4.7 Article

Water activity of poultry litter: Relationship to moisture content during a grow-out

期刊

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
卷 172, 期 -, 页码 201-206

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.02.036

关键词

Broiler; Meat chicken; Equilibrium relative humidity (ERH); Wet litter; Water absorption isotherms

资金

  1. Australian Government's Cooperative Research Centres Programme
  2. Department of Agriculture and Fisheries (DAF), Queensland Government
  3. University of New South Wales (UNSW)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Poultry grown on litter floors are in contact with their own waste products. The waste material needs to be carefully managed to reduce food safety risks and to provide conditions that are comfortable and safe for the birds. Water activity (A(w)) is an important thermodynamic property that has been shown to be more closely related to microbial, chemical and physical properties of natural products than moisture content. In poultry litter, A(w) is relevant for understanding microbial activity; litter handling and rheological properties; and relationships between in-shed relative humidity and litter moisture content. We measured the A(w) of poultry litter collected throughout a meat chicken grow-out (from fresh pine shavings bedding material to day 52) and over a range of litter moisture content (10-60%). The A(w) increased non-linearly from 0.71 to 1.0, and reached a value of 0.95 when litter moisture content was only 22-33%. Accumulation of manure during the grow-out reduced A(w) for the same moisture content. These results are relevant for making decisions regarding litter re-use in multiple grow-outs as well as setting targets for litter moisture content to minimise odour, microbial risks and to ensure necessary litter physical conditions are maintained during a grow-out. Methods to predict A(w) in poultry litter from moisture content are proposed. Crown Copyright (C) 2016 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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