评估分析方法,以便在粪便污染监测和评估中做出更明智的决策

IF 12.4 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL
Yussi M. Palacios Delgado , Maghfira Saifuddaolah , Rebekah Henry , Kerrie Burge , David Thomas McCarthy , S. Fiona Barker , Christelle Schang , Vinaina Waqa , Brandon Winfrey , Karin Leder
{"title":"评估分析方法,以便在粪便污染监测和评估中做出更明智的决策","authors":"Yussi M. Palacios Delgado ,&nbsp;Maghfira Saifuddaolah ,&nbsp;Rebekah Henry ,&nbsp;Kerrie Burge ,&nbsp;David Thomas McCarthy ,&nbsp;S. Fiona Barker ,&nbsp;Christelle Schang ,&nbsp;Vinaina Waqa ,&nbsp;Brandon Winfrey ,&nbsp;Karin Leder","doi":"10.1016/j.watres.2025.123207","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Quantification of faecal indicator organism (FIO) is essential for surveillance monitoring, performance compliance and public health interventions. IDEXX's automated FIO detection technique, TECTA<sup>TM</sup>, and IDEXX Colilert offer greater efficiency than traditional methods but have not been critically compared across diverse levels of faecal contamination or evaluated against key practical requirements and cost factors. This study compared the use of IDEXX Colilert and TECTA™ for measuring indicative contamination in 785 samples from drinking water, wells, surface water, greywater and a constructed wetland system, collected from Fijian and Indonesian informal settlements. Both methods ranked sample types in the same order in terms of indicative faecal contamination, and at <em>Escherichia coli</em> (<em>E. coli</em>) concentrations between &lt;1–10<sup>5</sup> CFU or MPN/100 mL (municipal, shallow and deep well samples), both methods were highly correlated. However, at 10<sup>2</sup>–10<sup>9</sup> CFU/100 mL (TECTA™) or 10<sup>2</sup>–10<sup>6</sup> MPN/100 mL (IDEXX Colilert) <em>E. coli</em> (surface water samples), a moderate positive correlation was observed (<em>R</em> = 0.56, <em>p</em> = 2.2<sup>−13</sup>), and a high proportion of samples exceeded the detection limit of the IDEXX Colilert method. Greywater and septic tank samples exhibited total coliform mean values greater than 10<sup>6</sup> CFU/100 mL, with no correlation between IDEXX Colilert and TECTA™ results. TECTA™ required only one dilution for returning specific <em>E. coli</em> values, ideal for performance compliance and faecal contamination assessments, while IDEXX Colilert often needed two levels of dilution. For surveillance purposes, IDEXX Colilert may be more cost-effective given the higher initial setup costs of TECTA™; however, TECTA™’s faster turnaround times and automated results may offset expenses. This study presents a versatile decision analysis that enables laboratories worldwide to customise method comparisons based on their unique requirements, driving more effective implementation and global standardisation of these methods.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":443,"journal":{"name":"Water Research","volume":"275 ","pages":"Article 123207"},"PeriodicalIF":12.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating analytical approaches for smarter decision-making in faecal contamination monitoring and assessment\",\"authors\":\"Yussi M. Palacios Delgado ,&nbsp;Maghfira Saifuddaolah ,&nbsp;Rebekah Henry ,&nbsp;Kerrie Burge ,&nbsp;David Thomas McCarthy ,&nbsp;S. Fiona Barker ,&nbsp;Christelle Schang ,&nbsp;Vinaina Waqa ,&nbsp;Brandon Winfrey ,&nbsp;Karin Leder\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.watres.2025.123207\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Quantification of faecal indicator organism (FIO) is essential for surveillance monitoring, performance compliance and public health interventions. IDEXX's automated FIO detection technique, TECTA<sup>TM</sup>, and IDEXX Colilert offer greater efficiency than traditional methods but have not been critically compared across diverse levels of faecal contamination or evaluated against key practical requirements and cost factors. This study compared the use of IDEXX Colilert and TECTA™ for measuring indicative contamination in 785 samples from drinking water, wells, surface water, greywater and a constructed wetland system, collected from Fijian and Indonesian informal settlements. Both methods ranked sample types in the same order in terms of indicative faecal contamination, and at <em>Escherichia coli</em> (<em>E. coli</em>) concentrations between &lt;1–10<sup>5</sup> CFU or MPN/100 mL (municipal, shallow and deep well samples), both methods were highly correlated. However, at 10<sup>2</sup>–10<sup>9</sup> CFU/100 mL (TECTA™) or 10<sup>2</sup>–10<sup>6</sup> MPN/100 mL (IDEXX Colilert) <em>E. coli</em> (surface water samples), a moderate positive correlation was observed (<em>R</em> = 0.56, <em>p</em> = 2.2<sup>−13</sup>), and a high proportion of samples exceeded the detection limit of the IDEXX Colilert method. Greywater and septic tank samples exhibited total coliform mean values greater than 10<sup>6</sup> CFU/100 mL, with no correlation between IDEXX Colilert and TECTA™ results. TECTA™ required only one dilution for returning specific <em>E. coli</em> values, ideal for performance compliance and faecal contamination assessments, while IDEXX Colilert often needed two levels of dilution. For surveillance purposes, IDEXX Colilert may be more cost-effective given the higher initial setup costs of TECTA™; however, TECTA™’s faster turnaround times and automated results may offset expenses. This study presents a versatile decision analysis that enables laboratories worldwide to customise method comparisons based on their unique requirements, driving more effective implementation and global standardisation of these methods.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":443,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Water Research\",\"volume\":\"275 \",\"pages\":\"Article 123207\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":12.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Water Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0043135425001216\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Water Research","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0043135425001216","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

