| Literature DB >> 35886115 |
Delin Du1,2, Jing Zhou3, Keqiang Zhang1,2, Suli Zhi1,4.
Abstract
Scientific interest in pollution from veterinary antibiotics (VAs) on intensive animal farms has been increasing in recent years. However, limited information is available on the seasonal pollution characteristics and the associated ecological risks of VAs, especially about the different scale farms. Therefore, this study investigated the seasonal pollution status and ecological risks of 42 typical VAs (5 classes) on three different scale pig farms (breeding scales of about 30,000, 1200, and 300 heads, respectively) in Tianjin, China. The results showed that large-scale pig farms usually had the highest antibiotic pollution levels, followed by small-scale pig farms and medium-scale pig farms. Among different seasons, antibiotic contamination was more severe in winter and spring than that in the other seasons. Tetracyclines (TCs) usually had higher proportions (over 51.46%) and the residual concentration detected in manure, and wastewater samples ranged from not detected (ND)-1132.64 mg/kg and ND-1692.50 μg/L, respectively, which all occurred for oxytetracycline (OTC) during winter. For the antibiotic ecological risks in the effluent, we found high-risk level of 12 selected VAs accounted for 58% in spring, and 7 kinds of VAs were selected in the amended soil, but nearly all the antibiotics had no obvious ecological risks except OTC (spring and summer). All these data provided an insight into the seasonal variability and the associated ecological risks of antibiotics on intensive pig farms, which can provide scientific guidance on decreasing antibiotic contamination to enhance environmental security in similar areas.Entities:
Keywords: ecological risks; intensive animal farms; seasonal pollution characteristics; veterinary antibiotics
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35886115 PMCID: PMC9320919 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19148264
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Figure 1The total average concentrations of antibiotics in manure samples (a) and wastewater samples (b) on different scale pig farms during the four seasons.
Figure 2The proportions and concentrations of five classes of antibiotics detected in manure on different scale pig farms during the four seasons. ((a): small farm for VAs percentage; (b): medium farm for VAs percentage; (c): large farm for VAs percentage; (d): small farm for VAs concentration; (e): medium farm for VAs concentration; (f): large farm for VAs concentration).
Figure 3The proportions and concentrations of the five classes of antibiotics detected in wastewater on different scale farms during four seasons. ((a): small farm for VAs percentage; (b): medium farm for VAs percentage; (c): large farm for VAs percentage; (d): small farm for VAs concentration; (e): medium farm for VAs concentration; (f): large farm for VAs concentration).
The main individual antibiotic concentration in manure in spring, summer, autumn, and winter (mg/kg).
| Antibiotics | Spring ( | Summer ( | Autumn ( | Winter ( | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Class | Type | Min | Max | Mean | Min | Max | Mean | Min | Max | Mean | Min | Max | Mean |
| TCs | OTC | ND | 1234.79 | 140.19 | ND | 226.19 | 63.81 | ND | 925.15 | 186.65 | ND | 1132.64 | 313.81 |
| TC | ND | 26.61 | 8.43 | ND | 13.74 | 3.88 | ND | 8.63 | 2.13 | ND | 27.69 | 5.86 | |
| DXC | ND | 10.95 | 1.90 | ND | 1.60 | 0.27 | ND | 5.48 | 0.75 | ND | 11.61 | 3.53 | |
| DMC | ND | 2.46 | 0.72 | ND | 1.59 | 0.27 | ND | 0.48 | 0.12 | ND | 0.87 | 0.20 | |
| QAs | OFL | ND | 5.87 | 0.67 | ND | 0.95 | 0.11 | ND | 0.04 | 0.04 | ND | 0.05 | 0.04 |
| LOM | ND | 0.07 | 0.04 | ND | 0.03 | 0.02 | ND | 0.03 | 0.03 | ND | 0.07 | 0.04 | |
| SAR | ND | 0.04 | 0.04 | ND | 0.02 | 0.01 | ND | 0.04 | 0.04 | ND | 0.05 | 0.04 | |
| CIP | ND | 1.73 | 0.28 | ND | 0.10 | 0.04 | ND | 0.04 | 0.04 | ND | 1.33 | 0.18 | |
| FLU | ND | 0.04 | 0.03 | ND | 0.01 | 0.00 | ND | 0.03 | 0.02 | ND | 0.03 | 0.02 | |
| SAs | SMM | ND | 0.24 | 0.06 | ND | 0.19 | 0.04 | ND | 6.69 | 0.84 | ND | 1.37 | 0.13 |
| SDMD | ND | 10.06 | 1.69 | ND | 5.65 | 0.97 | ND | 6.55 | 0.63 | ND | 10.06 | 2.06 | |
| SME | ND | 0.25 | 0.05 | ND | 0.23 | 0.04 | ND | 0.19 | 0.02 | ND | 0.35 | 0.08 | |
| MAs | AZI | ND | 9.92 | 0.96 | ND | 0.14 | 0.03 | ND | 0.08 | 0.03 | ND | 7.64 | 0.76 |
| TIL | ND | 2.97 | 0.71 | ND | 37.81 | 6.04 | ND | 4.28 | 0.71 | ND | 34.32 | 6.78 | |
| LAs | PENG | ND | 0.11 | 0.11 | ND | 0.03 | 0.02 | ND | 0.26 | 0.13 | ND | 0.26 | 0.26 |
ND: not detected; n: number of samples analyzed; Max: maximum concentration (mg/kg); Min: minimum concentration (mg/kg); 0.00: <0.005 mg/kg. The concentrations of the other 27 antibiotics are shown in Table S4.
