Recent advances in Australian broiler litter utilisation

© World’s Poultry Science Association 2007World’s Poultry Science Journal, Vol. 63, June 2007 Received for publication April 19, 2006Accepted for publication December 4, 2006 223

DOI: 10.1017/S0043933907001420

Recent advances in Australian broilerlitter utilisationJ.R. TURNELL1*, R.D. FAULKNER1 and G.N. HINCH2

1The Australian Poultry Cooperative Research Centre, Environmental Engineering,School of Environmental Sciences and Natural Resources Management, Universityof New England, Armidale NSW, Australia; 2Animal Science, School of RuralScience and Agriculture, University of New England, Armidale NSW, Australia*Corresponding author: [email protected]

The global poultry industry is undergoing many changes, one being the need forefficient disposal of its broiler litter (BL) due to a reduction in the land available forcost effective disposal. To date, Australian BL disposal has been achieved by sellingthe litter as a fertiliser to agricultural sectors. Research indicates BL and otherpoultry industry waste streams could be used as a food source for vermiculturesystems, allowing the sale of vermi-cast as a biologically enhanced fertiliser andworms for protein. If this approach is economically viable then the poultry industrycould reduce its environmental impact and operate more like a closed loop system.Integrated bio-systems using vermiculture, composting and waste-to-energytechnologies have developed significantly overseas and have shown potential to solvemany of the issues associated with poultry waste disposal.

Keywords: vermiculture; composting; direct combustion; anaerobic digestion; closed loopsystem; nutrient loop closure; integrated bio-systems

Introduction

Broiler production worldwide like other intensive animal systems generates a largeamount of biomass. This includes broiler litter (BL), of which Australia producesapproximately 700,000 T annually (Turnell et al., 2006), and is comprised of organicbedding, excreta, feed and feathers (Gilmour et al., 2004; Gupta et al., 1997). Theapplication of BL directly onto land provides a convenient mechanism for disposal(Ribaudo et al., 2003; Sharpe et al., 2004) and acts as both a fertiliser and soil amendment(Ginting et al., 2003; Pote et al., 2003). Globally, in excess of 90% of BL is spread on landclose to the grower (Moore et al., 1995; Vervoort and Keeler, 1999). For some poultryproducing regions, especially where the adoption of fewer and larger operations hasoccurred (Harmel et al., 2004), land application of BL has become less cost effective,primarily due to restrictions on land availability (Kaplan et al., 2004; Lu et al., 2003;

010684_Journal_2 10-05-2007 13:39 Pagina 223

224 World’s Poultry Science Journal, Vol. 63, June 2007

Broiler litter utilisation in Australia: J.R. Turnell et al.

Paudel et al., 2004; Ribaudo et al., 2003; Shepherd and Bhogal, 1998). In Australia it issuggested that land availability will decrease due to changing legislative requirements,decreasing social acceptance, environmental quality issues, biosecurity, odour andencroaching urban development.

Increasing public concern in Australia with both water quality and quantity, has led toland management practices that contribute to eutrophication and/or contamination of freshwater ecosystems becoming less socially acceptable (Nash and Halliwell, 1999; Nichols etal., 1998). For Australian conditions as with overseas, it is potentially the effect on waterquality, which will influence future land application of nutrients and trace elements in theform of organic wastes (Graetz et al., 1999; Jackson and Bertsch, 2001; Kpomblekou-A etal., 2002; Nash et al., 2003), including BL. Previous advice given to land owners was thatdue to Australia’s relatively nutrient poor soils, organic wastes could be applied atvirtually any rate which would provide maximum plant growth, this suggested thatAustralian soils were an unlimited nutrient and trace element sink (Jinadasa et al., 1997;Nash and Halliwell, 1999). As with overseas, this has potentially ignored widerenvironmental implications of applying animal wastes to land (Moore et al., 1998; Nahm,2003; Nash et al., 2003; Paudel et al., 2004; Sharpley and Moyer, 2000; Tiquia and Tam,2002; Vervoort and Keeler, 1999).

For the poultry industry as with all intensive animal production, an opportunity exists toachieve a closed loop system through the development of an integrated bio-system. Acomponent of a closed loop system is nutrient loop closure, whereby the nutrients inbroiler diets are eventually redistributed back to plant production areas. The success ofnutrient loop closure for BL re-use scenarios will depend on the worth of value-addedproducts, since transportation costs are the major limiting factor in determining how farnutrients can be distributed (Carpenter, 2000; Jackson et al., 2003). Waste-to-energytechnology may also help industry to operate closed loop systems and is becomingrecognised as a potentially viable disposal option for BL, due to global increases in thecost of non-renewable energy (Anonymous, 2000; McRoy and Dixon, 2002).

