4.7 Article

Application of Faecalibacterium 16S rDNA genetic marker for accurate identification of duck faeces

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
卷 23, 期 8, 页码 7639-7647

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-015-6024-z

关键词

Faecalibacterium; Host-specific PCR assay; Water pollution; Duck

资金

  1. National Science and Technology Supporting Program of China [2012BAJ25B06, 2012BAJ25B09]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51208533]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [106112015CDJZR235504]
  4. National Water Pollution Control and Management Technology Major Projects of China [2008ZX07425-003-01]
  5. Chongqing Engineering Laboratory in Vascular Implants
  6. National '111 Plan' Base [B06023]
  7. Public Experiment Center of State Bioindustrial Base (Chongqing), China

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this study was to judge the legal duty of pollution liabilities by assessing a duck faeces-specific marker, which can exclude distractions of residual bacteria from earlier contamination accidents. With the gene sequencing technology and bioinformatics method, we completed the comparative analysis of Faecalibacterium sequences, which were associated with ducks and other animal species, and found the sequences unique to duck faeces. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and agarose gel electrophoresis techniques were used to verify the reliability of both human and duck faeces-specific primers. The duck faeces-specific primers generated an amplicon of 141 bp from 43.3 % of duck faecal samples, 0 % of control samples and 100 % of sewage wastewater samples that contained duck faeces. We present here the initial evidence of Faecalibacterium-based applicability as human faeces-specificity in China. Meanwhile, this study represents the initial report of a Faecalibacterium marker for duck faeces and suggests an independent or supplementary environmental biotechnology of microbial source tracking (MST).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据