PSVIII-14 Fifteen months of using litter from recycled manure as bedding for dairy cows: a focus on Klebsiella pneumoniae, Klebsiella variicola and Clostridium perfringens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In recent years, for economical purposes and to improve well-being conditions of cows, several dairy producers have adopted litter made from recycled manure solids (RMS). However, its use raises several safety issues, particularly with respect to mastitis and other infections. We previously observed cases of mastitis caused by K. pneumoniae and K. variicola, and two deadly infections from C. perfringens from cows on RMS. A herd of Holstein cows, distributed in two barns of about 40 lactating cows, was used. RMS was used in one barn, and wood-chip litter (WCL), in the other. RMS was generated by roller presses separation followed by conditioning at 55°C for 24h. Clean and soiled (used) RMS and WCL samples were collected for 15 months. Similarly, material samples before conditioning were also collected, and all samples were analyzed by viability-qPCR. Milk samples from cows with mastitis and somatic cell count data (SCC) were analyzed. Total and living contents of K. pneumoniae, K. variicola, C. perfringens and Klebsiella spp. were higher in the RMS than the WCL (+1.6–4.2 log10, P < 0.05). Composting 24h at 55°C did not affect total and live levels of C. perfringens, K. pneumoniae, and even increased total and live levels of K. variicola (+0.9 log10, P < 0.05). A seasonal effect or the number of cycles recycling the RMS decreased levels of K. pneumoniae in winter. Overall, RMS had no significant effect on SCC, but increased mastitis incidence (+39%, P < 0.05), compared to WCL. Milk analysis revealed that higher levels of K. pneumoniae found in RMS could contribute to the increase in mastitis cases caused by this pathogen. Data reported from this study are not favorable to the use of an RMS conditioned for 24h at 55°C with dairy cows, apropos the microbiological aspect; however, these results must be confirmed by other studies.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".