Content uploaded by Carla Viegas
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Carla Viegas
Content may be subject to copyright.
1 INTRODUCTION
Several studies have shown that human exposure
to airborne dust and microorganisms, such as bacte-
ria and fungi, can cause respiratory diseases. Agri-
cultural workers have been found to be at high risk
of exposure to airborne particles (Radon et al., 2003;
Predicala and Maghirang, 2003; Baur et al., 2003;
Rautiala et al., 2003; Dosman et al., 2005).
From a human health perspective, dust exposure
in pig farming is the most important because of the
large number of workers needed in pig production
and the increasing number of working hours inside
enclosed buildings (Iversen et al., 2000). In pig
buildings, particulate matters like dust play a role in
not only deteriorating indoor air quality but also in
causing adverse health effects on workers (Donham
et al., 1990; Pearson and Sharples, 1995;
Mackiewicz, 1998; Kim et al., 2008). Generally,
dust is recognized to adsorb and transport odorous
compounds (Carpenter, 1986) and biological agents
(Robertson et al., 1984; Kim et al., 2005) such as
fungi (HSE, 2008). All these bioaerosoles in high
concentrations together with fungal metabolites pose
agricultural workers, and especially pig farmers, at
increased risk of occupational respiratory diseases.
Animal confinement, such as pig farming, tends
to increase the overall microbial load in the produc-
tion environment caused by high amounts of feed
and organic residuals (manure and wastewater) pre-
sent in those environments. The number of animals
and the handling and management required to work
in these settings also contribute to enhance that mi-
crobial load (Clark et al., 1983; Cole et al., 2000;
Douwes et al., 2003; Zejda et al., 1994). Exposure to
bioaerosols in swines may vary depending upon the
stage of the animals’ growth, density, manure man-
agement procedures, used floor coverage, among
others (HSE, 2009; Mc Donnell et al., 2008). Gath-
ering temporal information about occupational expo-
sure to particles and fungi is necessary to better un-
derstand eventual adverse health symptoms of
workers.
The aim of this study was to determine contami-
nation due to particles and fungi in 7 swine farms lo-
cated in Lisbon district, Portugal.
Exposure to particles and fungi in Portuguese swine production
S. Viegas, E. Carolino & C. Viegas
ESTeSL - IPL, Lisbon, Portugal
R. Sabino & C. Veríssimo
Mycology Laboratory - INSA, Lisbon, Portugal
ABSTRACT: A number of studies have shown that exposure to airborne dust and microorganisms can cause
respiratory diseases in humans. Agricultural workers, such as pig farmers, have been found to be at high risk
of exposure to airborne particles. The aim of this study was to detect contamination caused by particles and
fungi in 7 swine farms located in Lisbon district, Portugal. Environment evaluations were performed during
the winter season of 2011 with a portable direct-reading equipment (Lighthouse, model 3016 IAQ) and it was
possible to obtain data concerning contamination caused by particles with 5 different sizes (PM0.5; PM1;
PM2.5; PM5; PM10). To assess air contamination caused by fungi, air samples of 50 liters were collected us-
ing a Millipore Air Tester (Millipore) by impaction method at a velocity of 140 L / minute and at one meter
height, using malt extract agar supplemented with chloramphenicol (0.5%). Air sampling was also performed
outside premises, since this is the place regarded as reference. All the collected samples were incubated at 27
ºC for 5 to 7 days. Results from particles’ contamination showed that higher values were connected with PM5
and PM10 sizes and that smaller particles exhibit lower contamination values. Concerning the fungal load of
the analyzed swine, the highest obtained value was 4100 CFU/m3 and the lowest was 120 CFU/m3. Forty six
different fungal species were detected in the air, being Aspergillus versicolor the most frequent species found
(20.9%), followed by Scopulariopsis brevicaulis (17.0%) and Penicillium sp. (14.1%). Data gathered from
this study corroborate the need of monitoring the contamination by particulate matter, fungi and their metabo-
lites in Portuguese swine.
2 MATERIALS AND METHODS
Environment evaluations were performed during
the winter season of 2011 with a portable direct-
reading equipment (Lighthouse, model 3016 IAQ)
and it was possible to obtain data concerning con-
tamination caused by particles discriminated in 5
different sizes (PM0.5; PM1; PM2.5; PM5; PM10).
This differentiation between particle size fractions is
important because it allows the estimation of the
penetration and deposition of dust within the respira-
tory system. Vincent and Mark (1981) demonstrated
that the respirable dust is the fraction of airborne
dust that reaches regions of the lung where the gas
exchanges occur. It is composed with particles with
less than 7 µm aerodynamic diameter (size from
PM0.5 to PM5).
