Back to all available

A spatiotemporal analysis of the microbial community on the surface of public places in the urban areas of Xi'an city

bioinformatics
ecology
microbiology

Abstract

The dynamic changes of microbiota in urban public places have now attracted growing attention. The present study was conducted with the objective of investigating the microbiota, potential pathogenic microorganisms, virulence factors, mobile genetic elements (MGEs) and antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) in public places in Xi'an. A total of 549 microorganisms were identified in 72 samples collected from six sites in Xi'an public places. The samples were dominated by Actinomycetota, Pseudomonadota and Bacteroidota. Furthermore, the composition of the community demonstrated significant variations across locations and seasons. Pseudomonadota exhibited the highest abundance in subterranean railways, while Actinomycetota predominated in academic institutions and Bacteroidota prevailed in commercial markets. Within the eukaryotic phylum, Ascomycota exhibited the highest prevalence in university settings. Among the viral phyla, Uroviricota was the most prevalent in urban environments. With regard to archaeal phyla, Euryarchaeota demonstrated the highest abundance in markets. The most prevalent phylum, Pseudomonadota, was observed to be most abundant in the autumn, followed by Actinomycetota in the spring, and Bacteroidota in the winter. Among the eukaryotic phyla, the Ascomycota exhibited the highest abundance during the winter months. Among the viral phyla, Uroviricota demonstrated the greatest abundance during the autumn season. With regard to archaeal phyla, Euryarchaeota demonstrated the highest levels of abundance during the summer months. Following a thorough analysis, a total of 66 pathogenic microbe phenotypes, 893 virulence factors, 133 MGE classes, 303 ARGs families and 126 antibiotic drug classes were identified. The findings of this study offer insights that could inform the enhancement of public health in Xi'an's public spaces, with a view to reducing exposure to potential pathogens associated with infectious diseases.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.
  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].