Choose Which Way of Evolution Caused the Fq Antibiotic Resistance

Choose Which Way of Evolution Caused the Fq Antibiotic Resistance

Abstract

Determining the selective potential of antibiotics at ecology concentrations is disquisitional for designing effective strategies to limit selection for antibiotic resistance. This written report determined the minimal selective concentrations (MSCs) for macrolide and fluoroquinolone antibiotics included on the European Commissionʼs Water Framework Directive’s priority hazardous substances Watch List. The macrolides demonstrated positive selection for
ermF
at concentrations one–ii orders of magnitude greater (>500 and <750 µg/Fifty) than measured environmental concentrations (MECs). Ciprofloxacin illustrated positive selection for
intI1
at concentrations like to electric current MECs (>7.8 and <xv.6 µg/L). This highlights the need for compound specific assessment of selective potential. In addition, a sub-MSC selective window defined by the minimal increased persistence concentration (MIPC) is described. Differential rates of negative selection (or persistence) were associated with elevated prevalence relative to the no antibiotic control below the MSC. This increased persistence leads to opportunities for further choice over time and take chances of man exposure and environmental transmission.

Introduction

Antibody concentrations institute in the environment, released from anthropogenic sources1,2, are lower (ng/L–µg/L)3
than minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs). Traditionally these concentrations have not been regarded as posing a chance in terms of selecting for antimicrobial resistance (AMR). However, in research published in 2011 and 2014, single species competition assays determined that selection occurs at concentrations considerably lower than MICs, with the lowest selective concentration (where the resistant strain is enriched over the susceptible) termed the “minimal selective concentration” (MSC)iv,five. MSCs were adamant for various compounds, due east.thou., 100 ng/L for ciprofloxacin to three mg/L for erythromycin, in
Escherichia coli
strains carrying both chromosomal and plasmid borne resistance mechanisms4,five.

Later, attempts have been fabricated to determine MSCs of antibiotics in complex microbial communities more representative of human, fauna and environmental microbiomes. 1 study investigated the selective potential of tetracycline in a model biofilm6
establishing that the prevalence of
tetA
and
tetG
tetracycline resistance genes was significantly higher at 1 µg/50 compared to a no antibody controlhalf-dozen. The same squad too demonstrated significant increment in resistance to ciprofloxacin in
E. coli
isolated from a complex community in a exam tube arrangement and in a biofilm system (at 5 and 10 µg/Fifty of ciprofloxacin, respectively) in comparison to a no antibiotic controlseven. A more recent study undertook evolution experiments like to those used by Gullberg et al.5
in laboratory batch microcosms, but with a complex microbial customs rather than single species inoculum. A MSC of cefotaxime was determined as 0.iv µg/L using qPCR to track prevalence of the
bla
CTX-M
genes over timeeight.

Data using both single species and complex community experiments suggest that antibody concentrations found in environmental settings may select for AMR9. Information has been published showing associations between environmental AMR exposure and negative health outcomes in humans. 1 study determined a link betwixt surfing, and therefore college exposure to bathing waters, and increased gut carriage of CTX-M-producing
Eastward. coli
in comparison to non-surfersx. Information technology is critical to make up one’s mind MSCs for antibiotics and co-selective agents, as at that place is currently no requirement and no agreed test guidelines to test selective potential. Mitigation strategies may exist required to reduce selection for AMR in the environment reducing the probability of environmental transmission11 and evolution of new resistant strains.

In 2015, the European Commission produced a report with a list of ten priority substances or groups of substances which are potentially detrimental to the aquatic environment and require better monitoring. This list included the three macrolide antibiotics (azithromycin, clarithromycin and erythromycin). To determine which compounds should be placed on the Lookout List, predicted no outcome concentrations (PNECs) were compared to predicted environmental concentrations (PECs) for all iii antibiotics, and measured environmental concentrations (MECs), for azithromycin and clarithromycin. Toxicity information for
Ceriodaphnia dubia, Anabaena flos-aquae
and
Synechococcus leopoldenisis
were used to determine PNECs for azithromycin, clarithromycin and erythromycin, respectively. In all cases the PECs and MECs exceeded the PNECs generating unacceptable risk quotients (RQs) > 112. In 2018, the Watch List was updated with the continued inclusion of the macrolides and the addition of antibiotics ciprofloxacin and amoxicillin13.

Macrolides inhibit protein synthesis in bacterial cells by binding to the 23S rRNA component of the 50S subunit of the ribosome. This prevents newly synthesised peptides passing through the ribosome tunnel and, later, translation14,xv. There are a range of mechanisms that bacteria utilise to resist macrolides including rRNA methylases, efflux pumps (both ATP-binding transporters and major facilitators), esterases and phosphorylases16. Macrolides take been detected in a diversity of environmental settings. Concentrations range from ng/L to µg/50 with a maximum MEC (excluding unusually high concentrations from pharmaceutical production effluents, for case) of 4 µg/50 of erythromycin-H2O, a metabolite of erythromycin which is idea to select for resistance genes17,18, measured in surface water in the Jianhan Evidently, Red china19.

Fluoroquinolones (FQs) are a synthetic form of broad specturm antibiotics which has led to them being used extensively worldwide20,21. In 2012, ciprofloxacin was the about highly prescribed FQ in European countries bookkeeping for 71% of consumption22,23. This grade of antibiotics works by binding to, and inhibiting, bacterial type II topoisomerases which are important for cellular processes including DNA replication21. Due to the all-encompassing FQ use in the clinic, many mechanisms conferring resistance to FQs have emerged20. These include mutation of the target site and transferable resistance genes such equally
qnr
genes that encode proteins that block the target site21. Ciprofloxacin has been measured equally high as 31 mg/L in pharmaceutical effluent in Republic of india24, although a median concentration of 0.12 µg/L was calculated using the Umweltbundesamt (German Surroundings Bureau) “Pharmaceuticals in the surroundings” database (excluding values where ciprofloxacin was below the detection limit)25. This is more indicative of typical environmental concentrations of ciprofloxacin.

The aim of this written report was to investigate whether current MECs of azithromycin, clarithromycin, erythromycin and ciprofloxacin select for AMR and to determine the MSCs for each compound. Evolution experiments, as previously  described8, were performed with a complex microbial community inoculum in a elementary reproducible experimental system with greater bacterial and resistance gene diversity, and therefore realism, than single species model systems. A MSC of tetracycline was also determined to compare this method to the previously published model biofilm organisation6. Providing policy makers and regulators with MSC data is important equally this can be used in combination with traditional ecotoxicology information to decide safe discharge levels of antibiotics and other antibacterial compounds, protecting environmental and homo health respectively9,26,27.

Here we prove that the three macrolide antibiotics select for AMR at concentrations considerably college than those found typically in environmental settings simply that ciprofloxacin selects for AMR at concentrations more representative of those establish in the environment. We as well demonstrate a selective window below the MSC which we accept termed the minimal increased persistence concentration (MIPC).

Results

Assessing the selective potential of macrolides

Five macrolide resistance targets (ermB, ermF, mef
family,
mphA
and
msrD) were selected to quantify with qPCR as they are commonly reported from a range of Gram positive and Gram negative bacteria16. In addition,
mphA
was the most common resistance gene found in
East. coli
from clinical samples by Phuc Nguyen et al.28. Farther,
ermB
and
ermF
were suggested equally genetic indicator determinants for assessing resistance to macrolides in the environment29. Selection for the
intI1
gene was also adamant.
IntI1
encodes the class 1 integron integrase gene. Grade 1 integrons have been often described as good markers of anthropogenic pollution and of AMR prevalence equally they integrate a wide range of antibody and biocide resistance genes30,31,32,33,34.