Currently growers in Australia receive small profits from the sale of BL, which isapplied to land and these returns usually cover the cost of buying new bedding. However,recently some growers on the east coast of Australia have had to pay a small disposal fee(McTavish, K. 2005, pers. comm., 20 Aug) and if this trend continues producers will beseeking alternative means of disposal. Vermiculture, composting and waste-to-energy arepotential alternatives to current land application of BL and research into the differenttechnologies has advanced significantly in recent years. The following paper will discusssome recent advances in Australian BL utilisation.

Vermiculture

Vermiculture in Australia is receiving increased attention because of its potential to value-add to organic wastes such as animal manures, while providing an alternative, odour freedisposal option (Edwards and Steele, 1997). The vermiculture process can be defined asthe non-thermophilic biodegradation and stabilisation of organic materials (Arancon et al.,2003) resulting from interactions between earthworms and micro-organisms living in boththe worm’s intestine and the organic material (Pizl and Novakova, 2003). Vermiculturesystems world wide most commonly use two epigeic earthworm species, Eisenia andreiand Eisenia fetida (Dominguez et al., 2005; Elvira et al., 1996), and there are a widevariety of systems used. Poultry wastes including BL, dead birds, hatchery waste andsludges can potentially all be converted into vermi-cast and protein (vermi-meal) via lowcost vermiculture systems (Figure 1).

010684_Journal_2 10-05-2007 13:39 Pagina 224

World’s Poultry Science Journal, Vol. 63, June 2007 225


Vermi-cast is an industry recognised product that contains a proportion of casts mixedwith portions of stabilised undigested humic residue. Casts are digested organic remains,mucus and nitrogenous excretory substances from the worm’s intestinal tract (Tripathi andBhardwaj, 2003). The grinding gizzard of worms allows them to produce casts that have amuch finer texture than both raw and composted wastes (Bajsa et al., 2003). Vermi-cast isbecoming increasingly valuable due to its soil like texture and pleasant odour (Ndegwaand Thompson, 2000). The greater the proportions of casts in vermi-cast, the morevaluable the final product as it takes time to produce a cast-rich blend (Fauser, W. 2006,pers. comm., 18 April).

Vermi-cast derived from manures have been shown to supply growth benefits to plants,which out-perform conventional inorganic fertilisers when compared on a nutrient basis,and are sold as a biologically enhanced organic fertiliser (Buckerfield et al., 1999). Theyalso provide microbial biomass, plant growth hormones, enzymes and humic acids(Arancon et al., 2003; Atiyeh et al., 2002; Edwards and Arancon, 2004). A comparison ofthe vermi-cast and its organic origins show it to have more plant available N, P and K;greater organic carbon and lower C/N ratio (Arancon et al., 2003; Atiyeh et al., 2002;Bajsa et al., 2003; Ndegwa and Thompson, 2000; Tripathi and Bhardwaj, 2003). It isexpected that the environmental benefits of using vermi-cast would be similar to that of acomposted product, which will be discussed in the composting section below.

Efficient worm harvesting methods have been developed by vermiculturalists for theproduction of a protein rich meat meal (vermi-meal), however large scale commercialfacilities are yet to be developed in Australia. Eisenia foetida are becoming recognised asa safe alternative protein source for human and animal consumption, with vermi-mealcontaining 61.8% protein and 11.3% fat (Ganesh et al., 2003; Medina et al., 2003). Areport by Dynes (2003) clearly highlights how the concentrations of protein andcomposition of fatty acids can be manipulated in worms by changing their diet. Thecomposition of vermi-meal grown exclusively on BL has yet to be determined.

By the direct utilisation of worms for animal nutrition, vermiculture could further satisfynutrient loop closure for the poultry industry (Ganesh et al., 2003). In Asia, the integrationof vermiculture and aquaculture has demonstrated how vermi-meal can be used as anutrient source for fish (Ghosh, 2004). In other trials, animal production systems havesuccessfully used vermi-meal; therefore it has become a more accepted protein source(Das and Dash, 1990; Dynes, 2003; Reinecke et al., 1990). As long as biosecurity ismaintained then this approach recycles nutrients between industries, thereby closing thenutrient loop.

