↓ Skip to main content

Quantitative PCR measurements of Escherichia coli including Shiga Toxin-Producing E. coli (STEC) in Animal Feces…

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Science & Technology, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Quantitative PCR measurements of Escherichia coli including Shiga Toxin-Producing E. coli (STEC) in Animal Feces and Environmental Waters
Published in
Environmental Science & Technology, February 2015
DOI 10.1021/es505477n
Pubmed ID
Authors

W. Ahmed, P. Gyawali, S. Toze

Abstract

Quantitative PCR (qPCR) assays were used to determine the concentrations of E. coli including shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC) associated virulence genes (eaeA, stx1, stx2, and hlyA) in ten animal species (fecal sources) and environmental water samples in Southeast Queensland, Australia. The mean Log10 concentrations and standard deviations of E. coli 23S rRNA across fecal sources ranged from 1.3 ± 0.1 (horse) to 6.3 ± 0.4 (cattle wastewater) gene copies at a test concentration of 10 ng of DNA. The differences in mean concentrations of E. coli 23S rRNA gene copies among fecal source samples were significantly different from each other (P < 0.0001). Among the virulence genes, stx2 (25%, 95% CI, 17-33%) was most prevalent among fecal sources, followed by eaeA (19%, 95% CI, 12-27%), stx1 (11%, 95% CI, 5%-17%) and hlyA (8%, 95% CI, 3-13%). The Log10 concentrations of STEC virulence genes in cattle wastewater samples ranged from 3.8 to 5.0 gene copies at a test concentration of 10 ng of DNA. Of the 18 environmental water samples tested, three (17%) were positive for eaeA and two (11%) samples were also positive for the stx2 virulence genes. The data presented in this study will aid in the estimation of quantitative microbial risk assessment (QMRA) from fecal pollution of domestic and wild animals in drinking/recreational water catchments.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
China 1 3%
Unknown 39 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 15%
Other 5 13%
Student > Master 4 10%
Other 7 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 14 35%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 20%
Unspecified 4 10%
Engineering 3 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 8%
Other 8 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 March 2015.
All research outputs
#10,911,735
of 12,313,065 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Science & Technology
#11,804
of 12,334 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,579
of 225,032 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Science & Technology
#289
of 313 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,313,065 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,334 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 225,032 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 313 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.