Desde microorganismos a la macrofauna: un estudio comparativo de las comunidades bentónicas profundas y su respuesta a las variables ambientales a lo largo del talud de Malta (mar Jónico)

A comparative study for abundance, biomass and diversity was carried out for the prokaryote, meiofauna and macrofauna communities at three depth stations (1200, 1800 and 2100 m) along the Malta Escarpment (Mediterranean Sea). Our investigation showed a two-fold increase with depth in prokaryote abundance; the contribution of prokaryote biomass to the total benthic biomass was predominant at all depths. Bacteria were the dominant prokaryote component and Archaea formed a considerable fraction (20%-30%) of the prokaryote assemblages. The meio- and macrofauna abundances and meiofauna biomass did not decrease significantly with depth but macrofauna biomass did. The α diversity did not follow a clear bathymetric trend for both nematode and macrofauna species. Probably because of the large number of eurybathic nematode genera, nor did the turnover diversity in nematode composition change down the depth gradient. Conversely, for the macrofauna there was a perceptible change in community composition between the shallowest station and the two deeper stations. Food availability affected only the macrobenthic component. The increase in the prokaryote organisms with depth and the dominance of nematodes and macrofauna deposit feeders suggest active grazing by the two benthic components on microbes. This would transfer energy to the higher trophic levels through the microbial compartment.Se llevó a cabo un estudio comparativo de las comunidades de procariotas, meiofauna y macrofauna sobre la abundancia, biomasa y diversidad. Fue realizado en tres estaciones en varias profundidades (1200, 1800 y 2100 m) a lo largo del talud de Malta (mar Mediterráneo). Nuestra investigación muestra que, aumentando la profundidad, la abundancia de procariotas se duplica. La contribución de la biomasa procariota al total de la biomasa bentónica predominó en todas las profundidades. Las bacterias eran la fracción procariota dominante y junto con los Archaea representaban al 20-30% del total de procariotas. Por otra parte la abundancia de la meiofauna y macrofauna y la biomasa de la meiofauna no disminuían significativamente con la profundidad, mientras que la biomasa de la macrofauna sí lo hacía. La diversidad α no siguió una tendencia batimétrica muy clara para las especies de los nematodos y macrofauna. Probablemente debido a la gran abundancia de géneros de nematodos eurybatiales, la tasa derenovación de la diversidad en la composición de nematodos tampoco cambió por el gradiente de profundidad. En cambio, para la macrofauna hubo un cambio apreciable en la composición de la comunidad entre la estación más superficial y las dos estaciones más profundas. La disponibilidad de alimentos afectó sólo al componente macrobentónico. El aumento con la profundidad de los organismos procariotas, el dominio de los nematodos y la macrofauna que se alimenta de los materiales depositados sugieren un medio activo para los dos componentes bentónicos microbianos. Esto daría lugar a una transferencia de energía a niveles tróficos superiores a través del compartimento microbiano

From microbes to macrofauna: an integrated study of deep benthic communities and their response to environmental variables along the Malta Escarpment (Ionian Sea)

A comparative study for abundance, biomass and diversity was carried out for the prokaryote, meiofauna and macrofauna communities at three depth stations (1200, 1800 and 2100 m) along the Malta Escarpment (Mediterranean Sea). Our investigation showed a two-fold increase with depth in prokaryote abundance; the contribution of prokaryote biomass to the total benthic biomass was predominant at all depths. Bacteria were the dominant prokaryote component and Archaea formed a considerable fraction (20%-30%) of the prokaryote assemblages. The meio- and macrofauna abundances and meiofauna biomass did not decrease significantly with depth but macrofauna biomass did. The α diversity did not follow a clear bathymetric trend for both nematode and macrofauna species. Probably because of the large number of eurybathic nematode genera, nor did the turnover diversity in nematode composition change down the depth gradient. Conversely, for the macrofauna there was a perceptible change in community composition between the shallowest station and the two deeper stations. Food availability affected only the macrobenthic component. The increase in the prokaryote organisms with depth and the dominance of nematodes and macrofauna deposit feeders suggest active grazing by the two benthic components on microbes. This would transfer energy to the higher trophic levels through the microbial compartment