No viral or protozoan agents that exist in Australian BL have been identified as asignificant risk to humans (Blackall, 2005) and therefore are not considered a risk in litterre-use technologies like vermiculture. Processing of sewage biosolids by vermiculture hasresulted in pathogen reductions and is considered a safer treatment than direct landapplication of biosolids (Bajsa et al., 2003; Eastman et al., 2001). Trials in the USA onbiosolids have shown that the integration of thermophilic composting before vermiculture

Broiler litter

Dead birds & hatchery waste

Vermi-cast

Vermiculture

Vermi-meal AnimalsSludges

Plants

$

$

Figure 1 Vermiculture: Flow diagram for poultry waste streams via vermiculture.

010684_Journal_2 10-05-2007 13:39 Pagina 225



will satisfy regulatory requirements for pathogens which vermiculture alone does not(Ndegwa and Thompson, 2000). If social pressures to achieve biosecurity thresholdsincrease then adopting an on-site integrated approach may achieve greater levels ofsterility in vermi-cast.

Australian broiler growers will benefit from on-site value-adding options that attractlow capital costs, have good odour control and biosecurity measures. Thecommercialisation of vermiculture for large scale waste processing in Australia has not yetbeen achieved, however commercial interest is growing. Vermiculture systems can beestablished at low cost anywhere in Australia (Smith et al., 1999) and have the potential toreduce organic waste volume by up to 45% (Ndegwa and Thompson, 2000). Byprocessing BL on-site using vermiculture systems, volume reductions in waste can beachieved before final transport of vermi-cast, thus reducing waste disposal costs. Incontrast, an off-site vermiculture system would aggregate and process the somewhat bulkyBL on suitable land elsewhere, the cost of transport would greatly affect the economicfeasibility of off-site systems.

Variations in vermi-cast composition are presently a limitation to the sale ofvermiculture products as organic fertilisers (Edwards and Steele, 1997). However, it isfeasible for broiler integrators to supply large volumes of consistent BL (Turnell et al.,2006) which could be used by vermiculture for the production of quality vermi-cast.Composting and vermiculture are similar processes as they both use aerobic microbialactivity to degrade organic wastes (Ndegwa and Thompson, 2000), and there may bepotential advantages in integrating the systems.

Composting

This paper defines composting as the aerobic microbial breakdown of organic matterusually incorporating a thermophilic phase. The adoption of composting systems forpoultry waste has received attention due to its ability to reduce BL volume, dispose ofcarcases, stabilise trace elements, reduce pathogens and control odour. Agronomicbenefits of composted BL include increased plant available nutrients and humic residues(Atkinson et al., 1995; Brodie et al., 2000). The immobilisation of nitrogen andphosphorus during composting reduces the risk of soluble N and P entering aquaticsystems (Cooperband et al., 2002; Peigne and Girardin, 2004; Vervoort et al., 1998).

Composting could offer both on-site and off-site solutions to BL utilisation andpotentially improve the closing of the nutrient loop for the Australian poultry industry.However, commercialisation of the process and some sustainability issues may need to beaddressed (Peigne and Girardin, 2004; Tiquia and Tam, 2002). Factors that have preventedthe adoption of large scale BL composting overseas may also exist in Australia and mainlypertain to there being only one saleable product (Figure 2), which has a limited agronomicvalue (Brodie et al., 2000). Development of composting technology including forced-aeration could lead to more efficient, less labour intensive and more environmentallyfriendly composting facilities (Tiquia and Tam, 2002), but these will still be limited by asingle saleable product.

Broiler litter

CompostComposting Plants$Dead birds &

hatchery waste

Figure 2 Composting: Flow diagram for poultry waste streams via composting.

010684_Journal_2 10-05-2007 13:39 Pagina 226



Composting considerably reduces pathogen concentrations in organic wastes due to theheat produced in the decomposition process (Blake, 2004; Das et al., 2002). Hatcherywaste composting systems have been shown to reduce Escherichia coli by 99.9%, whileamending hatchery waste with small percentages of BL enabled the composting process toremove all Salmonella (Das et al., 2002). Interestingly, composting biosolids reducespathogens more effectively than conventional anaerobic digestion of sludge (Ponugoti etal., 1997), and the same is likely to be true for BL.

