Display options
Share it on

Front Microbiol. 2020 Dec 18;11:614424. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2020.614424. eCollection 2020.

Anaerobic Digestion of Tetracycline Spiked Livestock Manure and Poultry Litter Increased the Abundances of Antibiotic and Heavy Metal Resistance Genes.

Frontiers in microbiology

Getahun E Agga, John Kasumba, John H Loughrin, Eric D Conte

Affiliations

  1. USDA, Agricultural Research Service, Food Animal Environmental Systems Research Unit, Bowling Green, KY, United States.
  2. Department of Chemistry, Western Kentucky University, Bowling Green, KY, United States.

PMID: 33391245 PMCID: PMC7775313 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2020.614424

Abstract

Anaerobic digestion is used for the treatment of animal manure by generating biogas. Heavy metals cause environmental pollutions and co-select for antimicrobial resistance. We evaluated the impact of mesophilic anaerobic digestion of cattle manure (CM), swine manure (SM) and poultry litter (PL) on the concentrations of seven tetracycline [

Copyright © 2020 Agga, Kasumba, Loughrin and Conte.

Keywords: anaerobic digestion; animal manure; antimicrobial resistance; antimicrobial resistance genes; bacteria; heavy metal resistance; poultry litter; tetracycline resistance

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The handling editor declare

References

  1. Water Res. 2009 Mar;43(4):925-32 - PubMed
  2. J Environ Qual. 2016 Mar;45(2):420-31 - PubMed
  3. J Environ Qual. 2016 Mar;45(2):394-406 - PubMed
  4. Curr Opin Microbiol. 2011 Jun;14(3):236-43 - PubMed
  5. Bioresour Technol. 2003 Apr;87(2):161-6 - PubMed
  6. Water Environ Res. 2007 Nov;79(12):2380-6 - PubMed
  7. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1998 Aug;42(8):1871-7 - PubMed
  8. Microb Ecol. 2010 Oct;60(3):479-86 - PubMed
  9. J Environ Sci Health B. 2020;55(2):135-147 - PubMed
  10. Water Environ Res. 2013 May;85(5):411-21 - PubMed
  11. Prev Vet Med. 2015 May 1;119(3-4):179-89 - PubMed
  12. Foodborne Pathog Dis. 2015 Aug;12(8):670-8 - PubMed
  13. Environ Microbiol. 2007 Jan;9(1):143-51 - PubMed
  14. Front Microbiol. 2016 Mar 08;7:263 - PubMed
  15. J Environ Qual. 2019 Jan;48(1):171-178 - PubMed
  16. J Hazard Mater. 2015 Dec 15;299:577-83 - PubMed
  17. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2007 Aug;73(15):4813-23 - PubMed
  18. Sci Total Environ. 2002 Nov 1;299(1-3):89-95 - PubMed
  19. Environ Pollut. 2018 May;236:764-772 - PubMed
  20. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Oct 21;111(42):15202-7 - PubMed
  21. Environ Sci Technol. 2010 Dec 1;44(23):9128-33 - PubMed
  22. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2009 Sep;84(4):791-6 - PubMed
  23. J Environ Qual. 2020 May;49(3):754-761 - PubMed
  24. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2009 Jan;75(1):164-74 - PubMed
  25. J Environ Qual. 2011 Jan-Feb;40(1):248-55 - PubMed
  26. J Dairy Sci. 2020 Feb;103(2):1051-1071 - PubMed
  27. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2015 Sep;99(18):7771-9 - PubMed
  28. Environ Pollut. 2016 Jul;214:334-340 - PubMed
  29. Microb Ecol Health Dis. 2014 Sep 26;25: - PubMed
  30. Water Res. 2011 Oct 15;45(16):4758-68 - PubMed
  31. Sci Total Environ. 2013 Aug 1;458-460:267-72 - PubMed
  32. PLoS One. 2015 Jul 21;10(7):e0132586 - PubMed
  33. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2001 Apr;67(4):1494-502 - PubMed
  34. J Environ Qual. 2016 Mar;45(2):576-92 - PubMed
  35. Environ Sci Technol. 2010 Jan 15;44(2):580-7 - PubMed
  36. Vet Microbiol. 2011 Jun 2;150(3-4):344-8 - PubMed
  37. Environ Sci Technol. 2006 Dec 1;40(23):7445-50 - PubMed
  38. PLoS One. 2019 Feb 15;14(2):e0212510 - PubMed
  39. Water Res. 2015 Feb 1;69:234-242 - PubMed
  40. Environ Pollut. 2016 Jun;213:751-759 - PubMed
  41. Environ Sci Technol. 2011 Sep 15;45(18):7855-61 - PubMed
  42. Microbiol Spectr. 2018 Apr;6(2): - PubMed

Publication Types