An environmental survey of surface waters using mitochondrial DNA from human, bovine and porcine origin as fecal source tracking markers

Villemur, Richard; Imbeau, Marianne; Vuong, Minh N.; Masson, Luke; Payment, Pierre

doi:10.1016/j.watres.2014.10.063

Cited by 33 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is in contrast to recent studies that reported significant correlations between the BacHum Bacteroidales marker and the human ND5 mtDNA marker (Kapoor et al, 2013) or HF183 and mitoHu (Villemur et al, 2015). The lack of correlation in our study could be due to the markedly lower prevalence of the human markers (10% for HF183 and 5% for HcytB) compared with other studies reporting prevalences of 34 and 46 to 50% for watersheds in western (Tambalo et al, 2012) and central Canada (Villemur et al, 2015), respectively. While 100% of the positive samples from the urban watershed were detected during baseflow, the prevalence of HF183 increased to 20% in the rural watershed following storm events.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…Several studies have found evidence of human fecal contamination in both urban and mixed‐use watersheds and have attributed it to unidentified sources (Schriewer et al, 2010), urban stormwater runoff (Sauer et al, 2011, 2013), leaky and overflowing sewers (Bower et al, 2005; McQuaig et al, 2012), and failing septic systems (Peed et al, 2011; Drozd et al, 2013; Wilkes et al, 2013). Further investigations should be performed to determine which of the suspected point sources are responsible for the human contamination observed in both watersheds, albeit the overall contamination levels are much lower than recent reports from other parts of Canada (Tambalo et al, 2012; Villemur et al, 2015).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 73%

“…Many LI‐MST methods targeting regions of the 16S rRNA gene specific to human‐ and ruminant‐associated Bacteroidales have been established (Bernhard and Field 2000a,b; Seurinck et al, 2005; Layton et al, 2006; Kildare et al, 2007; Reischer et al, 2006, 2007; Boehm et al, 2013). More recently, mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA)‐based markers were developed to directly detect host cells in feces from humans, sheep, horses, dogs, deer, and cows (Caldwell et al, 2007; Schill and Mathes, 2008; Baker‐Austin et al, 2009, 2010; Kortbaoui et al, 2010; Villemur et al, 2015).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Fecal Contamination in the Surface Waters of a Rural- and an Urban-Source Watershed

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Surface waters are commonly used as source water for drinking water and irrigation. Knowledge of sources of fecal pollution in source watersheds benefits the design of effective source water protection plans. This study analyzed the relationships between enteric pathogens ( O157:H7, spp., and spp. [, and ]), water quality (turbidity, temperature, and ), and human and ruminant-cow and mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA)-based fecal source tracking (FST) markers in two source watersheds. Water samples ( = 329) were collected at 10 sites (five in each watershed) over 18 mo. The human marker (HF183) occurred in 9 to 10% of the water samples at nine sampling sites; while a forested site in the urban watershed tested negative. Ruminant-cow markers (BacR and CowM2) only appeared in the rural watershed (6%). The mtDNA markers (HcytB and AcytB) showed the same pattern but were less sensitive due to lower fecal concentrations. Higher prevalences ( < 0.05) of spp. (41 vs. 16% for the rural and urban watershed, respectively) and O157:H7 (12 vs. 3%) were observed in the rural watershed, while spp. levels were comparable (23-28%). Densities of ≥100 colony-forming units (CFU) 100 mL increased the odds ( < 0.05) of detecting the enteric bacterial pathogens. The water turbidity levels (nephelometric turbidity units [NTU] ≥ 1.0) similarly predicted ( < 0.05) pathogen presence. Storm events increased ( < 0.01) pathogen and fecal marker concentrations in the waterways. The employment of multiple FST methods suggested failing onsite wastewater systems contribute to human fecal pollution in both watersheds.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 73%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Fecal Contamination in the Surface Waters of a Rural- and an Urban-Source Watershed

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, the decay rate of DNA markers was evaluated in various temperatures, which showed a significant increase in the decay rate in higher temperature. In another study, Villemur, Imbeau, Vuong, Masson, and Payment (2015) extracted DNA from surface water samples of 82 watersheds to evaluate human, bovine and porcine mtDNA markers as well as Bacteroidales HF183 marker via PCR method. Based on their results, it was suggested that mitoHu (human mitochondrial DNA marker) and HF183 can be applied in source tracking.…”

Section: Mitochondrial Dnamentioning

confidence: 99%

Detection and occurrence of indicator organisms and pathogens

Motlagh

Yang

2019

Water Environment Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review paper focuses on detection and quantification techniques of indicator organisms that can be used for water quality assessment. The environmental pathogens that are critical to understand and better evaluate water quality are also discussed in this paper. Several recent studies using culture-independent methods such as microbial source tracking, pulsed field gel electrophoresis, mitochondrial DNA, and next generation sequencing to assess various environmental samples and water bodies have been reviewed.

show abstract

“…[ 139 ], and Methanobrevibacter smithii [ 140 ]. Commonly 16S rRNA gene has been used as a marker to track host-specific organisms [ 31 ], but other authors such as Villemur et al [ 141 ] and Caldwell et al [ 142 ] suggest the use of DNA (mtDNA) to target the identification of human and animal origins.…”

Section: Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment Of Waterborne Disementioning

confidence: 99%

Waterborne Pathogens: Detection Methods and Challenges

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Waterborne pathogens and related diseases are a major public health concern worldwide, not only by the morbidity and mortality that they cause, but by the high cost that represents their prevention and treatment. These diseases are directly related to environmental deterioration and pollution. Despite the continued efforts to maintain water safety, waterborne outbreaks are still reported globally. Proper assessment of pathogens on water and water quality monitoring are key factors for decision-making regarding water distribution systems’ infrastructure, the choice of best water treatment and prevention waterborne outbreaks. Powerful, sensitive and reproducible diagnostic tools are developed to monitor pathogen contamination in water and be able to detect not only cultivable pathogens but also to detect the occurrence of viable but non-culturable microorganisms as well as the presence of pathogens on biofilms. Quantitative microbial risk assessment (QMRA) is a helpful tool to evaluate the scenarios for pathogen contamination that involve surveillance, detection methods, analysis and decision-making. This review aims to present a research outlook on waterborne outbreaks that have occurred in recent years. This review also focuses in the main molecular techniques for detection of waterborne pathogens and the use of QMRA approach to protect public health.

show abstract

An environmental survey of surface waters using mitochondrial DNA from human, bovine and porcine origin as fecal source tracking markers

Cited by 33 publications

References 50 publications

Fecal Contamination in the Surface Waters of a Rural- and an Urban-Source Watershed

Fecal Contamination in the Surface Waters of a Rural- and an Urban-Source Watershed

Detection and occurrence of indicator organisms and pathogens

Waterborne Pathogens: Detection Methods and Challenges

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About