2012
DOI: 10.1099/jmm.0.043158-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Potential molecular tools for assessing the public health risk associated with waterborne Cryptosporidium oocysts

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
12
0
2

Year Published

2012
2012
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 87 publications
0
12
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…However, without assays determining the species/genotype, viability or infectivity, all oocysts detected by microscopy must be assumed to present a public health risk (Figure 1). Viability and infectivity assays have been reviewed recently by Kothavade, who highlights the difficulties in applying these to the small numbers of oocysts often present in water samples, lack of interlaboratory trials and validation and difficulties in interpretation of the data [55]. In contrast, some genotyping assays have been standardised and applied to counted oocysts from microscope slides; thus both sets of data are collected: the oocyst count and the species, improving the data for assessment of risk to public health.…”
Section: Application Of Molecular Assays For Species Determination Anmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, without assays determining the species/genotype, viability or infectivity, all oocysts detected by microscopy must be assumed to present a public health risk (Figure 1). Viability and infectivity assays have been reviewed recently by Kothavade, who highlights the difficulties in applying these to the small numbers of oocysts often present in water samples, lack of interlaboratory trials and validation and difficulties in interpretation of the data [55]. In contrast, some genotyping assays have been standardised and applied to counted oocysts from microscope slides; thus both sets of data are collected: the oocyst count and the species, improving the data for assessment of risk to public health.…”
Section: Application Of Molecular Assays For Species Determination Anmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other methods, such as laser capture microscopy and reverse line hybridization are at developmental stages, and loop-mediated isothermal amplification have yet to be validated independently [55]. The benchmark assay is a specialist test requiring equipment and skill outwith the scope of most routine diagnostic or detection laboratories.…”
Section: Application Of Molecular Assays For Species Determination Anmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Cryptosporidium species are commonly monitored in waters using standard detection methodologies (e.g., EPA Method 1622 and Method 1623). However, these methods provide no information on either the infectivity or identity of the detected oocyst, providing little information on the relative health risk posed to humans (9,10).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently, intensive efforts have been made to examine source waters destined for potable consumption, as well as wastewaters intended for reuse, using genotyping assays and, to a lesser extent, infectivity assays (9)(10)(11)(12)(13). The information from these assays provides an indication of the risk to of human health (13).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Traditional microscopy-based detection tools such as U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Method 1622/1623 cannot differentiate Cryptosporidium species. Thus, genotyping tools are increasingly used in the assessment of the human-infective potential and source of Cryptosporidium oocysts in source or finished water (2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%