A review of current macrolide concentrations found in typical aquatic environments (excluding concentrations where unusually high concentrations are found, for example pharmaceutical effluent) for the three compounds, and the metabolite erythromycin-HtwoO, was undertaken (Table i) and initial antibiotic concentrations were called based on these values. Supplementary Table ane showing the total listing of concentrations and the references tin can be found in the Supplementary Information.

Table i Environmental concentrations of macrolides.

Full size table

Initial range finding experiments investigated whether environmentally relevant concentrations (0.1, 1, 10 and 100 µg/L) of macrolides select for the targeted resistance genes, Supplementary Figs. i–3. No significant positive pick for any of the genes, at any concentration of macrolides, was observed. Investigation of college concentrations was so undertaken from m to x,000 µg/L for azithromycin and clarithromycin and at 1000, ten,000 and 100,000 µg/L for erythromycin (every bit it has been establish to be less potent than some of its semi-synthetic derivatives35) Supplementary Figs. iv–half-dozen.

For
mphA, significant positive option at extremely high concentrations was observed (x,000 µg/L for azithromycin and clarithromycin and 100,000 µg/L for erythromycin). Statistically significant positive selection for
ermF
was observed to xc% confidence at 1000 µg/50 for azithromycin and erythromycin and to 95% confidence for clarithromycin and at subsequent higher concentrations for all three. No significant positive selection was observed for
ermB,
msrD
or the
mef
family, although some genes showed increased persistence (i.e., charge per unit of gene loss over the 7 24-hour interval menses was reduced with increasing antibiotic concentration).

This suggested a concentration range between 100 and 1000 µg/Fifty was required to make up one’s mind more authentic lowest observable consequence concentrations (LOECs) and MSCs. A final range of macrolide concentrations was chosen based on responses seen in range finding experiments, these were 100, 250, 500, 750, k, x,000 and 100,000 µg/L. While
ermF, mphA
and
intI1
underwent positive pick, only information for
ermF
is presented as a selective effect for this gene was observed at the lowest concentration for all three compounds. However,
mphA
and
intI1
prove a much stronger response in terms of greater increases in gene prevalence at higher antibiotic concentrations (Supplementary Figs. vii–12). For all iii macrolides, pregnant positive pick for
ermF
was observed at 750 µg/L (Fig. 1a–c, respectively). Option for
ermF
was observed at ninety% confidence at 750 µg/L by both azithromycin (p = 0.0616,
z = −1.541855, Dunn’s exam, Δ = v.03) and erythromycin (p = 0.0663,
z = −one.503557, Dunn’s test, Δ = ane.89) and by clarithromycin to 95% confidence (p = 0.0336,
z = −ane.830510, Dunn’s examination, Δ = 3.22) just no pregnant selection was seen for all of the macrolides at 500 µg/L compared to the no antibiotic control (Fig. 1). Nosotros, therefore, adamant 750 µg/Fifty as the LOEC for all three macrolides.

Fig. 1: Selection for
ermF
past macrolide antibiotics.

a
Azithromycin.
b
Clarithromycin.
c
Erythromycin. *Significant positive pick to xc% confidence in comparison to the no antibiotic control. **Pregnant positive selection to 95% confidence in comparing to the no antibiotic control.
n = 5 replicates per concentration. One loftier outlier replicate has been removed from the clarithromycin experiment (24-hour interval seven, 250 µg/L). Boxplots follow the Tukey’s representation.

Full size image

For
mphA, pick past azithromycin occurred at grand (p = 9.21e−5,
t = 4.470, Gamma (log) GLM, Δ = 67.70), x,000 (p = 0.000413,
t = 3.941, Gamma (log) GLM, Δ = 43.27) and 100,000 µg/L (p = 0.003762,
t = 3.125, Gamma (log) GLM, Δ = 21.thirty). For clarithromycin, no significant increment of
mphA
prevalence, in comparison to the no antibiotic control, was seen until 100,000 µg/L (p = 0.0446,
z = −1.699673, Dunn’s test (departure), Δ = 8.66). Similarly, erythromycin did not positively select for
mphA
until 100,000 µg/L (p = 0.0361,
z = −1.797731, Dunn’southward examination, Δ = 26.56). Graphs for these information can be seen in Supplementary Figs. 7, 9 and eleven for azithromycin, clarithromycin and erythromycin, respectively.

In the presence of azithromycin,
intI1
showed a significant increase, compared to the no antibiotic control, to xc% confidence at 1000 µg/L (p = 0.0886,
t = −1.756, Gamma (changed) GLM, Δ = 415.64), 10,000 µg/Fifty (p = 0.0894,
t = −1.752 Gamma (inverse) GLM, Δ = 288.75) and 100,000 µg/Fifty (p = 0.0932,
t = −1.731, Gamma (inverse) GLM, Δ = 125.42). An increase in
intI1
prevalence in the presence of clarithromycin, compared to the no antibiotic control, was observed only at 100,000 µg/Fifty (p = 1.46e−05,
t = five.105, Gaussian GLM (departure), Δ = 1.81). Erythromycin also selected for
intI1, in comparison to the no antibiotic command, at 100,000 µg/L (p = 0.0142,
z = −2.191057, Dunn’s test, Δ = x.63). Graphs for this data can be seen in Supplementary Figs. viii, x and 12 for azithromycin, clarithromycin and erythromycin, respectively.

It was non possible to determine a MSC for choice of
ermF
by azithromycin and clarithromycin every bit the trendline was always above the
x-centrality for both. The MSC is defined where the line of all-time fit crosses the
x-axis (Supplementary Figs. 13 and xiv, respectively). A MSC of erythromycin, however, was calculated (Fig. 2) and was 514.1 µg/L for
ermF.

Fig. 2: Selection coefficient graph for
ermF
by erythromycin.

figure 2

Selection coefficient values were determined as described previously5. These were plotted with a line of best fit (polynomial regression line order 4,
R
2 = 0.1709,
y = −2.544e
−12
x
four + 1.564e
−09
x
3 + ii.59eastward
−06
x
2 − 0.001432x + 0.01684). Here the line of best fit crosses the
ten-axis at 514.i µg/L and this is divers every bit the MSC for this factor selected for by this compound.
n = 5 replicates per concentration.

Full size image

To determine if mutation based resistance to macrolides occurred below the LOEC, phenotypic resistance was quantified at a range of azithromycin concentrations. No significant selection for resistance was observed for
Enterobacteriaceae
spp. on Chromocult agar,
Staphylococci
spp. on Mannitol-table salt agar or leaner able to grow on Mueller-Hinton agar at 100 µg/Fifty. Although some increase in resistance was observed at 1000 µg/L, this was not meaning (Supplementary Fig. fifteen).

Metagenome analysis was undertaken on a subset of samples from macrolide selection experiments equally this was the master focus of the report and has not been investigated by previous studies. Metagenome analysis of tetracycline and ciprofloxacin selection has, however, been previously investigated in studies past Lundström et al.6
and Kraupner et al.7. Three replicates were taken from each handling including the LOEC for all three macrolides (750 µg/50), a concentration below this (250 µg/L) and concentrations higher than this where a strong selective effect is seen past
intI1
(k, 10,000 and 100,000 µg/50).

