Chickens too?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23224412

Here is a link that might be useful: link for above

Nothing would surpass me about that horrible contaminant. I realize that is an unscientific attitude.

It's behind a paywall, and I'm not going to pay $31.50 to satisfy my curiosity.

What concentration glyphosate inhibits the bacteria?
How does the glyphosate gets into the cows digestive system in that amount?

I'm dubious because you can show all kinds of interesting things in petri dishes that can't be reproduced in a live animal.

The article is a "Corrected Proof":
From the article: "Note to users: Corrected proofs are Articles in Press that contain the authors' corrections. Final citation details, e.g., volume/issue number, publication year and page numbers, still need to be added and the text might change before final publication.

Although corrected proofs do not have all bibliographic details available yet, they can already be cited using the year of online publication and the DOI , as follows: author(s), article title, journal (year), DOI. Please consult the journal's reference style for the exact appearance of these elements, abbreviation of journal names and use of punctuation. "
---------------------------------------------

H. Kuska comment: I retired in 1993 so the scientific conventions may have changed since then. I would "predict" that the authors would be reluctant to provide a reprint until the article is published.

The following 2 questions were asked:
1)What concentration glyphosate inhibits the bacteria?
2)How does the glyphosate gets into the cows digestive system in that amount?

------------------------------------------
From my preprint of corrected proof:
1) "All tested Enterococcus spp, isolated from Chlorella vulgaris and from faeces of cattle and horses (Table 1) inhibited neurotoxin production by C. botulinum types A, B, D and E reference strains. C.botulinum type C did not produce neurotoxin. Likewise, all enterococci co-cultivated with C. botulinum reduced the growth (cell numbers) of botulinum type A, B, C, D and E (Table 2). Even low numbers of E. faecalis (Fig. 1A) and E. faecium (Fig. 1B) inhibited BoNT production by all C. botulinum strains. Glyphosate itself also inhibited growth and BoNT expression of C. botulinum type B at relatively high concentrations (1 mg/ml). Roundup is more toxic to C. botulinum, the inhibitory effect of Roundup on the growth and toxin production of C. botulinum type B was more than 1 mg/ml (Table 3). Supplementation of the medium with 1 or 10 mg/ml glyphosate Roundup and glyphosate reduced the cell numbers of C. botulinum type B about 100 fold after 5 days of cultivation, respectively (Table 3). The inhibitory concentrations of glyphosate to C. botulinum type B were 10��"100 fold higher than those that suppressed growth (0.1 mg/ml and 1 mg/ml) of E. faecalis (Table 3)."
-------------------------------------------------

2) " Glyphosate residue differs from country to country (in some countries glyphosate is sprayed out of control) and even within a country depending on the quantity and frequency of glyphosate application. Also, the maximum daily intake (MDI) of glyphosate depends on the ration composition and the percent of each component in the ration. Some poultry and cattle feed samples in Germany were found to have 0.4��"0.9 mg glyphosate/kg (Data not published). On the other hand, glyphosate were determined in water samples from a transgenic soybean cultivation area located near to tributaries streams of the Pergamino��"Arrecifes system in the north of the province of Buenos Aires, Argentina ranged from 0.10 to 0.70 mg/l [32]. Glyphosate daily intake could be hazardous if feed and/or water contain high glyphosate residues; further work is urgently required to determine the real glyphosate residues in animal feed originated from different countries. In conclusion our results suggest that the herbicide glyphosate could be a significant predisposing factor responsible for the increase in C. botulinum associated diseases currently being experienced on dairy farms due to loss of the antagonistic bacteria as enterococci from the GIT. This hypothesis needs to be confirmed by further tests and in-vivo experiments."

"Influence of pesticide exposure on carbonic anhydrase II from sheep stomach."

Here is a link that might be useful: link for above

Let's replace Monsanto with Mollison, that would solve the problem with glyphosate.

"Supplementation of the medium with 1 or 10 mg/ml glyphosate Roundup "

1 mg/ml? That's a KILOGRAM per LITER ... the cows would have to be swilling the stuff like frat boys do beer.

Regarding the concentration, they are interested in what concentration the bad stuff will survive relative to the "good stuff". If Round-Up killed off both the same ,this would not probably be the concern that it is.

"The inhibitory concentrations of glyphosate to C. botulinum type B were 10��"100 fold higher than those that suppressed growth (0.1 mg/ml and 1 mg/ml) of E. faecalis (Table 3)." "