As with overseas broiler growers, most Australian growers use trace elements in broilerdiets to satisfy a host of production issues (Bednar et al., 2003; Gupta and Charles, 1999;Han et al., 1999). Roxarsone (3-nitro-4-hydroxyphenylarsonic acid) and p-ASA (4-aminobenzenearsenic acid) are aromatic arsenic (As) compounds used as feed additives tocontrol coccidial intestinal parasites (Garbarino et al., 2003; Jackson and Bertsch, 2001).Roxarsone is highly water soluble and is commonly found in BL (Jackson et al., 2003).The water solubility of Roxarsone and the use of arsenicals in general, have beenhighlighted as a potential concern for soil and water quality in catchments where BL isapplied directly on to land (Jackson and Bertsch, 2001; Jackson et al., 2003; Rutherford etal., 2003). One advantage of composting BL is that under the right conditions Roxarsoneand p-ASA can be degraded to more stable arsenate (AsO4)-3 ions, thus potentially limitingcontamination of ground and surface waters with arsenicals (Garbarino et al., 2003;Jackson et al., 2003).

A potential problem for large scale composting systems relate to greenhouse gasemissions and resulting sustainability issues. Methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) areconsidered significant greenhouse gases due to their efficiency in absorbing infraredradiation, with CH4 and N2O absorbing 26 to 200 times more infrared radiation,respectively, than CO2 (Sommer and Moller, 2000). Composted and surface appliedanimal manures have been shown to contribute to greenhouse gas emissions, therebypotentially contributing to global warming and acid rain (Ginting et al., 2003; Hao et al.,2004; Peigne and Girardin, 2004; Sharpe et al., 2004). Animal production worldwidecontributes 5-6% and 7% of the total emissions of CH4 and N2O respectively, through thedecomposition and degradation of manures (Hao et al., 2004). CH4 emissions arepotentially contributing 9-20% of the total global warming effect, while N2O goes throughphotochemical degradation and reduces levels of ozone in the stratosphere (Sommer andMoller, 2000). Large scale BL composting operations should consider these emissionswhen evaluating the project’s overall sustainability and implement minimisation optionslike forced-aeration composting (Tiquia and Tam, 2002).

Nitrogen losses occur through NH3 volatilisation during composting, reducing theagronomic value of the composts (DeLaune et al., 2004; Kelleher et al., 2002; Tiquia andTam, 2002), which also make it difficult to develop a closed loop system. Release ofnutrients from composted BL is often time dependant, relying on in-soil microbialprocesses to release plant available (inorganic) nutrients from their organic precursors.Traditional inorganic fertilisers and to a lesser extent raw BL, provide plant producerswith instant responses in growth which contrasts dramatically with composted BL(Cooperband et al., 2002). Transport costs associated with sale, distribution and spreadingof composted BL may limit the distance nutrients can be transported away from poultryproducing regions (Vervoort and Keeler, 1999).

The chemical energy that drives microbial populations in both vermiculture andcomposting systems is also attractive to renewable energy sectors. Australian BL has beenshown to contain 16.8 MJ/kg (dry wt.) of energy (Turnell et al., 2006) which is equivalentto half that of bituminous coal (Sheth and Turner, 2002). The energy in BL can be releasedthrough anaerobic microbial degradation or directly through many different types ofcombustion and gasification technologies.

010684_Journal_2 10-05-2007 13:39 Pagina 227



Waste-to-energy

Anaerobic digestion (AD) and direct combustion (DC) are waste-to-energy technologiesand have the potential to close the nutrient loop for the poultry industry. AD can degradeand stabilise a wide range of organic poultry wastes including BL, producing potentiallysaleable methane and digestate (Bujoczek et al., 2000; Collins et al., 2000). Methane canbe captured through AD, gas cleaned and then used as renewable energy, while thedigestate can be utilised as a soil improving agent with potentially good fertiliser attributes(Salminen and Rintala, 2002). However, capital and operation costs of AD may limit itsadoption on-site (Collins et al., 2000; Trably et al., 2003), while large centralised off-sitefacilities require commercialisation before BL can be streamed into this system. Researchinto steam pressure disruption is improving methane capture from the AD of cellulosicmaterials (Liu et al., 2002), which should be beneficial for BL digestion.

DC or incineration is recognised as an efficient option for generating renewable energyand fertiliser grade ash from BL (Abelha et al., 2003), with current successful large scaleelectricity utilities operating in the UK (Anonymous, 2000). Kelleher et al. (2002)provides an excellent review on the advantages and disadvantages of anaerobicallydigesting directly combusting poultry wastes. For on-site electricity and heat generationsmaller DC systems are being researched and developed, and if commercialised couldsupply Australian broiler growers with both environmentally sustainable waste disposaland energy (Abelha et al., 2003; Henihan et al., 2003). As for off-site AD, DC will alsorequire considerable commercial investment before BL in Australia will be use asrenewable energy in large power stations.

