Parasitological and Microbiological Characteristics of Wastes Generated and Impact on Water Sources Next to Abattoir Facilities in Lurambi Sub County. Kakamega County
Research Article
Parasitological and Microbiological Characteristics of Wastes Generated and Impact on Water Sources Next to Abattoir Facilities in Lurambi Sub County. Kakamega County
Ochieng Onunga George*, Owuor Ndonga Millicent Florence, Mario Kollenberg
Department of Biological Sciences, Masinde Muliro University of Science and Technology (MMUST), P.O Box 190 - 50100, Kakamega, Kenya.
Abstract | Slaughterhouse processes consist of several pollutants, including condemned meat parts, aborted fetuses, animal trimmings, horns, undigested ingesta (paunch contents), bones, and hairs. In contrast, liquid parts consist of blood, dissolved solids, urine, gut contents, and wastewater from slaughter operations and floor cleaning. It has been reported that Abattoir wastes can have negative impacts on the areas surrounding them by causing pollution and public health concerns. Therefore, this research was initiated with the main objective being to evaluate the Parasitological and Microbiological Characteristics of Wastes Generated and the Impact on Water Sources next to the Abattoir in Lurambi sub-county Kakamega County. Laboratory investigations were carried out for two months during the dry and wet seasons. Wastewater samples from five slaughterhouses and water samples from water sources next to the abattoirs were examined using standard procedures. The bacteria isolated were E. coli, P. aeruginosa, K. pneumoniae, E. faecalis, and S. dysenteriae. Bacterial concentrations cfu/100ml of abattoir effluents ranged from 3.17 × 106 of TC. 3.94x104 of FC, 2.84x104 of E. faecalis, 8.65x104 of E. coli, and BOD of 828.04mg/l.Fungi isolated were., Aspergillus niger, Fusarium oxysporum, Penicillium spp, Aspergillus fumigatus, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Aspergillus flavus. Parasites isolated from samples of effluent and water were Balantidium coli, Trichomonas hominis, Ancylostoma duodenale, and Ascaris lumbricoid. It was concluded that the abattoir wastes were unsuitable for discharge to the environment and resulted in water pollution near abattoirs that may cause serious waterborne diseases. The baseline information obtained from the results can be used by government authorities such as National Environmental Management Authority and researchers.
Keywords | Abattoirs, Abattoir wastes, Bacteria, Fungi, Parasites
Received | February 25, 2022; Accepted | July 30, 2022; Published | July 20, 2022
*Correspondence | Ochieng Onunga George, Department of Biological Sciences, Masinde Muliro University of Science and Technology (MMUST), P.O Box 190 - 50100, Kakamega, Kenya; Email: [email protected]
Citation | George OO, Florence ONM, Kollenberg M (2022). Parasitological and microbiological characteristics of wastes generated and impact on water sources next to abattoir facilities in lurambi sub county. Kakamega county. Adv. Anim. Vet. Sci. 10(8): 1797-1809.
DOI | http://dx.doi.org/10.17582/journal.aavs/2022/10.8.1797.1809
ISSN (Online) | 2307-8316
Copyright: 2022 by the authors. Licensee ResearchersLinks Ltd, England, UK.
This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
INTRODUCTION
Anthropogenic processes, including slaughterhouses, generate wastes that need to be handled properly to protect public health and surroundings while enhancing the perception of beauty (NEMA, 2014). Urban settlements, due to high population, rapid urbanization, and changing community affluence, generate large quantities of solid waste, which, if improperly disposed of, can impact negatively on the environment, particularly in cities and big towns (NEMA, 2014). In industrialized countries, the waste management system is tightly regulated and closely monitored, thus reducing its risk to public health (Rushton, 2003). Over the past 15-20 years, solid waste management has been a greater success and lesser extent, wastewater managementWastes generated by urban livestock markets, slaughterhouses, and related facilities have been neglected (World Bank, 2009). Most slaughterhouses in developing countries in Africa, such as Kenya, Nigeria, Uganda, etc., are owned by private individuals or local government authorities. The structures are operating above their original capacities and are in decrepit condition. If not appropriately treated and disposed of, the wastes from these facilities may cause public health and environmental disasters (World Bank, 2009).