Measurements were conducted in the vicinity of
nasal area of the workers and during the perfor-
mance of different tasks. In the swine farms, 3 to 11
measurements were undertaken and the mean value
obtained for each particle size was the one consid-
ered. All measurements were done continuously and
during 5 min. In all the studied swine farms, workers
did not use respiratory protection devices.
To assess air contamination caused by fungi, air
samples of 50 liters were collected using a Millipore
Air Tester (Millipore) by impaction method at a ve-
locity of 140 L / minute and at one meter height, us-
ing malt extract agar supplemented with chloram-
phenicol (0.5%). Air sampling was also performed
outside premises, since this is the place regarded as
reference. All the collected samples were incubated
at 27 ºC for 5 to 7 days.
After laboratory processing and incubation of the
collected samples, quantitative (colony forming
units/m3 - cfu/m3) and qualitative results were ob-
tained, with identification of the isolated fungal spe-
cies (Hoog et al. 2000).
To ascertain the existence of statistically significant
differences between contamination results of differ-
ent types of particles, it was used the Friedman test.
Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS for Win-
dows statistical statistical package, version 19.0.
3 RESULTS
3.1 Particles
Friedman's test showed the existence of statistical-
ly significant differences between the five sizes of
particles . The test for multiple
comparisons revealed the existence of statistically
significant differences between all particle sizes. In
an exploratory data analysis, it appears that smaller
particles exhibit lower contamination values.
The distribution of particles size showed the same
tendency in all swine farms. Farms B and D, howev-
er, presented higher levels of contamination, particu-
larly in PM5 and PM10 (Table 1). These two farms
were the ones having only natural ventilation as ven-
tilation resource. The other swine farms have a com-
bination between natural and mechanical (exhaust)
ventilation.
Table 1. Particles measurements obtained in each
swine farm (mean value/mg.m-3)
Fa
rms
Nº of
measure-
ments
PM
0.5
PM
1.0
PM
2.5
PM
5.0
PM
10.0
A
11
9.1x
10-4
1.4x
10-3
5.1x
10-3
4.9
x10-2
2.4
B
7
1.9x
10-3
5.4x
10-3
1.6x
10-2
1.1
4.9
C
6
2.5x
10-4
7.4x
10-4
4.6x
10-3
4.5x
10-2
2.0
D
5
2.8x
10-4
9.3x
10-4
8.8x
10-3
1.1
5.8
E
3
2.3x
10-3
4.3x
10-3
1.2x
10-2
6.0x
10-2
1.9
F
7
1.4x
10-4
8.6x
10-4
7.6x
10-3
7.9x
10-2
3.5
G
11
3.9x
10-4
7.6x
10-4
3.8x
10-3
4.5x
10-2
2.3
3.2 Fungi
Concerning the fungal load of the analysed swines,
the highest obtained value was 4100 CFU/m3 and
the lowest was 120 CFU/m3. Forty six different fun-
gal species were detected in air, being Aspergillus
versicolor the most frequent species found (20.9%),
followed by Scopulariopsis brevicaulis (17.0%) and
Penicillium spp. (14.1%) (Table 2).
Table 2. Fungal species most frequently found in
the air from the analyzed swine farms
Air
Frequency
(CFU/m3)
(N; %)
Aspergillus versicolor
3210; 20.9
Socpulariopsis brevicaulis
2620; 17.0
Penicillium spp.
2160; 14.1
Others
7380; 48.0
4 DISCUSSION
The majority of the previous studies estimated
particles’ exposure by measuring the total mass con-
centration; very few studies on agricultural farms in-
vestigated the exposure regarding to particles’ size.
The size of the particles, however, affects their dep-
osition in the respiratory system, resulting in differ-
ent types of health effects (Lee et al., 2006). Our
study gives information concerning 5 different sizes
and this information permits the achievement of
more detailed information concerning contamination
with particles and their possible health effects.
Our data showed higher values in PM5 size and,
predominantly in PM10, indicating that swine dust
can penetrate into the gas exchange region of the
lung (PM5) and may also produce disease by impact-
ing in the upper and larger airways below the vocal
cords (PM10) (Vincent and Mark, 1981).
Wathes and colleagues (1998) found that the in-
halable dust emissions from pig buildings were 40%
higher in the summer than in the winter, while res-
pirable dust emissions were not affected greatly by
the season. Considering this aspect, we can point out
that there is a possibility that PM10 values can be
even higher in the summer time.
