Literature DB >> 23886543

Performance of viruses and bacteriophages for fecal source determination in a multi-laboratory, comparative study.

Valerie J Harwood1, Alexandria B Boehm, Lauren M Sassoubre, Kannappan Vijayavel, Jill R Stewart, Theng-Theng Fong, Marie-Paule Caprais, Reagan R Converse, David Diston, James Ebdon, Jed A Fuhrman, Michele Gourmelon, Jennifer Gentry-Shields, John F Griffith, Donna R Kashian, Rachel T Noble, Huw Taylor, Melanie Wicki.   

Abstract

An inter-laboratory study of the accuracy of microbial source tracking (MST) methods was conducted using challenge fecal and sewage samples that were spiked into artificial freshwater and provided as unknowns (blind test samples) to the laboratories. The results of the Source Identification Protocol Project (SIPP) are presented in a series of papers that cover 41 MST methods. This contribution details the results of the virus and bacteriophage methods targeting human fecal or sewage contamination. Human viruses used as source identifiers included adenoviruses (HAdV), enteroviruses (EV), norovirus Groups I and II (NoVI and NoVII), and polyomaviruses (HPyVs). Bacteriophages were also employed, including somatic coliphages and F-specific RNA bacteriophages (FRNAPH) as general indicators of fecal contamination. Bacteriophage methods targeting human fecal sources included genotyping of FRNAPH isolates and plaque formation on bacterial hosts Enterococcus faecium MB-55, Bacteroides HB-73 and Bacteroides GB-124. The use of small sample volumes (≤50 ml) resulted in relatively insensitive theoretical limits of detection (10-50 gene copies or plaques × 50 ml(-1)) which, coupled with low virus concentrations in samples, resulted in high false-negative rates, low sensitivity, and low negative predictive values. On the other hand, the specificity of the human virus methods was generally close to 100% and positive predictive values were ∼40-70% with the exception of NoVs, which were not detected. The bacteriophage methods were generally much less specific toward human sewage than virus methods, although FRNAPH II genotyping was relatively successful, with 18% sensitivity and 85% specificity. While the specificity of the human virus methods engenders great confidence in a positive result, better concentration methods and larger sample volumes must be utilized for greater accuracy of negative results, i.e. the prediction that a human contamination source is absent.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bacteriophage; Fecal pollution; Validation; Virus; Water quality

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23886543     DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2013.04.064

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


  19 in total

1.  Quantitative CrAssphage PCR Assays for Human Fecal Pollution Measurement.

Authors:  Elyse Stachler; Catherine Kelty; Mano Sivaganesan; Xiang Li; Kyle Bibby; Orin C Shanks
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2017-07-25       Impact factor: 9.028

2.  Occurrence of and Sequence Variation among F-Specific RNA Bacteriophage Subgroups in Feces and Wastewater of Urban and Animal Origins.

Authors:  C Hartard; R Rivet; S Banas; C Gantzer
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2015-07-10       Impact factor: 4.792

3.  Ultrafiltration and Microarray for Detection of Microbial Source Tracking Marker and Pathogen Genes in Riverine and Marine Systems.

Authors:  Xiang Li; Valerie J Harwood; Bina Nayak; Jennifer L Weidhaas
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2016-01-04       Impact factor: 4.792

4.  Performance Evaluation of Human-Specific Viral Markers and Application of Pepper Mild Mottle Virus and CrAssphage to Environmental Water Samples as Fecal Pollution Markers in the Kathmandu Valley, Nepal.

Authors:  Bikash Malla; Rajani Ghaju Shrestha; Sarmila Tandukar; Jeevan B Sherchand; Eiji Haramoto
Journal:  Food Environ Virol       Date:  2019-05-13       Impact factor: 2.778

Review 5.  Bacteriophages as indicators of faecal pollution and enteric virus removal.

Authors:  B R McMinn; N J Ashbolt; A Korajkic
Journal:  Lett Appl Microbiol       Date:  2017-06-05       Impact factor: 2.858

6.  Human-Associated Bacteroides spp. and Human Polyomaviruses as Microbial Source Tracking Markers in Hawaii.

Authors:  Marek Kirs; Roberto A Caffaro-Filho; Mayee Wong; Valerie J Harwood; Philip Moravcik; Roger S Fujioka
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2016-10-27       Impact factor: 4.792

7.  Contamination Scenario Matters when Using Viral and Bacterial Human-Associated Genetic Markers as Indicators of a Health Risk in Untreated Sewage-Impacted Recreational Waters.

Authors:  Mary E Schoen; Alexandria B Boehm; Jeffrey Soller; Orin C Shanks
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2020-10-08       Impact factor: 9.028

Review 8.  Pepper mild mottle virus: A plant pathogen with a greater purpose in (waste)water treatment development and public health management.

Authors:  E M Symonds; Karena H Nguyen; V J Harwood; M Breitbart
Journal:  Water Res       Date:  2018-06-30       Impact factor: 11.236

9.  Relevance of F-Specific RNA Bacteriophages in Assessing Human Norovirus Risk in Shellfish and Environmental Waters.

Authors:  C Hartard; S Banas; J Loutreul; A Rincé; F Benoit; N Boudaud; C Gantzer
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2016-08-30       Impact factor: 4.792

10.  Acute toxic effect of sewage effluent on the early life phase of an estuarine crab Scylla serrata.

Authors:  Manickavalli Gurunadhan Ragunathan
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2017-06-02       Impact factor: 4.223

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.