MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W155758602 · doi:10.2134/jeq2002.2120

Evaluation of Commercial Odor Control Agents for Suppressing <i>Escherichia coli</i> in Swine Manure Slurry

2002· article· en· W155758602 on OpenAlexaff
D. L. Johnston, R. A. Chapman, Daniel I. Massé, Edward Topp

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Quality · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicOdor and Emission Control Technologies
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOdorManureMicrocosmSlurryEscherichia coliManure managementFood sciencePulp and paper industryBiotechnologyBiologyChemistryMicrobiologyEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental chemistryEnvironmental engineeringAgronomyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ten commercially available manure odor control agents were evaluated in bench-scale laboratory microcosms for their ability to inhibit or kill Escherichia coli, a commonly used indicator of fecal pollution and a potential pathogen. At manufacturer recommended rates, none of the agents reduced viable populations of E. coli in pure cultures or in swine manure slurry. However, at rates 10-fold higher than those recommended by the manufacturer, EnviroPur rapidly reduced viable populations of E. coli. Accelerated death of E. coli was observed at temperatures as low as 4 degrees C. Chemical analysis of EnviroPur indicated that it contains alkylphenol polyethoxylates, common industrial surfactants. These results suggest that at manufacturer-recommended rates, the odor-controlling agents would not be effective at suppressing E. coli in stored swine manure slurry.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.078
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental QualitySame topicOdor and Emission Control TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207