It should be noted that the annual per capita meat consumption in developing countries is increasing due to the high population and increasing per capita income; thus, large numbers of livestock, especially cows and shoats, are being slaughtered to meet the market demand (FAO, 2010). The large number of animals slaughtered comes with increased waste that must be environmentally handled to avoid contamination. An abattoir is defined as an approved specialized facility properly designed for hygienic ante mortem inspection, slaughtering, and carcass processing of animal meat and meat products for consumption by humans (Alonge, 2005). Slaughter wastes comprise solid, liquid, and gas components. The solid waste is mostly made up of bones, condemned parts, paunch contents, hairs, undigested ingesta and in certain instances, aborted fetuses; the liquid part comprises wash wastewater, dissolved solids, urine, blood, and gut contents. Gas wastes are Odors and emissions from the processing and putrefaction of dumped wastes (Fearon et al., 2014). In developing countries, water supply infrastructure is poorly developed, and slaughtering operations require large water quantities; thus, most abattoirs are located next to underground and surface water bodies. Due to proximity to abattoir waste disposal sites, the quality of groundwater and surface water sources is affected by leachates which contaminate aquifers and introduce enteric pathogens, parasites, and nutrients into waterways (Adegbola et al., 2012; Hassan et al., 2014). The harmful risk of waste on water, air, and land often occurs when wastewater is improperly channelled into water bodies and when solid wastes heaps are left in open spaces unattended, thus acting as non-point sources of pollution when precipitation takes place. The water bodies also act as the easiest way for abattoirs to dispose of the wastes as they lack waste treatment facilities and are not connected to sewer lines. The management of abattoir waste disposal has become a major issue or problem in developing countries in Asia and Africa. In countries like Ghana, Cameroon, Nigeria, Rwanda, and Kenya it has been reported to cause air, water, and soil pollution and pose serious public health risks (Regina et al., 2017; Koech et al., 2012; Nwanta et al., 2008). This research was initiated with the main objective being to evaluate the Parasitological and Microbiological Characteristics of Wastes Generated and the Impact on Water Sources next to Abattoirs in Lurambi sub-county Kakamega County.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Description of the study area
Kakamega County is in the western region of Kenya, with Lurambi sub-county located at a Latitude is 0017’ 49.992” N Longitude 340 45’ 58.3524” E. Over the years, Lurambi Sub-County has experienced exponential growth both demographically and spatially due to being a nodal settlement and headquarters of Kakamega County. The research was done on five slaughterhouses in Lurambi sub-county Kakamega (Figure 1). As common in most Kenyan cities, slaughterhouses are located in different areas of Lurambi Township among residences with no regard for their compatibility (Plate 1-6). This is against the existence of legislation that governs the location and operations of slaughterhouses both at the national and county level (Meat control act, 2012, Kakamega county abattoir act, 2017).
Sample collection
Triplicate water sources and wastewater from abattoirs samples were collected from March to April 2021 (wet season) and December to February 2022 (dry season). Wastewater effluents were collected when it was entering the lagoons for Shirere and Savona abattoirs and at disposal pits for Bukura, Ejinja corner, and Emusala abattoirs. The water samples were collected from borehole/hand dung wells within the abattoirs (0-250m) and 250-500m early when abattoir operations were at their peak and labelled properly. The river water was collected from three (3) different points, namely, 50 meters upstream (before mixing with the abattoir effluent), Point of discharge, and 50m downstream (after mixing with the abattoir effluent). Sampling was done between 6.00 am and 10.00 am when slaughtering operations and cleaning were done. Samples were preserved and analyzed in each case according to Standard Methods of Wastewater Analysis (APHA, 2017) and compared to WHO standards
Data analysis
The data obtained were analyzed using the ANOVA test at a 95% confidence level to test significant differences between the means. This was done using SPSS version 20.0.
Bacteriological Analysis
Media prepared per the manufacturer’s directives for the analysis were Mac Conkey Agar, Nutrient Agar, and Blood
Agar. The pour plate technique was employed to culture and enumerate bacteria in the water and effluent samples. Aliquots of 0.5ml of serially diluted samples were inoculated in triplicate plates of the prepared agar plates. At 37oC, the plates were incubated for 24 hours in an aerobic environment. The Stuart/Sc6+ colony counter was used to count the number of distinct colonies on the media plates. Colony-forming units per millilitre (CFU/ml) of the sample were used to illustrate this.
Bacterial Identification: By repeated sub-culturing, pure colonies were obtained for further characterization and identification using biochemical and microscopy tests. Colony morphology based on characteristic shape, size, colour, surface appearance, and texture was used to determine the bacteria type. Biochemical tests: Indole production, Gram’s reaction, Catalase, Urease, Methyl red, Citrate test, Voges Proskauer, Glucose test, Lactose test, sucrose test, Motility test H2S test, Gas test and Oxidase were employed on isolates for identification. Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) was done according to APHA procedures on the water and wastewater samples
Fungal Analysis
The media prepared according to the manufacturer’s directives for the analysis was potato dextrose agar (PDA). One millilitre (1ml) of each diluted sample was transferred into sterile triplicate Petri-dishes. Then cooled Potato Dextrose Agar (PDA) in a molten state was poured aseptically into a petri dish and swirled to distribute the samples evenly. The plates were allowed to be set undisturbed at 250C for five days and examined for fungal growth. Distinct colonies on each plate were counted and expressed as Cfu/ml (colony forming units /millilitre). (APHA).
Fungal Identification: Using a sterile inoculating needle, different distinct representative colonies were transferred to a sterile solidified PDA (Spread technique) and placed in an incubator at 30°C for three days. Distinct colonies on each plate were counted and expressed as Cfu/ml (colony forming units /millilitre) (APHA). Based on macroscopic observations of colony morphology, colour, texture, shape, appearance, and microscopic characteristics of septation in mycelium, reproductive structures, structure and shape of conidia (Cheesebrough, 2009).