Public concerns have been raised over the emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) carbonmonoxide (CO) and sulphur dioxide (SO2) from the combustion of fuels like BL (Henihanet al., 2003). Theses gasses along with ‘public-perceived’ emissions are considered amajor non-economic determinant in the commercialisation of DC (Porteous, 2002). Thisissue would be amplified in Australia due to the concerns the public have had withincineration of wastes in general. Advances in both gas cleanup and combustion systemdesign has led to emissions from BL combustion being well below the limits set by airquality standards (Henihan et al., 2002; Henihan et al., 2003). As gasification technologyimproves it may offer an even cleaner way to ultimately combust BL, an importantconsideration in light of global warming concerns (Sheth and Turner, 2002).

Conclusion

Vermiculture systems designed specifically for poultry wastes, possibly in conjunctionwith composting, show great promise to provide an alternative disposal option. If marketsfor vermi-cast and vermi-meal increase then this integrated bio-system may be the mostsuitable for the Australian poultry industry. From an academic and technical perspectivevermiculture, composting and waste-to-energy can be shown to address many issuessurrounding the sustainable disposal of BL and help the poultry industry operate as aclosed loop system, thereby increasing its sustainability.

ReferencesABELHA, P., GULYURTLU, I., BOAVIDA, D., SEABRA BARROS, J., CABRITA, I., LEAHY, J.J.,

KELLEHER, B.P. and LEAHY, M.J. (2003) Combustion of poultry litter in a fluidised bed combustor. Fuel82: 687-692.

ANONYMOUS (2000) Chicken runs provide the fuel for Fibrowatts’s global ambitions. Modern Power Systems20: 41-45.

010684_Journal_2 10-05-2007 13:39 Pagina 228



ARANCON, N.Q., EDWARDS, C.A., BIERMAN, P., METZGER, J.D., LEE, S. and WELCH, C. (2003)Effects of vermicomposts on growth and marketable fruits of field-grown tomatoes, peppers and strawberries.Pedobiologia 47: 731-735.

ATIYEH, R.M., LEE, S., EDWARDS, C.A., ARANCON, N.Q. and METZGER, J.D. (2002) The influenceof humic acids derived from earthworm-processed organic wastes on plant growth. Bioresource Technology84: 7-14.

ATKINSON, C.F., JONES, D.D. and GAUTHIER, J.J. (1995) Biodegradability and microbial activitiesduring composting of poultry litter. Poultry Science 75: 608-617.

BAJSA, O., NAIR, J., MATHEW, K. and HO, G.E. (2003) Vermiculture as a tool for domestic wastewatermanagement. Water Science and Technology 48: 125-132.

BEDNAR, A.J., GARBARINO, J.R., FERRER, I., RUTHERFORD, D.W., WERSHAW, R.L.,RANVILLE, J.F. and WILDEMAN, T.R. (2003) Photodegradation of roxarsone in poultry litter leachates.Science of the Total Environment 302: 237-245.

BLACKALL, P.J. (2005) Discussion Paper- Public health risks from use of waste products. Australian PoultryCRC, Armidale.

BLAKE, J.P. (2004) Methods and technologies for handling mortality losses. World’s Poultry Science Journal60: 489-499.

BRODIE, H.L., CARR, L.E. and CONDON, P. (2000) A comparison of static pile and turned windrowmethods for poultry litter compost production. Compost Science and Utilization 8: 178-189.

BUCKERFIELD, J.C., FLAVEL, T.C., LEE, K.E. and WEBSTER, K.A. (1999) Vermicompost in solid andliquid forms as a plant-growth promoter. Pedobiologia 43: 753-759.

BUJOCZEK, G., OLESZKIEWICZ, J., SPARLING, R. and CENKOWSKI, S. (2000) High solid anaerobicdigestion of chicken manure. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 76: 51-60.

CARPENTER, G.H. (2000) Nutrient management comes of age in the poultry industry. Biocycle 41: 61-63.COLLINS, A.R., MURPHY, J. and BAINBRIDGE, D. (2000) Optimal loading rates and economic analyses

for anaerobic digestion of poultry waste. Journal of the Air and Waste Management Association 50: 1037-1044.

COOPERBAND, L., BOLLERO, G. and COALE, F. (2002) Effect of poultry litter and composts on soilnitrogen and phosphorus availability and corn production. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 62: 185-194.

DAS, A.K. and DASH, M.C. (1990) Earthworm meal as a protein concentrate for broilers. Journal of TropicalAgriculture (Trinidad) 67: 342-344.

