Downloaded from http://journals.tums.ac.ir/ on Friday, August 24, 2012 fecal microorganisms (including pathogens for pathogens (including microorganisms fecal of variety wide a and quantities large also carries wastewater raw that fact the Despite exposure. with order todecrease public health risks associated in load pathogen reduce to is facilities reclamation wastewater of goal A major functioning. in their disturbance severe cause and ecosystems aquatic of contamination fecal of source major the are effluents wastewater The purposes. recreational other and irrigation drinking, for used bodies water these of quality water the depletes severely which of treated, partiallytreated untreated or environmental bodies amount receives significant a The sewage. was pathogens these of source was subsequently determined that threats. common were amoebiasis and cholera epidemicsdiseases of typhoid, such as shigellosis, countries, various of history the early During INTRODUCTION Tel:Fax:246811 1334 245940, 1334 +91 +91 author-Email:*Corresponding Key words: pathogens. me of predictive highly ismost indicator single certa of presence the of predictive be to likely more is p and viruses, enteric E As pathogens. borne water of spectrum total the reveal will these indicators of study and the indicators water microbial pollutio significant such four out brings literature relevant The quality. wastewater indicator microorganisms and proposed signific safeguard our water resources and public health. This review addresses the limitations current of faecal to regulations and guidelines implementing realistically before organisms indicator ofthese limitations presence of disease causing organisms. Therefore, it isimportant to understand the potential an Worldwide coliform bacteriaare ABSTRACT rotozoan and enteric viruses. Therefore, monitoring asuite ofindicator organisms in reclaimed effluen .coli 2 ALTERNATIVE MICROBIA Department of Zoology and Environm Zoology and Department of and enterococci indicates the presence of bact of indicates thepresence andenterococci 1 Department of Civil Engineering, Indian In Indian Engineering, ofCivil Department Indicator microorganisms, 1 V. K. Tyagi,V. K. [email protected] Clostridium perfringens Clostridium Iran.J. Environ. Health. Sci.Vol. Eng., 2006, 3, 3, No. 205-216 pp. Received 10 March 2005; revised 15 May 2006; accepted 18June2006 152006;accepted May 2005;revised 10March Received CURRENT PERSPECTIVE PERSPECTIVE CURRENT *
used as used of fecalcontamination indicators and hence, the possible 2 the primary A. K. Chopra, ental Science, Gurukula Kangriental Science,Gurukula University, Hardwar-249404 ,INDIA E.coli
sewage, L INDICATORS OFFAECAL POLLUTION: , fecal coliforms, coliphages, , fecal , an obligate anaerobe, indicates presence of parasitic of presence indicates anaerobe, obligate an ,
It stitute of stitute of Technology, Roorkee-247667, INDIA ant alternative microbial indicators of water anmicrobial of ant alternative water indicators mbership in the presence or absence category mbershipfo inthe presence category or absence
1 erial pathogens, Coliphages indicate the presence o thepresence indicate Coliphages pathogens, erial A. A. Kazmi, A. in pathogens in order to protect public health, as no health, public protect order to in pathogens in has been proved that the conventional indicators conventional the that proved been has origin (George (George origin of fecal microbes indicator of removal for facilities treatment wastewater of efficiency treatment efforts are devoted at present to assessing increasing the and pathogens the specific of presence safety of these waters by analyzingthem for the theThus, need to determine the microbiological crops. and parks of irrigation for future in the used be will water reclaimed more and more shortage, water a facing in areas and quality waters surface of deterioration global a to lead has demand the demography and growingincreasing water (Koivunen concern primary of is sewage to population of exposure indirect and direct the However, wastewater. treated of quality microbiological the regarding directives no are there present at and country developing inwastewater not has been in priority sofar a pollution microbiological of reduction The humans). 1 Arvind Kumar et al. et clostridium perfringens , 2002; Kazmi 2002; , et al. et et al et , 2003). The 2003)., ., 2006). It 2006). .,
