Next Article in Journal
Ecological and Human Health Risk Assessment of Heavy Metals in Cultured Shrimp and Aquaculture Sludge
Previous Article in Journal
Exposure to Air Pollutants Increases the Risk of Chronic Rhinosinusitis in Taiwan Residents
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Toxics
Volume 10
Issue 4
10.3390/toxics10040174
toxics-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Antibiotics in Wastewater: Baseline of the Influent and Effluent Streams in Kuwait

by
Bondi Gevao
1,
Saif Uddin
2,*,
Divya Krishnan
2,
Smitha Rajagopalan
2 and
Nazima Habibi
2
1
Environmental Protection Authority, Freetown 47235, Sierra Leone
2
Environment and Life Sciences Research Center, Kuwait Institute for Scientific Research, Safat 13109, Kuwait
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Toxics 2022, 10(4), 174; https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics10040174
Submission received: 10 February 2022 / Revised: 14 March 2022 / Accepted: 15 March 2022 / Published: 1 April 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Environmental Chemistry)
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This study provides baseline information on the concentrations of antibiotics in influent and effluent from two wastewater treatment plants in regular operation in the State of Kuwait. Wastewater samples were collected from the influent and effluent streams of two WWTPs, over four sampling campaigns and analyzed for a broad range of antibiotics. The mean influent concentrations of sulfamethoxazole, ciprofloxacin, clarithromycin, and cefalexin were 852 ng/L, 672 ng/L, 592 ng/L), and 491 ng/L, respectively, at Umm Al Hayman WWTP. At the Kabd WWTP, the influent concentration of clarithromycin was highest with a mean of 949 ng/L, followed by ciprofloxacin (mean, 865 ng/L), cefalexin (mean, 598 ng/L), and sulfamethoxazole (mean, 520 ng/L). The dominant compounds in the effluent from Umm Al Hayman were sulfamethoxazole (mean, 212 ng/L), ciprofloxacin (mean, 153 ng/L), ofloxacin (mean, 120 ng/L), dimetridazole (mean, 96 ng/L), and metronidazole (mean, 93 ng/L). Whereas, at the Kabd WWTP, the dominant compounds were sulfamethoxazole (mean, 338 ng/L), dimetridazole (mean, 274 ng/L), cefalexin (mean, 213 ng/L), ciprofloxacin (mean, 192 ng/L), and clarithromycin (189 ng/L). The mean influent concentrations of all compounds were higher than those measured in the effluents. The concentrations of antibiotic compounds were not significantly different between the two WWTPs (p > 0.05). The removal efficiencies of the various antibiotics over the four sampling campaigns for the Kabd and Umm Hayman WWTPs ranged between 10.87 and 99.75% and also showed that they were variable and were compound dependent. The data clearly show that the concentrations of antibiotics measured in the influents of both WWTPs were highest in samples collected during the winter-summer (September samples) transition followed by the concentrations measured during the winter-summer (March samples) transition period. This is possibly linked to the increased prescription of these medications to treat infectious diseases and flu prevalent in Kuwait during these periods. This study provides the first reported concentrations of antibiotics in the dissolved aqueous influents and effluents of WWTPs in Kuwait. Additional studies are required to evaluate the environmental impact that antibiotic residues may cause since treated wastewater is used in irrigation, and often there are instances when untreated wastewater is discharged directly into the marine environment.

1. Introduction

Antibiotics are a group of pharmaceuticals used to cure or prevent infectious human and veterinary diseases. After systemic absorption due to topical, pulmonary, or ingestion, residues of the parent pharmaceutical (and in some cases a complex array of metabolites) are excreted in urine and feces or are dislodged from the skin by sweating and bathing. These excreted compounds eventually end up in wastewater treatment plants and aquatic environments [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19]. The primary route by which human-use antibiotics gain entry to the environment is from the effluent from wastewater treatment plants after excretion from the body [20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33]. In addition to the excretion of pharmaceutical residues after metabolism, disposal of expired or unwanted drugs in sinks and toilets move them into sewers and eventually into the wastewater treatment plants [34]. Although wastewater treatment plants are not specifically designed to remove antibiotics and other micropollutants [14,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42], there is often recorded a significant difference in concentrations between influent and effluent streams. The concentration in the effluent usually enters the aquatic environment, where concerns emanate about the potential for the facilitation or development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria and antibiotic-resistant genes [43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52]. It has been suggested in several previous studies that the development of antibiotic resistance by bacteria was due to the occurrence of subtherapeutic concentrations of these antibiotics in these environments [53,54]. Several studies have reported measurable concentrations of antibiotics in the WWTP effluents that eventually ended up in surface waters [55,56,57,58] or even in the food chain [59] following recent and frequent applications of treated wastewater in aquaculture and agriculture [60]. There are many studies on antibiotics released from WWTPs in Europe [61,62], North America, the East, and the Far East [63,64], but very few assessments have been carried out in the Middle East and Africa [11,65,66,67]. This is the first study to examine the occurrence and concentrations of a broad range of antibiotics in the influent and effluent wastewater streams at two major WWTPs in Kuwait under normal operations. The WWTPs in this study both operate conventional activated sludge biological treatments with slightly different principles and both treatment processes disinfect final effluents by chlorination followed by UV irradiation as a tertiary step in the treatment process before effluents are sent to a gathering center for use in agriculture or greenery and landscaping activities [40]. Table 1 details the operating conditions of the two WWTPs in this study.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Sample Collection

The influent samples were taken before the screen when the wastewater entered the plant and the effluent wastewater samples were collected after the disinfection, from two WWTPs in normal operation in Kuwait: Kabd (29°12′18″ N, 047°43′8″ E) in the north and Umm Hayman WWTP in the south (28°52′24″ N, 048°13′57″ E). Primary treatment at Umm Al Hayman involves the removal of floating materials by an impinger employing three-bar screens and grit chambers to remove fine materials. At Kabd, a third step in the primary process involves oil skimmer channels to remove oil and grease before subjecting the effluent to biological treatment. Biological treatment at the Kabd treatment plant is achieved through four vertical-loop reactor aeration systems. Each consists of an aerated anoxic tank followed by an aerobic tank in two parallel operating trains. Biological treatment is based on an extended aeration principle served by four oxidation ditches and final settlement tanks at the Umm AL Hayman treatment plant. The water is then filtered through twelve sand filters, whereas at the Kabd WWTP, filtration is achieved by disc filtration. The water at both WWTPs is treated to the tertiary level with disinfection achieved by chlorination and UV treatment.
Samples were collected in September and December 2013, and March and June 2014. The samples were 24-hour time-proportional composite samples collected using automated wastewater samplers (Sigma 900, HACH, Loveland, CO, USA) installed at the influent and the final effluents. These samplers were programed to sample at 20 min intervals. The samples were collected in 1 L manufacturer-certified clean amber glass bottles rinsed with ultrapure water prior to sample collection. The collected samples were stored in ice, transported to the laboratory, and immediately filtered through 0.45 µm nylon membrane filters (Whatman, Little Chalfont, Buckinghamshire, UK), and 1 g sodium azide was added to each bottle as a preservative. An additional 25 mg/L of ascorbic acid was added to the effluent sample as a quenching agent. The samples were stored at 4 °C prior to their shipment to a laboratory in Spain for analysis. Frozen blue ice packs were used to keep the samples cool during shipment.

