ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology2007
Effects of different animal waste treatment technologies on detection and viability of porcine enteric viruses.
Article in Applied and environmental microbiology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Manure management during African swine fever outbreak: identifying gaps through a narrative review.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Review
- Biodigestion System Made of Polyethylene and Polystyrene Insulator for Dog Farm (on the Example of the Republic of Chile).Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Monitoring Survivability and Infectivity of Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea Virus (PEDv) in the Infected On-Farm Earthen Manure Storages (EMS).Frontiers in microbiology · 2016Article
- Detection of hepatitis E virus (HEV) through the different stages of pig manure composting plants.Microbial biotechnology · 2014Article
- The fecal virome of pigs on a high-density farm.Journal of virology · 2011Article
- Inactivation of murine norovirus 1 and Bacteroides fragilis phage B40-8 by mesophilic and thermophilic anaerobic digestion of pig slurry.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2010Article
- Using agro-industrial wastes for the cultivation of microalgae and duckweeds: Contamination risks and biomass safety concerns.Biotechnology advancesReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Enteric pathogens in animal waste that is not properly processed can contaminate the environment and food. The persistence of pathogens in animal waste depends upon the waste treatment technology, but little is known about persistence of porcine viruses. Our objectives were to characterize the porcine enteric viruses (porcine noroviruses [PoNoVs], porcine sapoviruses [PoSaVs], rotavirus A [RV-A], RV-B, and RV-C) in fresh feces or manure and to evaluate the effects of different candidate environmentally superior technologies (ESTs) for animal waste treatment on the detection of these viruses. Untreated manure and samples collected at different stages during and after treatment were obtained from swine farms that used conventional waste management (CWM) and five different candidate ESTs. The RNA from porcine enteric viruses was detected by reverse transcription-PCR and/or seminested PCR; PoSaV and RV-A were also detected by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Cell culture immunofluorescence (CCIF) and experimental inoculation of gnotobiotic (Gn) pigs were used to determine RV-A/C infectivity in posttreatment samples. The PoSaV and RV-A were detected in pretreatment samples from each farm, whereas PoNoV and RV-C were detected in pretreatment feces from three of five and four of five farms using the candidate ESTs, respectively. After treatment, PoSaV RNA was detected only in the samples from the farm using CWM and not from the farms using the candidate ESTs. RV-A and RV-C RNAs were detected in four of five and three of four candidate ESTs, respectively, after treatment, but infectious particles were not detected by CCIF, nor were clinical signs or seroconversion detected in inoculated Gn pigs. These results indicate that only RV-A/C RNA, but no viral infectivity, was detected after treatment. Our findings address a public health concern regarding environmental quality surrounding swine production units.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.