Study on the effects of different thermophilic microorganisms on high-temperature composting of pig manure

doi:10.16178/j.issn.0528-9017.20250305

Abstract

Abstract:

High-temperature composting of biomass waste materials such as livestock and poultry manure to prepare organic fertilizer is the main utilization method of livestock and poultry manure. Thermophilic microorganisms can significantly enhance composting efficiency. However, current research remains limited regarding the effects of different thermophilic microbial strains and their combinations on livestock manure composting. This study systematically investigated the impacts of single or compound inoculations of thermophilic bacteria on pig manure composting. Three thermophilic strains (Ureibacillus thermosphaericus Z2-1, Ureibacillus sp. Z4-4, and Geobacillus proteiniphilus H3-1) were employed to establish seven treatment groups and one control group (CK) for high-temperature composting experiments. The results demonstrated that all microbial inoculations elevated composting temperature, reduced nitrogen loss, and improved seed germination rate of final products. Notably, treatment G inoculated with the three-strain consortium achieved the highest temperature (77.2 ℃) and longest duration above 70.0 ℃ (5 days), enhancing harmless efficiency. Besides, microbial activities promoted organic matter degradation, the organic matter content of treatment G decreased the most, and the total nitrogen content decreased the least, indicating a better nitrogen retention effect. The germination index (GI) values of all treatments exceeded 80.0% at the end of composting, with treatment G reaching 100.1%, higher than CK (85.6%). Additionally, the compound inoculated with the bacterial agent compounded from three thermophilic bacteria increased the relative abundance of Bacillota in the compost community, accelerating organic matter decomposition. These findings indicate that compound thermophilic inoculants effectively promote organic matter transformation, enhance compost quality, and improve maturation efficiency in pig manure composting systems.

Key words: pig manure, high-temperature composting, thermophilic microorganisms, microbial community

CLC Number:

S141.4

WANG Yafei, WANG Jingbang, GUO Rui, ZHU Fengxiang, ZHANG Tao, HONG Chunlai, YAO Yanlai. Study on the effects of different thermophilic microorganisms on high-temperature composting of pig manure[J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2025, 66(8): 2015-2024.

