE listed diseases.