HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Related articles in JEQ Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (7) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Miller, D. N. Articles by Woodbury, B. L. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Miller, D. N. Articles by Woodbury, B. L. Agricola Articles by Miller, D. N. Articles by Woodbury, B. L. Related Collections Soil Organic Matter Air Pollution Soil Analysis Animal Waste

TECHNICAL REPORTS

Atmospheric Pollutants and Trace Gases

Simple Protocols to Determine Dust Potentials from Cattle Feedlot Soil and Surface Samples

USDA Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Meat Animal Research Center, P.O. Box 166, Clay Center, NE 68933

^* Corresponding author (miller{at}email.marc.usda.gov).

Received for publication October 16, 2002. Cattle feedlot dust is an annoyance and may be a route for nutrient transport, odor emission, and pathogen dispersion, but important environmental factors that contribute to dust emissions are poorly characterized. A general protocol was devised to test feedlot samples for their ability to produce dust under a variety of environmental conditions. A blender was modified to produce dust from a variety of dried feedlot surface and soil samples and collect airborne particles on glass fiber filters by vacuum collection. A general blending protocol optimized for sample volume (150–175 cm³), blending time (5 min of pre-blending), and dust collection time (15 s) provided consistent dust measurements for all samples tested. The procedure performed well on samples that varied in organic matter content, but was restricted to samples containing less than 200 to 700 g H₂O kg^-1 dry matter (DM). When applied to field samples, the technique demonstrated considerable spatial variability between feedlot pen sites. Mechanistically, dust potential was related to moisture and organic matter content. An alternative protocol also demonstrated differences within pen sites in maximum dust potential and dust airborne residence time. The two protocols were not intended, nor are they suitable, for predicting actual particulate matter emissions from agricultural sources. Rather, the protocols rapidly and inexpensively compared the potential for dust emission from samples of differing composition under a variety of environmental conditions.

Abbreviations: DM, dry matter

Related articles in JEQ:

This Issue in Journal of Environmental Quality

JEQ 2003 32: 1577-1582. [Full Text]  

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. N. Miller and E. D. Berry Cattle Feedlot Soil Moisture and Manure Content: I. Impacts on Greenhouse Gases, Odor Compounds, Nitrogen Losses, and Dust J. Environ. Qual., March 1, 2005; 34(2): 644 - 655. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]