ACT Field Study

Morris Creek Broiler Farm

Heavener, Oklahoma

Objective: To determine the efficacy of ACT (Active Catalysis Technologies, Odessa, TX) bioremediation product as a treatment in a commercial broiler operation for controlling ammonia release from the litter and as an aid in the control of darkling beetle populations.

Methods: On a 4-house commercial broiler farm with built-up litter (manure + bedding material) of 2 previous batches/flocks of birds, ACT evaluated for its effectiveness at controlling litter ammonia release and for controlling darkling beetle populations. Treatments will be in a 2x4 factorial arrangement consisting of 2 levels of addition to the drinking water and 4 concentrations of product to the litter.

Litter Applications

Litter applications will be made by spraying ACT at various concentrations to the litter prior to placement of baby chicks. The same amount of total liquid will be applied to each treatment area within the house. The brood end of each poultry houses will be marked off into 4 equal areas and the treatments will be randomly assigned to the quadrants of the brood chamber. Floor treatments will be repeated in each of the remaining 3 houses on the farm.

Each quadrant of the brood end represents ~2,600 square feet of floor space. Floor treatments of ACT will be 0, 2.5, 3.75, or 5 quarts of product to be added to water to make 5 gallons of total floor treatment for each quadrant of the brood end of the house.

Drinking Water

Drinking water treatments will be 0 or 1 pint of ACT added to 5 gallons of water to make a stock solution provided to the birds via a 1/128 proportioner. Stock solution will be provided continuously to birds.

Air Ammonia

Air ammonia monitoring will be determined through use of passive colorimetry ammonia detection tubes (Gastec Corp., Ayase-City, Japan.

To measure ammonia volatilization from the litter independent of house ventilation variations, each detection tube will be taped to the bottom of a 5 gallon plastic bucket which will be inverted to create a litter isolation chamber in which ammonia volatilization can be measured. Ammonia will be monitored in all quadrants of each house on the same day. Ammonia measurements will be taken periodically throughout the grow-out. Ammonia will be reported as ppm/hour.

Darkling Beetle

Darkling beetle populations will be measured through the use of beetle traps consisting of 1 ½ inch pvc tubing cut to 1 foot lengths containing 1 sq ft. of corrugated paper. Two traps will be place in each quadrant and left for 1 week. Following the week, traps will be collected and the contents of the tubing placed in a freezer overnight. Beetle populations will be determined by counting total population and number of various life stages of darkling beetles present in the traps.

Beetle trapping counts will be made during weeks 3 and 6 of the growout.

Data Analysis

Data will be statistically analyzed through analysis of variance and mean comparisons. The factorial arrangement will allow comparison of drinking water or floor treatment effects on air ammonia and darkling beetle population as well as any interaction effects of combining the two treatments. Significance will be declared at the P<.05 probability of error level.

Treatments

1. F-0

2. F-1

3. F-2

4. F-3

5. WF-0

6. WF-1

7. WF-2

8. WF-3

F = product sprayed on floor prior to bird placement

W = product provided to birds through drinking water at rate of 1 pint per 5 gallon stock solution daily.

0,1,2,3 = concentration of product sprayed on floor where

0 = none (5 gallons water only)

1 = 0.25 gallon per 1000 sq. ft

2 = 0.375 gallon per 1000 sq. ft.

3 = 0.50 gallon per 1000 sq. ft.

Treatment allocation to houses:

Pictures depict brood end of houses only!

Each quadrant represents ~ 65 linear feet of each house or ¼ of brood end (~2,600 sq. ft. floor space)

House # 1 2 3 4

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Effect of ACT™ Ammonia Control Product on Release of Ammonia from Broiler Litter During a Winter Production Growout

Dr. Jim Britton

Area Poultry Specialist

Oklahoma State University

P.O. Box 430

Poteau, OK 74953

Introduction

Air ammonia levels in commercial poultry houses have long been shown to have a detrimental health and performance effect on growing and laying poultry. Air ammonia levels as low as 25 ppm can significantly reduce feed efficiency of growing broilers (Caveny, et. al., 1981). Higher levels will reduce body weights at market age (Reece, et. al., 1980). Other work has linked air ammonia exposure to increased disease susceptibility (Anderson, 1964; Quarles and Ling, 1974) including keratoconjunctivitis, damage to the eyes (Bullis, et. al., 1950).

Research has shown that certain treatments when applied to the poultry litter can effectively reduce air ammonia (Moore, et. al, 1995) and improve broiler performance (Huff, et. al, 1984)

Materials and Methods

A field study on a commercial broiler farm was conducted to determine the efficacy of a biological-type poultry litter additive (ACT, Active Catalysis Technologies, Odessa, TX) on the evolution of ammonia from the bedding during one wintertime production cycle. Study was begun on the 4-house farm in late October, 2002 and continued through the batch of broilers and terminated in December, 2002. The broiler farm consisted of 4, identical 43’x 510’ environmental controlled houses. The experiment was designed in a 2 x 4 factorial arrangement with 2 levels of ACT provided daily in the drinking water and 4 levels of ACT applied as a spray on the surface of the poultry litter (bedding) prior to chick placement. Two of the houses were designated as drinking water treatment houses. All of the houses received all 4 floor treatments. The following table depicts the treatment combinations.

Floor treatments were applied using a hand sprayer attached to a battery powered pump. ACT was mixed with water at differing concentrations to get the levels so that equal volumes of water were sprayed over each test area. The control or 0-level received water only. All 4 floor treatment levels were repeated in each of the four houses. Treatment areas were quadrants of the brood end of the houses. Floor treatments were 0, 2.5, 3.75, or 5 quarts of ACT in 5 gallons of water. Floor treatments were randomly assigned to equal-area quadrants of the brood area within each house. Houses were half house brooded, so each treatment area represented approximately 2,600 sq. ft. of floor space or 65 linear feet of each house.

