确定抗菌药耐药性方面的知识差距:宾夕法尼亚州奶牛场抗菌基因探索性研究

IF 5.1 1区 社会学 Q1 GEOGRAPHY
{"title":"确定抗菌药耐药性方面的知识差距:宾夕法尼亚州奶牛场抗菌基因探索性研究","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.jrurstud.2024.103405","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>There is growing recognition that antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a wicked problem in need of more systematic and interdisciplinary engagement. However, there remain significant knowledge gaps in how antimicrobial use in food-producing animals translates to AMR in animals, humans, and the environment. Drawing on an interdisciplinary approach, we utilize fecal testing on farms, to evaluate the presence of AMR genes (AMRg). Based on the existing literature we hypothesized differences in AMRg would be present between (i) calves versus cows, (ii) farms that had non-family employees versus those that did not, (iii) farms that reported a language barrier between employees and farmers versus those that did not, and and (iv) women-versus men-operated farms. While sample size is too small to draw generalizable conclusions, we did find some differences, with the most pronounced difference between calves and cows. This is an exploratory case study that makes a two-fold contribution. First, we contribute to the nascent literature explicitly focused on gender and AMR in agriculture. Second, to advance interdisciplinary research on AMR we offer an innovative methodological approach that measures the presence of AMRg on farms in the context of farm management practices and descriptive characteristics of the farm.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":17002,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Rural Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0743016724002092/pdfft?md5=778b1d910ec49d4eee27211730e4dfd6&pid=1-s2.0-S0743016724002092-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Identifying knowledge gaps surrounding antimicrobial resistance: An exploratory study of antimicrobial resistant genes on Pennsylvania dairy farms\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jrurstud.2024.103405\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>There is growing recognition that antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a wicked problem in need of more systematic and interdisciplinary engagement. However, there remain significant knowledge gaps in how antimicrobial use in food-producing animals translates to AMR in animals, humans, and the environment. Drawing on an interdisciplinary approach, we utilize fecal testing on farms, to evaluate the presence of AMR genes (AMRg). Based on the existing literature we hypothesized differences in AMRg would be present between (i) calves versus cows, (ii) farms that had non-family employees versus those that did not, (iii) farms that reported a language barrier between employees and farmers versus those that did not, and and (iv) women-versus men-operated farms. While sample size is too small to draw generalizable conclusions, we did find some differences, with the most pronounced difference between calves and cows. This is an exploratory case study that makes a two-fold contribution. First, we contribute to the nascent literature explicitly focused on gender and AMR in agriculture. Second, to advance interdisciplinary research on AMR we offer an innovative methodological approach that measures the presence of AMRg on farms in the context of farm management practices and descriptive characteristics of the farm.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17002,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Rural Studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0743016724002092/pdfft?md5=778b1d910ec49d4eee27211730e4dfd6&pid=1-s2.0-S0743016724002092-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Rural Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0743016724002092\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOGRAPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Rural Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0743016724002092","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

越来越多的人认识到,抗菌素耐药性(AMR)是一个需要更系统化和跨学科参与的棘手问题。然而,在食用动物中使用抗菌素如何转化为动物、人类和环境中的 AMR 方面,仍然存在巨大的知识差距。借鉴跨学科方法,我们利用农场粪便检测来评估是否存在 AMR 基因(AMRg)。根据现有文献,我们假设 AMRg 在以下几种情况下存在差异:(i) 小牛与奶牛;(ii) 有非家庭雇员的农场与没有非家庭雇员的农场;(iii) 雇员与农场主之间有语言障碍的农场与没有语言障碍的农场;(iv) 女性经营的农场与男性经营的农场。虽然样本量太小,无法得出具有普遍意义的结论,但我们确实发现了一些差异,其中小牛和奶牛之间的差异最为明显。这是一项探索性案例研究,有两方面的贡献。首先,我们为明确关注农业中性别和 AMR 的新兴文献做出了贡献。其次,为了推动有关 AMR 的跨学科研究,我们提供了一种创新的方法论,结合农场管理实践和农场的描述性特征来衡量农场中是否存在 AMRg。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Identifying knowledge gaps surrounding antimicrobial resistance: An exploratory study of antimicrobial resistant genes on Pennsylvania dairy farms

There is growing recognition that antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a wicked problem in need of more systematic and interdisciplinary engagement. However, there remain significant knowledge gaps in how antimicrobial use in food-producing animals translates to AMR in animals, humans, and the environment. Drawing on an interdisciplinary approach, we utilize fecal testing on farms, to evaluate the presence of AMR genes (AMRg). Based on the existing literature we hypothesized differences in AMRg would be present between (i) calves versus cows, (ii) farms that had non-family employees versus those that did not, (iii) farms that reported a language barrier between employees and farmers versus those that did not, and and (iv) women-versus men-operated farms. While sample size is too small to draw generalizable conclusions, we did find some differences, with the most pronounced difference between calves and cows. This is an exploratory case study that makes a two-fold contribution. First, we contribute to the nascent literature explicitly focused on gender and AMR in agriculture. Second, to advance interdisciplinary research on AMR we offer an innovative methodological approach that measures the presence of AMRg on farms in the context of farm management practices and descriptive characteristics of the farm.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.80
自引率
9.80%
发文量
286
期刊介绍: The Journal of Rural Studies publishes research articles relating to such rural issues as society, demography, housing, employment, transport, services, land-use, recreation, agriculture and conservation. The focus is on those areas encompassing extensive land-use, with small-scale and diffuse settlement patterns and communities linked into the surrounding landscape and milieux. Particular emphasis will be given to aspects of planning policy and management. The journal is international and interdisciplinary in scope and content.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信