ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2020
Effects of Sulfamethoxazole on the Microbial Community Dynamics During the Anaerobic Digestion Process.
Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recent Trends in Enzyme-Based Biosensors for On-Site Screening of Antibiotic Residues.Chemistry, an Asian journal · 2025Review
- Metagenomics Disentangles Differential Resistome Traits and Risks in Full-Scale Anaerobic Digestion Plants under Ambient, Mesophilic, and Thermophilic Conditions.ACS environmental Au · 2025Article
- Effects of Ciprofloxacin Alone or in Mixture with Sulfamethoxazole on the Efficiency of Anaerobic Digestion and Its Microbial Community.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Anaerobic Digestion and Removal of Sulfamethoxazole, Enrofloxacin, Ciprofloxacin and Their Antibiotic Resistance Genes in a Full-Scale Biogas Plant.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Effect of Antibiotics on the Microbial Efficiency of Anaerobic Digestion of Wastewater: A Review.Frontiers in microbiology · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anaerobic digestion (AD) treatment of cattle manure and slurry makes it possible to produce biogas, a renewable and storable biofuel, as well as digestate, a residual organic matter that can be used to replace chemical fertilizers. On the other hand, the intense use of antibiotics (e.g., sulfamethoxazole) in animal husbandry practices is showing increasing negative impacts resulting from the release of still metabolically active molecules into agroecosystems. In the present study, cattle manure collected from an AD plant-feeding tank was used as feedstock for AD experiments in which some batches were spiked with 5 mg L
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.