Knowledge and Practices of Cypriot Bovine Farmers towards Effective and Safe Manure Management
Abstract
:Simple Summary
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Population
2.2. Questionnaire Development and Administration
2.3. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Description of the Responders
3.2. Description of Practices for Manure Management
3.3. Evaluation of Knowledge
3.4. Participant Characteristics in Relation to Knowledge Level and Applied Practices
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A. The Questionnaire
- Please state your age: ……………………
- How many years have you been in the profession of bovine farmer? ……………………
- What is the level of your education?
Primary (elementary) | |
Gymnasium | |
Lyceum | |
University | |
No |
- 4.
- In which district your farm is located? …………………………………………
- 5.
- Please note the animal population of your farm:
From 1 to 5 animals | |
6–250 | |
251–500 | |
501–750 | |
751–1000 | |
More than 1000 animals |
- 6.
- What is the productive direction of your farm?
Dairy exclusively | |
Fattening exclusively | |
Mixed | |
Local breed |
- 7.
- Please note which of the following do you believe help reducing the risk for the occurrence and transmission of diseases in animals or humans from improper manure management:
Vaccinations of animals for disease prevention | |
Waiting for the manure to become digested | |
Increase the milk yield with appropriate nutrition | |
Genetic improvement of animals | |
Production of feed on the farm | |
Maintaining a high level of animal welfare |
- 8.
- Please note whether the following diseases can be transported to other areas via manure:
YES | NO | I’m not sure | |
Mastitis (a disease that causes a decrease or cessation of lactation) | |||
Enteritis (a disease of the bowel, often with diarrhoea) | |||
Foot-and-mouth disease (disease with aphthae in the mouth and legs) | |||
Rabies | |||
Microbes that are resistant to antibiotics | |||
Ketosis (a disease that occurs during pregnancy or shortly after) | |||
Enteric parasites (mainly worms that live in the intestines or liver of animals) | |||
Pneumonia | |||
Mad cow disease | |||
Enterotoxaemia (diarrhoea with deaths in young animals) | |||
Tympany (Bloat=dilatation of the cattle stomach with gases) |
- 9.
- Below, some treatment methods for manure are listed. Please note in the appropriate column which of them you believe reduce the risks to animal and human health.
Reduces | Does not reduce | |
The addition of lime | ||
Pasteurisation (70 °C for an hour) | ||
Air-drying | ||
Storage in lagoons or tanks or tanks | ||
Composting | ||
Storage in piles for at least 40 days with mixing for ventilation | ||
Transformation into biogas | ||
Separation of liquids from the solids |
- 10.
- Please note whether the following statements are Right or Wrong:
R | W | |
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
|
- 11.
- How do you use/treat the manure produced in your farm?
Waste | |
Fertilizer | |
Energy Source | |
Dangerous material | |
Any other uses |
- 12.
- How often do you send the manure from your farm for final disposal?
Every Week | |
Every month | |
Every quarter | |
More than three months |
- 13.
- How important do you believe is the treatment of manure to reduce risks to animal or human health with each of the following methods, before it can be used as a fertilizer?
Not at All Important | Slightly Important | Important | Very Important | I Don’t Know | |
Storage in piles for at least 40 days with mixing for ventilation | |||||
Storage in lagoons or tanks or tanks for 6 months. | |||||
Pasteurisation (70 °C for an hour) | |||||
Air-drying under the sun | |||||
Composting | |||||
Transformation into biogas | |||||
Addition of lime or other chemicals for sanitization purposes |
- 14.
- To where do you dispatch the manure produced in your farm?
To be used directly as a fertiliser in the fields | |
To a biogas plant | |
To become fertilizer in a composting plant | |
To be incinerated | |
To be disposed of as a waste |
- 15.
- If you use manure as a fertilizer in the fields, this is in:
Liquid form | |
Dried form |
- 16.
- How do you store the manure on your farm, until you send it to another place?
In a watertight tank | |
In uncovered piles | |
In covered piles | |
I don’t store it at all | |
In a dedicated area with cement floor | |
In a place with earthen ground | |
In any place that is convenient |
- 17.
- How many days does the manure stay stored at your farm before you send it to another place? …………
- 18.
- How important do you consider the following actions for your farm?
