Next Article in Journal
Evaluating Healthcare Performance in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Pilot Study on Selected Settings in Ethiopia, Tanzania, and Uganda
Next Article in Special Issue
How COVID-19 Pandemic Has Influenced Public Interest in Foods: A Google Trends Analysis of Italian Data
Previous Article in Journal
Cultural Proficiency in First Nations Health Research: A Mixed-Methods, Cross-Cultural Evaluation of a Novel Resource
Previous Article in Special Issue
Acculturative Stress, Perceived Social Support, and Mental Health: The Mediating Effect of Negative Emotions Associated with Discrimination
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Perspective

Understanding the Interplay between Antimicrobial Resistance, Microplastics and Xenobiotic Contaminants: A Leap towards One Health?

by
Federica Piergiacomo
1,
Lorenzo Brusetti
1 and
Leonardo Pagani
2,*
1
Faculty of Science and Technology, Free University of Bolzano-Bozen, Piazza Università 1, 39100 Bolzano, Italy
2
Antimicrobial Stewardship Project, Provincial Hospital of Bolzano (SABES-ASDAA), Lehrkrankenhaus der Paracelsus Medizinischen Privatuniversität, 39100 Bolzano, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20(1), 42; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20010042
Submission received: 14 November 2022 / Revised: 16 December 2022 / Accepted: 19 December 2022 / Published: 20 December 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue New Challenges and Crucial Topics for 2030 Public Health)

Abstract

:
According to the World Health Organization, the two major public health threats in the twenty-first century are antibiotic-resistant bacteria and antibiotic-resistant genes. The reason for the global prevalence and the constant increase of antibiotic-resistant bacteria is owed to the steady rise in overall antimicrobial consumption in several medical, domestic, agricultural, industrial, and veterinary applications, with consequent environmental release. These antibiotic residues may directly contaminate terrestrial and aquatic environments in which antibiotic-resistance genes are also present. Reports suggest that metal contamination is one of the main drivers of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Moreover, the abundance of antibiotic-resistance genes is directly connected to the predominance of metal concentrations in the environment. In addition, microplastics have become a threat as emerging contaminants because of their ubiquitous presence, bio-inertness, toughness, danger to aquatic life, and human health implications. In the environment, microplastics and AMR are interconnected through biofilms, where genetic information (e.g., ARGs) is horizontally transferred between bacteria. From this perspective, we tried to summarize what is currently known on this topic and to propose a more effective One Health policy to tackle these threats.

1. Introduction

1.1. State of the Art

The biological and physicochemical properties of the environment have been adversely affected by rising energy and freshwater demand, and intensive agriculture and farming are tightly intertwined with population growth, urbanization, and industrialization. Hence, the environment itself has become more susceptible to phenomena such as antibiotic resistance (AMR), an acquired trait that makes microorganisms able to survive, grow, and reproduce even in the presence of significant concentrations of antibiotics [1,2]. According to a report by Ram and Kumar from the World Health Organization, in our century, the two most important issues in public health are antibiotic-resistant genes (ARGs) and, consequently, antibiotic-resistant pathogenic bacteria (ARB) [3]. The reason for the global prevalence and the constant increase of ARB is owed to the steady rise in overall consumption (and consequent environmental release) of antibiotics in several medical, domestic, agricultural, industrial, and veterinary applications; the implication of ARB is today a substantial dread in managing human- or animal-related severe illnesses [4,5]. The outdoor environments can be easily polluted by several kinds of antibiotic residues derived from civil wastewater, manure, hospital waste, or even from pharmaceutical industry pollution. Moreover, their residues in soils are also enhanced by many agricultural practices, such as the use of manure and sewage sludge [6]. Such antibiotic misuse has dramatically influenced the environmental microbial ecology, and the abundance of ARB and ARG in different environments, such as in urban wastewater, freshwater sediments, municipal solid-waste leachate, husbandry sludge, freshwater/drinking water and groundwater [3,7,8,9,10,11].
Urban discharge into inland waters and the prevalence and diversity of ARB have been significantly correlated, as shown in several studies [12,13]. A positive correlation has indeed been demonstrated between the concentration of some antibiotics and their corresponding ARGs in inland waters, including wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) [14]. It has also been reported that in WWTPs, the effluent displayed more ARB in percentage than the influent due to various factors, such as enhanced antimicrobial activity, water treatment conditions, chemical properties of antimicrobial agents, and bacterial genome dynamics, including gene transfer [3,15]. The overall data showed that WWTPs are not efficient in removing antibiotics, making them potential spots for gene transfer. The reasons why WWTP may increase the number of ARB in the effluent include the general bioavailability of antibiotics [7], the high bacterial density in the biofilms [16], and their augmented nutritional status.

1.1.1. Metal Contamination and ARG Spread

The presence and distribution of ARGs are also significantly correlated with other anthropogenic pollutants [14]. These include heavy metal ions, organometallic molecules, disinfectants, surfactants, biocides, and chemical solvents [17,18]. In addition, AMR is further spread by co-selection mechanisms that favor the dispersal of mobile genetic elements [19,20,21,22].
Boundless discharge of heavy metals into the environment can induce serious losses and dangers in microbial communities, organisms, and humans. Heavy metals, both from natural and anthropogenic sources [23,24], steadily bioaccumulate in living organisms, moving through the food chain from the bottom to the top trophic level. Unlike antibiotics, they persist for a very long time due to their non-degradability, and then, when they reach threshold concentrations, they start exerting toxicity. Metal elements involved in the biological organism’s formation and growth, such as Fe, Cu, and Zn, become toxic only if present in high concentrations; toxicity at lower concentrations can instead be exhibited by heavy metals, such as Hg, Pb, and Cd. Under certain circumstances, they could also form metallic complexes, boosting the toxicological implications of their presence [25,26,27].
Natural microbial communities have adapted their morphological structures and physiological and biochemical properties to develop and improve tolerance to heavy metals through evolutionary mechanisms. These mechanisms were reported from studies in the environment and rely on intracellular bioaccumulation, extracellular sequestration, redox reaction of heavy metals, bio-precipitation, and efflux pump systems [24].
Interestingly, a huge number of reports suggest that metal contamination is one of the main drivers of resistance against almost all antibiotics currently used in medical practices, provoking the transfer of ARGs and multidrug resistance among bacteria through selection and co-selection pressures [24,28,29,30,31], and through point mutations or changes at the genetic level and expression [32]. In many circumstances, the abundance of AMR genes is directly connected to the predominance of heavy metal concentrations in the environment [33,34]. Stepanauskas et al. [30] showed that nickel (Ni) and cadmium (Cd) predominant contamination increased bacterial resistance to ampicillin or chloramphenicol. Likewise, the combined co-selection of resistance to tetracycline, ampicillin, and chloramphenicol was related to the selection of copper (Cu) resistance due to agricultural soils contaminated with Cu [35].
Research has also shown that bacterial selection generally occurs through co-resistance, cross-resistance, and co-regulation [19]. The mechanism of co-resistance refers to the fact that several antigenic determinants, which are equally resistant to different toxic components, are localized in the same transposable genetic element. Cross-resistance means that the same removable genetic element brings the same antigenic determinant that can generate resistance to both antibiotics and heavy metals. Co-regulation grants a coordinated backlash to several toxic compound expositions [36].
Metallic nanoparticles (NPs-metals and metal oxides) have bactericidal synergistic effects with antibiotics [37,38]. Because of their high reactiveness and targeting action of microbial cells, NP-based antibacterial products have been widely employed in medical, food, and cosmetic contexts, as well as in wastewater treatments (e.g., membrane filtering methods) with the purpose of controlling infections. After many years, this huge chronic bacterial exposure to NP reagents has also raised the risk of microbes becoming increasingly tolerant. Hence, it is becoming more evident that resistance in bacteria could be promoted by the constant presence of NP sub-lethal or sub-inhibitory levels. Recent studies have shown that progressively growing concentrations of Cu and silver NPs can be tolerated by bacteria [39,40,41,42]. Indeed, NPs can enhance the horizontal gene transfer (HGT) of ARGs, thus fostering conjugation and transformation processes between bacteria in multiple environments (e.g., laboratory cultures [43,44], natural environments [45,46], and anthropological systems [47]). The same plasmid could harbor genes encoding silver resistance and antibiotic resistance, and integrons may also ease ARG co-selection. Moreover, bacteria seem to upregulate efflux pumps to expel metal ions together with antibiotics, acquiring cross-resistance. Ultimately, Zhang et al. [48] uncovered nanoalumina- and ZnO-NP-induced mutations in the gyrA and soxR genes, conferring resistance to ciprofloxacin and chloramphenicol in Escherichia coli. This means that NPs could also promote AR by fostering mutations [37,49].