n d d f r t 205 Downloaded from http://journals.tums.ac.ir/ on Friday, August 24, 2012 206 the detection of sewage borne pathogen become pathogen borne sewage of detection the for methods since coliform), fecal and coliform (Total common indicators these using by protected not is health public the Thus, environment. inthe growth of capable are many because contaminationfaecal unreliable of indicators considered generally are coliforms as, well (Harwood viruses enteric and parasites protozoan with correlate to failure and relatively high susceptibility tochemical disinfection their to due effluent wastewater disinfected in pathogens of occurrence the reflect adequately not do They information. erroneous provide waters of coliforms), used to evaluate microbiological quality fecal and (total bacteria coliform i.e. origin fecal of Shigella Vibrio cholerae Leptospira Cryptosporidium parvum Jaundice,Fe AcuteGastroenteritis Source InfectiousHepatitis IncubationPeriod Rota virus Hepatitis A Clinical Symptoms Enteroviruses Viruses Disease Salmonella typhi Ecoli Bacteria Agent Entamoeba histolytica Protozoa Giardia Lamblia Table 2:Table Pathogens inwastewater (Yates,1998) Cryptosporidium Cryptosporidium Entamoeba histolytica lamblia Giardia A Hepatitis Rota virus Virus Polio Leptospira 10-100000Vibrio E.Coli Shigella Salmonella Number Organisms (L) (enteropathogenic) Gastroenteritis Diarrhea 2-6 days Human feces Human feces 2-6days Diarrhea Gastroenteritis (enteropathogenic) Table 1: Infectious agents potentially present in raw domestic wastewater Shigellosis Bacillary Dysentery 1-7 days Human feces Human feces 1-7days Bacillary Dysentery Cholera Shigellosis etsioi Judc rfvr 2-20 days Jaundiceor fever Leptospirosis rpoprdoi irha 1-2 weeks Cryptosporidiosis Diarrhea Meningitis Heart anomalies, Polio, Gastroenteritis, Typhoid fever iriss irha asa nieto 5-25 days Diarrhea, nausea, indigestion Giardiasis Amoebiasis
V. K. Tyag i, et a l., l., a et i, Tyag K. V. Iran.J. Environ. Health. Sci.Vol. Eng., 2006, 3, 3, No. 205-216 pp. ( et al. et 5-5180 4 530-100000 Unknown 400-85000 182-492000 Unknown Unknown 10-10000 23-80000 Hurst et al. Hurst et , 2005). 2005). , As , 2002; Metcalf and Eddy, 2003) ALTERNATIVE MICROBIAL INDICATORS... dehydration heavyExtremely diarrhea, respiratory illness. disease, Paralytic ulceration of intestine small High fever, diarrhea, and vomiting nausea Gastroenteritiswith diarrhea Abdominal Painwithbloody
e,Aoei 1-0dy Human feces 15-50days Anorexia ver, (Fecham helminthes and protozoa, viruses, bacteria, found in polluted waters several are members of hepatitis, jaundice fever, diarrhea, amoebiasis etc) shigellosis, fever, cholera, (typhoid diseases waterborne with associated microorganisms The RESULTS obtained after extensive literature review is being i.e. outbreaks disease waterborne of major data study epidemiological Some diseases. waterborne to due world the of part different in year every die people of Millions authorities. treatment water to concern great of always is wastewater in raw microorganisms of number large of existence The in India) out carried studies (Epidemiological wastewater in to microbial pollutants effectsPublic due health nature and extent of contaminants. of extent and nature the suggests and occurred has contamination that presumes presence whose microbes indicator toselect someis unconventional the approach Therefore, consumer. for water of safety complete ensure do not and unreliable qualitatively complex, et al. et , (Table, 1983) 1 and Table 2). -2hs Human feces 9-72 hrs 3-14 days Human feces Human feces 3-14 days 7-28 days 2-3 days Human feces Human feces 2-3 days 2-4 weeks Human feces Human feces 2-4 weeks infected animalsinfected Urine from animal feces animal feces Human and urine and Human feces animal feces animal feces Human and Downloaded from http://journals.tums.ac.ir/ on Friday, August 24, 2012 Acute jaundice 84 2 84 12 24686 jaundice Acute Suspected 37 malarial 52707 cases Diarrhea Deaths Cases Progressive Situation Health water. drinking impure by primarily caused age under children UNICEF, m in 3.8 1993, from 178 blocks are affected. According to As per thedisease Surveillancecell report people and Volunteer UN National room, NGOs Doctor. control Govt. from received being is disease born water of Report Orissa. in centers health 235 of flooding to due hit been badly have services Health (v) Diarrhea cases histolytica. Entamoeba