4.8 Article

Prevalence of yeasts in beach sand at three bathing beaches in South Florida

期刊

WATER RESEARCH
卷 41, 期 9, 页码 1915-1920

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2007.02.010

关键词

fungi; non-traditional indicators; recreational waters; beach quality

资金

  1. NIEHS NIH HHS [P50 ES012736-05, P50 ES012736, P50ES12736] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The abundance and types of yeasts in the wet and dry sand of three recreational beaches in South Florida were determined. Samples were collected on 17 occasions between August 2001 and July 2002. After analyzing 102 sand samples, a total of 21 yeast species were identified by molecular methods. These isolates comprised four Basidiomycetes and 17 Ascomycetes and included eight species that had previously been reported from humans. The most frequently encountered yeasts were Candida tropicalis and Rhodotorula mucilaginosa. A greater diversity of species (16 species) was found in the dry sand above the high tide mark compared with the wet sand in the intertidal zone (11 species). Densities were also highest in the dry sand relative to wet sand (20-fold higher at Hobie beach, 6-fold higher at Fort Lauderdale Beach and 1.3-fold higher at Hollywood beach). There were no clear temporal patterns in the data and overall densities were greatest at the busiest bathing beach (Hobie Beach) where total yeasts averaged 37,720 cfu 100 (g-1) dry sand and 1852 cfu 100 g(-1) in the wet sand. This concentration of yeast was significantly higher than populations at the less populated beaches. Fort Lauderdale beach had a mean count of 4130 cfu 100 g-1 dry sand and 705 cfu 100 g(-1) in the wet sand while the least populated beach, Hollywood Beach averaged 1945 cfu 100 g(-1) dry sand and 1483 cfu 100 g(-1) wet sand. While definitive statements cannot be made, high levels of yeasts may have a deleterious bearing on human health and the presence of such a diverse aggregation of species suggests that yeasts could have a role as indicators of beach health. (c) 2007 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

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