Cargando…

Artificial-turf surfaces for sport and recreational activities: microbiota analysis and 16S sequencing signature of synthetic vs natural soccer fields

Synthetic fibres are used in place of the natural grass worldwide, for realizing playgrounds, soccer fields and even domestic gardens or recreational structures. An intensive use of artificial turf is currently observed in sports facilities, due to lower costs, higher sustainability in recycling of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Valeriani, Federica, Margarucci, Lory Marika, Gianfranceschi, Gianluca, Ciccarelli, Antonello, Tajani, Filippo, Mucci, Nicolina, Ripani, Maurizio, Romano Spica, Vincenzo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6728760/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31517095
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02334
_version_ 1783449475673489408
author Valeriani, Federica
Margarucci, Lory Marika
Gianfranceschi, Gianluca
Ciccarelli, Antonello
Tajani, Filippo
Mucci, Nicolina
Ripani, Maurizio
Romano Spica, Vincenzo
author_facet Valeriani, Federica
Margarucci, Lory Marika
Gianfranceschi, Gianluca
Ciccarelli, Antonello
Tajani, Filippo
Mucci, Nicolina
Ripani, Maurizio
Romano Spica, Vincenzo
author_sort Valeriani, Federica
collection PubMed
description Synthetic fibres are used in place of the natural grass worldwide, for realizing playgrounds, soccer fields and even domestic gardens or recreational structures. An intensive use of artificial turf is currently observed in sports facilities, due to lower costs, higher sustainability in recycling of materials, and advantages related to athletic practice and performance. However, even if chemical and physical risks were studied, the microbiological component was not fully addressed, especially considering a comprehensive evaluation of the microbiota in synthetic vs natural playground surfaces. Here, we investigated the microbial community present on soccer fields, using Next Generation Sequencing and a 16S amplicon sequencing approach. Artificial and natural turfs show own ecosystems with different microbial profiles and a mean Shannon's diversity value of 2.176 and 2.475, respectively. The bacterial community is significantly different between facilities (ANOSIM: R = 0.179; p < 0.001) and surface materials (ANOSIM: R = 0.172; p < 0.005). The relative abundance of potentially pathogenic bacterial OTUs was higher in synthetic than in natural samples (ANOVA, F = 2.2). Soccer fields are characterized by their own microbiota, showing a different 16S amplicon sequencing signature between natural and artificial turfs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6728760
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67287602019-09-12 Artificial-turf surfaces for sport and recreational activities: microbiota analysis and 16S sequencing signature of synthetic vs natural soccer fields Valeriani, Federica Margarucci, Lory Marika Gianfranceschi, Gianluca Ciccarelli, Antonello Tajani, Filippo Mucci, Nicolina Ripani, Maurizio Romano Spica, Vincenzo Heliyon Article Synthetic fibres are used in place of the natural grass worldwide, for realizing playgrounds, soccer fields and even domestic gardens or recreational structures. An intensive use of artificial turf is currently observed in sports facilities, due to lower costs, higher sustainability in recycling of materials, and advantages related to athletic practice and performance. However, even if chemical and physical risks were studied, the microbiological component was not fully addressed, especially considering a comprehensive evaluation of the microbiota in synthetic vs natural playground surfaces. Here, we investigated the microbial community present on soccer fields, using Next Generation Sequencing and a 16S amplicon sequencing approach. Artificial and natural turfs show own ecosystems with different microbial profiles and a mean Shannon's diversity value of 2.176 and 2.475, respectively. The bacterial community is significantly different between facilities (ANOSIM: R = 0.179; p < 0.001) and surface materials (ANOSIM: R = 0.172; p < 0.005). The relative abundance of potentially pathogenic bacterial OTUs was higher in synthetic than in natural samples (ANOVA, F = 2.2). Soccer fields are characterized by their own microbiota, showing a different 16S amplicon sequencing signature between natural and artificial turfs. Elsevier 2019-08-29 /pmc/articles/PMC6728760/ /pubmed/31517095 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02334 Text en © 2019 The Author(s) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Valeriani, Federica
Margarucci, Lory Marika
Gianfranceschi, Gianluca
Ciccarelli, Antonello
Tajani, Filippo
Mucci, Nicolina
Ripani, Maurizio
Romano Spica, Vincenzo
Artificial-turf surfaces for sport and recreational activities: microbiota analysis and 16S sequencing signature of synthetic vs natural soccer fields
title Artificial-turf surfaces for sport and recreational activities: microbiota analysis and 16S sequencing signature of synthetic vs natural soccer fields
title_full Artificial-turf surfaces for sport and recreational activities: microbiota analysis and 16S sequencing signature of synthetic vs natural soccer fields
title_fullStr Artificial-turf surfaces for sport and recreational activities: microbiota analysis and 16S sequencing signature of synthetic vs natural soccer fields
title_full_unstemmed Artificial-turf surfaces for sport and recreational activities: microbiota analysis and 16S sequencing signature of synthetic vs natural soccer fields
title_short Artificial-turf surfaces for sport and recreational activities: microbiota analysis and 16S sequencing signature of synthetic vs natural soccer fields
title_sort artificial-turf surfaces for sport and recreational activities: microbiota analysis and 16s sequencing signature of synthetic vs natural soccer fields
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6728760/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31517095
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02334
work_keys_str_mv AT valerianifederica artificialturfsurfacesforsportandrecreationalactivitiesmicrobiotaanalysisand16ssequencingsignatureofsyntheticvsnaturalsoccerfields
AT margaruccilorymarika artificialturfsurfacesforsportandrecreationalactivitiesmicrobiotaanalysisand16ssequencingsignatureofsyntheticvsnaturalsoccerfields
AT gianfranceschigianluca artificialturfsurfacesforsportandrecreationalactivitiesmicrobiotaanalysisand16ssequencingsignatureofsyntheticvsnaturalsoccerfields
AT ciccarelliantonello artificialturfsurfacesforsportandrecreationalactivitiesmicrobiotaanalysisand16ssequencingsignatureofsyntheticvsnaturalsoccerfields
AT tajanifilippo artificialturfsurfacesforsportandrecreationalactivitiesmicrobiotaanalysisand16ssequencingsignatureofsyntheticvsnaturalsoccerfields
AT muccinicolina artificialturfsurfacesforsportandrecreationalactivitiesmicrobiotaanalysisand16ssequencingsignatureofsyntheticvsnaturalsoccerfields
AT ripanimaurizio artificialturfsurfacesforsportandrecreationalactivitiesmicrobiotaanalysisand16ssequencingsignatureofsyntheticvsnaturalsoccerfields
AT romanospicavincenzo artificialturfsurfacesforsportandrecreationalactivitiesmicrobiotaanalysisand16ssequencingsignatureofsyntheticvsnaturalsoccerfields