Not Important | Slightly Important | Not Sure/No Opinion | Important | Very Important | |
Vaccination programme | |||||
Mice control | |||||
Increase in milk production | |||||
Genetic improvement | |||||
Production of feed | |||||
Animal welfare | |||||
Manure management |
Appendix B. Additional Material
Question | Possible Answer | n | Correct Answers | % |
---|---|---|---|---|
Which of the following do you believe help reducing the risk for the occurrence and transmission of diseases in animals or humans from the improper management of the manure | Vaccinations of animals for disease prevention | 101 | 61 | 60.4 |
Waiting for the manure to become digested | 101 | 55 | 54.5 | |
Increase the milk yield with appropriate nutrition | 101 | 76 | 75.2 | |
Genetic improvement of animals | 101 | 75 | 74.3 | |
Production of feed on the farm | 101 | 81 | 80.2 | |
Maintaining a high level of animal welfare | 101 | 58 | 57.4 | |
Which of the following diseases/hazards can be transported to other areas via manure | Mastitis | 93 | 56 | 60.2 |
Enteritis | 81 | 32 | 39.5 | |
Foot-and-mouth disease | 84 | 41 | 48.8 | |
Rabies | 81 | 31 | 38.3 | |
Microbes that are resistant to antibiotics | 81 | 47 | 58 | |
Ketosis | 80 | 56 | 70 | |
Intestinal parasites | 82 | 45 | 54.9 | |
Pneumonia | 80 | 48 | 60 | |
Mad cow disease | 81 | 49 | 60.5 | |
Enterotoxaemia | 80 | 37 | 46.3 | |
Tympany | 84 | 53 | 63.1 | |
Which of the following methods of manure treatment do you believe reduce the risks to animal and human health | The addition of lime | 91 | 86 | 94.5 |
Pasteurisation (70 °C for an hour) | 78 | 64 | 82.1 | |
Air-drying | 83 | 77 | 92.8 | |
Storage in lagoons or tanks or tanks | 81 | 31 | 38.3 | |
Composting | 77 | 63 | 81.8 | |
Storage in piles for at least 40 days with mixing for ventilation | 84 | 67 | 79.8 | |
Transformation into biogas | 84 | 74 | 88.1 | |
Separation of liquids from the solids | 83 | 57 | 68.7 | |
Right or Wrong Statements | ||||
Manure that has been air dried for 90 days is safer than liquid manure. | 97 | 89 | 91.8 | |
Undigested manure can be placed on the land before or after sowing. | 88 | 50 | 56.8 | |
Uniform spreading of manure on land reduces risks | 90 | 78 | 86.7 | |
The slope of the soil where liquid manure will be placed may affect safety because manure can be swept away elsewhere. | 90 | 70 | 77.8 | |
Raining does not affect the safety of manure dispersion on land. | 89 | 56 | 62.9 | |
After the manure is placed on land, at least week must elapse to harvest forage to be fed to cattle. | 91 | 69 | 75.8 |
Participants’ Characteristics | Median Score 1 | Effect Size 2 (r) | p-Value |
---|---|---|---|
Size of the farm n = 104 | |||
Farms with equal or less than 250 bovines | 19 (11, 22) | 0.23 | 0.022 3 |
Farms with more than 250 bovines | 21 (19, 23) | ||
Farming purpose n = 103 | |||
Pure Dairy or mixed with fattening | 21 (18, 23) | 0.49 | <0.001 |
Pure fattening or local breeds | 11 (7, 16) | ||
Participants’ educational level n = 104 | |||
Farmers with lower education (elementary or gymnasium) | 16 (8, 22) | 0.22 | 0.028 3 |
Farmers with higher education (lyceum or university) | 20 (16, 23) | ||
Age n = 101 | |||
Farmers up to 52 years old | 20 (16, 23) | 0.04 | 0.69 3 |
Farmers older than 52 years old | 21 (12, 23) | ||
Years in the occupation n = 99 | |||
Farmers with experience equal or less than 25 years | 19 (15, 23) | 0.09 | 0.39 3 |
Farmers with experience more than 25 years | 21 (16, 23) | ||
Participants’ district n = 102 | |||
Lefkosia | 22 a (18, 23) | <0.001 4 | |
Ammochostos | 20 a (14, 22.5) | ||
Larnaka | 21 a (20, 23) | ||
Lemesos | 21 a (19, 23) | ||
Paphos | 12 b (7, 17) |
References
- EFSA (European Food Safety Authority). Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ) on the Biological Safety of Heat Treatment of Manure. EFSA J. 2005, 3, 265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nag, R.; Russell, L.; Nolan, S.; Auer, A.; Markey, B.K.; Whyte, P.; O’Flaherty, V.; Bolton, D.; Fenton, O.; Richards, K.G.; et al. Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment Associated with Ready-to-Eat Salads Following the Application of Farmyard Manure and Slurry or Anaerobic Digestate to Arable Lands. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 806, 151227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Köninger, J.; Lugato, E.; Panagos, P.; Kochupillai, M.; Orgiazzi, A.; Briones, M.J.I. Manure Management and Soil Biodiversity: Towards More Sustainable Food Systems in the EU. Agric. Syst. 2021, 194, 103251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stylianou, M.; Kaikiti, K.; Agapiou, A. Sorption of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) from Cattle Manure by Biochar. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Chemistry and the Environment, Thessaloniki, Greece, 16–20 June 2019; pp. 134–135. [Google Scholar]
- Rosen, B.H.; Croft, R.; Atwill, E.R.; Stehman, S.; Wade, S. Waterborne Pathogens in Agricultural Watersheds; Watershed Science Institute, United States Department of Agriculture: Washington, DC, USA, 2000.