In a European project developed in England, the
Netherlands, Germany, and Denmark, stationary
measurements in 256 animal buildings were per-
formed and the mean value for inhalable dust in pig
buildings was 2.19 mg.m-3 (Seedorf, 1998; Takai,
1998, 1999; Iversen et al. 2000). In three of our sev-
en studied farms (B, D and F) the obtained mean
values were higher.
In a study developed by Donnell and colleagues
(2008) in five Irish swine farms the same tendency
was found on respect to the distribution of the parti-
cles’ size, namely a median value of 2.99 mg.m-3 for
inhalable and 0.19 mg.m-3 for respirable dust (Don-
nell et al., 2008).
The amount of dust in the air of livestock build-
ings is correlated to environmental factors such as
ventilation, feeding practices, bedding materials,
dung and slurry handling, and animal activity (Takai
and Pedersen, 2000). A well designed and managed
ventilation system will control the levels of gases,
dusts and vapours, and it is an important factor in
controlling odours from swine confinement build-
ings (Chastain, 2000). The absence of a ventilation
system in B and D farms can contribute to explain
the higher results obtained, particularly in PM5 and
PM10.
Regarding the fungal load, different fungal counts
were obtained when comparing with a study per-
formed by Duchaine et al (547 CFU/m3 – 2862
CFU/m3 versus 120 CFU/m3- 4100 CFU/m3). This
difference maybe due to different procedures of
building maintenance (Duchaine et al., 2010). In a
study published by Jo and Kang (Jo & Kang, 2005)
Aspergillus spp. and Penicillium spp. were also the
most frequent fungi found in swine.
Aspergillus versicolor, the most frequent species
isolated, is known as being the major producer of the
hepatotoxic and carcinogenic mycotoxin sterigmato-
cystin. The toxicity of this mycotoxin is manifested
primarily in liver and kidney (Engelhart et al., 2002).
Due to their easier detection, fungi are often used as
an indirect indicator of mycotoxins presence both in
agricultural and occupational settings. Because of
that, we must consider the eventual exposure not on-
ly to fungal particles, but also to mycotoxins (Thrane
et al., 2004). The mycotoxin sterigmatocystin is
closely related to the mycotoxin aflatoxin, as a pre-
cursor of aflatoxin biosynthesis (Barnes et al., 1994)
and it is classified by the International Agency for
Research on Cancer as a class 2B carcinogen (i.e., as
possibly carcinogenic to humans) (International
Agency for Research on Cancer, 1987).
5 CONCLUSIONS
Data gathered from this study corroborate the
need of monitoring the contamination by particulate
matter, fungi and their metabolites in Portuguese
swine. Results demonstrate high levels of particulate
matter in the swine farms studied, particularly re-
garding PM5 and PM10 sizes. This study also raises
the concern of occupational treat due not only to the
detected fungal load, but also to the toxigenic poten-
tial of Aspergillus versicolor. In this setting, inhala-
tion should be considered as a route of exposure to
sterigmatocystin.
The evidence of respiratory disease in this occu-
pational setting documented in many studies sup-
ports the need for the development of health protec-
tion programmes within the workplace.
6 ACKNOWELEDGMENTS
This study was funded by the Portuguese Authority
for Working Conditions and would not have been
possible without the assistance of the Portuguese
Ministry of Agriculture, Portuguese Ministry of
Health and swine farmers.
7 REFERENCES
Barnes, S., Dola, T., Bennett, J. & Bhatnagar, D.
1994. Synthesis of sterigmatocystin on a chemically
defined medium by species of Aspergillus and Chae-
tomium. Mycopathologia, 125,173–178
Baur, X., Preisser, A. & Wegner R. 2003. Asthma
due to grain dust. Pneumologie, 57, 335–339.
Carpenter, G.A. 1986. Dust in livestock buildings
– review of some aspects. J Agric Eng Res, 33, 227-
241.
Clark, S., Rylander, R. & Larsson, L. 1983. Air-
borne bacteria, endotoxin and fungi in dust in poul-
try and swine confinement buildings. Am. Ind. Hyg.
Assoc. J., 44, 537–541.
Chang, C., Chung, H., Huang, C. & Su, H. 2001.
Exposure of Workers to Airborne Microorganisms
in Open-Air Swine Houses. Appl Environ Microbiol,
67(1), 155-161.
Chastain, J. 2000. Air Quality and Odor Control
From Swine Production Facilities [Online]
http://www.clemson.edu/extension/livestock/livestoc
k/camm/camm_files/swine/sch9_03.pdf [24th Sep-
tember 2012].
Cole, D., Todd, L. & Wing, S. 2000. Concentrat-
ed swine feeding operations and public health: a re-
view of occupational and community health effects.
