Identification of Human and Animal Adenoviruses and Polyomaviruses for Determination of Sources of Fecal Contamination in the Environment

Abstract

The Adenoviridae and Polyomaviridae families comprise a wide diversity of viruses which may be excreted for long periods in feces or urine. In this study, a preliminary analysis of the prevalence in the environment and the potential usefulness as source-tracking tools of human and animal adenoviruses and polyomaviruses has been developed. Molecular assays based on PCR specifically targeting human adenoviruses (HAdV), porcine adenoviruses (PAdV), bovine adenoviruses (BAdV), and bovine polyomaviruses (BPyV) were applied to environmental samples including urban sewage, slaughterhouse, and river water samples. PAdV and BPyV were detected in a very high percentage of samples potentially affected by either porcine or bovine fecal contamination, respectively. However, BAdV were detected in only one sample, showing a lower prevalence than BPyV in the wastewater samples analyzed. The 22 slaughterhouse samples with fecal contamination of animal origin showed negative results for the presence of HAdV. The river water samples analyzed were positive for the presence of both human and animal adenoviruses and polyomaviruses, indicating the existence of diverse sources of contamination. The identities of the viruses detected were confirmed by analyses of the amplified sequences. All BPyV isolates showed a 97% similarity in nucleotide sequences. This is the first time that PAdV5, BAdV6, and BPyV have been reported to occur in environmental samples. Human and porcine adenoviruses and human and bovine polyomaviruses are proposed as tools for evaluating the presence of viral contamination and for tracking the origin of fecal/urine contamination in environmental samples.

Evaluation of Human Enteric Viruses in Surface Water and Drinking Water Resources in Southern Ghana

“…39 An additional target, HuPyV, was also included, based on recent research suggesting that HuPyV could be used as a reliable viral indicator of human fecal contamination. 28,[40][41][42][43][44] In this study, each type of water source was positive for a human enteric virus. The only human enteric viruses not detected in UF concentrates were EV and HEV.…”

Membrane Bioreactor-Based Wastewater Treatment Plant in Saudi Arabia: Reduction of Viral Diversity, Load, and Infectious Capacity

“…Hence, dPCR was employed to quantify AdV for two reasons. The Adenoviridae family is the only DNA viral family represented by two different viral species, namely human mastadenovirus A and F, and the AdV is commonly cited as an indicator of fecal contamination [23].…”

A Survey of Porcine Picornaviruses and Adenoviruses in Fecal Samples in Spain

“…This conventional RT-PCR is able to distinguish PTV and PSV by the size of the band amplified. To control the specificity of the technique, samples corresponding to PSV and PTV reference strains (1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11) c,d were assessed, giving bands of the expected sizes (Table 1). When the assay was applied to all 206 virus isolates, 18 PTV-negative isolates were identified as PSV, whereas only 48 of 97 PTV-positive isolates were found positive for PTV in this second test; this latter result possibly reflects the higher sensitivity of the real-time RT-PCR protocol applied in the first analysis for the detection of PTV.…”

“…Nevertheless, when comparing both studies, one should bear in mind that they differ in 2 important aspects: 1) the number of isolates analyzed (206 vs. 33) and 2) the sampling period, comprising 10 years in the Italian study (1992)(1993)(1994)(1995)(1996)(1997)(1998)(1999)(2000)(2001)(2002) and only 2 years in the present study (2004 and 2005). The current study was focused on members of the Picornaviridae and Adenoviridae families, because viruses belonging to these groups have been detected previously in fecal and environmental samples from pig populations in the absence of disease, 2,4,5,8 However, a still substantial percentage (40%) of the isolates could not be identified. These isolates are thus cytopathic viruses not belonging to the aforementioned viral groups, and their identification would merit further investigation.…”