Public Health Implications Related to Spread of Pathogens in Manure From Livestock and Poultry Operations
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the 20th century, food animal agriculture grew from small operations, where livestock (cattle, sheep, and swine) and poultry (chickens and turkeys) had access to free range, to large operations where animals and poultry were concentrated and confined to feed lots or buildings. The quantity of manure produced by confinement animals in the United States has been estimated to be in excess of 61 million tons of dry matter per year, and another report states that 1.2 billion tons of manure are produced by cattle annually in the United States (US Senate Agricultural Committee, 1998). As urban developments have come closer to livestock operations, there has been increasing public concern for the impact of the latter on public health and the environment. Although management practices for livestock production have increased in efficiency, insufficient attention has been given to managing and utilizing wastes so that they benefit rather than pollute the environment. Animal manure includes urine and various bodily secretions such as those from the nose, vagina, and mammary glands. Dust from animals and manure may be blown from buildings by powerful fans, and manure is often piled near the animal quarters or is spread on land in solid or liquid form. Public concerns associated with disposal of animal manure include objectionable odors, flies, excessive levels of phosphorous and nitrogen, and the potential for spread of human pathogens. It has been observed that despite linkages between outbreaks of gastroenteritis in humans and livestock operations, the importance of animal manure in the spread of infectious agents tends to be underestimated.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it