FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 10000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Journal of environmental quality2002; 31(4); 1273-1278; doi: 10.2134/jeq2002.1273

Geographic variability of Escherichia coli ribotypes from animals in Idaho and Georgia.

Abstract: Several genotypic methods have been developed for determining the host origin of fecal bacteria in contaminated waters. Some of these methods rely on a host origin database to identify environmental isolates. It is not well understood to what degree these host origin isolates are geographically variable (i.e., cosmopolitan or endemic). This is important because a geographically limited host origin database may or may not be universally applicable. The objective of our study was to use one genotypic method, ribotyping, to determine the geographic variability of the fecal bacterium, Escherichia coli, from one location in Idaho and three locations in Georgia for cattle (Bos taurus), horse (Equus caballus), swine (Sus scrofa), and chicken (Gallus gallus domesticus). A total of 568 fecal E. coli isolates from Kimberly, ID (125 isolates), Athens, GA (210 isolates), Brunswick, GA (102 isolates), and Tifton, GA (131 isolates), yielded 213 ribotypes. The percentage of ribotype sharing within an animal species increased with decreased distance between geographic locations for cattle and horses, but not for swine and chicken. When the E. coli ribotypes among the four host species were compared at one location, the percent of unshared ribotypes was 86, 89, 81, and 79% for Kimberly, Athens, Brunswick, and Tifton, respectively. These data suggest that there is good ribotype separation among host animal species at each location. The ability to match environmental isolates to a host origin database may depend on a large number of environmental and host origin isolates that ideally are not geographically separated.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2002-08-15 PubMed ID: 12175046DOI: 10.2134/jeq2002.1273Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article
  • Research Support
  • Non-U.S. Gov't
  • Research Support
  • U.S. Gov't
  • Non-P.H.S.

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

This research study explores the geographic variability of Escherichia coli ribotypes found in animals in Idaho and Georgia. It aims to determine whether the bacteria are cosmopolitan or endemic, and how this could impact the application of a host origin database utilized for fecal pollution detection in water.

Research Methodology

  • The researchers adopted a genotypic method called ribotyping to track the geographic variation of Escherichia coli.
  • Four different animal hosts were chosen for the study: cattle (Bos taurus), horse (Equus caballus), swine (Sus scrofa), and chicken (Gallus gallus domesticus).
  • The study was conducted in one location in Idaho (Kimberly) and three locations in Georgia (Athens, Brunswick, and Tifton).
  • A total of 568 fecal E. coli isolates were collected from the different locations and animals.

Findings

  • The research found 213 different ribotypes among the E. coli isolates.
  • The results showed that ribotype sharing within an animal species increased as the distance between geographic locations decreased for cattle and horses, but not for swine and chicken. This implies that the E. coli variations found in these animal species might be more influenced by their local environment.
  • When comparing the E. coli ribotypes among the four host species at one location, a high percentage of ribotypes were unique to each host species, ranging from 79% to 89% for different locations. This suggests that there is a considerable ribotype separation among host animal species at each location.

Implications

  • These findings suggest the importance of having a comprehensive and geographically diverse host origin database for identifying fecal contamination origin with more accuracy.
  • The geographic variability of E. coli variations and its impact on the applicability of a host origin database should not be overlooked. It emphasizes that E. coli variations can be highly influenced by local environmental conditions, which suggests that a universally applicable database might need to account for these variations.

Cite This Article

APA
Hartel PG, Summer JD, Hill JL, Collins JV, Entry JA, Segars WI. (2002). Geographic variability of Escherichia coli ribotypes from animals in Idaho and Georgia. J Environ Qual, 31(4), 1273-1278. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2002.1273

Publication

Journal of environmental quality
ISSN: 0047-2425
NlmUniqueID: 0330666
Country: United States
Language: English
Volume: 31
Issue: 4
Pages: 1273-1278

Researcher Affiliations

Hartel, Peter G
  • Dep of Crop and Soil Sciences, Univ of Georgia, Athens 30602-7272, USA. pghartel@arches.uga.edu
Summer, Jacob D
    Hill, Jennifer L
      Collins, J Victoria
        Entry, James A
          Segars, William I

            MeSH Terms

            • Animals
            • Cattle / microbiology
            • Chickens / microbiology
            • Databases, Factual
            • Escherichia coli / genetics
            • Escherichia coli / pathogenicity
            • Genetic Variation
            • Genotype
            • Geography
            • Georgia
            • Horses / microbiology
            • Idaho
            • Ribotyping
            • Swine / microbiology