1.1.2. Microplastic Contamination and ARG Spread

In many natural ecosystems, the phenomenon of ARG spread can be amplified by the presence of other pollutants, such as microplastics, in the inhabitant microbiota [19].
Microplastics (MPs: any plastic fragment smaller than 5 mm in size) have become a threat as an emerging contaminant, reaching 359 million tons worldwide in 2018 [50]. To reduce their impact on the environment, several public actions have been executed, including the UE initiative to ban the use of microplastics in European toiletries (UNEP40). The main reasons for global concern are the durability and general inertness of their chemical bonds, their pervasive presence in all the environments, and danger to biotic life, most likely including human health [3]. Moreover, complete plastic mineralization requires hundreds to thousands of years, meaning a long-term life and contaminant presence [3,51]. Finally, microplastic surfaces can adsorb and bond not only pollutants such as heavy metals, thus fostering cross-resistance [24], but also viruses, microorganisms, and complex molecules [51]. WWTPs have not been designed to remove microplastics, and from a median-sized plant (average treatment capacity of 5 × 107 m3/year), a daily discharge of up to 2 million plastic microparticles is estimated [52]. Most of the studies have explored the effects of microplastics’ presence on the communities’ response for the performance of the plant, such as on the removal of nitrogen toxic compounds in activated sludges [53,54,55], while fewer are available on the interactions between antibiotics and microbes inside the biofilms attached to microplastics in the plant [55]. Accordingly, Pham et al. [55] determined that microplastics from polyethylene (PE) and polystyrene (PS) could enhance the proliferation of sulfonamide-enriched biofilms in domestic WWTP-activated sludge samples.
From the WWTPs, microplastics can easily reach the outflowing canal and be dispersed in the receiving water body [56], including the river water column [57] and its sediments [58,59,60]; from there, they are going to reach marine water, beaches, and be dispersed into indoor air [61], different types of soil [62,63,64], and river and coastal sediments [65,66], fauna biota (mussels and fish) [67], and even in human blood, where polyethylene terephthalate, polyethylene, polymers of styrene and methyl-methacrylate were identified for the first time [68].
Urban and agricultural soils, and consequently vegetables and livestock, are especially assumed to be vulnerable to microplastic contamination: potential incoming pathways are littering (including debris from plastic mulch and greenhouse plastic covering), street runoff (including tire wear, atmospheric deposition, plastic mulching), irrigation with freshwater or wastewater, use of organic fertilizers derived from bio-waste, sewage sludge, or manure [69,70,71].
Ecosystems and their health can be clearly undermined by microplastics through several mechanisms: microplastics may induce changes in organism population balance, and any deleterious effect on a single species could indeed have overlooked consequences in the ecosystem. Indeed, microalgae populations can both be harmed if microplastics hinder the absorption of essential nutrients, and benefit if these reduce populations of primary consumers [72]. Conversely, in the clam Atactodea striata, energy uptake is affected and consequently influences energy transfer in the food web [73]. Likewise, the taxonomic abundance, richness, and diversity of the benthic fauna were found to have been increased by plastic debris, leading to a significant change in the community structure [74]. In the same way, microbial communities colonizing microplastics, the plastisphere, present different functional properties, compositions, and structures, with a potential ecological impact on the overall ecosystem biogeochemistry [75,76]. In this context, the microbiota on the microplastic surfaces could have different ecological functionalities; the ultimate consequence of such a shift is still partially unknown and context-dependent since they vary among different environments [77].
Bacteria can use the microplastic surface as a substrate for biofilm formation—where microbial cells are highly concentrated and embedded in extracellular polymers—sustaining their dispersal to new regions [78]. In this context, cells are facilitated in nutrient or metabolite exchanges, syntrophic behavior, cellular communication, self-protection, and stress resistance through enhanced HGT [79]. The high resistance and usually low density of MPs provide ideal conditions for the long-distance collection, transportation, and dispersion of related mobile genetic elements of microorganisms. Pathogens can invade new locations via MP dispersal. Moreover, natural and non-pathogenic microorganisms increase the chance of acquiring and rapidly spreading AR, which has ultimate adverse effects on several human activities, such as aquaculture resources [77].
Some studies have highlighted the spread of pathogenic bacteria coupled with ARGs through microplastics [80]. For example, Pseudomonas, Aeromonas spp., Vibrio spp., and E. coli, known to be opportunistic fish and human pathogens, were found in microplastic biofilms gaining ARGs [51,55]. Moreover, the transfer frequency of plasmids harboring ARGs from E. coli to other bacteria in vitro increases when bacteria are associated with MPs. In this context, the spread of ARBs has been found to be associated with MPs in marine ecosystems [77]. In marine aquacultures, there has been an increase in the ARB number on MP surfaces to an order of 100–5000 times more than in the surrounding water, thus also compromising food safety [81]. Moreover, the development rate and chlorophyll content of cyanobacteria Anabaena will be considerably lower after the adsorption of macrolide antibiotics on MP [82]. Similarly, the combined presence of tetracycline and polystyrene could worsen the damage caused by oxidation of juvenile Ctenopharyngodon idella and intestines and gill tissue injuries [83]. Again, clams could bioaccumulate in the blood increased levels of antibiotics, such as oxytetracycline or florfenicol, if co-exposed with MPs, which further undermined food safety [84]. Similar results have been demonstrated in other environments, such as agricultural soils. Indeed, Wu et al. [85] investigated AR in samples of Chinese soils with long-term exposure to plastic mulch applications and found they had a higher abundance of ARGs, and thousands of mobile genetics elements (MGEs-14 integrons, 28 insertions, and 2993 plasmids).

