Prolonged Survival of<i>Campylobacter</i>Species in Bovine Manure Compost
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The persistence of naturally occurring campylobacteria in aerobic compost constructed of manure from beef cattle that were administered chlortetracycline and sulfamethazine (AS700) or from cattle not administered antibiotics (control) was examined. Although there were no differences in population sizes of heterotrophic bacteria, the temperature of AS700 compost was more variable and did not become as high as that of control compost. There were significant differences in water content, total carbon (C), total nitrogen (N), and electrical conductivity but not in the C/N ratio or pH between the two compost treatments. Campylobacteria were readily isolated from pen manure, for up to day 15 from control compost, and throughout the active phase of AS700 compost. Campylobacter DNA (including Campylobacter coli, Campylobacter fetus, Campylobacter hyointestinalis, and Campylobacter jejuni) was detected over the ca. 10-month composting period, and no reductions in quantities of C. jejuni DNA were observed over the duration of the active phase. The utilization of centrifugation in combination with ethidium monoazide (EMA) significantly reduced (>90%) the amplification of C. jejuni DNA that did not originate from cells with intact cell membranes. No differences were observed in the frequency of Campylobacter DNA detection between EMA- and non-EMA-treated samples, suggesting that Campylobacter DNA amplified from compost was extracted from cells with intact cell membranes (i.e., from viable cells). The findings of this study indicate that campylobacteria excreted in cattle feces persist for long periods in compost and call into question the common belief that these bacteria do not persist in manure.
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 | 0.001 | 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".