Late Pleistocene pteropods, heteropods and planktonic foraminifera from the Caribbean Sea, Mediterranean Sea and Indian Ocean

Pteropods and heteropods (holoplanktonic gastropods) are an important component of the modern oceans; however, detailed information on their distribution in the fossil record is often based on poorly preserved specimens. This study presents the micropaleontological analysis of three exceptionally well-preserved Late Pleistocenemarine sediment cores from the eastern Caribbean Sea, westernMediterranean Sea and the Indian Ocean. This study presents the first stratigraphical record of heteropods in the Caribbean Sea and extends the known zonation of pteropods in the Mediterranean Sea. Distributions of pteropods, heteropods and planktonic foraminifera are presented with abundance and species richness data, as well as stratigraphical dates inferred from the oxygen isotope stratigraphy, argon-argon dating and biostratigraphy. The findings of this study greatly improve our understanding of holoplanktonic gastropod stratigraphy and ecology. Results reveal that the geographical range of heteropods, thought to be restricted to sub-tropical warm waters,may be much greater, including waters of sub-polar temperature. Heteropods were also found to be surprisingly abundant, potentially representing a more important part of the ocean food web than previously thought. Analysis revealed two species of holoplanktonic gastropod that are previously undescribed and indicate that the pteropod Heliconoides mermuysi (Cahuzac and Janssen 2010), known exclusively from the Moulin de Cabanes (Miocene),may have lived in theCaribbean Sea and Indian Ocean as recently as 4 kyr ago. These findings highlight the urgent need for increased research on holoplanktonic gastropods. The threat that current climate change and ocean acidification poses, particularly to the delicately shelled forms, means that some species may become extinct before they have even been fully ‘discovered’

Assessment of spatio-temporal variability of faecal pollution along coastal waters during and after rainfall events

© The Author(s), 2022. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Manini, E., Baldrighi, E., Ricci, F., Grilli, F., Giovannelli, D., Intoccia, M., Casabianca, S., Capellacci, S., Marinchel, N., Penna, P., Moro, F., Campanelli, A., Cordone, A., Correggia, M., Bastoni, D., Bolognini, L., Marini, M., & Penna, A. Assessment of spatio-temporal variability of faecal pollution along coastal waters during and after rainfall events. Water, 14(3), (2022): 502, https://doi.org/10.3390/w14030502.More than 80% of wastewaters are discharged into rivers or seas, with a negative impact on water quality along the coast due to the presence of potential pathogens of faecal origin. Escherichia coli and enterococci are important indicators to assess, monitor, and predict microbial water quality in natural ecosystems. During rainfall events, the amount of wastewater delivered to rivers and coastal systems is increased dramatically. This study implements measures capable of monitoring the pathways of wastewater discharge to rivers and the transport of faecal bacteria to the coastal area during and following extreme rainfall events. Spatio-temporal variability of faecal microorganisms and their relationship with environmental variables and sewage outflow in an area located in the western Adriatic coast (Fano, Italy) was monitored. The daily monitoring during the rainy events was carried out for two summer seasons, for a total of five sampling periods. These results highlight that faecal microbial contaminations were related to rainy events with a high flow of wastewater, with recovery times for the microbiological indicators varying between 24 and 72 h and influenced by a dynamic dispersion. The positive correlation between ammonium and faecal bacteria at the Arzilla River and the consequences in seawater can provide a theoretical basis for controlling ammonium levels in rivers as a proxy to monitor the potential risk of bathing waters pathogen pollution.This research was funded by WATERCARE project (Water management solutions for reducing microbial environment impact in coastal areas, project ID 10044130, https://www.italy-croatia.eu/web/watercare, accessed on 17 October 2021) funded by the European Union under the Interreg Italy–Croatia CBC Programme

Status of faecal pollution in ports: A basin-wide investigation in the Adriatic Sea

