In this task, you are given a paragraph (from a research paper) and your task is to classify each sentence of the paragraph (assume n sentence) into the following categories: Background, Purpose, Method, Finding/Contribution, or Other. Return the output in this format: 1 - category of sentence 1, 2 - category of sentence 2, ..., n - category of sentence n; where each number indicates the order of the sentence. The categories can be identified using the following questions: 
 Background: - Why is this problem important? - What relevant works have been done before? - What did the previous works miss? - What are the high-level research questions? - How might this help other researchers?
 Purpose: - What specific things do the researchers want to do? - What specific knowledge do the researchers want to know? - What specific hypothesis do the researchers want to test?
 Method: - How did the researchers do it or find it out? - What are the procedures and steps of this research?
 Finding/Contribution: - What did the researchers find out? Did the proposed methods work? - Did things behave as the researchers expected?
Other: put every text fragment that does not fit into any of the categories above here. Put a sentence here if its not in English, is not part of the article, contains numbers and dates, is a caption of a figure or a table, is a formatting error, or you are not sure about it.

Input: Consider Input: The prevalence of antibodies to bovine coronavirus (BCV) and bovine respiratory syncytial virus (BRSV) infections was studied in 20 conventional and 20 organic dairy herds. The organic farms had produced 'certified' milk for at least 2 years. On two occasions, with a 1-year interval, 699 serum samples from 624 peri-parturient cows were tested by ELISA for antibodies to BCV and BRSV. Accompanying data relating to the sampled animals were collected in order to identify potential factors associated with increased antibody prevalence. The antibody prevalence was high at both sampling times with approximately 85% and 80% of animals positive for antibodies to BCV and to BRSV, respectively. Conventional herds had a significantly higher mean antibody prevalence to BCV and BRSV than the organically managed herds (P < 0.01). Animal age was significantly associated with increased antibody prevalence (P < 0.001). The findings of this study suggest that organic farm management may be effective in reducing the seroprevalence of these viruses relative to conventional farming methods.

Output: 1 - background, 2 - background, 3 - method, 4 - method, 5 - method, 6 - finding, 7 - finding, 8 - finding, 9 - finding


Input: Consider Input: The results of this study showed that simultaneous colonization of the intestinal mucosa by adherent non-ETEC E. coli and Enterococcus spp. can be involved in the pathogenesis of neonatal porcine diarrhea. These bacteria should be considered in diagnosis of diarrhea in piglets, when detection of common, well-known enteric agents is unsuccessful.

Output: 1 - finding, 2 - finding, 3 - finding


Input: Consider Input: Epidemiological models of the spread of pathogens in livestock populations primarily focus on direct contact between farms based on animal movement data, and in some cases, local spatial spread based on proximity between premises. The roles of other types of indirect contact among farms is rarely accounted for. In addition, data on animal movements is seldom available in the United States. However, the spread of porcine epidemic diarrhea virus (PEDv) in U.S. swine represents one of the best documented emergences of a highly infectious pathogen in the U.S. livestock industry, providing an opportunity to parameterize models of pathogen spread via direct and indirect transmission mechanisms in swine. Using observed data on pig movements during the initial phase of the PEDv epidemic, we developed a network-based and spatially explicit epidemiological model that simulates the spread of PEDv via both indirect and direct movement-related contact in order to answer unresolved questions concerning factors facilitating between-farm transmission. By modifying the likelihood of each transmission mechanism and fitting this model to observed epidemiological dynamics, our results suggest that between-farm transmission was primarily driven by direct mechanisms related to animal movement and indirect mechanisms related to local spatial spread based on geographic proximity. However, other forms of indirect transmission among farms, including contact via contaminated vehicles and feed, were responsible for high consequence transmission events resulting in the introduction of the virus into new geographic areas. This research is among the first reports of farm-level animal movements in the U.S. swine industry and, to our knowledge, represents the first epidemiological model of commercial U.S. swine using actual data on farm-level animal movement.


Output: 1 - background, 2 - background, 3 - background, 4 - background, 5 - background, 6 - background, 7 - method, 8 - method, 9 - method, 10 - finding, 11 - finding, 12 - finding, 13 - finding, 14 - finding, 15 - finding