Popular:   Which Equation Can Be Used to Solve for B

Metagenome assay enabled the relative abundance of all characterised macrolide–lincosamide–streptogramin (MLS) resistance genes to be determined as a function of macrolide concentration (Fig. 3). A pregnant difference in MLS cistron prevalence was observed for both azithromycin (p = 0.0280,
z = −1.911797, Dunn’due south examination, Δ = 8.84) and erythromycin (p = 0.0843,
z = −1.376494, Dunn’south examination, Δ = 0.72) at 10,000 but non for clarithromycin. A significant deviation was seen at 100,000 µg/50 and for azithromycin (p = 0.0047,
z = −2.600044, Dunn’s test, Δ = 15.72) clarithromycin (p = 0.0089,
z = −2.370629, Dunn’s test, Δ = 5.16) and erythromycin (p = 0.0109,
z = −2.294157, Dunn’s test, Δ = v.40) compared to the no antibiotic command.

Fig. three: MLS resistance gene prevalence as a office of macrolide concentration.
figure 3

a
Azithromycin.
b
Clarithromycin.
c
Erythromycin. *Meaning increase to 90% confidence in comparison to the no antibody control. **Significant increment to 95% confidence in comparison to the no antibiotic command.
n = 3 replicates per concentration. Boxplots follow the Tukey’s representation.

Full size prototype

We also observed some individual macrolide genes increasing in prevalence, compared to the no antibiotic control, at 250 µg/Fifty, Supplementary Figs. 16–18. This is currently lower than our LOEC and MSC defined by
ermF. We, therefore, quantified molecular prevalence of two of these genes (ermB
and
macB) with qPCR, equally it has been deemed to be a more sensitive approach than metagenomics and considers gene prevalence in the entire customs rather than just the sequenced fraction6. These genes were chosen to represent the resistance genes observed increasing in relative abundance at lower concentrations.
MacA
was not quantified as it is always found in conjunction with
macB
as they encode two subunits of an ABC-type efflux pump—MacAB36,37. Using qPCR, no positive selection was observed for these genes (i.e., the prevalence of these genes did not increase over time in comparison to the no antibody control), Supplementary Figs. 19 and 20.

Co-selection was observed at loftier concentrations of azithromycin and clarithromycin, Supplementary Figs. 21–23. Resistance to certain antibiotic classes appeared to be selected for at relatively low concentrations of erythromycin (250 µg/L) although if individual gene abundances were compared, a dose dependent response of prevalence did non demonstrate an association with antibody concentration until much higher concentrations suggesting this may be an artefact (Supplementary Fig. 24).

The metagenome analyses also provided information on customs structure. Replicates from all treatments were institute to be dominated by
Due east. coli
and unclassified
Escherichia
spp. but also included a range of other Gram negative and Gram positive taxa.

Replicates treated with azithromycin and clarithromycin became less diverse with increasing concentration of antibiotic, but there was a less articulate pattern when samples were treated with erythromycin. Many species were undetectable when samples were treated with 100,000 µg/L of the specific macrolide, indicating exposure to loftier concentrations reduced community diversity (Supplementary Figs. 25–27).

Assessing the selective potential of ciprofloxacin

The
Enterobacteriaceae
clinical breakpoint from the EUCAST database was called equally the maximum concentration for ciprofloxacin—1000 µg/L (EUCAST, Clinical breakpoints—bacteria (v. 4)). Subsequent concentrations were a twofold dilution series downwardly to 0.98 µg/L.

qnrS
was the form specific gene targeted past qPCR to investigate selection by ciprofloxacin at a range of concentrations. Information technology is the nigh common cistron identified from clinical
Enterobacteriaceae
isolates, is mobile and is often constitute in environmental strains21,38. In improver,
qnr
genes have been reported embedded in complex class 1 integrons39. The
intI1
gene was likewise enumerated to investigate selection by ciprofloxacin. No significant selection for
qnrS
was observed at whatever concentration (Supplementary Fig. 28). For the
intI1
dataset, the Dunnett’southward/Dunn’s approach did not align well to the biological effect. No meaning option was observed with the Dunn’s test until 125 µg/L, however a clear biological event tin exist seen at xv.625 µg/L. For this reason, GLM was used. This determined a significant effect to 90% conviction at 15.625 (p = 0.0634,
t = 1.901, GLM Gamma (identity), Δ = 14.81) and 31.25 µg/L (p = 0.0553,
t = 1.964, GLM Gamma (identity), Δ = 21.01) and to 95% confidence at 62.five (p = 0.0491,
t = 2.019, GLM Gamma (identity), Δ = 32.39), 125 (p = 0.0470,
t = two.039, GLM Gamma (identity), Δ = 40.04), 250 (p = 0.0437,
t = 2.071, GLM Gamma (identity), Δ = 63.89), 500 (p = 0.0438,
t = 2.070, GLM Gamma (identity), Δ = 62.75) and thou µg/50 (p = 0.0429,
t = 2.080, GLM Gamma (identity), Δ = 75.78) (Fig. 4).

Fig. iv: Selection for
intI1
by Ciprofloxacin.

figure 4

Significant pick for
intI1
past ciprofloxacin is seen at concentrations of 15.625 µg/50 (p = 0.0634, Gamma GLM) and college. *Pregnant positive pick to 90% confidence in comparing to the no antibiotic control. **Significant positive option to 95% confidence in comparing to the no antibiotic control.
due north = five replicates per concentration. Boxplot follows the Tukey’s representation.

Full size image

By plotting the data equally choice coefficients, a MSC of 10.77 µg/L was adamant (Fig. 5).

Fig. five: Selection coefficient graph for
intI1
by ciprofloxacin.

figure 5

Selection coefficient values were determined every bit previously in Gullberg et al.five. These were plotted with a line of best fit (polynomial regression line, order 4,
R
2 = 0.4396,
y = 0.1093 + 0.293x–0.5274x
2 + 0.1921x
iii −  0.0188x
4). Hither the line of best fit crosses the
10-axis at 10.77 µg/L and this is defined as the MSC. Plotted here is a square root transformation of the ciprofloxacin concentrations 0.9765625, 1.953125, 3.90625, 7.8125, 15.625 and 31.25 µg/Fifty.
n = 5 replicates per concentration.

Full size image

Comparing in vitro assays for determining MSCs

To determine whether MSCs/LOECs calculated here were comparable to the biofilm microcosm assay adult by Lundström et al.six,
tetG
was quantified using qPCR in a selection experiment run for 7 days under tetracycline hydrochloride choice. Tetracycline concentrations were selected to bridge concentrations where the MSC was reported by Lundström et al.half dozen
(i.east., 0.ane, 1, 10 and 100 µg/Fifty). Significant pick to 90% conviction was observed at 1 µg/L (p = 0.0784,
z = −i.416214 Dunn’due south test, Δ = 2.01), x µg/L (p = 0.0658,
z = −ane.507583, Dunn’s test, Δ = thirteen.84) and 100 µg/Fifty (p = 0.0784,
z = −1.416214, Dunn’s test, Δ = 11.42) in comparing to the no antibiotic command for
tetG
at day 7 (Fig. 6a). However, when data was analysed by comparing prevalence at solar day 0–seven for each concentration as previously in this written report, loss of the
tetG
genes at all tetracycline concentrations tested (0.1–100 µg/Fifty) was observed (Fig. 6b). The average starting prevalence of
tetG
in the current study was 0.0096 and the highest prevalence at the end of the 7 days was 4.3E−06. In the selection coefficient graph produced for this dataset, no positive choice was observed so a MSC could not be determined (Supplementary Fig. 29).

Fig. vi: Persistence of
tetG
as a function of tetracycline concentration.

figure 6

a
Persistence of
tetG
at solar day 7.
b
tetG
prevalence at both day 0 and day 7. *Significant increase to xc% confidence in comparison to the no antibody control.
due north
= 3 replicates per concentration. Boxplots follow the Tukeyʼs representation.