2.2. Analytical Methods

Details of the analytical methods used for the analysis of the samples, including quality control measures, are given in Gros et al. [19]. The filtered samples were spiked with a range of isotopically labeled standards and extracted using Oasis HLB (60 mg, 3 mL) (Waters Corporation, Milford, MA, USA). The 60 mg cartridges were conditioned with 5 mL of methanol followed by 5 mL of high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) grade water at a flow rate of 2 mL/min. In contrast, the 200 mg cartridges were conditioned with 6 mL of methanol followed by 6 mL of HPLC grade water at the same flow rate. Extractions of influent (25 mL) and effluent (50 mL) wastewater, as well as potable water and seawater (500 mL) were carried out automatically by a GX-271 ASPEC™ system (Gilson, Villiers le Bel, France). The analytes were eluted with 6 mL of pure methanol at a rate of 1 mL/min following several rinsing and drying steps. The extracts were concentrated under a gentle stream of nitrogen and reconstituted with 1 mL of methanol/water (10:90, v/v), spiked with isotopically labeled internal standards. The method development is provided as Tables S1 and S2 in Supplementary Material. A Waters Acquity ultra-performance liquid chromatographic (UPLC) system was used for chromatographic separation and mass spectrometric (MS) detection and analysis on a 5500 QTRAP hybrid triple-linear ion trap system connected in tandem. The wastewater samples were also spiked with isotopically labeled standards, and 2 mL of the sample was directly injected into an online solid-phase extraction column coupled to a mass spectrometer. Antibiotics from a wide range of classes were targeted in this study based on their frequency of detection in other studies worldwide, and their usage from records obtained from the Ministry of Health in Kuwait. These included: macrolides, clarithromycin, azithromycin, and erythromycin; sulfonamides, sulfamethoxazole and trimethoprim; nitroimidazoles, dimetridazole, metronidazole, metronidazole-OH, and ronidazole; fluoroquinolones, ciprofloxacin, and ofloxacin; the antibiotic, tetracycline; and β-lactams and cefalexin. Method detection limits and method quantification limits for all compounds are reported in Table 2.

2.3. Statistical Analyses

As only a one-time integrated sample was collected at each sampling location for each antibiotic, it was not possible to use a full model including all the tested parameters (location (2 levels), influent/effluent (2 levels), time (4 levels), and type of antibiotic (13 levels) on the measured concentration. First, a one-way ANOVA model was used to compare the effect of the type of antibiotics on the measured concentration. No significant effects were observed among the different types of antibiotics (F12,169 = 2.07, p = 0.03). An ANOVA 3 model was used to test the impact of location, influent/effluent, and time on antibiotic concentration without discriminating between antibiotics. Data were log transformed to fulfill assumptions of normality according to the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test and equality of variance following the Levene median test. All statistical analyses were performed using the SAS software.

3. Results and Discussion

The minimum, maximum, average, and median concentrations of individual antibiotics measured in dissolved aqueous influents and effluents of the two WWTPs studied are summarized in Table 3. Figure 1 presents average concentrations of various classes of antibiotics in the aqueous dissolved influents and effluents measured at both wastewater treatment plants. At the Umm Al Hayman WWTP, the dominant compounds in the aqueous dissolved influent were sulfamethoxazole with a mean concentration of 852 ng/L, ciprofloxacin (mean, 672 ng/L), clarithromycin (mean, 592 ng/L), and cefalexin (mean, 491 ng/L). At the Kabd WWTP, clarithromycin was the dominant compound in the influent at a mean concentration of 949 ng/L, followed in decreasing importance by ciprofloxacin (mean, 865 ng/L), cefalexin (mean, 598 ng/L), and sulfamethoxazole (mean, 520 ng/L). The dominant compounds in the dissolved effluent from Umm Al Hayman were sulfamethoxazole (mean, 212 ng/L), ciprofloxacin (mean, 153 ng/L), ofloxacin (mean, 120 ng/L), dimetridazole (mean, 96 ng/L), and metronidazole (mean, 93 ng/L). Whereas at the Kabd WWTP, the dominant compounds were sulfamethoxazole (mean, 338 ng/L), dimetridazole (mean, 274 ng/L), cefalexin (mean, 213 ng/L), ciprofloxacin (mean, 192 ng/L), and clarithromycin (189 ng/L). The concentrations measured in both aqueous dissolved influents and effluents in this study were higher than those reported by Gros et al. [39], for the same antibiotics in the WWTP influents and effluents from Girona, Spain. They were also higher than the median concentrations reported in the database compiled for the 117 WWTPs worldwide. These concentrations were also comparable to the effluent concentrations reported from 13 WWTPs in Portugal (PT), Spain (ES), Cyprus (CYP), Ireland (IL), Germany (DE), Finland (FI), and Norway (NO) [9].
The mean influent concentrations of all compounds were higher than those measured in the effluents. The concentration of fluoroquinolone antibiotics was the highest in the influent followed in decreasing order of importance by sulfonamides, macrolides, nitroimidazoles, β-lactams, and tetracycline. In the effluents, however, the concentrations of nitroimidazoles were dominant, particularly at Kabd, followed in decreasing order of importance by sulfonamides, fluoroquinolones, β-lactams, macrolides, and tetracycline. The difference in concentrations of antibiotics between the two WWTPs was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). The mean concentrations were very similar for all the compounds except for cefalexin, ciprofloxacin, and clarithromycin. Higher mean concentrations of clarithromycin were measured at the Kabd WWTP and of sulfamethoxazole at the Umm Al Hayman WWTP.
The differences in the influent concentrations observed between two WWTPs may be influenced by government policies on housing and drug prescription implemented in Kuwait. Foreign workers primarily inhabit certain areas, and certain medicines are only prescribed to Kuwaiti nationals. The differences observed in the influent concentrations between the two WWTPs may be attributed to the catchment of the wastewater reaching the plant. The effluent concentrations of all compounds were higher in the aqueous phase at Kabd as compared with the concentrations measured at the Umm Hayman WWTP, except for metronidazole, metronidazole-OH, ofloxacin, and ranidazole where the concentrations were identical for both WWTPs. This observation appears to suggest that the Umm Hayman WWTP may be a more efficient plant at attenuating the concentrations of antibiotics as compared with the Kabd WWTP.
An ANOVA 3 model revealed a significant effect of the influent/effluent and time but no effect of the location or any interaction (Table 4). The concentration of antibiotics was significantly higher in influent waters as compared with effluent waters. Scheffe’s post hoc test revealed that the concentration of antibiotics was significantly higher in September 2013 as compared with the three other sampling times.

