4.8 Article

Rapid, cultivation-independent assessment of microbial viability in drinking water

期刊

WATER RESEARCH
卷 42, 期 14, 页码 4010-4018

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2008.07.017

关键词

bacterial viability; flow cytometry; drinking water; ATP

资金

  1. 6th Framework European project TECHNEAU [018320]
  2. EAWAG-internal funding [Wave21]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fast and accurate monitoring of chemical and microbiological parameters in drinking water is essential to safeguard the consumer and to improve the understanding of treatment and distribution systems. However, most water utilities and drinking water guidelines still rely solely on time-requiring heterotrophic plate counts (HPC) and plating for faecal indicator bacteria as regular microbiological control parameters. The recent development of relative simple bench-top flow cytometers has made rapid and quantitative analysis of cultivation-independent microbial parameters more feasible than ever before. Here we present a study using a combination of cultivation-independent methods including fluorescence staining (for membrane integrity, membrane potential and esterase activity) combined with flow cytometry and total adenosine tri-phosphate (ATP) measurements, to assess microbial viability in drinking water. We have applied the methods to different drinking water samples including non-chlorinated household tap water, untreated natural spring water, and commercially available bottled water. We conclude that the esterase-positive cell fraction, the total ATP values and the high nucleic acid (HNA) bacterial fraction (from SYBR (R) Green I staining) were most representative of the active/viable population in all of the water samples. These rapid methods present an alternative way to assess the general microbial quality of drinking water as well as specific events that can occur during treatment and distribution, with equal application possibilities in research and routine analysis. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.8
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