containing sewage by contaminated was water drinking when resulted deaths 98 and people were affected which 1400 over in inChicago epidemic an by illustrated as nonetheless, serious be can infection Protozoan (iv) Amoebic dysentery water supply andfac sanitary poor to due occur will outbreaks These year. each casesaround reported 60,000 in the United States break ofOut hepatitis moreare common, with Hepatitis (iii) Tripura. Mizoram, Assam, Meghalaya, Karnataka, and reported fromfollowed Orissa, by West Bengal, were death of number largest the and Rajasthan U.P., Jharkhand, West Bengal, Chattisgarh, were reported from Orissa,followed by Gujrat, largestIn number 2004, cases of inthe country deaths werereported from the countryin 2003. An overall million1.87 1006 andmalaria cases of Malaria (ii) reported. fever typhoid due to death whereas incases and 78,451 304 2, about 1994, death, 888 and cases 57,452 3, number was cases with deaths735 were reported. the In1993 food born disease. In India (1992), about 52,9803, or born water of outbreaks periodic with country the of part all endemic is in almost disease The Fever Typhoid (i) provided. 5 died from diarrhea diseases diarrhea from died Iran.J. Environ. Health. Sci.Vol. Eng., 2006, 3, 3, No. 205-216 pp. illion developing-world illion ilities. 1933 in of which contain water of a quality inferior to that to inferior quality a of water contain which of some sources, new of development the towards mankind pushed has water of demands Increasing 10,000 countries reuse/ NA Microbiological quality disposal standards for 21000 million 4 2 billion 500million Typhoid 25,000Cholera 1million Amoebiasis Diarrhea Disease of Infected Persons No. of Deaths No. Year (WHO,1992) (x). Deaths from water borne diseases each vomiting. and aches body highfever, include leptospirosis of symptoms The infection. bacterial a Leptospirosis, to attributed were deaths the of Most andstate the deathtoll expected is to210. rise to remain in hospitals westernacross Maharashtra breathlessness and nausea fever, of complaining die (Aug.16, 2005). More than 6,000 patients Water supply completely polluted –more than 300 in Western fall –Mumbai. rain massive India after epidemic like spreading diseases Waterborne Leptospirosis (ix) 2200 people died from cholera (Times of approximately India, 1994). 1994, and August May of months the between Bihar of state the in — India in problem later, the cholera epidemic continues to be a and Bangladesh. A in India, Thailand, reported year was cholera of outbreak an 1993, In August (viii) Cholera diseases. gastrointestinal waterborne of result a as day per deaths infant 300 approximately are there alone, of Orissa state the In communities. Indian Gastroenteritis (vii) Gastroenteritis almost all water born diseases of (Kulkarni factors contributing main the one of as seen be therefore can mechanism disposal waste and facilities sanitation Poor water. of contamination with entericfever.to fecal attributed was This them presented of all and affected, were individual (India),An around Maharashtra 415 outbreaks at Fever Enteric (vi) recycle of wastewaterurban various in
poses serious a healththreat to et al. et , 1996)., 207 / Downloaded from http://journals.tums.ac.ir/ on Friday, August 24, 2012 208 (Table 6and Table 7). different uses of have waters been developed Worldwide microbial various for standards nematode conditions. egg incertain limits (<10 coliform (FC) value for restricted irrigation fecal a for recommendations new are guidelines WHO the from main1989 differences The by WHO (Table 4) and USEPA (Table 5). recommended been have standards quality water and world the of parts inwater-short used widely is wastewater reclaimed processes, industrial certain and recharge groundwater irrigation, fodder irrigation, landscape as uses such For 3). (Table wastewater and of (DBU) water Uses on Best Designated based guidelines microbiological some formulates (CPCB) Board Control Pollution Central Ganga its Actionin (GAP) Therefore,Plan 1986. sourcepisciculture of a andas inand aquaculture a resourcefor energy, irrigation water as for crops wastewater urban accepted and early problem this envisaged India of Government The purposes. supply water for past in the acceptable judged * Values in brackets arethe 2000-guideline values. C A Category Reuse conditions B
