Polytechnique Montréal, Civil, Geological and Mining Engineering Dpt., P.O. Box 6079, Succ. Centre-ville, Montréal H3C 3A7, Québec, Canada.
Department of Natural Resource Sciences, McGill University, Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue H9X 3V9, Québec, Canada.
Sci Total Environ. 2024 Nov 10;950:175136. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.175136. Epub 2024 Jul 30.
Precise and rapid methods are needed to improve monitoring approaches of L. pneumophila (Lp) in cooling towers (CTs) to allow timely operational adjustments and prevent outbreaks. The performance of liquid culture (ASTM D8429-21) and an online qPCR device were first compared to conventional filter plate culture (ISO 11731-2017), qPCR and semi-automated qPCR at three spiked concentrations of Lp (serogroup 1) validated by flow cytometry (total/viable cell count). The most accurate was qPCR, followed by liquid culture, online and semi-automated qPCR, and lastly, by a significant margin, filter plate culture. An industrial CT system was monitored using liquid and direct plate culture by the facility, qPCR and online qPCR. Direct plate and liquid culture results agreed at regulatory sampling point, supporting the use of the faster liquid culture for monitoring culturable Lp. During initial operation, qPCR and online qPCR results were within one log of culture at the primary pump before deviating after first cleaning. Other points revealed high spatial variability of Lp. The secondary pumps and chiller had the most positivity and highest concentrations by both qPCR and liquid culture compared to the basin and infeed tank. Altogether, this suggests that results from monthly compliance sampling at a single location with plate culture are not representative of Lp risks in this CT due to the high temporal and spatial variability. The primary pump, rather than the CT basin, should be designated for sampling, as it is representative of the health risk. An annual multi point survey of the system should be conducted to identify and target Lp hot spots. Generally, a combination of liquid culture for compliance and frequent qPCR for process control provides a more agile and robust monitoring scheme than plate culture alone, enabling early treatment adjustments, due to lower limit of detection (LOD) and turnover time.
需要精确和快速的方法来改进冷却塔(CT)中嗜肺军团菌(Lp)的监测方法,以允许及时进行操作调整并防止爆发。首先将液体培养(ASTM D8429-21)和在线 qPCR 设备与传统的滤膜平板培养(ISO 11731-2017)、qPCR 和半自动 qPCR 进行比较,这些方法在流式细胞术验证的三个 Lp(血清群 1)浓度下进行了比较(总/活细胞计数)。最准确的是 qPCR,其次是液体培养、在线和半自动 qPCR,最后是滤膜平板培养,差异显著。设施使用液体和直接平板培养、qPCR 和在线 qPCR 对工业 CT 系统进行了监测。直接平板和液体培养结果在法规采样点一致,支持使用更快的液体培养来监测可培养的 Lp。在初始运行期间,qPCR 和在线 qPCR 结果在初级泵前与培养结果一致,在首次清洗后开始偏离。其他点显示出 Lp 的高度空间变异性。与盆地和进料罐相比,次级泵和冷水机的 qPCR 和液体培养阳性率和浓度最高。总体而言,这表明由于时间和空间变异性高,使用平板培养进行每月合规性采样的单一位置的结果不能代表该 CT 中的 Lp 风险。由于其具有代表性,应将初级泵而不是 CT 盆地指定用于采样,因为它代表健康风险。应每年对系统进行多点调查,以确定和定位 Lp 热点。通常,液体培养用于合规性,qPCR 用于频繁的过程控制,这种组合比单独使用平板培养提供了更灵活和强大的监测方案,由于检测限(LOD)和周转时间更低,因此可以更早地进行治疗调整。