Ports are subject to a variety of anthropogenic impacts, and there is mounting evidence of faecal contamination through several routes. Yet, little is known about pollution in ports by faecal indicator bacteria (FIB). FIB spatio-temporal dynamics were assessed in 12 ports of the Adriatic Sea, a semi-enclosed basin under strong anthropogenic pressure, and their relationships with environmental variables were explored to gain insight into pollution sources. FIB were abundant in ports, often more so than in adjacent areas ; their abundance patterns were related to salinity, oxygen, and nutrient levels. In addition, a molecular method, quantitative (q)PCR, was used to quantify FIB. qPCR enabled faster FIB determination and water quality monitoring that culture-based methods. These data provide robust baseline evidence of faecal contamination in ports and can be used to improve the management of routine port activities (dredging and ballast water exchange), having potential to spread pathogens in the sea

Maximum levels of cross‐contamination for 24 antimicrobial active substances in non‐target feed. Part 12: Tetracyclines: tetracycline, chlortetracycline, oxytetracycline, and doxycycline

[EN] The specific concentrations of tetracycline, chlortetracycline, oxytetracycline and doxycycline in non-target feed for food-producing animals, below which there would not be an effect on the emergence of, and/or selection for, resistance in bacteria relevant for human and animal health, as well as the specific antimicrobial concentrations in feed which have an effect in terms of growth promotion/increased yield were assessed by EFSA in collaboration with EMA. Details of the methodology used for this assessment, associated data gaps and uncertainties are presented in a separate document. To address antimicrobial resistance, the Feed Antimicrobial Resistance Selection Concentration (FARSC) model developed specifically for the assessment was applied. The FARSC for these four tetracyclines was estimated. To address growth promotion, data from scientific publications obtained from an extensive literature review were used. Levels in feed that showed to have an effect on growth promotion/increased yield were reported for tetracycline, chlortetracycline, oxytetracycline, whilst for doxycycline no suitable data for the assessment were available. Uncertainties and data gaps associated with the levels reported were addressed. It was recommended to perform further studies to supply more diverse and complete data related to the requirements for calculation of the FARSC for these antimicrobialsSIThe specific concentrations of tetracycline, chlortetracycline, oxytetracycline and doxycycline in non-target feed for food-producing animals, below which there would not be an effect on the emergence of, and/or selection for, resistance in bacteria relevant for human and animal health, as well as the specific antimicrobial concentrations in feed which have an effect in terms of growth promotion/increased yield were assessed by EFSA in collaboration with EMA. Details of the methodology used for this assessment, associated data gaps and uncertainties are presented in a separate document. To address antimicrobial resistance, the Feed Antimicrobial Resistance Selection Concentration (FARSC) model developed specifically for the assessment was applied. The FARSC for these four tetracyclines was estimated. To address growth promotion, data from scientific publications obtained from an extensive literature review were used. Levels in feed that showed to have an effect on growth promotion/increased yield were reported for tetracycline, chlortetracycline, oxytetracycline, whilst for doxycycline no suitable data for the assessment were available. Uncertainties and data gaps associated with the levels reported were addressed. It was recommended to perform further studies to supply more diverse and complete data related to the requirements for calculation of the FARSC for these antimicrobial

Maximum levels of cross‐contamination for 24 antimicrobial active substances in non‐target feed. Part 11: Sulfonamides

