Effect of freshwater sediment characteristics on the persistence of fecal indicator bacteria and genetic markers within a Southern California watershed

Zimmer‐Faust, Amity G.; Thulsiraj, Vanessa; Marambio-Jones, Catalina; Cao, Yiping; Griffith, John F.; Holden, Patricia A.; Jay, Jennifer A.

doi:10.1016/j.watres.2017.04.028

Cited by 32 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several studies reported increased E. coli persistence after addition of organic carbon in the form of fecal material (88,89) or organic-rich sediment (81) ( Table 1). FIB decay rates were often reduced in sediment compared to the overlying water column (81,88), and culturable E. coli and enterococci, as well as the GenBac3 MST marker, decayed more slowly in sediments with higher organic carbon levels (94). Extended survival in sediments is attributed to factors including greater access to nutrients, such as organic carbon, and protection from UV light and predators.…”

Section: Nutrientsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Extended survival in sediments is attributed to factors including greater access to nutrients, such as organic carbon, and protection from UV light and predators. Other factors, such as sediment properties (e.g., particle size and clay content), as well as the presence of biofilms, can also promote extended survival in sediment (81,88,94).…”

Section: Nutrientsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other studies focused on elucidating the effects of sediment characteristics on decay, rather than direct comparisons between the two matrices. In general, smaller grain size was frequently associated with elevated nutrient content and extended survival of culturable FIB (E. coli and enterococci) (94,121,123,124), FIB quantified by qPCR (Entero1a) (94), general (GenBac3) as well humanassociated (HF183) MST markers (94), and a variety of bacterial pathogens (Vibrio cholerae, Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium, and Shigella dysenteriae) (124).…”

Section: Alternative Habitatsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…or Bacteroidales). We focused only on studies or specific treatments within the study that attempted to simulate environmental conditions (4,25,26,28,31,39,41,46,69,94,122,156) (Fig. 6).…”

Section: Intrinsic Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Persistence and Decay of Fecal Microbiota in Aquatic Habitats

Korajkic

Wanjugi

Brooks

et al. 2019

Microbiol Mol Biol Rev

Self Cite

113

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY Fecal microorganisms can enter water bodies in diverse ways, including runoff, sewage discharge, and direct fecal deposition. Once in water, the microorganisms experience conditions that are very different from intestinal habitats. The transition from host to aquatic environment may lead to rapid inactivation, some degree of persistence, or growth. Microorganisms may remain planktonic, be deposited in sediment, wash up on beaches, or attach to aquatic vegetation. Each of these habitats offers a panoply of different stressors or advantages, including UV light exposure, temperature fluctuations, salinity, nutrient availability, and biotic interactions with the indigenous microbiota (e.g., predation and/or competition). The host sources of fecal microorganisms are likewise numerous, including wildlife, pets, livestock, and humans. Most of these microorganisms are unlikely to affect human health, but certain taxa can cause waterborne disease. Others signal increased probability of pathogen presence, e.g., the fecal indicator bacteria Escherichia coli and enterococci and bacteriophages, or act as fecal source identifiers (microbial source tracking markers). The effects of environmental factors on decay are frequently inconsistent across microbial species, fecal sources, and measurement strategies (e.g., culture versus molecular). Therefore, broad generalizations about the fate of fecal microorganisms in aquatic environments are problematic, compromising efforts to predict microbial decay and health risk from contamination events. This review summarizes the recent literature on decay of fecal microorganisms in aquatic environments, recognizes defensible generalizations, and identifies knowledge gaps that may provide particularly fruitful avenues for obtaining a better understanding of the fates of these organisms in aquatic environments.

show abstract

Section: Nutrientsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Nutrientsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Alternative Habitatsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…or Bacteroidales). We focused only on studies or specific treatments within the study that attempted to simulate environmental conditions (4,25,26,28,31,39,41,46,69,94,122,156) (Fig. 6).…”

Section: Intrinsic Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Persistence and Decay of Fecal Microbiota in Aquatic Habitats

Korajkic

Wanjugi

Brooks

et al. 2019

Microbiol Mol Biol Rev

Self Cite

113

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…After deposition onto stream waters, fecal bacteria often become incorporated in stream sediments (Droppo et al, 2009), where they have been shown to survive for several weeks (Haller et al, 2009; Martín‐Díaz et al, 2017). Therefore, stream sediments can function as fecal contamination reservoirs, acting not only as sinks but also as sources of fecal contamination (Agouridis et al, 2005) when inevitable disturbance events take place (Nagels et al, 2002; Ekwanzala et al, 2017; Zimmer‐Faust et al, 2017), such as cattle drinking or crossing the streams or high rainfall events. For instance, Craig et al (2004), at a recreational coastal site in Australia, observed a dramatic increase of fecal coliforms concentrations in both waters and sediments from 17 ± 11 CFU 100 mL −1 and 143 ± 57 CFU 100 mg −1 to >10 6 CFU 100 mL −1 and 10 6 CFU mg −1 , respectively, after a significant rainfall event.…”

Section: In‐stream and Sediment Pathogenic Microbesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Environmental Impact of Cattle Access to Watercourses: A Review

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The degradation of freshwater resources and loss of freshwater biodiversity by anthropogenic activities, including agriculture, are of major global concern. Together with diffuse pollutants, point sources, such as where cattle have direct access to riparian margins and watercourses, can potentially present significant environmental challenges. These can include impacts on stream morphology, increased sedimentation, nutrient additions, microbial contamination, and impacts on aquatic biota. Mitigation measures aimed at reducing these frequently include reducing the amount of time cattle spend in riparian margins and watercourses. This is often accomplished through the provision of an alternative water supply and grazing management, or even cattle exclusion measures. Although a number of studies refer to potential negative impacts, there has been little attempt to review previous research on this topic. The key aim of this paper is to collate and review these disparate studies, as well as those relating to the effectiveness of mitigation measures. Although it is difficult to draw generalizations from studies due to the inherent variability between and within catchments, evidence pertaining to impacts in relation to sedimentation, pathogens, and riparian margin vegetation were strong. Conclusions in relation to impacts on stream morphology and nutrient parameters were less clear, whereas studies on responses of macroinvertebrate communities were particularly variable, with differences due to cattle access difficult to separate from catchment scale effects. A greater understanding of the impact of cattle access on watercourses under varying conditions will help inform policymakers on the cost effectiveness of existing management criteria and will help in revising existing measures.

show abstract