MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Antibiotic Resistance in Gut Bacteria from Dairy Calves: A Dose Response to the Level of Antibiotics Fed in Milk

2003· article· en· W2029702111 on OpenAlexafffund
Fritha M. Langford, Daniel M. Weary, L. J. FISHER

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental Impacts
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsPenicillinAntibioticsBacteriaFecesAntibiotic resistanceMicrobiologyBiologyAnimal scienceFood scienceVeterinary medicineMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dairy calves are commonly fed milk from cows treated with antibiotics. The concentration of beta-lactam antibiotic residues found in milk from treated cows was used to determine the range of concentrations of penicillin used in a dose-regulated experiment. Thirty-one Holstein calves were randomly assigned to milk with penicillin G added at concentrations of 0, 6.25, 12.5, 25, and 50 microl/kg. Fecal swabs were taken from each calf twice weekly. Resistance to penicillin was tested by measuring the zone of inhibition in bacterial growth around a disk impregnated with the antibiotic. Inhibition was greatest for bacteria from calves fed milk with no penicillin (2.89 +/- 0.14 mm), and declined as the penicillin dose provided in the milk increased (to a low of 0.70 +/- 0.10 for the 50 microl/kg treatment group). In conclusion, resistance of gut bacteria to antibiotics increases with increasing concentrations of penicillin in the milk fed to dairy calves.

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)0.000
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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations123
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicPharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental ImpactsFrench-language works237,207