4.7 Article

Spatial and temporal analogies in microbial communities in natural drinking water biofilms

Journal

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
Volume 581, Issue -, Pages 277-288

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.12.118

Keywords

Bacteria; Biofilm; Flow; Succession; Re-growth

Funding

  1. UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) [EP/G029946/1]
  2. EPSRC [EP/1029346/1]
  3. EPSRC-LWEC Challenge Fellowship [EP/N02950X/1]
  4. EPSRC [EP/G029946/1, EP/I029346/1, EP/N02950X/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  5. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/N02950X/1, EP/G029946/1, EP/I029346/1] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Biofilms are ubiquitous throughout drinking water distribution systems (DWDS), playing central roles in system performance and delivery of safe clean drinking water. However, little is known about how the interaction of abiotic and biotic factors influence the microbial communities of these biofilms in real systems. Results are presented here from a one-year study using in situ sampling devices installed in two operational systems supplied with different source waters. Independently of the characteristics of the incoming Water and marked differences in hydraulic conditions between sites and over time, a core bacterial community was observed in all saniples suggesting that internal factors (autogenic) are central in shaping biofilm formation and composition. From this it is apparent that future research and management strategies need to consider the specific microorganisms found to be able to colonise pipe surfaces and form biofilms, such that it might be possible to exclude these and hence protect the supply of safe clean drinking water. (C) 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available