1.1.3. Relationship between Heavy Metals, Microplastics and Antibiotic Resistance

Several studies demonstrated both the ubiquity and the negative potential of pollutants such as heavy metals, MPs, and antibiotics on ecosystem safety. Furthermore, since MPs are hydrophobic and represent large attractable areas, hydrophobic pollutants are easily adsorbed on their surfaces, with the consequence of their bioavailability and chemical properties being modified [86,87]. To date, the concentrations of heavy metals and organic pollutants found on the surface of MPs are 106 times higher than the ones present in the close vicinity [19], and this yields combined toxic effects for the surrounding environment: recent studies showed how chemicals, attached, or embedded on MP biofilms, are released because of the natural weathering process. These chemicals include heavy metals, antibiotics, and other xenobiotics. MPs can therefore act as potential carriers of pollution and multidrug resistance in humans [88]. Indeed, there are more metal resistance and multidrug resistance gene types in bacteria isolated from MPs than in free-living strains [89].
The bad implications are related to human health, since these contaminated particles reach humans through ingestion of environmental products. Indeed, humans may feed from seafood such as crustaceans [90], bivalves [91], fish [92], or sea salt [93], which may contain MPs and transmit AR pathogens and metal-driven multi-resistances [24]. Around 80% of fish actually displayed MPs in their stomach [94]; this can cause necrosis of tissues injuries/inflammations or cell necrosis in humans that ingested them [95] or potential cytotoxic complications and oxidative stress on the brain, on epithelial cells, and on the placenta [96,97,98]. In addition, the heavy metals adsorbed on MPs could produce oxygen radicals and damage human cell metabolism [99,100].

1.2. The AMR Burden: Global Data on Human Health

Although in countries such as the UK and Canada, antibiotic use has been falling since its peak in 2014 (e.g., from 2015 to 2019, in the UK the use has dropped from 19.4 to 17.9 defined daily doses (DDDs) per 1000 inhabitants per day), both hospital and community settings showed again increases in use (+3.5% over the last 5-years in the UK, +30% as antimicrobial purchasing by hospitals and +10% of human consumption in Canada) [101,102].
Moreover, to understand the burden of AMR and multidrug resistance pathogens, to foresee the future of human health, and to establish informed surveillance plans, several countries all over the world have launched reports on AMR-related deaths in humans, highlighting dreadful data. In a recent and important paper, Murray et al. overviewed 4.95 million deaths related to bacterial AMR in 204 countries and territories in 2019, of which 1.27 million deaths can be directly attributable to bacterial AMR. ARB caused 929,000 deaths, while 3.57 million deaths were due to AMR-indirect causes. The main ARB species were Acinetobacter baumannii, E. coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Staphylococcus aureus, and Streptococcus pneumoniae. Furthermore, all-age mortality rates for AMR were highest in some low- and middle-income countries, such as sub-Saharan Africa, raising the problem of AMR as a troublesome issue for some of the poorest countries in the world [103].
Between 2014 and 2019, Canada and the UK recorded an increment in the incidence of bloodstream infection with key-bacterial species such as E. coli, K. pneumoniae, and Enterococcus spp. In addition, a doubled rate of healthcare-associated vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus has been recorded, and a 140% increase in the rate of community-associated methicillin-resistant S. aureus, leading to an estimated 178 new antibiotic-resistant infections per day. The major concern is that around 20% of patients diagnosed with these antimicrobial-resistant bloodstream infections died within 30 days of diagnosis [101,102].
These data also parallel those of O’Neill’s report, where 10 million people per year were expected to die because of AMR by 2050 [104]; and this report did not even consider how broad the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on antibiotic consumption and misuse can be, and therefore AMR spread. Similarly, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Antibiotic Resistant Threats in the United States 2019 found that 2.8 million resistant infections are responsible for 35,900 deaths annually, with only Clostridioides difficile infection killing 12,800 people [105]. Cassini et al. [106] assessed approximately 30,000 deaths and 796,000 disability-adjusted life years caused by AMR in the EU in 2015. Not surprisingly, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Health Committee, together with the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, projected that in the EU and USA, resistant infections are responsible for about 60,000 deaths a year [105]. Further investigations at the regional level considering patient demographics and healthcare interactions are now being performed to identify better areas of intervention and to develop a more efficient understanding of the AMR scale.

1.3. A One Health Approach?

The challenges posed by the above-mentioned stressors concurrently engage human, animal, and environmental health. They are all indeed susceptible to such threats, and their related issues could benefit from a transdisciplinary approach [3].
The One Health approach is a concept of “designing and implementing programs, policies, legislation, and research in which multiple sectors communicate and work together to achieve better public health outcomes”. One Health offers a different and multidisciplinary viewpoint, trying to blend data on animal, human, and environmental health. One Health recognizes the interconnection of ecosystem health. The key point of the One Health approach is the continuous dialogue between experts, scientists, and professionals to find potential global health solutions [60,107].
Pathogenic ARB dispersal could be managed at multiple levels: improvement of antimicrobial prescriptions; antibiotic policies and legislations, as well as infection prevention and control; integrated surveillance, together with antimicrobial handling, sanitation, and animal husbandry [107], to wastewater treatment or mitigation measures for MPs since they contribute to the rise of AMR.
The management of MPs needs a targeted One Health approach because they can affect multiple ecological compartments, leading to potential ecosystem impacts that ultimately threaten public health [108]. The “access to food for all” (food certainty) would face the threat of MP, with the consequent worsening of human nutritional deficiencies and diseases in some countries [109]. Only a multidisciplinary approach has the potential to be efficacious as a tool for assessing such effects and mitigating them with the intervention of multiple partners with broad expertise.

