4.7 Article

Contamination profiles and mass loadings of macrolide antibiotics and illicit drugs from a small urban wastewater treatment plant

期刊

CHEMOSPHERE
卷 75, 期 1, 页码 70-77

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2008.11.047

关键词

PPCPS; Macrolide antibiotics; Methamphetamine; Ecstasy; Wastewater; Kentucky

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Information is limited regarding Sources, distribution, environmental behavior, and fate of prescribed and illicit drugs. Wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) effluents can be one of the sources of pharmaceutical and personal care products (PPCP) into streams, rivers and lakes. The objective of this study was to determine the contamination profiles and mass loadings of urobilin (a chemical marker of human waste), macrolide antibiotics (azithromycin, clarithromycin, roxithromycin), and two drugs of abuse (methamphetamine and ecstasy), from a small (<19 mega liters day(-1), equivalent to <5 million gallons per day) wastewater treatment plant in southwestern Kentucky. The concentrations of azithromycin, clarithromycin, methamphetamine and ecstasy in wastewater samples varied widely, ranging from non-detects to 300 ng L-1. Among the macrolide antibiotics analyzed, azithromycin was consistently detected in influent and effluent samples. in general, influent samples contained relatively higher concentrations of the analytes than the effluents. Based on the daily flow rates and an average concentration of 17.5 ng L-1 in the effluent, the estimated discharge of azithromycin was 200 mg day(-1) (range 63-400 mg day(-1)). Removal efficiency of the detected analytes from this WWTP were in the following order: Urobilin > nnethamphetamine > azithromycin with percentages of removal of 99.9%, 54.5% and 47%, respectively, indicating that the azithromycin and methamphetamine are relatively more recalcitrant than others and have potential for entering receiving waters. (C) 2008 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