Full size image

Discussion

The information generated in this study suggests that, in this experimental organization, environmental concentrations of the 3 macrolides do non positively select for macrolide resistance genes. For all of the macrolides, significant positive selection for
ermF
was observed at 750 µg/L but not at 500 µg/50.

The LOECs determined here are significantly higher than the maximum MECs determined by the literature review (Table 1) (1.five, 1, ii.4 and four µg/50 for azithromycin, clarithromycin, erythromycin and erythromycin-H2O, respectively).

Past applying a tenfold assessment factor (every bit recommended by the European Medicines Agency40) to 500 µg/L (i.eastward., the highest no observable effect concentration (NOEC)) for azithromycin, clarithromycin and erythromycin, a PNEC of fifty µg/L was obtained. For erythromycin, a tenfold cess gene can be applied to the MSC (514.1 µg/50) to calculate a PNEC of 51.41 µg/L. However, equally macrolide resistance mechanisms developed by bacteria are common to all three macrolides, we assume that they will have an additive selective upshot when all 3 compounds are released together (although this has non been tested and should be considered in time to come studies). These PNECs may notwithstanding, therefore, be underestimates when taking into account combined exposure furnishings.

In the case of option for
intI1
and
mphA
using qPCR and the MLS genes from the metagenome analysis, azithromycin appears to be more selective than both clarithromycin and erythromycin, whereas the latter two appear to correlate with each other. I possible explanation is that clarithromycin and erythromycin are more chemically similar to each other, containing a 14 member lactone band, whereas azithromycin contains a 15 member lactone band41. In addition, it has been shown that azithromycin is a more potent drug than erythromycin35. Furthermore, i study demonstrated lower MICs for azithromycin in comparing to erythromycin and found information technology had increased potency in a range of different bacterial species42.

MSCs and PNECs generated in this study are significantly college than the estimated PNECs for the choice of resistance (PNECRsouth) calculated past Bengtsson-Palme and Larsson43
(azithromycin (0.25 µg/Fifty), clarithromycin (0.25 µg/L) and erythromycin (one µg/L))43, the freshwater PNECs reported by the European Commission12
(azithromycin (0.09 µg/Fifty), clarithromycin (0.13 µg/L) and erythromycin (0.2 µg/L))12
and the PNEC in surface water determined by Le Page et al. (azithromycin (0.019 µg/50), clarithromycin (0.084 µg/50) and erythromycin (0.ii µg/Fifty))26; but prevarication in between the MSCs determined for erythromycin for chromosomal and plasmid based resistance (200 µg/L and 3000 µg/L, respectively) adamant in unmarried species assays by Gullberg et al.4. This suggests that current ecological PNECs may be protective of resistance selection for macrolides, simply this may not be the instance for all classes of antibiotics8,26. The reasons backside these variations in selective outcome concentrations are circuitous. Gullberg et al.four
demonstrated that resistance mechanism (eastward.g., location of mutation) and genetic context influenced MSCs in a unmarried host species organisation. It is also likely that host identity affects MSC and Klümper et al.44
recently demonstrated that when a focal
E. coli
strain was embedded within a complex microbial community the MSC increased by 13–43 times44. Therefore, higher observed MSCs in complex microbial communities, compared to single species assays, are likely to be driven by biological processes as well every bit by less sensitive detection methodologies used (e.g., flow cytometry of fluorescently labelled isogenic strains compared to qPCR and metagenomic approaches) and greater variation betwixt replicates due to the complication of the arrangement.

The subtract in diverseness of species observed in the metagenome for all three macrolides, especially at 100,000 µg/L, could explain why a significant decrease in prevalence was seen for
ermF
at 100,000 µg/50. Presumably, the bacterial species predominantly harbouring this gene were significantly reduced in number by this concentration of macrolide.

Whilst the experimental population is dominated past
E. coli
and
Escherichia
spp, there is notwithstanding a diverse population of bacterial species present. This is non unexpected as the inoculum used was raw wastewater and
E. coli
is a faecal coliform bacterium45. The laboratory conditions that these experiments were undertaken in also favour the growth conditions of
Eastward. coli
and other
Escherichia
spp. These species are Gram negative opportunistic pathogens and are, therefore, of nifty concern in regards to the emergence of resistance. In add-on,
E. coli
has been shown to exist a reservoir for the macrolide resistance gene
mphA
28, which was consistently the resistance cistron plant to be one of the most abundant genes in all three metagenome datasets.

Of all the form specific genes tested, three targets (ermB, msrD
and the
mef
gene family) did non undergo positive pick at any antibiotic concentration, even at clinically relevant concentrations. One possible caption might be the depression prevalence of these genes in the population in our initial inoculum, although
ermF
consistently demonstrated the everyman starting prevalence of all macrolide resistance genes quantified (except for msrD, which was 0.002 lower) but still demonstrated enrichment with increasing macrolide concentration. It is also possible that the bacterial taxa carrying
ermB, msrD
and
mef
were outcompeted by other resistant taxa with intrinsic or acquired resistance conferred by other mechanisms.

For ciprofloxacin, we determined a MSC of 10.77 µg/L, and with an cess factor of 10 applied, a PNEC of 1.077 µg/Fifty. These values are in the same society of magnitude as ciprofloxacin MECs reported in aquatic environments (not including pharmaceutical manufacturing waste pollution)46. Ciprofloxacin levels in hospital wastewater influent in Switzerland, for example, accept been reported betwixt 3 and 87 µg/L47. This means that selection for FQ resistance may occur in certain environmental settings polluted with peculiarly high levels of ciprofloxacin. Furthermore, as this MSC is based on
intI1
pick, information technology is likely genes conferring resistance to different antimicrobials may also be co-selected by ciprofloxacin at these low concentrations. This is due to the fact that start; some class 1 integron backbones also contain the
sul1
gene (which confers resistance to sulphonamides) and the partly functional, multi-drug efflux pump
qacΔ1
(which confers resistance to quaternary ammonium compounds);
and second; class ane integron arrays are known to carry a diversity of dissimilar AMR factor cassettes48. A form specific qPCR gene target (qnrS) was likewise enumerated, merely no option was observed. Previously, metagenome analyses have been performed in the same experimental system, where untreated wastewater was exposed to ciprofloxacin at 500 µg/L. Even at this comparatively high concentration, no meaning increase in known FQ resistance genes was observed. Withal, prevalence of genes conferring resistance to several other antibiotic classes did increase significantly49. This suggests that at that place may be uncharacterised FQ resistance mechanisms that are selected for below the MSC established by
intI1
prevalence in this study.

Popular:   People Began to Study Classical Thought During the Renaissance to

The ciprofloxacin MSC determined hither (10.77 µg/Fifty) is similar to the LOEC adamant in the biofilm (10 µg/L) and test tube (v µg/L) experiments past Kraupner et al.7
simply are, as with the macrolide compounds, college than the PNECR
calculated by Bengtsson-Palme and Larsson43
(0.064 µg/50) and the freshwater PNEC calculated past the European Commission12
(0.089 µg/Fifty). The value determined by the European Committee12
has, however, had an assessment factor of fifty applied meaning the NOEC was 4.45 µg/50, which is in the same society of magnitude as the MSC determined in the electric current study. It is also in the same club of magnitude as the MSCs determined for a variety of chromosomal mutations, by Gullberg et al.five, that ranged from 0.1 to ii.v µg/L and the PNEC in surface h2o determined for ciprofloxacin (0.565 µg/L) by Le Page et al.26
for cyanobacteria. This agreement in selective effect concentrations across several studies past different research groups suggests that, for ciprofloxacin at least, we can be fairly confident that positive choice occurs in the range of current MECs. The organization used hither maximises numbers of bacterial generations, and therefore opportunities to notice selection, using high temperature and nutrient conditions. It however, however, generated comparable information to the lower temperature/nutrient flow through biofilm system used previously6.

