4.0 Article

Water quality of small ruminant production systems in the Brazilian semiarid region

期刊

BIOLOGICAL RHYTHM RESEARCH
卷 52, 期 6, 页码 934-945

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/09291016.2019.1608731

关键词

Coliforms; drinkers; Escherichia coli; goats and sheep; semiarid

资金

  1. City Hall of Bela Cruz, through the Agribusiness Secretariat

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aimed to analyze the factors that affect water quality for small ruminants in the Brazilian semiarid region, finding high levels of total coliform, Escherichia coli, and nitrate in the water samples. The implementation of preventive measures, such as regular cleaning of drinkers and chlorination, is necessary to guarantee adequate water consumption for the animals.
The objective of this study was to analyze the microbiological and physical-chemical factors that affect the water quality for small ruminants of production in the Brazilian semiarid region. Water samples were collected from 23 farms during the months of February to April 2018, directly from the point of animal consumption (drinking fountains). Total coliform (TC) ranged from 2.0 to >1.6 x 10(3) MLN 100mL(-1) and Thermotolerant coliform (TTC) ranged from 1.6 x 10(3) MLN 100mL(-1), with the presence of Escherichia coli (EC) in 73.91% of the samples analyzed. Only 43.47% of the samples presented a pH within the ideal range (6-9). Total dissolved solids (TDS) values ranged from 30.08 to 1881.60 ppm. Dissolved oxygen (DO) was 0.15 to 1.55 ppm and nitrate (NTT) was 0.13 to 44.99 ppm. Water samples from tubular and artesian wells were considered mostly unsuitable for animal watering. Physical-chemical parameters were interfered due to local geology and the microbiological quality of the water. The implementation of preventive measures, such as the periodic cleaning of drinkers and the adoption of treatments like chlorination, can guarantee adequate water consumption, without causing sanitary problems or intoxications to the animals.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据