10.57647/ijrowa-kaar-zs35

Aerobic and anaerobic biological treatment of extracted chicken manure mixed with cassava dregs for potential use as liquid organic biofertilizer

PDF
  • Viagian Pastawan*1,
  • Muhammad Daffa Shiddiq1,
  • Zulhammi Ahsan1,
  • Dimas Hand Vidya Paradhipta1,
  • Muhamad Khoiru Zaki2,
  • Mohammad Zainal Abidin1,
  • Nanung Agus Fitriyanto1,
  1. Faculty of Animal Science, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Jl. Fauna No. 3 Bulaksumur, Yogyakarta 55281, Indonesia
  2. Faculty of Agricultural Technology, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Jl. Flora No. 1 Bulaksumur, Yogyakarta 55281, Indonesia
Aerobic and anaerobic biological treatment of extracted chicken manure mixed with cassava dregs for potential use as liquid organic biofertilizer

Received: 2024-01-01

Revised: 2024-05-09

Accepted: 2024-08-17

Published 2024-10-08

Copyright (c) 2024 @Authors

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

Pastawan, V., Shiddiq, M. D., Ahsan, Z., Paradhipta, D. H. V., Zaki, M. K., Abidin, M. Z., & Fitriyanto, N. A. (2024). Aerobic and anaerobic biological treatment of extracted chicken manure mixed with cassava dregs for potential use as liquid organic biofertilizer. International Journal of Recycling of Organic Waste in Agriculture, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.57647/ijrowa-kaar-zs35
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

PDF views: 196

Abstract

Purpose: This study aims to investigate the biological treatment of excreta wastewater to evaluate the effective production of liquid organic biofertilizer (LOB).Method: This research was carried out by the pre-initial mixing process of excreta with cassava dregs, then biological processing with the aeration rate of 4 L/minutes at environmental temperature (28 oC) and pH of 5 for 42 days with two treatments in triplicates: aerobically (T1), and anaerobically (T2) conditions. LOB was analyzed for physical, chemical, and microbiological parameters.Results: We showed that the characteristics of waste solids analysis of LOB were significantly decreased (P<0.05) in both aerobic and anaerobic treatment on the initial day of composting compared to the final day (42 days) by measuring the content of total solid (TS), total volatile solid (TVS), total fixed solid (TFS), and settleable solid (SS). Next, we showed the chemical properties of LOB respectively as follows: total N 6.73 mg/L and 7.31 mg/L; total P 36.27 mg/L and 87.17 mg/L; total K 640.85 mg/L and 674.82 mg/L; total C-organic 65.57 mg/L and 22.48 mg/L; and C/N ratio 10.13 and 3.5. The microbiological quality was evaluated at the end of LOB production by measuring total plate count (TPC) of 182000x105 cfu/ml and 203667x105 cfu/ml; total lactic acid bacteria of 31x105 cfu/ml and 32.67x105 cfu/ml; and there is no coliform growth observed in LOB, respectively.Conclusion: Finally, we concluded that the biological treatment is an important process in composting organic wastewater as a key to managing wastewater in the environment as reuse for liquid organic biofertilizer. The processing of excreta wastewater has managed to remove the total solid pollutants.

Research Highlights

  • The use of aerobic treatment improves the available nutrient accumulation (N, P, K, C).
  • Decomposition of organic matter in anaerobic treatment influences the low C/N ratio in LOB.
  • Processing LOB with aerobic and anaerobic conditions shows a removal of pathogenic bacteria indicating the safety for environmentally friendly.
  • Biological treatment in excreta wastewater enhances the liquid organic biofertilizer properties.
  • The application of biological wastewater treatments reduces the solids content (TS and TVS) in liquid fertilizers by more than 40%.

Keywords

  • Aeration,
  • Chicken excreta,
  • Fermentation,
  • Liquid waste,
  • Microorganism,
  • Total solid
PDF

