Sources and Prevalence of Cyclospora cayetanensis in Southeastern U.S. Growing Environments

•Ag water, wastewater, and portable toilets were tested for Cyclospora cayetanensis.•C. cayetanensis qPCR detections from wastewater were confirmed by sequencing.•qPCR detections from water could not be confirmed, suggesting false detection.•A single method may not be able to discern C. cayetanensis...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of food protection 2024-07, Vol.87 (7), p.100309-100309, Article 100309
Hauptverfasser: Kahler, Amy M., Hofstetter, Jessica, Arrowood, Michael, Peterson, Anna, Jacobson, David, Barratt, Joel, da Silva, Andre Luiz Biscaia Ribeiro, Rodrigues, Camila, Mattioli, Mia C.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:•Ag water, wastewater, and portable toilets were tested for Cyclospora cayetanensis.•C. cayetanensis qPCR detections from wastewater were confirmed by sequencing.•qPCR detections from water could not be confirmed, suggesting false detection.•A single method may not be able to discern C. cayetanensis from other Eimeriidae. Recent cyclosporiasis outbreaks associated with fresh produce grown in the United States highlight the need to better understand Cyclospora cayetanensis prevalence in U.S. agricultural environments. In this study, C. cayetanensis occurrence was assessed in municipal wastewater sludge, on-farm portable toilets, irrigation pond water, and spent packing house dump tank water in a Southeastern Georgia growing region over two years. Detection of the C. cayetanensis 18S rRNA qPCR gene target in pond samples was 0%, 28%, and 42% (N = 217) depending on the detection definition used, and ≤1% in dump tank samples (N = 46). However, no qPCR detections were confirmed by sequencing, suggesting false detection occurred due to cross-reactions. C. cayetanensis qPCR detections were confirmed in 9% of wastewater sludge samples (N = 76). The human-specific fecal markers HF183 and crAssphage were detected in 33% and 6% of pond samples, respectively, and 4% and 0% of dump tank samples, respectively. Despite community Cyclospora shedding and evidence of human fecal contamination in irrigation water, there was no correlation between C. cayetanensis and HF183 qPCR detections, further supporting that 18S gene target qPCR amplifications were due to cross−reactions. When evaluating C. cayetanensis qPCR environmental detection data, the impact of assay specificity and detection criteria should be considered. Moreover, additional sequence-based testing may be needed to appropriately interpret Cyclospora qPCR environmental data.
ISSN:0362-028X
1944-9097
1944-9097
DOI:10.1016/j.jfp.2024.100309