粪便指示生物(FIO)的量化对于监测、绩效遵守和公共卫生干预至关重要。IDEXX的自动化FIO检测技术,TECTATM和IDEXX Colilert提供了比传统方法更高的效率,但没有在不同水平的粪便污染中进行严格的比较,也没有根据关键的实际要求和成本因素进行评估。本研究比较了IDEXX Colilert和TECTATM在测量来自斐济和印度尼西亚非正式住区的饮用水、水井、地表水、灰水和人工湿地系统的785个样本中的指示性污染的使用情况。根据指示性粪便污染,两种方法对样品类型的排序相同,当大肠杆菌(E. coli)浓度在<;1-105 CFU或MPN/100 mL之间时(城市、浅井和深井样品),两种方法都高度相关。然而,在102-109 CFU/100 mL (TECTATM)或102-106 MPN/100 mL (IDEXX Colilert)大肠杆菌(地表水样品)中,观察到中度正相关(R = 0.56,p = 2.2−13),并且高比例的样品超过IDEXX Colilert方法的检测限。灰水和化粪池样品显示总大肠菌群平均值大于106 CFU/100 mL, IDEXX Colilert和TECTATM结果之间没有相关性。TECTATM只需要一次稀释即可返回特定的大肠杆菌值,非常适合性能依从性和粪便污染评估,而IDEXX Colilert通常需要两次稀释。鉴于TECTATM的初始设置成本较高,对于监测目的,IDEXX Colilert可能更具成本效益;然而,TECTATM更快的周转时间和自动化结果可能会抵消费用。这项研究提出了一个通用的决策分析,使世界各地的实验室能够根据他们独特的要求定制方法比较,推动这些方法更有效的实施和全球标准化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluating analytical approaches for smarter decision-making in faecal contamination monitoring and assessment
Quantification of faecal indicator organism (FIO) is essential for surveillance monitoring, performance compliance and public health interventions. IDEXX's automated FIO detection technique, TECTATM, and IDEXX Colilert offer greater efficiency than traditional methods but have not been critically compared across diverse levels of faecal contamination or evaluated against key practical requirements and cost factors. This study compared the use of IDEXX Colilert and TECTA™ for measuring indicative contamination in 785 samples from drinking water, wells, surface water, greywater and a constructed wetland system, collected from Fijian and Indonesian informal settlements. Both methods ranked sample types in the same order in terms of indicative faecal contamination, and at Escherichia coli (E. coli) concentrations between <1–105 CFU or MPN/100 mL (municipal, shallow and deep well samples), both methods were highly correlated. However, at 102–109 CFU/100 mL (TECTA™) or 102–106 MPN/100 mL (IDEXX Colilert) E. coli (surface water samples), a moderate positive correlation was observed (R = 0.56, p = 2.2−13), and a high proportion of samples exceeded the detection limit of the IDEXX Colilert method. Greywater and septic tank samples exhibited total coliform mean values greater than 106 CFU/100 mL, with no correlation between IDEXX Colilert and TECTA™ results. TECTA™ required only one dilution for returning specific E. coli values, ideal for performance compliance and faecal contamination assessments, while IDEXX Colilert often needed two levels of dilution. For surveillance purposes, IDEXX Colilert may be more cost-effective given the higher initial setup costs of TECTA™; however, TECTA™’s faster turnaround times and automated results may offset expenses. This study presents a versatile decision analysis that enables laboratories worldwide to customise method comparisons based on their unique requirements, driving more effective implementation and global standardisation of these methods.
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
Water Research
Water Research 环境科学-工程:环境
CiteScore
20.80
自引率
9.40%
发文量
1307
审稿时长
38 days
期刊介绍: Water Research, along with its open access companion journal Water Research X, serves as a platform for publishing original research papers covering various aspects of the science and technology related to the anthropogenic water cycle, water quality, and its management worldwide. The audience targeted by the journal comprises biologists, chemical engineers, chemists, civil engineers, environmental engineers, limnologists, and microbiologists. The scope of the journal include: •Treatment processes for water and wastewaters (municipal, agricultural, industrial, and on-site treatment), including resource recovery and residuals management; •Urban hydrology including sewer systems, stormwater management, and green infrastructure; •Drinking water treatment and distribution; •Potable and non-potable water reuse; •Sanitation, public health, and risk assessment; •Anaerobic digestion, solid and hazardous waste management, including source characterization and the effects and control of leachates and gaseous emissions; •Contaminants (chemical, microbial, anthropogenic particles such as nanoparticles or microplastics) and related water quality sensing, monitoring, fate, and assessment; •Anthropogenic impacts on inland, tidal, coastal and urban waters, focusing on surface and ground waters, and point and non-point sources of pollution; •Environmental restoration, linked to surface water, groundwater and groundwater remediation; •Analysis of the interfaces between sediments and water, and between water and atmosphere, focusing specifically on anthropogenic impacts; •Mathematical modelling, systems analysis, machine learning, and beneficial use of big data related to the anthropogenic water cycle; •Socio-economic, policy, and regulations studies.
×
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