Taylor William, Bohm Kristin, Dyet Kristin, Weaver Louise, Pattis Isabelle
Institute of Environmental Science and Research Ltd, Christchurch, New Zealand.
Institute of Environmental Science and Research Ltd, Kenepuru, Wellington, New Zealand.
BMC Res Notes. 2025 Jan 7;18(1):5. doi: 10.1186/s13104-024-07027-9.
The World Health Organization (WHO) has declared antimicrobial resistance (AMR) as one of the top threats to global public health. While AMR surveillance of human clinical isolates is well-established in many countries, the increasing threat of AMR has intensified efforts to detect antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) accurately and sensitively in environmental samples, wastewater, animals, and food. Using five ARGs and the 16S rRNA gene, we compared quantitative PCR (qPCR) and metagenomic sequencing (MGS), two commonly used methods to uncover the wastewater resistome. We compared both methods by evaluating ARG detection through a municipal wastewater treatment chain.
Our results demonstrate that qPCR was more sensitive than MGS, particularly in diluted samples with low ARG concentrations such as oxidation pond water. However, MGS was potentially more specific and has less risk of off-target binding in concentrated samples such as raw sewage. MGS analysis revealed multiple subtypes of each gene which could not be distinguished by qPCR; these subtypes varied across different sample types. Our findings affect the conclusions that can be drawn when comparing different sample types, particularly in terms of inferring removal rates or origins of genes. We conclude that both methods appear suitable to profile the resistome of wastewater and other environmental samples, depending on the research question and type of sample.
世界卫生组织(WHO)已将抗菌药物耐药性(AMR)列为对全球公共卫生的最大威胁之一。虽然许多国家对人类临床分离株的AMR监测已很成熟,但AMR日益增加的威胁促使人们加大力度,以准确、灵敏地检测环境样本、废水、动物和食品中的抗生素耐药基因(ARG)。我们使用5种ARG和16S rRNA基因,比较了定量PCR(qPCR)和宏基因组测序(MGS)这两种常用的揭示废水耐药组的方法。我们通过评估城市污水处理链中的ARG检测情况,对这两种方法进行了比较。
我们的结果表明,qPCR比MGS更灵敏,特别是在ARG浓度较低的稀释样本(如氧化塘水)中。然而,MGS可能更具特异性,在诸如原污水等浓缩样本中出现非靶向结合的风险较小。MGS分析揭示了每个基因的多个亚型,而qPCR无法区分这些亚型;这些亚型在不同样本类型中有所不同。我们的研究结果影响了在比较不同样本类型时得出的结论,特别是在推断基因的去除率或来源方面。我们得出结论,根据研究问题和样本类型,这两种方法似乎都适用于分析废水和其他环境样本的耐药组。