            Citations

            This article has been cited 25 times.
            1. Ahmed W, Staley C, Sadowsky MJ, Gyawali P, Sidhu JP, Palmer A, Beale DJ, Toze S. Toolbox Approaches Using Molecular Markers and 16S rRNA Gene Amplicon Data Sets for Identification of Fecal Pollution in Surface Water. Appl Environ Microbiol 2015 Oct;81(20):7067-77.
              doi: 10.1128/AEM.02032-15pubmed: 26231650google scholar: lookup
            2. Webster LF, Graves DA, Eargle DA, Chestnut DE, Gooch JA, Fulton MH. Assessment of animal impacts on bacterial water quality in a South Carolina, USA tidal creek system. Environ Monit Assess 2013 Sep;185(9):7749-56.
              doi: 10.1007/s10661-013-3132-4pubmed: 23435851google scholar: lookup
            3. Murugan K, Prabhakaran P, Al-Sohaibani S, Sekar K. Identification of source of faecal pollution of Tirumanimuttar River, Tamilnadu, India using microbial source tracking. Environ Monit Assess 2012 Oct;184(10):6001-12.
              doi: 10.1007/s10661-011-2398-7pubmed: 22016043google scholar: lookup
            4. Wicki M, Karabulut F, Auckenthaler A, Felleisen R, Tanner M, Baumgartner A. Identification of fecal input sites in spring water by selection and genotyping of multiresistant Escherichia coli. Appl Environ Microbiol 2011 Dec;77(23):8427-33.
              doi: 10.1128/AEM.05651-11pubmed: 21965413google scholar: lookup
            5. Ballesté E, Bonjoch X, Belanche LA, Blanch AR. Molecular indicators used in the development of predictive models for microbial source tracking. Appl Environ Microbiol 2010 Mar;76(6):1789-95.
              doi: 10.1128/AEM.02350-09pubmed: 20118380google scholar: lookup
            6. Hansen DL, Ishii S, Sadowsky MJ, Hicks RE. Escherichia coli populations in Great Lakes waterfowl exhibit spatial stability and temporal shifting. Appl Environ Microbiol 2009 Mar;75(6):1546-51.
              doi: 10.1128/AEM.00444-08pubmed: 19139226google scholar: lookup
            7. Olivas Y, Faulkner BR. Fecal source tracking by antibiotic resistance analysis on a watershed exhibiting low resistance. Environ Monit Assess 2008 Apr;139(1-3):15-25.
              doi: 10.1007/s10661-007-9805-0pubmed: 17562197google scholar: lookup
            8. Gourmelon M, Caprais MP, Ségura R, Le Mennec C, Lozach S, Piriou JY, Rincé A. Evaluation of two library-independent microbial source tracking methods to identify sources of fecal contamination in French estuaries. Appl Environ Microbiol 2007 Aug;73(15):4857-66.
              doi: 10.1128/AEM.03003-06pubmed: 17557850google scholar: lookup
            9. Stoeckel DM, Harwood VJ. Performance, design, and analysis in microbial source tracking studies. Appl Environ Microbiol 2007 Apr;73(8):2405-15.
              doi: 10.1128/AEM.02473-06pubmed: 17308193google scholar: lookup
            10. Yan T, Sadowsky MJ. Determining sources of fecal bacteria in waterways. Environ Monit Assess 2007 Jun;129(1-3):97-106.
              doi: 10.1007/s10661-006-9426-zpubmed: 17072547google scholar: lookup
            11. Anderson MA, Whitlock JE, Harwood VJ. Diversity and distribution of Escherichia coli genotypes and antibiotic resistance phenotypes in feces of humans, cattle, and horses. Appl Environ Microbiol 2006 Nov;72(11):6914-22.
              doi: 10.1128/AEM.01029-06pubmed: 16950903google scholar: lookup
            12. Hamilton MJ, Yan T, Sadowsky MJ. Development of goose- and duck-specific DNA markers to determine sources of Escherichia coli in waterways. Appl Environ Microbiol 2006 Jun;72(6):4012-9.
              doi: 10.1128/AEM.02764-05pubmed: 16751510google scholar: lookup
            13. Indest KJ, Betts K, Furey JS. Application of oligonucleotide microarrays for bacterial source tracking of environmental Enterococcus sp. isolates. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2005 Apr;2(1):175-85.
              doi: 10.3390/ijerph2005010175pubmed: 16705816google scholar: lookup