Parasitological analysis
The modified Bailenger method (MBM) (Rachel et al., 1996) was employed to analyse parasites. The equation n = ax / PV was used to quantify parasites.
Where
n represents number of eggs or (oocysts L− 1 of wastewater
a represents counted number of eggs or oocysts
x is the volume of the final product (mL),
p is the volume examined (0.15mLfor MBM and 0.05ml for ZN),
v represents the original sample volume (L).
Parasite identification: Based on morphological and morphometric parasitological criteria, including size parasite identification was done. Using a calibrated microscope at magnifications of 100x, 400x, and 1000x, we distinguished between protozoan (oo)cysts and helminth eggs.
Table 1: Mean values of Bacteria, Fungi and Parasites of abattoir sites in Lurambi Sub County Kakamega County during Wet season
Microbial counts | ||||||||
Abattoir | Sample type | Total coliform count (MPN/100ml) |
Faecal coliform (cfu/100ml) |
Enterococci faecalis ( cfu/100ml) |
Escherichia coli ( cfu/100ml) |
BOD (mg/l) |
Fungi (cfu/ml) |
Parasites (Trophozoite/eggs/ 100 g) |
Bukura | Effluent |
8.17 x105 |
4.37 x104 |
1.97 x104 |
2.03 x103 |
2.63 x103 |
6.80 x103 |
1.10 x102 |
Bore hole 0-250m |
6.07 x102 |
37 | 28 | 11 | 12 |
1.88 x103 |
28 | |
Bore hole 250- 500m |
1.03 x102 |
1.30 x102 |
10 | 0 | 5 | 8.33 | 0 | |
Ejinja corner | Effluent |
4.73 x105 |
3.82 x104 |
3.41 x104 |
5.79 x105 |
2.63 x103 |
4.93 x105 |
1.27 x102 |
Bore hole 0-250m |
4.27 x102 |
26 | 13 | 8 | 12 | 18.33 | 25 | |
Bore hole 250- 500m | 87 | 12 | 10 | 0 | 5 | 8.33 | 0 | |
Shirere | Effluent |
3.37 x105 |
3.20 x104 |
2.90 x104 |
6.13 x103 |
1.04 x102 |
5.71 x105 |
1.04 x102 |
Lagoon |
4.13 x105 |
3.90 x104 |
3.47 x104 |
6.87 x103 |
1.08 x102 |
7.0 x105 |
1.29 x102 |
|
50m above upstream |
2.77 x103 |
3.97 x102 |
2.43 x102 |
120 | 11 |
1.40. x102 |
87 | |
At point of discharge |
5.40 x105 |
1.17 x104 |
1.13 x105 |
2.87 x103 |
28 |
6.24 x105 |
1.17 x102 |
|
50m below point of discharge |
6 x105 |
1.87 x104 |
1.63 x104 |
3.50 x103 |
11 |
6.43 x105 |
1.49 x102 |
|
Savona | Effluent |
7.30 x105 |
3.60 x104 |
1.63 x104 |
1.87 x103 |
1.05 x102 |
2.15 x104 |
1.08 x102 |
Lagoon |
8 x105 |
4.30 x104 |
2.07 x104 |
2.10 x103 |
1.07 x102 |
6.24 x104 |
1.36 x102 |
|
Bore hole 0-250m |
4.67 x102 |
27 | 15 | 8 | 13 | 16.33 |
23.00 |
|
Spring |
3.54 x102 |
29 | 18 | 11 | 9 | 17.00 | 47.00 | |
Emusala | Effluent |
3.46 x105 |
3.25 x104 |
3.03 x104 |
6.10 x103 |
106 |
5.25 x105 |
1.08 x102 |
Lagoon |
4.03 x105 |
3.90 x104 |
3.6 x104 |
6.90 x103 |
5 x102 |
6.95 x105 |
1.57 x102 |
|
Bore hole 0-250m |
4.37 x102 |
24 | 12 | 8 | 12 | 18.33 | 23.00 | |
Bore hole 250- 500m |
1.23 x102 |
14 | 9 | 0 | 5 | 4.67 |
`0.00 |
Table 2: Mean values of Bacteria, Fungi and Parasites of abattoir sites in Lurambi Sub County Kakamega County during Dry season
Microbial counts | ||||||||
Abattoir | Sample type |
Total coliform count (cfu/100ml) |
Faecal coliform (cfu/100ml) |
Enterococci faecalis ( cfu/100ml) |
Escherichia coli (cfu/100ml) |
BOD (mg/l) |
Fungi ( cfu/ml) |
Parasites (Trophozoite/ |
Bukura | Effluent |
1.01 x106 |
6.53x104 |
3.78 x104 |
3.073 x103 |
3.101 x103 |
7.81 x103 |
1.22 x102 |
Bore hole 0-250m |
7.20 x102 |
44 | 30 | 19 | 13 | 20 | 20 | |
Bore hole 250- 500m |
1.30 x102 |
15 | 13 | 0 | 6 | 7.33 | 0 | |