2. Discussion/Pitfalls

Data obtained from national and international reports show that the burden of AMR and the number of infections caused by pathogens resistant to one or more key antibiotics continue to rise globally. Resistance to multiple agents leads to increased use of last-resort antibiotics, thus enhancing the vicious circle of AMR. Research suggests that explicit awareness and understanding are essential for the distribution and frequency of AMR related to pollutants such as MPs and heavy metals. The microbiological activity involved in some environmental contexts and samples (e.g., agricultural system-irrigation water, compost, manure), as well as correlations between the prevalence of ARB and MPs or metals, is still a huge scientific room to explore.
MPs, heavy metals, antibiotics, resistance genes, and other pollutants ubiquitously present in the environment, and their latent aversive consequences on the biological community are alarming environmental challenges. Heavy metals promote selection or co-selection for ARGs. Metallic NPs have exhibited antimicrobial activity against different microorganisms and Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria but also the spreading of AR, at the point that their mechanisms of action are still questioned and remain poorly understood. Since the usage of metallic NPs showed great potential, it is essential to shed light on the genetic mechanisms behind the rise of resistance [37].
Most of the studies covered the investigation of the distribution, abundance, concentration, and toxicological implications of pollutant takeover by organisms. MPs soak up heavy metals and antibiotics, inducing elements and resistance gene transfer and switching the plastisphere as potentially toxic for the surrounding organisms. In this context, the influence of MP biofilms on the spread of ARGs and multi-resistance genes is still too vague. Additionally, little research has taken into account a study about the way to efficiently reduce persistent pollutants such as MPs, heavy metals, antibiotics, and resistance genes in the environment. Moreover, the possibility that the MP surface acts as a binding material for heavy metal ions occurring in the soil system, with unexpected consequences in antibiotic resistance mediated by the heavy metal efflux pump, also deserves focused studies. Likewise, it is still not fully clear how biofilm forms on MPs (e.g., processes and mechanisms behind it). Elucidations on microbe succession and on the different factors affecting biofilm formation on MPs particles, such as the environmental conditions and the age of microplastic particles, are required [110,111]. In addition, how and how much MPs impact the functionality of environmental microbiota is very unclear. Even though the effects of MPs and their involvement in troublesome worldwide issues have been assessed, there is also a need to recognize the lack of scientific maturity in the field [112], which requires growing collaborative efforts from different sectors to address mitigation measures [113,114]. Thus, since MPs are abundant and ubiquity, the risks of their dispersal need to be carefully studied, considering the biotic and abiotic effects on the ecosystem that potentially lead to unrecoverable global changes. Up to now, MP-related research has rarely focused on the ecosystems’ functionality, their abiotic effects, or on the chemical changes in the matrices (sediments, soil aggregates, humus). The ecological significance of their presence in the environment is completely obscure. For instance, the accumulation of MP particles could affect the thermal conductivity or water loss in soils and sediments properties, influencing both the micro- and macrobiota. The risks related to pathogen presence and human or fish exposure, as well as MP-associated pathogens’ capability to cause infectious diseases, are still underestimated, and in-depth risk studies are warranted.
Similarly, the large-scale effects of the accumulation of MPs in several environments have not been sufficiently studied. More research must be financed to support mesocosm studies, long-term experiments, and in-field trials. Although HGT has been shown to increase with MPs [77,115], the MPs’ role in the evolution and dissemination of antibiotic resistance genes in both environmental and pathogen bacteria remains unknown. A further assessment of the indirect effects of MPs in terms of associations and interactions between microplastics and ARGs, especially on the marine environment and sea food safety, is needed.
In addition, it is important to finance more studies on MPs-associated bacteria whole genomes and their metabolic potential [116,117]. Hence, since only a small portion of environmental bacteria could be cultivated in laboratories, culture-based methods based on bacteria isolation on a culture media, to which antibiotic sensitivity testing is followed, have limited usage in studying antibiotic resistance [118,119,120]. This detection limit can be easily overcome with methods that use total genomic DNA extracted from a given sample, such as quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) analysis or shotgun metagenomics, which give a general outline of the total bacteria and their associated genes inside the investigated sample [121]. In particular, with tools such as next-generation sequencing technology or whole-genome sequencing (WGS), genotyping pathogens has become very easy [122]. WGS analyses are indeed very efficient in displaying the total metabolic potentiality of microorganisms in order to better understand the basis of antibiotic resistance genetics [123,124]. Despite this, WGS findings on microorganisms related to MP are lacking to a large extent.

