ArticleEnvironmental monitoring and assessment2020
Tracking faecal microorganisms using the qPCR method in a typical urban catchment in China.
Article in Environmental monitoring and assessment, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Faecal microorganisms represent a key threat to human health. Potential origins of faecal microbial contamination in a typical urban-representative micro-scale were evaluated. The quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) method was used in this study. The Bacteroidetes is selected as the indicative microorganism in runoff samples that are collected during four representative stormwater events in north China. The principal component analysis (PCA) method indicated the distribution feature of the environmental factors. The largest contributor is dog, followed by bird and human to the faecal pollution in stormwater runoff. The output of human and dog faecal pollutants in response to the first flush effect of nonpoint source pollution while the transmit time of bird faecal pollutant is relatively longer. In addition, the number of antecedent drying days represents the key factor for dog faecal pollution, while human faecal pollution is impacted by more factors. The results of this study will provide sound evidence for the tracking and management of nonpoint source faecal pollution in urban catchment areas.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32016573What 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.