Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of Sensitivity and Cost-Effectiveness of Molecular Methods for the Co-detection of Waterborne Pathogens in India

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
Marine Biotechnology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Waterborne microbial diseases are regarded as a major public health concern, particularly in nations with poor sanitation, a lack of social awareness, and problems linked with low socioeconomic status. Waterborne pathogen identification using traditional culture methods is time-consuming and labor-intensive. As a result, there is a growing demand for quick pathogen detection technologies. High sensitivity, specificity, and rapidity are all advantages of using molecular techniques like polymerase chain reaction (PCR) in such instances. In this study, we designed multiplex PCR and quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) assays for the co-detection and enumeration of waterborne pathogens such as Aeromonas hydrophila, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Salmonella enterica, Yersinia enterocolitica, Escherichia coli, Vibrio cholerae, and Shigella spp. Specific primers were selected against the virulence and species-specific genes of the seven target pathogens. For all seven target organisms, the detection limits for conventional culture methods were in the range of 103–104 cells/ml. While employing multiplex PCR method in this study, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Shigella spp. have a detection sensitivity of 101 cells/ml, Vibrio cholerae and Aeromonas hydrophila have a detection sensitivity of 102 cells/ml, whereas Salmonella enterica, E. coli, and Yersinia enterocolitica have a detection sensitivity of only 103 cells/ml. According to our cost–benefit analysis, these molecular technologies are less expensive, with unit analysis costs of ₹52 and ₹173 for qPCR and multiplex PCR, respectively. Furthermore, all of the target genes had a detection limit of 1 cell/ml in qPCR. Because of their speed, sensitivity, specificity, and cost-effectiveness, these multiplex and qPCR assays could be employed for successful co-detection of aquatic pathogens.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ahmed W, Zhang Q, Ishii S, Hamilton K, Haas C (2018) Microfluidic quantification of multiple enteric and opportunistic bacterial pathogens in roof-harvested rainwater tank samples. Environ Monit Assess 190:105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allegra S, Berger F, Berthelot P, Grattard F, Pozzetto B, Riffard S (2008) Use of flow cytometry to monitor Legionella viability. Appl Environ Microbiol 74:7813–7816

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Babu L, Reddy P, Murali HS, Batra HV (2013) Optimization and evaluation of a multiplex PCR for simultaneous detection of prominent foodborne pathogens of Enterobacteriaceae. Ann Microbiol 63:1591–1599

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Balakrishna K, Murali HS, Batra HV (2010) Cloning, expression and characterization of attachment-invasion locus protein (Ail) of Yersinia enterocolitica and its utilization in rapid detection by immunoassays. Lett Appl Microbiol 50:131–137

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • CBHI (2018) National Health Profile 2018. New Delhi: Directorate General of Health Services

  • Chen J, Tang J, Liu J, Cai Z, Bai X (2012) Development and evaluation of a multiplex PCR for simultaneous detection of five foodborne pathogens. J Appl Microbiol 112:823–830

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2013) Surveillance for waterborne disease outbreaks associated with drinking water and other nonrecreational water-United States, 2009–2010. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 62:714

    Google Scholar 

  • El-Sayed AK, Abou-Dobara MI, Abdel-Malak CA, El-Badaly AA (2019) Taqman hydrolysis probe application for Escherichia coli, Salmonella enterica, and Vibrio cholerae detection in surface and drinking water. J Water Sanit Hyg Dev 9:492–499

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fan H, Wu Q, Kou X (2008) Co-detection of five species of water-borne bacteria by multiplex PCR. Life Sci J 5:47–54

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gruntzig V, Nold SC, Zhou J, Tiedje JM (2001) Pseudomonas stutzeri nitrite reductase gene abundance in environmental samples measured by real-time PCR. Appl Environ Microbiol 67:760–768

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Halder M, Mookerjee S, Batabyal P, Palit A (2018) Waterborne outbreaks in diarrhoea endemic foci of India: a longitudinal exploration and its implications. Environ Monit Assess 190:172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heid CA, Stevens J, Livak KJ, Williams PM (1996) Real time quantitative PCR. Genome Res 6:986–994

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hein I, Lehner A, Rieck P, Klein K, Brandl E, Wagner M (2001) Comparison of different approaches to quantify Staphylococcus aureus cells by real-time quantitative PCR and application of this technique for examination of cheese. Appl Environ Microbiol 67:3122–3126

