Occurrence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria and endotoxin associated with the land application of biosolids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria and endotoxin in soil after land application of biosolids. Soil was collected over a 15 month period following land application of biosolids, and antibiotic resistance was ascertained using clinically relevant antibiotic concentrations. Ampicillin, cephalothin, ciprofloxacin, and tetracycline resistance were all monitored separately for any changes throughout the 15 month period. Endotoxin soil concentrations were monitored using commercially available endotoxin analysis reagents. Overall, land application of biosolids did not increase the percentage of antibiotic-resistant culturable bacteria above background soil levels. Likewise, land application of biosolids did not significantly increase the concentration of endotoxin in soil. This study determined and established a baseline understanding of the overall effect that land application of biosolids had on the land-applied field with respect to antibiotic-resistant bacterial and endotoxin soil densities.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".