4.7 Article

Sunlight-induced degradation of soil-adsorbed veterinary antimicrobials Marbofloxacin and Enrofloxacin

期刊

CHEMOSPHERE
卷 86, 期 2, 页码 130-137

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2011.09.053

关键词

Antimicrobial; Depollution path; Fluoroquinolone; Photodegradation; Photoproduct; Soil

资金

  1. FAR, Pavia University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Marbofloxacin (MAR) and Enrofloxacin (ENR), two largely employed veterinary Fluoroquinolones (FQs), were found to be present at the micrograms per kilogram level in agricultural soils of South Lombardy (Italy) several months after manuring. Distribution coefficients (K-d) from sorption experiments indicated a strong binding to the soil. Soil samples fortified with environmentally significant FQs amounts (0.5 mg kg(-1)) were exposed to solar light that promoted extensive degradation (80%) of both drugs in 60-150 h. Thus, photochemistry could be considered a significant depollution path in the soil, although it was two orders of magnitudes slower than in aqueous solution and a fraction of the drug (ca. 20%) remained unaffected. For MAR the photoprocess was the same as in solution, and involved cleavage of the tetrahydrooxadiazine ring. On the contrary, with ENR only some of the photoproducts determined in water (those arising from a stepwise oxidation of the piperazine side chain) were observed. Substitution of the 6-fluoro by a hydroxyl group and reduction did not occur in the soil, supporting the previous contention that such processes required polar solvation of FQs. Consistently with this rationalization, the irradiation of thin layers of solid drugs led to essentially the same products distribution as in the soil. From the environmental point of view it is important to notice that photodegradation mainly affects the side-chains, while the fluoroquinolone ring, to which the biological effect is associated, is conserved up to the later stages of the degradation. (C) 2011 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