A European longitudinal study in <i>Salmonella</i> seronegative- and seropositive-classified finishing pig herds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Surveillance and control are important aspects of food safety assurance strategies at the pre-harvest level of pork production. Prior to implementation of a Salmonella surveillance and control programme, it is important to have knowledge on the dynamics and epidemiology of Salmonella infections in pig herds. For this purpose, 17 finishing pig herds initially classified as seropositive and 15 as seronegative, were followed for a 2-year period through serological and bacteriological sampling. The study included 10 herds from Denmark, 13 from The Netherlands, 4 from Germany and 5 from Sweden and was performed between October 1996 and May 1999. The Salmonella status of finishing pig herds was determined by an initial blood sampling of approximately 50 finishing pigs close to market weight per herd. The development of the Salmonella status of the selected herds was assessed at seven subsequent sampling rounds of 25 blood samples from finishing pigs, 25 blood samples from grower pigs and 10 pen faecal samples each, approximately 3 months apart. The odds for testing finishers seropositive, given that growers were found seropositive previously were 10 times higher than if growers were seronegative (OR 10.0, 95% CI 3.2-32.8). When Salmonella was isolated from pen faecal samples, the herd was more likely to be classified seropositive in the same sampling round, compared to no Salmonella being detected (OR 4.0, 95% CI 1.1-14.6). The stability of an initially allocated Salmonella status was found to vary noticeably with time, apparently irrespective of a seropositive or seronegative classification at onset of the study. Given the measured dynamics in the occurrence of Salmonella in pig herds, regular testing is necessary to enable producers, advisors and authorities to react to sudden increases in the Salmonella prevalence in single herds or at a national level.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".