An Evaluation of three methods to clean feedlot water tanks

Authors

  • David R. Smith Department of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Nebraska -Lincoln, Lincoln, NE 68583
  • Terry Klopfenstein Department of Animal Science, Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Nebraska -Lincoln, Lincoln, NE 68583
  • Rodney Moxley Department of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Nebraska -Lincoln, Lincoln, NE 68583
  • C. Todd Milton Department of Animal Science, Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Nebraska -Lincoln, Lincoln, NE 68583
  • Laura Hungerford Department of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Nebraska -Lincoln, Lincoln, NE 68583
  • Jeffrey T. Gray Department of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Nebraska -Lincoln, Lincoln, NE 68583

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21423/bovine-vol36no1p1-4

Keywords:

cleaning and sterilizing, coliform bacteria, disease prevention, disinfectants, disinfection, drinking water, methodology, sodium hypochlorite, tanks

Abstract

Three methods of physically or chemically cleaning cattle feedlot water tanks were tested for their ability to reduce amounts of coliform bacteria in the water and the surface of the tank (biofilm) during the summer months: in the first method, the water tank was drained and refilled; in the second method, the water tank was scrubbed with a bootbrush to loosen and remove any visible sediment, drained and refilled; and in the third method, water tank was scrubbed with a brush (as above), drained and refilled. Household chlorine bleach (5.25% Na hypochlorite) was added to the water tank to a final 1:32 dilution. The disinfectant solution was kept in the tank for 15 minutes before the tank was drained again and refilled. In Trial 1, we found that the first and second methods did not reduce coliform bacteria in water or biofilm. On the other hand, coliform bacteria in water and biofilm were reduced 99% (p=0.0003) and 99.9% (p<0.0001), respectively, after draining, scrubbing and 15 minutes of chemical disinfection with chlorine bleach and refilling (method 3). However, coliforms returned to pretreatment levels 24 hours after treatment (p=0.12). In Trial 2, we demonstrated that the rapid re-population in coliform bacteria was due to the cattle drinking from the tanks (p=0.0003). These data indicate that coliform bacteria rapidly re-populate water tanks in the summer because cattle re-contaminate them with coliform bacteria and/or substrate. If the overall number of coliforms in a water tank reflects the likelihood of transmitting coliform bacteria from water tanks to cattle, then the benefits of cleaning and disinfecting water tanks to minimize the transmission of coliform bacteria to cattle are short-lived.

Author Biographies

C. Todd Milton, Department of Animal Science, Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Nebraska -Lincoln, Lincoln, NE 68583

Present address: 10249 W. Loup River Road, Dannebrog, NE 68831

Jeffrey T. Gray, Department of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Nebraska -Lincoln, Lincoln, NE 68583

Present address: USDA, ARS, Antimicrobial Resistance Research Unit, Athens, GA 30605

Cover image of Volume 36, No.1 of the Bovine Practitioner: a herd of cattle in a milking barn, facing the camera, grazing placidly while being milked.

Downloads

Published

2002-02-01

How to Cite

Smith, D. R., Klopfenstein, T., Moxley, R., Milton, C. T., Hungerford, L., & Gray, J. T. (2002). An Evaluation of three methods to clean feedlot water tanks. The Bovine Practitioner, 36(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.21423/bovine-vol36no1p1-4

Issue

Vol. 36, No. 1 (2002 February)

Section

Articles

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>