- Wade, S.E.; Mohammed, H.O.; Schaaf, S.L. Epidemiologic Study of Giardia Sp. Infection in Dairy Cattle in Southeastern New York State. Vet. Parasitol. 2000, 89, 11–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sobsey, M.D.; Khatib, L.A.; Hill, V.R.; Alocilja, E.; Pillai, S. Pathogens in Animal Wastes and the Impacts of Waste Management Practices on Their Survival, Transport and Fate; American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers: St. Joseph, MI, USA, 2006; pp. 609–666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soller, J.A.; Schoen, M.E.; Bartrand, T.; Ravenscroft, J.E.; Ashbolt, N.J. Estimated Human Health Risks from Exposure to Recreational Waters Impacted by Human and Non-Human Sources of Faecal Contamination. Water Res. 2010, 44, 4674–4691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). Literature Review of Contaminants in Livestock and Poultry Manure and Implications for Water Quality. Available online: https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=P100H2NI.txt (accessed on 23 March 2022).
- Manyi-Loh, C.E.; Mamphweli, S.N.; Meyer, E.L.; Makaka, G.; Simon, M.; Okoh, A.I. An Overview of the Control of Bacterial Pathogens in Cattle Manure. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2016, 13, 843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Geldreich, E.E.; Fox, K.R.; Goodrich, J.A.; Rice, E.W.; Clark, R.M.; Swerdlow, D.L. Searching for a Water Supply Connection in the Cabool, Missouri Disease Outbreak of Escherichia Coli 0157:H7. Water Res. 1992, 26, 1127–1137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Solo-Gabriele, H.; Neumeister, S. US Outbreaks of Cryptosporidiosis. J. Am. Water Works Assoc. 1996, 88, 76–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pell, A.N. Manure and Microbes: Public and Animal Health Problem? J. Dairy Sci. 1997, 80, 2673–2681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khan, S.J.; Roser, D.J.; Davies, C.M.; Peters, G.M.; Stuetz, R.M.; Tucker, R.; Ashbolt, N.J. Chemical Contaminants in Feedlot Wastes: Concentrations, Effects and Attenuation. Environ. Int. 2008, 34, 839–859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pérez, S.; Barceló, D.; Aga, D. Advances in the Analysis of Pharmaceuticals in the Aquatic Environment; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Chee-Sanford, J.C.; Mackie, R.I.; Koike, S.; Krapac, I.G.; Lin, Y.-F.; Yannarell, A.C.; Maxwell, S.; Aminov, R.I. Fate and Transport of Antibiotic Residues and Antibiotic Resistance Genes Following Land Application of Manure Waste. J. Environ. Qual. 2009, 38, 1086–1108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Spielmeyer, A. Occurrence and Fate of Antibiotics in Manure during Manure Treatments: A Short Review. Sustain. Chem. Pharm. 2018, 9, 76–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Muhammad, J.; Khan, S.; Su, J.Q.; Hesham, A.E.L.; Ditta, A.; Nawab, J.; Ali, A. Antibiotics in Poultry Manure and Their Associated Health Issues: A Systematic Review. J. Soils Sediments 2020, 20, 486–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hölzel, C.S.; Schwaiger, K.; Harms, K.; Küchenhoff, H.; Kunz, A.; Meyer, K.; Müller, C.; Bauer, J. Sewage Sludge and Liquid Pig Manure as Possible Sources of Antibiotic Resistant Bacteria. Environ. Res. 2010, 110, 318–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Udikovic-Kolic, N.; Wichmann, F.; Broderick, N.A.; Handelsman, J. Bloom of Resident Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria in Soil Following Manure Fertilization. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2014, 111, 15202–15207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Oliver, J.P.; Gooch, C.A.; Lansing, S.; Schueler, J.; Hurst, J.J.; Sassoubre, L.; Crossette, E.M.; Aga, D.S. Invited Review: Fate of Antibiotic Residues, Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria, and Antibiotic Resistance Genes in US Dairy Manure Management Systems. J. Dairy Sci. 2020, 103, 1051–1071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Welsch-Pausch, K.; McLachlan, M.S. Fate of Airborne Polychlorinated Dibenzo-p-Dioxins and Dibenzofurans in an Agricultural Ecosystem. Environ. Pollut. 