A comparison of the method used in this study and that used previously by Lundström et al.6
was made by undertaking a tetracycline selection experiment. A significant increase in prevalence of
tetG
was observed at i µg/L compared to the no antibiotic control (Fig. 6a) when because only day 7 prevalence (at the terminate of the experiment), as reported in Lundström et al.6. Notwithstanding, when taking into account the starting prevalence, a reduction in
tetG
prevalence over time was observed at all concentrations of tetracycline tested (Fig. 6b). Therefore what was described by Lundström et al.six
may take been due to increased persistence (i.e., reduced rate of negative selection) and non positive selection or enrichment as suggested. The term MSC should exist reserved for the lowest concentration of antibiotic “where the resistant mutant is enriched over the susceptible strain”l. A concentration above which a pregnant increase in persistence is observed could instead exist divers as the minimal increased persistence concentration (MIPC). The MIPC is important every bit concentrations of antibody above this will decrease the rate at which resistant bacteria disappear from the environment. This will effect in an increased human exposure risk and the probability of subsequent development in comparing to environments where no antibiotics are nowadays. It is less of a concern, yet, than if positive pick was occurring where numbers of resistance genes and resistant bacteria increase over time. This raises concerns regarding a sub-MSC persistence window (Fig. 7) where numbers of resistant bacteria are higher than if there was no antibiotic present, even though concentrations are beneath the MSC. Therefore, it could be argued that regulators should exist using the MIPC rather than MSC/LOEC as the endpoint when determining safe discharge limits for antimicrobials. The vastly different MSCs/LOECs for the different antibiotics determined hither demonstrates the importance of individually testing the selective potential of all antibiotics and other co-selective compounds. Information technology is of import that gene targets used to determine selection endpoints past qPCR are appropriate and this can be ensured using metagenome analysis to identify genes enriched at the everyman antibody concentrations8. Yet, the being of uncharacterised resistance genes cannot be ruled out, which is why phenotypic characterisation is still useful.

Fig. seven: Effect of antibiotic concentration on the growth rate of leaner.
figure 7

Diagrammatic representation of change of growth rate of susceptible leaner (bluish line) and resistant bacteria (reddish line) with increasing antibody concentration. Graph adjusted from Gullberg et al.5
to include a sub-MSC persistence window (blue area), the surface area between the MIPC and the MSC. In both the dark-green and blue area, the susceptible bacteria outcompete resistant bacteria. In the sub-MSC persistence window (bluish surface area), withal, as growth rate of susceptible begins to subtract there is an overall change in the ratio of resistant to susceptible leaner and afterwards a difference in full number of resistant bacteria compared to if no antibiotic was nowadays. Information technology is not until the MSC and then in the sub-MIC selective window (yellowish surface area) that resistant bacteria are enriched over susceptible bacteria and positive selection for resistance occurs.

Full size prototype

Although determining the MSC is important for evaluating the selective effects of existing and new antibiotics, it should be used in combination with other bacterial and ecological endpoints. This will enable a more informed assessment of the risk these compounds pose to the surroundings and indirectly to human health through option for AMR, every bit the MSC may not ever be the most protective endpoint. In addition it should exist noted that the MSC determines the threshold at which positive selection occurs and does not give whatever insights into the magnitude of the selective effect. For instance the macrolide MSC/LOECs were adamant by
ermF
but the increase in prevalence was small, whereas the LOEC adamant for
intI1and
mphA
was higher but was associated with a much greater increase in prevalence.

We also show, for the starting time time to our noesis, that sub-MSC concentrations, to a higher place the MIPC may as well be of import to consider as they are likely to be associated with increased human exposure risk, increased probability of resistance factor transfer and increased AMR evolution due to greater numbers of resistant bacteria being nowadays in ecology settings. Still, with increased persistence the number of resistant bacteria or resistance genes volition decrease over time at antibiotic concentrations to a higher place the MIPC whereas enrichment through positive choice (at antibiotic concentrations above the MSC) will lead to increased AMR over time, and so the two phenomena are fundamentally unlike in terms of outcome. If the MIPC was used every bit the selective endpoint when determining prophylactic release limits, this could subtract the PNECs of some antibiotics considerably.

Based on selection for AMR alone, this data would propose that the macrolides could be removed from the European Commission’s H2o Framework Directive’s priority hazardous substances Watch Listing, whereas ciprofloxacin should remain. However, the decision as to whether the macrolides remain on the Lookout Listing, are deprioritised, or are included every bit priority substances will need to be based on whether the Watch List monitoring data indicates that they pose an EU-wide ecological gamble or not.

Methods

Circuitous community sample collection

A grab sample of raw wastewater influent was obtained from a small wastewater treatment plant in Falmouth, U.k. serving a population of circa 43,000 in Oct 2015. Samples were frozen at −80 °C in twoscore mL aliquots consisting of 20 mL wastewater and 20 mL 40% glycerol (Fisher).

Selection experiment

Samples were washed past pelleting bacteria by centrifugation at 3500 rpm, removing the supernatant and resuspending in the same volume of 0.85% saline solution. This was repeated to remove existing, potentially selective compounds. Iso-sensitest broth (Oxoid) was inoculated with 10% v/5 of the washed wastewater sample with the appropriate concentration of antibody (azithromycin (Sigma-aldrich), clarithromycin (Molekula), erythromycin (Acros Organics), ciprofloxacin (Sigma-Aldrich) or tetracycline hydrochloride (Fisher)). These were incubated at 37 °C for 24 h, after which 50 µL of the culture was passaged in fresh broth (five mL) with the appropriate antibiotic concentrations. These experiments were carried out over a 7 day period with passage every 24 h. In total, 1 mL of samples was taken at day 0 and 7, centrifuged at xiv,800 rpm for 3 min and the pellet was resuspended in 1 mL of xx% glycerol and frozen at −fourscore °C.

DNA extraction

DNA was extracted from samples using the MO Bio UltraClean®
Microbial Deoxyribonucleic acid Isolation Kit (at present QIAGEN DNeasy UltraClean Microbial Kit, 12224-250), as per the manufacturer’s instructions. DNA was stored at −twenty °C until utilize.

Real-time PCR

The form specific macrolide resistance gene targets chosen were
ermB, ermF, mphA, msrD
and
mef
family unit (which targeted genes
mefA, mefE, mefI
and
mefO), for ciprofloxacin the target was
qnrS
and for tetracycline the class specific gene was
tetG. The
intI1
integrase gene was besides targeted for both the macrolide and ciprofloxacin experiment. Finally, the 16S rRNA gene, which has been used as a proxy for bacterial jail cell numberhalf-dozen,eight, was also enumerated to make up one’s mind molecular prevalence (target gene re-create number/16S rRNA copy number).

Genes tested and their respective primers are shown in Tabular array two.

Table 2 Primer sequences for qPCR.

Full size table

qPCR using Deoxyribonucleic acid extracted from the macrolide and tetracycline experiments was undertaken using Brilliant III Ultra-Fast Sybr®
Green QPCR Chief Mix (Agilent Technologies) on the Applied Biosystems StepOne™ auto. Cycling conditions used included an initial cycling phase of 95 °C for 20 s, followed by 50 cycles of 95 °C for ten s and 60 °C for thirty south. Reactions consisted of 10 µL of chief mix, ii µL of primer pair (10 µM for all primers except 16S which was ix µM), 0.half-dozen µL of ROX dye, 5 µL of diluted template and were fabricated upwards to 20 µL with sterile water.