3. Conclusions

MPs, antibiotics, and other xenobiotics, such as heavy metals and NPs, are a threat to ecosystems, even due to their chemical properties or to their environmental concentration. These environmental contaminants may stick to the surface of MPs and aggravate the health of the organisms that ingest them. Because of the accumulation of heavy metals at critical concentrations in the environment, bacterial antibiotic resistance may be co-selected while also triggered by co-resistance or cross-resistance. This makes MPs upcoming spots for the co-selection of metal-driven multidrug-resistant pathogens. Additionally, the microbial community in the plastisphere showed a faster HGT rate than the free-living microorganisms, highlighting another cause for environmental and human concerns.
The ultimate consequences for human and animal health are largely to be understood. Their single or correlated effects could affect the microbiota species composition and functionality, shift the physical properties of habitats, modify the nutrient fluxes, and ultimately, the overall ecosystem functions. These accumulative changes may bring to a minor ecosystem resilience, with very serious effects on the Earth’s natural systems. The lack of knowledge regarding it requires new approaches to promoting and assessing interventions.
The One Health approach could truly create a flow of information between different fields, as environmental, animal, and human health stand in interdependency. The integration of professional figures, even with very different backgrounds, such as biologists, chemists, engineers, health professionals, economists, and policymakers, could help assess direct and indirect adverse effects and propose solutions that can mitigate these threats for the next generation.
Putting this into a scientific perspective, future research directions should focus on (1) the improvement of the MPs monitoring system, innovation, and standardization of research methods; (2) the investigation of the MPs’ long-term implications on the ecology of the environment, and their related acute and chronic toxicity effects; (3) the upgrading of the methods used for heavy metals, antibiotics, pollutant removal, and treatment (e.g., by exploiting submerged plants to absorb MPs in waters); (4) on the study of MPs degradation processes, that are still scarcely investigated; and (5) on the assessment and quantification of the frequency of AR-HGT on MP biofilms and on the comparison of these results with natural AR-HGT, both in-vitro studies and in natural environmental matrices.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: L.B. and L.P.; investigation: F.P. and L.B.; writing—original draft preparation: F.P.; writing—review and editing: L.P.; supervision: L.B. and L.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Bong, C.W.; Low, K.Y.; Chai, L.C.; Lee, C.W. Prevalence and diversity of antibiotic resistant Escherichia coli from anthropogenic-impacted Larut River. Front. Public Health 2022, 10, 794513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Khan, A.H.; Aziz, H.A.; Khan, N.A.; Hasan, M.A.; Ahmed, S.; Farooqi, I.H.; Mahtab, M.S. Impact, disease outbreak and the eco-hazards associated with pharmaceutical residues: A critical review. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2022, 19, 677–688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Ram, B.; Kumar, M. Correlation appraisal of antibiotic resistance with fecal, metal and microplastic contamination in a tropical Indian river, lakes and sewage. NPJ Clean Water 2020, 3, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  4. Jiang, L.; Hu, X.; Xu, T.; Zhang, H.; Sheng, D.; Yin, D. Prevalence of antibiotic resistance genes and their relationship with antibiotics in the Huangpu River and the drinking water sources, Shanghai, China. Sci. Total Environ. 2013, 458–460, 267–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Andersson, D.J.; Hughes, D. Antibiotic resistance and its cost: Is it possible to reverse resistance? Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2010, 8, 260–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Bombaywala, S.; Mandpe, A.; Paliya, S.; Kumar, S. Antibiotic resistance in the environment: A critical insight on its occurrence, fate, and eco-toxicity. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 24889–24916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Zhang, S.; Han, B.; Gu, J.; Wang, C.; Wang, P.; Ma, Y.; He, Z. Fate of antibiotic resistant cultivable heterotrophic bacteria and antibiotic resistance genes in wastewater treatment processes. Chemosphere 2015, 135, 138–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Threedeach, S.; Chiemchaisri, W.; Watanabe, T.; Chiemchaisri, C.; Honda, R.; Yamamoto, K. Antibiotic resistance of Escherichia coli in leachates from municipal solid waste landfills: Comparison between semi-aerobic and anaerobic operations. Bioresour. Technol. 2012, 113, 253–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Storteboom, H.; Arabi, M.; Davis, J.G.; Crimi, B.; Pruden, A. Tracking antibiotic resistance genes in the South Platte River basin using molecular signatures of urban, agricultural, and pristine sources. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2010, 44, 7397–7404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Al-Judaibi, E. Infection and antibiotic resistant bacteria in developing countries: A genetic review. J. Microbiol. Res. 2014, 4, 10–17. [Google Scholar]
  11. Chee-Sanford, J.C.; Aminov, R.I.; Krapac, I.J.; Garrigues-Jeanjean, N.; Mackie, R.I. Occurrence and diversity of tetracycline resistance genes in lagoons and groundwater underlying two swine production facilities. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2001, 67, 1494–1502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Kümmerer, K. Resistance in the environment. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2004, 54, 311–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Goñi-Urriza, M.; Capdepuy, M.; Arpin, C.; Raymond, N.; Caumette, P.; Quentin, C. Impact of an urban effluent on antibiotic resistance of riverine Enterobacteriaceae and Aeromonas spp. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2000, 66, 125–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Yang, Y.; Xu, C.; Cao, X.; Lin, H.; Wang, J. Antibiotic resistance genes in surface water of eutrophic urban lakes are related to heavy metals, antibiotics, lake morphology and anthropic impact. Ecotoxicology 2017, 26, 831–840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Marcinek, H.; Wirth, R.; Muscholl-Silberhorn, A.; Gauer, M. Enterococcus faecalis gene transfer under natural conditions in municipal sewage water treatment plants. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1998, 64, 626–632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Suidan, M.T.; Esperanza, M.; Zein, M.; McCauley, P.; Brenner, R.C.; Venosa, A.D. Challenges in biodegradation of trace organic contaminants gasoline oxygenates and sex hormones. Water Environ. Res. 2005, 77, 4–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Holmes, A.H.; Moore, L.S.; Sundsfjord, A.; Steinbakk, M.; Regmi, S.; Karkey, A.; Piddock, L.J. Understanding the mechanisms and drivers of antimicrobial resistance. Lancet 2016, 387, 176–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Singer, A.C.; Shaw, H.; Rhodes, V.; Hart, A. Review of antimicrobial resistance in the environment and its relevance to environmental regulators. Front. Microbiol. 2016, 7, 1728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Baker-Austin, C.; Wright, M.S.; Stepanauskas, R.; McArthur, J.V. Co-selection of antibiotic and metal resistance. Trends Microbiol. 2006, 14, 176–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Berg, J.; Thorsen, M.K.; Holm, P.E.; Jensen, J.; Nybroe, O.; Brandt, K.K. Cu exposure under field conditions coselects for antibiotic resistance as determined by a novel cultivation-independent bacterial community tolerance assay. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2010, 44, 8724–8728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Ashbolt, N.J.; Amézquita, A.; Backhaus, T.; Borriello, P.; Brandt, K.K.; Collignon, P.; Topp, E. Human health risk assessment (HHRA) for environmental development and transfer of antibiotic resistance. Environ. Health Perspect. 2013, 121, 993–1001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Perry, J.A.; Wright, G.D. The antibiotic resistance “mobilome”: Searching for the link between environment and clinic. Front. Microbiol. 2013, 4, 138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  23. Ju, Y.R.; Chen, C.W.; Chen, C.F.; Chuang, X.Y.; Dong, C.D. Assessment of heavy metals in aquaculture fishes collected from southwest coast of Taiwan and human consumption risk. Int. Biodeterior. Biodegrad. 2017, 124, 314–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Li, Z.; Junaid, M.; Chen, G.; Wang, J. Interactions and associated resistance development mechanisms between microplastics, antibiotics and heavy metals in the aquaculture environment. Rev. Acquac. 2022, 14, 1028–1045. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Jia, Y.; Wang, L.; Qu, Z.; Wang, C.; Yang, Z. Effects on heavy metal accumulation in freshwater fishes: Species, tissues, and sizes. