Human and bovine viruses in the Milwaukee River watershed: Hydrologically relevant representation and relations with environmental variables

Abstract

To examine the occurrence, hydrologic variability, and seasonal variability of human and bovine viruses in surface water, three stream locations were monitored in the Milwaukee River watershed in Wisconsin, USA, from February 2007 through June 2008. Monitoring sites included an urban subwatershed, a rural subwatershed, and the Milwaukee River at the mouth. To collect samples that characterize variability throughout changing hydrologic periods, a process control system was developed for unattended, large-volume (56-2800 L) filtration over extended durations. This system provided flow-weighted mean concentrations during runoff and extended (24-h) low-flow periods. Human viruses and bovine viruses were detected by real-time qPCR in 49% and 41% of samples (n=63), respectively. All human viruses analyzed were detected at least once including adenovirus (40% of samples), GI norovirus (10%), enterovirus (8%), rotavirus (6%), GII norovirus (1.6%) and hepatitis A virus (1.6%). Three of seven bovine viruses analyzed were detected including bovine polyomavirus (32%), bovine rotavirus (19%), and bovine viral diarrhea virus type 1 (5%). Human viruses were present in 63% of runoff samples resulting from precipitation and snowmelt, and 20% of low-flow samples. Maximum human virus concentrations exceeded 300 genomic copies/L. Bovine viruses were present in 46% of runoff samples resulting from precipitation and snowmelt and 14% of low-flow samples. The maximum bovine virus concentration was 11 genomic copies/L. Statistical modeling indicated that stream flow, precipitation, and season explained the variability of human viruses in the watershed, and hydrologic condition (runoff event or low-flow) and season explained the variability of the sum of human and bovine viruses; however, no model was identified that could explain the variability of bovine viruses alone. Understanding the factors that affect virus fate and transport in rivers will aid watershed management for minimizing human exposure and disease transmission.

Surface water quality in the Sinos River basin, in Southern Brazil: tracking microbiological contamination and correlation with physicochemical parameters

“…In this study, the data also showed the occurrence of HAdV in samples of river water present in all points and with a mean frequency of 54 % (39 to 83 %) along the SRB. These data corroborate other studies that found detection rates ranging from 29 to 96 % in surface waters in South Korea, Germany, Brazil, and USA (Lee et al 2005;Jurzik et al 2010;Rigotto et al 2010;Fongaro et al 2012;Miagostovich et al 2014;Corsi et al 2014). Point 1 had the highest rate HAdV detection (83 %); This point is characterized by having the lowest population density.…”

“…Although this stretch is characterized by an increase in population and presents characteristics of intense disturbance, in a landscape with less rural components than the upper section, it is still possible to detect nonhuman adenovirus species at high concentrations, and the most frequently detected were CAV 51.66 % (1.19×10 6 GC/ l), followed by AvAdV 10.12 % (3,33×10 5 GC/l), BAdV 5.83 % (1.09×10 6 GC/l), and PAdV 4.17 % (9.31×10 5 GC/ l) (Figs. 2 and 3b,c,d,and e), showing that the contamination along the river takes on characteristics of diffuse contamination, because it receives effluent loads dragged through surface runoff coming from various sources along the watercourse Corsi et al 2014;Oliveira and Henkes 2013).…”

Waterborne Viruses and F-Specific Coliphages in Mixed-Use Watersheds: Microbial Associations, Host Specificities, and Affinities with Environmental/Land Use Factors

“…The highest levels of animal virus detection were associated with higher relative water flow conditions and relatively higher daily rainfall, suggesting more spatially uniform hydrologically driven inputs (e.g., surface runoff, tile drainage, and in-stream mobilization of antecedent waters/sediment/stream detritus [55,85]). HEV detection was also linked to relatively higher daily rainfalls, as well as higher relative water electrical conductivity values (i.e., salts).…”

Web-Based BFlow System for the Assessment of Streamflow Characteristics at National Level

“…Although baseflow separation using the digital filter method is performed by signal processing without physical meaning, the digital filter method has been used in many applications of baseflow separation (e.g., [17,20,31,34,42]) due to its speed, consistency, and reproducibility [17]. Direct runoff and baseflow using the digital filter method can be estimated by Equations (1) and (2).…”

“…For this reason, many governments and institutions have installed gauging stations to periodically measure streamflow. Baseflow and direct runoff, which are the main components of streamflow, provide seasonally different contributions to river flow [1,2]. For example, the intensification of direct runoff during the wet season can cause soil erosion and deposition and water pollution (e.g., non-point pollution and suspended sediment).…”