3.1. Removal Efficiencies from the Influents of the Two WWTPs

The removal efficiency, which was computed as the percent reduction between the dissolved aqueous phase concentration of each compound in the influent and the dissolved aqueous phase concentration of the same compound in the effluent (Equation (1)) is presented in Table 5.
R e m o v a l   E f f e c i e n c y = I n f l u e n t   C o n c e n t r a t i o n   – E f f l u e n t   C o n c e n t r a t i o n I n f l u e n t   C o n c e n t r a t i o n × 100
The removal of antibiotics from the influents of WWTPs has been reported to vary widely worldwide. It depends heavily on the type of compound, the operating conditions, and the treatment technology [37,68,69,70]. The removal of antibiotics in WWTPs can occur by volatilization, sorption on sludge or particulate matter (by hydrophobic or electrostatic interaction), and degradation primarily by bacterial breakdown (e.g., oxidation, hydrolysis, demethylation, and cleavage of conjugates). It is, however, thought that volatilization of most antibiotics is a negligible removal pathway in WWTPs [71,72,73]. The most critical parameter controlling the bacterial removal of antibiotics and other pharmaceuticals is the retention time of the sludge in the WWTP [74]. The concentrations of antibiotics over four sampling campaigns at the two WWTPs are given in Table 6. The removal efficiencies of the various antibiotics over the four sampling campaigns for the Kabd and Umm Hayman WWTPs showed that they were variable and compound dependent, with removal efficiencies ranging between 10.87 and 99.75%. There are also subtle differences between the treatment plants. The Umm Hayman WWTP had higher removal efficiencies for most compounds than the Kabd WWTP. The reason for the higher performance of the Umm Hayman WWTP was a higher retention time; the Kabd WWTP is a more recent and advanced plant that serves a very big catchment area, and the sludge retention time is comparatively shorter than Umm Hayman. The most efficiently removed compounds were azithromycin > ciprofloxacin > trimethoprim > ofloxacin, all with removal efficiencies above 60% in both the WWTPs. In contrast, those with the lowest removal efficiencies were erythromycin, ronidazole, and tetracycline. The oxidation removal with UV shows a removal of 95% antibiotics [75], in the case of Kuwait where the summer temperatures and UV radiation are too high.

3.2. Temporal Variability in the Concentration of Antibiotics

Several studies have reported seasonal variations in the concentrations of different medications in WWTP influents and effluents, and surface water [73]. These changes have been linked to differences in consumption patterns in the case of influent concentrations, since certain drugs are consumed more at specific times of the year to cure certain seasonal ailments [55,68,73,76,77,78,79,80]. A typical example is the increased consumption of flu-related medications in winter in European countries. It has been argued that the effluent concentrations may be lower during summertime due to the enhanced microbial degradation during wastewater treatment in summer as compared with slower degradation in the colder winter months [55,68,76]. Some have argued that seasonality may be linked to increased rainfall with the potential to dilute effluent concentrations or reduce microbial activity in WWTP in Kuwait during each sampling campaign.
The concentrations of antibiotics in the influents and effluents of the two WWTPs for all four sampling campaigns were examined to tease out patterns related to seasonal consumption linked to illnesses in Kuwait. There are two main seasons in Kuwait: the summer season, which generally begins at the end of March and ends sometime in October, and the winter season, which runs from November to March. There is generally an increase in flu occurrences in Kuwait during the summer-winter, winter-summer changeovers. During the four sampling campaigns, the mean temperatures were: September 2013, 40 °C; December 2013, 13 °C; March 2014, 22 °C; and June 2014, 41 °C [81]. The March and September sampling periods may reflect these winter-summer and summer-winter transitions, respectively. The data clearly showed that the concentrations of antibiotics measured in the influents of both WWTPs were highest in samples collected during the winter-summer (September samples) transition followed by the concentrations measured during the summer-winter (March samples) transition period. This was possibly linked to the increased prescription of these medications to treat infectious diseases and flu prevalent in Kuwait during these/periods. The concentrations of various antibiotics were also dependent on the type of antibiotics, with erythromycin, ronidazole, tetracycline, azithromycin, and dimetridazole being more prevalent in the samples collected in September; clarithromycin, sulfamethoxazole, and ofloxacin mainly found in the samples collected in March.

4. Conclusions

This study was carried out to generate baseline concentrations of antibiotics in wastewater influents and effluents. The study also provided insight into the seasonality in the concentrations and a comparative assessment of the effectiveness of removing antibiotics during the treatment process at two WWTPs in regular operation in Kuwait. The concentrations of antibiotics measured in the influents of all WWTPs were considerably higher (almost an order of magnitude higher) than those measured in the effluents. The data also show that the concentrations of antibiotics in the dissolved influents and effluents in Kuwait are higher than the median concentrations of these compounds worldwide reported for 117 WWTPs but are comparable to levels reported in seven European countries. The higher level of antibiotics is possibly explained by the generous free healthcare available in-country and the advisory from the Ministry of Health in Kuwait to flush down unused/expired medication down the drain. For the first time, this study provides the concentrations of antibiotics in the dissolved aqueous influents and effluents of WWTPs in Kuwait. There is an eminent need to take up the comprehensive environmental impact that these residues may cause since there are instances when untreated wastewater is discharged directly into the marine environment. The discharge of treated or partly treated wastewater streams into the marine environment will possibly contribute to antibiotic resistance evolution. One of the highest concentrations observed in effluent was for ciprofloxacin that is notoriously known for its environmental risk and antibiotic resistance development. The treated effluent is also being utilized in agriculture farms and can lead to food chain transfer and the evolution of antibiotic-resistant microbes in the rhizosphere. There is an eminent need to undertake a detailed investigation of all the pharmaceuticals that are released into the marine environment.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/toxics10040174/s1, Table S1: ES+Tuning parameters for the target analytes on the AQUITY UPLC—Xevo TQS System title, Table S2: ES-Tuning parameters for the target analytes on the AQUITY UPLC—Xevo TQS System.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, B.G. and S.U.; methodology, B.G.; software, N.H.; validation, B.G., D.K. and S.R.; formal analysis, B.G.; investigation, B.G. and S.U.; resources, N.H.; data curation, B.G.; writing—original draft preparation, B.G. and S.U.; writing—review and editing, B.G., S.U. and N.H.; visualization, N.H.; supervision, B.G.; project administration, B.G.; funding acquisition, B.G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by Kuwait Institute for Scientific Research and Kuwait Foundation for Advancement of Sciences, grant number EM049C. And The APC was funded by Kuwait Institute for Scientific Research.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The complete data is provided in the paper.

