Disinfection effectiveness of slightly acidic electrolysed water in swine barns
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To evaluate the disinfection effectiveness of slightly acidic electrolysed water (SAEW, pH 6·25-6·53), a new environmental friendly agent for inactivating micro-organisms adhered to the facility and aerosolized in the air of the swine barns and to explore the application of SAEW in livestock industries. METHODS AND RESULTS: Bacteria and fungi were isolated from the swine house air and treated by SAEW. The SAEW solution was flushed onto surfaces and sprayed within the whole swine barn. SAEW with an available chlorine concentration (ACC) of 300 mg l(-1) can inhibit isolated microbes completely. The usage of SAEW (300 mg l(-1) ) resulted in a significant (P < 0·05) reduction in microbes on the wall, rail and floor after flushing disinfection. Additionally, spraying SAEW at an ACC of 300 mg l(-1) reduced 59% of the airborne organisms in 30 min and kept the population of microbes at a reduced level for at least 8 h. SAEW treatment also reduced pathogens on surfaces (P < 0·03) after spraying disinfection except on the surface of the wall. CONCLUSIONS: SAEW may be a potential alternative disinfectant to reduce infections in swine barns. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: The results of this study provide information on the antimicrobial efficiency of SAEW on the airborne bacteria and fungi in swine barns.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".