The Contribution of Dairy Bedding and Silage to the Dissemination of Genes Coding for Antimicrobial Resistance: A Narrative Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a concern in the dairy industry. Recent studies have indicated that bedding serves as a reservoir for antimicrobial-resistant bacteria and antimicrobial-resistance genes (ARGs), while silage has been proposed as another possible source. The impact of AMR in dairy farming can be significant, resulting in decreased productivity and economic losses for farmers. Several studies have highlighted the safety implications of AMR bacteria and genes in bedding and silage, emphasizing the need for further research on how housing, bedding, and silage management affect AMR in farm environments. Exposure to sub-lethal concentrations of antibiotics, such as those from contaminated bedding and silage, can prompt bacteria to develop resistance mechanisms. Thus, even if antimicrobial usage is diminished, ARGs may be maintained in the dairy farm environment. By implementing proactive measures to tackle AMR in dairy farming, we can take steps to preserve the health and productivity of dairy cattle while also protecting public health. This involves addressing the prudent use of antibiotics during production and promoting animal welfare, hygiene, and management practices in bedding and farm environments to minimize the risk of AMR development and spread. This narrative review compiles the growing research, positioning the contribution of bedding and silage to the prevalence and dissemination of AMR, which can elicit insights for researchers and policymakers.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".