Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31170166›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Large-scale implementation of standardized quantitative real-time PCR fecal source identification procedures in the Tillamook Bay Watershed.

Xiang Li, Mano Sivaganesan, Catherine A Kelty, Amity Zimmer-Faust, Pat Clinton, Jay R Reichman, York Johnson, William Matthews, Stephanie Bailey, Orin C Shanks

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. 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.

Xiang LiOak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, Oak Ridge, TN, United States of America.
Mano SivaganesanU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Cincinnati, OH, United States of America.
Catherine A KeltyU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Cincinnati, OH, United States of America.
Amity Zimmer-FaustSouthern California Coastal Water Research Project, Costa Mesa, CA, United States of America.
Pat ClintonU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Newport, OR, United States of America.
Jay R ReichmanU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Corvallis, OR, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-5657-1115
York JohnsonOregon Department of Environmental Quality & Tillamook Estuaries Partnership, Garibaldi, Oregon, United States of America.
William MatthewsOregon Department of Agriculture, Salem, Oregon, United States of America.
Stephanie BaileyU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Manchester Laboratory, Port Orchard, WA, United States of America.
Orin C ShanksU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Cincinnati, OH, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-3203-0645

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

BaysEscherichia coliFecesReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionReference StandardsWater Pollution

Identifiers

PMID31170166
PMCPMC6553688

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.