Advertisement

Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 23, Issue 18, pp 18639–18648 | Cite as

Quantitative detection of viable helminth ova from raw wastewater, human feces, and environmental soil samples using novel PMA-qPCR methods

  • P. GyawaliEmail author
  • W. Ahmed
  • J. P. S. Sidhu
  • S. V. Nery
  • A. C. Clements
  • R. Traub
  • J. S. McCarthy
  • S. Llewellyn
  • P. Jagals
  • S. Toze
Research Article

Abstract

In this study, we have evaluated the efficacy of propidium monoazide quantitative polymerase chain reaction (PMA-qPCR) to differentiate between viable and non-viable Ancylostoma caninum ova. The newly developed method was validated using raw wastewater seeded with known numbers of A. caninum ova. Results of this study confirmed that PMA-qPCR has resulted in average of 88 % reduction (P < 0.05) in gene copy numbers for 50 % viable +50 % non-viable when compared with 100 % viable ova. A reduction of 100 % in gene copies was observed for 100 % non-viable ova when compared with 100 % viable ova. Similar reductions (79–80 %) in gene copies were observed for A. caninum ova-seeded raw wastewater samples (n = 18) collected from wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) A and B. The newly developed PMA-qPCR method was applied to determine the viable ova of different helminths (A. caninum, A. duodenale, Necator americanus and Ascaris lumbricoides) in raw wastewater, human fecal and soil samples. None of the unseeded wastewater samples were positive for the above-mentioned helminths. N. americanus and A. lumbricoides ova were found in unseeded human fecal and soil samples. For the unseeded human fecal samples (1 g), an average gene copy concentration obtained from qPCR and PMA-qPCR was found to be similar (6.8 × 105 ± 6.4 × 105 and 6.3 × 105 ± 4.7 × 105) indicating the presence of viable N. americanus ova. Among the 24 unseeded soil samples tested, only one was positive for A. lumbricoides. The mean gene copy concentration in the positively identified soil sample was 1.0 × 105 ± 1.5 × 104 (determined by qPCR) compared to 4.9 × 104 ± 3.7 × 103 (determined by PMA-qPCR). The newly developed PMA-qPCR methods were able to detect viable helminth ova from wastewater and soil samples and could be adapted for health risk assessment.

Keywords

Hookworm ova Viability Wastewater PMA-qPCR Public health 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to appreciate financial support from the Water Corporation, WA, and the Commonwealth Scientific and Industry Research Organization (CSIRO). The authors are thankful to Lyn Knott, Laboratory Manager Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Queensland, Australia, for providing A. caninum-positive dog fecal samples. We also thank Queensland Urban Utilities for providing access to the wastewater treatment plants for collecting samples and people in study communities in East Timor for providing their fecal samples.