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hlavsa MC, Roberts VA, Kahler AM, Hilborn ED, Wade TJ, Backer LC, Yoder JS, Centers for Disease, C. & Prevention (2014) Recreational water-associated disease outbreaks–United States, 2009–2010. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 63:6–10

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Johansson E, Carvajal L, Newby H, Young M, Wardlaw T (2012) Pneumonia and diarrhoea: tackling the deadliest diseases for the world’s poorest children. UNICEF, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Kheiri R, Ranjbar R, Memariani M, Akhtari L (2017) Multiplex PCR for detection of water-borne bacteria. Water Science and Technology: Water Supply 17:169–175

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kong RY, Lee SK, Law TW, Law SH, Wu RS (2002) Rapid detection of six types of bacterial pathogens in marine waters by multiplex PCR. Water Res 36:2802–2812

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lam JT, Lui E, Chau S, Kueh CSW, Yung Y-K, Yam WC (2014) Evaluation of real-time PCR for quantitative detection of Escherichia coli in beach water. J Water Health 12:51–56

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lee CS, Wetzel K, Buckley T, Wozniak D, Lee J (2011) Rapid and sensitive detection of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in chlorinated water and aerosols targeting gyrB gene using real-time PCR. J Appl Microbiol 111:893–903

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Li B, Saingam P, Ishii S, Yan T (2019) Multiplex PCR Coupled with Direct Amplicon Sequencing for Simultaneous Detection of Numerous Waterborne Pathogens 103:953–961

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Liu Y, Cao Y, Wang T, Dong Q, Li J, Niu C (2019) Detection of 12 Common Food-Borne Bacterial Pathogens by TaqMan Real-Time PCR Using a Single Set of Reaction Conditions. Front Microbiol 10:222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mehrabadi JF, Morsali P, Nejad HR, Imani Fooladi AA (2012) Detection of toxigenic Vibrio cholerae with new multiplex PCR. J Infect Public Health 5:263–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Misri R, Pande S, Khopkar U (2006) Confocal laser microscope. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol 72:394–397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park SH, Hanning I, Jarquin R, Moore P, Donoghue DJ, Donoghue AM, Ricke SC (2011) Multiplex PCR assay for the detection and quantification of Campylobacter spp., Escherichia coli O157:H7, and Salmonella serotypes in water samples. FEMS Microbiol Lett 316:7–15

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ramírez-Castillo FY, Loera-Muro A, Jacques M, Garneau P, Avelar-González FJ, Harel J, Guerrero-Barrera AL (2015) Waterborne pathogens: detection methods and challenges. Pathogens 4:307–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rompre A, Servais P, Baudart J, De-Roubin MR, Laurent P (2002) Detection and enumeration of coliforms in drinking water: current methods and emerging approaches. J Microbiol Methods 49:31–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sin MLY, Mach KE, Wong PK, Liao JC (2014) Advances and challenges in biosensor-based diagnosis of infectious diseases. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 14:225–244

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Szewzyk U, Szewzyk R, Manz W, Schleifer KH (2000) Microbiological safety of drinking water. Annu Rev Microbiol 54:81–127

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wang G, Clark CG, Liu C, Pucknell C, Munro CK, Kruk TM, Caldeira R, Woodward DL, Rodgers FG (2003) Detection and Characterization of the Hemolysin Genes in Aeromonas hydrophila and Aeromonas sobria by Multiplex PCR. J Clin Microbiol 41:1048–1054

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Who (2017) Progress on drinking water, sanitation and hygiene: 2017 update and SDG baselines. World Health Organization, Switzerland

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are thankful to the Department of Science and Technology-Inspire Fellowship (IF No. 140841) and Central instrumentation facility, University of Calicut, for providing the necessary infrastructural support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Life Sciences, University of Calicut, Malappuram, Kerala-673635, India

    Ambili M & Denoj Sebastian

Authors
  1. Ambili M
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Denoj Sebastian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Denoj Sebastian.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 706 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

M, A., Sebastian, D. Evaluation of Sensitivity and Cost-Effectiveness of Molecular Methods for the Co-detection of Waterborne Pathogens in India. Mar Biotechnol 23, 955–963 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10126-021-10078-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10126-021-10078-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation