动物营养学报 >

2015 , Vol. 27 >Issue 11: 3402 - 3410

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2015.11.011

禽营养 Poultry Nutrition

冬季大棚养鸭模式中微生物气溶胶对肉鸭应激和生产性能的影响

  • 于观留 ,
  • 刘纪园 ,
  • 王叶 ,
  • 蔡玉梅 ,
  • 柴同杰 ,
  • 高静
展开
  • 1. 山东农业大学动物科技学院, 山东省中德疫源人兽共患病研究中心, 泰安 271018;
    2. 泰安市中心医院, 泰安 271018

收稿日期: 2015-05-09

  网络出版日期: 2015-11-21

基金资助

国家科技支撑计划(2012BAD39B0205);国家环境保护环境微生物利用与安全控制重点实验室与清华大学项目(SMARC2013D001);山东省自然科学基金(ZR2011HM032)

收起

Influence of Ambient Microbial Aerosol on Stress and Performance of Meat Ducks Raised in Sheds during Winter

  • YU Guanliu ,
  • LIU Jiyuan ,
  • WANG Ye ,
  • CAI Yumei ,
  • CHAI Tongjie ,
  • GAO Jing
Expand
  • 1. Sino-German Cooperative Research Centre for Zoonosis of Animal Origin Shandong Province, College of Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine, Shandong Agricultural University, Tai'an 271018, China;
    2. The Central Hospital of Tai'an, Tai'an 271018, China

Received date: 2015-05-09

  Online published: 2015-11-21

Fold

摘要

本研究通过评估不同饲养卫生清洁状况下微生物气溶胶的浓度对肉鸭生产性能的影响,为建立家禽养殖环境微生物气溶胶标准提供参考。选用600只1日龄的樱桃谷肉鸭,随机平均分配到1个对照组(A组)和4个清洁卫生条件逐步变差的试验组(B、C、D、E组),每组3个重复,每个重复40只。使用国际标准的Andersen-6级和AGI-30空气微生物采集器收集各组空气样品,检测微生物气溶胶浓度。检测鸭血清促肾上腺皮质激素(ACTH)浓度变化,评估其应激强度。与此相应地对肉鸭生长性能、屠宰指标等进行检测与评定,分析微生物气溶胶对肉鸭机体的影响。结果显示:当肉鸭舍的微生物气溶胶浓度升高至气载需氧菌为2.96×105 CFU/m3、气载真菌为2.63×104 CFU/m3、气载革兰氏阴性菌为3.09×104 CFU/m3、气载内毒素为41.78×103 EU/m3时(D组),该组肉鸭的血清ACTH浓度、料重比、死淘率显著或极显著高于对照组(P<0.05或P<0.01),该组肉鸭的平均日增重、胸肌率、胸肌重、屠宰率、屠体重显著或极显著低于对照组(P<0.05或P<0.01)。由此可见,微生物气溶胶可显著降低肉鸭的生产性能,气载需氧菌2.96×105 CFU/m3、气载真菌2.63×104 CFU/m3、气载革兰氏阴性菌3.09×104 CFU/m3、气载内毒素41.78×103 EU/m3可初步作为肉鸭养殖环境中的微生物气溶胶上限标准。

关键词： 大棚养鸭; 微生物气溶胶; 生产性能; 应激; 樱桃谷肉鸭

本文引用格式

于观留 , 刘纪园 , 王叶 , 蔡玉梅 , 柴同杰 , 高静 . 冬季大棚养鸭模式中微生物气溶胶对肉鸭应激和生产性能的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2015 , 27(11) : 3402 -3410 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2015.11.011

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of different microbial aerosol concentrations on the performance of meat ducks and shed light on the establishment of microbial aerosol concentration standards for poultry breeding. A total of 600 one-day-old Cherry Valley duck were selected and randomly divided into five groups (one standardized management as control group named group A and four test group with sanitary conditions gradually becoming poor respectively named groups B, C, D and E). Each group was set up for three repeats and each repeat contained 40 ducks. Air samples were collected by two air microorganism sample collectors Andersen-6 and AGI-30 to detect the composition and content of microbial aerosol. The concentration changes of adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) of ducks were detected to evaluate animal stress intensity. Correspondingly, the performance indicators, slaughter index and so on were tested and evaluated to analyze the influence of environmental factors on the duck body. The results showed that when microbial aerosol concentrations (group D) reached 2.96×105 CFU/m3, 2.63×104 CFU/m3, 3.09×104 CFU/m3, 41.78×103 EU/m3 for aerobic bacteria, fungi, gram-negative bacteria and endotoxin, respectively, the ACTH concentration of serum, feed to gain ratio, mortality of meat ducks were significantly increased compared with that of the control group (P<0.05 or P<0.01); the daily gain, breast muscle percentage, carcass weight, slaughter rate of the meat duck were significantly reduced compared with that of the control group (P<0.05 or P<0.01). Our study indicates that microbial aerosol can significantly reduce the performance of ducks. Furthermore, the microbial aerosol parameters of airborne aerobic bacteria (2.96×105 CFU/m3), airborne fungi (2.63×104 CFU/m3), airborne Gram-negative bacteria (3.09×104 CFU/m3) and airborne endotoxin concentration (41.78×103 EU/m3) can be preliminarily used for the upper limit of the standard of microbial aerosol in duck breeding environment.