DNA extracted from the ciprofloxacin development experiment was analysed using the PrimerDesign PrecisionPLUS MasterMix with pre-added ROX (PrimerDesign). In total, 20 µL reactions consisted of 5 µL of diluted template, 10 µL of mastermix, 2 µL of primer pair (iv.five µM), 0.2 µL of BSA (xx mg/mL) and filter sterilised water up to 20 µL full book. Cycling atmospheric condition used were x min at 95 °C, 40 cycles of 95 °C for fifteen south and 60 °C for i min.

The 2 mastermixes were compared and no significant difference was seen between copy numbers determined for the sample template Deoxyribonucleic acid.

Plating experiment

As azithromycin has been shown to be more than stiff than the natural compound, erythromycin35
and has a lower MIC42, a phenotypic resistance experiment was only conducted on azithromycin as it was expected to bear witness the lowest response of the three macrolides.

Day vii cultures from samples grown with azithromycin concentrations of 0, 100, 1000 and ten,000 µg/L were plated onto three different types of agar to determine phenotypic resistance. These were Chromocult Coliform Agar Enhanced Selectivity (Merck), for growing
Enterobacteriaceae
spp., Mannitol-salt agar (composition co-ordinate to HiMedia Laboratories Technical Data protocol), for
Staphylococcus
spp., and the non-selective (in terms of bacterial diverseness) Mueller-Hinton agar (Oxoid). Serial dilutions of 100 µL of culture were plated onto agar with and without azithromycin. For Chromocult agar, 16 mg/Fifty azithromycin was used (the clinical breakpoint for
Salmonella
Typhi and
Shigella
spp. (EUCAST, Clinical breakpoints—bacteria (five 7.one)), and for Mannitol-salt and Muller-Hinton agar two mg/L was used (the clinical breakpoint for
Staphylococcus
spp. (EUCAST, Clinical breakpoints—leaner (v. 7.1))).

Metagenome sequencing

A subset of samples from the week long selection experiments were chosen for metagenomic analysis. Three replicates from 0, 250, 750, 1000, 10,000 and 100,000 µg/L for all 3 macrolides were sequenced.

DNA was purified as described in Murray et al.eight
using RNase A (Qiagen) and AMPure XP beads (Beckman Coulter). Samples were sent to Exeter Sequencing Eye. Libraries were prepared using the Nextera XT Dna Library Prep Kit and paired finish sequencing was undertaken on a HiSeq 2500.

Sequences were outset trimmed for adaptor removal using Skewer51
and quality was checked using FastQC52
and MultiQC53. Paired stop reads were combined using FLASH version ii54
and MetaPlAn255
was used to assign bacterial species. Heatmaps for species diversity were generated using Hclust256. Antibiotic Resistance Gene Online Analysis Pipeline (ARGs-OAP) version 257
was used, with default settings, to quantify relative abundance and diversity of AMR genes.

Statistics and reproducibility

The macrolide range finding experiments and the tetracycline experiments accept three biological replicates per concentration. All other experiments had five biological replicates per concentration.

All statistical analyses were performed in R Studio58. ANOVA and Dunnett’south tests59
were performed for parametric data; and for non-parametric information, Kruskal Wallis and Dunn’southward testssixty
were undertaken. Significance was adamant to 90 and 95% conviction. Every bit mixed community experiments are inherently noisy due to founder effects and stochasticity, 90% confidence was besides highlighted to show less strong associations and will be more protective of selection for AMR in the environment. Where the Dunnett’due south/Dunn’s test did not marshal well to the biological effect observed, a general linearised model (GLM) approach was used. Gaussian and Gamma model families were explored with diverse link functions and the best model fit was selected if assumptions were well met (if residuals were normal and variances were homogenous) and by testing for overdispersion. Test statistics are reported (z
for Dunn’s examination and
t
for GMLs) and Glass’s delta (Δ) is used to report estimated effect size.

ANOVA/Kruskal Wallis tests were performed on the prevalence at twenty-four hour period 0 to ensure there was no variation betwixt starting prevalences of samples. If a difference was observed, the post-hoc tests described above were undertaken on the difference between twenty-four hour period 0 and 7. This is specified where appropriate.

Popular:   Did D Day Ultimately End German Ambitions in Europe

Selection coefficient graphs were produced using the formula
s = [ln (prevalence at 24-hour interval seven/prevalence at 24-hour interval 0)]/seven equally in Gullberg et al.five. Where genes were adamant by qPCR to have a re-create number of zero at twenty-four hour period 0, we determined a pseudo value every bit these samples e’er showed presence of the cistron at day seven. We were able to conclude, therefore, that these genes were below the limit of detection at the start of the experiment. The pseudo value was taken to exist one-half of the detection limit every bit an estimate. A line of best fit (testing linear and polynomial models) was adamant using the polynom package61
in R studio and a summary of the models was produced. The model with the best fit was determined by considering the
R
2
value and comparing models using a one-manner ANOVA.

Definitions of selective endpoints

The lowest selective endpoint determined by statistical assay of qPCR data was defined as the LOEC and the highest concentration where no pregnant selection occurred as the no appreciable consequence concentration (NOEC). The selective endpoint determined by the pick coefficient is defined as the MSC.

Reporting summary

Further information on research pattern is available in the Nature Research Reporting Summary linked to this commodity.

Data availability

The datasets associated with Figs. one–6 are included in this published article every bit a Supplementary Data file. Metagenome sequence files accept been deposited in the European Nucleotide Archive. Accession number: PRJEB38942.

Code availability

Lawmaking used for metagenome assay: FastQC; MultiQC; FLASH2; Metaphlan2; Hclust2 and ARGs-OAP v2.

References

  1. Levy, S. B. & Marshall, B. Antibacterial resistance worldwide: causes, challenges and responses.
    Nat. Med.
    x, S122–S129 (2004).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

  2. Finley, R. Fifty. et al. The scourge of antibiotic resistance: the of import role of the environment.
    Clin. Infect. Dis.
    57, 704–710 (2013).

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

  3. Homem, V. & Santos, L. Degradation and removal methods of antibiotics from aqueous matrices—a review.
    J. Environ. Manag.
    92, 2304–2347 (2011).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar

  4. Gullberg, E., Albrecht, 50. K., Karlsson, C., Sandegren, L. & Andersson, D. I. Selection of a multidrug resistance plasmid past sublethal levels of antibiotics and heavy metals.
    mBio
    5, e01918–01914 (2014).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar

  5. Gullberg, East. et al. Option of resistant bacteria at very depression antibody concentrations.
    PLoS Pathog.
    7, e1002158 (2011).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar

  6. Lundström, S. V. et al. Minimal selective concentrations of tetracycline in circuitous aquatic bacterial biofilms.
    Sci. Total Environ.
    553, 587–595 (2016).

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar

  7. Kraupner, N. et al. Selective concentration for ciprofloxacin resistance in
    Escherichia coli
    grown in complex aquatic bacterial biofilms.
    Environ. Int.
    116, 255–268 (2018).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

  8. Murray, A. K. et al. Novel insights into selection for antibody resistance in complex microbial communities.
    mBio
    9, https://doi.org/x.1128/mBio.00969-18 (2018).

