Jacobs N J, Zeigler W L, Reed F C, Stukel T A, Rice E W
Appl Environ Microbiol. 1986 May;51(5):1007-12. doi: 10.1128/aem.51.5.1007-1012.1986.
Methods for detecting total coliform bacteria in drinking water were compared using 1,483 different drinking water samples from 15 small community water systems in Vermont and New Hampshire. The methods included the membrane filter (MF) technique, a 10-tube fermentation tube (FT) technique, and the presence-absence (P-A) test. Each technique was evaluated using a 100-ml drinking water sample. Of the 1,483 samples tested, 336 (23%) contained coliforms as indicated by either one, two, or all three techniques. The FT detected 82%, the P-A detected 88%, and the MF detected 64% of these positives. All techniques simultaneously detected 55% of the positives. Evaluation of the confirmation efficiency of the P-A technique showed 94% of the presumptive positives confirming as coliforms. Thirteen different species of coliforms were identified from the 37 tests in which the P-A was positive but the MF and FT were negative. The P-A test was simple to inoculate and interpret and was considerably more sensitive than the MF and slightly more sensitive than the FT in detecting coliforms in this type of drinking water supply.
利用来自佛蒙特州和新罕布什尔州15个小型社区供水系统的1483份不同饮用水样本,对饮用水中总大肠菌群的检测方法进行了比较。这些方法包括膜过滤(MF)技术、10管发酵管(FT)技术和存在-缺失(P-A)试验。每种技术都使用100毫升饮用水样本进行评估。在检测的1483个样本中,336个(23%)样本通过一种、两种或所有三种技术检测出含有大肠菌群。FT检测出这些阳性样本中的82%,P-A检测出88%,MF检测出64%。所有技术同时检测出55%的阳性样本。对P-A技术的确认效率评估显示,94%的推定阳性样本被确认为大肠菌群。在P-A呈阳性但MF和FT呈阴性的37次检测中,鉴定出了13种不同的大肠菌群。P-A试验接种和解读简单,在检测这类饮用水供应中的大肠菌群时,比MF灵敏度高得多,比FT略灵敏。