露天排便区井水与污染河水微生物质量比较

Mitoriana Porusia, Rezania Asyfiradayati, Shesa Ratna Suryaning Putri, Sarsa Shahila Dwinanda
{"title":"露天排便区井水与污染河水微生物质量比较","authors":"Mitoriana Porusia, Rezania Asyfiradayati, Shesa Ratna Suryaning Putri, Sarsa Shahila Dwinanda","doi":"10.2991/ahsr.k.220403.013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction : At the end of 2019, Mulyoharjo village in Pemalang regency, Indonesia, had not reached an Open Defecation Free (ODF) status and diarrhea was frequent in the area. Some houses located by the river have no septic tank and dispose of the stool to the river. The local river water was contaminated, however, the quality of well water was not fully understood. Therefore, the quality of both water sources is required to be understood for the local community safety. Objectives : This study aims to determine and compare the microbiological quality ( Escherichia coli ) of well water and river water contaminated with stool in Mulyoharjo Village, Pemalang regency. Method : Seven houses were located next to the river (<20 m) and had dug well (depth 8-10 m). Four of seven houses had a septic tank while three houses had not. Both water sources from each house were collected using a weighted water sample bottle. E.coli presence was determined using the compact dry EC plates. Results: The result showed the river water had higher contamination (>1800 CFU/100ml) than well water (0-1125 CFU/100ml) (p=0.000, 95%). A difference was also found between the number of E.coli colonies in well water between houses with septic tanks and those without septic tanks (p=0.001). Conclusion : The contaminated river has a higher number of E.coli than well water. However, the houses with septic tanks tend to have well water with high E.coli compared to those who have no septic tank. It is assumed that the presence of septic tanks around the wells was too closed and caused contamination. Real-Time Reaction Quantification of Salmonella spp., coli, and Staphylococcus aureus in Different Food Matrices Advantages and Disadvantages.","PeriodicalId":120811,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the International Conference on Health and Well-Being (ICHWB 2021)","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Microbiological Quality of Well Water and Contaminated River Water in Open Defecation Area\",\"authors\":\"Mitoriana Porusia, Rezania Asyfiradayati, Shesa Ratna Suryaning Putri, Sarsa Shahila Dwinanda\",\"doi\":\"10.2991/ahsr.k.220403.013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction : At the end of 2019, Mulyoharjo village in Pemalang regency, Indonesia, had not reached an Open Defecation Free (ODF) status and diarrhea was frequent in the area. Some houses located by the river have no septic tank and dispose of the stool to the river. The local river water was contaminated, however, the quality of well water was not fully understood. Therefore, the quality of both water sources is required to be understood for the local community safety. Objectives : This study aims to determine and compare the microbiological quality ( Escherichia coli ) of well water and river water contaminated with stool in Mulyoharjo Village, Pemalang regency. Method : Seven houses were located next to the river (<20 m) and had dug well (depth 8-10 m). Four of seven houses had a septic tank while three houses had not. Both water sources from each house were collected using a weighted water sample bottle. E.coli presence was determined using the compact dry EC plates. Results: The result showed the river water had higher contamination (>1800 CFU/100ml) than well water (0-1125 CFU/100ml) (p=0.000, 95%). A difference was also found between the number of E.coli colonies in well water between houses with septic tanks and those without septic tanks (p=0.001). Conclusion : The contaminated river has a higher number of E.coli than well water. However, the houses with septic tanks tend to have well water with high E.coli compared to those who have no septic tank. It is assumed that the presence of septic tanks around the wells was too closed and caused contamination. Real-Time Reaction Quantification of Salmonella spp., coli, and Staphylococcus aureus in Different Food Matrices Advantages and Disadvantages.\",\"PeriodicalId\":120811,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the International Conference on Health and Well-Being (ICHWB 2021)\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the International Conference on Health and Well-Being (ICHWB 2021)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2991/ahsr.k.220403.013\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the International Conference on Health and Well-Being (ICHWB 2021)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2991/ahsr.k.220403.013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

截至2019年底,印度尼西亚马马郎县的Mulyoharjo村尚未达到无露天排便(ODF)状态,该地区腹泻频发。一些位于河边的房子没有化粪池,把粪便扔到河里。当地的河水受到污染,而井水的水质却不完全清楚。因此,为了当地社区的安全,需要了解这两种水源的质量。目的:测定和比较白马郎县Mulyoharjo村粪便污染的井水和河水的微生物质量(大肠杆菌)。方法:靠近河流的7户(1800 CFU/100ml)比靠近井水的(0 ~ 1125 CFU/100ml)多(p=0.000, 95%)。有化粪池的家庭和没有化粪池的家庭的井水中大肠杆菌菌落数量也存在差异(p=0.001)。结论:污染河水中大肠杆菌数量高于井水。然而,与没有化粪池的房子相比,有化粪池的房子往往有高大肠杆菌的井水。据推测,水井周围的化粪池过于封闭,造成了污染。不同食物基质中沙门氏菌、大肠杆菌和金黄色葡萄球菌的实时反应定量
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of Microbiological Quality of Well Water and Contaminated River Water in Open Defecation Area
Introduction : At the end of 2019, Mulyoharjo village in Pemalang regency, Indonesia, had not reached an Open Defecation Free (ODF) status and diarrhea was frequent in the area. Some houses located by the river have no septic tank and dispose of the stool to the river. The local river water was contaminated, however, the quality of well water was not fully understood. Therefore, the quality of both water sources is required to be understood for the local community safety. Objectives : This study aims to determine and compare the microbiological quality ( Escherichia coli ) of well water and river water contaminated with stool in Mulyoharjo Village, Pemalang regency. Method : Seven houses were located next to the river (<20 m) and had dug well (depth 8-10 m). Four of seven houses had a septic tank while three houses had not. Both water sources from each house were collected using a weighted water sample bottle. E.coli presence was determined using the compact dry EC plates. Results: The result showed the river water had higher contamination (>1800 CFU/100ml) than well water (0-1125 CFU/100ml) (p=0.000, 95%). A difference was also found between the number of E.coli colonies in well water between houses with septic tanks and those without septic tanks (p=0.001). Conclusion : The contaminated river has a higher number of E.coli than well water. However, the houses with septic tanks tend to have well water with high E.coli compared to those who have no septic tank. It is assumed that the presence of septic tanks around the wells was too closed and caused contamination. Real-Time Reaction Quantification of Salmonella spp., coli, and Staphylococcus aureus in Different Food Matrices Advantages and Disadvantages.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信