EVALUATION OF EFFLUENT TREATMENT METHODS IN DAIRY FARM

Simple item page
dc.contributor.advisorA. Kannan
dc.contributor.authorJONATHAN JAMES MOONNUMACKAL
dc.date.accessioned2022-11-03T10:46:18Z
dc.date.available2022-11-03T10:46:18Z
dc.date.issued2018-09-30
dc.descriptionSubmitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Master of Veterinary Science in Livestock Production Managementen_US
dc.description.abstractA study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of different effluent treatment methods in dairy farm and to analyze cost effectiveness of effluent treatments. An initial survey was conducted among hundred farms of Thrissur district using a well structured questionnaire and data was collected regarding the farming system and their effluent management. The farms were categorised into small, medium and large. Six farms from each category were selected randomlyfor effluent collection in two different season namely summer and monsoon. Effluent was collected in the morning at 8am and evening at 5pm and pooled together. Representative sample (15 litres) of pooled effluent was taken from each farm and was subjected for different treatment protocols. After the end of each treatment water quality parameters were analysed. From the data of survey, it was found that there was a positive correlation between number of animals (96 per cent) and total water used (98 per cent) with effluent output. Effluent subjected with different treatment protocols (C- control, T1- Screening, T2- sedimentation, T3- Filtration and T4- chlorination). After the end of each treatment, the water were subjected to evaluation of quality parameters like colour, Total Dissolved Solids (TDS), pH, turbidity, Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD), Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), Total Coliform count (TCC) and E. coli count. Data were compared with Indian Standards for reuse in dairy farm.The colour (Hazen) of water indicated that control (958.50 ± 4.18) was significantly higher than the rest of treatments. There was no significant difference between colour value of water from T3 (266.80 ± 5.8) and T4 (249.13 ± 8.66). T3 (filtered water) and T4 (chlorinated water) were lesser due to the respective treatments. The TDS (mg/L)of water from treatments T3 (1404.47 ± 31.68), T2 (2358.63 ± 34.52), T4 (2408.05 ±48.23) and T1 (3354.55 ± 29.65) with increasing trend were significantly lower than that of control (5161.22 ± 28.94). T2 (2358.63 ± 34.52) and T4 (2408.05 ± 48.23) were not significantly different from each other and T4 was significantly higher than that of T3. The pH of water from control (8.20 ± 0.07)and T1 (8.19 ± 0.05), T3 (7.40 ± 0.05)and T4 (7.26 ± 0.06)were significantly not different from each other where T2 (6.98 ± 0.10)was significantly different from all other treatments. The turbidity (NTU) of water from control (718.80 ± 6.86)and T1 (669.36 ± 10.16), T2 (76.38 ± 2.02)and T3 (42.26 ± 1.53) were significantly different from each other where T3 (42.26 ± 1.53) and T4 (38.00 ± 1.74)were not significantly different from each other. The BOD 5 (mg/L) of water from control (154.30 ± 1.31), T1 (131.75 ± 1.31), T2 (77.16 ± 1.31), T3 (52.41 ± 1.31) and T4 (41.44 ± 1.31) were significantly different from each other. The COD (mg/L) of water from control (1447.83 ± 15.04), T1 (1222.08 ± 19.40), T2 (672.00 ± 6.62), T3 (426.80 ± 10.37) and T4 (316.50 ± 8.51) were significantly different from each other. The TCC (MPN/100 ml) of water for control, T1, T2, T3 and T4 were 22.25 ± 0.27, 21.44 ± 0.27, 12.93 ± 0.27, 11.12 ± 0.27 and < 1.80 ± 0.27respectively.Control and T1 were having highest and T4 was having least TCC. The E. coli count (MPN/100 ml) of water for control, T1, T2, T3 and T4 were 22.22 ± 0.27, 21.13 ± 0.27, 12.93 ± 0.27, 11.12 ± 0.27and <1.80 ± 0.27respectively.Control and T1 were having highest and T4 was having least E. coli count.Effect of effluent treatments between the farm size revealed that parameters like pH, turbidity, COD and BOD 5 showed significant difference between treatment and farms and parameters like colour, TDS, TCC and E. coli had no significant difference between treatment and farms. The pH value of water from small farm (8.40 ± 0.12) was not significantly different from medium farm (8.32 ± 0.12)but significantly different from large farm (7.94 ± 0.12) in the control group. The turbidity (NTU) of water was significant different between treatments and farms. There was no significant difference between T3 and T4 in small, medium and large farms. The COD (mg/L) of water in small, medium and large farms, control (small- 1401.08 ± 26.05, medium- 1378.05 ± 26.05 and large- 1564.16 ± 26.05)were significantly higher (p<0.05) than that of T4, T3, T2 and T1. The BOD 5 (mg/L) was significant difference between treatments and farms. In small, medium and large farms, control was significantly higher (p<0.05) than that of T4, T3, T2 and T1.`Effect of effluent treatment between the seasons revealed that for all the water quality parameters like colour, TDS, pH, turbidity, COD, BOD5, TCC and E. coli count had no significant difference between treatment and seasons. The water quality parameters colour, TDS, pH, turbidity, Total Coliform Count and E. coli count were within the limits of Indian standards IS 10500. COD and BOD 5 were slightly higher than the limits of the Indian standards (IS 10500), so this water must be treated for reuse. The overall results in the study indicated that T4 having better efficacy compared to all other treatments. The results of the study indicated that the wastewater generated in the dairy farm can be effectively treated using the four stage treatment (C- control, T1- Screening, T2- sedimentation, T3- Filtration and T4- chlorination) in this study and the reclaimed water can be reused in the dairy farms for cleaning the shed, toconserve water and to reduce the water body contamination. The cost of the fourth treatment is comparatively higher however effectiveness of effluent treatment indicated that T4 is better in comparison with other treatments.en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://krishikosh.egranth.ac.in/handle/1/5810189566
dc.keywordsEFFLUENT TREATMENT METHODS, DAIRY FARM, Dairy farm waste and its management, Quantity of manure generated, Frequency of waste removal, Separation of liquid and solid waste, Management of effluent in cattle farm,Storage of Solid and liquid waste, Recycling of manure,Effluent waste disposal methods, Dairy farm management, Housing of cattle, Feeding practices, Health management, Water requirement of cattle, Volume of waste water produced in dairy farms, Climatological data, Screening, Sedimentation, Chemical treatment,Sand filters, Effluent Chlorination, pH, Turbidity, Total Dissolved Solids (TDS), Chemical oxygen demand (COD), Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD), Total Coliform Count (TCC), E .coli count, Collection of effluent, WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS, Herd details of dairy farms, Feeds and feeding management of dairy farms, CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA, water quality parameters, Micro - biological quality parameters, Total Coliform Count,en_US
dc.language.isoEnglishen_US
dc.pages141 p.en_US
dc.publisherKerala Veterinary and Animal Sciences Mannuthy, Thrissuren_US
dc.research.problemTo evaluate the efficacy of effluent treatment in dairy farms , To analyse cost effectiveness of effluent treatmentsen_US
dc.subLivestock Production and Managementen_US
dc.themeEFFLUENT TREATMENT METHODS IN DAIRY FARMen_US
dc.these.typeM.V.Sc.en_US
dc.titleEVALUATION OF EFFLUENT TREATMENT METHODS IN DAIRY FARMen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
JONATHAN JAMES MOONNUMACKAL.pdf
Size:
3.17 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Thesis: EVALUATION OF EFFLUENT TREATMENT METHODS IN DAIRY FARM
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download
Collections
Thesis