1998, 102, 129–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koch, F.; Kowalczyk, J.; Wagner, B.; Klevenhusen, F.; Schenkel, H.; Lahrssen-Wiederholt, M.; Pieper, R. Chemical Analysis of Materials Used in Pig Housing with Respect to the Safety of Products of Animal Origin. Animal 2021, 15, 100319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gavinelli, M.P. Persistance of Illegal Drugs in Bovine Manure. Doctoral Dissertation, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Kjær, J.; Olsen, P.; Bach, K.; Barlebo, H.C.; Ingerslev, F.; Hansen, M.; Sørensen, B.H. Leaching of Estrogenic Hormones from Manure-Treated Structured Soils. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2007, 41, 3911–3917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Andaluri, G.; Suri, R.P.S.; Kumar, K. Occurrence of Estrogen Hormones in Biosolids, Animal Manure and Mushroom Compost. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2011, 184, 1197–1205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Combalbert, S.; Bellet, V.; Dabert, P.; Bernet, N.; Balaguer, P.; Hernandez-Raquet, G. Fate of Steroid Hormones and Endocrine Activities in Swine Manure Disposal and Treatment Facilities. Water Res. 2012, 46, 895–906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Duerschner, J.; Bartelt-Hunt, S.; Eskridge, K.M.; Gilley, J.E.; Li, X.; Schmidt, A.M.; Snow, D.D. Swine Slurry Characteristics as Affected by Selected Additives and Disinfectants. Environ. Pollut. 2020, 260, 114058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Shao, Z.; Guo, X.; Qu, Q.; Kang, K.; Su, Q.; Wang, C.; Qiu, L. Effects of Chlorine Disinfectants on the Microbial Community Structure and the Performance of Anaerobic Digestion of Swine Manure. Bioresour. Technol. 2021, 339, 125576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jahne, M.A.; Rogers, S.W.; Holsen, T.M.; Grimberg, S.J.; Ramler, I.P. Emission and Dispersion of Bioaerosols from Dairy Manure Application Sites: Human Health Risk Assessment. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 9842–9849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alegbeleye, O.O.; Sant’Ana, A.S. Manure-Borne Pathogens as an Important Source of Water Contamination: An Update on the Dynamics of Pathogen Survival/Transport as Well as Practical Risk Mitigation Strategies. Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health 2020, 227, 113524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Font-Palma, C. Methods for the Treatment of Cattle Manure—A Review. C 2019, 5, 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gollehon, N.R.; Caswell, M.; Ribaudo, M.; Kellogg, R.L.; Lander, C.; Letson, D. Confined Animal Production and Manure Nutrients; Agricultural Information Bulletins, 33763; United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service: Washington, DC, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shortall, O.; Sutherland, L.; Ruralis, A.R.-S.; Kaler, J. True Cowmen and Commercial Farmers: Exploring Vets’ and Dairy Farmers’ Contrasting Views of ’good Farming’in Relation to Biosecurity. Wiley Online Libr. 2018, 58, 583–603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maye, D.; Chan, K.W.R. On-Farm Biosecurity in Livestock Production: Farmer Behaviour, Cultural Identities and Practices of Care. Emerg. Top. Life Sci. 2020, 4, 521–530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Youssef, D.M.; Wieland, B.; Knight, G.M.; Lines, J.; Naylor, N.R. The Effectiveness of Biosecurity Interventions in Reducing the Transmission of Bacteria from Livestock to Humans at the Farm Level: A Systematic Literature Review. Zoonoses Public Health 2021, 68, 549–562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Z.; Wang, X. Manure Treatment and Utilization in Production Systems. In Animal Agriculture: Sustainability, Challenges and Innovations; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2020; pp. 455–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heinonen-Tanski, H.; Mohaibes, M.; Karinen, P.; Koivunen, J. Methods to Reduce Pathogen Microorganisms in Manure. Livest. Sci. 2006, 102, 