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to the management of the Kuwait Institute for Scientific Research and to the KFAS for funding the research reported in this paper. We acknowledge the analytical support provided to us by Mira Petrovic and her research group at the Institut Català de Recerca de l’Aigua, c/Emili Grahit, 101, 17003 Girona, Spain. Authors are thankful to Sam Dupont, Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Gothenburg, Sweden for helping with the statistical analyses. Authors are thankful to Scott W. Fowler for some very pertinent suggestions and editing the manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Thomas, K.V.; Langford, K.H. Point Sources of Human Pharmaceuticals into the Aquatic Environment. In Green and Sustainable Pharmacy; Kümmerer, K., Hempel, M., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2010; pp. 211–223. [Google Scholar]
  2. Daughton, C.G. Pharmaceuticals & Personal Care Products (PPCPs) in the Environment: Agents of Subtle Change? USEPA, NERL: Las Vegas, NV, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  3. Daughton, C.G.; Jones-Lepp, T. Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products in the Environment: Scientific and Regulatory Issues; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, USA, 2001; p. 396. [Google Scholar]
  4. Daughton, C.G.; Ruhoy, I.S. Reducing the Ecological Footprint of Pharmaceutical Usage: Linkages between Healthcare Practices and the Environment, in Green and Sustainable Pharmacy; Kümmerer, K., Hempel, M., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2010; pp. 77–102. [Google Scholar]
  5. Brain, R.A.; Solomon, K.R.; Brooks, B.W. Targets, Effects and Risks in Aquatic Plants Exposed to Veterinary Antibiotics. In Veterinary Pharmaceuticals in the Environment; Coats, J., Henderson, K., Eds.; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  6. Brooks, B.W.; Ankley, G.L.; Hobson, J.F.; Lazorchak, J.M.; Meyerhoff, R.L.; Solomon, K.R. Aquatic hazard assessment of veterinary medicines. In Veterinary Pharmaceuticals in the Environment; Crane, M., Barrett, K., Boxall, A., Eds.; SETAC Press, Taylor and Francis: Pensicola, FL, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  7. Brooks, B.W.; Huggett, D.; Boxall, A. Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products: Research Needs for the Next Decade. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2009, 28, 2469–2472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Brooks, B.W.; Brain, R.A.; Huggett, D.B.; Ankley, G.T. Risk assessment considerations for veterinary medicines in aquatic systems. In Veterinary Pharmaceuticals in the Environment; Coats, J., Henderson, K., Eds.; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, USA, 2009; pp. 205–223. [Google Scholar]
  9. Rodriguez-Mozaz, S.; Vaz-Moreira, I.; Della Giustina, S.V.; Llorca, M.; Barcelo, D.; Schubert, S.; Berendonk, T.U.; Michael-Kordatou, I.; Fatta-Kassinos, D.; Martinez, J.L.; et al. Antibiotic residues in final effluents of European wastewater treatment plants and their impact on the aquatic environment. Environ. Int. 2020, 140, 105733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Wang, W.; Zhang, W.; Liang, H.; Gao, D. Occurrence and fate of typical antibiotics in wastewater treatment plants in Harbin, North-east China. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng. 2019, 13, 34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Gevao, B.; Uddin, S.; Dupont, S. Baseline concentrations of pharmaceuticals in Kuwait’s coastal marine environment. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2021, 173, 113040. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Diaz, L.F. Pharmaceuticals in the Environment: Sources, Fate, Effects and Risks; Kümmerer, K., Ed.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  13. Kümmerer, K.; Henninger, A. Promoting resistance by the emission of antibiotics from hospitals and households into effluent. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2003, 9, 1203–1214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Blair, B.D.; Crago, J.P.; Hedmna, C.J.; Klaper, R.D. Pharmaceuticals and personal care products found in the Great Lakes above concentrations of environmental concern. Chemosphere 2013, 93, 2116–2123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  15. Binh, V.N.; Dang, N.; Kieu Anh, N.T.; Ky, L.X.; Thai, P.K. Antibiotics in the aquatic environment of Vietnam: Sources, concentrations, risk and control strategy. Chemosphere 2018, 197, 438–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Kim, H.-Y.; Lee, I.-S.; Oh, J.-E. Human and veterinary pharmaceuticals in the marine environment including fish farms in Korea. Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 579, 940–949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Du, J.; Zhao, H.; Liu, S.; Xie, H.; Wang, Y.; Chen, J. Antibiotics in the coastal water of the South. Yellow Sea in China: Occurrence, distribution and ecological risks. Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 595, 521–527. [Google Scholar]
  18. Zhang, R.; Yu, K.; Wang, Y.; Huang, X.; Pei, J.; Wei, C.; Pan, Z.; Qin, Z.; Zhang, G. Occurrence, sources and transport of antibiotics in the surface water of coral reef regions in the South. China Sea: Potential risk to coral growth. Environ. Pollut. 2018, 232, 450–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Gros, M.; Rodríguez-Mozaz, S.; Barceló, D. Fast and comprehensive multi-residue analysis of a broad range of human and veterinary pharmaceuticals and some of their metabolites in surface and treated waters by ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography coupled to quadrupole-linear ion trap tandem mass spectrometry. J. Chromatogr. A 2012, 1248, 104–121. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  20. Daughton, C.G.; Ruhoy, I.S. Environmental footprint of pharmaceuticals: The significance of factors beyond direct excretion to sewers. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2009, 28, 2495–2521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  21. Kümmerer, K. Pharmaceuticals in the Environment: Knowing and Managing the Risks, in a Healthy Future—Pharmaceuticals in a Sustainable Society; MistraPharma, and Stockholm County Council: Stockholm, Sweden, 2009; pp. 124–147. [Google Scholar]
