| Literature DB >> 30225180 |
Dennis Gilfillan1, Timothy A Joyner2, Phillip Scheuerman1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The leading cause of surface water impairment in United States' rivers and streams is pathogen contamination. Although use of fecal indicators has reduced human health risk, current approaches to identify and reduce exposure can be improved. One important knowledge gap within exposure assessment is characterization of complex fate and transport processes of fecal pollution. Novel modeling processes can inform watershed decision-making to improve exposure assessment.Entities:
Keywords: Environmental microbiology; Fecal indicators; Statistical modeling; Surface Water quality
Year: 2018 PMID: 30225180 PMCID: PMC6139247 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.5610
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PeerJ ISSN: 2167-8359 Impact factor: 2.984
Figure 1Map of sampling sites and watershed of the study area, Sinking Creek.
The inset map shows the United States and the state of Tennessee, and the location of Sinking Creek. Samples were taken from August 2004 to August 2011 during the months of August, November, February, and May. The outline represents the watershed boundary of Sinking Creek, and 2006 NLCD has been clipped to the watershed (Fry et al., 2011). Stream flows from its headwaters at SC14 downstream to SC1.
Sampling sites, land use, and E. coli concentrations in Sinking Creek.
Percentage of each land cover types (Agricultural, Developed, and Forested) as well as E. coli Geometric means (GM), geometric standard deviations (GSD), and maximum and minimum values for each site used in the study.
| SC1 | 15.6 | 36.4 | 47.3 | 254.5 (3.4) | 43.7,2398.8 |
| SC2 | 14 | 37.2 | 48.1 | 182.3 (6.1) | 17.4,39810.7 |
| SC3 | 9.7 | 38 | 51.5 | 137.1 (4.0) | 14.5,1737.8 |
| SC4 | 9.7 | 37.9 | 51.6 | 169.8 (5.7) | 8.5,23988.3 |
| SC5 | 8.7 | 38.1 | 52.4 | 140.0 (7.2) | 4.1,30903.0 |
| SC6 | 7.1 | 30.2 | 61.6 | 50.2 (8.3) | 0.5,8709.6 |
| SC7 | 7.1 | 30 | 61.8 | 36.7 (9.4) | 0.5,10232.9 |
| SC8 | 7.7 | 24.3 | 66.8 | 73.9 (5.3) | 10.7,8709.6 |
| SC9 | 7.4 | 19.9 | 71.4 | 110.3 (5.8) | 14.5,3981.1 |
| SC10 | 5.2 | 6.6 | 86.5 | 70.6 (5.2) | 6.2, 1995.3 |
| SC11 | 5.6 | 3.8 | 89 | 17.2 (9.9) | 0.5,1202.3 |
| SC12 | 5.8 | 2.1 | 90.3 | 91.3 (3.8) | 5.2,812.8 |
| SC13 | 0 | 1.1 | 96.5 | 7.8 (5.5) | 0.5,102.3 |
| SC14 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 5.0 (6.1) | 0.5, 245.5 |
Figure 2Theoretical plots to illustrate the concept of the ROC, decision boundaries, and action values.
(A) Plot of an ROC curve, where the x-axis represents the false positive rate, or the compliment of the specificity, and the y-axis represents the true positive rate, the sensitivity. The curve is integrated to obtain the AUC, the performance metric for each of the models. The box represents the point at the decision boundary (B) Theoretical plot of a univariate Maxent model function (Eq. (3)) with values for alkalinity rescaled from 0 to 1. The solid red line represents Eq. (3), the dotted lines represent the upper and lower 95% confidence intervals, and the horizontal black line represents the decision boundary. The action values, or environmental thresholds, and associated confidence intervals are the intersections between the results of Eq. (3) and the decision boundary.
Summary of training and testing performance of Maxent models based AUC metrics, accuracy based on maximum test sensitivity and specificity decision boundary (logistic threshold), and action values with 95% confidence intervals.
If an upper bound of a confidence interval exceeds the maximum sampling value for a set of data, the maximum value is given.
| Action values (x) ¥ (95% CI) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alkalinity | 0.616 (0.003) | 0.620 (0.006) | 68.5 | |
| BOD | 0.572 (0.004) | 0.554 (0.008) | 60.6 | |
| Conductivity (µS) | 0.628 (0.003) | 0.638 (0.006) | 65.6 | |
| Dissolved Oxygen | 0.635 (0.003) | 0.640 (0.007) | 67.7 | |
| Discharge ( | 0.556 (0.004) | 0.553 (0.006) | 63.8 | |
| Hardness | 0.632 (0.003) | 0.627 (0.006) | 59.9 | |
| NO3 | 0.581 (0.004) | 0.579 (0.007) | 63.4 | |
| pH | 0.571 (0.003) | 0.562 (0.006) | 55.6 | |
| PO4 ( | 0.581 (0.004) | 0.580 (0.008) | 63.8 | 0.0642 |
| Water Temperature (°C) | 0.666 (0.003) | 0.670 (0.005) | 65.2 | |
| 8-variable model | 0.770 (0.002) | 0.709 (0.005) | 78.5 | |
| 5-variable model | 0.753 (0.002) | 0.723 (0.006) | 77.8 | |
| 4 variable model | 0.750 (0.002) | 0.726 (0.005) | 77.8 |
Notes.
Model was not significant.
Values of the variables that corresponded to impairment.
95% CI for the lower bound of the action value.
95% CI for the upper bound of the action value.
Variable contribution and permutation importance for the multivariate models, normalized to percentages.
| Percent contribution | Permutation importance | Percent contribution | Permutation importance | Percent contribution | Permutation importance | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BOD | 3.6 | 5.9 | ||||
| Conductivity | 26.2 | 23.0 | 22.6 | 22.3 | 25.6 | 27.5 |
| Discharge | 14.5 | 22.0 | 12.1 | 20.1 | 13.4 | 21.6 |
| Dissolved Oxygen | 9.9 | 5.2 | 12.3 | 6.6 | ||
| NO3 | 9.5 | 8.5 | 8.9 | 8.6 | 8.9 | 10.3 |
| pH | 3.9 | 1.7 | ||||
| PO4 | 2.7 | 2.5 | ||||
| Water temperature | 49.9 | 46.5 | 36.4 | 33.7 | 39.7 | 34.0 |
Figure 3Bar graph displaying results of jack-knife sensitivity analysis.
Each color represents the information gain contributed for each parameter in the model, and features are removed one at a time to assess their importance in the trimmed model.
Figure 4Response surface for the 4-variable Maxent model.
Surface shows the probability of impairment for each sample for the monitoring program. This represents the mean probability of 100 bootstrapped runs. Rows are oriented by each sampling period, while columns represent each sampling site over the length of the stream; left to right indicates flow direction. Black cells denote samples in which a parameter was missing and were excluded from analysis, while circles with black centers represent samples in which a stream would be identified as impaired in the study.