Environ. Health Perspec., 108, 685–699.
Cormior, Y., Tremblay, G., Meriaux, A., Brochu,
G. & Lavoie, J. 1990. Airborne Microbial Content in
Two Types of Swine Confinement Buildings in
Quebec. Am Ind Hyg Assoc, 51(6), 304-309.
Donham, K. 2000. The concentration of swine
production: effects on swine health, productivity,
human health, and the environment. Toxicology,
16(3), 559-597.
Donham, K.J., Merchant, J.A., Lassie, D., Popen-
dorf, W.J. & Burmeister, LF. 1990. Preventing res-
piratory disease in swine confi nement workers: in-
tervention through applied epidemiology, education
and consultation. Am J Ind Med, 18, 241-261.
Donnell, P.E., Coggins, M.A., Hogan, V.J. &
Fleming, G.T. 2008. Exposure assessment of air-
borne contaminants in the indoor environment of
Irish swine farms. Ann Agric Environ Med, 15, 323–
326.
Dosman, J.A., Lawson, J.A., Kirychuk, S.P.,
Cormier, Y., Biem, J. & Koehnce, N. 2005. Occupa-
tional asthma in newly employed workers in inten-
sive swine confinement facilities. Eur. Respir. J., 24,
698–702.
Douwes, J., Thorne, P., Pearce, N. & Heederik,
D. 2003. Bioaerosol health effects and exposure as-
sessment: progress and prospects. Ann. Occup. Hyg.,
47, 187–200.
Duchaine, C., Grimard, Y. & Cormier, Y. 2000.
Influence of Building Maintenance, Environmental
Factors, and Seasons on Airborne Contaminants of
Swine Confinement Buildings. AIHAJ – American
Industrial Hygiene Association, 61, 1, 56 — 63.
Engelhart, S., Loock, A., Skutlarek, D., Sagunski,
H., Lommel, A., Harald, F. & Exner, M. 2002. Oc-
currence of Toxigenic Aspergillus versicolor Isolates
and Sterigmatocystin in Carpet Dust from Damp In-
door Environments. Applied and Environmental Mi-
crobiology, 68 (8), 3886–3890.
Iversen, M., Kirychuk S., Drost, H. & Jacobson,
L. 2000. Human Health Effects of Dust Exposure in
Animal Confinement Buildings. Journal of Agricul-
tural Safety and Health, 6(4), 283-288.
Hoog, C., Guarro, J., Gené, G. & Figueiras, M.
2000 Atlas of Clinical Fungi. (2th ed). Centraalbu-
reau voor Schimmelcultures.
HSE. “Statement of evidence: Respiratory haz-
ards of poultry dust Health and Safety” Executive
03/09 14 pages.
International Agency for Research on Cancer.
1987. Some naturally occurring substances. Mono-
graphs, vol. 10, Suppl. 7, p. 72. International Agency
for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.
Kogevinas, M., Anto, J., Sunyer, J., Tobias, A.,
Kromhout, H. & Burney, P. 1999. Occupational
asthma in Europe and other industrialized areas: a
population based study. Lancet, 353, 1750–1754
Kim K., Ko H., Kim Y. & Kim C. 2008. Assess-
ment of Korean farmer´s exposure level to dust in
pig buildings. Ann Agric Environ Med, 15, 51–58.
Kim, K.Y., Ko, H.J., Lee, K.J., Park, J.B. & Kim,
C.N. 2005. Temporal and spatial distributions of aer-
ial contaminants in an enclosed pig building in win-
ter. Environ Res, 99, 150-157.
Lee, S., Adhikari, A., Grinshpun, S.A., McKay,
R., Shukla, R. & Reponen,T. 2006. Personal Expo-
sure to Airborne Dust and Microorganisms in Agri-
cultural Environments. Journal of Occupational and
Environmental Hygiene, 3, 118–130.
Mc Donnell1,P., Coggins, M., Hogan, V. &
Fleming, G. 2008. Exposure assessment of airborne
contaminants in the indoor environment of irish
swine farms. Ann. Agric. Environ. Med., 15, 323–
326.
Mackiewicz, B. 1998. Study on exposure of pig
farm workers to bioaerosols, immunologic reactivity
and health effects. Ann Agric Environ Med, 5, 169-
175.
Novak, D. 1994. Prevalence and risk factors for
airway diseases in farmers: a new EC multicentre
project. Ann Agric Environ Med, 1, 81–82.
Oppliger, A., Charrie, N., Droz, P. & Rinsoz, T.
