ArticleEnvironmental microbiology reports2026
Using Ongoing Wildlife Surveillance Programs to Monitor Antibiotic Resistant Bacteria in the Environment.
Article in Environmental microbiology reports, 2026. 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The need to include wildlife in surveillance programs for antibiotic resistance has been previously highlighted. In the present study, we explored the possibility of sampling Swedish wildlife in conjunction with ongoing monitoring programs for wildlife health and disease to evaluate the occurrence of antibiotic resistance. The animals included in the study represented different trophic levels and degrees of interaction with humans, namely bears, eagles, wolves, foxes, otters, and hares. Samples were screened for ESBL-, pAmpC-, and carbapenemase-producing Escherichia coli using selective media, and indicator E. coli was also isolated from each sample. All isolates were tested for antimicrobial susceptibility, and a subset of isolates was genome sequenced. Two samples from foxes were found to carry ESBL- or pAmpC-producing isolates, while no carbapenemase-producing E. coli could be detected. Geographical information on the samples and genetic characterization of the ESBL- and pAmpC-producing isolates suggest that proximity to anthropogenic settings could play a role in the occurrence of antibiotic resistance in wildlife. In addition, the study demonstrated that the use of ongoing wildlife surveillance programs presents a cost-efficient possibility to monitor antibiotic resistance in wild animals. However, future studies and monitoring programs should take careful consideration regarding selection of animal species and distribution.
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.