4.6 Article

Occurrence of Antibiotic-Resistant Genes and Bacteria in Household Greywater Treated in Constructed Wetlands

期刊

WATER
卷 14, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/w14050758

关键词

antibiotic resistance; greywater; constructed wetlands; greywater treatment systems; extended spectrum beta lactamase

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Greywater treatment systems can effectively reduce antibiotic-resistant genes in greywater. The composition of bacterial community remains stable after treatment, with Proteobacteria, Epsilonbacteraeota, and Bacteroidetes being the dominant phyla. Several clinically relevant bacteria were identified in the treated greywater.
There is a growing body of knowledge on the persistence of antibiotic-resistant genes (ARGs) and antibiotic-resistant bacteria (ARB) in greywater and greywater treatment systems such as constructed wetlands (CWs). Our research quantified ARGs (sul1, qnrS, and bla(CTXM32)), class one integron (intI1), and bacterial marker (16S) in four recirculating vertical flow CWs in a small community in the Negev desert, Israel, using quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR). The greywater microbial community was characterized using 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing. Results show that CWs can reduce ARG in greywater by 1-3 log, depending on the gene and the quality of the raw greywater. Community sequencing results showed that the bacterial community composition was not significantly altered after treatment and that Proteobacteria, Epsilonbacteraeota, and Bacteroidetes were the most dominant phyla before and after treatment. Pseudomonas, Citrobacter, Enterobacter, and Aeromonas were the most commonly identified genera of the extended spectrum beta lactamase (ESBL) colonies. Some of the ESBL bacteria identified have been linked to clinical infections (Acinetobacter nosocomialis, Pseudomonas fulva, Pseudomonas putida, Pseudomonas monteilii, and Roseomonas cervicalis). It is important to monitor intI1 for the potential transfer of ARGs to pathogenic bacteria.

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

4.6
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