Ejinja corner | Effluent |
5.78. x106 |
4.62 x104 |
4.13 x104 |
6.52 x105 |
2.831 x103 |
58.06 |
1.32 x102 |
Bore hole 0-250m |
4.91 x102 |
31 | 22 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 20 | |
Bore hole 250- 500m |
1.13 x102 |
13 | 12 | 0 | 6 | 7.67 | 0 | |
Shirere | Effluent |
4.33. x106 |
3.97 x104 |
2.9 x104 |
6.90 x103 |
1.10 x102 |
6.46 x103 |
1.26 x102 |
Lagoon |
5.1 x106 |
4.47 x104 |
4.10 x104 |
7.58 x103 |
115 |
7.78 x105 |
1.43 x102 |
|
50m above point of discharge |
3.8 x103 |
5.06 x102 |
3.60 x102 |
19 | 12 | 21 |
1.03 x102 |
|
At point of discharge |
6.82 x105 |
2.50 x104 |
2.17 x104 |
3.633 x103 |
33 |
3.90 x103 |
1.14 x102 |
|
50m below point of discharge |
7.1 x105 |
2.88 x104 |
2.58 x104 |
4.58 x103 |
12 |
2.8 x103 |
1.69 x102 |
|
Savona | Effluent |
8.59. x105 |
47733.33 | 27833.33 | 2876.67 |
1.11 x102 |
6.52 x103 |
1.31 x102 |
Lagoon |
8.87 x105 |
5.50 x104 |
3.30 x104 |
3.16 x103 |
1.12 x102 |
2966.67 |
1.60 x102 |
|
Bore hole 0-250m |
5.85 x102 |
34 | 20 | 12 | 13 | 19 | 30 | |
Spring |
5.10 x102 |
31 | 19 | 8 | 9 | 6.67 | 64 | |
Emusala | Effluent |
4.80 x106 |
4.58 x104 |
4.16. x104 |
7.78 x103 |
1.11 x102 |
7.13 x105 |
1.25 x102 |
Lagoon |
5.19 x106 |
4.58 x104 |
4.21 x104 |
7.48 x104 |
1.14 x102 |
7.89 x105 |
1.82. x102 |
|
Bore hole 0-250m |
5.42 x102 |
29 | 19 | 12 | 13 |
1.83 x103 |
18 | |
Bore hole 250- 500m |
1.77 x102 |
18 | 11 | 0 | 7 | 8 |
0 |
Table 3: Morphological Identification of Bacteria Isolates in Abattoirs in Lurambi Sub County Kakamega County
Sample type | Morphological characteristics |
Effluent | Small circular Colonies, white, raised. Smooth edges |
Small circular colonies, white, smooth edges | |
large milky flat colonies, rough edges | |
circular, white/cream, entire edges, smooth | |
Lagoon | small circular white colonies raised smooth edges |
small circular white colonies smooth edges | |
large milky flat colonies, rough edges | |
circular, white/cream, entire edges, smooth | |
Borehole water | small circular white colonies raised smooth edges |
Small circular colonies, white, raised. rough edges | |
large milky flat colonies, rough edges | |
circular, white/cream, entire edges, smooth | |
River water | small circular white colonies raised rough edges |
small circular white colonies raised smooth edges | |
circular, white/cream, entire edges, smooth | |
large milky flat colonies, rough edges | |
Spring | small circular white colonies raised smooth edges |
circular, white/cream ,entire edges, smooth | |
large milky flat colonies, rough edges |
Table 4: Biochemical Characteristics of Bacteria Isolated In Abattoirs Lurambi Sub County (Kakamega County)
Grams reaction | Catalase | Citrate t | Indole | urease | MR | V/P | Glucose | lactose | Sucrose | Motility | H2S | Gas |
Micro organism |
- rods | + | - | + | - | + | - | + | + | - | + | - | + |
Escherichia coli |
- rods | + | + | - | - | + | - | + | + | + | + | - | - | Psedomonas aerugenosa |
- rods | + | + | + | - | + | - | + | + | + | - | - | + |
Klebsiella pneumoniae |
+ ve cocci | - | - | - | - | - | + | + | + | + | - | - | - | Enterococcus faecalis |
- rods | + | + | + | - | + | - | + | - | - | - | - | + | Shigella dysenteriae |
Table 5: Bacteria Identified at Bukura, Ejinja and Emusala Abattoirs in Lurambi Sub County Kakamega County.
