ArticleItalian journal of food safety2025
Food safety and public health implications by determining the antibiotic residues in animal-derived food commercially available in southern Punjab, Pakistan.
Article in Italian journal of food safety, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This comprehensive study aimed to estimate the prevalence of antimicrobial residues in beef, mutton, chicken, fish, and milk. Twenty fresh samples of chicken, mutton, beef, fish, and bovine milk were collected aseptically from retail shops in Southern Punjab, Pakistan. The enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) technique was used to screen the samples for various antimicrobial residues. The ELISA screening of fish samples revealed residue contamination with tetracycline, as well as the metabolites 3-amino-2-oxazolidinone (AOZ) and 5-methyl-morpholino-3-amino-2-oxazolidinone (AMOZ), with concentration ranges of 2.00-108 parts per billion (ppb), 0.09-0.47 ppb, and 0.01-1.08 ppb, respectively. Chicken samples showed residues of tetracycline, quinolone, AOZ, and AMOZ, with detected residual concentrations ranging from 5.60 to 126 ppb for tetracycline, 18 to 230 ppb for quinolone, 0.20 to 1.96 ppb for AOZ, and 0.01 to 1.02 ppb for AMOZ. In livestock, milk samples exhibited 100% contamination for penicillin and 10% for chloramphenicol residues, with concentrations of 0.2-4.1 ppb and 0.01-0.19 ppb, respectively. Beef samples tested positive for residues of penicillin (20%), tetracycline (40%), and chloramphenicol (45%), with residual ranges of 1.36-88 ppb for penicillin, 3.7-148 ppb for tetracycline, and 0.04-0.37 ppb for chloramphenicol. Mutton samples were contaminated with 10% tetracycline and 25% quinolones, showing residual ranges of 1.28-108 ppb for tetracycline and 34-520 ppb for quinolones. Out of 100 samples, 23 showed residues exceeding the maximum residue limit. Specifically, 30.4% of chicken samples, 17.3% of mutton samples, 30.4% of beef samples, 17.3% of milk samples, and 4.3% of fish samples were affected. This study conclusively demonstrated the presence of various antibiotic residues in food-producing animal samples.
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.