Dynamics of Air Temperature, Velocity and Ammonia Emissions in Enclosed and Conventional Pig Housing Systems

Abstract

This study aimed to compare the dynamics of air temperature and velocity under two different ventilation and housing systems during summer and winter in Korea. The $NH_3$ concentration of both housing systems was also investigated in relation to the pig's growth. The ventilation systems used were; negative pressure type for the enclosed pig house (EPH) and natural airflow for the conventional pig house (CPH). Against a highly fluctuating outdoor temperature, the EPH was able to maintain a stable temperature at 24.8 to $29.1^{\circ}C$ during summer and 17.9 to $23.1^{\circ}C$ during winter whilst the CPH had a wider temperature variance during summer at 24.7 to $32.3^{\circ}C$. However, the temperature fluctuation of the CPH during winter was almost the same with that of EPH at 14.5 to $18.2^{\circ}C$. The NH3 levels in the CPH ranged from 9.31 to 16.9 mg/L during summer and 5.1 to 19.7 mg/L during winter whilst that of the EPH pig house was 7.9 to 16.1 mg/L and 3.7 to 9.6 mg/L during summer and winter, respectively. These values were less than the critical ammonia level for pigs with the EPH maintaining a lower level than the CPH in both winter and summer. The air velocity at pig nose level in the EPH during summer was 0.23 m/s, enough to provide comfort because of the unique design of the inlet feature. However, no air movement was observed in almost all the lower portions of the CPH during winter because of the absence of an inlet feature. There was a significant improvement in weight gain and feed intake of pigs reared in the EPH compared to the CPH (p<0.05). These findings proved that despite the difference in the housing systems, a stable indoor temperature was necessary to minimize the impact of an avoidable and highly fluctuating outdoor temperature. The EPH consistently maintained an effective indoor airspeed irrespective of season; however the CPH had defective and stagnant air at pig nose level during winter. Characteristics of airflow direction and pattern were consistent relative to housing system during both summer and winter but not of airspeed. The ideal air velocity measurement favored the EPH and therefore can be appropriate for the Korean environment. Further emphasis on its cost effectiveness will be the subject of future investigations.

Keywords

Conventional Pig Housing;Enclosed Pig Housing;Ammonia;Hydrogen Sulfide;Air Velocity

File

Download PDF

References

1. Barker, J., S Curtis, O. Hogsett and F. Humenik. 1986. Safety in swine production systems. Pork Industry Handbook. p. 104.
2. Bond, T. E., H. Heitman, Jr. and C. F. Kelly. 1965. Effects of increased air velocities on heat and moisture loss and growth of swine. Trans. ASAE. 8:167-169. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0372-1248(65)80010-8
3. Brugger, M. F. and L. A. Brooks. 1977. Ventilation of dairy and other livestock building-design, operation and equipment. Univ. Wis. Ext. Bull. A2812.
4. Choi, H. L., K. Y. Kim and H. Kim. 2005. Correlation of air pollutants and thermal environment factors in a confined pig house in winter. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 18:574-579.
5. Choi, H. L., J. I. Song and H. K. Ahn. 2000. Field survey of structural and environmental characteristics of pig houses in the southern provinces in Korea. J. Lives. Hous. Env. 6:1-14.
6. Curtis, S. E. 1983. Environmental managment in animal agriculture. University Extension Bulletin. Livestock Industry Facilities and Environment Ames, Iowa State University.
7. Esmay, M. L. 1978. Principles of Animal Environment. AVI Publishing Company, Inc.
8. Geers, R., E. Vranken, V. Goedlseels, D. Berkmans and F. Maes. 1988. Air temperature related behavioural problems and mortality rate of pigs. Livestock Environment III. ASAE Publication. 1-88, 343-348.
9. Grub, W., E. P. Foerster and L. F. Tribble. 1974. Swine building air contaminant control with pit ventilation. Presented at the 1974 Winter Meeting. Paper No. 74-4532. ASAE, St. Joseph, MI, USA.
10. Harmon, J. D. and J. Lawrence. 1995. Open vs enclosed swine finishing: making the decision. University Extension Bulletin. Livestock Industry Facilities and Environment Ames, Iowa State University.
11. Harmon, J. D. and H. Xin. 1995. Environmental guidelines for confinement swine housing. University Extension Bulletin. Livestock Industry Facilities and Environment Ames, Iowa State University.
12. MacDonald, R. 2005. Indoor air quality and ventilating systems in pig barns. Technical Article.http//www.engormix.com.
13. MWPS 8. 1988. Swine housing and equipment handbook. 4th Edition. Midwest Plan Service, Ames, Iowa, USA.
14. MWPS 32. 1990. Mechanical ventilating systems for livestock housing. First Edition. Midwest Plan Service, Ames, Iowa, USA.
15. SAS Institute Inc. 1991. SAS Language and Procedures: Version 6. First Edition . SAS institute Inc. Cary, North Carolina, USA.
16. Sainsbury, D. W. B. 1995. Pig health, environment and housing. In: The Health of Pigs (Ed. J. R. Hill and D. W. B. Sainsbury). Longmon Singapore Publishers (Pte) Ltd., Singapore. p. 69.
17. Schauberger, G., M. Piringer and E. Petz. 2000. Dynamic model of the indoor climate inside livestock buildings: A case study for fattening pigs. Conference Paper. First International Swine Housing Conference. Iowa, October, 2000.
18. Spillman, C. K. and C. N. Hinkle. 1971. Conduction heat transfer from swine to controlled temperature floors. Trans. ASAE 14: 301-303. https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.38280
19. Yoo, J. E., J. Y. Joo, S. C. Kim, C. S. Park, D. I. Chang, H. H. Chang and Y. I. Lim. 1998. Development of Korean pig-housing models for the optimum control of environmental systems. J. Lives. Hous. Env. 4:113-126.
20. Wathes, C. M., K. Howard, C. D. R. Jones and A. J. F. Webster. 1983. Ventilation, air hygiene and animal health. Vet. Rec. 113: 554-559.

Cited by

1. Comparison of two housing systems on behaviour and performance of fattening pigs vol.47, pp.1, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1080/09712119.2018.1561372