248–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Collins, E.; Arogo, J.; Krometis, L.A.; Howes, S. Evaluating the Effects of Pasteurization Temperature and Treatment Duration on Pathogen Inactivation in Separated Liquid Dairy Manure. In Proceedings of the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers Annual International Meeting, Kansas City, MO, USA, 21–24 July 2013. Paper No. 131620727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nolan, S.; Thorn, C.E.; Ashekuzzaman, S.M.; Kavanagh, I.; Nag, R.; Bolton, D.; Cummins, E.; O’Flaherty, V.; Abram, F.; Richards, K.; et al. Landspreading with Co-Digested Cattle Slurry, with or without Pasteurisation, as a Mitigation Strategy against Pathogen, Nutrient and Metal Contamination Associated with Untreated Slurry. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 744, 140841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Basnet, B.B.; Apan, A.A.; Raine, S.R. Geographic Information System Based Manure Application Plan. J. Environ. Manage 2002, 64, 99–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Albihn, A.; Vinnerås, B. Biosecurity and Arable Use of Manure and Biowaste—Treatment Alternatives. Livest. Sci. 2007, 112, 232–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bonetta, S.; Ferretti, E.; Bonetta, S.; Fezia, G.; Carraro, E. Microbiological Contamination of Digested Products from Anaerobic Co-Digestion of Bovine Manure and Agricultural by-Products. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 2011, 53, 552–557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mc Carthy, G.; Lawlor, P.G.; Coffey, L.; Nolan, T.; Gutierrez, M.; Gardiner, G.E. An Assessment of Pathogen Removal during Composting of the Separated Solid Fraction of Pig Manure. Bioresour. Technol. 2011, 102, 9059–9067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Loyon, L. Overview of Manure Treatment in France. Waste Manag. 2017, 61, 516–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, P.; Gamal El-Din, M.; Ikehata, K.; Craik, S.A.; Bromley, D. UV Inactivation of Bacteria in Raw and Pretreated Liquid Swine Manure. Environ. Technol. 2006, 27, 1261–1270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- European Commission (DG Environment) Collection and Analysis of Data for the Control of Emissions from the Spreading of Manure Final Report. 2014. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/pdf/Final%20Report.pdf (accessed on 17 April 2022).
- de Corato, U. Agricultural Waste Recycling in Horticultural Intensive Farming Systems by On-Farm Composting and Compost-Based Tea Application Improves Soil Quality and Plant Health: A Review under the Perspective of a Circular Economy. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 738, 139840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Polycarpou, M.; (Veterinary Services of Cyprus,1417, Lefkosia, Cyprus). Personal communication, 7 December 2021.
- Department of Agriculture (Animal Production and Nutrition Branch) Overview of Cattle Breeding 2021; Lefkosia. 2022. Available online: http://www.moa.gov.cy/moa/da/da.nsf/All/AAD5881263760756C22587A600338D12?OpenDocument (accessed on 23 March 2022).
- Valeeva, N.I.; van Asseldonk, M.A.P.M.; Backus, G.B.C. Perceived Risk and Strategy Efficacy as Motivators of Risk Management Strategy Adoption to Prevent Animal Diseases in Pig Farming. Prev. Vet. Med. 2011, 102, 284–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tierney, M.; Gallagher, A.M.; Giotis, E.S.; Pentieva, K. An Online Survey on Consumer Knowledge and Understanding of Added Sugars. Nutrients 2017, 9, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Boivin, X.; Marcantognini, L.; Boulesteix, P.; Godet, J.; Brulé, A.; Veissier, I. Attitudes of Farmers towards Limousin Cattle and Their Handling. Anim. Welf. J. 2007, 16, 147–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jansen, J.; van den Borne, B.H.P.; Renes, R.J.; van Schaik, G.; Lam, T.J.G.M.; Leeuwis, C. Explaining Mastitis Incidence in Dutch Dairy Farming: The Influence of Farmers’ Attitudes and Behaviour. Prev. Vet. Med. 2009, 92, 210–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows 2019, v.27.0; IBM Corp.: Armonk, NY, USA, 2019.
