Ammonia and Hydrogen Sulfide Monitoring in Broiler Barns and Cattle Barns

계사 및 우사 내 암모니아 및 황화수소 노출농도 평가

  • Park, Jihoon (Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Graduate School of Public Health, Seoul National University) ;
  • Seok, Jiwon (Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Graduate School of Public Health, Seoul National University) ;
  • Lee, Sangah (Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Graduate School of Public Health, Seoul National University) ;
  • Kwon, Ohhun (Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Graduate School of Public Health, Seoul National University) ;
  • Lee, Kyungsuk (National Academy of Agricultural Science, Rural Development Administration) ;
  • Heo, Yong (Department of Occupational Health, Catholic University of Daegu) ;
  • Yoon, Chungsik (Institute of Health and Environment, Graduate School of Public Health, Seoul National University)
  • 박지훈 (서울대학교 보건대학원 환경보건학과) ;
  • 석지원 (서울대학교 보건대학원 환경보건학과) ;
  • 이상아 (서울대학교 보건대학원 환경보건학과) ;
  • 권오훈 (서울대학교 보건대학원 환경보건학과) ;
  • 이경숙 (농촌진흥청 국립농업과학원) ;
  • 허용 (대구가톨릭대학교 산업보건학과) ;
  • 윤충식 (서울대학교 보건환경연구소)
  • Received : 2015.09.16
  • Accepted : 2015.10.13
  • Published : 2015.10.28


Objectives: There are many hazardous agents at livestock farms. In particular, gases can be detrimental to both workers and animals. This study evaluated ammonia and hydrogen sulfide concentrations in broiler hen barns and beef cattle barns according to sampling location and height. Methods: Three broiler hen barns and three beef cattle barns were selected for gas monitoring in this study. Ammonia and hydrogen sulfide concentrations were measured using a direct-reading instrument which could measure the target gases simultaneously. Gas monitoring was conducted at human breathing height and animal breathing height at three points in each livestock farm. Results: Ammonia concentrations at the broiler hen barns ranged from 3.3 to 12.5 ppm by sampling location and height, but hydrogen sulfide was not detected. In the beef cattle barns, ammonia ranged from 3.1 to 16.3 ppm and low concentrations of hydrogen sulfide were detected at some animal breathing heights. The gas concentrations detected at each livestock farm were significantly higher in the animal breathing zones than in human breathing zones (p<0.0001). Conclusions: We found a difference in gas concentrations between human breathing zones and animal breathing zones. Gas monitoring should be conducted to improve the related environment considering both workers' and animals' health and safety.


Supported by : 농촌진흥청, 한국연구재단


  1. Kim KY, Ko HJ, Kim HT, Kim DK, Kim YS. Concentration characteristics of ammonia and hydrogen sulfide emitted from domestic types of chicken buildings. J Korean Soc Indoor Environ. 2010; 7(4): 216-223.
  2. Kim KY, Kim CN. Fluctuation of indoor air pollutants emitted from enclosed pig building in winter. J Korean Soc Occup Environ Hyg. 2003; 13(3): 191-7.
  3. Thorne PS, Ansley AC, Perry SS: Concentrations of bioaerosols, odors, and hydrogen sulfide inside and downwind from two types of swine livestock operations. J Occup Environ Hyg. 2009; 6(4): 211-220.
  4. Milby TH, Baselt RC. Hydrogen sulfide poisoning: clarification of some controversial issues. Am J Ind Med. 1999; 35(2): 192-5<192::AID-AJIM11>3.0.CO;2-C
  5. Kim KR, KIM HC, Lee KS, Chae HS. Exposure to dust and organic gas during chicken entrance and shipment tasks in poultry farms. J Korean Soc Occup Environ Hyg. 2014; 24(4): 471-7.
  6. Lee SH, Xin H, Liang Y. Ammonia emission in the windowless laying hen house. Korean Soc 2003 Proceedings of the Korean Association for Livestock Housing and Environment Conference 2003.100-7.
  7. Shin CL, Lee KS, Kim KR, Kang TS, Paik NW. A study on exposure to organic dust and ammonia in poultry confinement buildings. Korean J of Rural Med. 2004; (2): 303-314.
  8. Seedorf J, Hartung J. Survey of ammonia concentrations in livestock buildings. J Agric Sci. 1999; 133(4): 433-7.
  9. Radon K, Danuser B, Iversen M, Monso E, Weber C, Hartung J, et al. Air contaminants in different European farming environments. Ann Agric Environ Med. 2002; 9(1): 41-8.
  10. Koerkamp PG, Metz JHM, Uenk GH, Phillips VR, Holden MR, Sneath RW, et al. Concentrations and emissions of ammonia in livestock buildings in Northern Europe. J Agric Eng Res. 1998; 70(1): 79-95.
  11. Zhu J, Jacobson L, Schmidt D, Nicolai R. Daily variations in odor and gas emissions from animal facilities. Appl Eng Agric. 2000; 16(2): 153-8.
  12. Herbut P, Angrecka S. Ammonia concentrations in a free-stall dairy barn. Ann Ani Sci. 2014; 14(1): 153-166.
  13. Simsek E, Kilic I, Yaslioglu E, Arici I. Ammonia emissions from dairy cattle barns in summer season. J Anim Vet Adv. 2012; 11(11): 2116-2120.
  14. Guarrasi J, Trask C, Kirychuk S. A Systematic Review of Occupational Exposure to Hydrogen Sulfide in Livestock Operations. J Agromedicine. 2015; 20(2): 225-236.
  15. Beaver RL, Field WE. Summary of documented fatalities in livestock manure storage and handling facilities-1975-2004. J Agromed. 2007; 12(2): 3-23.
  16. Burton DL, Beauchamp EG. Nitrogen losses from swine housings. Agric. Wastes. 1986; 15(1): 59-74.
  17. Hinz T, Linke S. A comprehensive experimental study of aerial pollutants in and emissions from livestock buildings. Part 2: Results. J. Agric. Eng. Res. 1998; 70(1): 119-129.
  18. Hoff SJ, Bundy DS, Nelson MA, Zelle BC, Jacobson LD, Heber AJ, et al. Emissions of ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, and odor before, during, and after slurry removal from a deep-pit swine finisher. J. Air Waste Manage. 2006; 56(5): 581-590.
  19. Badjagbo K, Sauve S, Moore S. Real-time continuous monitoring methods for airborne VOCs. TrAC Trend Anal Chem. 2007; 26(9): 931-940.