4.7 Article

Evaluation of phoxim toxicity on aquatic and zebrafish intestinal microbiota by metagenomics and 16S rRNA gene sequencing analysis

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
卷 29, 期 42, 页码 63017-63027

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-022-20325-8

关键词

Pesticides; Phoxim; Gut microbiota; Microbial community; Antibiotic resistance genes

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21976161, 22176176, 21777144]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the impact of phoxim on the aquatic microbial community and the intestinal microbiota of fish using shotgun metagenomics and 16S rRNA gene sequencing. The results demonstrated that short-term exposure to phoxim significantly altered the structure and function of microbial communities and had a negative impact on freshwater ecosystems.
Phoxim is one of the main organophosphorus pesticides used in agricultural production. However, little information is known about how it affects the aquatic microbial community and the intestinal microbiota of fish. Herein, we utilized shotgun metagenomics and 16S rRNA gene sequencing to reveal the aquatic eco-risk of phoxim. Seven days of phoxim exposure significantly changed the composition of aquatic microbial community, obliterated the interactions between microorganisms, and thus reduced the complexity and stability of the microbial community. During long-time exposure (i.e., 14 days), most of the ecological functions were restored due to the redundancy of the microbial community. However, phoxim exposure promoted the dissemination of elfamycin resistance gene. The zebrafish gut microbial community also recovered from a temporary ecological disorder of aquatic microbiota, but phoxim continually affected zebrafish growth and swimming behavior. Overall, our results demonstrated that phoxim exposure significantly changed the structure and function of the microbial community and displayed a negative impact on freshwater ecosystems in a short exposure time.

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