Comparing Quantitative Methods for Analyzing Sediment DNA Records of Cyanobacteria in Experimental and Reference Lakes

Sediment DNA (sedDNA) analyses are rapidly emerging as powerful tools for the reconstruction of environmental and evolutionary change. While there are an increasing number of studies using molecular genetic approaches to track changes over time, few studies have compared the coherence between quantitative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) methods and metabarcoding techniques. Primer specificity, bioinformatic analyses, and PCR inhibitors in sediments could affect the quantitative data obtained from these approaches. We compared the performance of droplet digital polymerase chain reaction (ddPCR) and high-throughput sequencing (HTS) for the quantification of target genes of cyanobacteria in lake sediments and tested whether the two techniques similarly reveal expected patterns through time. Absolute concentrations of cyanobacterial 16S rRNA genes were compared between ddPCR and HTS using dated sediment cores collected from two experimental (Lake 227, fertilized since 1969 and Lake 223, acidified from 1976 to 1983) and two reference lakes (Lakes 224 and 442) in the Experimental Lakes Area (ELA), Canada. Relative abundances of Microcystis 16S rRNA (MICR) genes were also compared between the two methods. Moderate to strong positive correlations were found between the molecular approaches among all four cores but results from ddPCR were more consistent with the known history of lake manipulations. A 100-fold increase in ddPCR estimates of cyanobacterial gene abundance beginning in ~1968 occurred in Lake 227, in keeping with experimental addition of nutrients and increase in planktonic cyanobacteria. In contrast, no significant rise in cyanobacterial abundance associated with lake fertilization was observed with HTS. Relative abundances of Microcystis between the two techniques showed moderate to strong levels of coherence in top intervals of the sediment cores. Both ddPCR and HTS approaches are suitable for sedDNA analysis, but studies aiming to quantify absolute abundances from complex environments should consider using ddPCR due to its high tolerance to PCR inhibitors

The spatial and temporal distribution of SARS-CoV-2 from the built environment of COVID-19 patient rooms: A multicentre prospective study.

BackgroundSARS-CoV-2 can be detected from the built environment (e.g., floors), but it is unknown how the viral burden surrounding an infected patient changes over space and time. Characterizing these data can help advance our understanding and interpretation of surface swabs from the built environment.MethodsWe conducted a prospective study at two hospitals in Ontario, Canada between January 19, 2022 and February 11, 2022. We performed serial floor sampling for SARS-CoV-2 in rooms of patients newly hospitalized with COVID-19 in the past 48 hours. We sampled the floor twice daily until the occupant moved to another room, was discharged, or 96 hours had elapsed. Floor sampling locations included 1 metre (m) from the hospital bed, 2 m from the hospital bed, and at the room's threshold to the hallway (typically 3 to 5 m from the hospital bed). The samples were analyzed for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 using quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR). We calculated the sensitivity of detecting SARS-CoV-2 in a patient with COVID-19, and we evaluated how the percentage of positive swabs and the cycle threshold of the swabs changed over time. We also compared the cycle threshold between the two hospitals.ResultsOver the 6-week study period we collected 164 floor swabs from the rooms of 13 patients. The overall percentage of swabs positive for SARS-CoV-2 was 93% and the median cycle threshold was 33.4 (interquartile range [IQR]: 30.8, 37.2). On day 0 of swabbing the percentage of swabs positive for SARS-CoV-2 was 88% and the median cycle threshold was 33.6 (IQR: 31.8, 38.2) compared to swabs performed on day 2 or later where the percentage of swabs positive for SARS-CoV-2 was 98% and the cycle threshold was 33.2 (IQR: 30.6, 35.6). We found that viral detection did not change with increasing time (since the first sample collection) over the sampling period, Odds Ratio (OR) 1.65 per day (95% CI 0.68, 4.02; p = 0.27). Similarly, viral detection did not change with increasing distance from the patient's bed (1 m, 2 m, or 3 m), OR 0.85 per metre (95% CI 0.38, 1.88; p = 0.69). The cycle threshold was lower (i.e., more virus) in The Ottawa Hospital (median quantification cycle [Cq] 30.8) where floors were cleaned once daily compared to the Toronto hospital (median Cq 37.2) where floors were cleaned twice daily.ConclusionsWe were able to detect SARS-CoV-2 on the floors in rooms of patients with COVID-19. The viral burden did not vary over time or by distance from the patient's bed. These results suggest floor swabbing for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in a built environment such as a hospital room is both accurate and robust to variation in sampling location and duration of occupancy

Twenty-five essential research questions to inform the protection and restoration of freshwater biodiversity

Freshwater biodiversity is declining at an unprecedented rate. Freshwater conservationists and environmental managers have enough evidence to demonstrate that action must not be delayed but have insufficient evidence to identify those actions that will be most effective in reversing the current trend. Here, the focus is on identifying essential research topics that, if addressed, will contribute directly to restoring freshwater biodiversity through supporting ‘bending the curve’ actions (i.e. those actions leading to the recovery of freshwater biodiversity, not simply deceleration of the current downward trend). The global freshwater research and management community was asked to identify unanswered research questions that could address knowledge gaps and barriers associated with ‘bending the curve’ actions. The resulting list was refined into six themes and 25 questions. Although context-dependent and potentially limited in global reach, six overarching themes were identified: (i) learning from successes and failures; (ii) improving current practices; (iii) balancing resource needs; (iv) rethinking built environments; (v) reforming policy and investments; and (vi) enabling transformative change. Bold, efficient, science-based actions are necessary to reverse biodiversity loss. We believe that conservation actions will be most effective when supported by sound evidence, and that research and action must complement one another. These questions are intended to guide global freshwater researchers and conservation practitioners, identify key projects and signal research needs to funders and governments. Our questions can act as springboards for multidisciplinary and multisectoral collaborations that will improve the management and restoration of freshwater biodiversity