References

  1. Ahmed W, Gyawali P, Sidhu JPS, Toze S (2014) Relative inactivation of faecal indicator bacteria and sewage markers in freshwater and seawater microcosms. Lett Appl Microbiol 59:348–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alonso JL, Amoros I, Guy RA (2014) Quantification of viable Giardia cysts and Cryptosporidium oocysts in wastewater using propidium monoazide quantitative real-time PCR. Parasitol Res 113:2671–2678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bethony J, Brooker S, Albonico M, Geiger SM, Loukas A, Diemert D, Hotez PJ (2006) Soil-transmitted helminth infections: ascariasis, trichuriasis, and hookworm. Lancet 367:1521–1532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bowman DD, Little MD, Reimers RS (2003) Precision and accuracy of an assay for detecting Ascaris eggs in various biosolid matrices. Water Res 37:2063–2072CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brescia CC, Griffin SM, Ware MW, Varughese EA, Egorov AI, Villegas EN (2009) Cryptosporidium propidium monoazide-PCR, a molecular biology-based technique for genotyping of viable Cryptosporidium oocysts. Appl Environ Microbiol 75:6856–6863CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brooker S, Hotez PJ, Bundy DAP (2008) Hookworm-related anaemia among pregnant women: a systematic review. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 2(9):e291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cattani F, Ferreira C, Oliveira S (2013) The detection of viable vegetative cells of Bacillus sporothermodurans using propidium monoazide with semi-nested PCR. Food Microbiol 34:196–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chen NT, Chang CW (2010) Rapid quantification of viable legionellae in water and biofilm using ethidium monoazide coupled with real-time quantitative PCR. J Appl Microbiol 109:623–634Google Scholar
  9. De Victorica J, Galvan M (2003) Preliminary testing of a rapid coupled methodology for quantitation/viability determination of helminth eggs in raw and treated wastewater. Water Res 37:1278–1287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dineen S, Aranda R, Anders D, Robertson J (2010) An evaluation of commercial DNA extraction kits for the isolation of bacterial spore DNA from soil. J Appl Microbiol 109:1886–1896CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Do TT, Molbak K, Phung DC, Dalsgaard A (2007) Helminth infections among people using wastewater and human excreta in peri-urban agriculture and aquaculture in Hanoi, Vietnam. Tropical Med Int Health 12:82–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fittipaldi M, Codony F, Adrados B, Camper AK, Morato J (2011) Viable real-time PCR in environmental samples: can all data be interpreted directly? Microb Ecol 61:7–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Freeman MC, Clasen T, Brooker SJ, Akoko DO, Rheingans R (2013) The impact of a school-based hygiene, water quality and sanitation intervention on soil-transmitted helminth reinfection: a cluster-randomized trial. Am J Trop Med Hyg 89:875–883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gensberger ET, Polt M, Konrad-Koszler M, Kinner P, Sessitsch A, Kostic T (2014) Evaluation of quantitative PCR combined with PMA treatment for molecular assessment of microbial water quality. Water Res 67:367–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Goodman D, Haji HJ, Bickle QD, Stoltzfus RJ, Tielsch JM, Ramsan M, Savioli L, Albonico M (2007) A comparison of methods for detecting the eggs of Ascaris, Trichuris, and hookworm in infant stool, and the epidemiology of infection in Zanzibari infants. Am J Trop Med Hyg 76:725–731Google Scholar
  16. Gupta N, Khan DK, Santra SC (2009) Prevalence of intestinal helminth eggs on vegetables grown in wastewater-irrigated areas of Titagarh, West Bengal, India. Food Control 20:942–945CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gyawali P (2012) Parasitic disease of indigenous community (kumal) in Nepal. Nepal J Sci Tech 13:175–178Google Scholar
  18. Gyawali P, Sidhu JPS, Ahmed W, Jagals P, Toze S (2015a) Rapid concentration and sensitive detection of hookworm ova from wastewater matrices using a real-time PCR method. Exp Parasitol 159:5–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gyawali P, Sidhu JPS, Ahmed W, Jagals P, Toze S (2015b) Comparison of concentration methods for rapid detection of hookworm ova in wastewater matrices using quantitative PCR. Exp Parasitol 159:160–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Haugland RA, Siefring SC, Wymer LJ, Brenner KP, Dufour AP (2005) Comparison of Enterococcus measurements in freshwater at two recreational beaches by quantitative polymerase chain reaction and membrane filter culture analysis. Water Res 39:559–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hotez PJ, Bethony J, Bottazzi ME, Brooker S, Buss P (2005) Hookworm: “the great infection of mankind”. PLoS Med 2:e67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hotez PJ, Gurwith M (2011) Europe’s neglected infections of poverty. Int J Infect Dis 15:e611–e619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jia TW, Melville S, Utzinger J, King CH, Zhou XN (2012) Soil-transmitted helminth reinfection after drug treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 6:e1621CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Knopp S, Steinmann P, Keiser J, Utzinger J (2012) Nematode infections: soil-transmitted helminths and Trichinella. Infect Dis Clin N Am 26:341–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Li D, Tong T, Zeng S, Lin Y, Wu S, He M (2014) Quantification of viable bacteria in wastewater treatment plants by using propidium monoazide combined with quantitative PCR (PMA-qPCR). J Environ Sci 26:299–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lier T, Do DT, Johansen MV, Nguyen TH, Dalsgaard A, Asfeldt AM (2014) High reinfection rate after preventive chemotherapy for fishborne zoonotic trematodes in Vietnam. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 8:e2958CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Maya C, Jimenez B, Schwartzbord J (2006) Comparison of techniques for the detection of helminth ova in drinking water and wastewater. Water Environ Res 78:118–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. McCarthy JS, Lustigman S, Yang GJ, Barakat RM, Garcia HH, Sripa B, Willingham AL, Prichard RK, Basanez MG (2012) A research agenda for helminth diseases of humans: diagnostics for control and elimination programmes. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 6:e1601CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mccuin RM, Clancy JL (2005) Methods for the recovery, isolation and detection of Cryptosporidium oocysts in wastewaters. J Microbiol Methods 63:73–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nelson K (2003) Concentrations and inactivation of Ascaris eggs and pathogen indicator organisms in wastewater stabilization pond sludge. Water Sci Technol 48:89–95Google Scholar
  31. Nkuipou-Kenfack E, Engel H, Fakih S, Nocker A (2013) Improving efficiency of viability-PCR for selective detection of live cells. J Microbiol Methods 93:20–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nocker A, Cheung CY, Camper AK (2006) Comparison of propidium monoazide with ethidium monoazide for differentiation of live vs. dead bacteria by selective removal of DNA from dead cells. J Microbiol Methods 67:310–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Nocker A, Mazza A, Masson L, Camper AK, Brousseau R (2009) Selective detection of live bacteria combining propidium monoazide sample treatment with microarray technology. J Microbiol Methods 76:253–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Nocker A, Sossa KE, Camper AK (2007) Molecular monitoring of disinfection efficacy using propidium monoazide in combination with quantitative PCR. J Microbiol Methods 70:252–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. NRMMC (2004) National water quality management strategy: guidelines for sewerage systems biosolids management. NRMMC secretariat, NSWGoogle Scholar
  36. Pecson BM, Barrios JA, Johnson DR, Nelson KL (2006) A real-time PCR method for quantifying viable Ascaris eggs using the first internally transcribed spacer region of ribosomal DNA. Appl Environ Microbiol 72:7864–7872CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rudi K, Moen B, Dromtorp SM, Holck AL (2005) Use of ethidium monoazide and PCR in combination for quantification of viable and dead cells in complex samples. Appl Environ Microbiol 71:1018–1024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Schrader C, Schielke A, Ellerbroek L, Johne R (2012) PCR inhibitors—occurrence, properties and removal. J Appl Microbiol 113:1014–1026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rogers SW, Donnelly M, Peed L, Kelty CA, Mondal S, Zhong Z, Shanks OC (2011) Decay of bacterial pathogens, fecal indicators, and real-time quantitative PCR genetic markers in manure-amended soils. Appl Environ Microbiol 77:4839–4848CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Santiago P, Moreno Y, Ferrus MA (2015) Identification of viable Helicobacter pylori in drinking water supplies by cultural and molecular techniques. Helicobacter 20:252–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Trang TT, Hoek WVD, Camp PD, Vinh KT, Nguyen VH, Dalsgaard A (2006) Low risk for helminth infection in wastewater-fed rice cultivation in Vietnam. J Water Health 4:321–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Taskin B, Gozen AG, Duran M (2011) Selective quantification of viable Escherichia coli bacteria in biosolids by quantitative PCR with propidium monoazide modification. Appl Environ Microbiol 77:4329–4335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Traub RJ, Hobbs RP, Adams PJ, Behnke JM, Harris PD, Thompson RC (2007) A case of mistaken identity-reappraisal of the species of canid and felid hookworms (Ancylostoma) present in Australia and India. Parasitology 134:113–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Traub RJ, Inpankaew T, Sutthikornchai C, Sukthana Y, Thompson RC (2008) PCR-based coprodiagnostic tools reveal dogs as reservoirs of zoonotic ancylostomiasis caused by Ancylostoma ceylanicum in temple communities in Bangkok. Vet Parasitol 155:67–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Traub RJ, Robertson ID, Irwin P, Mencke N, Thompson RC (2004) Application of a species-specific PCR-RFLP to identify Ancylostoma eggs directly from canine faeces. Vet Parasitol 123:245–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Truscott JE, Hollingsworth TD, Brooker SJ, Anderson RM (2014) Can chemotherapy alone eliminate the transmission of soil transmitted helminths. Parasit Vectors 7:e266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. US EPA (1999) Control of pathogens and vector attraction in sewage sludge. US EPA environmental regulations and technology. Office of Research and Development, EPA/623/R-92/013, Washington DC.Google Scholar
