312 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15382721)
1. Phenotypic library-based microbial source tracking methods: efficacy in the California collaborative study.
Harwood VJ; Wiggins B; Hagedorn C; Ellender RD; Gooch J; Kern J; Samadpour M; Chapman AC; Robinson BJ; Thompson BC
J Water Health; 2003 Dec; 1(4):153-66. PubMed ID: 15382721
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Evaluation of antibiotic resistance analysis and ribotyping for identification of faecal pollution sources in an urban watershed.
Moore DF; Harwood VJ; Ferguson DM; Lukasik J; Hannah P; Getrich M; Brownell M
J Appl Microbiol; 2005; 99(3):618-28. PubMed ID: 16108804
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Evaluation of microbial source tracking methods using mixed fecal sources in aqueous test samples.
Griffith JF; Weisberg SB; McGee CD
J Water Health; 2003 Dec; 1(4):141-51. PubMed ID: 15382720
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Assessment of statistical methods used in library-based approaches to microbial source tracking.
Ritter KJ; Carruthers E; Carson CA; Ellender RD; Harwood VJ; Kingsley K; Nakatsu C; Sadowsky M; Shear B; West B; Whitlock JE; Wiggins BA; Wilbur JD
J Water Health; 2003 Dec; 1(4):209-23. PubMed ID: 15382725
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Choice of indicator organism and library size considerations for phenotypic microbial source tracking by FAME profiling.
Duran M; Yurtsever D; Dunaev T
Water Sci Technol; 2009; 60(10):2659-68. PubMed ID: 19923772
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Identification of the sources of Escherichia coli in a watershed using carbon-utilization patterns and composite data sets.
Moussa SH; Massengale RD
J Water Health; 2008 Jun; 6(2):197-207. PubMed ID: 18209282
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Microbial source tracking in a rural watershed dominated by cattle.
Graves AK; Hagedorn C; Brooks A; Hagedorn RL; Martin E
Water Res; 2007 Aug; 41(16):3729-39. PubMed ID: 17582454
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A comparative study of culture-independent, library-independent genotypic methods of fecal source tracking.
Field KG; Chern EC; Dick LK; Fuhrman J; Griffith J; Holden PA; LaMontagne MG; Le J; Olson B; Simonich MT
J Water Health; 2003 Dec; 1(4):181-94. PubMed ID: 15382723
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Discriminant analysis of fecal bacterial species composition for use as a phenotypic microbial source tracking method.
Evenson CJ; Strevett KA
Res Microbiol; 2006 Jun; 157(5):437-44. PubMed ID: 16725314
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Application of enterococci antibiotic resistance patterns for contamination source identification at Huntington Beach, California.
Choi S; Chu W; Brown J; Becker SJ; Harwood VJ; Jiang SC
Mar Pollut Bull; 2003 Jun; 46(6):748-55. PubMed ID: 12787583
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Direct comparison of four bacterial source tracking methods and use of composite data sets.
Casarez EA; Pillai SD; Mott JB; Vargas M; Dean KE; Di Giovanni GD
J Appl Microbiol; 2007 Aug; 103(2):350-64. PubMed ID: 17650195
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Fidelity of bacterial source tracking: Escherichia coli vs Enterococcus spp and minimizing assignment of isolates from nonlibrary sources.
Hassan WM; Ellender RD; Wang SY
J Appl Microbiol; 2007 Feb; 102(2):591-8. PubMed ID: 17241366
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison of genotypic-based microbial source tracking methods requiring a host origin database.
Myoda SP; Carson CA; Fuhrmann JJ; Hahm BK; Hartel PG; Yampara-Lquise H; Johnson L; Kuntz RL; Nakatsu CH; Sadowsky MJ; Samadpour M
J Water Health; 2003 Dec; 1(4):167-80. PubMed ID: 15382722
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Use of viral pathogens and indicators to differentiate between human and non-human fecal contamination in a microbial source tracking comparison study.
Noble RT; Allen SM; Blackwood AD; Chu W; Jiang SC; Lovelace GL; Sobsey MD; Stewart JR; Wait DA
J Water Health; 2003 Dec; 1(4):195-207. PubMed ID: 15382724
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Microbial source tracking by DNA sequence analysis of the Escherichia coli malate dehydrogenase gene.
Ivanetich KM; Hsu PH; Wunderlich KM; Messenger E; Walkup WG; Scott TM; Lukasik J; Davis J
J Microbiol Methods; 2006 Dec; 67(3):507-26. PubMed ID: 16973226
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Microbial source tracking in a small southern California urban watershed indicates wild animals and growth as the source of fecal bacteria.
Jiang SC; Chu W; Olson BH; He JW; Choi S; Zhang J; Le JY; Gedalanga PB
Appl Microbiol Biotechnol; 2007 Sep; 76(4):927-34. PubMed ID: 17589839
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Identifying fecal sources in a selected catchment reach using multiple source-tracking tools.
Vogel JR; Stoeckel DM; Lamendella R; Zelt RB; Santo Domingo JW; Walker SR; Oerther DB
J Environ Qual; 2007; 36(3):718-29. PubMed ID: 17412907
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Novel application of a statistical technique, Random Forests, in a bacterial source tracking study.
Smith A; Sterba-Boatwright B; Mott J
Water Res; 2010 Jul; 44(14):4067-76. PubMed ID: 20566209
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A comparison of ARA and DNA data for microbial source tracking based on source-classification models developed using classification trees.
Price B; Venso E; Frana M; Greenberg J; Ware A
Water Res; 2007 Aug; 41(16):3575-84. PubMed ID: 17599384
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Considerations when using discriminant function analysis of antimicrobial resistance profiles to identify sources of fecal contamination of surface water in Michigan.
Kaneene JB; Miller R; Sayah R; Johnson YJ; Gilliland D; Gardiner JC
Appl Environ Microbiol; 2007 May; 73(9):2878-90. PubMed ID: 17337537
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
