Comparison of the Disinfection Kinetics of Wastewater-Sourced and Laboratory-Cultured E. coli and Enterococcus spp. (E. faecalis, E. faecium, E. casseliflavus) with Exposure to Free Chlorine, Monochloramine, UVC, and Simulated Sunlight

IF 4.3 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Mwanarusi H. Mwatondo, Mwale Chiyenge, Alma Y. Rocha and Andrea I. Silverman*, 
{"title":"Comparison of the Disinfection Kinetics of Wastewater-Sourced and Laboratory-Cultured E. coli and Enterococcus spp. (E. faecalis, E. faecium, E. casseliflavus) with Exposure to Free Chlorine, Monochloramine, UVC, and Simulated Sunlight","authors":"Mwanarusi H. Mwatondo,&nbsp;Mwale Chiyenge,&nbsp;Alma Y. Rocha and Andrea I. Silverman*,&nbsp;","doi":"10.1021/acsestwater.5c00285","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p >Most data on laboratory-scale experiments evaluating <i>E. coli</i> and enterococci disinfection are from experiments conducted using laboratory-cultured bacteria. However, environmental bacteria, such as those in wastewater, have potential to be more resistant to disinfection than their laboratory-cultured counterparts. Additionally, most <i>Enterococcus</i> disinfection studies have only evaluated <i>E. faecalis</i> despite the diversity of <i>Enterococcus</i> species in the environment. In this study, we evaluated inactivation kinetics of wastewater-sourced <i>E. coli</i> and enterococci, laboratory-cultured <i>E. coli</i>, and three species of laboratory-cultured <i>Enterococcus</i> with exposure to free chlorine, monochloramine, UVC, and simulated sunlight. All bacteria were purified and suspended in a chlorine-demand-free buffer with minimal light attenuation to allow comparison between populations without confounding matrix effects. Laboratory-cultured bacteria were more susceptible to the oxidants than the wastewater-sourced bacteria, highlighting that research using reference-strain bacteria in the laboratory may not reflect inactivation kinetics in the environment. When exposed to the light-based disinfectants, only laboratory-cultured <i>E. coli</i> and <i>E. faecalis</i> were more susceptible than the wastewater-sourced bacteria. Notably, different laboratory-cultured <i>Enterococcus</i> species had different inactivation rates, with <i>E. faecalis</i> being the most susceptible. These findings highlight the importance of incorporating indigenous environmental bacteria in laboratory studies and assessing a variety of <i>Enterococcus</i> species in disinfection research.</p><p >Environmental bacteria in wastewater can have slower disinfection kinetics than bacteria grown in the laboratory and should be included in laboratory-based experiments evaluating the mechanisms and kinetics of disinfection.</p>","PeriodicalId":93847,"journal":{"name":"ACS ES&T water","volume":"5 9","pages":"5695–5706"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/acsestwater.5c00285","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS ES&T water","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsestwater.5c00285","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Most data on laboratory-scale experiments evaluating E. coli and enterococci disinfection are from experiments conducted using laboratory-cultured bacteria. However, environmental bacteria, such as those in wastewater, have potential to be more resistant to disinfection than their laboratory-cultured counterparts. Additionally, most Enterococcus disinfection studies have only evaluated E. faecalis despite the diversity of Enterococcus species in the environment. In this study, we evaluated inactivation kinetics of wastewater-sourced E. coli and enterococci, laboratory-cultured E. coli, and three species of laboratory-cultured Enterococcus with exposure to free chlorine, monochloramine, UVC, and simulated sunlight. All bacteria were purified and suspended in a chlorine-demand-free buffer with minimal light attenuation to allow comparison between populations without confounding matrix effects. Laboratory-cultured bacteria were more susceptible to the oxidants than the wastewater-sourced bacteria, highlighting that research using reference-strain bacteria in the laboratory may not reflect inactivation kinetics in the environment. When exposed to the light-based disinfectants, only laboratory-cultured E. coli and E. faecalis were more susceptible than the wastewater-sourced bacteria. Notably, different laboratory-cultured Enterococcus species had different inactivation rates, with E. faecalis being the most susceptible. These findings highlight the importance of incorporating indigenous environmental bacteria in laboratory studies and assessing a variety of Enterococcus species in disinfection research.

Environmental bacteria in wastewater can have slower disinfection kinetics than bacteria grown in the laboratory and should be included in laboratory-based experiments evaluating the mechanisms and kinetics of disinfection.

污水源和实验室培养的大肠杆菌和肠球菌(粪肠球菌、粪肠球菌、casseliflavus)在游离氯、单氯胺、UVC和模拟阳光下的消毒动力学比较
评估大肠杆菌和肠球菌消毒的实验室规模实验的大多数数据来自使用实验室培养的细菌进行的实验。然而,环境细菌,例如废水中的细菌,有可能比实验室培养的细菌更耐消毒。此外,尽管环境中肠球菌种类多样,但大多数肠球菌消毒研究仅评估了粪肠球菌。在这项研究中,我们评估了来自废水的大肠杆菌和肠球菌、实验室培养的大肠杆菌和三种实验室培养的肠球菌在游离氯、单氯胺、UVC和模拟阳光下的失活动力学。所有细菌都被纯化并悬浮在无氯需求的缓冲液中,光衰减最小,以便在没有混杂基质效应的情况下进行种群比较。实验室培养的细菌比废水来源的细菌更容易受到氧化剂的影响,这突出表明在实验室中使用参考菌株的研究可能无法反映环境中的失活动力学。当暴露于光基消毒剂时,只有实验室培养的大肠杆菌和粪肠杆菌比废水源细菌更敏感。值得注意的是,不同的实验室培养肠球菌有不同的灭活率,以粪肠球菌最敏感。这些发现强调了在实验室研究中纳入本地环境细菌和在消毒研究中评估各种肠球菌物种的重要性。废水中的环境细菌可能比实验室中培养的细菌具有更慢的消毒动力学,因此应将其包括在以实验室为基础的实验中,以评估消毒机制和动力学。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信