  9. Ashbolt, Due north. J. et al. Human Health Adventure Assessment (HHRA) for environmental development and transfer of antibiotic resistance.
    Environ. Health Perspect.
    121, 993–1001 (2013).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar

  10. Leonard, A. F. C. et al. Exposure to and colonisation by antibiotic-resistant
    E. coli
    in United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland coastal water users: environmental surveillance, exposure assessment, and epidemiological study (Embankment Bum Survey).
    Environ. Int.
    114, 326–333 (2018).

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

  11. Agerstrand, M. et al. Improving environmental risk assessment of human being pharmaceuticals.
    Environ. Sci. Technol.
    49, 5336–5345 (2015).

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar

  12. EuropeanCommission.
    Development of the first Watch Listing nether the Ecology Quality Standards Directive. https://doi.org/10.2788/101376 (2015).

  13. EuropeanCommission. Commission Implementing Decision (Eu) 2018/840 of 5 June 2018 establishing a spotter list of substances for Union-wide monitoring in the field of water policy pursuant of Directive 2008/105/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Commission Implementing Decision (Eu) 2015/495.
    Off. J. Eur. Wedlock
    1–4. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32018D0840&from=EN (2018).

  14. Kannan, Grand. & Mankin, A. S. Macrolide antibiotics in the ribosome exit tunnel: species-specific binding and action.
    Ann. Northward.Y. Acad. Sci.
    1241, 33–47 (2011).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

  15. Mazzei, T., Mini, E., Novelli, A. & Periti, P. Chemistry and mode of action of macrolides.
    J. Antimicrob. Chemother.
    31 Suppl C, 1–9 (1993).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

  16. Roberts, M. C. Update on macrolide-lincosamide-streptogramin, ketolide, and oxazolidinone resistance genes.
    FEMS Microbiol. Lett.
    282, 147–159 (2008).

    CAS  PubMed  Commodity  Google Scholar

  17. Fan, C. et al. Influence of trace erythromycin and eryhthromycin-H2o on carbon and nutrients removal and on resistance selection in sequencing batch reactors (SBRs).
    Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol.
    85, 185–195 (2009).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Cardinal  Article  Google Scholar

  18. Majer, J. In vitro consecration of resistance to erythromycin past its metabolite.
    Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
    19, 628–633 (1981).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Commodity  Google Scholar

  19. Tong, L., Huang, S., Wang, Y., Liu, H. & Li, M. Occurrence of antibiotics in the aquatic environment of Jianghan Apparently, central China.
    Sci. Total Environ.
    497-498, 180–187 (2014).

    CAS  PubMed  Commodity  Google Scholar

  20. Adachi, F., Yamamoto, A., Takakura, K. & Kawahara, R. Occurrence of fluoroquinolones and fluoroquinolone-resistance genes in the aquatic environment.
    Sci. Full Environ.
    444, 508–514 (2013).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

  21. Redgrave, L. S., Sutton, Due south. B., Webber, G. A. & Piddock, Fifty. J. Fluoroquinolone resistance: mechanisms, impact on bacteria, and function in evolutionary success.
    Trends Microbiol.
    22, 438–445 (2014).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

  22. Janecko, N., Pokludova, Fifty., Blahova, J., Svobodova, Z. & Literak, I. Implications of fluoroquinolone contamination for the aquatic environment—a review.
    Environ. Toxicol. Chem.
    35, 2647–2656 (2016).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

  23. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Command.
    Surveillance of Antimicrobial Consumption in Europe 2012. https://doi.org/10.2900/32937 (2014).

  24. Larsson, D. Yard., de Pedro, C. & Paxeus, Due north. Effluent from drug manufactures contains extremely high levels of pharmaceuticals.
    J. Hazard Mater.
    148, 751–755 (2007).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

  25. Umweltbundesamt.
    Pharmaceuticals in the Environment
    (Umweltbundesamt, 2016).

  26. Le Page, Yard., Gunnarsson, L., Snape, J. & Tyler, C. R. Integrating human and environmental health in antibody risk cess: a disquisitional analysis of protection goals, species sensitivity and antimicrobial resistance.
    Environ. Int.
    109, 155–169 (2017).

    PubMed  Commodity  CAS  Google Scholar

  27. Brandt, Thou. Thou. et al. Ecotoxicological assessment of antibiotics: a telephone call for improved consideration of microorganisms.
    Environ. Int.
    85, 189–205 (2015).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

  28. Phuc Nguyen, M. C. et al.
    Escherichia coli
    every bit reservoir for macrolide resistance genes.
    Emerg. Infect. Dis.
    fifteen, 1648–1650 (2009).

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar

  29. Berendonk, T. U. et al. Tackling antibiotic resistance: the environmental framework.
    Nat. Rev. Microbiol.
    thirteen, 310–317 (2015).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

  30. Gillings, M. R. et al. Using the form i integron-integrase gene as a proxy for anthropogenic pollution.
    ISME J.
    9, 1269–1279 (2015).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

  31. Kotlarska, E., Luczkiewicz, A., Pisowacka, M. & Burzynski, A. Antibody resistance and prevalence of class ane and two integrons in Escherichia coli isolated from ii wastewater handling plants, and their receiving waters (Gulf of Gdansk, Baltic Body of water, Poland).
    Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. Int.
    22, 2018–2030 (2015).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

  32. Gaze, Westward. H. et al. Impacts of anthropogenic activity on the ecology of class 1 integrons and integron-associated genes in the surround.
    ISME J.
    5, 1253–1261 (2011).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar

  33. Abella, J., Fahy, A., Duran, R. & Cagnon, C. Integron multifariousness in bacterial communities of freshwater sediments at different contamination levels.
    FEMS Microbiol. Ecol.
    91, https://doi.org/10.1093/femsec/fiv140 (2015).

  34. Jechalke, Due south. et al. Widespread dissemination of class 1 integron components in soils and related ecosystems every bit revealed past cultivation-independent analysis.
    Front Microbiol.
    four, 420 (2013).

    PubMed  Google Scholar

  35. Jelic, D. & Antolovic, R. From Erythromycin to azithromycin and new potential ribosome-binding antimicrobials.
    Antibiotics
    5, https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics5030029 (2016).

  36. Rouquette-Loughlin, C. E., Balthazar, J. T. & Shafer, W. Thou. Label of the MacA-MacB efflux organisation in Neisseria gonorrhoeae.
    J. Antimicrob. Chemother.
    56, 856–860 (2005).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

  37. Bogomolnaya, L. Grand. et al. The ABC-type efflux pump MacAB protects Salmonella enterica serovar typhimurium from oxidative stress.
    mBio
    iv, e00630–00613 (2013).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar

  38. Strahilevitz, J., Jacoby, Grand. A., Hooper, D. C. & Robicsek, A. Plasmid-mediated quinolone resistance: a multifaceted threat.
    Clin. Microbiol. Rev.
    22, 664–689 (2009).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar

  39. Moura, A. et al. INTEGRALL: a database and search engine for integrons, integrases and factor cassettes.
    Bioinformatics
    25, 1096–1098 (2009).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

  40. European Medical Agency.
    Guideline on the Environmental Gamble Assessment of Medicinal Products for Human Utilise
    (European Medical Agency, 2018).

  41. Leclercq, R. & Courvalin, P. Resistance to macrolides and related antibiotics in Streptococcus pneumoniae.
    Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
    46, 2727–2734 (2002).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar

  42. Retsema, J. et al. Spectrum and fashion of action of azithromycin (CP-62,993), a new 15-membered-ring macrolide with improved authority against gram-negative organisms.
    Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
    31, 1939–1947 (1987).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar

  43. Bengtsson-Palme, J. & Larsson, D. Grand. Concentrations of antibiotics predicted to select for resistant bacteria: Proposed limits for ecology regulation.
    Environ. Int.
    86, 140–149 (2016).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

  44. Klümper, U. et al. Option for antimicrobial resistance is reduced when embedded in a natural microbial community.
    ISME J.
    xiii, 2927–2937 (2019).