  48. US EPA (2003) Control of pathogens and vector attraction in sewage sludge. US EPA environmental regulations and technology. Office of Research and Development, EPA/625/R-92/013. Washington DC.Google Scholar
  49. van Frankenhuyzen JK, Trevors JT, Lee H, Flemming CA, Habash MB (2011) Molecular pathogen detection in biosolids with a focus on quantitative PCR using propidium monoazide for viable cell enumeration. J Microbiol Methods 87:263–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Varma M, Field R, Stinson M, Rukovets B, Wymer L, Haugland R (2009) Quantitative real-time PCR analysis of total and propidium monoazide-resistant fecal indicator bacteria in wastewater. Water Res 43:4790–4801CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Verweij JJ, Brienen EAT, Ziem J, Yelifari L, Polderman M, ven Lieshout L (2007) Simultaneous detection and quantification of Ancylostoma duodenale, Necator americanus, and Oesophagostomum bifurcum in fecal samples using multiplex real-time PCR. AmJTrop Med Hyg 77:685–690Google Scholar
  52. Vuong TA, Nguyne TT, Klank LT, Phung DC, Dalsgaard A (2007) Faecal and protozoan parasite contamination of water spinach (Ipomoea aquatica) cultivated in urban wastewater in Phnom Penh, Cambodia. Tropical Med Int Health 12:73–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wanger AO, Malin C, Knapp BA, Illmer P (2008) Removal of free extracellular DNA from environmental samples by ethidium monoazide and propidium monoazide. Appl Environ Microbiol 74:2537–2539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wang L, Ye C, Xu H, Aguilar ZP, Xiong Y, Lai W, Wei H (2015) Development of an SD-PMA-mPCR assay with internal amplification control for rapid and sensitive detection of viable Salmonella spp., Shigella spp. and Staphylococcus aureus in food products. Food Control 57:314–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Wang XB, Wang GF, Zhang LX, Luo RF, Tian HC, Tang LN, Wang JJ, Medina A, Wise P, Rozelle S (2012) Investigation on prevalence of soil-transmitted nematode infections and influencing factors for children in southwest areas of China. Asian Pac J Trop Biomed 24(268–73):293Google Scholar
  56. Weber R, Bryan RT, Bishop HS, Wahlquist SP, Sullivan JJ, Juranek DD (1991) Threshold of detection of Cryptosporidium oocysts in human stool specimens: evidence for low sensitivity of current diagnostic methods. J Clin Microbiol 29:1323–1327Google Scholar
  57. WHO (2006) Guidelines for the safe use of wastewater, excreta and greywater in agriculture, vol. 2 and vol. 4. WHO library cataloguing-in-publication data, p.213. Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  58. WHO (2012) Soil-transmitted helminthiases: eliminating soil-transmitted helminthiases as a public health problem in children: progress report 2001–2010 and strategic plan 2011–2020. WHO, 20 Avenue Appia, 1211 Geneva, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  59. WHO (2015) Investing to overcome the global impact of neglected tropical diseases: third WHO report on neglected diseases. WHO press, 20 Avenue Appia, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  60. Yap P, Du ZW, Wu FW, Jiang JY, Chen R, Zhou XN, Hattendorf J, Utzinger J, Steinmann P (2013) Rapid re-infection with soil-transmitted helminths after triple-dose albendazole treatment of school-aged children in Yunnan, People’s Republic of China. Am J Trop Med Hyg 89:23–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Yun JJ, Heisler LE, Hwang II, Wilkins O, Lau SK, Hyrcza M, Jayabalasingham B, Jin J, Mclaurin J, Tsao MS, Der SD (2006) Genomic DNA functions as a universal external standard in quantitative real-time PCR. Nucleic Acids Res 34:e85CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. Gyawali
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • W. Ahmed
    • 1
  • J. P. S. Sidhu
    • 1
    • 2
  • S. V. Nery
    • 3
  • A. C. Clements
    • 3
  • R. Traub
    • 4
  • J. S. McCarthy
    • 5
    • 6
  • S. Llewellyn
    • 5
  • P. Jagals
    • 2
  • S. Toze
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.CSIRO Land and WaterBrisbaneAustralia
  2. 2.School of Public HealthThe University of QueenslandHerstonAustralia
  3. 3.Research School of Population Health, College of Medicine, Biology and EnvironmentThe Australian National UniversityLinnaeus WayAustralia
  4. 4.Faculty of Veterinary and Agricultural SciencesThe University of MelbourneParkvilleAustralia
  5. 5.Clinical Tropical Medicine LaboratoryQIMR Berghofer Medical Research InstituteHerstonAustralia
  6. 6.School of MedicineThe University of QueenslandHerstonAustralia

Personalised recommendations