Literature DB >> 24141130

Decay of fecal indicator bacterial populations and bovine-associated source-tracking markers in freshly deposited cow pats.

Adelumola Oladeinde1, Thomas Bohrmann, Kelvin Wong, S T Purucker, Ken Bradshaw, Reid Brown, Blake Snyder, Marirosa Molina.   

Abstract

Understanding the survival of fecal indicator bacteria (FIB) and microbial source-tracking (MST) markers is critical to developing pathogen fate and transport models. Although pathogen survival in water microcosms and manure-amended soils is well documented, little is known about their survival in intact cow pats deposited on pastures. We conducted a study to determine decay rates of fecal indicator bacteria (Escherichia coli and enterococci) and bovine-associated MST markers (CowM3, Rum-2-bac, and GenBac) in 18 freshly deposited cattle feces from three farms in northern Georgia. Samples were randomly assigned to shaded or unshaded treatment in order to determine the effects of sunlight, moisture, and temperature on decay rates. A general linear model (GLM) framework was used to determine decay rates. Shading significantly decreased the decay rate of the E. coli population (P < 0.0001), with a rate of -0.176 day(-1) for the shaded treatment and -0.297 day(-1) for the unshaded treatment. Shading had no significant effect on decay rates of enterococci, CowM3, Rum-2-bac, and GenBac (P > 0.05). In addition, E. coli populations showed a significant growth rate (0.881 day(-1)) in the unshaded samples during the first 5 days after deposition. UV-B was the most important parameter explaining the decay rate of E. coli populations. A comparison of the decay behaviors among all markers indicated that enterococcus concentrations exhibit a better correlation with the MST markers than E. coli concentrations. Our results indicate that bovine-associated MST markers can survive in cow pats for at least 1 month after excretion, and although their decay dynamic differs from the decay dynamic of E. coli populations, they seem to be reliable markers to use in combination with enterococci to monitor fecal pollution from pasture lands.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24141130      PMCID: PMC3910999          DOI: 10.1128/AEM.02203-13

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol        ISSN: 0099-2240            Impact factor:   4.792


  43 in total

1.  Application of a rapid method for identifying fecal pollution sources in a multi-use estuary.

Authors:  Anne E Bernhard; Thierry Goyard; Michael T Simonich; Katharine G Field
Journal:  Water Res       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 11.236

2.  Rapid estimation of numbers of fecal Bacteroidetes by use of a quantitative PCR assay for 16S rRNA genes.

Authors:  Linda K Dick; Katharine G Field
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 4.792

3.  Comparison of Enterococcus measurements in freshwater at two recreational beaches by quantitative polymerase chain reaction and membrane filter culture analysis.

Authors:  Richard A Haugland; Shawn C Siefring; Larry J Wymer; Kristen P Brenner; Alfred P Dufour
Journal:  Water Res       Date:  2004-12-24       Impact factor: 11.236

Review 4.  Inactivation credit of UV radiation for viruses, bacteria and protozoan (oo)cysts in water: a review.

Authors:  W A M Hijnen; E F Beerendonk; G J Medema
Journal:  Water Res       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 11.236

5.  Persistence of host-specific Bacteroides-Prevotella 16S rRNA genetic markers in environmental waters: effects of temperature and salinity.

Authors:  Satoshi Okabe; Yoko Shimazu
Journal:  Appl Microbiol Biotechnol       Date:  2007-06-28       Impact factor: 4.813

6.  Phylogenetic analysis of Bacteroidales 16S rRNA gene sequences from human and animal effluents and assessment of ruminant faecal pollution by real-time PCR.

Authors:  S Mieszkin; J-F Yala; R Joubrel; M Gourmelon
Journal:  J Appl Microbiol       Date:  2009-07-25       Impact factor: 3.772

7.  Fate of enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli O157:H7 in bovine feces.

Authors:  G Wang; T Zhao; M P Doyle
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 4.792

8.  Decay of bacterial pathogens, fecal indicators, and real-time quantitative PCR genetic markers in manure-amended soils.

