4.7 Article

Distribution of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in chicken manure and manure-fertilized vegetables

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
Volume 21, Issue 2, Pages 1231-1241

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-013-1994-1

Keywords

Antibiotic resistance; Chicken manure; Antibiotic-resistant endophytic bacteria; Multiple antibiotic-resistant; bacteria; Vegetable; 454-pyrosequencing

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [NSFC 21277041, NSFC 21077032]
  2. Program for Innovative Research Team (in Science and Technology) in University of Henan Province [13IRTSTHN009]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Veterinary manure is an important pollution reservoir of antibiotics and antibiotic-resistant bacteria (ARB). However, little is known of the distribution of ARB in plant endophytic bacteria and the number/types of ARB in chicken manure. In this study, 454-pyrosequencing was used to investigate the distribution and composition of ARBs in chicken manure and fertilized vegetables. The prevalence of ARB in the samples of the chicken manure compost recovered from farms on which amoxicillin, kanamycin, gentamicin, and cephalexin were used was 20.91-65.9 % for ARBs and 8.24-20.63 % simultaneously resistant to two or more antibiotics (multiple antibiotic resistant bacteria (MARB)). Antibiotic-resistant endophytic bacteria were widely detected in celery, pakchoi, and cucumber with the highest rate of resistance to cephalexin. The pyrosequencing indicated that the chicken manure dominantly harbored Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, Synergistetes, and Proteobacteria and that Bacteroidetes was significantly enhanced in farms utilizing antibiotics. In the total cultivable colonies, 62.58-89.43 % ARBs and 95.29 % MARB were clustered in Bacteroidetes with the dominant species (Myroides ordoratimimus and Spningobacterium spp., respectively) related to human clinical opportunistic pathogens.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available