Abattoir | Sample type | Code | Micro organism |
BUKURA |
Effluent | BBEW-1 | Escherichia coli |
BBEW-2 | Pseudomonas aerugenosa | ||
BBEW-3 | Klebsiella pneumoniae | ||
BBEW-4 | Enterococcus faecalis | ||
Borehole 0-250m | BB1W-1 | Enterococcus faecalis | |
BB1W-2 | Escherichia coli | ||
BB1W-3 | Shigella dysenteriae | ||
Borehole 250-500m | BB2W-1 | Klebsiella pneumoniae | |
BB2W-2 | Escherichia coli | ||
EJINJA | Effluent | EJEW-1 | Pseudomonas aerugenosa |
EJEW-2 | Escherichia coli | ||
EJEW-3 | Klebsiella pneumoniae | ||
EJEW-4 | Enterococcus faecalis | ||
Borehole 0-250m | EJB1W-1 | Escherichia coli | |
EJB1W-2 | Shigella dysenteriae | ||
EJB1W-3 | Klebsiella pneumoniae | ||
EJB1W-4 | Enterococcus faecalis | ||
Borehole 250-500m | EJB2W-1 | Escherichia coli | |
EJB2W-2 | Klebsiella pneumoniae | ||
EJB2W-3 | Enterococcus faecalis | ||
EMUSALA | Effluent | EMEW-1 | Pseudomonas aerugenosa |
EMEW-2 | Klebsiella pneumoniae | ||
EMEW-3 | Escherichia coli | ||
EMEW-4 | Enterococcus faecalis | ||
Borehole 0-250m | EMB1W-1 | Shigella dysenteriae | |
EMB1W-2 | Enterococcus faecalis | ||
EMB1W-3 | Escherichia coli | ||
Borehole 250-500m | EMB2W-1 | Escherichia coli | |
EMB2W-2 | Enterococcus faecalis | ||
EMB2W-1 | Escherichia coli | ||
EMB2D-2 | Enterococcus faecalis | ||
Lagoon | EMLW-1 | Pseudomonas aerugenosa | |
EMLW-2 | Escherichia coli | ||
EMLW-3 | Klebsiella pneumoniae |
Table 6: Bacteria Identified at Shirere and Savona abattoir sites in Lurambi Sub County Kakamega County
Abattoir | Sample type | Code | Micro organism | |
SHIRERE | Effluent | SHEW-1 | Pseudomonas aerugenosa | |
SHEW-2 | Klebsiella pneumoniae | |||
SHEW-3 | Enterococcus faecalis | |||
SHEW-4 | Escherichia coli | |||
50m above Upstream | SHWU-1 | Shigella dysenteriae | ||
SHWU-2 | Escherichia coli | |||
SHWU-3 | Enterococcus faecalis | |||
SHWU-4 | Klebsiella pneumoniae | |||
At point of discharge | SHOW-1 | Shigella dysenteriae | ||
SHOW-2 | Escherichia coli | |||
SHOW-3 | Klebsiella pneumoniae | |||
SHOW-4 | Enterococcus faecalis | |||
River 50m below point of discharge | SHWE-1 | Shigella dysenteriae | ||
SHWE-2 | Klebsiella pneumoniae | |||
SHWE-3 | Escherichia coli | |||
SHWE-4 | Enterococcus faecalis | |||
Lagoon | SHLW-1 | Escherichia coli | ||
SHLW-2 | Pseudomonas aerugenosa | |||
SHLW-3 | Klebsiella pneumoniae | |||
SHLW-4 | Enterococcus faecalis | |||
SAVONA | Effluent | SAEW-1 | Escherichia coli | |
SAEW-2 | Pseudomonas aerugenosa | |||
SAEW-3 | Klebsiella pneumoniae | |||
SAEW-4 | Enterococcus faecalis | |||
Bore hole (0-250m) | SAB1W-1 | Klebsiella pneumoniae | ||
SAB1W-2 | Escherichia coli | |||
SAB1W-3 | Shigella dysenteriae | |||
SAB1W-4 | Enterococcus faecalis | |||
Spring | SASW-1 | Escherichia coli | ||
SASW-2 | Enterococcus faecalis | |||
SASW-3 | Klebsiella pneumoniae | |||
Lagoon | SALW-1 | Escherichia coli | ||
SALW-2 | Enterococcus faecalis | |||
SALW-3 | Klebsiella pneumoniae |
Table 7: Morphological identification of Fungi
MACROSCOPY | MICROSCOPY | IDENTIFICATION |
Upper surface olive green, white edges, granular surface, green coloration on reverse | conidiophores thick walled, hyaline roughened, erect long aseptate with vesicle short conidial chains | Aspegillus flavus |
widely spread colonies, black, smooth white edges, spongy surface, brown on reverse side | conidiophores long erected, smooth walled, hyaline with globes conidial heads | Aspergillus niger |
colony widely spread, dark green, smooth white edges, spongy surface, brown on reverse | Conidiophores long, narrow at base smooth walled hyaline | Aspergillus fumigatus |
Pale pink in colour, fluffy white growth, dark violet on reverse side | macroconidia canoe shaped, single celled, oval shape | Fusarium oxysporum |
White cream, smooth, ellipsoidal in shape | Oval yeasts budding presence | Saccharymyoces cerevisae |
White cream yellow colour, reverse colour white to cream yellow | conidiophores, simple branched terminated by clusters of flask shaped philades | Penicillium species |
Table 8: Fungi Identified at Bukura, Ejinja and Shirere Abattoir sites in Lurambi Sub County Kakamega County
Abattoir | Sample type | Identification |
BUKURA | Effluent | Aspegillus flavus |
Aspergillus niger | ||
Aspergillus fumigatus | ||
Fusarium oxysporum | ||
Borehole 0-250m | Saccharymyoces cerevisae | |
Aspergillus fumigatus | ||
Fusarium oxysporum | ||
Borehole 250-500m | Saccharymyoces cerevisae | |
EJINJA | Effluent | Saccharymyoces cerevisae |
Penicillium species | ||
Aspergillus fumigatus | ||
Fusarium oxysporum | ||
Borehole 0-250m | Saccharymyoces cerevisae | |
Penicillium species | ||
Borehole 250-500m | Aspergillus niger | |
SHIRERE | Saccharymyoces cerevisae | |