  22. Kümmerer, K. The presence of pharmaceuticals in the environment due to human use—Present knowledge and future challenges. J. Environ. Manag. 2009, 90, 2354–2366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Zorita, S.; Mårtensson, L.; Mathiasson, L. Occurrence and removal of pharmaceuticals in a municipal sewage treatment system in the south of Sweden. Sci. Total Environ. 2009, 407, 2760–2770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Palli, L.; Spina, F.; Varese, C.; Romagnolo, A.; Bonari, A.; Bossi, I.; Pompilio, I.; Dugheri, S.; Tilli, S.; Scozzafava, A.; et al. Pharmaceuticals in Wastewater Treatment Plants of Tuscany: Occurrence and Toxicity; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 308–312. [Google Scholar]
  25. Halling-Sorensen, B.; Nielsen, S.N.; Lanzky, P.F.; Ingerslev, F.; Lutzhoft, H.C.; Jorgensen, S.E. Occurrence, fate and effects of pharmaceutical substances in the environment—A review. Chemosphere 1998, 36, 357–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Di Guardo, A.; Calamari, D.; Benfenati, E.; Halling-Sorensen, B.; Zuccato, E.; Fanelli, R. Pharmaceuticals as Environmental Contaminants: Modelling Distribution and Fate, in Pharmaceuticals in the Environment—Sources, Fate, Effects and Risks; Kümmerer, K., Ed.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2004; pp. 183–194. [Google Scholar]
  27. Aubertheau, E.; Stalder, T.; Mondamert, L.; Ploy, M.-C.; Dagot, C.; Labanowski, J. Impact of wastewater treatment plant discharge on the contamination of river biofilms by pharmaceuticals and antibiotic resistance. Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 579, 1387–1398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Uddin, S.; Aba, A.; Behbahani, M. Baseline concentration of 210Po and 210Pb in Sargassum from the northern Gulf. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2015, 90, 330–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Zuccato, E.; Castiglioni, S.; Fanelli, R.; Reitano, G.; Bagnati, R.; Chiabrando, C.; Pomati, F.; Rossetti, C.; Calamari, D. Pharmaceuticals in the environment in Italy: Causes, occurrence, effects and control. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2006, 13, 15–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Castiglioni, S.; Bagnati, R.; Fanelli, R.; Pomati, F.; Calamari, D.; Zuccato, E. Removal of Pharmaceuticals in Sewage Treatment Plants in Italy. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2006, 40, 357–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Pereira, A.; Silva, L.J.G.; Laranjeiro, C.S.M.; Meisel, L.M.; Lino, C.M.; Pena, A. Human pharmaceuticals in Portuguese rivers: The impact of water scarcity in the environmental risk. Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 609, 1182–1191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Younes, H.A.; Mahmoud, H.M.; Abdelrahman, M.M.; Nassar, H.F. Seasonal occurrence, removal efficiency and associated ecological risk assessment of three antibiotics in a municipal wastewater treatment plant in Egypt. Environ. Nanotechnol. Monit. Manag. 2019, 12, 100239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Abbassi, B.; Abusaleem, M.; Zytner, R.; Gharabaghi, B.; Rudra, R. Antibiotics in wastewater: Their degradation and effect on wastewater treatment efficiency. J. Food Agric. Environ. 2016, 14, 95–99. [Google Scholar]
  34. Denver, J.; Dick, M.E.; Gervin, L.; Hughes, S.; McCumby, H.K.; Didriksen North, K.; Valiela, L.; Ventura, A. Discussion Paper on Pharmaceutical Disposal to Sewer Systems; Emerging Contaminants Workgroup of the Santa Clara Basin Watershed Management Initiative: San Jose, CA, USA, 2005; p. 18. [Google Scholar]
  35. Di Marcantonio, C.; Chiavola, A.; Dossi, S.; Cecchini, G.; Leoni, S.; Frugis, A.; Spizzirri, M.; Boni, M.R. Occurrence, seasonal variations and removal of Organic Micropollutants in 76 Wastewater Treatment Plants. Process. Saf. Environ. Prot. 2020, 141, 61–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Kreuzinger, N.; Clara, M.; Strenn, B.; Vogel, B. Investigation on the behaviour of selected pharmaceuticals in the groundwater after infiltration of treated wastewater. Water Sci. Technol. 2004, 50, 221–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Clara, M.; Kreuzinger, N.; Strenn, B.; Gans, O.; Kroiss, H. The solids retention time—A suitable design parameter to evaluate the capacity of wastewater treatment plants to remove micropollutants. Water Res. 2005, 39, 97–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Clara, M.; Strenn, B.; Gans, O.; Martinez, E.; Kreuzinger, N.; Kroiss, H. Removal of selected pharmaceuticals, fragrances and endocrine disrupting compounds in a membrane bioreactor and conventional wastewater treatment plants. Water Res. 2005, 39, 4797–4807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Miège, C.; Choubert, J.M.; Ribeiro, L.; Eusèbe, M.; Coquery, M. Fate of pharmaceuticals and personal care products in wastewater treatment plants—Conception of a database and first results. Environ. Pollut. 2009, 157, 1721–1726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Uddin, S.; Fowler, S.W.; Behbehani, M. An assessment of microplastic inputs into the aquatic environment from wastewater streams. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2020, 160, 111538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Naji, A.; Azadkhah, S.; Farahani, H.; Uddin, S.; Khan, F.R. Microplastics in wastewater outlets of Bandar Abbas city (Iran.): A potential point source of microplastics into the Persian Gulf. Chemosphere 2021, 262, 128039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Uddin, S.; Fowler, S.W.; Habibi, N.; Behbehani, M. Micro-Nano Plastic in the Aquatic Environment: Methodological Problems and Challenges. Animals 2022, 12, 297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Kotwani, A.; Joshi, J.; Kaloni, D. Pharmaceutical effluent: A critical link in the interconnected ecosystem promoting antimicrobial resistance. