Issue

Vol. 30 No. 5 (2018): Vol 30 Issue 5, 2018

Copyright (c) 2018 AJC

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Occurrence and Distribution of Veterinary Residues in Aquatic Environments near Livestock and Poultry Farms in Zhejiang Province, China

https://doi.org/10.14233/ajchem.2018.21208
Jianmei Wang
Institute of Quality and Standard for Agro-Products, Zhejiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, MOA Key Laboratory for Pesticide Residue Detection, Shiqiao Road 198#, Hangzhou 310021, P.R. China
Huizhen Wu
College of Biology and Environmental Engineering, Zhejiang Shuren University, Shuren Street 8#, Hangzhou 310015, P.R. China
Mingrong Qian
Institute of Quality and Standard for Agro-Products, Zhejiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, MOA Key Laboratory for Pesticide Residue Detection, Shiqiao Road 198#, Hangzhou 310021, P.R. China
Junwei Ma
Environmental Resources and Soil Fertilizer Institute, Zhejiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Shiqiao Road 198#, Hangzhou 310021, P.R. China
Hu Zhang
Institute of Quality and Standard for Agro-Products, Zhejiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, MOA Key Laboratory for Pesticide Residue Detection, Shiqiao Road 198#, Hangzhou 310021, P.R. China
Hua Yang
Institute of Quality and Standard for Agro-Products, Zhejiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, MOA Key Laboratory for Pesticide Residue Detection, Shiqiao Road 198#, Hangzhou 310021, P.R. China

Corresponding Author(s) : Mingrong Qian

qianmr@mail.zaas.ac.cn

Asian Journal of Chemistry, Vol. 30 No. 5 (2018): Vol 30 Issue 5, 2018

Abstract

Five categories of antibiotics viz., nineteen fluoroquinolones, sixteen sulfonamides, four tetracyclines, three chloramphenicols, four nitroimidazoles and three of their metabolites were measured in 72 water samples from the river near the livestock and poultry farms in Zhejiang province of China. 48.6 % water sample was positive with at least one drug residue. The detection frequency ranged from 8.3 % for fluoroquinolones to 37.5 % for chloramphenicols. For all the target veterinary drugs, florfenicol had the highest occurrence of 31.9 % with the mean concentration of 484.3 ng L-1. Based on the calculation of hazard quotients, the risk to the aquatic organisms was evaluated and it was demonstrated that the occurrence of sulfamethoxazole, sulfamonomethoxine and florfenicol might pose a risk to aquatic organisms in some study areas.

