2006
DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2006.04.038
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Genotyping of single Cryptosporidium oocysts in sewage by semi-nested PCR and direct sequencing

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
13
0
2

Year Published

2008
2008
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
0
13
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Surprisingly, urban wastewater discharge was not found to be a significant contributor to Cryptosporidium oocyst contamination in river water in this study. Although two watershed sites (the Great Seneca Creek and Monocacy River sites) are downstream of discharges of treated urban wastewater and the two downstream treatment intake sites are under the cumulative influence of all the environmental factors considered in this study, the most common Cryptosporidium genotypes in raw urban wastewater, C. hominis and C. parvum (11,13,53,57,62,63), were never found in river water samples in this study. This finding differs from the results of a previous study conducted in neighboring areas.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 71%
“…Surprisingly, urban wastewater discharge was not found to be a significant contributor to Cryptosporidium oocyst contamination in river water in this study. Although two watershed sites (the Great Seneca Creek and Monocacy River sites) are downstream of discharges of treated urban wastewater and the two downstream treatment intake sites are under the cumulative influence of all the environmental factors considered in this study, the most common Cryptosporidium genotypes in raw urban wastewater, C. hominis and C. parvum (11,13,53,57,62,63), were never found in river water samples in this study. This finding differs from the results of a previous study conducted in neighboring areas.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 71%
“…Accordingly, DNA extraction from formalin-fixed samples is affected by factors such as incomplete cell lysis, crosslinkage with the protein, coextraction of PCR inhibitors and degradation of DNA (Jara et al 2008;Santos et al 2008). The failure of sequence amplification is often associated with low quantity and quality of DNA extracted from this kind of samples, and the sensitivity of PCR drops with the decrease in DNA template (Hashimoto et al 2006). Nested and semi-nested PCR have been proven powerful to improve the specificity and sensitivity of PCR amplifications (Cowley et al 2004;Hashimoto et al 2006).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, limitations of RFLP resulted in some isolates identified as mixtures or atypical genotypes (14.5%). Therefore, to complete the Cryptosporidium identification and characterisation sometimes it is necessary to apply other molecular techniques, like cloning and sequencing (Gòmez-Couso et al 2004, 2005Hashimoto et al 2006;Trotz-Williams et al 2006). Indeed, molecular tools improved our PCR-RFLP results.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…PCR-based genotyping techniques may target several housekeeping or structural genes, such as the oocyst wall protein (Cryptosporidium parvum oocyst wall protein (COWP); Sulaiman et al 1999). Nested PCR procedures were shown to increase considerably the amplification sensitivity of Cryptosporidium DNA extracted from water (Sturbaum et al 2001), sewage (Hashimoto et al 2006) and faecal samples (Pedraza-Dìaz et al 2001;Amar et al 2004;Trotz-Williams et al 2006).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%