Chemical and bioassay-based characterization of the growth promoter ractopamine in beef cattle manure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study follows a previously published feeding trial investigating the fate of ractopamine and other veterinary-use pharmaceuticals in feedlot environments. Manure from these feeding trials was composted in windrows, stockpiled, and applied to soil to assess the fate and dissipation of ractopamine over 28 days. Concentrations of ractopamine increased over the first 2-4 days of composting and stockpiling, with concentrations as great as 2,500 ng/g dry weight, before dissipating with a half-life of 5.7 days to concentrations <100 ng/g dry weight after 28 days (>95% treatment). Due to incorporation and dilution, manure-amended soils contained lesser initial concentrations of ractopamine (75 ng/g dry wt) and dissipated by ≈80% to <10 ng/g dry weight after 28 days. Stockpiled manure extracts collected at Days 0, 4, and 28 were tested for their (anti)estrogenicity and (anti)androgenicity using in vitro bioassays. Only estrogenicity was observed, with median effect concentration (EC50) values ranging from 0.006 to 0.03 mg sample equivalents (SEQ) per ml. Relative to the positive control, 17β-estradiol, estrogen equivalents (EEQ) at the EC50 level (EEQ50, ng/g) of stockpiled manure ranged from 470 ± 50 ng/g at Day 0 to 80 ± 25 ng/g at Day 28. The presence of ractopamine in the manure had no impact on estrogenic potency. Endogenous hormones excreted by cattle are suspected to be the primary cause of observed estrogenic responses. However, trenbolone implants administered in ractopamine-treated cattle 85 days prior to the described experiments contained estradiol and thus likely also contributed to observed responses based on comparisons to non-implanted controls. Stockpiling manure reduced the estrogenic potency more than fivefold, as indicated by increasing EC50 values over the 28-day study period. The results presented here suggest that ractopamine is effectively dissipated during manure stockpiling and composting and is unlikely to pose any estrogenic or androgenic effects on agricultural environments when manures containing ractopamine are used as a fertilizer.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".