Keywords

Veterinary drugs Livestock and poultry farm LC-MS/MS Risk assessment
Wang, J., Wu, H., Qian, M., Ma, J., Zhang, H., & Yang, H. (2018). Occurrence and Distribution of Veterinary Residues in Aquatic Environments near Livestock and Poultry Farms in Zhejiang Province, China. Asian Journal of Chemistry, 30(5), 1109–1114. https://doi.org/10.14233/ajchem.2018.21208
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
References
  1. X. Pan, Z. Qiang, W. Ben and M. Chen, Chemosphere, 84, 695 (2011); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2011.03.022.
  2. L. Zhao, Y.H. Dong and H. Wang, Sci. Total Environ., 408, 1069 (2010); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.11.014.
  3. K. Kummerer, Chemosphere, 75, 417 (2009); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2008.11.086.
  4. J.C. Chee-Sanford, R.I. Mackie, S. Koike, I.G. Krapac, Y.F. Lin, A.C. Yannarell, S. Maxwell and R.I. Aminov, J. Environ. Qual., 38, 1086 (2009); https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2008.0128.
  5. H. Dolliver and S. Gupta, J. Environ. Qual., 37, 1227 (2008); https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2007.0392.
  6. W. Cheng, H. Chen, C. Su and S. Yan, Environ. Int., 61, 1 (2013); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2013.08.023.
  7. X. Liang, B. Chen, X. Nie, Z. Shi, X. Huang and X. Li, Chemosphere, 92, 1410 (2013); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2013.03.044.
  8. L.J. Zhou, G.G. Ying, J.L. Zhao, J.F. Yang, L. Wang, B. Yang and S. Liu, Environ. Pollut., 159, 1877 (2011); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2011.03.034.
  9. H. Shi, Y. Yang, M. Liu, C. Yan, H. Yue and J. Zhou, Mar. Pollut. Bull., 83, 317 (2014); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014.04.034.
  10. L. Gao, Y. Shi, W. Li, J. Liu and Y. Cai, J. Environ. Monit., 14, 1248 (2012); https://doi.org/10.1039/c2em10916f.
  11. A. Iglesias, C. Nebot, B.I. Vazquez, J.M. Miranda, C.M. Abuin and A. Cepeda, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. Int., 21, 2367 (2014); https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-013-2142-7.
  12. L. Jiang, X. Hu, D. Yin, H. Zhang and Z. Yu, Chemosphere, 82, 822 (2011); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2010.11.028.
  13. C. Yan, Y. Yang, J. Zhou, M. Liu, M. Nie, H. Shi and L. Gu, Environ. Pollut., 175, 22 (2013); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2012.12.008.
  14. H. Chen, X. Li and S. Zhu, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. Int., 19, 2381 (2012); https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-012-0750-2.
  15. Z. Ye, H.S. Weinberg and M.T. Meyer, Anal. Chem., 79, 1135 (2007); https://doi.org/10.1021/ac060972a.
  16. A. Murata, H. Takada, K. Mutoh, H. Hosoda, A. Harada and N. Nakada, Sci. Total Environ., 409, 5305 (2011); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2011.09.014.
  17. W. Li, Y. Shi, L. Gao, J. Liu and Y. Cai, Chemosphere, 89, 1307 (2012); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2012.05.079.
  18. K. Chen and J.L. Zhou, Chemosphere, 95, 604 (2014); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2013.09.119.
  19. Y. Jiang, M. Li, C. Guo, D. An, J. Xu, Y. Zhang and B. Xi, Chemosphere, 112, 267 (2014); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2014.04.075.
  20. D.J. Huang, J.H. Hou, T.F. Kuo and H.T. Lai, Environ. Toxicol. Pharmacol., 38, 874 (2014); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.etap.2014.09.006.
  21. M. Kolodziejska, J. Maszkowska, A. Bialk-Bielinska, S. Steudte, J. Kumirska, P. Stepnowski and S. Stolte, Chemosphere, 92, 1253 (2013); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2013.04.057.
  22. B. Huerta, E. Marti, M. Gros, P. Lopez, M. Pompeo, J. Armengol, D. Barcelo, J.L. Balcazar, S. Rodriguez-Mozaz and R. Marce, Sci. Total Environ., 456-457, 161 (2013); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.03.071.
  23. E.R. Campagnolo, K.R. Johnson, A. Karpati, C.S. Rubin, D.W. Kolpin, M.T. Meyer, J.E. Esteban, R.W. Currier, K. Smith, K.M. Thu and M. McGeehin, Sci. Total Environ., 299, 89 (2002); https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-9697(02)00233-4.
  24. W.H. Xu, G. Zhang, S.C. Zou, X.D. Li and Y.C. Liu, Environ. Pollut., 145, 672 (2007); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2006.05.038.
  25. E.M. Golet, A.C. Alder and W. Giger, Environ. Sci. Technol., 36, 3645 (2002); https://doi.org/10.1021/es0256212.
  26. Y. Luo, L. Xu, M. Rysz, Y. Wang, H. Zhang and P.J. Alvarez, Environ. Sci. Technol., 45, 1827 (2011); https://doi.org/10.1021/es104009s.
  27. W. Li, L. Gao, Y. Shi, J. Liu and Y. Cai, Environ. Sci. Process. Impacts, 17, 1611 (2015); https://doi.org/10.1039/C5EM00216H.
  28. M.J. Garcia-Galan, S. Gonzalez-Blanco, R. Lopez-Roldan, S. Diaz-Cruz and D. Barcelo, Sci. Total Environ., 437, 403 (2012); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.08.038.
  29. A. Ginebreda, I. Munoz, M.L. de Alda, R. Brix, J. Lopez-Doval and D. Barcelo, Environ. Int., 36, 153 (2010); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2009.10.003.
  30. Y. Kim, K. Choi, J. Jung, S. Park, P.G. Kim and J. Park, Environ. Int., 33, 370 (2007); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2006.11.017.
  31. M. Isidori, M. Lavorgna, A. Nardelli, L. Pascarella and A. Parrella, Sci. Total Environ., 346, 87 (2005); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2004.11.017.
  32. B. Ferrari, R. Mons, B. Vollat, B. Fraysse, N. Paxéus, R.L. Giudice, A. Pollio and J. Garric, Environ. Toxicol. Chem., 23, 1344 (2004); https://doi.org/10.1897/03-246.
  33. H.-T. Lai, J.-H. Hou, C.-I. Su and C.-L. Chen, Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf., 72, 329 (2009); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2008.03.005.
  34. K. Eguchi, H. Nagase, M. Ozawa, Y.S. Endoh, K. Goto, K. Hirata, K. Miyamoto and H. Yoshimura, Chemosphere, 57, 1733 (2004); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2004.07.017.
Read More
Author biographies is not available.
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 0 Download : 0