Transfer of a rifampicin-resistant Escherichia coli strain among feedlot cattle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To determine the incidence of transfer of a naturally occurring rifampicin-resistant strain of Escherichia coli (RREC) among cattle in a research feedlot. METHODS AND RESULTS: During three separate experiments, steers in three different pens were orally inoculated with RREC originally isolated from bovine faeces. Faecal swabs were performed on all steers in the feedlot at approximately 5 week intervals thereafter. Faecal grab samples were collected from steers in the inoculated and the immediately adjacent pens for up to 4 months. In all three experiments, the inoculated steers and penmates shed RREC within 48 h, and then shed intermittently throughout the sampling periods. Transfer of RREC to steers in an adjacent pen was confirmed only during the first experiment, but never to those in non-adjacent pens. All recovered RREC isolates were compared with the inoculated strain using multiple methods indicating that all RREC isolates were descendants of the original inoculated strain. CONCLUSIONS: Detection of the RREC strain on the pen floor and within the animal handling system, but not in the feed troughs or water bowls, suggests faecal-oral to be the primary mode of transmission among animals. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: The results suggest that in the absence of selective pressure, antibiotic-resistant bacteria may persist in cattle for a short duration but widespread transfer among cattle in a feedlot environment may be an exception rather than the norm. Modifications to feedlot management are discussed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".