DAS, K.C., MINKARA, M.Y., MELEAR, N.D. and TOLLNER, E.W. (2002) Effect of poultry litteramendment on hatchery waste composting. Journal of Applied Poultry Research 11: 282-290.

DELAUNE, P.B., MOORE, P.A., DANIEL, T.C. and LEMUNYON, J.L. (2004) Effect of chemical andmicrobial amendments on ammonia volatilisation from composting poultry litter. Journal of EnvironmentalQuality 33: 728-734.

DOMINGUEZ, J., VELANDO, A. and FERREIRO, A. (2005) Are Eisenia fetida (Savigny, 1826) and Eiseniaandrei Bouche (1972) (Oligochaeta, Lumbricidae) different biological species? Pedobiologia 49: 81-87.

DYNES, R.A. (2003) Earthworms- Technology information to enable the development of earthwormproduction. RIRDC, Canberra.

EASTMAN, B.R., KANE, P.N., EDWARDS, C.A., TRYTEK, L., GUNADI, B., STERMER, A.L. andMOBLEY, J.R. (2001) The effectiveness of vermiculture in human pathogen reduction for USEPA biosolidsstabilization. Compost Science and Utilisation 9: 38-49.

EDWARDS, C. and STEELE, J. (1997) Using earthworm systems. BioCycle 38: 63-64.EDWARDS, C.A. and ARANCON, N.Q. (2004) Vermicomposts suppress plant pests and disease attacks.

Biocycle 45: 51-54.ELVIRA, C., DOMINGUEZ, J. and MATO, S. (1996) The growth and reproduction of Lumbricus rubellus

and Dendrobaena rubida in cow manure mixed cultures with Eisenia andrei. Applied Soil Ecology 5: 97-103.GANESH, P., MOHAN, M., SUBHA, R. and VIJAYALAKSHMI, G.S. (2003) Earthworm meal for fish feed

formulation and its influence on growth of mrigal fingerlings. Journal of Ecobiology 15: 181-184.GARBARINO, J.R., BEDNAR, A.J., RUTHERFORD, D.W., BEYER, R.S. and WERSHAW, R.L. (2003)

Environmental fate of roxarsone in poultry litter. 1. Degradation of roxarsone during composting.Environmental Science and Technology 37: 1509-1514.

GHOSH, C. (2004) Integrated vermi-pisciculture - an alternative option for recycling of solid municipal wastein rural India. Bioresource Technology 93: 71-75.

GILMOUR, J.T., KOEHLER, M.A., CABRERA, M.L., SZAJDAK, L. and MOORE, P.A. (2004) Alumtreatment of poultry litter: Decomposition and nitrogen dynamics. Journal of Environmental Quality 33: 402-405.

GINTING, D., KESSAVALOU, A., EGHBALL, B. and DORAN, J.W. (2003) Greenhouse gas emissions andsoil indicators four years after manure and compost applications. Journal of Environmental Quality 32: 23-32.

GRAETZ, D.A., NAIR, V.D., PORTIER, K.M. and VOSS, R.L. (1999) Phosphorus accumulation in manure-impacted Spodosols of Florida. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 75: 31-40.

GUPTA, G., BOROWIEC, J. and OKOH, J. (1997) Toxicity identification of poultry litter aqueous leachate.Poultry Science 76: 1364-1367.

010684_Journal_2 10-05-2007 13:39 Pagina 229



GUPTA, G. and CHARLES, S. (1999) Trace elements in soils fertilized with poultry litter. Poultry Science 78:1695-1698.

HAN, F.X., KINGERY, W.L., SELIM, H.M. and GERARD, P.D. (1999) Accumulation of heavy metals inlong-term poultry waste-amended soils. Soil Science 165: 260-268.

HAO, X., CHANG, C. and LARNEY, F.J. (2004) Carbon, nitrogen balances and greenhouse gas emissionduring cattle feedlot manure composting. Journal of Environmental Quality 33: 37-44.

HARMEL, R.D., TORBERT, H.A., HAGGARD, B.E., HANEY, R. and DOZIER, M. (2004) Water qualityimpacts of converting to a poultry litter fertilization strategy. Journal of Environmental Quality 33: 2229-2242.

HENIHAN, A.M., KELLEHER, B.P., LEAHY, M.J., CUMMINS, E. and LEAHY, J.J. (2002) Monitoringand dispersion modelling of emissions from the fluidised bed combustion of poultry litter. EnvironmentalMonitoring and Assessment 85: 239-255.

