↓ Skip to main content

Presence of antibiotic residues in various environmental compartments of Shandong province in eastern China: Its potential for resistance development and ecological and human risk

Overview of attention for article published in Environment International, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
287 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
423 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Presence of antibiotic residues in various environmental compartments of Shandong province in eastern China: Its potential for resistance development and ecological and human risk
Published in
Environment International, March 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.envint.2018.02.003
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nada Hanna, Pan Sun, Qiang Sun, Xuewen Li, Xiwei Yang, Xiang Ji, Huiyun Zou, Jakob Ottoson, Lennart E. Nilsson, Björn Berglund, Oliver James Dyar, Ashok J. Tamhankar, Cecilia Stålsby Lundborg

Abstract

To investigate the occurrence of antibiotic residues in different types of environmental samples including water samples in rural Shandong province, China. Further, to characterize the potential ecological risk for development of antibiotic resistance in the environment, and the potential direct human health risk of exposure to antibiotics via drinking water and vegetables. Environmental samples (n = 214) (river water, waste water, drinking water, sediments, manure, soil and edible parts of vegetables) were collected in twelve villages in Shandong province in eastern China. High performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS/MS) was used to determine the concentration of antibiotic residues. The ratio of the measured environmental concentrations (MEC) to the predicted no-effect concentrations (PNEC) was used to evaluate the ecological risk (risk quotient, RQ) for development of antibiotic resistance. The potential risks to human health through exposure to antibiotics in drinking water were assessed by comparing measured environmental concentrations (MEC) and predicted no-effect concentration in drinking water (PNECDW), and in vegetables by comparing estimated daily intake (EDI) to ADI. Sulfapyridine, sulfamethoxazole, ciprofloxacin, enrofloxacin, levofloxacin, norfloxacin, chloramphenicol, florfenicol, doxycycline, and metronidazole were detected at concentrations ranging between 0.3 and 3.9 ng/L in river water, 1.3 and 12.5 ng/L in waste water, 0.5 and 21.4 ng/L in drinking water, 0.31 and 1.21 μg/kg in river sediment, 0.82 and 1.91 μg/kg in pig manure, 0.1 and 11.68 μg/kg in outlet sediment, 0.5 and 2.5 μg/kg in soil, and 6.3 and 27.2 μg/kg in vegetables. The RQs for resistance development were >1 for enrofloxacin, levofloxacin, and ranged between 0.1 and 1 for ciprofloxacin. MECs/PNECDW ratios were <1 from exposure to antibiotics through drinking water for both adults and children. EDI/ADI ratios were <0.1 from exposure to antibiotics by vegetable consumption. Antibiotic pollutants were ubiquitous in various environmental compartments of Shandong province of China. Risk estimates indicated a potential for the measured levels of enrofloxacin, levofloxacin and ciprofloxacin in waste water to pose an ecological risk for resistance selection, and further studies are needed to validate this finding. The investigated antibiotics did not appear to pose an appreciable direct human health risk from environmental exposure through drinking water or vegetables consumption. However, they might still pose a risk for resistance development.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 423 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 423 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 59 14%
Student > Master 57 13%
Researcher 44 10%
Student > Bachelor 35 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 22 5%
Other 69 16%
Unknown 137 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 47 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 39 9%
Chemistry 32 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 25 6%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 20 5%
Other 92 22%
Unknown 168 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 June 2020.
All research outputs
#17,363,471
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Environment International
#4,225
of 5,351 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#219,543
of 350,200 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environment International
#77
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,351 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.7. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 350,200 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.