ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2017
Regional Assessment of Human Fecal Contamination in Southern California Coastal Drainages.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2017. 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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Assessing human-source microbial contamination of stormwater in the U.S.Water research · 2025Pooled it
- Article
- Article
- Genetic sequence data evidence that human faecal-associated HF183 sequences are on human skin and in urine.Journal of applied microbiology · 2022Article
- Bather Shedding as a Source of Human Fecal Markers to a Recreational Beach.Frontiers in microbiology · 2021Article
- Microbial Indicators of Fecal Pollution: Recent Progress and Challenges in Assessing Water Quality.Current environmental health reports · 2020Review
- Alterations of the human skin microbiome after ocean water exposure.Marine pollution bulletin · 2019Article
- Urbanization Impacts the Physicochemical Characteristics and Abundance of Fecal Markers and Bacterial Pathogens in Surface Water.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- Frequent detection of a human fecal indicator in the urban ocean: environmental drivers and covariation with enterococci.Environmental science. Processes & impacts · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Host-associated genetic markers that allow for fecal source identification have been used extensively as a diagnostic tool to determine fecal sources within watersheds, but have not been used in routine monitoring to prioritize remediation actions among watersheds. Here, we present a regional assessment of human marker prevalence among drainages that discharge to the U.S. southern California coast. Approximately 50 samples were analyzed for the HF183 human marker from each of 22 southern California coastal drainages under summer dry weather conditions, and another 50 samples were targeted from each of 23 drainages during wet weather. The HF183 marker was ubiquitous, detected in all but two sites in dry weather and at all sites during wet weather. However, there was considerable difference in the extent of human fecal contamination among sites. Similar site ranking was produced regardless of whether the assessment was based on frequency of HF183 detection or site average HF183 concentration. However, site ranking differed greatly between dry and wet weather. Site ranking also differed greatly when based on enterococci, which do not distinguish between pollution sources, vs. HF183, which distinguishes higher risk human fecal sources from other sources, indicating the additional value of the human-associated marker as a routine monitoring tool.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.