HENIHAN, A.M., LEAHY, M.J., LEAHY, J.J., CUMMINS, E. and KELLEHER, B.P. (2003) Modelling offluidised bed co-combustion of poultry litter and peat. Bioresource Technology 87: 289-294.

JACKSON, B.P. and BERTSCH, P.M. (2001) Determination of arsenic speciation in poultry wastes by IC-ICP-MS. Environmental Science and Technology 35: 4868-4873.

JACKSON, B.P., BERTSCH, P.M., CABRERA, M.L., CAMBERATO, J.J., SEAMAN, J.C. and WOOD,C.W. (2003) Trace element speciation in poultry litter. Journal of Environmental Quality 32: 535-540.

JINADASA, K.B.P.N., MILHAM, P.J., HAWKINS, C.A., CORNISH, P.S., WILLIAMS, P.A., KALDOR,C.J. and CONROY, J.P. (1997) Survey of cadmium levels in vegetables and soils of greater Sydney,Australia. Journal of Environmental Quality 26: 924-933.

KAPLAN, J.D., JOHANSSON, R.C. and PETERS, M. (2004) The manure hits the land: Economic andenvironmental implications when land application of nutrients is constrained. American Journal ofAgricultural Economics 86: 688-700.

KELLEHER, B.P., LEAHY, J.J., HENIHAN, A.M., O’DWYER, T.F., SUTTON, D. and LEAHY, M.J.(2002) Advances in poultry litter disposal technology - a review. Bioresource Technology 83: 27-36.

KPOMBLEKOU-A, K., ANKUMAH, R.O. and AJWA, H.A. (2002) Trace and nontrace element contents inbroiler litter. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 33: 1799-1811.

LIU, H.W., WALTER, H.K., VOGT, G.M., VOGT, H.S. and HOLBEIN, B.E. (2002) Steam pressuredisruption of municipal solid waste enhances anaerobic digestion kinetics and biogas yield. Biotechnologyand Bioengineering 77: 121-130.

LU, J., SANCHEZ, S., HOFACRE, C., MAURER, J.J., HARMON, B.G. and LEE, M.D. (2003) Evaluationof broiler litter with reference to the microbial composition as assessed by using 16S rRNA and functionalgene markers. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 62: 901-908.

MCROY, R.A. and DIXON, M.W. (2002) Litter to energy: centralised projects versus ‘on-farm’ solutions.Nottingham University Press, Nottingham.

MEDINA, A.L., COVA, J.A., VIELMA, R.A., PUJIC, P., CARLOS, M.P. and TORRES, J.V. (2003)Immunological and chemical analysis of proteins from Eisenia foetida earthworms. Food and AgriculturalImmunology 15: 255-263.

MOORE, P.A., DANIEL, T.C., GILMOUR, J.T., SHREVE, B.R., EDWARDS, D.R. and WOOD, B.H.(1998) Decreasing metal runoff from poultry litter with aluminium sulfate. Journal of Environmental Quality27: 92-99.

MOORE, P.A., DANIEL, T.C., SHARLEY, A.N. and WOOD, C.W. (1995) Poultry manure management:environmentally sound options. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 50: 321-327.

NAHM, K.H. (2003) Evaluation of the nitrogen content in poultry manure. World’s Poultry Science Journal 59:77-88.

NASH, D., HANNAH, M., CLEMOW, L., HALLIWELL, D., WEB, B. and CHAPMAN, D. (2003) Alaboratory study of phosphorus mobilisation from commercial fertilisers. Australian Journal of Soil Research41: 1201-1212.

NASH, D.M. and HALLIWELL, D.J. (1999) Fertiliser and phosphorous loss from productive grazing systems.Australian Journal of Soil Research 37: 403-424.

NDEGWA, P.M. and THOMPSON, S.A. (2000) Integrating composting and vermicomposting in the treatmentand bioconversion of biosolids. Bioresource Technology 76: 107-112.

NICHOLS, D.J., DANIEL, T.C., MOORE, P.A. and POTE, D.H. (1998) Use of grass filter strips to reduce17B-estradiol in runoff from fescue-applied poultry litter. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 53: 74-77.

PAUDEL, K.P., ADHIKARI, M. and MARTIN, N.R. (2004) Evaluation of broiler litter transportation innorthern Alabama, USA. Journal of Environmental Management 73: 13-23.

PEIGNE, J. and GIRARDIN, P. (2004) Environmental impacts of farm-scale composting practices. Water, Airand Soil Pollution 153: 45-68.

