Skip to main content
. 2009 Dec 28;76(5):1486–1496. doi: 10.1128/AEM.02288-09

TABLE 6.

Estimated richness of E. coli populations obtained from 5 representative sampling sites over the study perioda

Method Site r2b No. of genotypes:
% of predicted genotypes that were detected No. of isolates required to capture 50% of predicted genotypes (mean ± SD)e
Predicted (mean ± SD)c Detectedd
BOX-PCR MST-1 0.9999 5,794 ± 196 1,196 21 14,384 ± 578
MST-5 0.9999 6,964 ± 207 1,621 23 19,007 ± 685
MST-6 0.9999 6,138 ± 190 1,479 24 17,282 ± 654
MST-9 0.9999 3,970 ± 133 888 22 13,697 ± 549
MST-15 0.9998 1,220 ± 69 325 27 4,589 ± 325
ERIC-PCR MST-1 0.9999 10,295 ± 514 1,755 17 19,614 ± 1,123
MST-5 0.9998 9,599 ± 385 2,152 22 19,390 ± 937
MST-6 0.9998 10,374 ± 413 2,093 20 20,985 ± 985
MST-9 0.9998 6,491 ± 311 1,470 23 13,294 ± 769
MST-15 0.9998 2,083 ± 172 509 24 5,050 ± 509
a

The total numbers of water samples and E. coli isolates obtained from each site are given in Table 2.

b

Coefficient of determination of the goodness of fit to the Michaelis-Menten equation.

c

The Vmax parameter in the Michaelis-Menten equation.

d

The number of genotypes detected in the rarefaction analysis is used to estimate the percentage of total community diversity that was captured in the collection.

e

The Km parameter in the Michaelis-Menten equation.