- Casal, J.; de Manuel, A.; Mateu, E.; Martín, M. Biosecurity Measures on Swine Farms in Spain: Perceptions by Farmers and Their Relationship to Current on-Farm Measures. Prev. Vet. Med. 2007, 82, 138–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Benjamin, L.A.; Fosgate, G.T.; Ward, M.P.; Roussel, A.J.; Feagin, R.A.; Schwartz, A.L. Attitudes towards Biosecurity Practices Relevant to Johne’s Disease Control on Beef Cattle Farms. Prev. Vet. Med. 2010, 94, 222–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cohen, J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 1988; ISBN 9780203771587. [Google Scholar]
- Ström, G.; Albihn, A.; Jinnerot, T.; Boqvist, S.; Andersson-Djurfeldt, A.; Sokerya, S.; Osbjer, K.; San, S.; Davun, H.; Magnusson, U. Manure Management and Public Health: Sanitary and Socio-Economic Aspects among Urban Livestock-Keepers in Cambodia. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 621, 193–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Šūmane, S.; Kunda, I.; Knickel, K.; Strauss, A.; Tisenkopfs, T.; des los Rios, I.; Rivera, M.; Chebach, T.; Ashkenazy, A. Local and Farmers’ Knowledge Matters! How Integrating Informal and Formal Knowledge Enhances Sustainable and Resilient Agriculture. J. Rural. Stud. 2018, 59, 232–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eltayb, A.; Barakat, S.; Marrone, G.; Shaddad, S.; Stålsby Lundborg, C. Antibiotic Use and Resistance in Animal Farming: A Quantitative and Qualitative Study on Knowledge and Practices among Farmers in Khartoum, Sudan. Zoonoses Public Health 2012, 59, 330–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Calistri, P.; D’Albenzio, S.; Falconi, A.; Pediconi, O.; Johnson, J.; Vincent, A. 2021 EFSA/IZSAM Animal Health Crisis Preparedness Exercise with Mediterranean Countries. EFSA Support. Publ. 2021, 18, 6832E. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sahlström, L.; Bagge, E.; Emmoth, E.; Holmqvist, A.; Danielsson-Tham, M.L.; Albihn, A. A Laboratory Study of Survival of Selected Microorganisms after Heat Treatment of Biowaste Used in Biogas Plants. Bioresour. Technol. 2008, 99, 7859–7865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, X.; Lendormi, T.; Lanoisellé, J.L. Conventional and Innovative Hygienization of Feedstock for Biogas Production: Resistance of Indicator Bacteria to Thermal Pasteurization, Pulsed Electric Field Treatment, and Anaerobic Digestion. Energies 2021, 14, 1938. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meyer, D.; Price, P.L.; Rossow, H.A.; Silva-del-Rio, N.; Karle, B.M.; Robinson, P.H.; DePeters, E.J.; Fadel, J.G. Survey of Dairy Housing and Manure Management Practices in California. J. Dairy Sci. 2011, 94, 4744–4750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Nandiyanto, A.B.D.; Ragadhita, R.; Maulana, A.C.; Abdullah, A.G. Feasibility Study on the Production of Biogas in Dairy Farming. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2018, 288, 012024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gebrezgabher, S.A.; Meuwissen, M.P.M.; Prins, B.A.M.; Lansink, A.G.J.M.O. Economic Analysis of Anaerobic Digestion—A Case of Green Power Biogas Plant in The Netherlands. NJAS Wagening. J. Life Sci. 2021, 57, 109–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pochwatka, P.; Kowalczyk-Juśko, A.; Sołowiej, P.; Wawrzyniak, A.; Dach, J. Biogas Plant Exploitation in a Middle-Sized Dairy Farm in Poland: Energetic and Economic Aspects. Energies 2020, 13, 6058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coats, E.R.; Gregg, M.; Crawford, R.L. Effect of Organic Loading and Retention Time on Dairy Manure Fermentation. Bioresour. Technol. 2011, 102, 2572–2577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Water Pollution Control Law ΚΔΠ 433/2006, The Water Pollution Control General Conditions for Disposing of Waste from Cattle Farming Units, Decree 2006, Cyprus Government Gazette, 4148, annex III(1), 3701–3714. Available online: https://www.mof.gov.cy/mof/gpo/gazette.nsf/All/58C81A479097F4B9C2258728003A2228/$file/4148%2017.11.2006%20Parartima%203o%20Meros%20I.pdf?OpenElement (accessed on 23 March 2022).