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. Int. 2021, 28, 32111–32124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Zieliński, W.; Korzeniewska, E.; Harnisz, M.; Drzymała, J.; Felis, E.; Bajkacz, S. Wastewater treatment plants as a reservoir of integrase and antibiotic resistance genes—An epidemiological threat to workers and environment. Environ. Int. 2021, 156, 106641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Wang, Q.; Wang, P.; Yang, Q. Occurrence and diversity of antibiotic resistance in untreated hospital wastewater. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 621, 990–999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Qiao, M.; Ying, G.-G.; Singer, A.C.; Zhu, Y.-G. Review of antibiotic resistance in China and its environment. Environ. Int. 2018, 110, 160–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Pan, M.; Chu, L.M. Occurrence of antibiotics and antibiotic resistance genes in soils from wastewater irrigation areas in the Pearl River Delta region, southern China. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 624, 145–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Ben, W.; Wang, J.; Cao, R.; Yang, M.; Zhang, Y.; Qiang, Z. Distribution of antibiotic resistance in the effluents of ten municipal wastewater treatment plants in China and the effect of treatment processes. Chemosphere 2017, 172, 392–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Yi, L.; Daqing, M.; Rysz, M.; Qixing, Z.; Hongjie, Z.; Lin, X.; Alvarez, P.J.J. Trends in Antibiotic Resistance Genes Occurrence in the Haihe River, China. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2010, 44, 7220–7225. [Google Scholar]
  50. Sabri, N.A.; Schmitt, H.; Van der Zaan, B.; Gerritsen, H.W.; Zuidema, T.; Rijnaarts, H.H.M.; Langenhoff, A.A.M. Prevalence of antibiotics and antibiotic resistance genes in a wastewater effluent-receiving river in The Netherlands. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2020, 8, 102245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Rizzo, L.; Manaia, C.; Merlin, C.; Schwartz, T.; Dagot, C.; Ploy, M.C.; Michael, I.; Fatta-Kassinos, D. Urban wastewater treatment plants as hotspots for antibiotic resistant bacteria and genes spread into the environment: A review. Sci. Total Environ. 2013, 447, 345–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Dunlop, P.S.M.; Ciavola, M.; Rizzo, L.; McDowell, D.A.; Byrne, J.A. Effect of photocatalysis on the transfer of antibiotic resistance genes in urban wastewater. Catal. Today 2015, 240, 55–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Anthony, A.; Adekunle, A.F.; Thor, S. Residual antibiotics, antibiotic resistant superbugs and antibiotic resistance genes in surface water catchments: Public health impact. Phys. Chem. Earth 2018, 105, 177–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Jendrzejewska, N.; Karwowska, E. The influence of antibiotics on wastewater treatment processes and the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Water Sci. Technol. 2018, 77, 2320–2326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Vieno, N.M.; Tuhkanen, T.; Kronberg, L. Seasonal variation in the occurrence of pharmaceuticals in effluents from a sewage treatment plant and in the recipient water. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2005, 39, 8220–8226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Vieno, N.M.; Tuhkanen, T.; Kronberg, L. Analysis of neutral and basic pharmaceuticals in sewage treatment plants and in recipient rivers using solid phase extraction and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry detection. J. Chromatogr. A 2006, 1134, 101–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. van Nuijs, A.L.N.; Pecceu, B.; Theunis, L.; Covaci, A.; Bervoets, L.; Dubois, N.; Jorens, P.G.; Blust, R.; Charlier, C.; Neels, H. Cocaine and metabolites in waste and surface water across Belgium. Environ. Pollut. 2009, 157, 123–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. van Nuijs, A.L.N.; Castiglioni, S.; Tarcomnicu, I.; Postigo, C.; de Alda, M.L.; Neels, H.; Zuccato, E.; Barcelo, D.; Covaci, A. Illicit drug consumption estimations derived from wastewater analysis: A critical review. Sci. Total Environ. 2011, 409, 3564–3577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Kim, J.-W.; Ishibashi, H.; Yamauchi, R.; Ichikawa, N.; Takao, Y.; Hirano, M.; Koga, M.; Arizono, K. Acute toxicity of pharmaceutical and personal care products on freshwater crustacean (Thamnocephalus platyurus) and fish (Oryzias latipes). J. Toxicol. Sci. 2009, 34, 227–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  60. Al-Murad, M.; Uddin, S.; Rashid, T.; Al-Qallaf, H.; Bushehri, A. Waterlogging in Arid Agriculture Areas Due to Improper Groundwater Management—An Example from Kuwait. Sustainability 2017, 9, 2131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  61. Papageorgiou, M.; Kosma, C.; Lambropoulou, D. Seasonal occurrence, removal, mass loading and environmental risk assessment of 55 pharmaceuticals and personal care products in a municipal wastewater treatment plant in Central Greece. Sci. Total Environ. 2016, 543, 547–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Guedes-Alonso, R.; Afonso-Olivares, C.; Montesdeoca-Esponda, S.; Sosa-Ferrera, Z.; Santana-Rodríguez, J.J. An Assessment of the Concentrations of Pharmaceutical Compounds in Wastewater Treatment Plants on the Island of Gran Canaria (Spain). SpringerPlus 2013, 2, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  63. Praveena, S.M.; Shaifuddin, S.N.M.; Sukiman, S.; Nasir, F.A.M.; Hanafi, Z.; Kamarudin, N.; Ismail, T.H.T.; Aris, A.Z. Pharmaceuticals residues in selected tropical surface water bodies from Selangor (Malaysia): Occurrence and potential risk assessments. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 642, 230–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Subedi, B.; Balakrishna, K.; Sinha, R.K.; Yamashita, N.; Balasubramanian, V.G.; Kannan, K. Mass loading and removal of pharmaceuticals and personal care products, including psychoactive and illicit drugs and artificial sweeteners, in five sewage treatment plants in India. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2015, 3, 2882–2891. