4.7 Article

Effects of slurry from sulfadiazine- (SDZ) and difloxacin- (DIF) medicated pigs on the structural diversity of microorganisms in bulk and rhizosphere soil

期刊

SOIL BIOLOGY & BIOCHEMISTRY
卷 62, 期 -, 页码 82-91

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2013.03.007

关键词

Veterinary antibiotics; Microbial community structure; Manure composition; Phospholipid fatty acids; Denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis; Mesocosm

资金

  1. German Research Foundation (DFG) within the Research Unit FOR [566]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Conventional farming still consumes considerable amounts of antibiotics such as sulfadiazine (SDZ) or difloxacin (DIF) to protect livestock from infectious diseases. Consequently, slurries from medicated animals are applied to arable soils. Antibiotics, co-applied with pig slurry, are increasingly reported to change soil microbial community structures in un-rooted bulk soil. The effects in rhizosphere soil, as well as the medication-derived direct and indirect effects of an altered slurry composition are poorly investigated. We evaluated the response of microorganisms to slurry of SDZ- and DIF-medicated pigs in a 63-d mesocosm experiment, considering the natural complexity of a typical agricultural pig slurry amendment and developing Zea mays L root systems. Slurry-derived fecal bacteria were still present in mesosocosm soil 14 days after amendment. Medication with DIF and SDZ further altered the molecular-chemical pattern of the pig slurry, confounding the precise antibiotic effect. This has to be considered when investigating antimicrobial effects under ecological relevant conditions. Effects on the microbial community in mesocosm bulk soil widely matched results from previous studies on directly spiked soil. Effects were also found in the mesocosm rhizosphere soil, but not more pronounced than in bulk soil. This was also verified under laboratory conditions after application of artificially SDZ-spiked control slurry. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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