4.7 Article

Complex migration of antibiotic resistance in natural aquatic environments

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION
卷 232, 期 -, 页码 1-9

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2017.08.078

关键词

Antibiotic resistance; Aquatic environments; Pathogens; Non-corresponding contaminants

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41406088, 21377032]
  2. Chinese Polar Environment Comprehensive Investigation and Assessment Programs [2016-02-01, 2016-04-01, 2016-04-03]
  3. Marine public welfare scientific research projects [201105013]
  4. Project of China Scholarship Council [CSC201504180002]
  5. Liaoning BaiQianWan Talents Program [201723]
  6. Foundation of polar science key laboratory, SOA, China [KP201208]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Antibiotic resistance is a worsening global concern, and the environmental behaviors and migration patterns of antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) have attracted considerable interest. Understanding the long-range transport of ARG pollution is crucial. In this study, we characterized the dynamics of ARG changes after their release into aquatic environments and demonstrated the importance of traditional chemical contaminants in the transmission mechanisms of ARGs. We hypothesized that the main route of ARG proliferation switches from active transmission to passive transmission. This antibiotic dominated switch is motivated and affected by non-corresponding contaminants. The effect of anthropogenic activities gradually weakens from inland aquatic environments to ocean environments; however, the effect of changes in environmental conditions is enhanced along this gradient. The insights discussed in this study will help to improve the understanding of the distribution and migration of ARG pollution in various aquatic environments, and provide a modern perspective to reveal the effect of corresponding contaminants and non-corresponding contaminants in the process of antibiotic resistance proliferation. (C) 2017 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