    PubMed  PubMed Primal  Article  CAS  Google Scholar

  45. Edberg, Due south. C., Rice, E. W., Karlin, R. J. & Allen, M. J.
    Escherichia coli: the best biological drinking h2o indicator for public health protection.
    Symp. Ser. Soc. Microbiol.
    88, 106S-116S (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar

  46. Larsson, D. G. Pollution from drug manufacturing: review and perspectives.
    Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci.
    369, https://doi.org/ten.1098/rstb.2013.0571 (2014).

  47. Hartmann, A., Alder, A. C., Koller, T. & Widmer, R. Chiliad. Identification of fluoroquinolone antibiotics as the main source of umuC genotoxicity in native hospital wastewater.
    Environ. Toxicol. Chem.
    17, https://doi.org/ten.1002/etc.5620170305 (2009).

  48. Partridge, Southward. R., Tsafnat, G., Coiera, E. & Iredell, J. R. Cistron cassettes and cassette arrays in mobile resistance integrons.
    FEMS Microbiol. Rev.
    33, 757–784 (2009).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

  49. Murray, A. K., Zhang, L., Snape, J. & Gaze, W. H. Comparing the selective and co-selective effects of different antimicrobials in bacterial communities.
    Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents
    53, 767–773 (2019).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar

  50. Andersson, D. I. & Hughes, D. Persistence of antibiotic resistance in bacterial populations.
    FEMS Microbiol. Rev.
    35, 901–911 (2011).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

  51. Jiang, H., Lei, R., Ding, South. & Zhu, South. Skewer: a fast and accurate adapter trimmer for next-generation sequencing paired-end reads.
    BMC Bioinform.
    xv, https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-15-182 (2014).

  52. Andrews, S.
    FastQC: A Quality Control Tool for High Throughput Sequence Data. https://www.bioinformatics.babraham.air conditioning.britain/projects/fastqc/ (2010).

  53. Ewels, P., Magnusson, 1000., Lundin, S. & Käller, G. MultiQC: summarize assay results for multiple tools and samples in a single written report.
    Bioinformatics
    32, 3047–3048 (2016).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Commodity  Google Scholar

  54. Magoc, T. & Salzberg, South. L. Flash: fast length adjustment of short reads to improve genome assemblies.
    Bioinformatics
    27, 2957–2963 (2011).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Fundamental  Article  Google Scholar

  55. Truong, D. T. et al. MetaPhlAn2 for enhanced metagenomic taxonomic profiling.
    Nat. Methods
    12, 902–903 (2015).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

  56. Segata, Northward. HClust2. https://github.com/SegataLab/hclust2 (GitHub., 2018).

  57. Yin, X. et al. ARGs-OAP v2.0 with an expanded SARG database and Hidden Markov Models for enhancement characterization and quantification of antibiotic resistance genes in ecology metagenomes.
    Bioinformatics
    34, 2263–2270 (2018).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

  58. R Team.
    RStudio: Integrated Development Environment for R
    (RStudio Inc., Boston, MA, 2016).

  59. Hothorn, T., Bretz, F. & Westfall, P. Simultaneous inference in general parametric models.
    Biom. J.
    l, 346–363 (2008).

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

  60. Dinno, A.
    Dunn’s Test of Multiple Comparisons Using Rank Sums
    (2017).

  61. Venables, B., Hornik, G. & Maechler, Chiliad. Polynom: a collection of functions to implement a class for univariate polynomial manipulations.
    R Bundle Version 1.4-0
    (2019).

  62. Jung, J. H., Yoon, Eastward. J., Choi, East. C. & Choi, S. S. Development of TaqMan probe-based existent-time PCR method for erm(A),erm(B), and erm(C), rapid detection of macrolide-lincosamide-streptogramin B resistance genes, from clinical isolates.
    J. Microbiol. Biotechnol.
    nineteen, 1464–1469 (2009).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

  63. Barraud, O., Baclet, M. C., Denis, F. & Ploy, M. C. Quantitative multiplex real-time PCR for detecting course 1, two and 3 integrons.
    J. Antimicrob. Chemother.
    65, 1642–1645 (2010).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

  64. Suzuki, M. T., Taylor, Fifty. T. & DeLong, E. F. Quantitative analysis of small-subunit rRNA genes in mixed microbial populations via 5’-nuclease assays.
    Appl. Environ. Microbiol.
    66, 4605–4614 (2000).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Primal  Commodity  Google Scholar

  65. Colomer-Lluch, K. et al. Antibiotic resistance genes in bacterial and bacteriophage fractions of Tunisian and Spanish wastewaters as markers to compare the antibiotic resistance patterns in each population.
    Environ. Int.
    73, 167–175 (2014).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

Download references

Acknowledgements

I.C.Due south. was supported by a BBSRC/AZ CASE Studentship BB/N504026/1. A.Thou.One thousand. was supported by a BBSRC/AZ CASE Studentship, BB/L502509/1, and a NERC Industrial Innovation Fellowship, NE/R01373X/1. L.Z. was supported by Natural Surround Research Council grants NE/M011259/1 and NE/N019717/i. The authors would like to thank Richard Henshaw and JJ Valletta for their aid and advice on statistical analysis.

Writer information

Authors and Affiliations

Contributions

I.C.S., A.K.M., 50.Z., J.Due south. and West.H.G. contributed equally to the design of the work. I.C.S. undertook the experimental piece of work for the macrolides and tetracycline. A.K.Thou. undertook the experimental work for ciprofloxacin. A.Thousand.Thousand. undertook the bioinformatics analysis of the metagenome samples. I.C.S. drafted the paper and A.One thousand.M., L.Z., J.S. and W.H.G. contributed to revisions and have read the final version.

Respective author

Correspondence to William H. Gaze.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

J.Southward. is an employee and shareholder of AstraZeneca PLC. All remaining authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s annotation
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Open Access
This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits utilise, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, equally long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Eatables license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party textile in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the textile. If material is non included in the commodity’south Creative Commons license and your intended utilise is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/four.0/.

Reprints and Permissions

Nearly this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Stanton, I.C., Murray, A.One thousand., Zhang, Fifty.
et al.
Evolution of antibiotic resistance at low antibiotic concentrations including selection below the minimal selective concentration.
Commun Biol
3, 467 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-020-01176-west

Download citation

  • Received:



  • Accepted:



  • Published:



  • DOI
    :

    https://doi.org/x.1038/s42003-020-01176-w

Further reading

  • Existing testify on antibiotic resistance exposure and transmission to humans from the environment: a systematic map

    • Isobel Catherine Stanton
    • Alison Bethel
    • Ruth Garside

    Environmental Testify
    (2022)

  • Antibiotic resistance in the environment

    • D. G. Joakim Larsson
    • Carl-Fredrik Flach

    Nature Reviews Microbiology
    (2022)

  • High concentrations of pharmaceuticals emerging as a threat to Himalayan water sustainability

    • Duncan J. Quincey
    • Paul Kay
    • Lee E. Brown

    Environmental Science and Pollution Research
    (2022)

Comments

By submitting a comment y’all agree to bide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you lot find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Choose Which Way of Evolution Caused the Fq Antibiotic Resistance

Source: https://www.nature.com/articles/s42003-020-01176-w