Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 285

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 26 of the 26 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment Models for Consumption of Raw Vegetables Irrigated with Reclaimed Water

Hamilton, Andrew J., Stagnitti, Frank, Premier, Robert, Boland, Anne-Maree, Hale, Glenn·2006·Applied and Environmental Microbiology

Abstract

Quantitative microbial risk assessment models for estimating the annual risk of enteric virus infection associated with consuming raw vegetables that have been overhead irrigated with nondisinfected secondary treated reclaimed water were constructed. We ran models for several different scenarios of crop type, viral concentration in effluent, and time since last irrigation event. The mean annual risk of infection was always less for cucumber than for broccoli, cabbage, or lettuce. Across the various crops, effluent qualities, and viral decay rates considered, the annual risk of infection ranged from 10 −3 to 10 −1 when reclaimed-water irrigation ceased 1 day before harvest and from 10 −9 to 10 −3 when it ceased 2 weeks before harvest. Two previously published decay coefficients were used to describe the die-off of viruses in the environment. For all combinations of crop type and effluent quality, application of the more aggressive decay coefficient led to annual risks of infection that satisfied the commonly propounded benchmark of ≤10 −4 , i.e., one infection or less per 10,000 people per year, providing that 14 days had elapsed since irrigation with reclaimed water. Conversely, this benchmark was not attained for any combination of crop and water quality when this withholding period was 1 day. The lower decay rate conferred markedly less protection, with broccoli and cucumber being the only crops satisfying the 10 −4 standard for all water qualities after a 14-day withholding period. Sensitivity analyses on the models revealed that in nearly all cases, variation in the amount of produce consumed had the most significant effect on the total uncertainty surrounding the estimate of annual infection risk. The models presented cover what would generally be considered to be worst-case scenarios: overhead irrigation and consumption of vegetables raw. Practices such as subsurface, furrow, or drip irrigation and postharvest washing/disinfection and food preparation could substantially lower risks and need to be considered in future models, particularly for developed nations where these extra risk reduction measures are more common.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1128/aem.72.5.3284-3290.2006

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 26 references

Cited by

See all 285

Metadata

Authors
Hamilton, A. J., Stagnitti, F., Premier, R., Boland, A.-M., & Hale, G.
Venue
Applied and Environmental Microbiology
Published
2006-05
Volume
72
Issue
5
Pages
3284-3290
ISSN
  • 0099-2240 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-5336
OpenAlex
W2167563446
Cited by
285
References
26
FWCI
10.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment Models for Consumption of Raw Vegetables Irrigated with Reclaimed Water. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/aem.72.5.3284-3290.2006
The paper
Hamilton, A. J., Stagnitti, F., Premier, R., Boland, A.-M., & Hale, G. (2006). Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment Models for Consumption of Raw Vegetables Irrigated with Reclaimed Water. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.72.5.3284-3290.2006

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.