- Wang, W.; Jin, J.; He, R.; Gong, H. Gender Differences in Pesticide Use Knowledge, Risk Awareness and Practices in Chinese Farmers. Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 590–591, 22–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, B.B.; Kaur, R.; Gill, G.S.; Gill, J.P.S.; Soni, R.K.; Aulakh, R.S. Knowledge, Attitude and Practices Relating to Zoonotic Diseases among Livestock Farmers in Punjab, India. Acta Trop. 2019, 189, 15–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hundal, J.S.; Sodhi, S.S.; Gupta, A.; Singh, J.; Chahal, U.S. Awareness, Knowledge, and Risks of Zoonotic Diseases among Livestock Farmers in Punjab. Vet. World 2016, 9, 186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Saha, D.; Hoque Akand, A.; Hai, A. Livestock Farmers’ Knowledge about Rearing Practices in Ganderbal District of Jammu & Kashmir. Indian Res. J. Ext. Edu. 2010, 10, 15–20. [Google Scholar]
- Musallam, I.I.; Abo-Shehada, M.N.; Guitian, J. Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices Associated with Brucellosis in Livestock Owners in Jordan. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2015, 93, 1148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Holt, H.R.; Eltholth, M.M.; Hegazy, Y.M.; El-Tras, W.F.; Tayel, A.A.; Guitian, J. Brucella Spp. Infection in Large Ruminants in an Endemic Area of Egypt: Cross-Sectional Study Investigating Seroprevalence, Risk Factors and Livestock Owner’s Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices (KAPs). BMC Public Health 2011, 11, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Gozdzielewska, L.; King, C.; Flowers, P.; Mellor, D.; Dunlop, P.; Price, L. Scoping Review of Approaches for Improving Antimicrobial Stewardship in Livestock Farmers and Veterinarians. Prev. Vet. Med. 2020, 180, 105025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nöremark, M.; Lindberg, A.; Vågsholm, I.; Sternberg Lewerin, S. Disease Awareness, Information Retrieval and Change in Biosecurity Routines among Pig Farmers in Association with the First PRRS Outbreak in Sweden. Prev. Vet. Med. 2009, 90, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Variable | Category | n | % | p-Value 1 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Age (years) | 18–24 | 102 | 1 | <0.001 |
25–34 | 6.9 | |||
35–44 | 23.5 | |||
45–54 | 24.5 | |||
55–64 | 33.3 | |||
>65 | 10.8 | |||
Farming experience (years) | <10 | 100 | 13 | <0.001 |
10–19 | 11 | |||
20–29 | 19 | |||
30–39 | 27 | |||
40–49 | 26 | |||
>50 | 4 | |||
Education | Primary (Elementary) | 105 | 6.7 | <0.001 |
Gymnasium | 20 | |||
Lyceum | 53.3 | |||
University | 19 | |||
None of the above | 1 | |||
District of the farm | Lefkosia | 103 | 30.1 | <0.001 |
Ammochostos | 12.6 | |||
Larnaka | 22.3 | |||
Lemesos | 6.8 | |||
Paphos | 28.2 | |||
Herd size (number of animals) | 1–6 | 105 | 6.7 | <0.001 |
7–250 | 58.1 | |||
251–500 | 30.5 | |||
501–750 | 1.9 | |||
751–1000 | 1.9 | |||
>1000 | 1 | |||
Farming purpose | Dairy (exclusively) | 104 | 15.4 | <0.001 |
Beef (exclusively) | 2.9 | |||
Mixed | 62.5 | |||
Local breed | 19.2 |
Question | n | Possible Answers | Number of Answers | % | p-Value 1 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
How do you use manure produced on your farm? | 94 | As a Waste | 5 | 5.3 | <0.001 |
As a Fertiliser | 80 | 85.1 | |||
As an Energy Source | 1 | 1.1 | |||
Any other uses | 8 | 8.5 | |||
How often do you send manure from your farm for final use? | 102 | Every week | 12 | 11.8 | <0.001 |
Every month | 12 | 11.8 | |||
Every quarter | 11 | 10.8 | |||
More than three months | 67 | 65.7 | |||
In case the manure is used as a fertiliser, in which form is it used? | 101 | Liquid form | 4 | 4 | <0.001 |
Air dried form | 70 | 69.3 | |||
Both liquid and air dried | 27 | 26.7 | |||
How do you store manure at your farm before you send it to another place? | 130 | In a watertight tank | 28 | 21.5 | <0.001 |