The main individual antibiotic concentration in wastewater in spring, summer, autumn, and winter (μg/L).
| Antibiotics | Spring ( | Summer ( | Autumn ( | Winter ( | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Class | Type | Min | Max | Mean | Min | Max | Mean | Min | Max | Mean | Min | Max | Mean |
| TCs | OTC | ND | 1071.91 | 292.56 | ND | 600.04 | 238.63 | ND | 477.54 | 89.79 | ND | 1692.50 | 432.27 |
| TC | ND | 29.52 | 8.97 | ND | 75.86 | 24.24 | ND | 24.42 | 6.12 | ND | 24.37 | 8.74 | |
| DXC | ND | 12.08 | 4.47 | ND | ND | ND | ND | 73.59 | 21.64 | ND | 352.51 | 118.47 | |
| DMC | ND | 2.71 | 1.89 | ND | ND | ND | ND | 1.94 | 1.34 | ND | 2.48 | 1.71 | |
| QAs | OFL | ND | 6.40 | 3.09 | ND | 8.49 | 4.74 | ND | 2.01 | 1.42 | ND | 11.00 | 6.16 |
| LOM | ND | 1.71 | 1.61 | ND | 6.92 | 3.81 | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | |
| SAR | ND | 2.79 | 2.09 | ND | 5.11 | 3.21 | ND | 1.35 | 1.06 | ND | 27.32 | 6.92 | |
| CIP | ND | 0.78 | 0.75 | ND | ND | ND | ND | 0.50 | 0.50 | ND | 0.56 | 0.55 | |
| FLU | ND | 2.27 | 1.52 | ND | 2.42 | 1.50 | ND | 1.28 | 1.11 | ND | 8.83 | 3.34 | |
| SAs | SMM | ND | 22.33 | 5.89 | ND | 15.88 | 6.04 | ND | 21.74 | 13.57 | ND | 123.33 | 78.96 |
| SDMD | ND | 464.44 | 92.42 | ND | 78.36 | 23.95 | ND | 27.36 | 7.17 | ND | 479.43 | 125.38 | |
| SME | ND | 8.06 | 2.13 | ND | 20.05 | 7.42 | ND | 0.96 | 0.56 | ND | 14.67 | 5.63 | |
| MAs | AZI | ND | 0.28 | 0.27 | ND | 1.71 | 0.88 | ND | 0.62 | 0.52 | ND | 10.5 | 2.55 |
| TIL | ND | 0.54 | 0.41 | ND | 4.30 | 2.21 | ND | 1.86 | 0.80 | ND | 65.33 | 15.49 | |
| LAs | PENG | ND | 0.25 | 0.21 | ND | 0.78 | 0.38 | ND | 3.09 | 1.16 | ND | ND | ND |
ND: not detected; n: number of samples analyzed; Max: maximum concentration (μg/L); Min: minimum concentration (μg/L). The concentrations of the other 27 antibiotics are shown in Table S5.
Figure 4Risk assessment of antibiotics in effluent wastewater (a) and soil (b).
Figure 5Detection concentration characteristics of antibiotics in waste (manure (b) and wastewater (c)) and the corresponding feed (a).