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Ali, A.; Rønning, H.; Alarif, W.; Kallenborn, R.; Al-Lihaibi, S. Occurrence of pharmaceuticals and personal care products in effluent-dominated Saudi Arabian coastal waters of the Red Sea. Chemosphere 2017, 175, 503–513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Kairigo, P.; Ngumba, E.; Sundberg, L.-R.; Gachanja, A.; Tuhkanen, T. Occurrence of antibiotics and risk of antibiotic resistance evolution in selected Kenyan wastewaters, surface waters and sediments. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 720, 137580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Semerjian, L.; Shanableh, A.; Semreen, M.H.; Samarai, M. Human health risk assessment of pharmaceuticals in treated wastewater reused for non-potable applications in Sharjah, United Arab Emirates. Environ. Int. 2018, 121, 325–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Sui, Q.; Huang, J.; Deng, S.; Chen, W.; Yu, G. Seasonal variation in the occurrence and removal of pharmaceuticals and personal care products in different biological wastewater treatment processes. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45, 3341–3348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. de Ilurdoz, M.S.; Sadhwani, J.J.; Reboso, J.V. Antibiotic removal processes from water & wastewater for the protection of the aquatic environment—A review. J. Water Process. Eng. 2022, 45, 102474. [Google Scholar]
  70. Huang, A.; Yan, M.; Lin, J.; Xu, L.; Gong, H.; Gong, H. A Review of Processes for Removing Antibiotics from Breeding Wastewater. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 4909. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Jones, O.A.H.; Voulvoulis, N.; Lesten, J.N. Aquatic environmental assessment of the top 25 English prescription pharmaceuticals. Water Res. 2002, 36, 5013–5022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Jones, S. Assessing the effectiveness of one-stop dispensing. Hosp. Pharm. 2002, 9, 237–239. [Google Scholar]
  73. Sun, Q.; Lv, M.; Hu, A.; Yang, X.; Yu, C.-P. Seasonal variation in the occurrence and removal of pharmaceuticals and personal care products in a wastewater treatment plant in Xiamen, China. J. Hazard. Mater. 2014, 277, 69–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Gonzalez-Gil, L.; Fernandez-Fontaina, E.; Singh, R.R.; Lema, J.M.; Carballa, M.; Aga, D.S. Feeding composition and sludge retention time both affect (co-)metabolic biotransformation of pharmaceutical compounds in activated sludge systems. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2021, 9, 105123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Li, W.J.; Lan, M.; Peng, X. Removal of antibiotics from swine wastewater by UV/H2O2 combined oxidation. Environ. Pollut. Control. 2011, 33, 25–28. [Google Scholar]
  76. Yu, Y.; Wu, L.; Chang, A.C. Seasonal variation of endocrine disrupting compounds, pharmaceuticals and personal care products in wastewater treatment plants. Sci. Total Environ. 2013, 442, 310–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Lv, Y.; Yuan, T.; Hu, J.; Wang, W. Seasonal occurrence and behavior of synthetic musks (SMs) during wastewater treatment process in Shanghai, China. Sci. Total Environ. 2010, 408, 4170–4176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Daneshvar, A.; Svanfelt, J.; Kronberg, L.; Prévost, M.; Weyhenmeyer, G.A. Seasonal variations in the occurrence and fate of basic and neutral pharmaceuticals in a Swedish river-lake system. Chemosphere 2010, 80, 301–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Daneshvar, A.; Svanfelt, J.; Kronberg, L.; Weyhenmeyer, G. Winter accumulation of acidic pharmaceuticals in a Swedish river. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2010, 17, 908–916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. van Nuijs, A.L.N.; Pecceu, B.; Theunis, L.; Dubois, N.; Charlier, C.; Jorens, P.G.; Bervoets, L.; Blust, R.; Neels, H.; Covaci, A. Spatial and temporal variations in the occurrence of cocaine and benzoylecgonine in waste- and surface water from Belgium and removal during wastewater treatment. Water Res. 2009, 43, 1341–1349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Elkadiri, R.; Manche, C.; Sultan, M.; Al-Dousari, A.; Uddin, S.; Chouinard, K.; Abotalib, A.Z. Development of a Coupled Spatiotemporal Algal Bloom Model. for Coastal Areas: A Remote Sensing and Data Mining-Based Approach. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Appl. Earth Obs. Remote Sens. 2016, 9, 5159–5171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Toxics 10 00174 g001 550
Figure 1. The concentration (µg/L) of various classes of antibiotics in the aqueous dissolved phase in the influents and effluents in two WWTPs in Kuwait.
Figure 1. The concentration (µg/L) of various classes of antibiotics in the aqueous dissolved phase in the influents and effluents in two WWTPs in Kuwait.
Toxics 10 00174 g001
Table
Table 1. Operational parameters of the wastewater treatment plants investigated.
Table 1. Operational parameters of the wastewater treatment plants investigated.
Umm Al Hayman WWTPKabd WWTP
Flow rate (m3/day)27,000180,000
Primary treatmentScreening and grit removalScreening, grit removal, oil and grease removal
Secondary treatmentAeration tanks (oxidation ditches)Vertical activated sludge process
PrincipleExtended aerationHybrid aerated anoxic-aerobic oxidation
MLSS (mg/L) 30006000
SRT (d) 258
HRT (h) 1110
Secondary calcifiers
No tanks46
MLSS (mg/d) 28004000
HRT (h) 1.963.5
Tertiary treatmentSand filtrationDisc filtration
No. of units128
Surface area (m2) 20100
Advance TreatmentChlorination and UV radiationChlorination and UV radiation
Residual chlorine (mg/L) 0.50.5–1
Population of catchment173,0001,200,000
SRT, Solid retention time; HRT, hydraulic retention time; MLSS, mixed liquor suspended solids.
Table
Table 2. Parameters indicating the performance of the analytical method: Method detection and quantification limits (MDL and MQL).
Table 2. Parameters indicating the performance of the analytical method: Method detection and quantification limits (MDL and MQL).
CompoundsRecoveries % (n = 3)MDL (ng/L)MQL (ng/L)
EffluentInfluentWWEWWIWWEWWI
Eryhromycin137 ± 18.0110 ± 18.01.12.13.56.9
Azithromycin111 ± 11.674 ± 8.20.421.26.6
Clarithromycin106 ± 12.575 ± 7.21.33.14.310.4
Tetracycline127 ± 6.3101 ± 2.27262360
Ofloxacin116 ± 15.974 ± 14.30.63.71.812.1
