Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16672466›Full record

ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology2006

Inactivation of enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli in rumen content- or feces-contaminated drinking water for cattle.

Tong Zhao, Ping Zhao, Joe W West, John K Bernard, Heath G Cross, Michael P Doyle

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied and environmental microbiology, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. ProbioticAntioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tong ZhaoCenter for Food Safety, University of Georgia, Griffin, GA 30223, USA.
Ping Zhao
Joe W West
John K Bernard
Heath G Cross
Michael P Doyle
University of Georgia · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cattle drinking water is a source of on-farm Escherichia coli O157:H7 transmission. The antimicrobial activities of disinfectants to control E. coli O157:H7 in on-farm drinking water are frequently neutralized by the presence of rumen content and manure that generally contaminate the drinking water. Different chemical treatments, including lactic acid, acidic calcium sulfate, chlorine, chlorine dioxide, hydrogen peroxide, caprylic acid, ozone, butyric acid, sodium benzoate, and competing E. coli, were tested individually or in combination for inactivation of E. coli O157:H7 in the presence of rumen content. Chlorine (5 ppm), ozone (22 to 24 ppm at 5 degrees C), and competing E. coli treatment of water had minimal effects (<1 log CFU/ml reduction) on killing E. coli O157:H7 in the presence of rumen content at water-to-rumen content ratios of 50:1 (vol/wt) and lower. Four chemical-treatment combinations, including (i) 0.1% lactic acid, 0.9% acidic calcium sulfate, and 0.05% caprylic acid (treatment A); (ii) 0.1% lactic acid, 0.9% acidic calcium sulfate, and 0.1% sodium benzoate (treatment B); (iii) 0.1% lactic acid, 0.9% acidic calcium sulfate, and 0.5% butyric acid (treatment C); and (iv) 0.1% lactic acid, 0.9% acidic calcium sulfate, and 100 ppm chlorine dioxide (treatment D); were highly effective (>3 log CFU/ml reduction) at 21 degrees C in killing E. coli O157:H7, O26:H11, and O111:NM in water heavily contaminated with rumen content (10:1 water/rumen content ratio [vol/wt]) or feces (20:1 water/feces ratio [vol/wt]). Among them, treatments A, B, and C killed >5 log CFU E. coli O157:H7, O26:H11, and O111:NM/ml within 30 min in water containing rumen content or feces, whereas treatment D inactivated approximately 3 to 4 log CFU/ml under the same conditions. Cattle given water containing treatment A or C or untreated water (control) ad libitum for two 7-day periods drank 15.2, 13.8, and 30.3 liters/day, respectively, and cattle given water containing 0.1% lactic acid plus 0.9% acidic calcium sulfate (pH 2.1) drank 18.6 liters/day. The amounts of water consumed for all water treatments were significantly different from that for the control, but there were no significant differences among the water treatments. Such treatments may best be applied periodically to drinking water troughs and then flushed, rather than being added continuously, to avoid reduced water consumption by cattle.

Indexed as

DrinkingWater SupplyAnimalsCalcium SulfateCarboxylic AcidsCattleChlorine CompoundsColony Count, MicrobialDisinfectantsDisinfectionEscherichia coli O157FecesFresh WaterOxidesRumenSodium BenzoateCalcium SulfateCarboxylic AcidsChlorine Compoundschlorine dioxideDisinfectantsOxidesSodium Benzoate

Identifiers

PMID16672466
PMCPMC1472328
OpenAlexW2128874810

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.