Water Treatments were 0 or 1 pint of ACT per 5 gallons of stock solution provided to birds through a medicator at a rate of 1 ounce of stock solution per gallon of drinking water. Water treatments were repeated in 2 houses while the other two contained floor-only treatments. Water treatments were provided continuously or until the 5 gallons of stock solution was utilized in a day. New water treatment was then prepared and provided beginning in the morning of the next day .d

Ammonia monitoring was determined using passive colorimetry ammonia detection tubes (Gastec Corp, Ayase-City, Japan). Ammonia was determined by capturing the ammonia released from the litter over a given time span and collected under a 5-gallon, clean, plastic bucket. Ammonia detection tubes were taped to the inside, bottom of each bucket and inverted over on the litter. Start time and end time were recorded and total elapsed time determined for each ammonia measurement. The passive tubes indicated accumulated ammonia which was converted to ppm/hour by dividing the ammonia reading on the tube by the total time elapsed. Ammonia monitoring was completed once each week throughout the growout. Each treatment zone within the brood area was measured two times for air ammonia on each sampling day. All measurements were taken between the feed and water lines toward the center of the house and repeated on the other side of the house. Care was taken to allow approximately equal elapsed time for each sample collected on a given sampling day.

Results

Data was analyzed using the General Linear Models formula according to SAS. The factorial arrangement allowed for measurement and mean comparisons of the effects of the presence of ACT on the floor or in the water and the interactions of the treatments with day of sampling and with one another.

The analysis of variance revealed highly significant effects of flock age and presence of ACT in the water on air ammonia. The effect of ACT on the floor approached significance, but there was no effect of differing the level or rate of ACT applied to the floor at the rates tested on air ammonia measured

The day of production effect on air ammonia showed that release of ammonia from the litter was lowest early in the flock and increased as the flock aged (Table 1). Week one ammonia readings averaged over all treatments was significantly lower than weeks 5 and 6 (P< 0.01).

The ACT in the drinking water effect is shown in Table 2. Averaged over all treatments and all days shows that the presence of ACT in the drinking water resulted in a 23% reduction in accumulated air ammonia being emitted from the litter when compared to all treatment areas where no ACT was provided in the drinking water

The analysis of variance indicated two significant interactions: a day of age x floor treatment interaction and a water treatment x floor treatment interaction. The interaction of spraying ACT on the floor with age of bird showed that there was essentially no difference between the presence or the absence of ACT on the floor except on day 12 of the growout where ACT on the floor caused a significant reduction in ammonia release from the bedding. All other days showed no difference (data not shown).

The interaction of ACT on the floor and ACT in the water showed that any presence of ACT either on the floor or in the water reduced ammonia release from the litter, but the greatest ammonia control was seen in treatments utilizing ACT in the water (Table 3).

Discussion

ACT ammonia control product which, according to the manufacturers, is a combination of four, single-celled, aerobic bacteria in a water-based solution. It is extremely safe as indicated in the Material Safety Data Sheet. The bacteria are purported to control ammonia release from poultry litter through its biological action on the ureate /urease release of nitrogen.

Researcher’s Note In this study, ACT when supplied in the drinking water at 16 ounces per 5 gallons of stock solution and run through the medicators cause a significant and sustained reduction in ammonia release from broiler litter. ACT when sprayed on the floor showed a limited effect which diminished by day 19 of the growout.

The ammonia values expressed in this study do not reflect levels of ammonia expected in a poultry operation. These values were artificially elevated by eliminating the effects of house ventilation by allowing ammonia levels to accumulate in an air tight chamber for a period of 2 hours before recording the values. These values can be used for comparison as what might be expected to occur in terms of litter release of ammonia into the air.

References:

Anderson, D.P., C.W. Beard, and R.P. Hanson, 1964. The adverse effects of ammonia on chickens including resistance to New Castle Disease virus. Avian Dis. 8:369-379.

Bullis, K.L., G.H. Snoeyenbos, and H. Van Roekel, 1950. A keratoconjunctivitis in chickens. Poultry Sci. 29:386-399.

Caveny, D.D., C.L. Quarles, and G.A. Greathouse, 1981. Atmospheric ammonia and broiler cockerel performance. Poultry Sci. 60:513-516.

Huff, W.E., G.W. Malone, and G.W. Chaloupka, 1984. Effect of litter treatment on broiler performance and certain litter quality parameters. Poultry Sci. 63:2167-2171.

Moore, P.A. Jr., T.C. Daniel, D.R. Edwards, and D.M. Miller, 1995. Effect of chemical amendments on ammonia volatilization from poultry litter. J. Envir. Qual. 24:293-300.

Reece, F.N., B.D. Lott, and J.W. Deaton, 1980. Ammonia in the atmosphere during brooding affects performance of broiler chickens. Poultry Sci. 59:486-488.

Table 1. Mean comparisons of effect of day of age of broiler flock on air ammonia release from the litter.
Sampling Day	Ammonia (ppm/hr)	Std. Err
5	69.2 ^d	12.1
12	166.4 ^b	12.1
19	129.1 ^c	12.1
26	88.5 ^d	12.1
32	197.4 ^ab	12.2
40	221.2 ^a	12.1
^abcdmeans with no similar superscript are significantly different (P > 0.01).
Table 2. Effect of the presence of ACT in the drinking water on accumulated air ammonia collecting under a bucket.
Treatment	Ammonia (ppm/hr)	Std Err
ACT in Drinking water	126.9^***	7.00
No ACT in Drinking water	163.8	7.02
^*** P < 0.001)