Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25659126›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Co-detection of virulent Escherichia coli genes in surface water sources.

Thando Ndlovu, Marcellous Le Roux, Wesaal Khan, Sehaam Khan

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Water and food contamination withJournal of water and health · 2026
    Article
  2. EnteroaggregativeEcoSal Plus · 2025
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Multi-Drug-Resistant DiarrheagenicInfection and drug resistance · 2020
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Distribution and diversity of biosurfactant-producing bacteria in a wastewater treatment plant.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2016
    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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Thando NdlovuDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Health and Wellness Sciences, Cape Peninsula University of Technology, PO Box 1906, Bellville, 7535, South Africa.
Marcellous Le RouxDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Health and Wellness Sciences, Cape Peninsula University of Technology, PO Box 1906, Bellville, 7535, South Africa.
Wesaal KhanDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Science, Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1, Stellenbosch, 7602, South Africa.
Sehaam KhanDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Health and Wellness Sciences, Cape Peninsula University of Technology, PO Box 1906, Bellville, 7535, South Africa.
Cape Peninsula University of Technology · ZAStellenbosch University · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

McNemar's test and the Pearson Chi-square were used to assess the co-detection and observed frequency, respectively, for potentially virulent E. coli genes in river water. Conventional multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) assays confirmed the presence of the aggR gene (69%), ipaH gene (23%) and the stx gene (15%) carried by Enteroaggregative E. coli (EAEC), Enteroinvasive E. coli (EIEC) and Enterohermorrhagic E. coli (EHEC), respectively, in river water samples collected from the Berg River (Paarl, South Africa). Only the aggR gene was present in 23% of samples collected from the Plankenburg River system (Stellenbosch, South Africa). In a comparative study, real-time multiplex PCR assays confirmed the presence of aggR (EAEC) in 69%, stx (EHEC) in 15%, ipaH (EIEC) in 31% and eae (EPEC) in 8% of the river water samples collected from the Berg River. In the Plankenburg River, aggR (EAEC) was detected in 46% of the samples, while eae (EPEC) was present in 15% of the water samples analyzed using real-time multiplex PCR in the Plankenburg River. Pearson Chi-square showed that there was no statistical difference (p > 0.05) between the conventional and real-time multiplex PCRs for the detection of virulent E. coli genes in water samples. However, the McNemar's test showed some variation in the co-detection of virulent E. coli genes, for example, there was no statistical difference in the misclassification of the discordant results for stx versus ipaH, which implies that the ipaH gene was frequently detected with the stx gene. This study thus highlights the presence of virulent E. coli genes in river water and while early detection is crucial, quantitative microbial risk analysis has to be performed to identify and estimate the risk to human health.

Indexed as

Water MicrobiologyEnterohemorrhagic Escherichia coliEscherichia coliEscherichia coli ProteinsHumansMultiplex Polymerase Chain ReactionSouth AfricaVirulence FactorsEscherichia coli ProteinsVirulence Factors

Identifiers

PMID25659126
PMCPMC4320055
OpenAlexW1970320422

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.