Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24727274›Full record

ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology2014

Long-term monitoring of waterborne pathogens and microbial source tracking markers in paired agricultural watersheds under controlled and conventional tile drainage management.

Graham Wilkes, Julie Brassard, Thomas A Edge, Victor Gannon, Natalie Gottschall, Cassandra C Jokinen, Tineke H Jones, Izhar U H Khan, Romain Marti, Mark D Sunohara and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied and environmental microbiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Graham WilkesAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Julie BrassardAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Saint-Hyacinthe, Québec, Canada.
Thomas A EdgeWater Science & Technology, Environment Canada, Burlington, Ontario, Canada.
Victor GannonLaboratory for Foodborne Zoonoses, Public Health Agency of Canada, Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada.
Natalie GottschallAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Cassandra C JokinenLaboratory for Foodborne Zoonoses, Public Health Agency of Canada, Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada.
Tineke H JonesAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Lacombe, Alberta, Canada.
Izhar U H KhanAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Romain MartiAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada, London, Ontario, Canada.
Mark D SunoharaAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Edward ToppAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada, London, Ontario, Canada.
David R LapenAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada David.Lapen@agr.gc.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Surface waters from paired agricultural watersheds under controlled tile drainage (CTD) and uncontrolled tile drainage (UCTD) were monitored over 7 years in order to determine if there was an effect of CTD (imposed during the growing season) on occurrences and loadings of bacterial and viral pathogens, coliphages, and microbial source tracking markers. There were significantly lower occurrences of human, ruminant, and livestock (ruminant plus pig) Bacteroidales markers in the CTD watershed in relation to the UCTD watershed. As for pathogens, there were significantly lower occurrences of Salmonella spp. and Arcobacter spp. in the CTD watershed. There were no instances where there were significantly higher quantitative loadings of any microbial target in the CTD watershed, except for F-specific DNA (F-DNA) and F-RNA coliphages, perhaps as a result of fecal inputs from a hobby farm independent of the drainage practice treatments. There was lower loading of the ruminant marker in the CTD watershed in relation to the UCTD system, and results were significant at the level P = 0.06. The odds of Salmonella spp. occurring increased when a ruminant marker was present relative to when the ruminant marker was absent, yet for Arcobacter spp., the odds of this pathogen occurring significantly decreased when a ruminant marker was present relative to when the ruminant marker was absent (but increased when a wildlife marker was present relative to when the wildlife marker was absent). Interestingly, the odds of norovirus GII (associated with human and swine) occurring in water increased significantly when a ruminant marker was present relative to when a ruminant marker was absent. Overall, this study suggests that fecal pollution from tile-drained fields to stream could be reduced by CTD utilization.

Indexed as

Environmental MonitoringAgricultureAnimalsBacteriaBiomarkersHumansRiversSeasonsVirusesWater MicrobiologyBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID24727274
PMCPMC4054145

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.