ArticleEnvironmental monitoring and assessment2020
Are anglers exposed to Escherichia coli from an agriculturally impacted river?
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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Pine River, in the central, Lower Peninsula region of Michigan, has a long history of contamination. Livestock facilities and manure application sites along the Pine River and its tributaries have led to elevated nutrient levels. In addition to nutrient loading and associated low levels of dissolved oxygen, the presence Escherichia coli bacteria have caused environmental and human health concerns. According to the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services, and the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy, E. coli counts in summer months consistently have exceeded safe levels for human contact since 2005. Though it is recommended that residents do not swim in the Pine River, there are no specific restrictions on recreational fishing which is prevalent. Few studies have evaluated whether or not E. coli accumulates in the mucus of fish and, if so, whether that provides a viable route of E. coli exposure for anglers. This study first evaluated the presence of fecal coliform and E. coli bacteria on hatchery-raised caged fish placed in the river as well as resident fish. Results showed that fecal coliform and E. coli bacteria accumulated both on caged and resident fish. This result led to further testing showing E. coli to be found on anglers' hands whether or not they handled or interacted with resident fish. This study suggests that fishing in rivers with heavy bacterial loading from agricultural runoff may expose anglers to potentially harmful E. coli.
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.