Premium
M ycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis is widely distributed in B ritish soils and waters: implications for animal and human health
Author(s) -
Rhodes Glenn,
Henrys Peter,
Thomson Bruce C.,
Pickup Roger W.
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
environmental microbiology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.954
H-Index - 188
eISSN - 1462-2920
pISSN - 1462-2912
DOI - 10.1111/1462-2920.12137
Subject(s) - paratuberculosis , soil water , biology , drainage basin , range (aeronautics) , agriculture , distribution (mathematics) , feces , spatial distribution , hydrology (agriculture) , veterinary medicine , soil test , physical geography , ecology , cartography , geography , geology , mycobacterium , remote sensing , bacteria , mathematics , composite material , medicine , mathematical analysis , genetics , materials science , geotechnical engineering
Summary In the first comprehensive geographical survey of distribution in G reat B ritain, M ycobacterium avium ssp. paratuberculosis ( MAP ) was detected in 115 of 1092 (10.5%) soil cores, in the range of 5 × 10 2 to 3 × 10 6 MAP cell equivalents ( CE ) g −1 wet weight soil with the majority of the positive PCR reactions ( n = 75; 65%) occurring around the limit of detection (500–5000 CE g −1 wet weight soil). The distribution of MAP significantly increased from N orth to S outh and was significantly correlated with increasing cattle numbers over the same longitudinal axis. Similarly MAP occurrence significantly increased towards easterly latitudes although none of the parameters measured were associated. Comparisons of land use indicated that MAP was widely distributed in both farming and non‐farming areas. Soil core samples taken from the rivers W yre and D ouglas catchments ( L ancashire, UK ) and river T ywi ( S outh W ales) were negative for MAP . However, river monitoring showed a consistent presence of MAPs throughout those catchments over a 6‐month period. We concluded that MAP is widely distributed within and outside the confines of the farming environment; its geographical distribution is wider than originally anticipated and; monitoring rivers describes the MAP status of catchment better than individual soil samples.