Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 3 of 3 items for

  • Author or Editor: R. Nolan Clark x
  • Refine by Access: All Content x
Clear All Modify Search

Abstract

Objective—To compare Salmonella isolates cultured from feedyard and nonfeedyard (control) playas (ie, temporary shallow lakes) of the Southern High Plains.

Sample Population—Water and muck (sediment) samples were obtained from 7 feedyard playas and 3 nonfeedyard playas in the winter and summer.

Procedure—Each water and muck sample was enriched with sulfur-brilliant-green broth and incubated in a shaker at 37°C for 24 hours. A sample (100 mL) of the incubated bacterial-enriched broth was then mixed with 100 mL of fresh sulfur-brilliant-green enrichment broth and incubated in a shaker at 37°C for 24 hours. After the second incubation, a swab sample was streaked on differential media. Suspect Salmonella isolates were further identified by use of biochemical tests, and Salmonella isolates were confirmed and serovar determinations made.

ResultsSalmonella isolates were not recovered from the 3 control playas. Seven Salmonella enterica serovars were isolated from 5 of 7 feedyard playas in the summer, and 13 S enterica serovars were isolated from 7 of 7 feedyard playas in the winter. In the summer, 296 isolates were cultured, and 47 were Salmonella organisms. In the winter, 288 isolates were cultured, and 171 were Salmonella organisms.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results indicated that feedyard playas are frequently contaminated with many Salmonella serovars. These pathogens should be considered whenever feedyard managers contemplate the use of water from these playas. Water from feedyard playas should not be used to cool cattle in the summer or for dust abatement. ( Am J Vet Res 2004;65:40–44)

Restricted access
in American Journal of Veterinary Research

Abstract

Objective—To determine the bacterial, fungal, and endotoxin concentrations in aerosolized ambient air during the winter and summer in feedyards located in the Southern High Plains, identify aerosolized microbial pathogens, and determine the size of microbial and dust components.

Sample Population—Aerosol samples were obtained from 7 feedyards.

Procedure—Aerosol samples were collected upwind, on-site, and downwind from each feedyard at a point 1 m above the ground by use of biological 2- and 6- stage cascade impactors.

Results—Significantly more microbes were cultured from on-site and downwind samples than upwind samples. There were significantly more microbes during the summer than during the winter. However, mean endotoxin concentration was significantly higher during the winter (8.37 ng/m3) than the summer (2.63 ng/m3). Among 7 feedyards, mean ± SE number of mesophilic bacteria (1,441 ± 195 colony-forming units [CFUs]/m3) was significantly higher than mean number of anaerobic bacteria (751 ± 133 CFUs/m3) or thermophilic bacteria (54 ± 10 CFUs/m3) in feedyard air. Feedyard aerosol samples contained more mesophilic fungi (78 ± 7 CFUs/m3) than thermophilic fungi (2 ± 0.2 CFUs/m3). Eighteen genera of bacteria were identified by use of an automated identification system.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—It appeared that gram-negative enteric pathogens offered little risk to remote calves or humans via ambient aerosols and that gram-positive pathogens of the Bacillus, Corynebacterium, and Staphylococcus spp can be spread by aerosols in and around feedyards. It was common to detect concentrations of endotoxin in the ambient air of 7 feedyards. ( Am J Vet Res 2004; 65:45–52)

Restricted access
in American Journal of Veterinary Research

Abstract

Objective—To determine the impact of feedyards on endotoxin concentration, fecal coliform count, and other water quality measurements during winter and summer in feedyard playas (shallow lakes).

Sample Population—Water samples obtained from 7 feedyard playas and 3 nonfeedyard control playas.

Procedure—Surface water samples were collected from each playa and at various depths from 3 feedyard playas. Endotoxin concentrations, 22 water quality variables, and fecal coliform counts were determined in samples collected in summer and winter from various combinations of playas.

Results—Cattle numbers per feedyard ranged from 40,000 to 175,000 head/y. Mean endotoxin concentrations were significantly lower in control playas than in feedyard playas in winter and summer. Endotoxin concentration appeared to be homogenous at various water depths. Values for 20 of 22 water quality variables were higher in the feedyard playas than in control playas in winter and summer. In winter only, mean total fecal coliform concentration in feedyard playas was significantly greater than in control playas.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results indicated that feedyards have the potential to impact water quality in playas, and cattle should not be allowed access to them. Feedyard playa water should not be used under high pressure to settle dust in pens with cattle or to cool cattle, because aerosols containing pathogens and high concentrations of endotoxin are a health hazard for humans and cattle. (Am J Vet Res 2001;62:1402–1407)

Restricted access
in American Journal of Veterinary Research