Main menu options
(also at bottom of page) General information View the proceedings Meetings AFO Links Bibliography Studies - Field and lab

Studies - Field and Lab

Effects of Animal Feeding Operations (AFOs) on
Hydrologic Resources and the Environment

New submissions, updates, and corrections to this page are welcome,
as are suggestions for improving the value of this page to users. Contact
TopicDescription of Study
(Status of study: Current [C], Completed [D], and Proposed [P])

 - antibiotics 
 - endocrine 
 - hormones



 - viruses

 - protozoa

 - bacteria












Reconnaissance sampling of 100 streams across the USA to provide
baseline data on the occurrence of antibiotics in streams. 
Occurrences of antibiotics to be compared with predominant animal 
type for respective watersheds. [C]

Reconnaissance sampling to determine occurrence of antibiotics in 
30 streams in Iowa and the potential relation of such occurrence 
to density of swine operations. [C]

Cooperative project with CDC Reconnaissance and Experimental Field 
study of the occurrence of antibiotics, pathogens, and bacterial 
resistance patterns in soil, surface and ground water at CAFO's [C]. 
Also occurrence of antibiotics in and near wastewater treatment 
plants in Georgia [C].

Cooperative Project with EPA occurrence of antibiotics in confined
swine feeding operations and in soil, surface and ground water in 
the  Neuse River basin, NC and in surface water and sediment that 
drains poultry land-use areas in the Delmarva Peninsula [C].

Cooperative project with EPA occurrence of antibiotics in surface 
water draining areas with confined animal feeding operations in 
Oklahoma [P].

Assessment of exposure of biota to hormonal simulators (endocrine
disruptors) in the field.  Conduct laboratory bioassays to 
determine relative promotion or antagonism of constituents. Relate 
results to potential species at risk (i.e., low fecundity rates 
and/or isolated distributions)  [P]

Monitoring concentrations and transport of nutrients and bacteria 
in ground water and soil from swine operations, Savoy experimental 
field, Fayetteville Arkansas.  [C]

Monitoring of water quality of springs in karst areas in northern
Arkansas populated with poultry AFOs to determine the nonpoint 
source of nutrient and bacterial contamination. [C]

Stateline water-quality monitoring of streams in Arkansas with 
potential nonpoint contamination from cattle and poultry 
operations. [C]

Investigation of the chemical and microbial constituents of Iowa 
ground and surface waters proximal to swine operations. [C]

Monitoring of ground water in deep wells in the High Plains of OK 
and KS, for contamination related to swine waste and cow manure 
irrigation practices.[C]

Monthly stream sampling in Arkansas to determine potential 
contamination from nearby poultry operations. [C]

Assessment and monitoring of effects of waste-disposal practices 
from a high-density hog production on the quality of streams and 
ground water in Illinois. [P]

Evaluation of the efficacy of riparian buffers to reduce loading 
of nitrate from swine waste in No. Carolina ground water. [C]

Effects of waste-disposal practices at poultry farms on ground-
water quality in Florida. [D]

Efficacy of AFO practices and BMPs to reduce contaminant loading
(nutrients, bacteria, suspended solids) to streams in Wisconsin 

DNA testing to determine source (poultry or cattle) of fecal 
coliform contamination in a 303(d)-listed stream in Missouri; 
nutrients also being sampled. [C]

RNA ribotyping technique being developed/applied to track the 
source of microorganisms found in Virginia streams or ground 
water near AFOs. [C]

Use of age-dating techniques and nitrogen isotope ratios on 
ground-water samples in Colorado to determine if origin of 
elevated nitrate and ammonia concentrations is from swine 
operation. Completed study: indicated that nitrogen concen-
trations were not related to the current swine operation.[D]

Use of dye tracers to determine source of nutrient and bacterial
contamination of shallow wells and springs in a watershed with 
dairy and swine feedlots, Buffalo River watershed, AK. [C]

Characterize the distribution and sources of fecal coliform and 
E.coli in No. Carolina streams and sediments near AFOs (dairies) 
and use coliphage serotyping techniques to distinguish animal 
from human fecal bacteria. [C]

Development/use of statistical procedures such as discriminant 
analysis in addition to analyses of isotope and organic tracers 
to identify the source of nitrate contamination in No. Carolina 
ground water. Sources being evaluated include poultry waste, 
swine waste, human waste, and commercial fertilizer. [C]

Evaluation of the BARNY and WINHUSLE computer models to compare
phosphorus loads from AFOs and croplands in the Otter Creek 
Watershed,  Wisconsin. [D]

Mobility and fate of arsenic from feed amendments for poultry 
in the Pocomoke River watershed, MD. [P]

Monitoring of nutrients and trace elements in runoff from dairy
operations in California. [C]

Detection of contaminant plumes in ground water underlying 
waste-storage lagoons at university-research swine feedlots 
in Kentucky. [P]

Risk assessment of primary metals, pesticides, and other organic
constituents using invertebrate and fish data. Determination of 
risk by comparing predicted and measured exposures to published
effect Concentrations. [P]

Toxicity identification of ammonia in environmental samples 
(laboratory studies). [C]

Toxicity of ammonia to endangered fishes of the Colorado River.

Examination of assimilative capacity of experimental wetland 
systems for nitrate--examination of direct/indirect effects [C]

Primary productivity and water-quality assessments to support 
efforts by Missouri Dept. of Conservation to study Topeka Shiner 
populations in relation to water quality and sources of animal 
waste in the Moniteau Creek Watershed. [C]

Nitrate contamination of ground water underlying cattle feedlots 
in California. [C]

Denitrification in ground water receiving nitrate from poultry 
and dairy operations in Washington. [C]

Storage and transport of nitrogen and phosphorus in a pristine
Chesapeake Bay watershed compared with that of the Pokomoke 
watershed impacted by large-scale poultry operations. [P]

Assessment of fish and invertebrate communities at selected 
reference and impacted sites to determine resource conditions. 

Sediment toxicity testing: TIE with Ceriodaphnia and FHM to 
partition effects of ammonia, dissolved oxygen, metals, and 
pesticides. [P]

Laboratory assessment of interactions between ammonia, pH, 
temperature,and dissolved oxygen for representative biota 
(e.g. one fish and one invertebrate). [P]

Laboratory algal bioassays paired with nutrient monitoring data 
to determine nutrient limitation and eutrophication potential 
of receiving waters. [P]

Monitoring of blue-green algae and associated cyanotoxins, 
which may result in adjacent wetlands, streams, or reservoirs. 

Comparison of nutrient loading to streams from AFOs and 
croplands  [D]

Monitoring concentrations of nitrate in springs and ground 
water near dairy farms in Florida. [D]

Reconnaissance of water quality at swine farms and dairy in 
Florida. [D]

Nutrient transport from animal waste (poultry) and other 
agricultural practices of ground water and the Chesapeake Bay.

Affects of poultry AFOs in Delmarva on ground-water and 
surface-water quality.


General information | Proceedings | AFO Links
| Bibliography | Studies: Field and Lab
USGS Water Quality Information Pages | USGS Toxic Substances Hydrology Program |
USGS Water Resources | USGS Home
The URL for this page is
Contact us with your comments and questions.
USGS Privacy Statement and Disclaimer
Last Modified: Wednesday, 02-Jan-2013 18:21:32 EST