PIZL, V. and NOVAKOVA, A. (2003) Interactions between microfungi and Eisenia andrei (Oligochaeta)during cattle manure vermicomposting. Pedobiologia 47: 895-899.

PONUGOTI, P.R., DAHAB, M.F. and SURAMPALLI, R. (1997) Effects of different biosolids treatmentsystems on pathogen and pathogen indicator reduction. Water Environment Research 69: 1195-1206.

010684_Journal_2 10-05-2007 13:39 Pagina 230



PORTEOUS, A. (2002) Incineration of residual municipal solid waste for both energy recovery andenvironmentally sound waste disposal - a consideration of selected major non-economic determinants.Journal of the Institute of Energy 75: 30-36.

POTE, D.H., KINGERY, W.L., AIKEN, G.E., HAN, F.X., MOORE, P.A. and BUDDINGTON, K. (2003)Water-quality effects of incorperating poultry litter into perennial grassland soils. Journal of EnvironmentalQuality 32: 2392-2398.

REINECKE, A.J., HAYES, J.P. and CILLIERS, S.C. (1990) Protein quality of three different species ofearthworms. South African Journal of Animal Science 21: 99-103.

RIBAUDO, M.O., GOLLEHON, N.R. and AGAPOFF, J. (2003) Land application of manure by animalfeeding operations: Is more land needed? Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 58: 30-38.

RUTHERFORD, D.W., BEDNAR, A.J., GARBARINO, J.R., NEEDHAM, R., STAVER, K.W. andWERSHAW, R.L. (2003) Environmental fate of roxarsone in poultry litter. Part II. Mobility of arsenic in soilsamended with poultry litter. Environmental Science & Technology 37: 1515-1520.

SALMINEN, E. and RINTALA, J. (2002) Anaerobic digestion of organic solid poultry slaughterhouse waste -a review. Bioresource Technology 83: 13-26.

SHARPE, R.R., SCHOMBERG, H.H., HARPER, L.A., ENDALE, D.M., JENKINS, M.B. andFRANZLUEBBERS, A.J. (2004) Atmospheric pollutants and trace gases. Journal of Environmental Quality33: 1183-1188.

SHARPLEY, A.N. and MOYER, B. (2000) Phosphorus forms in manure and compost and their release duringsimulated rainfall. Journal of Environmental Quality 29: 1462-1469.

SHEPHERD, M. and BHOGAL, A. (1998) Regular applications of poultry litter to a sandy arable soil: effectson nitrate leaching and nitrogen balance. Journal of Science, Food and Agriculture 78: 19-29.

SHETH, A.C. and TURNER, A.D. (2002) Kinetics and economics of catalytic steam gasification of broilerlitter. Transactions of the ASAE 45: 1111-1121.

SMITH, C.J., BOND, W.J. and WANG, W. (1999) Waste-free: vermicompost to improved agricultural soils.CSIRO, Canberra.

SOMMER, S.G. and MOLLER, H.B. (2000) Emission of greenhouse gases during composting of deep litterfrom pig production - effect of straw content. Journal of Agricultural Science 134: 327-335.

TIQUIA, S.M. and TAM, N.F.Y. (2002) Characterization and composting of poultry litter in forced-aerationpiles. Process Biochemistry 37: 869-880.

TRABLY, E., PATUREAU, D. and DELGENES, J.P. (2003) Enhancement of polycyclic aromatichydrocarbons removal during anaerobic treatment of urban sludge. Water Science and Technology 48: 53-60.

TRIPATHI, G. and BHARDWAJ, P. (2003) Decomposition of kitchen waste amended with cow manure usingan epigeic species (Eisenia fetida) and an anecic species (Lampito mauritii). Bioresource Technology 92: 215-218.

TURNELL, J.R., HINCH, G.N. and FAULKNER, R.D. (2006) Preliminary Assessment of the Variability inBroiler Litter Composition and its Implication for Vermiculture In: Australian Poultry Science Symposium, TScott, Sydney, pp. 230-233.

VERVOORT, R.W. and KEELER, A.G. (1999) The economics of land application of fresh and compostedbroiler litter with an environmental constraint. Journal of Environmental Management 55: 265-272.

VERVOORT, R.W., RADCLIFFE, D.E., CABRERA, M.L. and LATIMORE, M. (1998) Field-scalenitrogen and phosphorus losses from hayfields receiving fresh and composted broiler litter. Journal ofEnvironmental Quality 27: 1246-1254.

010684_Journal_2 10-05-2007 13:39 Pagina 231

Documents

Recent advances in Australian broiler litter utilisation