Ciprofloxacin140 ± 21.2122 ± 21.97102335
Cefalexin70 ± 8.6108 ± 6.75816.626.8
Sulfamethoxazole81 ± 11.384 ± 5.55.57.11823.7
Trimethoprim67 ± 7.165 ± 6.92.47.18.120
Dimetridazole109 ± 11.179 ± 2.015205068
Metronidazole109 ± 4.7127 ± 4.526504470
Metronidazole-OH43 ± 8.261 ± 12.814254870
Ronidazole108 ± 10.151 ± 2.815175153
WWE, wastewater effluents; WWI, wastewater influents.
Table
Table 3. Summary of average, minimum, maximum, and median concentrations of antibiotics (n = 4), expressed in ng/L, in influents and effluents of the two wastewater treatment plants in Kuwait.
Table 3. Summary of average, minimum, maximum, and median concentrations of antibiotics (n = 4), expressed in ng/L, in influents and effluents of the two wastewater treatment plants in Kuwait.
Influent Concentration (ng/L)
Umm Al Hayman WWTPKabd WWTP
AverageMinimumMaximumMedianAverageMinimumMaximumMedian
Azithromycin17482355129157<MDL46678
Cefalexin491412536525598481794519
Ciprofloxacin67225613355488652371492865
Clarithromycin592251258493949371999810
Dimetridazole209<MDL415210169 <MDL466103
Erythromycin1116216111112<MDL219112
Metronidazole238145331238246144356236
Metronidazole-OH128303655918496384128
Ofloxacin4466488941544687779460
Ronidazole16963321691786350178
Sulfamethoxazole8522641231956520328743505
Tetracycline2934853729324921562164
Trimethoprim262117419257234112479172
Effluent Concentration (ng/L)
Umm Al Hayman WWTPKabd WWTP
AverageMinimumMaximumMedianAverageMinimumMaximumMedian
Azithromycin26<MDL741448611932
Cefalexin69<MDL2032213<MDL444192
Ciprofloxacin153<MDL53340192<MDL535115
Clarithromycin39<MDL803518914420134
Dimetridazole96<MDL2374827476527246
Erythromycin34<MDL6634572511828
Metronidazole932915793933418264
Metronidazole-OH62<MDL16518612017923
Ofloxacin120<MDL32476127<MDL31198
Ronidazole80<MDL1568078<MDL15378
Sulfamethoxazole212105272236338174649264
Tetracycline752412675112<MDL30727
Trimethoprim41<MDL1411048613128
Table
Table 4. Summary of an ANOVA 3 (F and p values) testing the impact of location, influent/influent, and time on antibiotic concentration.
Table 4. Summary of an ANOVA 3 (F and p values) testing the impact of location, influent/influent, and time on antibiotic concentration.
SourceFp
ModelF12,169 = 10.05<0.0001
LocationF1 = 1.980.16
Influent/effluentF1 = 75.18<0.0001
TimeF1 = 118.32<0.0001
Location × influent/effluentF1 = 1.860.17
Location × timeF3 = 0.160.93
Influent/effluent × timeF3 = 2.380.07
Location x influent/effluent × timeF3 = 0.760.52
Table
Table 5. Removal efficiencies of antibiotics, expressed as percentages, during wastewater treatment over the four sampling campaigns at Kabd and Umm Hayman WWTPs.
Table 5. Removal efficiencies of antibiotics, expressed as percentages, during wastewater treatment over the four sampling campaigns at Kabd and Umm Hayman WWTPs.
Umm HaymanKabd
September 2013December 2013March 2014June 2014Sepember 2013December 2013March 2014June 2014
Azithromycin79.0885.4089.9397.7974.4166.6087.3886.45
Cefalexin62.1599.6299.51 60.0099.7514.42
Ciprofloxacin60.1083.9799.5194.4764.1313.1499.7097.70
Clarithromycin83.87 97.2391.8683.50 78.9862.97
Dimetridazole42.9391.67 99.0544.7585.6798.2998.02
Erythromycin69.61 67.74 46.26 85.71
Metronidazole52.4280.07 49.0373.01 76.63
Metronidazole-OH54.8264.85 93.4253.4375.3982.8784.21
Ofloxacin53.3496.8884.6788.3360.0597.6975.6995.97
Ronidazole53.00 50.79 56.39 45.16
Sulfamethoxazolle85.9810.8777.9579.6452.5256.3612.5927.44
Tetracycline76.55 50.0645.4098.78 21.79
Trimethoprim66.2884.8999.1599.2872.7581.4185.5094.49
Table
Table 6. Concentrations of antibiotics, expressed in ng/L, in influents and effluents of the two wastewater treatment plants in Kuwait, sampled at four different seasons of the year.
Table 6. Concentrations of antibiotics, expressed in ng/L, in influents and effluents of the two wastewater treatment plants in Kuwait, sampled at four different seasons of the year.
Umm Al Hayman WWTPKabd WWTP
InfluentEffluentInfluentEffluent
September 2013December 2013March 2014June 2014September 2013December 2013March 2014June 2014September 2013December 2013March 2014June 2014September 2013December 2013March 2014June 2014
Azithromycin355.281.5166.890.6674.311.916.82465.89431.762.2119.231.448.43
Cefalexin535.5524.6412.3Nd202.722nd480.5794.2518.9nd192.22444.1nd
Ciprofloxacin1335.4255.8406.7688.34532.841238.081491.8236.7665.61064.9535.1205.6224.53
Clarithromycin492.9Nd1258.124.5779.5nd34.82810.1Nd1998.937.29133.7nd420.113.81
Dimetridazole414.648Blq209.62236.64blq2466.4527233.97202.2257.775.544
Erythromicin215.5Nd6.2Nd65.5nd2nd219.4Nd28nd117.9nd425.4
Metronidazole330.6145BlqNd157.328.9blqnd356.3236blq144.28181.663.7blq33.72
Metronidazole-OH36551.565.530.41164.918.1nd2384.496.3130.2126.6917923.722.320.01
Ofloxacin695.264.1888.5135.34324.42136.215.79777.886.7779.1141.38310.72189.45.7
Ronidazole331.9Nd6.3Nd156nd3.1nd350.4Nd6.2nd152.8nd3.4Nd
Sulfamethoxazolle747.6264.11231.11163.94104.8235.4271.5236.92612398.3742.9328.13290.6173.8649.4238.1
Tetracycline536.9NdBlq48.16125.9ndblq24.05561.5164.4blq26.8306.62blq20.96
Trimethoprim419.3116.5235.9278.14141.417.622479.2171.6172.4111.88130.631.9256.17
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Gevao, B.; Uddin, S.; Krishnan, D.; Rajagopalan, S.; Habibi, N. Antibiotics in Wastewater: Baseline of the Influent and Effluent Streams in Kuwait. Toxics 2022, 10, 174. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics10040174

AMA Style

Gevao B, Uddin S, Krishnan D, Rajagopalan S, Habibi N. Antibiotics in Wastewater: Baseline of the Influent and Effluent Streams in Kuwait. Toxics. 2022; 10(4):174. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics10040174

Chicago/Turabian Style

Gevao, Bondi, Saif Uddin, Divya Krishnan, Smitha Rajagopalan, and Nazima Habibi. 2022. "Antibiotics in Wastewater: Baseline of the Influent and Effluent Streams in Kuwait" Toxics 10, no. 4: 174. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics10040174

APA Style

Gevao, B., Uddin, S., Krishnan, D., Rajagopalan, S., & Habibi, N. (2022). Antibiotics in Wastewater: Baseline of the Influent and Effluent Streams in Kuwait. Toxics, 10(4), 174. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics10040174

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop