A comparison of ten USEPA approved total coliform/E. coli tests

Author:

Olstadt Jeremy1,Schauer James Jay2,Standridge Jon3,Kluender Sharon3

Affiliation:

1. Water Bacteriology Department, Wisconsin State Laboratory of Hygiene, 2601 Agriculture Dr., P.O. Box 7996, Madison, WI 53707-7996, USA

2. Environmental Chemistry and Technology Program, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 600 N. Park Street, Madison, WI USA

3. Environmental Health, Department – Water Bacteriology, Wisconsin State Laboratory of Hygiene, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 2601 Agriculture Drive, Madison, WI 53718, USA

Abstract

Since 2002, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has approved ten enzyme-based total coliform and E. coli detection tests for examination of drinking water. These tests include: Colilert®, Colilert-18®, Colisure®, m-Coli Blue 24®, Readycult® Coliforms 100, Chromocult®, Coliscan®, E*Colite®, Colitag™ and MI Agar. The utility of the enzyme based test systems is based on both the ability of the test to detect the target organisms at low levels and the ability of the test system to suppress the growth of non-target organisms that might result in false positive results. Differences in the ability of some of these methods to detect total coliform and E. coli, as well as suppress Aeromonas spp., a common cause of “false positive” results, have been observed. As a result, this study was undertaken to elucidate the strengths and weaknesses of each method. Water samples were collected from three geographically and chemically diverse groundwaters in Wisconsin. One-hundred milliliter aliquots were individually spiked with both low concentrations (one to ten organisms) and high concentrations (fifty to one-hundred) of each of five different total coliform organisms (Serratia, Citrobacter, Enterobacter, E. coli, & Klebsiella). These spiked samples were used to test the capability of ten enzyme-based test systems to both detect and enumerate the spiked organisms. In addition, 100 ml samples were independently spiked with two different strains of Aeromonas spp. at six different levels, to assess the ability of each enzyme-based test to suppress Aeromonas spp. Analysis of the data indicated that wide variability exists among USEPA approved tests to detect and quantify total coliforms, as well as suppress Aeromonas spp.

Publisher

IWA Publishing

Subject

Infectious Diseases,Microbiology (medical),Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Waste Management and Disposal,Water Science and Technology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3