4.3 Article

Fate of Cryptosporidium parvum and Cryptosporidium hominis oocysts and Giardia duodenalis cysts during secondary wastewater treatments

期刊

PARASITOLOGY RESEARCH
卷 105, 期 3, 页码 689-696

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00436-009-1440-y

关键词

-

资金

  1. Irish EPA Strive [2007-PhD-EH-3]
  2. Fulbright Senior Specialist Fellowship [2225 Graczyk]
  3. Johns Hopkins Center in Urban Environmental Health [P30 ES03819]
  4. School of Science Institute of Technology, Sligo, Ireland
  5. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Science to Achieve Results (STAR) Program [RD83300201]
  6. Environmental Protection Agency Ireland (EPA) [2007-PhD-EH-3] Funding Source: Environmental Protection Agency Ireland (EPA)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates the fate of Cryptosporidium parvum and C. hominis oocysts and Giardia duodenalis cysts at four Irish municipal wastewater treatment plants (i.e., Plant A, B, C, and D) that utilize sludge activation or biofilm-coated percolating filter systems for secondary wastewater treatment. The fate of these pathogens through the sewage treatment processes was determined based on their viable transmissive stages, i.e., oocysts for Cryptosporidium and cysts for Giardia. Analysis of final effluent indicated that over 97% of viable oocysts and cysts were eliminated, except at Plant C, which achieved only 64% of oocyst removal. A significant correlation between the removal of oocysts and cysts was found at Plants A, B, and D (R = 0.98, P < 0.05). All sewage sludge samples were positive for C. parvum and C. hominis, and G. duodenalis, with maximum concentrations of 20 oocysts and eight cysts per gram in primary sludge indicating the need for further sludge sanitization treatments. This study provides evidence that C. parvum and C. hominis oocysts and G. duodenalis cysts are present throughout the wastewater processes and in end-products, and can enter the aquatic environment with consequent negative implications for public health.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据