Suppr超能文献

基于聚合酶链反应(PCR)的检测方法对牛粪便污染的拟杆菌门遗传标记进行性能评估。

Performance assessment PCR-based assays targeting bacteroidales genetic markers of bovine fecal pollution.

机构信息

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, National Risk Management Research Laboratory, 26 West Martin Luther King Drive, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268, USA.

出版信息

Appl Environ Microbiol. 2010 Mar;76(5):1359-66. doi: 10.1128/AEM.02033-09. Epub 2010 Jan 8.

Abstract

There are numerous PCR-based assays available to characterize bovine fecal pollution in ambient waters. The determination of which approaches are most suitable for field applications can be difficult because each assay targets a different gene, in many cases from different microorganisms, leading to variation in assay performance. We describe a performance evaluation of seven end-point PCR and real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR) assays reported to be associated with either ruminant or bovine feces. Each assay was tested against a reference collection of DNA extracts from 247 individual bovine fecal samples representing 11 different populations and 175 fecal DNA extracts from 24 different animal species. Bovine-associated genetic markers were broadly distributed among individual bovine samples ranging from 39 to 93%. Specificity levels of the assays spanned 47.4% to 100%. End-point PCR sensitivity also varied between assays and among different bovine populations. For qPCR assays, the abundance of each host-associated genetic marker was measured within each bovine population and compared to results of a qPCR assay targeting 16S rRNA gene sequences from Bacteroidales. Experiments indicate large discrepancies in the performance of bovine-associated assays across different bovine populations. Variability in assay performance between host populations suggests that the use of bovine microbial source-tracking applications will require a priori characterization at each watershed of interest.

摘要

有许多基于 PCR 的检测方法可用于描述环境水中的牛粪便污染。确定哪些方法最适合野外应用可能很困难,因为每种检测方法都针对不同的基因,在许多情况下来自不同的微生物,导致检测方法的性能存在差异。我们描述了七种终点 PCR 和实时定量 PCR(qPCR)检测方法的性能评估,这些方法被认为与反刍动物或牛粪便有关。每个检测方法都针对一个包含 247 个个体牛粪便样本的参考 DNA 提取物进行了测试,这些样本代表了 11 个不同的种群,还有来自 24 个不同动物物种的 175 个粪便 DNA 提取物。牛相关的遗传标记在个体牛样本中广泛分布,范围从 39%到 93%。检测方法的特异性水平从 47.4%到 100%不等。终点 PCR 的敏感性也在不同的检测方法和不同的牛种群之间有所差异。对于 qPCR 检测方法,在每个牛种群中测量了每个宿主相关遗传标记的丰度,并与针对 Bacteroidales 16S rRNA 基因序列的 qPCR 检测方法的结果进行了比较。实验表明,不同牛种群中牛相关检测方法的性能存在很大差异。宿主种群之间检测方法性能的差异表明,在每个感兴趣的流域,使用牛微生物源追踪应用程序都需要事先进行特征描述。

相似文献

1
Performance assessment PCR-based assays targeting bacteroidales genetic markers of bovine fecal pollution.
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2010 Mar;76(5):1359-66. doi: 10.1128/AEM.02033-09. Epub 2010 Jan 8.
2
Quantitative identification of fecal water pollution sources by TaqMan real-time PCR assays using Bacteroidales 16S rRNA genetic markers.
Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2010 Dec;88(6):1373-83. doi: 10.1007/s00253-010-2880-0. Epub 2010 Sep 25.
4
Estimation of pig fecal contamination in a river catchment by real-time PCR using two pig-specific Bacteroidales 16S rRNA genetic markers.
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2009 May;75(10):3045-54. doi: 10.1128/AEM.02343-08. Epub 2009 Mar 27.
5
Improving the performance of an end-point PCR assay commonly used for the detection of Bacteroidales pertaining to cow feces.
Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2012 Feb;93(4):1703-13. doi: 10.1007/s00253-011-3782-5. Epub 2012 Jan 5.
6
Comparison of PCR and quantitative real-time PCR methods for the characterization of ruminant and cattle fecal pollution sources.
Water Res. 2013 Nov 15;47(18):6921-8. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2013.03.061. Epub 2013 Jul 5.

引用本文的文献

2
An overview of molecular markers for identification of non-human fecal pollution sources.
Front Microbiol. 2023 Nov 23;14:1256174. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1256174. eCollection 2023.
3
The Tomato Brown Rugose Fruit Virus Movement Protein Gene Is a Novel Microbial Source Tracking Marker.
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2023 Jul 26;89(7):e0058323. doi: 10.1128/aem.00583-23. Epub 2023 Jul 5.
5
Tomato brown rugose fruit virus Mo gene is a novel microbial source tracking marker.
bioRxiv. 2023 Jan 10:2023.01.09.523366. doi: 10.1101/2023.01.09.523366.
6
Genetic fecal source identification in urban streams impacted by municipal separate storm sewer system discharges.
PLoS One. 2023 Jan 26;18(1):e0278548. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0278548. eCollection 2023.
7
Microbial Source Tracking as a Method of Determination of Beach Sand Contamination.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Jun 28;19(13):7934. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19137934.
10
Evidence of Genetic Fecal Marker Interactions between Water Column and Periphyton in Artificial Streams.
ACS Omega. 2018 Aug 29;3(8):10107-10113. doi: 10.1021/acsomega.8b01785. eCollection 2018 Aug 31.

本文引用的文献

2
Temporal assessment of the impact of exposure to cow feces in two watersheds by multiple host-specific PCR assays.
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2008 Nov;74(22):6839-47. doi: 10.1128/AEM.00601-08. Epub 2008 Sep 19.
4
A discrete, stochastic model and correction method for bacterial source tracking.
Environ Sci Technol. 2008 Jan 15;42(2):524-9. doi: 10.1021/es070943x.
6
Quantitative PCR for detection and enumeration of genetic markers of bovine fecal pollution.
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2008 Feb;74(3):745-52. doi: 10.1128/AEM.01843-07. Epub 2007 Dec 7.
9
Identification of bacterial DNA markers for the detection of human fecal pollution in water.
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2007 Apr;73(8):2416-22. doi: 10.1128/AEM.02474-06. Epub 2007 Jan 5.
10

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验