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2017, 24, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Gobi, N.; Vaseeharan, B.; Rekha, R.; Vijayakumar, S.; Faggio, C. Bioaccumulation, cytotoxicity and oxidative stress of the acute exposure selenium in Oreochromis mossambicus. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2018, 162, 147–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Simionov, I.A.; Cristea, V.; Petrea, S.M.; Mogodan, A.; Nicoara, M.; Baltag, E.S.; Faggio, C. Bioconcentration of Essential and Nonessential Elements in Black Sea Turbot (Psetta Maxima Maeotica Linnaeus, 1758) in Relation to Fish Gender. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Dickinson, A.W.; Power, A.; Hansen, M.G.; Brandt, K.K.; Vos, M. Heavy metal pollution and co-selection for antibiotic resistance: A microbial paleontology approach. Environ. Int. 2019, 132, 105–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Zhao, Y.; Cocerva, T.; Cox, S.; Tardif, S.; Su, J.Q.; Zhu, Y.G.; Brandt, K.K. Evidence for co-selection of antibiotic resistance genes and mobile genetic elements in metal polluted urban soils. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 656, 512–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Stepanauskas, R.; Glenn, T.C.; Jagoe, C.H.; Tuckfield, R.C.; Lindell, A.H.; King, C.J.; McArthur, J.V. Coselection for microbial resistance to metals and antibiotics in freshwater microcosms. Environ. Microbiol. 2006, 8, 1510–1514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Bednorz, C.; Oelgeschläger, K.; Kinnemann, B.; Hartmann, S.; Neumann, K.; Pieper, R.; Guenther, S. The broader context of antibiotic resistance: Zinc feed supplementation of piglets increases the proportion of multi-resistant Escherichia coli in vivo. Int. J. Med. Microbiol. 2013, 303, 396–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Munita, J.M.; Arias, C.A. Mechanisms of antibiotic resistance. Microbiol. Spectr. 2016, 4, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Ji, L.; Xie, S.; Feng, J.; Li, Y.; Chen, L. Heavy metal uptake capacities by the common freshwater green alga Cladophora fracta. J. Appl. Phycol. 2012, 24, 979–983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Knapp, C.W.; McCluskey, S.M.; Singh, B.K.; Campbell, C.D.; Hudson, G.; Graham, D.W. Antibiotic resistance gene abundances correlate with metal and geochemical conditions in archived Scottish soils. PLoS ONE 2011, 6, e27300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Berg, J.; Tom-Petersen, A.; Nybroe, O. Copper amendment of agricultural soil selects for bacterial antibiotic resistance in the field. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 2005, 40, 146–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Vert, M.; Doi, Y.; Hellwich, K.H.; Hess, M.; Hodge, P.; Kubisa, P.; Schué, F. Terminology for biorelated polymers and applications (IUPAC recommendations 2012). Pure Appl. Chem. 2012, 84, 377–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Amaro, F.; Morón, Á.; Díaz, S.; Martín-González, A.; Gutiérrez, J.C. Metallic nanoparticles—Friends or foes in the battle against antibiotic-resistant bacteria? Microorganisms 2021, 9, 364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Makabenta, J.M.V.; Nabawy, A.; Li, C.H.; Schmidt-Malan, S.; Patel, R.; Rotello, V.M. Nanomaterial-based therapeutics for antibiotic-resistant bacterial infections. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2021, 19, 23–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Guo, J.; Gao, S.H.; Lu, J.; Bond, P.L.; Verstraete, W.; Yuan, Z. Copper Oxide Nanoparticles Induce Lysogenic Bacteriophage and Metal-Resistance Genes in Pseudomonas aeruginosa PAO1. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2017, 9, 22298–22307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Panacek, A.; Kvitek, L.; Smekalova, M.; Vecerova, R.; Kolar, M.; Roderova, M.; Dycka, F.; Sebela, M.; Prucek, R.; Tomanec, O.; et al. Bacterial resistance to silver nanoparticles and how to overcome it. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2018, 13, 65–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Valentin, E.; Bottomley, A.L.; Chilambi, G.S.; Harry, E.J.; Amal, R.; Sotiriou, G.A.; Rice, S.A.; Gunawan, C. Heritable nanosilver resistance in priority pathogen: A unique genetic adaptation and comparison with ionic silver and antibiotics. Nanoscale 2020, 12, 2384–2392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Graves, J.L., Jr.; Tajkarimi, M.; Cunningham, Q.; Campbell, A.; Nonga, H.; Harrison, S.H.; Barrick, J.E. Rapid evolution of silver nanoparticle resistance in Escherichia coli. Front. Genet. 2015, 6, 42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  43. Qi, L.; Ge, Y.; Xia, T.; He, J.-Z.; Shen, C.; Wang, J.; Liu, Y.-J. Rare earth oxide nanoparticles promote soil microbial antibiotic resistance by selectively enriching antibiotic resistance genes. Environ. Sci. Nano 2019, 6, 456–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Ding, C.; Jin, M.; Ma, J.; Chen, Z.; Shen, Z.; Yang, D.; Shi, D.; Liu, W.; Kang, M.; Wang, J.; et al. Nano-Al2O3 can mediate transduction-like transformation of antibiotic resistance genes in water. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 405, 124224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Chen, Q.L.; Zhu, D.; An, X.L.; Ding, J.; Zhu, Y.G.; Cui, L. Does nano silver promote the selection of antibiotic resistance genes in soil and plant? Environ. Int. 2019, 128, 399–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Wang, X.; Yang, F.; Zhao, J.; Xu, Y.; Mao, D.; Zhu, X.; Luo, Y.; Alvarez, P.J.J. Bacterial exposure to ZnO nanoparticles facilitates horizontal transfer of antibiotic resistance genes. NanoImpact 2018, 10, 61–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Huang, H.; Chen, Y.; Yang, S.; Zheng, X. CuO and ZnO nanoparticles drive the propagation of antibiotic resistance genes during sludge anaerobic digestion: Possible role of stimulated signal transduction. Environ. Sci. Nano 2019, 6, 528–539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Zhang, Y.; Gu, A.Z.; Xie, S.; Li, X.; Cen, T.; Li, D.; Chen, J. Nano-metal oxides induce antimicrobial resistance via radical-mediated mutagenesis. Environ. Int. 2018, 121, 1162–1171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Miller, J.H.; Novak, J.T.; Knocke, W.R.; Young, K.; Hong, Y.; Vikesland, P.J.; Pruden, A. Effect of silver nanoparticles and antibiotics on antibiotic resistance genes in anaerobic digestion. Water Environ. Res. 2013, 85, 411–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Plastics Europe. Plastics—The Facts 2019. Available online: https://plasticseurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/2019-Plastics-the-facts.pdf (accessed on 30 November 2022).
  51. Marathe, N.P.; Bank, M.S. The Microplastic-Antibiotic Resistance Connection. In Microplastic in the Environment: Pattern and Process; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; pp. 311–322. [Google Scholar]
  52. Sun, J.; Dai, X.; Wang, Q.; van Loosdrecht, M.C.; Ni, B.J. Microplastics in wastewater treatment plants: Detection, occurrence and removal. Water Res. 2019, 152, 21–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Zhang, Z.; Chen, Y. Effects of microplastics on wastewater and sewage sludge treatment and their removal: A review. Chem. Eng. J. 2020, 382, 122955. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Wang, Z.; Gao, J.; Li, D.; Dai, H.; Zhao, Y. Co-occurrence of microplastics and triclosan inhibited nitrification function and enriched antibiotic resistance genes in nitrifying sludge. J. Hazard. Mater. 2020, 399, 123049. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Pham, D.N.; Clark, L.; Li, M. Microplastics as hubs enriching antibiotic-resistant bacteria and pathogens in municipal activated sludge. J. Hazard. Mater. Lett. 2021, 2, 100014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Anderson, J.C.; Park, B.J.; Palace, V.P. Microplastics in aquatic environments: Implications for Canadian ecosystems. Environ. Pollut. 2016, 218, 269–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Barnes, D.K.A.; Galgani, F.; Thompson, R.C.; Barlaz, M. Accumulation and fragmentation of plastic debris in global environments. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2009, 364, 1985–1998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  58. Thompson, R.C.; Olsen, Y.; Mitchell, R.P.; Davis, A.; Rowland, S.J.; John, A.W.; Russell, A.E. Lost at sea: Where is all the plastic? Science 2004, 304, 838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Law, K.L.; Morét-Ferguson, S.; Maximenko, N.A.; Proskurowski, G.; Peacock, E.E.; Hafner, J.; Reddy, C.M. Plastic accumulation in the North Atlantic gyre. Sci. Xpress 2010, 19, 8. [Google Scholar]
