4.7 Article

Combined membrane filtration and 265 nm UV irradiation for effective removal of cell free antibiotic resistance genes from feed water and concentrate

期刊

JOURNAL OF MEMBRANE SCIENCE
卷 598, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.memsci.2019.117676

关键词

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR); Extracellular free DNA; Contaminants of emerging concern (CEC); Ultrafiltration/nanofiltration/reverse osmosis (UF/NF/RO); Concentrate management

资金

  1. NIVA's Strategic Institute Initiative Urban water challenges (Research Council of Norway) [160016]
  2. COST (European Cooperation in Science and Technology) [ES1403 NEREUS]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The removal of cell free DNA (plasmids) carrying antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) was investigated at benchscale using ultrafiltration (UF), nanofiltration (NF) and reverse osmosis (RO) membranes commonly applied in water reuse applications. The removal of the plasmid spiked to ultrapure water was determined using a direct qPCR method. More than 99% plasmid removal was achieved by membranes with 1 kDa molecular weight cut off (MWCO). Membranes with lower MWCO showed complete removal under the specific experimental conditions, reaching a maximum log reduction value above 6.6. The concentrate from membrane filtration was further subjected to UV-LED irradiation at 265 nm. The required fluence for 1 log damage was 73 mJ/cm(2) for the 267 target bp segment and 23 mJ/cm(2) for the 601 target bp segment, respectively. With these two DNA segments, the inactivation rate per segment length was higher for the larger segment, in accordance with a higher pyrimidine and TT content, compared with the smaller fragment. Target DNA was not detectable anymore when using 100 and 300 mJ/cm(2) for the 601 and 267 bp segments respectively. The results indicate that membrane filtration, combined with UV-LED treatment of the concentrate, can be an effective measure to remove and inactivate ARGs from water to prevent their release to the environment.

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