| Literature DB >> 26114244 |
J Alfredo Bonilla1,2, Tonya D Bonilla3,4, Amir M Abdelzaher5,6, Troy M Scott7,8, Jerzy Lukasik9, Helena M Solo-Gabriele10,11, Carol J Palmer12,13.
Abstract
Large sample volumes are traditionally required for the analysis of waterborne pathogens. The need for large volumes greatly limits the number of samples that can be processed. The aims of this study were to compare extraction and detection procedures for quantifying protozoan parasites and viruses from small volumes of marine water. The intent was to evaluate a logistically simpler method of sample collection and processing that would facilitate direct pathogen measures as part of routine monitoring programs. Samples were collected simultaneously using a bilayer device with protozoa capture by size (top filter) and viruses capture by charge (bottom filter). Protozoan detection technologies utilized for recovery of Cryptosporidium spp. and Giardia spp. were qPCR and the more traditional immunomagnetic separation-IFA-microscopy, while virus (poliovirus) detection was based upon qPCR versus plaque assay. Filters were eluted using reagents consistent with the downstream detection technologies. Results showed higher mean recoveries using traditional detection methods over qPCR for Cryptosporidium (91% vs. 45%) and poliovirus (67% vs. 55%) whereas for Giardia the qPCR-based methods were characterized by higher mean recoveries (41% vs. 28%). Overall mean recoveries are considered high for all detection technologies. Results suggest that simultaneous filtration may be suitable for isolating different classes of pathogens from small marine water volumes. More research is needed to evaluate the suitability of this method for detecting pathogens at low ambient concentration levels.Entities:
Keywords: Cryptosporidium; Giardia; enterovirus; quantitative PCR; water quality
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26114244 PMCID: PMC4515645 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph120707118
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Initial Concentration of Spiking Solutions as Measured for each Trial. Target concentrations of the spiking solutions were 500 oocysts or cysts per 200 µL for Cryptosporidium or Giardia and 103 per mL for poliovirus.
| Trial | Poliovirus per mL | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| qPCR | IMS/IFA | qPCR | IMS/IFA | qPCR | Plaque Assay | |
| A | 240 | 232 | 184 | 128 | − | − |
| B | 372 | 102 | 367 | 262 | 634 | − |
| C | 452 | − | 384 | − | 834 | 240 |
Primers and Probes used in this study.
| Target | Sequence 5′–3′ |
|---|---|
| Primer G101 | CATCCGCGAGGAGGTCAA |
| Primer G102 | GCAGCCATGGTGTCGATCT |
| Probe G103 | 6FAM-AAGTCCGCCGACAACATGTACCTAACGA-IB |
| Primer C104 | CAAATTGATACCGTTTGTCCTTCTG |
| Primer C105 | GGCATGTCGATTCTAATTCAGCT |
| Probe C106 | 6FAM-TGCCATACATTGTTGTCCTGACAAATTGAAT-IB |
| Poliovirus [ | |
| Primer P107 | CCTCCGGCCCCTGAATG |
| Primer P108 | ACCGGATGGCCAATCCAA |
| Probe P109 | 6FAM-CGACTACTTTGGGTGTCCGTGTTTCC-IB |
| Internal control nucleic acid (This study) | |
| Primer P110 | CATGATAAGGTTTTGAGCTCTGTGTATTG |
| Primer P111 | TCCTTTTTGTGCATAACCTGATTTAA |
| Probe P112 | 6FAM- ACATATGTAAAAGAGAGCTTC-MGBNFQ |
Percent Recovery of Cryptosporidium oocysts and Giardia cysts by qPCR vs. IMS/FA. Recoveries incorporate differences in extraction and detection methodologies.
| Trial/Replicate | Percent Recovery | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| qPCR | IMS/IFA | qPCR | IMS/IFA | |
| A1 | 55 | 61 | 98 | 34 |
| A2 | 51 | 52 | 49 | 38 |
| B1 | 23 | 116 | 40 | 34 |
| B2 | 39 | 145 | 2 | 20 |
| B3 | 22 | 83 | 61 | 13 |
| C1 | 85 | − | 16 | − |
| C2 | 56 | − | 48 | − |
| C3 | 52 | − | 25 | − |
| C4 | 23 | − | 31 | − |
| Average | 45 | 91 | 41 | 28 |
| Std. Deviation | 21 | 39 | 26 | 11 |
Percent Recovery of Poliovirus qPCR vs. plaque assay. Recoveries incorporate differences in extraction and detection methodologies.
| Trial/Replicate | Poliovirus Percent Recovery | |
|---|---|---|
| qPCR | Plaque Assay | |
| B1 | 86 | − |
| B2 | 106 | − |
| C1 | 13 | 75 |
| C2 | 68 | 41 |
| C3 | 22 | 83 |
| C4 | 34 | |
| Average | 55 | 67 |
| Std. Deviation | 37 | 22 |