| Literature DB >> 33947135 |
Islam Nour1, Atif Hanif1, Adel M Zakri2, Ibrahim Al-Ashkar2,3, Abdulkarim Alhetheel4, Saleh Eifan1.
Abstract
The regular monitoring of water environments is essential for preventing waterborne virus-mediated contamination and mitigating health concerns. We aimed to detect human adenovirus (HAdV) in the Wadi Hanifah (WH) and Wadi Namar (WN) lakes, King Saud University wastewater treatment plant (KSU-WWTP), Manfouha-WWTP, irrigation water (IW), and AnNazim landfill (ANLF) in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. HAdV hexon sequences were analyzed against 71 HAdV prototypes and investigated for seasonal influence. ANLF had the highest HAdV prevalence (83.3%). Remarkably, the F species of HAdV, especially serotype 41, predominated. Daily temperature ranges (22-45 °C and 10-33 °C) influenced the significance of the differences between the locations. The most significant relationship of ANLF and IW to WH and KSU-WWTP was found at the high-temperature range (p = 0.001). Meanwhile, WN was most correlated to ANLF at the low-temperature range (p < 0.0001). Seasonal influences on HAdV prevalence were insignificant despite HAdV's high prevalence in autumn and winter months, favoring low temperatures (high: 22-25 °C, low: 14-17 °C) at five out of six locations. Our study provides insightful information on HAdV prevalence and the circulating strains that can address the knowledge gap in the environmental impacts of viruses and help control viral diseases in public health management.Entities:
Keywords: human adenovirus; prevalence; seasonality; type 41; waterborne
Year: 2021 PMID: 33947135 PMCID: PMC8125220 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18094773
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1RT-PCR product. Lane 1, DNA ladder (50–500 bp). Lane 2, HAdV positive control. Lanes 3 to 7, 261-bp HAdV amplicons. Lane 8, negative control.
HAdV cases in different sample locations.
| Sampling Area | HAdV Cases in 2018 (April–December) | HAdV Cases in 2019 | HAdV Prevalence (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| KSU-WWTP | 15 | 7 | 61.11 |
| MN-WWTP | 11 | 5 | 44.44 |
| WH | 21 | 6 | 75.0 |
| WN | 22 | 6 | 77.78 |
| ANLF | 22 | 8 | 83.33 |
| IW | 13 | 6 | 52.78 |
KSU-WWTP, King Saud University Wastewater Treatment Plan; MN-WWTP, Manfouhah-WWTP; WH, Wadi Hanifah; WN, Wadi Namar; ANLF, AnNazim landfill; IW, irrigation water.
Figure 2The phylogenetic tree for the HAdV hexon sequences constructed by the maximum likelihood method and Tamura 3-parameter model.
Pearson’s correlation matrix of HAdV detection percentage at the various sampling areas.
| % DetKSU-WWTP | % DetMN-WWTP | % DetWH | % DetWN | % DetANLF | % DetIW | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| 0.578 | 0.667 | 0.688 |
| |
|
|
| 0.422 | 0.463 | 0.568 | 0.720 | |
|
| 0.811 |
|
|
| 0.523 | |
|
| 0.767 |
|
|
| 0.710 | |
|
|
|
|
|
| 0.630 | |
|
|
|
| 0.728 | 0.780 |
|
The numbers above the gray-highlighted diagonal refer to correlation values at the high-temperature range, whereas those below the diagonal are correlation values at the low-temperature range. The percentage of HAdV detectability is denoted by “% Det” at different sampling areas. For example, % DetKSU-WWTP refers to the HAdV detection percentage at KSU-WWTP. Significant correlation values are displayed as bold numbers.
Figure 3Map showing correlations between sampling areas at the higher temperature range (red arrows) and lower temperature range (blue arrows), using Mapline integrated Excel Addin 2016 (Mapline Co., Provo, UT 84604, USA).
Figure 4The impact of temperature variation on HAdV prevalence. Av. High Temp., the average high temperature; Av. Low Temp., the average low temperature.
The significance of the influence of high or low-temperature ranges on HAdV prevalence in various sampling areas.
| Sampling Area | Temperature Range | R2 | RMSE | Equation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| KSU-WWTP | High | 0.641 | 8.544 | % PrevKSU-WWTP = 58.94 − 1.36 × TH ‡ |
| Low | 0.476 | 10.829 | % PrevKSU-WWTP = 40.11 − 1.23 × TL | |
| MN-WWTP | High | 0.480 | 10.885 | % PrevMN-WWTP = 55.42 − 1.25 × TH |
| Low | 0.325 | 12.924 | % PrevMN-WWTP = 30.24 − 0.71 × TL | |
| WH | High | 0.007 | 13.754 | % PrevWH = 32.28 − 0.13 × TH |
| Low | 0.025 | 16.178 | % PrevWH = 34.06 − 0.31 × TL | |
| WN | High | 0.011 | 14.356 | % PrevWN = 34.70 − 0.18 × TH |
| Low | 0.011 | 14.356 | % PrevWN = 32.56 − 0.18 × TL | |
| ANLF | High | 0.035 | 15.652 | % PrevANLF = 42.32 − 0.36 × TH |
| Low | 0.073 | 15.917 | % PrevANLF = 41.43 − 0.54 × TL | |
| IW | High | 0.553 | 10.414 | % PrevIW = 62.69 − 1.38 × TH |
| Low | 0.476 | 12.145 | % PrevIW = 46.09 − 1.38 × TL |
% Prev denotes HAdV prevalence percentage at different locations. RMSE refers to the root mean squared error, which is an absolute measure of fit. ‡ TH represents the highest temperature, whereas TL denotes the lowest temperature.
Figure 5The influence of temperature variations on HAdV prevalence in different sampling locations.