Blake G. Lindner, Rakin A. Choudhury, Princess Pinamang, Lilia Bingham, Isabelle D’Amico, Janet K. Hatt, Konstantinos T. Konstantinidis and Katherine E. Graham*,
{"title":"推进源追踪:粪便脱落原核生物的系统回顾和特定来源基因组数据库整理","authors":"Blake G. Lindner, Rakin A. Choudhury, Princess Pinamang, Lilia Bingham, Isabelle D’Amico, Janet K. Hatt, Konstantinos T. Konstantinidis and Katherine E. Graham*, ","doi":"10.1021/acs.estlett.4c0023310.1021/acs.estlett.4c00233","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p >Advancements within fecal source tracking (FST) studies are complicated by a lack of knowledge regarding the genetic content and distribution of fecally shed microbial populations. To address this gap, we performed a systematic literature review and curated a large collection of genomes (n = 26,018) representing fecally shed prokaryotic species across broad and narrow source categories commonly implicated in FST studies of recreational waters (i.e., cats, dogs, cows, seagulls, chickens, pigs, birds, ruminants, human feces, and wastewater). We find that across these sources the total number of prokaryotic genomes recovered from materials meeting our initial inclusion criteria varied substantially across fecal sources: from none in seagulls to 9,085 in pigs. We examined genome sequences recovered from these metagenomic and isolation-based studies extensively via comparative genomic approaches to characterize trends across source categories and produce a finalized genome database for each source category which is available online (n = 12,730). On average, 81% of the genomes representing species-level populations occur only within a single source. Using fecal slurries to test the performance of each source database, we report read capture rates that vary with fecal source alpha diversity and database size. We expect this resource to be useful to FST-related objectives, One Health research, and sanitation efforts globally.</p>","PeriodicalId":37,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Science & Technology Letters Environ.","volume":"11 9","pages":"931–939 931–939"},"PeriodicalIF":8.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/epdf/10.1021/acs.estlett.4c00233","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Advancing Source Tracking: Systematic Review and Source-Specific Genome Database Curation of Fecally Shed Prokaryotes\",\"authors\":\"Blake G. Lindner, Rakin A. Choudhury, Princess Pinamang, Lilia Bingham, Isabelle D’Amico, Janet K. Hatt, Konstantinos T. Konstantinidis and Katherine E. Graham*, \",\"doi\":\"10.1021/acs.estlett.4c0023310.1021/acs.estlett.4c00233\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p >Advancements within fecal source tracking (FST) studies are complicated by a lack of knowledge regarding the genetic content and distribution of fecally shed microbial populations. To address this gap, we performed a systematic literature review and curated a large collection of genomes (n = 26,018) representing fecally shed prokaryotic species across broad and narrow source categories commonly implicated in FST studies of recreational waters (i.e., cats, dogs, cows, seagulls, chickens, pigs, birds, ruminants, human feces, and wastewater). We find that across these sources the total number of prokaryotic genomes recovered from materials meeting our initial inclusion criteria varied substantially across fecal sources: from none in seagulls to 9,085 in pigs. We examined genome sequences recovered from these metagenomic and isolation-based studies extensively via comparative genomic approaches to characterize trends across source categories and produce a finalized genome database for each source category which is available online (n = 12,730). On average, 81% of the genomes representing species-level populations occur only within a single source. Using fecal slurries to test the performance of each source database, we report read capture rates that vary with fecal source alpha diversity and database size. We expect this resource to be useful to FST-related objectives, One Health research, and sanitation efforts globally.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Science & Technology Letters Environ.\",\"volume\":\"11 9\",\"pages\":\"931–939 931–939\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/epdf/10.1021/acs.estlett.4c00233\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Science & Technology Letters Environ.\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.estlett.4c00233\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Science & Technology Letters Environ.","FirstCategoryId":"1","ListUrlMain":"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.estlett.4c00233","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Advancing Source Tracking: Systematic Review and Source-Specific Genome Database Curation of Fecally Shed Prokaryotes
Advancements within fecal source tracking (FST) studies are complicated by a lack of knowledge regarding the genetic content and distribution of fecally shed microbial populations. To address this gap, we performed a systematic literature review and curated a large collection of genomes (n = 26,018) representing fecally shed prokaryotic species across broad and narrow source categories commonly implicated in FST studies of recreational waters (i.e., cats, dogs, cows, seagulls, chickens, pigs, birds, ruminants, human feces, and wastewater). We find that across these sources the total number of prokaryotic genomes recovered from materials meeting our initial inclusion criteria varied substantially across fecal sources: from none in seagulls to 9,085 in pigs. We examined genome sequences recovered from these metagenomic and isolation-based studies extensively via comparative genomic approaches to characterize trends across source categories and produce a finalized genome database for each source category which is available online (n = 12,730). On average, 81% of the genomes representing species-level populations occur only within a single source. Using fecal slurries to test the performance of each source database, we report read capture rates that vary with fecal source alpha diversity and database size. We expect this resource to be useful to FST-related objectives, One Health research, and sanitation efforts globally.
期刊介绍:
Environmental Science & Technology Letters serves as an international forum for brief communications on experimental or theoretical results of exceptional timeliness in all aspects of environmental science, both pure and applied. Published as soon as accepted, these communications are summarized in monthly issues. Additionally, the journal features short reviews on emerging topics in environmental science and technology.