            14. Soule M, Kuhn E, Loge F, Gay J, Call DR. Using DNA microarrays to identify library-independent markers for bacterial source tracking. Appl Environ Microbiol 2006 Mar;72(3):1843-51.
              doi: 10.1128/AEM.72.3.1843-1851.2006pubmed: 16517630google scholar: lookup
            15. Carson CA, Christiansen JM, Yampara-Iquise H, Benson VW, Baffaut C, Davis JV, Broz RR, Kurtz WB, Rogers WM, Fales WH. Specificity of a Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron marker for human feces. Appl Environ Microbiol 2005 Aug;71(8):4945-9.
              doi: 10.1128/AEM.71.8.4945-4949.2005pubmed: 16085903google scholar: lookup
            16. Ahmed W, Neller R, Katouli M. Host species-specific metabolic fingerprint database for enterococci and Escherichia coli and its application to identify sources of fecal contamination in surface waters. Appl Environ Microbiol 2005 Aug;71(8):4461-8.
              doi: 10.1128/AEM.71.8.4461-4468.2005pubmed: 16085837google scholar: lookup
            17. Fong TT, Lipp EK. Enteric viruses of humans and animals in aquatic environments: health risks, detection, and potential water quality assessment tools. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 2005 Jun;69(2):357-71.
              doi: 10.1128/MMBR.69.2.357-371.2005pubmed: 15944460google scholar: lookup
            18. Johnson LK, Brown MB, Carruthers EA, Ferguson JA, Dombek PE, Sadowsky MJ. Sample size, library composition, and genotypic diversity among natural populations of Escherichia coli from different animals influence accuracy of determining sources of fecal pollution. Appl Environ Microbiol 2004 Aug;70(8):4478-85.
              doi: 10.1128/AEM.70.8.4478-4485.2004pubmed: 15294775google scholar: lookup
            19. Seurinck S, Verstraete W, Siciliano SD. Use of 16S-23S rRNA intergenic spacer region PCR and repetitive extragenic palindromic PCR analyses of Escherichia coli isolates to identify nonpoint fecal sources. Appl Environ Microbiol 2003 Aug;69(8):4942-50.
              doi: 10.1128/AEM.69.8.4942-4950.2003pubmed: 12902290google scholar: lookup
            20. Wiggins BA, Cash PW, Creamer WS, Dart SE, Garcia PP, Gerecke TM, Han J, Henry BL, Hoover KB, Johnson EL, Jones KC, McCarthy JG, McDonough JA, Mercer SA, Noto MJ, Park H, Phillips MS, Purner SM, Smith BM, Stevens EN, Varner AK. Use of antibiotic resistance analysis for representativeness testing of multiwatershed libraries. Appl Environ Microbiol 2003 Jun;69(6):3399-405.
              doi: 10.1128/AEM.69.6.3399-3405.2003pubmed: 12788742google scholar: lookup
            21. Carson CA, Shear BL, Ellersieck MR, Schnell JD. Comparison of ribotyping and repetitive extragenic palindromic-PCR for identification of fecal Escherichia coli from humans and animals. Appl Environ Microbiol 2003 Mar;69(3):1836-9.
              doi: 10.1128/AEM.69.3.1836-1839.2003pubmed: 12620878google scholar: lookup
            22. Scott TM, Parveen S, Portier KM, Rose JB, Tamplin ML, Farrah SR, Koo A, Lukasik J. Geographical variation in ribotype profiles of Escherichia coli isolates from humans, swine, poultry, beef, and dairy cattle in Florida. Appl Environ Microbiol 2003 Feb;69(2):1089-92.
              doi: 10.1128/AEM.69.2.1089-1092.2003pubmed: 12571033google scholar: lookup
            23. Scott TM, Rose JB, Jenkins TM, Farrah SR, Lukasik J. Microbial source tracking: current methodology and future directions. Appl Environ Microbiol 2002 Dec;68(12):5796-803.
              doi: 10.1128/AEM.68.12.5796-5803.2002pubmed: 12450798google scholar: lookup
            24. . Confidentiality and the courts. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1982 Dec 11;285(6356):1747.
              pubmed: 11652382
            25. Teaf CM, Flores D, Garber M, Harwood VJ. Toward Forensic Uses of Microbial Source Tracking. Microbiol Spectr 2018 Jan;6(1).
              doi: 10.1128/microbiolspec.EMF-0014-2017pubmed: 29350132google scholar: lookup
            Subscribe to our newsletter
            Join 99,850 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.