Environmental Resources Center, University of Wisconsin-Extension, 445 Henry Mall, Madison, WI 53706, USA.
Environ Monit Assess. 2011 Mar;174(1-4):625-33. doi: 10.1007/s10661-010-1483-7. Epub 2010 May 8.
Fecal contamination of water is a public health concern for those using the water for drinking or recreation. The EPA recommends using Escherichia coli to evaluate recreational freshwaters for fecal contamination. With limited resources available, states have recently focused on training volunteers to expand data collection and resource assessment. Several bacteria testing methods are available for use by the public; however, few studies have comprehensively evaluated their use by volunteers. This study evaluated two E. coli monitoring methods used by volunteers: Coliscan Easygel® and 3M(TM) Petrifilm(TM), incubated for 24 and 48 hours. The methods were assessed to determine how closely each matched results with EPA-approved laboratory analyses. Analysis of covariance results indicated that when used by volunteers to monitor surface water, 3M(TM) Petrifilm(TM) results were more similar to laboratory analyses than Coliscan Easygel®. Both test methods had similar overall accuracy of predicting if a sample exceeded or fell below the 235 cfu/100 mL EPA body contact standard for recreational surface waters. Two-thirds of volunteers preferred 3M(TM) Petrifilm(TM).
粪便污染水是一个公共卫生关注的问题，对于那些使用水饮用或娱乐。环保局建议使用大肠杆菌来评估娱乐性淡水粪便污染。随着有限的资源，各州最近都集中培训志愿者，以扩大数据收集和资源评估。有几种细菌检测方法可供公众使用；然而，很少有研究全面评估其使用志愿者。本研究评估了两种志愿者使用的大肠杆菌监测方法：Coliscan Easygel®和 3M（TM）Petrifilm（TM），培养 24 小时和 48 小时。方法进行了评估，以确定每个方法与环保署批准的实验室分析结果的接近程度。协方差分析结果表明，当志愿者用于监测地表水时，3M（TM）Petrifilm（TM）的结果与实验室分析结果更接近。两种测试方法都具有相似的总体准确性，以预测样品是否超过或低于 235 cfu/100 毫升环保署身体接触标准的娱乐性地表水。三分之二的志愿者更喜欢 3M（TM）Petrifilm（TM）。