  60. Claessens, M.; Van Cauwenberghe, L.; Vandegehuchte, M.B.; Janssen, C.R. New techniques for the detection of microplastics in sediments and field collected organisms. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2013, 70, 227–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  61. Vianello, A.; Jensen, R.L.; Liu, L.; Vollertsen, J. Simulating human exposure to indoor airborne microplastics using a breathing thermal manikin. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 8670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  62. Garcés-Ordónez, O.; Castillo-Olaya, V.A.; Granados-Briceno, A.; García, L.M.B.; Díaz, L.F.E. Marine litter and microplastic pollution on mangrove soils of the Ciénaga Grande de Santa Marta, Colombian Caribbean. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2019, 145, 455–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Baldwin, A.K.; Corsi, S.R.; Mason, S.A. Plastic debris in 29 great lakes tributaries: Relations to watershed attributes and hydrology. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2016, 50, 10377–10385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Zhou, Q.; Zhang, H.; Fu, C.; Zhou, Y.; Dai, Z.; Li, Y.; Tu, C.; Luo, Y. The distribution and morphology of microplastics in coastal soils adjacent to the Bohai Sea and the Yellow Sea. Geoderma 2018, 322, 201–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Klein, S.; Worch, E.; Knepper, T.P. Occurrence and spatial distribution of microplastics in river shore sediments of the rhine-main area in Germany. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 6070–6076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Wen, X.; Du, C.; Xu, P.; Zeng, G.; Huang, D.; Yin, L.; Yin, Q.; Hu, L.; Wan, J.; Zhang, J.; et al. Microplastic pollution in surface sediments of urban water areas in Changsha, China: Abundance, composition, surface textures. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2018, 136, 414–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Digka, N.; Tsangaris, C.; Torre, M.; Anastasopoulou, A.; Zeri, C. Microplastics in mussels and fish from the Northern Ionian Sea. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2018, 135, 30–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Leslie, H.A.; Van Velzen, M.J.; Brandsma, S.H.; Vethaak, A.D.; Garcia-Vallejo, J.J.; Lamoree, M.H. Discovery and quantification of plastic particle pollution in human blood. Environ. Int. 2022, 163, 107199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Möller, J.N.; Löder, M.G.; Laforsch, C. Finding microplastics in soils: A review of analytical methods. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2020, 54, 2078–2090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Sun, M.; Ye, M.; Jiao, W.; Feng, Y.; Yu, P.; Liu, M.; Hu, F. Changes in tetracycline partitioning and bacteria/phage-comediated ARGs in microplastic-contaminated greenhouse soil facilitated by sophorolipid. J. Hazard. Mater. 2018, 345, 131–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Weithmann, N.; Möller, J.N.; Löder, M.G.; Piehl, S.; Laforsch, C.; Freitag, R. Organic fertilizer as a vehicle for the entry of microplastic into the environment. Sci. Adv. 2018, 4, eaap8060. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  72. Prata, J.C.; da Costa, J.P.; Lopes, I.; Duarte, A.C.; Rocha-Santos, T. Effects of microplastics on microalgae populations: A critical review. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 665, 400–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Xu, X.Y.; Lee, W.T.; Chan, A.K.Y.; Lo, H.S.; Shin, P.K.S.; Cheung, S.G. Microplastic ingestion reduces energy intake in the clam Atactodea striata. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2017, 124, 798–802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Clemente, C.C.C.; Paresque, K.; Santos, P.J.P. The effects of plastic bags presence on a macrobenthic community in a polluted estuary. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2018, 135, 630–635. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Zettler, E.R.; Mincer, T.J.; Amaral-Zettler, L.A. Life in the “plastisphere”: Microbial communities on plastic marine debris. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2013, 47, 7137–7146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Miao, L.; Wang, P.; Hou, J.; Yao, Y.; Liu, Z.; Liu, S.; Li, T. Distinct community structure and microbial functions of biofilms colonizing microplastics. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 650, 2395–2402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Arias-Andres, M.; Klümper, U.; Rojas-Jimenez, K.; Grossart, H.P. Microplastic pollution increases gene exchange in aquatic ecosystems. Environ. Pollut. 2018, 237, 253–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  78. Prata, J.C.; da Costa, J.P.; Lopes, I.; Andrady, A.L.; Duarte, A.C.; Rocha-Santos, T. A One Health perspective of the impacts of microplastics on animal, human and environmental health. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 777, 146094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Eckert, E.M.; Di Cesare, A.; Kettner, M.T.; Arias-Andres, M.; Fontaneto, D.; Grossart, H.P.; Corno, G. Microplastics increase impact of treated wastewater on freshwater microbial community. Environ. Pollut. 2018, 234, 495–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Hu, D.; Shen, M.; Zhang, Y.; Li, H.; Zeng, G. Microplastics and nanoplastics: Would they affect global biodiversity change? Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2019, 26, 19997–20002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Zhang, Y.; Lu, J.; Wu, J.; Wang, J.; Luo, Y. Potential risks of microplastics combined with superbugs: Enrichment of antibiotic resistant bacteria on the surface of microplastics in mariculture system. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2020, 187, 109852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. González-Pleiter, M.; Pedrouzo-Rodríguez, A.; Verdú, I.; Leganés, F.; Marco, E.; Rosal, R.; Fernández-Piñas, F. Microplastics as vectors of the antibiotics azithromycin and clarithromycin: Effects towards freshwater microalgae. Chemosphere 2021, 268, 128824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Liu, S.; Yan, L.; Zhang, Y.; Junaid, M.; Wang, J. Polystyrene nanoplastics exacerbated the ecotoxicological and potential carcinogenic effects of tetracycline in juvenile grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella). Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 803, 150027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Zhou, W.; Han, Y.; Tang, Y.; Shi, W.; Du, X.; Sun, S.; Liu, G. Microplastics aggravate the bioaccumulation of two waterborne veterinary antibiotics in an edible bivalve species: Potential mechanisms and implications for human health. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2020, 54, 8115–8122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Wu, C.; Song, X.; Wang, D.; Ma, Y.; Ren, X.; Hu, H.; Ma, Y. Tracking antibiotic resistance genes in microplastic-contaminated soil. Chemosphere 2022, 312, 137235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Sleight, V.A.; Bakir, A.; Thompson, R.C.; Henry, T.B. Assessment of microplastic-sorbed contaminant bioavailability through analysis of biomarker gene expression in larval zebrafish. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2017, 116, 291–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  87. Trevisan, R.; Voy, C.; Chen, S.; Di Giulio, R.T. Nanoplastics decrease the toxicity of a complex PAH mixture but impair mitochondrial energy production in developing zebrafish. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2019, 53, 8405–8415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Imran, M.; Das, K.R.; Naik, M.M. Co-selection of multi-antibiotic resistance in bacterial pathogens in metal and microplastic contaminated environments: An emerging health threat. Chemosphere 2019, 215, 846–857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Yang, Y.; Liu, G.; Song, W.; Ye, C.; Lin, H.; Li, Z.; Liu, W. Plastics in the marine environment are reservoirs for antibiotic and metal resistance genes. Environ. Int. 2019, 123, 79–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Botterell, Z.L.R.; Beaumont, N.; Dorrington, T.; Steinke, M.; Thompson, R.C.; Lindeque, P.K. Bioavailability and effects of microplastics on marine zooplankton: A review. Environ. Pollut. 2019, 245, 98–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Brate, I.L.N.; Hurley, R.; Iversen, K.; Beyer, J.; Thomas, K.V.; Steindal, C.C.; Lusher, A. Mytilus spp. as sentinels for monitoring microplastic pollution in Norwegian coastal waters: A qualitative and quantitative study. Environ. Pollut. 2018, 243, 383–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Ferreira, G.; Barletta, M.; Lima, A.R.A.; Morley, S.A.; Justino, A.; Costa, M.F. High intake rates of microplastics in a Western Atlantic predatory fish, and insights of a direct fishery effect. Environ. Pollut. 2018, 236, 706–717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Yang, D.; Shi, H.; Li, L.; Li, J.; Jabeen, K.; Kolandhasamy, P. Microplastic pollution in table salts from China. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 13622–13627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Walkinshaw, C.; Lindeque, P.K.; Thompson, R.; Tolhurst, T.; Cole, M. Microplastics and seafood: Lower trophic organisms at highest risk of contamination. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2019, 190, 110066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Rochman, C.M.; Kross, S.M.; Armstrong, J.B.; Bogan, M.T.; Darling, E.S.; Green, S.J.; Veríssimo, D. Scientific evidence supports a ban on microbeads. