A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Rapid detection of Naegleria fowleri in water distribution pipeline biofilms and drinking water samples. | LitMetric

Rapid detection of Naegleria fowleri in water distribution pipeline biofilms and drinking water samples.

Environ Sci Technol

Water for a Healthy Country Flagship, Centre for Environment and Life Sciences, CSIRO Land and Water, Private Bag No.5, Wembley, Western Australia 6913, Australia.

Published: September 2009

Rapid detection of pathogenic Naegleria fowler in water distribution networks is critical for water utilities. Current detection methods rely on sampling drinking water followed by culturing and molecular identification of purified strains. This culture-based method takes an extended amount of time (days), detects both nonpathogenic and pathogenic species, and does not account for N. fowleri cells associated with pipe wall biofilms. In this study, a total DNA extraction technique coupled with a real-time PCR method using primers specific for N. fowleri was developed and validated. The method readily detected N. fowleri without preculturing with the lowest detection limit for N. fowleri cells spiked in biofilm being one cell (66% detection rate) and five cells (100% detection rate). For drinking water, the detection limit was five cells (66% detection rate) and 10 cells (100% detection rate). By comparison, culture-based methods were less sensitive for detection of cells spiked into both biofilm (66% detection for <10 cells) and drinking water (0% detection for <10 cells). In mixed cultures of N. fowleri and nonpathogenic Naegleria, the method identified N. fowleri in 100% of all replicates, whereastests with the current consensus primers detected N. fowleri in only 5% of all replicates. Application of the new method to drinking water and pipe wall biofilm samples obtained from a distribution network enabled the detection of N. fowleri in under 6 h, versus 3+ daysforthe culture based method. Further, comparison of the real-time PCR data from the field samples and the standard curves enabled an approximation of N. fowleri cells in the biofilm and drinking water. The use of such a method will further aid water utilities in detecting and managing the persistence of N. fowleri in water distribution networks.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/es900432mDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

detection rate
16
drinking water
12
66% detection
12
detection
10
rapid detection
8
water distribution
8
fowleri cells
8
detection limit
8
cells spiked
8
spiked biofilm
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!