↓ Skip to main content

Comparing methods of determining Legionella spp. in complex water matrices

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Microbiology, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users
patent
1 patent
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comparing methods of determining Legionella spp. in complex water matrices
Published in
BMC Microbiology, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12866-015-0423-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Álvaro Díaz-Flores, Juan Carlos Montero, Francisco Javier Castro, Eva María Alejandres, Carmen Bayón, Inmaculada Solís, Roberto Fernández-Lafuente, Guillermo Rodríguez

Abstract

Legionella testing conducted at environmental laboratories plays an essential role in assessing the risk of disease transmission associated with water systems. However, drawbacks of culture-based methodology used for Legionella enumeration can have great impact on the results and interpretation which together can lead to underestimation of the actual risk. Up to 20% of the samples analysed by these laboratories produced inconclusive results, making effective risk management impossible. Overgrowth of competing microbiota was reported as an important factor for culture failure. For quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR), the interpretation of the results from the environmental samples still remains a challenge. Inhibitors may cause up to 10% of inconclusive results. This study compared a quantitative method based on immunomagnetic separation (IMS method) with culture and qPCR, as a new approach to routine monitoring of Legionella. First, pilot studies evaluated the recovery and detectability of Legionella spp using an IMS method, in the presence of microbiota and biocides. The IMS method results were not affected by microbiota while culture counts were significantly reduced (1.4 log) or negative in the same samples. Damage by biocides of viable Legionella was detected by the IMS method. Secondly, a total of 65 water samples were assayed by all three techniques (culture, qPCR and the IMS method). Of these, 27 (41.5%) were recorded as positive by at least one test. Legionella spp was detected by culture in 7 (25.9%) of the 27 samples. Eighteen (66.7%) of the 27 samples were positive by the IMS method, thirteen of them reporting counts below 10(3) colony forming units per liter (CFU l(-1)), six presented interfering microbiota and three presented PCR inhibition. Of the 65 water samples, 24 presented interfering microbiota by culture and 8 presented partial or complete inhibition of the PCR reaction. So the rate of inconclusive results of culture and PCR was 36.9 and 12.3%, respectively, without any inconclusive results reported for the IMS method. The IMS method generally improved the recovery and detectability of Legionella in environmental matrices, suggesting the possibility to use IMS method as valuable indicator of risk. Thus, this method may significantly improve our knowledge about the exposure risk to these bacteria, allowing us to implement evidence-based monitoring and disinfection strategies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Slovenia 1 1%
Unknown 74 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 19%
Researcher 13 17%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 9%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 19 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 20%
Immunology and Microbiology 12 16%
Environmental Science 9 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 7%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 22 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 January 2023.
All research outputs
#4,041,824
of 24,717,692 outputs
Outputs from BMC Microbiology
#377
of 3,405 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,792
of 269,448 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Microbiology
#5
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,717,692 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,405 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 269,448 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.