Skip to main content
. 2020 Mar 2;86(6):e02525-19. doi: 10.1128/AEM.02525-19

TABLE 2.

Culture-based versus in silico E. coli detection

Location Sample ID Detection method
Culture baseda
In silicob
EcO157 STEC No. reads matching % relative abundance
GABOSR G130904 1,652 0.0062
G140116 + 576 0.0019
G140128 + 406 0.0020
G140210 + 936 0.0032
G140224 + 644 0.0024
G140301 + 886 0.0026
G140319 866 0.0028
G140402 + 1,112 0.0030
G140415 711 0.0022
G140611 1,050 0.0029
TOWOSR T130904 516 0.0022
T130918 + 255 0.0011
T131023 606 0.0023
T131230 + 379 0.0013
T140116 505 0.0019
T140128 + 367 0.0016
T140210 607 0.0035
T140224 + 780 0.0026
T140319 459 0.0016
T140611 1,495 0.0037
Upstream GABOSR GC1 411 0.0016
GC2 + 419 0.0017
GC3 423 0.0015
Upstream TOWOSR TC1 + 478 0.0016
TC2 626 0.0017
West Salinas WS1 958 0.0032
WS2 601 0.0022
a

Culture-based methods to detect E. coli in resuspended sediment/water samples included an enrichment culturing step followed by Shiga toxin (stx) PCR procedures to detect specific virulence genes and genotypes as described in Materials and Methods. Detection of E. coli O157 (EcO157) was determined using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) serotyping and a sample was positive for STEC if PCR and/or ELISA data yielded a positive result.

b

In silico methods included a blastn search of metagenomic reads against an STEC reference genome with a 95% identity and 97% read coverage cutoff for a read match, which was then normalized by dividing by the total number of reads per metagenome. The two samples with highest relative abundance of reads matching the STEC reference genome are in boldface font.