2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2016.03.038
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Distribution of antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) in anaerobic digestion and land application of swine wastewater

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

3
46
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 177 publications
(49 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
(58 reference statements)
3
46
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These results were opposite to results of the research (LaPara and Diehl, 2010), which demonstrated that tetA and intl1 could be effectively removed from the municipal wastewater solids and decreased by more than one order of magnitude at the end of the 37°C mesophilic anaerobic digestion. Sui et al (2016) investigated the distribution of ARGs in swine wastewater anaerobic digestion and the results showed that tetX was effectively removed but intl1 was barely reduced after the mesophilic anaerobic digestion. These reduction differences of intl1 and ARGs might be caused by different substrates (e.g., swine manure, sewage sludge), inoculums, or different operating conditions, and further investigation is needed.…”
Section: Reductions Of Args Hmrgs Meg In Anaerobic Digestionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…These results were opposite to results of the research (LaPara and Diehl, 2010), which demonstrated that tetA and intl1 could be effectively removed from the municipal wastewater solids and decreased by more than one order of magnitude at the end of the 37°C mesophilic anaerobic digestion. Sui et al (2016) investigated the distribution of ARGs in swine wastewater anaerobic digestion and the results showed that tetX was effectively removed but intl1 was barely reduced after the mesophilic anaerobic digestion. These reduction differences of intl1 and ARGs might be caused by different substrates (e.g., swine manure, sewage sludge), inoculums, or different operating conditions, and further investigation is needed.…”
Section: Reductions Of Args Hmrgs Meg In Anaerobic Digestionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Wu et al (2016) reported that the acidogenic phase of thermophilic digestion was mainly responsible for reducing the ARGs, such as tetA, tetG, tetX, sul1, ermB, dfrA1, dfrA2 and intI1, while the subsequent methanogenic phase caused a rebound in their quantity; thermophilic digestion could effectively decrease the ARGs and mesophilic one could barely reduce the ARGs. In the study of Sui et al (2016), mesophilic anaerobic digestion obviously reduced the ARGs and the reduction efficiency was improved by stable operational temperature and longer solid retention time (SRT). However, few studies investigated whether reduction efficiencies of ARGs, as well as HMRGs and MGEs would be affected by different external pressures (including antibiotics and heavy metals) during anaerobic digestion.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Considering the huge amounts of swine manure, anaerobic digestion (AD) was widely adopted due to its effectiveness on the pathogens removal, volume reduction and resource utilization, especially the biogas production, and luckily, it was demonstrated that AD could also realize some ARGs reduction in swine manure (Youngquist et al, 2016). But the digestate still contributed a lot to the spread and proliferation of ARGs in the environment (Sui et al, 2016) and there was much space for the improvement of AD efficiency (Astals et al, 2012), which indicated that some work could be done to simultaneously enhance the AD efficiency and ARGs removal.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Sui et al (2016) examined the distribution of ARGs during the process of anaerobic digestion (AD) followed by land application of swine wastewater. The ARGs of tetracycline ( tet (G), tet (M) and tet (X)), sulfonamide ( sul (1) and sul (2)), and macrolide ( erm (B), erm (A), ere (A) and mef (A)) were detected in high abundance ( >108 copies mL −1 ) in swine wastewater and digested liquor.…”
Section: Antibiotic Resistance Genesmentioning
confidence: 99%