Key words： shed-raising ducks; microbial aerosol; performance; stress; cherry valley ducks

参考文献

[1] 金灵, 叶慧, 高玉云, 等.家禽环境与健康养殖研究进展[J].中国家禽, 2011, 33(8):37-40.
[2] KALISTE E, LINNAINMAA M.Airborne contaminants in conventional laboratory rabbit rooms[J].Laboratory Animals, 2002, 36(1):43-50.  
[3] SEEDORF J, HARTUNG J, SCHRÖDER M, et al.Concentrations and emissions of airborne endotoxins and microorganisms in livestock buildings in Northern Europe[J].Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research, 1998, 70(1):97-109.  
[4] DOUWES J, THORNE P, PEARCE N, et al.Bioaerosol health effects and exposure assessment:progress and prospects[J].Annals of Occupational Hygiene, 2003, 47(3):187-200.  
[5] 贺争鸣, 李根平, 李冠民, 等.实验动物福利与动物实验科学[M].北京:科学出版社, 2011:100-107.
[6] ZUCKER B A, TROJAN S, MÜLLER W.Airborne gram-negative bacterial flora in animal houses[J].Journal of Veterinary Medicine, Series B, 2000, 47(1):37-46.  
[7] MASDSEN A M.Airborne endotoxin in different background environments and seasons[J].Annals of Agricultural and Environmental Medicine, 2006, 13(1):81-86.
[8] DUAN H, CHAI T, ZHANG X, et al.Microbiological aerosols in poultry houses and its ambience[C]//Proceedings of 13th international congress in animal hygiene.Tartu, Estonia:ISAH, 2007:526-232.
[9] MASCLAUX F G, SAKWINSKA O, CHARRIÈRE N, et al.Concentration of airborne Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA and MSSA), total bacteria, and endotoxins in pig farms[J].Annals of Occupational Hygiene, 2013, 57(5):550-557.  
[10] MATKOVIĆ K, VUČEMILO M, ŠTOKOVIĆ I, et al.Concentrations of airborne bacteria and fungi in a livestock building with caged laying hens[J].Veterinarski Arhiv, 2013, 83(4):413-424.
[11] 李超, 郝海玉, 孙玲玉, 等.猪舍环境气载微生物监测[J].畜牧兽医学报, 2014, 45(10):1684-1692.
[12] 要志强, 李玉春.畜禽舍中有害气体对畜禽的影响及防控措施[J].畜禽业, 2010(10):22-23.
[13] MOORE P A, DANIEL T C, EDWARDS D R, et al.Evaluation of chemical amendments to reduce ammonia volatilization from poultry litter[J].Poultry Science, 1996, 75(3):315-320.  
[14] ANDERSEN A A.New sampler for the collection, sizing, and enumeration of viable airborne particles[J].Journal of Bacteriology, 1958, 76(5):471-484.
[15] BRACHMANN P S, EHRLICH R, EICHENWALD H F, et al.Standard sampler for assay of airborne microorganisms[J].Science, 1964, 144(3624):1295.
[16] KRZYSZTOFIK B.Microbiology of air[M].Warszawa:Politechniki Warszawskiej, 1992:45-60.
[17] GÓRNY R L, DUTKIEWICZ J.Bacterial and fungal aerosols in indoor environments in Central and Eastern European countries confinement buildings[J].Annals of Agricultural and Environmental Medicine, 2002, 9(1):17-23.
[18] RYLANDER R.The role of endotoxin for reactions after exposure to cotton dust[J].American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 1987, 12(6):687-697.  
[19] 魏凤仙.湿度和氨暴露诱导的慢性应激对肉仔鸡生长性能、肉品质、生理机能的影响及其调控机制[D].博士学位论文.杨凌:西北农林科技大学, 2012:1-8.
[20] 王长平.不同冷刺激对商品肉鸡生理、免疫、肉质、行为及生产性能的影响[D].博士学位论文.沈阳:东北农业大学, 2012:77-78.
[21] BANHAI T M, SEEDORF J, LAFFRIQUE M, et al.Identification of the risk factors for high airborne particle concentrations in broiler buildings using statistical modelling[J].Biosystems Engineering, 2008, 101(1):100-110.  
[22] LIBBY D A, SCHAIBLE P J.Observations on growth responses to antibiotics and arsonic acids in poultry feeds[J].Science, 1955, 121(3151):733-734.  
[23] MASHSLY M M, HENDRICKS G L, KALAMA M A, et al.Effect of heat stress on production parameters and immune responses of commercial laying hens[J].Poultry Science, 2004, 83(6):889-894.  
Options
文章导航

/

〈 〉

    联系我们

  • 地址：北京市海淀区圆明园西路2号
    　　　中国农业大学动科动医大楼153室
  • 邮编：100193
  • 电话：010－62817823
  • 网址：http://www.chinajan.com
  • E-mail：cjan@chinajan.com
京公网安备 11010802041926号    京ICP备17050989号-2