Authors:  Shane W Rogers; Matthew Donnelly; Lindsay Peed; Catherine A Kelty; Sumona Mondal; Zirong Zhong; Orin C Shanks
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2011-06-03       Impact factor: 4.792

9.  Swimming-associated gastroenteritis and water quality.

Authors:  V J Cabelli; A P Dufour; L J McCabe; M A Levin
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1982-04       Impact factor: 4.897

10.  Effect of oxygen and temperature on the dynamic of the dominant bacterial populations of pig manure and on the persistence of pig-associated genetic markers, assessed in river water microcosms.

Authors:  R Marti; S Mieszkin; O Solecki; A-M Pourcher; D Hervio-Heath; M Gourmelon
Journal:  J Appl Microbiol       Date:  2011-09-14       Impact factor: 3.772

View more
  12 in total

1.  Capturing Microbial Sources Distributed in a Mixed-use Watershed within an Integrated Environmental Modeling Workflow.

Authors:  Gene Whelan; Keewook Kim; Rajbir Parmar; Gerard F Laniak; Kurt Wolfe; Michael Galvin; Marirosa Molina; Yakov A Pachepsky; Paul Duda; Richard Zepp; Lourdes Prieto; Julie L Kinzelman; Gregory T Kleinheinz; Mark A Borchardt
Journal:  Environ Model Softw       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 5.288

2.  Evidence for extraintestinal growth of bacteroidales originating from poultry litter.

Authors:  Jennifer Weidhaas; Sirisha Mantha; Elliott Hair; Bina Nayak; Valerie J Harwood
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2014-10-17       Impact factor: 4.792

3.  Occurrence of Traditional and Alternative Fecal Indicators in Tropical Urban Environments under Different Land Use Patterns.

Authors:  Nazanin Saeidi; Xiaoqiong Gu; Ngoc Han Tran; Shin Giek Goh; Masaaki Kitajima; Ariel Kushmaro; Bradley William Schmitz; Karina Yew-Hoong Gin
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2018-07-02       Impact factor: 4.792

4.  Sediment and fecal indicator bacteria loading in a mixed land use watershed: Contributions from suspended sediment and bedload transport.

Authors:  J Kenneth Bradshaw; Blake Snyder; David Spidle; Roy C Sidle; Kathleen Sullivan; Marirosa Molina
Journal:  J Environ Qual       Date:  2021-04-22       Impact factor: 3.866

5.  Effects of seasonal meteorological variables on E. coli persistence in livestock faeces and implications for environmental and human health.

Authors:  David M Oliver; Trevor Page
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-11-15       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  What's the risk? Identifying potential human pathogens within grey-headed flying foxes faeces.

Authors:  Rebekah Henry; Penelope Galbraith; Scott Coutts; Toby Prosser; John Boyce; David T McCarthy
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-01-23       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  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

8.  Modeling the Effect of Tylosin Phosphate on Macrolide-Resistant Enterococci in Feedlots and Reducing Resistance Transmission.

Authors:  Gregory Sean Stapleton; Casey L Cazer; Yrjö T Gröhn
Journal:  Foodborne Pathog Dis       Date:  2020-10-02       Impact factor: 3.171

9.  Rapid Microbiome Changes in Freshly Deposited Cow Feces under Field Conditions.

Authors:  Kelvin Wong; Timothy I Shaw; Adelumola Oladeinde; Travis C Glenn; Brian Oakley; Marirosa Molina
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2016-04-13       Impact factor: 5.640

10.  Transcriptome Changes of Escherichia coli, Enterococcus faecalis, and Escherichia coli O157:H7 Laboratory Strains in Response to Photo-Degraded DOM.

Authors:  Adelumola Oladeinde; Erin Lipp; Chia-Ying Chen; Richard Muirhead; Travis Glenn; Kimberly Cook; Marirosa Molina
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2018-05-08       Impact factor: 5.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.