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 10759–10761. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  96. Naik, R.K.; Naik, M.M.; D’Costa, P.M.; Shaikh, F. Microplastics in ballast water as an emerging source and vector for harmful chemicals, antibiotics, metals, bacterial pathogens and HAB species: A potential risk to the marine environment and human health. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2019, 149, 110525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  97. Schirinzi, G.F.; Perez-Pomeda, I.; Sanchis, J.; Rossini, C.; Farre, M.; Barcelo, D. Cytotoxic effects of commonly used nanomaterials and microplastics on cerebral and epithelial human cells. Environ. Res. 2017, 159, 579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Alimba, C.G.; Faggio, C.; Sivanesan, S.; Ogunkanmi, A.L.; Krishnamurthi, K. Micro(nano)-plastics in the environment and risk of carcinogenesis: Insight into possible mechanisms. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 416, 126143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Fu, Z.; Xi, S. The effects of heavy metals on human metabolism. Toxicol. Mech. Methods 2020, 30, 167–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Burgos-Aceves, M.A.; Cohen, A.; Paolella, G.; Lepretti, M.; Smith, Y.; Faggio, C.; Lionetti, L. Modulation of mitochondrial functions by xenobiotic-induced microRNA: From environmental sentinel organisms to mammals. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 645, 79–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Public Health Agency of Canada. Canadian Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance System Report; Public Health Agency of Canada: Nepean, ON, Canada, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  102. Public Health England. English Surveillance Programme for Antimicrobial Utilisation and Resistance (ESPAUR) Report 2019–2020. Available online: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/english-surveillance-programme-antimicrobial-utilisation-and-resistance-espaur-report (accessed on 9 February 2021).
  103. Murray, C.J.; Ikuta, K.S.; Sharara, F.; Swetschinski, L.; Aguilar, G.R.; Gray, A.; Naghavi, M. Global burden of bacterial antimicrobial resistance in 2019: A systematic analysis. Lancet 2022, 399, 629–655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. O’Neill, J. Tackling Drug-Resistant Infections Globally: Final Report and Recommendations. London: Review on Antimicrobial Resistance; Government of the United Kingdom: London, UK, 2016.
  105. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Combating Antimicrobial Resistance and Protecting the Miracle of Modern Medicine; National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine: Washington, DC, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  106. Cassini, A.; Högberg, L.D.; Plachouras, D.; Quattrocchi, A.; Hoxha, A.; Simonsen, G.S.; Hopkins, S. Attributable deaths and disability-adjusted life-years caused by infections with antibiotic-resistant bacteria in the EU and the European Economic Area in 2015: A population-level modelling analysis. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2019, 19, 56–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  107. Pieri, A.; Aschbacher, R.; Fasani, G.; Mariella, J.; Brusetti, L.; Pagani, E.; Sartelli, M.; Pagani, L. Country Income Is Only One of the Tiles: The Global Journey of Antimicrobial Resistance among Humans, Animals, and Environment. Antibiotics 2020, 9, 473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Barboza, L.G.A.; Vethaak, A.D.; Lavorante, B.R.B.O.; Lundebye, A.-K.; Guilhermino, L. Marine microplastic debris: An emerging issue for food security, food safety and human health. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2018, 133, 336–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. World Health Organization. The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2020: Transforming Food Systems for Affordable Healthy Diets (Volume 2020). Available online: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=it&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=World+Health+Organization.+The+state+of+food+security+and+nutrition+in+the+world+2020%3A+transforming+food+systems+for+affordable+healthy+diets+%28Vol.+2020%29.+2020.+Food+%26+Agriculture+Org.&btnG= (accessed on 18 December 2022).
  110. Su, Y.; Zhang, Z.; Zhu, J.; Shi, J.; Wei, H.; Xie, B.; Shi, H. Microplastics act as vectors for antibiotic resistance genes in landfill leachate: The enhanced roles of the long-term aging process. Environ. Pollut. 2020, 270, 116278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Yang, K.; Chen, Q.L.; Chen, M.L.; Li, H.Z.; Liao, H.; Pu, Q.; Zhu, Y.G.; Cui, L. Temporal dynamics of antibiotic resistome in the plastisphere during microbial colonization. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2020, 54, 11322–11332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Backhaus, T.; Wagner, M. Microplastics in the environment: Much ado about nothing? A Debate. Glob. Chall. 2019, 4, 1900022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  113. Rochman, C.M.; Browne, M.A.; Underwood, A.J.; van Franeker, J.A.; Thompson, R.C.; Amaral-Zettler, L.A. The ecological impacts of marine debris: Unraveling the demonstrated evidence from what is perceived. Ecology 2016, 97, 302–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  114. Wagner, M.; Scherer, C.; Alvarez-Muñoz, D.; Brennholt, N.; Bourrain, X.; Buchinger, S.; Fries, E.; Grosbois, C.; Klasmeier, J.; Marti, T.; et al. Microplastics in freshwater ecosystems: What we know and what we need to know. Environ. Sci. Eur. 2014, 26, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  115. Arias-Andres, M.; Rojas-Jimenez, K.; Grossart, H.P. Collateral effects of microplastic pollution on aquatic microorganisms: An ecological perspective. TrAC Trends Anal. Chem. 2019, 112, 234–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Li, Q.; Xu, X.; He, C.; Zheng, L.; Gao, W.; Sun, C.; Li, J.; Gao, F. Complete genome sequence of a quorum-sensing bacterium, Oceanicola sp. strain D3, isolated from a microplastic surface in coastal water of Qingdao. China Microbiol. Resour. Announc. 2019, 8, e01022-19. [Google Scholar]
  117. Radisic, V.; Lunestad, B.T.; Sanden, M.; Bank, M.S.; Marathe, N.P. Draft genome sequence of multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas protegens strain 11HC2, isolated from marine plastic collected from the west coast of Norway. Microbiol. Resour. Announc. 2021, 10, e01285-20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Khan, Z.A.; Siddiqui, M.F.; Park, S. Current and emerging methods of antibiotic susceptibility testing. Diagnostics 2019, 9, 49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  119. Lloyd, K.G.; Steen, A.D.; Ladau, J.; Yin, J.; Crosby, L. Phylogenetically novel uncultured microbial cells dominate earth microbiomes. MSystems 2018, 3, e00055-18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  120. Stewart, E.J. Growing unculturable bacteria. J. Bacteriol. 2012, 194, 4151–4160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Simon, C.; Daniel, R. Metagenomic analyses: Past and future trends. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2011, 77, 1153–1161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  122. Quainoo, S.; Coolen, J.P.; van Hijum, S.A.; Huynen, M.A.; Melchers, W.J.; van Schaik, W.; Wertheim, H.F. Whole-genome sequencing of bacterial pathogens: The future of nosocomial outbreak analysis. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2017, 30, 1015–1063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  123. Grevskott, D.H.; Salvà-Serra, F.; Moore, E.R.B.; Marathe, N.P. Nanopore sequencing reveals genomic map of CTX-M-type extended spectrum β-lactamases carried by Escherichia coli strains isolated from blue mussels (Mytilus edulis) in Norway. BMC Microbiol. 2020, 20, 134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Hendriksen, R.S.; Bortolaia, V.; Tate, H.; Tyson, G.; Aarestrup, F.M.; McDermott, P. Using genomics to track global antimicrobial resistance. Front. Public Health 2019, 7, 242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Piergiacomo, F.; Brusetti, L.; Pagani, L. Understanding the Interplay between Antimicrobial Resistance, Microplastics and Xenobiotic Contaminants: A Leap towards One Health? Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 42. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20010042

AMA Style

Piergiacomo F, Brusetti L, Pagani L. Understanding the Interplay between Antimicrobial Resistance, Microplastics and Xenobiotic Contaminants: A Leap towards One Health? International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2023; 20(1):42. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20010042

Chicago/Turabian Style

Piergiacomo, Federica, Lorenzo Brusetti, and Leonardo Pagani. 2023. "Understanding the Interplay between Antimicrobial Resistance, Microplastics and Xenobiotic Contaminants: A Leap towards One Health?" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 20, no. 1: 42. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20010042

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