References

  1. Abbey L, Abbey J, Leke‐Aladekoba A, Iheshiulo EMA, Ijenyo M (2019) Biopesticides and biofertilizers: types, production, benefits, and utilization. Byproducts from Agriculture and Fisheries: Adding Value for Food, Feed, Pharma, and Fuels 1: 479-500. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119383956.ch20
  2. Alarefee HA, Ishak CF, Othman R, Karam DS (2023) Effectiveness of mixing poultry litter compost with rice husk biochar in mitigating ammonia volatilization and carbon dioxide emission. J Environ Manag 329: 117051. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.117051
  3. APHA: American Public Health Association (2017) Standard methods for examination of water and wastewater, 23rd edn. APHA, AWWA, WPCF, Washington.
  4. Aziz A, Basheer F, Sengar A, Khan SU, Farooqi IH (2019) Biological wastewater treatment (anaerobic-aerobic) technologies for safe discharge of treated slaughterhouse and meat processing wastewater. Sci Total Environ 686: 681-708. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.05.295
  5. Bist RB, Subedi S, Chai L, Yang X (2023) Ammonia emissions, impacts, and mitigation strategies for poultry production: A critical review. J Environ Manag 328: 116919. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.116919
  6. Bleizgys R, Bagdonienė I, Baležentienė L (2013) Reduction of the livestock ammonia emission under the changing temperature during the initial manure nitrogen biomineralization. Sci World J (1): 825437. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/825437
  7. Bryant RB, Endale DM, Spiegal SA, Flynn KC, Meinen RJ, Cavigelli MA, Kleinman PJ (2022) Poultry manureshed management: Opportunities and challenges for a vertically integrated industry. J Environ Qual 51(4): 540-551. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeq2.20273
  8. Chang R, Li Y, Chen Q, Gong X, Qi Z (2020) Effects of carbon-based additives and ventilation rate on nitrogen loss and microbial community during chicken manure composting. PLoSOne 15(9): e0229880. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0229880
  9. Chen J, Shi L, Liu H, Yang J, Guo R, Chen D, Jiang X, Liu Y (2017) Screening of fermentation starters for organic fertilizer composted from chicken manure. Asian Agric Res 9(4): 92-98. https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/262788
  10. Chew KW, Chia SR, Yen HW, Nomanbhay S, Ho YC, Show PL (2019) Transformation of biomass waste into sustainable organic fertilizers. Sustainability 11(8): 2266. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11082266
  11. Ching YC, Redzwan G (2017) Biological treatment of fish processing saline wastewater for reuse as liquid fertilizer. Sustainability 9(7): 1062. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9071062
  12. Cruz-Conesa A, Ferré J, Pérez-Vendrell AM, Callao MP, Ruisánchez I (2022) Use of visible-near infrared spectroscopy to predict nutrient composition of poultry excreta. Anim. Feed Sci Technol 283: 115169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2021.115169
  13. Czarnecka-Komorowska D, Tomasik M, Thakur VK, Kostecka E, Rydzkowski T, Jursa-Kulesza J, Bryll K, Mysłowski J, Gawdzińska K (2022) Biocomposite composting based on the sugar-protein condensation theory. Ind Crops Prod 183: 114974. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2022.114974
  14. de Souza Vandenberghe LP, Garcia LMB, Rodrigues C, Camara MC, de Melo Pereira GV, de Oliveira J, Soccol CR (2017) Potential applications of plant probiotic microorganisms in agriculture and forestry. AIMS Microbiol 3(3): 629.
  15. Deng B, Fu L, Zhang X, Zheng J, Peng L, Sun J, Zhu H, Wang Y, Li W, Wu X, Wu D (2014) The denitrification characteristic of Pseudomonas stutzeri SC221-M and Its application to water quality control in grass carp aquaculture. PLoS One 9(12): e114886.
  16. Dróżdż D, Wystalska K, Malińska K, Grosser A, Grobelak A, Kacprzak M (2020) Management of poultry manure in Poland–Current state and future perspectives. J Environ Manag 264: 110327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110327
  17. Duan M, Zhang Y, Zhou B, Qin Z, Wu J, Wang Q, Yin Y (2020) Effects of Bacillus subtilis on carbon components and microbial functional metabolism during cow manure–straw composting. Bioresour Technol 303: 122868. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2020.122868
  18. Fakkaew K, Polprasert C (2021) Air stripping pre-treatment process to enhance biogas production in anaerobic digestion of chicken manure wastewater. Bioresour Technol Rep 14: 100647. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biteb.2021.100647
  19. Fitriyanto NA, Winarti A, Imar F, Erwanto Y, Hayakawa T, Nakagawa T (2016) Identification and growth characters of nitrifying Pseudomonas sp. LS3K isolated from the odorous region of the poultry farm. J Biol Sci 17: 1-10.
  20. Gržinić G, Piotrowicz-Cieślak A, Klimkowicz-Pawlas A, Górny RL, Ławniczek-Wałczyk A, Piechowicz L, Olkowska E, Potrykus M, Tankiewicz M, Krupka M, Siebielec G, Wolska L (2023) Intensive poultry farming: A review of the impact on the environment and human health. Sci Total Environ 858: 160014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.160014
  21. Hernández-Fernández M, Cordero-Bueso G, Ruiz-Muñoz M, Cantoral JM (2021) Culturable yeasts as biofertilizers and biopesticides for a sustainable agriculture: A comprehensive review. Plants 10(5): 822. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10050822
