Literature DB >> 23871256

Comparison of PCR and quantitative real-time PCR methods for the characterization of ruminant and cattle fecal pollution sources.

Meredith R Raith1, Catherine A Kelty, John F Griffith, Alexander Schriewer, Stefan Wuertz, Sophie Mieszkin, Michele Gourmelon, Georg H Reischer, Andreas H Farnleitner, Jared S Ervin, Patricia A Holden, Darcy L Ebentier, Jennifer A Jay, Dan Wang, Alexandria B Boehm, Tiong Gim Aw, Joan B Rose, E Balleste, W G Meijer, Mano Sivaganesan, Orin C Shanks.   

Abstract

The State of California has mandated the preparation of a guidance document on the application of fecal source identification methods for recreational water quality management. California contains the fifth highest population of cattle in the United States, making the inclusion of cow-associated methods a logical choice. Because the performance of these methods has been shown to change based on geography and/or local animal feeding practices, laboratory comparisons are needed to determine which assays are best suited for implementation. We describe the performance characterization of two end-point PCR assays (CF128 and CF193) and five real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR) assays (Rum2Bac, BacR, BacCow, CowM2, and CowM3) reported to be associated with either ruminant or cattle feces. Each assay was tested against a blinded set of 38 reference challenge filters (19 duplicate samples) containing fecal pollution from 12 different sources suspected to impact water quality. The abundance of each host-associated genetic marker was measured for qPCR-based assays in both target and non-target animals and compared to quantities of total DNA mass, wet mass of fecal material, as well as Bacteroidales, and enterococci determined by 16S rRNA qPCR and culture-based approaches (enterococci only). Ruminant- and cow-associated genetic markers were detected in all filters containing a cattle fecal source. However, some assays cross-reacted with non-target pollution sources. A large amount of variability was evident across laboratories when protocols were not fixed suggesting that protocol standardization will be necessary for widespread implementation. Finally, performance metrics indicate that the cattle-associated CowM2 qPCR method combined with either the BacR or Rum2Bac ruminant-associated methods are most suitable for implementation. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cattle; Fecal pollution; Microbial source tracking; Ruminants

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23871256     DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2013.03.061

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Water Res        ISSN: 0043-1354            Impact factor:   11.236


  4 in total

1.  U.S. Recreational Water Quality Criteria: A Vision for the Future.

Authors:  Roger S Fujioka; Helena M Solo-Gabriele; Muruleedhara N Byappanahalli; Marek Kirs
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2015-07-09       Impact factor: 3.390

2.  Extended persistence of general and cattle-associated fecal indicators in marine and freshwater environment.

Authors:  Asja Korajkic; Brian R McMinn; Nicholas J Ashbolt; Mano Sivaganesan; Valerie J Harwood; Orin C Shanks
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2018-09-09       Impact factor: 7.963

3.  The Use of Ribosomal RNA as a Microbial Source Tracking Target Highlights the Assay Host-Specificity Requirement in Water Quality Assessments.

Authors:  Annastiina Rytkönen; Ananda Tiwari; Anna-Maria Hokajärvi; Sari Uusheimo; Asko Vepsäläinen; Tiina Tulonen; Tarja Pitkänen
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2021-06-02       Impact factor: 5.640

4.  Genetic Microbial Source Tracking Support QMRA Modeling for a Riverine Wetland Drinking Water Resource.

Authors:  Julia Derx; Katalin Demeter; Rita Linke; Sílvia Cervero-Aragó; Gerhard Lindner; Gabrielle Stalder; Jack Schijven; Regina Sommer; Julia Walochnik; Alexander K T Kirschner; Jürgen Komma; Alfred P Blaschke; Andreas H Farnleitner
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2021-07-14       Impact factor: 6.064

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.