In uncovered piles | 32 | 24.6 | |||
In covered piles | 6 | 4.6 | |||
In a dedicated area with cement floor | 37 | 28.5 | |||
In a place with earthen ground | 15 | 11.5 | |||
In any place that is convenient | 5 | 3.8 | |||
I don’t store it at all | 7 | 5.4 | |||
To where do you dispatch the manure produced on your farm? | 103 | To be used directly as a fertiliser in the fields | 88 | 85.4 | <0.001 |
To a biogas plant | 3 | 2.9 | |||
To become fertiliser in a composting plant | 10 | 9.7 | |||
To be disposed of as a waste | 2 | 1.9 | |||
To be incinerated | 0 | 0 |
Question | Mean Score | SD 2 | % of Maximum Score 3 |
---|---|---|---|
| 4.1 | 0.87 | 68.5 |
| 4.8 | 2.52 | 43.5 |
| 5.1 | 2.54 | 64.3 |
| 4.1 | 1.69 | 67.8 |
Total score | 18.1 | 5.92 | 58.4 |
Total Knowledge Score | |||
---|---|---|---|
β | 95% CI | p * | |
Farming experience (years) | 0.037 | −0.07–0.10 | 0.69 |
Education level | 0.192 | 0.06–3.47 | 0.043 |
Herd size (number of animals) | 0.158 | −0.17–2.48 | 0.087 |
Farming purpose | −0.497 | −5.2–−2.36 | <0.0005 |
R2 | 0.429 | p ** | <0.0005 |
Adjusted R2 | 0.402 | F | 16.131 |
Question about Attitudes and Beliefs | Statement | n | Median Score 1 | p-Value 2 | Effect 3 Size (r) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
How important do you believe is the treatment of manure to reduce risks to animal or human health with each of the following methods before it can be used as a fertiliser? | |||||
Storage in piles for at least 40 days with mixing for ventilation | Not important | 26 | 16 (14, 21.5) | 0.015 | 0.26 |
Important | 61 | 22 (19, 23) | |||
Storage in lagoons or tanks or tanks for 6 months | Not important | 33 | 20 (16, 23) | 0.016 | 0.29 |
Important | 35 | 22 (20, 24) | |||
Pasteurisation (70 °C for an hour) | Not important | 21 | 21 (16, 23.5) | 0.297 | |
Important | 37 | 22 (20, 23) | |||
Air-drying under the sun | Not important | 14 | 16.5 (13.75, 23) | 0.047 | 0.21 |
Important | 72 | 21 (19, 23) | |||
Composting | Not important | 11 | 20 (14, 22) | 0.049 | 0.23 |
Important | 62 | 21.5 (19, 23) | |||
Transformation into biogas | Not important | 14 | 19.5 (15.5, 23.25) | 0.097 | |
Important | 56 | 22 (20, 23) | |||
Addition of lime or other chemicals for sanitization purposes | Not important | 18 | 21 (16, 23) | 0.08 | |
Important | 51 | 22 (20, 23) | |||
How important do you consider the following actions for your farm? | |||||
Vaccination program | Not important | 17 | 16 (13,18.5) | 0.001 | 0.33 |
Important | 80 | 21 (18,23) | |||
Mice control | Not important | 11 | 11 (6, 14) | <0.0005 | 0.43 |
Important | 87 | 21 (18, 23) | |||
Increase in milk production | Not important | 7 | 15 (12, 22) | 0.042 | 0.22 |
Important | 80 | 21 (19, 23) | |||
Genetic improvement | Not important | 7 | 12 (9, 16) | 0.001 | 0.35 |
Important | 81 | 21 (18.5, 23) | |||
Production of feed | Not important | 13 | 20 (14, 23.5) | 0.378 | |
Important | 77 | 21 (18, 23) | |||
Animal welfare | Not important | 6 | 13 (10.5, 17.25) | 0.005 | 0.29 |
Important | 85 | 21 (17.5, 23) | |||
Manure management | Not important | 12 | 16 (12.5, 20.75) | 0.014 | 0.25 |
Important | 80 | 21 (18, 23) |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Christophe, S.; Pentieva, K.; Botsaris, G. Knowledge and Practices of Cypriot Bovine Farmers towards Effective and Safe Manure Management. Vet. Sci. 2023, 10, 293. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci10040293
Christophe S, Pentieva K, Botsaris G. Knowledge and Practices of Cypriot Bovine Farmers towards Effective and Safe Manure Management. Veterinary Sciences. 2023; 10(4):293. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci10040293
Chicago/Turabian StyleChristophe, Soteris, Kristina Pentieva, and George Botsaris. 2023. "Knowledge and Practices of Cypriot Bovine Farmers towards Effective and Safe Manure Management" Veterinary Sciences 10, no. 4: 293. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci10040293