Occurrence and human dietary assessment of fluoroquinolones antibiotics in cultured fish around Tai Lake, China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Fluoroquinolone antibiotics are widely used in the production of aquatic products and considered to be a significant contributing factor to the burden of both natural and aquaculture environments. However, the main types of fluoroquinolones present in aquaculture systems have not been determined. The objectives of the present study were to explore the occurrence of residual fluoroquinolone antibiotics in fish muscle tissues sampled from across the entire aquaculture season in the Tai Lake basin in China and to assess the dietary risks associated with the upcoming vendible fish in the last month of the aquaculture season. Fluoroquinolones were detected in 95.69% of all fish samples, and the concentrations ranged from the limit of quantification (LOQ) to 47 108.00 μg · kg−1. Enrofloxacin contributed the most among the 9 fluoroquinolone antibiotics tested. Of the 4 fish species studied, enrofloxacin was present in bream at significant (p < 0.05) concentrations in August, with an average value of 321.45 μg · kg−1, while enrofloxacin concentrations peaked in crab and shrimp in September, with average values of 6949.60 and 460.82 μg · kg−1, respectively. However, different patterns were observed in perch, suggesting that other categories of antibiotics may be used in the production of this fish. Dietary risk assessment showed that the residual levels and estimated daily intake in bream, perch, and shrimp were far below the maximum residual level and acceptable daily intake. However, the average residual level in crab exceeded the maximum residual level, and the estimated daily intake value accounted for 78.49% of the acceptable daily intake, indicating potential consumption risk. In summary, the present study aims to guide the production and consumption of aquatic products. Environ Toxicol Chem 2017;36:2899–2905. © 2017 SETAC
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".