Figures/Tables 11

References 38

[1]	佘磊, 姜珊, 姜彩红, 等. 我国畜禽养殖环境管理进程及展望[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2021, 40(11): 2277-2282, 22.2.
[2]	王维东. 农业废弃物可持续发展现状及对策分析[J]. 现代农村科技, 2021(4): 103-104.
[3]	陈薇, 高帅帅, 汪彬, 等. 微生物菌剂对猪粪-稻糠混合堆肥的影响[J]. 湖南农业科学, 2024(8): 41-45, 50.
[4]	曹云, 黄红英, 吴华山, 等. 超高温堆肥提高土壤养分有效性和水稻产量的机理[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2020, 26(3): 481-491.
[5]	钱玉婷, 杜静, 曹云, 等. 接种嗜热菌促进鸡粪超高温堆肥处理的效果[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2018, 46(23): 321-325.
[6]	WANG X, SELVAM A, WONG J W C. Influence of lime on struvite formation and nitrogen conservation during food waste composting[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2016, 217: 227-232.
[7]	常攀峰, 刘瑞生, 徐建峰, 等. 猪粪好氧堆肥发酵条件的研究[J]. 家畜生态学报, 2022, 43(7): 65-69.
[8]	竹江良, 刘晓琳, 李少明, 等. 两种微生物菌剂对烟草废弃物高温堆肥腐熟进程的影响[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2010, 29(1): 194-199.
[9]	TIQUIA S M. Evaluation of organic matter and nutrient composition of partially decomposed and composted spent pig litter[J]. Environmental Technology, 2003, 24(1): 97-107.
[10]	刘建斌, 熊建军, 张淑彬, 等. 污泥高温堆肥过程中细菌群落动态特征[J]. 中国农学通报, 2015, 31(35): 164-171.
[11]	HUANG C, ZENG G M, HUANG D L, et al. Effect of Phanerochaete chrysosporium inoculation on bacterial community and metal stabilization in lead-contaminated agricultural waste composting[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2017, 243: 294-303.
[12]	KONG Z J, WANG X Q, WANG M M, et al. Bacterial ecosystem functioning in organic matter biodegradation of different composting at the thermophilic phase[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2020, 317: 123990.
[13]	YANG X C, HU Q Q, HAN Z Z, et al. Effects of exogenous microbial inoculum on the structure and dynamics of bacterial communities in swine carcass composting[J]. Canadian Journal of Microbiology, 2018, 64(12): 1042-1053.
[14]	谢小林, 陈猛, 李成江, 等. 1株半乳糖地质杆菌分离筛选及其对畜禽养殖固体有机废弃物的处理效果研究[J]. 山东农业科学, 2025, 57(1): 96-102.
[15]	李敬波, 王熙涛, 王丽丽, 等. 接种复合嗜热菌剂对牛粪堆肥的影响[J]. 饲料与畜牧, 2014(6): 47-51.
[16]	杨剑虹, 王成林, 代亨林. 土壤农化分析与环境监测[M]. 北京: 中国大地出版社, 2008: 21-23.
[17]	李向, 杨进, 黄爱军, 等. 高通量测序在柑橘病毒鉴定与种群多样性分析中的应用[J]. 果树学报, 2025, 42(3): 651-661.
[18]	陶兴玲, 詹亚斌, 王宁, 等. 耐热菌剂对堆肥有机质降解及细菌演替的影响[J]. 科学技术与工程, 2023, 23(14): 6264-6270.
[19]	陈磊, 戴亦军. 基于Illumina MiSeq高通量测序技术分析丹阳黄酒酒曲中微生物菌群多样性[J]. 中国酿造, 2024, 43(6): 141-145.
[20]	SÁNCHEZ Ó J, OSPINA D A, MONTOYA S. Compost supplementation with nutrients and microorganisms in composting process[J]. Waste Management, 2017, 69: 136-153.
[21]	罗一鸣, 魏宗强, 孙钦平, 等. 沸石作为添加剂对鸡粪高温堆肥氨挥发的影响[J]. 农业工程学报, 2011, 27(2): 243-247.
[22]	SÁNCHEZ-MONEDERO M A, ROIG A, PAREDES C, et al. Nitrogen transformation during organic waste composting by the Rutgers system and its effects on pH, EC and maturity of the composting mixtures[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2001, 78(3): 301-308.
[23]	李艳霞, 薛澄泽, 陈同斌. 污泥和垃圾堆肥用作林木育苗基质的研究[J]. 农村生态环境, 2000, 16(1): 60-63.
[24]	曾凡, 孙淇, 张竣, 等. 通沟污泥与园林垃圾好氧堆肥作为绿肥基质的探索[J/OL]. 净水技术, 1-8[2025-05-21]. .
[25]	GARCÍA-GÓMEZ A, BERNAL M P, ROIG A. Organic matter fractions involved in degradation and humification processes during composting[J]. Compost Science & Utilization, 2005, 13(2): 127-135.
[26]	SUN Y, MEN M Q, XU B S, et al. Assessing key microbial communities determining nitrogen transformation in composting of cow manure using illumina high-throughput sequencing[J]. Waste Management, 2019, 92: 59-67.
[27]	MUSCOLO A, PAPALIA T, SETTINERI G, et al. Are raw materials or composting conditions and time that most influence the maturity and/or quality of composts? Comparison of obtained composts on soil properties[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2018, 195: 93-101.
[28]	EDGAR R C. UPARSE: highly accurate OTU sequences from microbial amplicon reads[J]. Nature Methods, 2013, 10(10): 996-998.
[29]	LIU N, ZHOU J L, HAN L J, et al. Role and multi-scale characterization of bamboo biochar during poultry manure aerobic composting[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2017, 241: 190-199.
[30]	JIANG J S, WANG Y, YU D, et al. Garbage enzymes effectively regulated the succession of enzymatic activities and the bacterial community during sewage sludge composting[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2021, 327: 124792.
[31]	WEI H W, WANG L H, HASSAN M, et al. Succession of the functional microbial communities and the metabolic functions in maize straw composting process[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2018, 256: 333-341.
[32]	李开发. 添加微生物菌剂对牛粪堆肥理化指标及微生物群落的影响[D]. 合肥: 安徽农业大学, 2022.
[33]	PALMER M W, MCGLINN D J, WESTERBERG L, et al. Indices for detecting differences in species composition: some simplifications of rda and cca[J]. Ecology, 2008, 89(6): 1769-1771.
[34]	王立群, 张晓东, 吴邵萍, 等. 禽粪好氧堆肥发酵高温阶段微生物的分离及其作用[J]. 东北农业大学学报, 2008, 39(2): 204-206.
[35]	SÁNCHEZ O J, CARDONA C A. Trends in biotechnological production of fuel ethanol from different feedstocks[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2008, 99(13): 5270-5295.
[36]	李昌宁, 苏明, 姚拓, 等. 微生物菌剂对猪粪堆肥过程中堆肥理化性质和优势细菌群落的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2020, 26(9): 1600-1611.
[37]	魏宗强. 鸡粪堆肥过程中养分损失及其控制对策研究[D]. 泰安: 山东农业大学, 2010.
[38]	MAO H, LV Z Y, SUN H D, et al. Improvement of biochar and bacterial powder addition on gaseous emission and bacterial community in pig manure compost[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2018, 258: 195-202.

原料	含水率/ %	pH值	碳含量/ %	全氮含量/ %	碳氮比 (C/N)
猪粪	73.44	8.31	33.35	2.91	11.46
木屑	30.23	6.80	42.73	0.57	74.96

原料	含水率/ %	pH值	碳含量/ %	全氮含量/ %	碳氮比 (C/N)
猪粪	73.44	8.31	33.35	2.91	11.46
木屑	30.23	6.80	42.73	0.57	74.96

处理	接种的菌剂
处理A	单一菌Z2-1
处理B	单一菌Z4-4
处理C	单一菌H3-1
处理D	菌H3-1和菌Z2-1等体积混合
处理E	菌H3-1和菌Z4-4等体积混合
处理F	菌Z2-1和菌Z4-4等体积混合
处理G	菌Z2-1、菌Z4-4、菌H3-1等体积混合
对照(CK)	无菌水

处理	接种的菌剂
处理A	单一菌Z2-1
处理B	单一菌Z4-4
处理C	单一菌H3-1
处理D	菌H3-1和菌Z2-1等体积混合
处理E	菌H3-1和菌Z4-4等体积混合
处理F	菌Z2-1和菌Z4-4等体积混合
处理G	菌Z2-1、菌Z4-4、菌H3-1等体积混合
对照(CK)	无菌水

处理	OTU数(0 d)	OTU数(3 d)	OTU数(8 d)	OTU数(15 d)	OTU数(30 d)
处理A	1 411	1 239	1 253	1 455	1 097
处理B		1 705	1 256	1 459	1 091
处理C		1 145	1 282	1 461	1 094
处理D		1 158	1 253	1 451	1 202
处理E		1 156	1 250	1 456	1 092
处理F		1 158	1 251	1 453	1 103
处理G		1 170	1 250	1 455	1 086
对照(CK)		1 147	1 268	1 504	1 173