ArticlePloS one2019
Large-scale implementation of standardized quantitative real-time PCR fecal source identification procedures in the Tillamook Bay Watershed.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Have genetic targets for faecal pollution diagnostics and source tracking revolutionized water quality analysis yet?FEMS microbiology reviews · 2023Pooled it
- An integrated approach to coupled nutrient and microbial source tracking in an agricultural watershed.Water research · 2025Article
- Performance of Conditional Random Forest and Regression Models at Predicting Human Fecal Contamination of Produce Irrigation Ponds in the Southeastern United States.ACS ES&T water · 2024Article
- Quantitative fecal pollution assessment with bacterial, viral, and molecular methods in small stream tributaries.The Science of the total environment · 2024Article
- Quantitative fecal source characterization of urban municipal storm sewer system outfall 'wet' and 'dry' weather discharges.Water research · 2024Article
- A fecal score approximation model for analysis of real-time quantitative PCR fecal source identification measurements.Water research · 2024Article
- Genetic fecal source identification in urban streams impacted by municipal separate storm sewer system discharges.PloS one · 2023Article
- Performance of NIST SRM® 2917 with 13 recreational water quality monitoring qPCR assays.Water research · 2022Article
- Variable fecal source prioritization in recreational waters routinely monitored with viral and bacterial general indicators.Water research · 2021Article
- A Combined Digital PCR and Next Generation DNA-Sequencing Based Approach for Tracking Nearshore Pollutant Dynamics Along the Southwest United States/Mexico Border.Frontiers in microbiology · 2021Article
- Identifying Inorganic Turbidity in Water Samples as Potential Loss Factor During Nucleic Acid Extraction: Implications for Molecular Fecal Pollution Diagnostics and Source Tracking.Frontiers in microbiology · 2021Article
- CrAssphage for fecal source tracking in Chile: Covariation with norovirus, HF183, and bacterial indicators.Water research X · 2020Article
- Fecal pollution source characterization at non-point source impacted beaches under dry and wet weather conditions.Water research · 2020Article
- Microbial Indicators of Fecal Pollution: Recent Progress and Challenges in Assessing Water Quality.Current environmental health reports · 2020Review
- Democratizing water monitoring: Implementation of a community-based qPCR monitoring program for recreational water hazards.PloS one · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fecal pollution management remains one of the biggest challenges for water quality authorities worldwide. Advanced fecal pollution source identification technologies are now available that can provide quantitative information from many animal groups. As public interest in these methodologies grows, it is vital to use standardized procedures with clearly defined data acceptance metrics and conduct field studies demonstrating the use of these techniques to help resolve real-world water quality challenges. Here we apply recently standardized human-associated qPCR methods with custom data acceptance metrics (HF183/BacR287 and HumM2), along with established procedures for ruminant (Rum2Bac), cattle (CowM2 and CowM3), canine (DG3 and DG37), and avian (GFD) fecal pollution sources to (i) demonstrate the feasibility of implementing standardized qPCR procedures in a large-scale field study, and (ii) characterize trends in fecal pollution sources in the research area. A total of 602 water samples were collected over a one-year period at 29 sites along the Trask, Kilchis, and Tillamook rivers and tributaries in the Tillamook Bay Watershed (OR, USA). Host-associated qPCR results were combined with high-resolution geographic information system (GIS) land use and general indicator bacteria (E. coli) measurements to elucidate water quality fecal pollution trends. Results demonstrate the feasibility of implementing standardized fecal source identification qPCR methods with established data acceptance metrics in a large-scale field study leading to new investigative leads suggesting that elevated E. coli levels may be linked to specific pollution sources and land use activities in the Tillamook Bay Watershed.
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.