These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
160 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33609910)
1. Investigation of relationships between fecal contamination, cattle grazing, human recreation, and microbial source tracking markers in a mixed-land-use rangeland watershed. Joseph N; Lucas J; Viswanath N; Findlay R; Sprinkle J; Strickland MS; Winford E; Kolok AS Water Res; 2021 Apr; 194():116921. PubMed ID: 33609910 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Microbial source tracking (MST) in Chattahoochee River National Recreation Area: Seasonal and precipitation trends in MST marker concentrations, and associations with E. coli levels, pathogenic marker presence, and land use. McKee BA; Molina M; Cyterski M; Couch A Water Res; 2020 Mar; 171():115435. PubMed ID: 31927096 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Microbial Source Tracking Using Quantitative and Digital PCR To Identify Sources of Fecal Contamination in Stormwater, River Water, and Beach Water in a Great Lakes Area of Concern. Staley ZR; Boyd RJ; Shum P; Edge TA Appl Environ Microbiol; 2018 Oct; 84(20):. PubMed ID: 30097445 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Water Quality Conditions Associated with Cattle Grazing and Recreation on National Forest Lands. Roche LM; Kromschroeder L; Atwill ER; Dahlgren RA; Tate KW PLoS One; 2013; 8(6):e68127. PubMed ID: 23826370 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Microbial source tracking to elucidate the impact of land-use and physiochemical water quality on fecal contamination in a mixed land-use watershed. Tarek MH; Hubbart J; Garner E Sci Total Environ; 2023 May; 872():162181. PubMed ID: 36775177 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of Microbial and Chemical Source Tracking Markers To Identify Fecal Contamination Sources in the Humber River (Toronto, Ontario, Canada) and Associated Storm Water Outfalls. Staley ZR; Grabuski J; Sverko E; Edge TA Appl Environ Microbiol; 2016 Nov; 82(21):6357-6366. PubMed ID: 27542934 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Semi-quantitative evaluation of fecal contamination potential by human and ruminant sources using multiple lines of evidence. Stoeckel DM; Stelzer EA; Stogner RW; Mau DP Water Res; 2011 May; 45(10):3225-44. PubMed ID: 21513966 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Multiple lines of evidence to identify sewage as the cause of water quality impairment in an urbanized tropical watershed. Kirs M; Kisand V; Wong M; Caffaro-Filho RA; Moravcik P; Harwood VJ; Yoneyama B; Fujioka RS Water Res; 2017 Jun; 116():23-33. PubMed ID: 28292677 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Microbial source tracking to identify human and ruminant sources of faecal pollution in an ephemeral Florida river. Chase E; Hunting J; Staley C; Harwood VJ J Appl Microbiol; 2012 Dec; 113(6):1396-406. PubMed ID: 22963043 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Determining the primary sources of fecal pollution using microbial source tracking assays combined with land-use information in the Edwards Aquifer. Hinojosa J; Green J; Estrada F; Herrera J; Mata T; Phan D; Pasha ABMT; Matta A; Johnson D; Kapoor V Water Res; 2020 Oct; 184():116211. PubMed ID: 32721766 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Differentiating Sources of Fecal Contamination to Wilderness Waters Using Droplet Digital PCR and Fecal Indicator Bacteria Methods. Pendergraph DP; Ranieri J; Ermatinger L; Baumann A; Metcalf AL; DeLuca TH; Church MJ Wilderness Environ Med; 2021 Sep; 32(3):332-339. PubMed ID: 34172374 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Microbial source tracking of fecal contamination in stormwater runoff. Sherchan S; Shahin S; Alarcon J; Brosky H; Potter C; Dada AC J Water Health; 2022 Sep; 20(9):1271-1283. PubMed ID: 36170186 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Source specific fecal bacteria modeling using soil and water assessment tool model. Parajuli PB; Mankin KR; Barnes PL Bioresour Technol; 2009 Jan; 100(2):953-63. PubMed ID: 18703332 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Fecal indicator dynamics at the watershed scale: Variable relationships with land use, season, and water chemistry. Badgley BD; Steele MK; Cappellin C; Burger J; Jian J; Neher TP; Orentas M; Wagner R Sci Total Environ; 2019 Dec; 697():134113. PubMed ID: 32380608 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Determining the source of fecal contamination in recreational waters. Meyer KJ; Appletoft CM; Schwemm AK; Uzoigwe JC; Brown EJ J Environ Health; 2005; 68(1):25-30. PubMed ID: 16121484 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Linking watershed modeling and bacterial source tracking to better assess E. coli sources. Jeong J; Wagner K; Flores JJ; Cawthon T; Her Y; Osorio J; Yen H Sci Total Environ; 2019 Jan; 648():164-175. PubMed ID: 30114587 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Efficacy of Bacteroides measurements for reducing the statistical uncertainty associated with hydrologic flow and fecal loads in a mixed use watershed. Gentry RW; Layton AC; McKay LD; McCarthy JF; Williams DE; Koirala SR; Sayler GS J Environ Qual; 2007; 36(5):1324-30. PubMed ID: 17636294 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]