4.5 Article

Comparison of UV, Peracetic Acid and Sodium Hypochlorite Treatment in the Disinfection of Urban Wastewater

期刊

PATHOGENS
卷 10, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/pathogens10020182

关键词

wastewater; disinfection; Campylobacter; Salmonella spp; E coli O157; H7; STEC; indicator microrganisms; UV; peracetic acid; sodium hypochlorite

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study showed that sodium hypochlorite disinfection treatment had a better reduction in microbiological parameters compared to UV and peracetic acid. It is necessary to establish a complete and specific monitoring program to prevent potential risks to public health.
One source of water contamination is the release of wastewater that has not undergone efficient treatment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the reduction obtained with sodium hypochlorite (NaClO), UV and peracetic acid disinfection treatment of Salmonella spp., pathogenic Campylobacter, STEC and bacterial indicators in three full-scale municipal wastewater plants. A general reduction in Salmonella was observed after disinfection, but these bacteria were detected in one UV-treated sample (culture method) and in 33%, 50% and 17% of samples collected after NaClO, UV and PAA disinfection treatments, respectively (PCR method). A better reduction was also observed under NaClO disinfection for the microbial indicators. Independent of the disinfection treatment, E. coli O157:H7 was not detected in the disinfected samples, whereas some samples treated with UV and PAA showed the presence of the stx1 gene. No reduction in the presence of stx2 genes was verified for any of the disinfection treatments. Campylobacter was not detected in any of the analysed samples. The overall results highlight a better reduction in microbiological parameters with a NaClO disinfection treatment in a full-scale municipal wastewater plant compared with UV and PAA. However, the results indicate that a complete and specific monitoring program is necessary to prevent a possible risk to 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

4.5
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