Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 339

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 154 of the 154 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Monitoring antibiotic resistance genes in wastewater treatment: Current strategies and future challenges

Open access
Nguyen, Anh Q., Vu, Hang P., Nguyen, Luong N., Wang, Qilin, Djordjevic, Steven P., Donner, Erica, Yin, Huabing, Nghiem, Long D.·2021·Science of The Total Environment

Abstract

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a growing threat to human and animal health. Progress in molecular biology has revealed new and significant challenges for AMR mitigation given the immense diversity of antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs), the complexity of ARG transfer, and the broad range of omnipresent factors contributing to AMR. Municipal, hospital and abattoir wastewater are collected and treated in wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs), where the presence of diverse selection pressures together with a highly concentrated consortium of pathogenic/commensal microbes create favourable conditions for the transfer of ARGs and proliferation of antibiotic resistant bacteria (ARB). The rapid emergence of antibiotic resistant pathogens of clinical and veterinary significance over the past 80 years has re-defined the role of WWTPs as a focal point in the fight against AMR. By reviewing the occurrence of ARGs in wastewater and sludge and the current technologies used to quantify ARGs and identify ARB, this paper provides a research roadmap to address existing challenges in AMR control via wastewater treatment. Wastewater treatment is a double-edged sword that can act as either a pathway for AMR spread or as a barrier to reduce the environmental release of anthropogenic AMR. State of the art ARB identification technologies, such as metagenomic sequencing and fluorescence-activated cell sorting, have enriched ARG/ARB databases, unveiled keystone species in AMR networks, and improved the resolution of AMR dissemination models. Data and information provided in this review highlight significant knowledge gaps. These include inconsistencies in ARG reporting units, lack of ARG/ARB monitoring surrogates, lack of a standardised protocol for determining ARG removal via wastewater treatments, and the inability to support appropriate risk assessment. This is due to a lack of standard monitoring targets and agreed threshold values, and paucity of information on the ARG-pathogen host relationship and risk management. These research gaps need to be addressed and research findings need to be transformed into practical guidance for WWTP operators to enable effective progress towards mitigating the evolution and spread of AMR.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146964

Cites

154 of 154 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 154 references

Cited by

See all 339

Metadata

Authors
Nguyen, A. Q., Vu, H. P., Nguyen, L. N., Wang, Q., Djordjevic, S. P., Donner, E., Yin, H., & Nghiem, L. D.
Venue
Science of The Total Environment
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-08
Volume
783
Pages
146964
ISSN
0048-9697 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3150659052
Cited by
339
References
154
FWCI
11.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Monitoring antibiotic resistance genes in wastewater treatment: Current strategies and future challenges. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146964
The paper
Nguyen, A. Q., Vu, H. P., Nguyen, L. N., Wang, Q., Djordjevic, S. P., Donner, E., Yin, H., & Nghiem, L. D. (2021). Monitoring antibiotic resistance genes in wastewater treatment: Current strategies and future challenges. Science of The Total Environment. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146964

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.