Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Putative causal diagram of factors that may influence the likelihood of E. coli O157:H7 in cattle feces.

Pen-dependent factors are in bold and italic typeface. Time-dependent factors are marked with an *. Lines indicate a putative association between factors.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Mean temperature, dew-point, relative humidity and mean precipitation during the seven days preceding each sampling date.

Points show 7-day mean of average daily values. Upper and lower horizontal lines show 7-day means of maximum and minimum daily values. Bars represent mean precipitation over the 7 days preceding the sampling date.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Proportion of fecal pats positive for E. coli O157:H7 by sampling date and weather conditions.

Data shown from control pens only (number of fecal samples = 1360). Light gray indicates year 1 (2014). Dark gray indicates year 2 (2015). Bars indicate 95% confidence intervals.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Table 1.

Results of mixed effect logistic regression models to assess the association between weather variables and the log odds of E. coli O157:H7 presence in fecal pats, after adjusting for pen and date as random effects.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 4.

Proportion of fecal pats positive for E. coli O157:H7 by pen, and pen-level variables.

Data shown from pre-intervention time-point only (number of fecal samples = 1400). Light gray indicates year 1 (2014). Dark gray indicates year 2 (2015). Bars indicate 95% confidence intervals. Note: clustering of pens by sampling date is not shown.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

The change in the proportion of cattle fecal pats positive for E. coli O157:H7 over time.

(A) The proportion of fecal pats positive for E. coli O157:H7 by control and intervention groups, pre- and post-intervention. Bars indicate 95% confidence interval after adjusting the standard errors for clustering within pens. (Number of fecal samples = 2719) (B) Box-plots of the (unadjusted) change in within-pen prevalence of positive fecal pats within each pen (post- minus pre-intervention prevalence). (Number of fecal samples = 2719).

More »

Fig 5 Expand