[EN] The specific concentrations of sulfonamides in non-target feed for food-producing animals, below which there would not be an effect on the emergence of, and/or selection for, resistance in bacteria relevant for human and animal health, as well as the specific antimicrobial concentrations in feed which have an effect in terms of growth promotion/increased yield were assessed by EFSA in collaboration with EMA. Details of the methodology used for this assessment, associated data gaps and uncertainties, are presented in a separate document. To address antimicrobial resistance, the Feed Antimicrobial Resistance Selection Concentration (FARSC) model developed specifically for the assessment was applied. However, due to the lack of data on the parameters required to calculate the FARSC, it was not possible to conclude the assessment until further experimental data are available. To address growth promotion, data from scientific publications obtained from an extensive literature review were used. Levels in feed that showed to have an effect on growth promotion/increased yield were identified for three sulfonamides: sulfamethazine, sulfathiazole and sulfamerazine. It was recommended to carry out studies to generate the data that are required to fill the gaps which prevented the calculation of the FARSC for these antimicrobials.SIThe BIOHAZ Panel, leading Panel in charge of the adoption of the scientificopinion and assessment of Term of Reference 1 (ToR1, antimicrobial resistance) wishes to thank thefollowing for the support provided to this scientific output: EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare(AHAW Panel), who supported ToR1 assessments development and endorsement of those sectionsunder their remit (animal production, main use of antimicrobials); EFSA Panel for Additives andProducts or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP), in charge of the assessment and endorsementof ToR2, and providing advice and data needed for ToR1 assessments; European Medicines Agency(EMA), who was represented by an external expert and EMA secretariat as members of the WorkingGroup (WG); Valeria Bortolaia, who was member of the WG until 17 April 2020; EFSA staff members:Angelica Amaduzzi, Gina Cioacata, Pilar Garc ıa-Vello, Michaela Hempen, Rita Navarrete, Daniel Plazaand Anita Radovnikovic; EMA staff members: Barbara Freischem, Zoltan Kunsagi, Nicholas Jarrett, JordiTorren, and Julia F abrega (currently EFSA staff). The BIOHAZ Panel wishes also to acknowledge theEMA Committee for Medicinal Products for Veterinary Use (CVMP) and their experts

Maximum levels of cross‐contamination for 24 antimicrobial active substances in non‐target feed. Part 2: Aminoglycosides/aminocyclitols: apramycin, paromomycin, neomycin and spectinomycin

[EN] The specific concentrations of apramycin, paromomycin, neomycin and spectinomycin in non-target feed for food-producing animals, below which there would not be an effect on the emergence of, and/or selection for, resistance in bacteria relevant for human and animal health, as well as the specific antimicrobial concentrations in feed which have an effect in terms of growth promotion/increased yield, were assessed by EFSA in collaboration with EMA. Details of the methodology used for this assessment, associated data gaps and uncertainties, are presented in a separate document. To address antimicrobial resistance, the Feed Antimicrobial Resistance Selection Concentration (FARSC) model developed specifically for the assessment was applied. However, due to the lack of data on the parameters required to calculate the FARSC for these antimicrobials, it was not possible to conclude the assessment until further experimental data become available. To address growth promotion, data from scientific publications obtained from an extensive literature review were used. Levels in feed that showed to have an effect on growth promotion/increased yield were reported for apramycin and neomycin, whilst for paromomycin and spectinomycin, no suitable data for the assessment were available. It was recommended to carry out studies to generate the data that are required to fill the gaps which prevented the calculation of the FARSC for these four antimicrobialsSIThe BIOHAZ Panel, leading Panel in charge of the adoption of the scientific opinion and assessment of Term of Reference 1 (ToR1, antimicrobial resistance) wishes to thank the following for the support provided to this scientific output: EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW Panel), who supported ToR1 assessments development and endorsement of those sections under their remit (animal production, main use of antimicrobials); EFSA Panel for Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP), in charge of the assessment and endorsement of ToR2, and providing advice and data needed for ToR1 assessments; European Medicines Agency (EMA), who was represented by an external expert and EMA secretariat as members of the Working Group (WG); Valeria Bortolaia, who was member of the WG until 17 April 2020; EFSA staff members: Angelica Amaduzzi, Gina Cioacata, Pilar Garc ıa-Vello, Michaela Hempen, Rita Navarrete, Daniel Plaza and Anita Radovnikovic; EMA staff members: Barbara Freischem, Zoltan Kunsagi, Nicholas Jarrett, Jordi Torren, and Julia F abrega (currently EFSA staff). The BIOHAZ Panel wishes also to acknowledge the EMA Committee for Medicinal Products for Veterinary Use (CVMP) expert

Maximum levels of cross‐contamination for 24 antimicrobial active substances in non‐target feed. Part 8: Pleuromutilins: tiamulin and valnemulin

