Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26002900›Full record

ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology2015

Automated Sampling Procedures Supported by High Persistence of Bacterial Fecal Indicators and Bacteroidetes Genetic Microbial Source Tracking Markers in Municipal Wastewater during Short-Term Storage at 5°C.

R E Mayer, J Vierheilig, L Egle, G H Reischer, E Saracevic, R L Mach, A K T Kirschner, M Zessner, R Sommer, A H Farnleitner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied and environmental microbiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Seasonal and diurnal surveillance of treated and untreated wastewater for human enteric viruses.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2018
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

10 authors.

R E MayerInstitute of Chemical Engineering, Research Division Biotechnology and Microbiology, Research Group Environmental Microbiology and Molecular Ecology, Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria Interuniversity Cooperation Centre for Water & Health, Vienna, Austria‡
J VierheiligInstitute of Chemical Engineering, Research Division Biotechnology and Microbiology, Research Group Environmental Microbiology and Molecular Ecology, Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria Interuniversity Cooperation Centre for Water & Health, Vienna, Austria‡ Centre for Water Resource Systems, Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria.
L EgleInstitute for Water Quality Resources and Waste Management, Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria Centre for Water Resource Systems, Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria.
G H ReischerInstitute of Chemical Engineering, Research Division Biotechnology and Microbiology, Research Group Environmental Microbiology and Molecular Ecology, Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria Interuniversity Cooperation Centre for Water & Health, Vienna, Austria‡
E SaracevicInstitute for Water Quality Resources and Waste Management, Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria.
R L MachInstitute of Chemical Engineering, Research Division Biotechnology and Microbiology, Research Group Environmental Microbiology and Molecular Ecology, Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria Interuniversity Cooperation Centre for Water & Health, Vienna, Austria‡
A K T KirschnerInteruniversity Cooperation Centre for Water & Health, Vienna, Austria‡ Medical University Vienna, Institute for Hygiene and Applied Immunology, Water Hygiene, Vienna, Austria.
M ZessnerInstitute for Water Quality Resources and Waste Management, Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria Centre for Water Resource Systems, Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria.
R SommerInteruniversity Cooperation Centre for Water & Health, Vienna, Austria‡ Medical University Vienna, Institute for Hygiene and Applied Immunology, Water Hygiene, Vienna, Austria regina.sommer@meduniwien.ac.at.
A H FarnleitnerInstitute of Chemical Engineering, Research Division Biotechnology and Microbiology, Research Group Environmental Microbiology and Molecular Ecology, Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria Interuniversity Cooperation Centre for Water & Health, Vienna, Austria‡ Centre for Water Resource Systems, Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria.

Funding

Austrian Science Fund FWF P 22032Austrian Science Fund FWF P 22309Austrian Science Fund FWF P 23900
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Because of high diurnal water quality fluctuations in raw municipal wastewater, the use of proportional autosampling over a period of 24 h at municipal wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) to evaluate carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus removal has become a standard in many countries. Microbial removal or load estimation at municipal WWTPs, however, is still based on manually recovered grab samples. The goal of this study was to establish basic knowledge regarding the persistence of standard bacterial fecal indicators and Bacteroidetes genetic microbial source tracking markers in municipal wastewater in order to evaluate their suitability for automated sampling, as the potential lack of persistence is the main argument against such procedures. Raw and secondary treated wastewater of municipal origin from representative and well-characterized biological WWTPs without disinfection (organic carbon and nutrient removal) was investigated in microcosm experiments at 5 and 21°C with a total storage time of 32 h (including a 24-h autosampling component and an 8-h postsampling phase). Vegetative Escherichia coli and enterococci, as well as Clostridium perfringens spores, were selected as indicators for cultivation-based standard enumeration. Molecular analysis focused on total (AllBac) and human-associated genetic Bacteroidetes (BacHum-UCD, HF183 TaqMan) markers by using quantitative PCR, as well as 16S rRNA gene-based next-generation sequencing. The microbial parameters showed high persistence in both raw and treated wastewater at 5°C under the storage conditions used. Surprisingly, and in contrast to results obtained with treated wastewater, persistence of the microbial markers in raw wastewater was also high at 21°C. On the basis of our results, 24-h autosampling procedures with 5°C storage conditions can be recommended for the investigation of fecal indicators or Bacteroidetes genetic markers at municipal WWTPs. Such autosampling procedures will contribute to better understanding and monitoring of municipal WWTPs as sources of fecal pollution in water resources.

Indexed as

Water PurificationBacteriaBacteriological TechniquesDNA, BacterialDNA FingerprintingDNA, RibosomalFecesHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingRNA, Ribosomal, 16SSequence Analysis, DNATemperatureWastewaterDNA, BacterialDNA, RibosomalRNA, Ribosomal, 16SWastewater

Identifiers

PMID26002900
PMCPMC4495213

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.