Effluent | Aspegillus flavus | |
Aspergillus niger | ||
Aspergillus fumigatus | ||
50m above upstream | Aspergillus niger | |
Saccharymyoces cerevisae | ||
At point of discharge | Aspergillus niger | |
Penicillium species | ||
Saccharymyoces cerevisae | ||
River 50m below point of discharge downstream | Aspergillus niger | |
Penicillium species | ||
Saccharymyoces cerevisae | ||
Lagoon | Fusarium oxysporum | |
Aspegillus flavus | ||
Aspergillus niger | ||
Aspergillus fumigatus |
Table 9: Fungi Identified at Savona and Emusala Abattoir sites in Lurambi Sub County Kakamega County
Abattoir | Sample type | Identification |
SAVONA | Effluent | Aspegillus flavus |
Aspergillus niger | ||
Aspergillus fumigatus | ||
Fusarium oxysporum | ||
Bore hole (0-250m) | Saccharymyoces cerevisae | |
Penicillium species | ||
Aspergillus niger | ||
Spring | Saccharymyoces cerevisae | |
Penicillium species | ||
Aspergillus niger | ||
Lagoon | Aspegillus flavus | |
Aspergillus niger | ||
Aspergillus fumigatus | ||
Fusarium oxysporum | ||
EMUSALA | Effluent | Aspegillus flavus |
Aspergillus niger | ||
Aspergillus fumigatus | ||
Fusarium oxysporum | ||
Borehole 0-250m | Saccharymyoces cerevisae | |
Penicillium species | ||
Aspergillus niger | ||
Borehole 250-500m | Penicillium species | |
Aspergillus niger | ||
Lagoon | Aspegillus flavus | |
Aspergillus niger | ||
Fusarium oxysporum | ||
Aspergillus fumigatus |
Table 10: Frequency of occurrence of fungi
Name of isolates | Number of colonies Of isolates | Frequency of occurrence % |
Aspegillus flavus | 7 | 12.07 |
Aspergillus niger | 9 | 15.52 |
Aspergillus fumigatus | 15 | 25.86 |
Fusarium oxysporum | 8 | 13.79 |
Saccharymyoces cerevisae | 11 | 18.97 |
Penicillium species | 8 | 13.79 |
58 |
100 |
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Bacteria, fungi, viruses, helminths and protozoan parasites are the major microbial pathogens associated with water contamination. The major sources of these pathogens are Animal and human faeces, and their presence in water is due to faecal contamination (WHO, 2006). The study’s findings in the wet season (Table 1) and dry season (Table 2) show the microbial counts from wastewater samples and water samples from the various sites. The total bacterial count of wastewater samples from abattoirs revealed an average of 4.6 × 10 Cfu/ml and an average fungal count of 5.2 × 10 Cfu/ml. This is higher for the wastewater according to World Health Organization’s standard limit (1 × 10² Cfu/ml). Bacterial counts in Boreholes, River Shikalamunga, and Savona spring water show high numbers of total viable coliform, faecal coliforms, Enterococci faecalis, Escherichia coli and BOD, which corresponded with similar studies were done by Nafarnda et al. (2012) and Coker et al. (2001). The mean BOD values of slaughter wastes at 11840mg/l were extremely high. The World Health Organization (WHO) permissible limit is 80mg/L (BOD) for discharged abattoirs wastewater into surface water. (WHO 2009). While high BOD values indicate contaminated water, low BOD values suggest clean water. Since the rate at which dissolved oxygen depletes in a stream increases with increasing BOD affects aquatic life. The morphological and biochemical characteristics of bacteria are shown in Table 3 and Table 4 from the various samples. The bacteria isolated were Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginous, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Enterococcus faecalis, and Shigella dysenteriae, which is similar to studies were done by Abdullah et al. (2020) and Neboh et al. (2013). The distribution of fungal isolates and fungal counts are presented in the wet season (Table 1) and dry season (Table 2), Table 8, Table 9, and Table 10. From analysis, most fungi isolated are dermatophytes, well known common spoilage organisms in the beef industry. Fungi species isolated from the samples and frequency of occurrence were Aspergillus flavus-12.07%, Aspergillus fumigatus-25.86%, Aspergillus niger-15.52%, Fusarium oxysporum-13.79%, Penicillium spp-13. 