4.3 Article

Monitoring Antibiotic Residues and Corresponding Antibiotic Resistance Genes in an Agroecosystem

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHEMISTRY
卷 2015, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

HINDAWI LTD
DOI: 10.1155/2015/974843

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ministry of Environment as The GAIA Project in Korea [172-112-011]
  2. Institute of Environmental Research
  3. Central Laboratory at Kangwon National University in Korea
  4. National Research Foundation of Korea [2012R1A2A4A01008205, 22A20130011002] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) have been commonly reported due to the overuse worldwide of antibiotics. Antibiotic overuse disturbs the environment and threatens public human health. The objective of this study was to measure the residual concentrations of veterinary antibiotics in the tetracycline group (TCs), including tetracycline (TC) and chlortetracycline (CTC), as well as those in the sulfonamide group (SAs), including sulfamethazine (SMT), sulfamethoxazole (SMX), and sulfathiazole (STZ). We also isolated the corresponding ARGs in the agroecosystem. Four sediment samples and two rice paddy soil samples were collected from sites near a swine composting facility along the Naerincheon River in Hongcheon, Korea. High performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS/MS) was employed with a solid-phase extraction method to measure the concentration of each antibiotic. ARGs were identified by the qualitative polymerase chain-reaction using synthetic primers. SAs and their corresponding ARGs were highly detected in sediment samples whereas TCs were not detected except for sediments sample #1. ARGs for TCs and SAs were detected in rice paddy soils, while ARGs for TCs were only found in sediment #2 and #4. Continuous monitoring of antibiotic residue and its comprehensive impact on the environment is needed to ensure environmental health.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据