Skip to main content
. 2018 Jan 31;11:87. doi: 10.1186/s13104-018-3201-4

Table 2.

Duck management and their possible access to antibiotic residues (n = 26)

Parameter assessed Response category Number (%)
Duck flock size 5–50 21 (80.8)
51–120 5 (19.2)
Duck management (feeding system) Extensive 15 (57.7)
Intensive given maize bran and kitchen wastes 2 (7.7)
Both 9 (34.6)
Ducks scavenging areas Around homestead areas and neighbouring households areas 21 (80.8)
Around homestead areas 5 (19.2)
Number of dumps the ducks access during scavenging One dumping place 6 (23.1)
Two dumping places 9 (34.6)
Three dumping places 9 (34.6)
Four dumping places 2 (7.7)
Duck treatment Yes 0 (0.0)
No 26 (100.0)
Keeping other animals apart from ducks Yes 24 (92.3)
No 2 (7.7)
Treatment of other animals Yes 13 (50.0)
No 13 (50.0)
Antibiotic used in treatment of other animals Tetracycline/oxytetracyclines 4 (15.4)
Sulfonamides 3 (11.5)
Oxytetracyclines, sulfonamides, penicillin dihydrostreptomycin 2 (7.7)
Other antibiotic not known 4 (15.4)
No treatment 13 (50.0)
Commonly used antibiotics in humans Tetracycline 4 (15.4)
Ampicillin 2 (7.7)
More than one antibiotic (tetracyclines, ampicillin, amoxicillin, sulphonamides) 8 (30.8)
Other antibiotic not known 12 (46.2)
Drug containers and unused medicine disposal system Dump 13 (50.0)
Latrines 7 (26.9)
Burn 6 (23.1)