79 %). Saccharomyces cerevisiae—18.97%. This is similar to studies by Dauda et al. (2016), Rabah et al. (2008) and Adesemoye et al. (2006), who studied the microbiological qualities of abattoir wastewater in Minna Niger State, Lagos and Sokoto in Nigeria, respectively. The parasites isolated from various samples are shown in Figures 2,3, and 4: Balantidium coli, Trichomonas hominis, Strongyle enterocolitis, hookworm, and Ascaris lumbricoides from abattoir effluents, spring water and borehole water. Ascaris lumbricoides was the major parasite isolated from water samples with abattoir effluent showing a higher percentage of Balantidium coli. Borehole water contained only Ascaris lumbricoides at 100%. This is similar to studies done by Udoh SJ et al. (2019), Hatam-Nahavandi et al. (2015); and Adeyeba et al. (2002). Abattoir waste has a complex composition that is disposed of indiscriminately and is harmful to the environment. The treatment of waste is necessary to reduce its impact on the environment and enhance the quality of life. The number of microbes, both bacteria, fungi and parasites, showed a marked difference in effluent and lagoon where it is supposed to undergo treatment in Shirere, Savona and Emusala abattoir. These values were high, indicating that no treatment of waste was occurring. The lagoons had no outlets and, during the rainy season, were overflowing into the nearby river streams. The lagoons were acting as holding grounds for wastes and other vermin. There were significant differences for Total coliform count, faecal coliform E. faecalis, E. coli and BOD of effluent and lagoon at p<0.05. The high microbial contents may have been due to wastewater’s high organic content and alkalinity. This is due to its components, such as manure, blood, fat, and undigested feeds of the abattoir effluent stream (Nafarnda et al., 2012).
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Foodborne and waterborne diseases are common illnesses in the developing world whose common source is microbiological contamination of water bodies. The meat processing industry in Kenya and Kakamega, in particular, is on an upward trend, and more animals will be slaughtered to meet the demand for meat, and this will result in issues of abattoir waste management being raised from time to time. The study shows that all the abattoirs generate a significant amount of waste, including wastewater, animal blood, urine, carcass, bones, hoofs, animal faeces, hides and skin, and intestinal contents (i.e. paunch manure). The findings showed that these wastes have a profound impact on the quality of the water sources within the vicinity of the abattoirs. Moreover, all five abattoirs have confirmed harmful bacteria, fungi, and parasites. The bacteria isolated were Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Enterococcus faecalis, and Shigella dysenteriae. Fungi identified in the samples were Fusarium oxysporum, Aspergillus flavus, Aspergillus fumigatus, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Aspergillus niger, and Penicillium spp. Parasites isolated from samples of effluent and water were Balantidium coli, Trichomonas hominis, Ancylostoma duodenale, and Ascaris lumbricoides. The bacteria, fungi, and parasites identified are associated with waterborne diseases. The abattoir wastes are discharged into streams, rivers and some leaches to underground waters resulting into serious public health hazard. The waste generated, when properly managed, will aid in the reduction of sanitation and health challenges to neighbourhoods around abattoirs and in turn produce benefits such as biogas and manures.
Given that the research findings of this work and that the release of untreated abattoir wastes may continue unabated. It is recommended that sensitization of stakeholders through environmental education on the implications of poor waste management of abattoir for both workers and residents be done. Abattoirs enveloped by urban growth should be relocated.
Conflict of Interest
The authors have declared no conflict of interest.
novelty statement
The water sources next to abattoirs were polluted with abattoir wastes due to presence of fungi,bacteria and parasites.
Author’s Contribution
All authors contributed to the writing of this manuscript.
REFERENCES
Abdullah M, Mehraj G, Safiullah KA, Safia G, Allah NK Mehmoona Safeer, Safiullah K, Uzma A, Hamid Shah, Muhammad JA, Habibullah, Matiullah, Asif A, Sana A, Kanwal A, Unsa T, Nadia H (2020). Isolation of Bacteria and Fungi from Effluent from Gusau Modern Abattoir Bullet. Environ., Pharmacol. Life Sci. Vol 9.January 2020 : 45-54. ©2020 Academy for Environment and Life Sciences, India.
Adegbola A. A. A., Abosede O. (2012). On Investigating Pollution of Groundwater from Atenda Abattoir Wastes, Ogbomosho, Nigeria Int. J. Engineer. Technol. Vol. 2 No. 9.
Adesemoye A. O., Opere B. O., Makinde S. C. O. (2006) Microbial content of abattoir wastewater and its contaminated soil in Lagos, Nigeria African J. Biotechnol. 5 (20): 1963-1968. 16 October 2006.
Adeyeba O.A., Akinbo J.A. (2002). Pathogenic Intestinal Parasites and Bacterial Agents In Solid Wastes East African Med. J. Vol. 79 (11). https://doi.org/10.4314/eamj.v79i11.8807
Alonge D.O. (2005). Meat and Milk Hygiene in the Tropics. Farmose Press, Ibadan, Nigeria. pp: 77-86.
