<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:contributor>K. Przybyla-Kelly</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>D.A. Shively</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>M.N. Byappanahalli</dc:contributor>
  <dc:creator>R.L. Whitman</dc:creator>
  <dc:date>2007</dc:date>
  <dc:description>The occurrence of the enterococcal surface protein (&lt;i&gt;esp&lt;/i&gt;) gene in the opportunistic pathogens &lt;i&gt;Enterococcus faecalis&lt;/i&gt; and &lt;i&gt;E. faecium&lt;/i&gt; is well-documented in clinical research. Recently, the &lt;i&gt;esp&lt;/i&gt; gene has been proposed as a marker of human pollution in environmental waters; however, information on its relative incidence in various human and animal fecal sources is limited. We have determined the occurrence of the &lt;i&gt;esp&lt;/i&gt; gene in enterococci from human (&lt;i&gt;n&lt;/i&gt; = 64) and animal (&lt;i&gt;n&lt;/i&gt; = 233) fecal samples by polymerase chain reaction using two primer sets: one presumably specific for &lt;i&gt;E. faecium&lt;/i&gt; (&lt;i&gt;esp&lt;/i&gt;&lt;sub&gt;fm&lt;/sub&gt;) and the other for both &lt;i&gt;E. faecalis&lt;/i&gt; and &lt;i&gt;E. faecium&lt;/i&gt; (&lt;i&gt;esp&lt;/i&gt;&lt;sub&gt;fs/fm&lt;/sub&gt;). We believe that this research is the first to explore the use of &lt;i&gt;esp&lt;/i&gt;&lt;sub&gt;fs/fm&lt;/sub&gt; for the detection of human waste in natural environmental settings. The incidence in human sources was 93.1% &lt;i&gt;esp&lt;/i&gt;&lt;sub&gt;fm&lt;/sub&gt; and 100% &lt;i&gt;esp&lt;/i&gt;&lt;sub&gt;fs/fm&lt;/sub&gt; in raw sewage influent; 30% for both &lt;i&gt;esp&lt;/i&gt;&lt;sub&gt;fm&lt;/sub&gt; and &lt;i&gt;esp&lt;/i&gt;&lt;sub&gt;fs/fm&lt;/sub&gt; in septic waste; and 0% &lt;i&gt;esp&lt;/i&gt;&lt;sub&gt;fm&lt;/sub&gt; and 80% &lt;i&gt;esp&lt;/i&gt;&lt;sub&gt;fs/fm&lt;/sub&gt; in active pit toilets. The overall occurrence of the gene in animal feces was 7.7% (&lt;i&gt;esp&lt;/i&gt;&lt;sub&gt;fs/fm&lt;/sub&gt;) and 4.7% (&lt;i&gt;esp&lt;/i&gt;&lt;sub&gt;fm&lt;/sub&gt;); animal types with positive results included dogs (9/43, all &lt;i&gt;esp&lt;/i&gt;&lt;sub&gt;fm&lt;/sub&gt;), gulls (10/34, &lt;i&gt;esp&lt;/i&gt;&lt;sub&gt;fs/fm&lt;/sub&gt;; 2/34, &lt;i&gt;esp&lt;/i&gt;&lt;sub&gt;fm&lt;/sub&gt;), mice (3/22, all &lt;i&gt;esp&lt;/i&gt;&lt;sub&gt;fs/fm&lt;/sub&gt;), and songbirds (5/55, all &lt;i&gt;esp&lt;/i&gt;&lt;sub&gt;fs/fm&lt;/sub&gt;). The &lt;i&gt;esp&lt;/i&gt; gene was not detected in cat (0/34), deer (0/4), goose (0/18), or raccoon (0/23) feces. The inconsistent occurrence, especially in septic and pit toilet sewage, suggests a low statistical power of discrimination between animal and human sources, which means a large number of replicates should be collected. Both &lt;i&gt;esp&lt;/i&gt;&lt;sub&gt;fm&lt;/sub&gt; and &lt;i&gt;esp&lt;/i&gt;&lt;sub&gt;fs/fm&lt;/sub&gt; were common in raw sewage, but neither one efficiently differentiated between animal and other human sources.</dc:description>
  <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
  <dc:identifier>10.1021/es070817t</dc:identifier>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <dc:title>Incidence of the enterococcal surface protein (&lt;i&gt;esp&lt;/i&gt;) gene in human and animal fecal sources</dc:title>
  <dc:type>article</dc:type>
</oai_dc:dc>