[EN] The specific concentrations of tiamulin and valnemulin in non-target feed for food-producing animals, below which there would not be an effect on the emergence of, and/or selection for, resistance in bacteria relevant for human and animal health, as well as the specific antimicrobial concentrations in feed which have an effect in terms of growth promotion/increased yield were assessed by EFSA in collaboration with EMA. Details of the methodology used for this assessment, associated data gaps and uncertainties, are presented in a separate document. To address antimicrobial resistance, the Feed Antimicrobial Resistance Selection Concentration (FARSC) model developed specifically for the assessment was applied. However, due to the lack of data on the parameters required to calculate the FARSC, it was not possible to conclude the assessment until further experimental data become available. To address growth promotion, data from scientific publications obtained from an extensive literature review were used. Levels in feed that showed to have an effect on growth promotion/increased yield were reported for tiamulin, while for valnemulin no suitable data for the assessment were available. It was recommended to carry out studies to generate the data that are required to fill the gaps which prevented the calculation of the FARSC for these two antimicrobials.SIThe BIOHAZ Panel, leading Panel in charge of the adoption of the scientific opinion and assessment of Term of Reference 1 (ToR1, antimicrobial resistance) wishes to thank the following for the support provided to this scientific output: EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW Panel), who supported ToR1 assessments development and endorsement of those sections under their remit (animal production, main use of antimicrobials); EFSA Panel for Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP), in charge of the assessment and endorsement of ToR2, and providing advice and data needed for ToR1 assessments; European Medicines Agency (EMA), who was represented by an external expert and EMA secretariat as members of the Working Group (WG); Valeria Bortolaia, who was member of the WG until 17 April 2020; EFSA staff members: Angelica Amaduzzi, Gina Cioacata, Pilar Garc ıa-Vello, Michaela Hempen, Rita Navarrete, Daniel Plaza and Anita Radovnikovic; EMA staff members: Barbara Freischem, Zoltan Kunsagi, Nicholas Jarrett, Jordi Torren, and Julia Fabrega (currently EFSA staff). The BIOHAZ Panel wishes also to acknowledge the EMA Committee for Medicinal Products for Veterinary Use (CVMP) and their expert

Maximum levels of cross‐contamination for 24 antimicrobial active substances in non‐target feed. Part 3: Amprolium

[EN] The specific concentrations of amprolium in non-target feed for food-producing animals, below which there would not be an effect on the emergence of, and/or selection for, resistance in bacteria relevant for human and animal health, as well as the specific antimicrobial concentrations in feed which have an effect in terms of growth promotion/increased yield were assessed by EFSA in collaboration with EMA. Details of the methodology used for this assessment, associated data gaps and uncertainties, are presented in a separate document. To address antimicrobial resistance, the Feed Antimicrobial Resistance Selection Concentration (FARSC) model developed specifically for the assessment was applied. However, due to the lack of data on the parameters required to calculate the FARSC for amprolium, it was not possible to conclude the assessment. To address growth promotion, data from scientific publications obtained from an extensive literature review were used. Levels of amprolium in feed that showed to have an effect on growth promotion/increased yield were reported. The lack of antibacterial activity at clinically relevant concentrations for amprolium suggests that further studies relating to bacterial resistance are not a priority.SI: The BIOHAZ Panel, leading Panel in charge of the adoption of the scientific opinion and assessment of Term of Reference 1 (ToR1, antimicrobial resistance) wishes to thank the following for the support provided to this scientific output: EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW Panel), who supported ToR1 assessments development and endorsement of those sections under their remit (animal production, main use of antimicrobials); EFSA Panel for Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP), in charge of the assessment and endorsement of ToR2, and providing advice and data needed for ToR1 assessments; European Medicines Agency (EMA), who was represented by an external expert and EMA secretariat as members of the Working Group (WG); Valeria Bortolaia, who was member of the WG until 17 April 2020; EFSA staff members: Angelica Amaduzzi, Gina Cioacata, Pilar Garc ıa-Vello, Michaela Hempen, Rita Navarrete, Daniel Plaza and Anita Radovnikovic; EMA staff members: Barbara Freischem, Zoltan Kunsagi, Nicholas Jarrett, Jordi Torren, and Julia Fabrega (currently EFSA staff). The BIOHAZ Panel wishes also to acknowledge the EMA Committee for Medicinal Products for Veterinary Use (CVMP) and their experts