American Public Health Association. (2017). Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. American Public Health Association.
Coker A.O., Olugasa B.O., Adeyemi A.O. (2001). Abattoir Wastewater Quality in Southwestern Nigeria People and Systems for Water Sanitation and Health 27th WEDC Conference Lusaka Zambia.
County Government of Kakamega Director of Veterinary Services. (2018). Annual Report of Department of Veterinary Services. Kakamega County.
County Government of Kakamega. Kakamega Abattoir Act (2014).
Dauda D.R., Duro. D U., J. J. Ijah (2016) Physicochemical and Microbiological Qualities of the Abattoir Wastewater in Part of Minna Niger State Advances in Life Science and Technology Vol.51.
Fearon J., Mensah S. B., Boateng V. (2014). Abattoir Operations, Waste Generation, and Management in the Tamale Metropolis: A Case Study of the Tamale Slaughterhouse.
Food and Agricultural Organization. (2010). Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (The State of Food and Agriculture 2009: Livestock in the balance, 176pp, 2010).
Government of Kenya, National Environmental Management Authority (2014). The National Solid Waste Management Strategy. Government of Kenya.
Government of Kenya. Meat Control Act, vol. 356. 2012. National Council for Law Reporting Meat Control Act. (2012). Government of Kenya.
Hassan I. A., Campbell C., Ademola T. G. (2014). Effect of Abattoir Effluent On Surrounding Underground Water Quality: A Case Study Of Governor Road Abattoir At Ikotun, Lagos State. Int. J. Adv. Pharm., Biol. Chem. 3(4): 2277 – 4688.
Kareem H.N., Amir H. M., Mehdi M., Hossein K., Iraj M., Mostafa R. (2015). Detection Of Parasitic Particles In Domestic And Urban Wastewaters And Assessment Of Removal Efficiency Of Treatment Plants In Tehran, Iran
Koech H.K., Ogendi G., Kipkemboi J. (2012). Status of Treated Slaughter-House Effluent and its Effects on the Physico-Chemical Characteristics of Surface Water in Kavuthi Stream, Dagoretti-Kenya: Res. J. Environ. Earth Sci. 4(8): 789-796.
Lesley R (2003). Health hazards and waste management. Brit. Med. Bullet., 68(1)183–197. https://doi.org/10.1093/bmb/ldg034
Monica C. (2009). District Laboratory Practice in Tropical Countries Part 1, Second, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA.
Neboh H.A.1, Ilusanya O.A., Ezekoye C.C, Orji F.A (2013). Assessment of Ijebu-Igbo Abattoir Effluent and Its Impact on the Ecology of The Receiving Soil and River IOSR J. Environ. Sci., Toxicol. Food Technol. ISSN: 2319-2399. Volume 7(5) PP 61-67. https://doi.org/10.9790/2402-0756167
Nwanta J.A., Onunkwo J.I., Ezenduka V.E., Phil-Eze P.O., Egege S.C. (2008). Abattoir Operations and Waste Management in Nigeria. A Review of the Challenges and Prospects J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 1(2): 56 - 54.
Rabah A.B., Ijah U.J.J., Manga S.B., Ibrahim M.L. (2008): Assessment of Physico-chemical and Microbiological qualities of Abattoir Wastewater in Sokoto, Nigeria. Nigerian J. Basic Appl. Sci. vol. 16 ( 2)
Rachel. M. Ayres, Duncan, Mara. (1996). Analysis of Wastewater for Use In Agriculture. Laboratory Manual of Parasitological and Bacteriological Techniques, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland, 1996.
Regina E. Adonu, Lucia D., Sherifatu I. S. (2017). Sanitary and Hygiene Conditions of Slaughterhouses and Its Effect on the Health of Residents. Food Sci. Quality Manag. Vol.65, 2017.
Udoh S.J, Olaniran O, Adedire B.A, Hassan-Olajokun R.E, Olaniran O.O, Oyetokeo O, (2019). Investigation on the Pattern of Intestinal Parasites Present in Refuse Dumps and Abattoir Wastes in Ile-Ife. Nigeria. Biol. Med. (Aligarh). 11:460.
W. D. Nafarnda, I. E. Ajayi, J. C. Shawulu, M. S. Kawe, G. K. Omeiza, N. A. Sani, O. Z. Tenuche, D. D. Dantong, S. Z. Tags (2012). Bacteriological Quality of Abattoir Effluents Discharged into Water Bodies in Abuja, Nigeria”, International Scholarly Research Notices, vol. 2012. https://doi.org/10.5402/2012/515689
WHO (2006). Guidelines for the Safe Use of Wastewater, Excreta and Greater, vol. 3. World Health Organization Press, Geneva, Switzerland.
WHO (2009). Guidelines for Drinking water quality 3rdEdition. World Health Organization Press, Geneva, Switzerland.
World Bank. (2009). Global study of livestock markets, slaughterhouses, and related waste management systems.
To share on other social networks, click on any share button. What are these?