  22. Huang F, Pan L, He Z, Zhang M, Zhang M (2020) Culturable heterotrophic nitrification-aerobic denitrification bacterial consortia with cooperative interactions for removing ammonia and nitrite nitrogen in mariculture effluents. Aquaculture 523: 735211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2020.735211
  23. Ji R, Dong G, Shi W, Min J (2017) Effects of liquid organic fertilizers on plant growth and rhizosphere soil characteristics of chrysanthemum. Sustainability 9(5): 841. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9050841
  24. Kalus K, Konkol D, Korczyński M, Koziel JA, Opaliński S (2020) Laying hens biochar diet supplementation Effect on performance, excreta N content, NH3 and VOCs emissions, egg traits and egg consumers acceptance. Agriculture 10(6): 237. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture10060237
  25. Koupaie EH, Azizi A, Lakeh AB, Hafez H, Elbeshbishy E (2019) Comparison of liquid and dewatered digestate as inoculum for anaerobic digestion of organic solid wastes. Waste Manag 87: 228-236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2019.02.014
  26. Kyakuwaire M, Olupot G, Amoding A, Nkedi-Kizza P, Ateenyi Basamba T (2019) How safe is chicken litter for land application as an organic fertilizer?: A review. Int J Environ Res Public Health 16(19): 3521. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16193521
  27. Li C, Yang J, Wang X, Wang E, Li B, He R, Yuan H (2015) Removal of nitrogen by heterotrophic nitrification–aerobic denitrification of a phosphate accumulating bacterium Pseudomonas stutzeri YG-24. Bioresour Technol 182: 18-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2015.01.100
  28. Macias-Corral MA, Cueto-Wong JA, Morán-Martínez J, Reynoso-Cuevas L (2019) Effect of different initial C/N ratio of cow manure and straw on microbial quality of compost. Int J Recycl Org Waste Agricul 8: 357-365. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40093-019-00308-5
  29. Mengqi Z, Shi A, Ajmal M, Ye L, Awais M (2021) Comprehensive review on agricultural waste utilization and high-temperature fermentation and composting. Biomass Convers Bior 13: 5445-5468. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-021-01438-5
  30. Mistry AN, Kachenchart B, Pinyakong O, Assavalapsakul W, Jitpraphai SM, Somwangthanaroj A, Luepromchai E (2023) Bioaugmentation with a defined bacterial consortium: A key to degrade high molecular weight polylactic acid during traditional composting. Bioresour Technol 367: 128237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2022.128237
  31. Naseem S, King AJ (2020) Effects of multi-species Lactobacillus and sunflower seed meal on nitrogen-containing compounds in laying hens' manure and biological components in blood serum. J Appl Poult Res 29(1): 130-141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.japr.2019.11.008
  32. Niu J, Li X (2022) Effects of microbial inoculation with different indigenous Bacillus species on physicochemical characteristics and bacterial succession during short-term composting. Fermentation 8(4): 152. https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation8040152
  33. Pastawan V, Erwanto Y, Yusiati LM, Jamhari, Hayakawa T, Nakagawa T, Fitriyanto NA (2017) Ability of indigenous microbial consortium in the process of ammonia oxidation of livestock waste. Asian J Anim Sci 11: 74-81. https://docsdrive.com/pdfs/ansinet/ajas/2017/74-81.pdf
  34. Phibunwatthanawong T, Riddech N (2019) Liquid organic fertilizer production for growing vegetables under hydroponic conditions. Int J Recycl Org Waste Agricul 8: 369-380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40093-019-0257-7
  35. Rahman MM, Hassan A, Hossain I, Jahangir MMR, Chowdhury EH, Parvin R (2022) Current state of poultry waste management practices in Bangladesh, environmental concerns, and future recommendations. J Adv Vet Anim Res 9(3): 490. http://doi.org/10.5455/javar.2022.i618
  36. Seenivasagan R, Babalola OO (2021) Utilization of microbial consortia as biofertilizers and biopesticides for the production of feasible agricultural products. Biology 10(11): 1111. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology10111111
  37. Seidavi AR, Zaker-Esteghamati H, Scanes CG (2019) Present and potential impacts of waste from poultry production on the environment. World's Poult Sci J 75(1): 29-42. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043933918000922
  38. Shapovalov Y, Zhadan S, Bochmann G, Salyuk A, Nykyforov V (2020) Dry anaerobic digestion of chicken manure: A review. Appl Sci 10(21): 7825. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10217825
  39. Sharma B, Vaish B, Monika, Singh UK, Singh P, Singh RP (2019) Recycling of organic wastes in agriculture: an environmental perspective. Int J Environ Res 13: 409-429. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41742-019-00175-y
  40. Such N, Pál L, Strifler P, Horváth B, Koltay IA, Rawash MA, Farkas V, Mezőlaki Á, Wágner L, Dublecz K (2021) Effect of feeding low protein diets on the production traits and the nitrogen composition of excreta of broiler chickens. Agriculture 11(8): 781. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11080781
  41. Thomas C, Idler C, Ammon C, Amon T (2020) Effects of the C/N ratio and moisture content on the survival of ESBL-producing Escherichia coli during chicken manure composting. Waste Manag 105: 110-118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2020.01.031
  42. Yuan T, Cheng Y, Huang W, Zhang Z, Lei Z, Shimizu K, Utsumi M (2018) Fertilizer potential of liquid product from hydrothermal treatment of swine manure. Waste Manag 77: 166-171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2018.05.018