11.07.2015 Views

Animal Waste, Water Quality and Human Health

Animal Waste, Water Quality and Human Health

Animal Waste, Water Quality and Human Health

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

394<strong>Animal</strong> <strong>Waste</strong>, <strong>Water</strong> <strong>Quality</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Human</strong> <strong>Health</strong>Table A10.1 Campylobacter.Reference Prevalence (%) Concentration NotesCattleBerry et al. (2007) 2.2–14.9 – Beef cattle feedlotsBesser et al. (2005) 1.6–62.2 – Beef cattle feedlotsBrown et al. (2004) 36 – Rural Cheshire, UKDevane et al. (2005) 97.8 – New Zeal<strong>and</strong> dairy cattle (all positive for C.jejuni)Hakkinen & Hänninen (2009) 49.7 – Substantial differences between herdsHutchison et al. (2004/5) 12.8 320 cfu/g (g.m.) Fresh composite farm manure, UK. max. =1.5 × 10 5 cfu/gKwan et al. (2008) 35.9 – Five NW Engl<strong>and</strong> farms, prevalence range =26.4% (winter) to 50.8% (summer)McAllister et al. (2005) 30–47 – Cows (Ontario, Canada)41.7 – Calves (British Columbia, Canada)McAllister et al. (2005) 41.7 – CanadaMoriarty et al. (2008) – 430 cfu/g (med.) New Zeal<strong>and</strong>: Concentration range15–1.8 × 10 7 cfu/gStanley et al. (1998a) – 610 MPN/g (ave.) UK beef cattle at slaughter– 69.9 MPN/g (ave.) UK cows– 33,000 MPN/g (ave.) UK calvesSwineDorner et al. (2004) 45.9, 79.7 – Canadian sows <strong>and</strong> gilts (females, not yetmated)Hutchison et al. (2004/5) 13.5 310 cfu/g (g.m.) Fresh composite farm manure, UK. max. =1.5 × 10 4 cfu/g(Continued)

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!