2008. Exposure to Bioaerosols in Poultry Houses at
Different Stages of Fattening; Use of Real-time PCR
for Airborne Bacterial Quantification. Ann. Occup.
Hyg., 52, 5, 405 – 412.
Pearson, C.C. & Sharples, T.J. 1995. Airborne
dust concentrations in livestock buildings and the ef-
fect of feed. J Agric Eng Res, 60, 145-154.
Pedersen, S., Nonnenmann, M., Rautiainen, R.,
Demmers, T.G.M., Banhazi, T. & Lyngbye, M.
2000. Dust in Pig Buildings. Journal of Agricultural
Safety and Health. 6(4), 261-274.
Portengen, L., Preller, L., Tielen, M., Doekes, G.
& Heederik, D. 2005. Endotoxin exposure and atop-
ic sensitization in adult pig farmers. J Allergy Clin
Immunol, 115, 797-802.
Predicala, B.Z. & Maghirang R.G. 2003. Field
comparison of inhalable and total dust samplers for
assessing airborne dust in swine confinement barns.
Appl. Occup. Environ. Hyg.18, 694–701.
Radon, K., Danuser, B., Iversen, M., Jo¨rres, R.,
Monso, E., Opravil, U. et al. 2001 Respiratory
symptoms in European animal farmers. Eur. Respir.
J., 17,747–754.
Radon, K., Danuser, B., Iversen, M., Monso, E.,
Weber, C., Hartung, J., Donham, K., Palmgren, U. &
Nowak, D. 2002. Air Contaminants in Different Eu-
ropean Farming Environments. Ann Agric Environ
Med, 9, 41-48.
Radon, K., Garz, S., Riess, A. et al. 2003. Respir-
atory diseases in European farmers—II. Part of the
European Farmers’ Project. Pneumologie, 57, 510–
517.
Rautiala, S.J., Kangas, K., Louhelainen &
Reiman, M. 2003. Farmers’ exposure to airborne
microorganisms in composting swine confinement
buildings. Am. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J. 64, 673–677.
Rimac, D., Macan, J., Varnai, V., Vucˇemilo, M.,
Matkovic´, K., Prester, L., Orct, T., Trosˇic´,I. &
Pavicˇic, I. 2010. Exposure to poultry dust and
health effects in poultry workers: impact of mould
and mite allergens. Int Arch Occup Environ Health,
83, 9 – 19.
Robertson, J.H. & Frieben, W.R. 1984. Microbial
validation of ven filters. Biotechnol Bioeng, 26, 828-
835.
Senthilselvan, A., Dosman, J., Kirychuk, S., Bar-
ber, E., Rhodes, C., Zhang, Y. et al. 1997. Acceler-
ated lung function decline in swine confinement
workers. Chest, 111, 1733–1741.
Simpson, J., Mc Niven, R., Pickering, C., Old-
ham, L., Fletcher, A. & Francis, H. 1999 Compara-
tive Personal Exposures to Organic Dusts and Endo-
toxin. Ann Occup Hyg 1999, 32(1), 107-115.
Takai, H. & Pederson, S. 2000. A Comparison
Study of Different Dust Control Methods in Pig
Buildings. App. Eng. in Agri., 16(3), 269-277.
Thrane, U., Adler, A., Clasen, P., E., Galvano, F.,
Langseth, W., Lew, H., Logrieco, A., Nielsen, K.,F.
& Ritieni, A. 2004. Diversity in metabolite produc-
tion by Fusarium langsethiae, Fusarium poae, and
Fusarium sporotrichioides. Int. J. Food
Microbiol, 95,257-266.
Zejda, J.E., Barber, E.M., Dosman, J.A., Olen-
chock, S.A., McDuffie, H.H., Rhodes, C.S. & Hurst,
T.S. 1994. Respiratory health status in swine pro-
ducers relates to endotoxin exposure in the presence
of low dust levels. J. Occup. Med., 36, 49–56.
Wan-Kuen, J. & Jung-Hwan, K. 2005. Exposure
Levels of Airborne Bacteria and Fungi in Korean
Swine and Poultry Sheds. Archives of Environmental
& Occupational Health, 60, 3, 140 – 146.
Wathes, C., Phillips, V., Holden, M., Sneath, R.,
Short, J., White, R., Hartung, J., Seedorf, J., Schro,
M., Linkert, K., Pederson, S., Takai, H., Johnsem,
O., G root, K.,Uenk, G., Metz. J., Hinz, T., Caspary,
V. and Linke, S. 1998. Emissions of Aerial Pollu-
tants in Livestock Buildings in Northern Europe:
Overview of a Multinational Project. J. Agri. Eng.
Research, 70, 3-9.
