ArticleThe Science of the total environment2020
Ranking hazards pertaining to human health concerns from land application of anaerobic digestate.
Article in The Science of the total environment, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Using feeding regime as a microbial selective pressure to optimise biogas production and digestate sanitisation from slurry-based anaerobic digestion.Environmental microbiome · 2026Article
- Bioprospecting Bacteria From Psychrophilic Anaerobic Digestate for Potential Plant Growth-Promoting Attributes.International journal of microbiology · 2025Article
- Food waste to resource recovery: a way of green advocacy.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2024Review
- How to study SARS-CoV-2 in soils?Environmental research · 2021Review
- A Rapid Culture Method for the Detection ofInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- A review of the COVID-19 pandemic and its interaction with environmental media.Environmental challenges (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2021Review
- SARS-CoV-2 and other pathogens could be determined in liquid samples from soils.Environmental pollution (Barking, Essex : 1987) · 2021Article
- COVID-19 in the environment.Chemosphere · 2021Review
- The Mucosal Innate Immune Response toFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2021Review
- SARS-CoV-2 in soils.Environmental research · 2020Article
- What do we know about the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus in the environment?The Science of the total environment · 2020Article
- Observed and Potential Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Environment.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anaerobic digestion (AD) has been identified as one of the cleanest producers of green energy. AD typically uses organic materials as feedstock and, through a series of biological processes, produces methane. Farmyard manure and slurry (FYM&S) are important AD feedstock and are typically mixed with agricultural waste, grass and/or food wastes. The feedstock may contain many different pathogens which can survive the AD process and hence also possibly be present in the final digestate. In this study, a semi-quantitative screening tool was developed to rank pathogens of potential health concern emerging from AD digestate. A scoring system was used to categorise likely inactivation during AD, hazard pathways and finally, severity as determined from reported human mortality rates, number of global human-deaths and infections per 100,000 populations. Five different conditions including mesophilic and thermophilic AD and three different pasteurisation conditions were assessed in terms of specific pathogen inactivation. In addition, a number of scenarios were assessed to consider foodborne incidence data from Ireland and Europe and to investigate the impact of raw FYM&S application (without AD and pasteurisation). A sensitivity analysis revealed that the score for the mortality rate (S3) was the most sensitive parameter (rank coefficient 0.49) to influence the final score S; followed by thermal inactivation score (S1, 0.25) and potential contamination pathways (S2, 0.16). Across all the scenarios considered, the screening tool prioritised Cryptosporidium parvum, Salmonella spp., norovirus, Streptococcus pyogenes, enteropathogenic E. coli (EPEC), Mycobacterium spp., Salmonella typhi (followed by S. paratyphi), Clostridium spp., Listeria monocytogenes and Campylobacter coli as the highest-ranking pathogens of human health concern resulting from AD digestate in Ireland. This tool prioritises potentially harmful pathogens which can emerge from AD digestate and highlights where regulation and intervention may be required.
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.