Table 5: USEPA Typical 5: USEPA Table 5 Indirect reuse reuse Indirect aquifers Potable Reclaimed quality waterrecharge Ground crops. Non-food irrigation, orchards, andvineyards. surface processed crops, commercially Food reuse Agricultural Recreational lakes Toilet flushing irrigationLandscape reuse Urban Typeof reuse FC/100mL) and new fecal coliform and Table 4:WHOrecommendedmicrobiol human exposure crops incategoryB ifno Localized irrigation of and fodder crops, cereal crops, industrial Restricted Irrigation of public parks fields, crops tobeeaten, of Irrigation Unrestricted Guidelines for effluent reuse (United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1992) 1992) Agency, Protection StatesEnvironmental reuse (United for Guidelines effluent Iran.J. Environ. Health. Sci.Vol. Eng., 2006, 3, 3, No. 205-216 pp. V. K. Tyagi, et al., None Not applicable Not applicable Workers <1 <1 Workers public consumers, Workers group Exposed (World Health Organization,(World Health 1989) residual chlorine; other parameters as potablestandards. as parameters other chlorine; residual coliforms/100ml;No fecal 1mg/L 2NTU; < Turbidity pH 6.5-8.5, chlorine. mg/L residual 1 /100mL; 200 < coliforms Fecal mg/L; <30mg/L,< 30 pH 6-9, BOD SS No fecal coliformsmg/L1 /100mL;residual chlorine. <10mg/L,pH 6-9,2NTU; BOD Turbidity< ALTERNATIVE MICROBIAL INDICATORS... ogical quality guidelines for wastewater use in agriculture (<0.1)<1 <1000 (eggs/litre) nematodes Intestinal
D- Surface waters used for fish waters D-Surface treatment followed by disinfection C-Surface waters for use as drinking water sourceswith conventional watersfor B-Surface bathing outdoor conventional treatment butafter disinfection watersdr foruseas A-Surface classification *CPCB with respec disposal disposal for irrigation, waters i E-Surface 9 - 8 Viruses 7 6 5 4 Fecal 3 Fecal streptococci Coliform 2 Total - - Coliform 1 Total No. Sample - count Table 3: Guidelines for surface waters
helminths, etc.) etc.) helminths, and (protozoans parasites Pathogenic cholerae Vibrio P. aeruginosa Salmonella Parameters No standard (10 (cells/litre) Fecal coliforms 5 ) inking watersourceswithout culture andwild ndustrial control cooling or waste t to DesignatedBest Use(DBU) - - - - - E- - D- C- 5000 500 B- 50(MPN/100ml)A- (A,E) B,C,D, ofwater, 1982) classes* various for standards INDIAN sedimentation At leastprimary stabilization ponds 8-10 dayin retention ponds stabilization Series of microbiological quality the toachieve Treatment life proplife agation agation Downloaded from http://journals.tums.ac.ir/ on Friday, August 24, 2012 indicators or not. Thus, the prevention and control and prevention the Thus, not. or indicators coliforms fulfills the basic criteria of an appropriate either that recognized be should it guidelines, and standards quality water implementing the before However, wastewaters. and waters of safety microbiological the detect to tool useful a as oncoliforms reliance heavy put standards and guidelines most that revealed literature The wastewater. and water of use of modes various for standards and guidelines quality water the orders in put to and waters of quality microbiological the to determine tool microbial reliable Worldwide a as coliforms have been treated DISCUSSION parasites Pathogenic Vibrio cholera P. aeruginosa Salmonella coliforms Fecal coliforms Total Total Count 1984) Association, Health (American Public Pools, Swimming Public Covering Regulations and Ordinances suggested *APHA d-Non-mains water supply a-Treated water fed into mains; b-Untreated water fed into mains; c-mains water 1. Parameters No. Sample 2. Coliforms 3. E.coli 3. E.coli 4. .Sloel - i - - - Nil Nil Nil - 7. Vibrio - - 6. Salmonella - 5. F. cholerae streptococci - - Parameters USA* Middle Middle Parameters USA* East (permL) 100 count Total Sources (permL) 100 coliforms Total Table 7: Waterquality standards for recreati Free fromall kindsofindicator andpathogenic bacteria ( ii ) Membrane filter-1 ( ii coliform/50ml )( MPN-any i five10ml portions notmoreMPN/100ml than2.2 200 colonies/100ml than 15%month inany should show agar35 platecountat Whenml 10 of portions thesampleare tested methodMPN by more –not Table 6: Guidelines for potable wate forpotable 6:Guidelines Table Iran.J. Environ. Health. Sci.Vol. Eng., 2006, 3, 3, No. 205-216 pp. - 198 recommendations, WHO d. 10 d. 10 3 c. 0, b. 3 0, a. 0 d. 0 d. 0 c. 0 b. 0 a. 0 - EPA, USA (1976) Middle East Middle USA(1976)EPA, not exceed 4/ 100 mL - 0/100 mL 0/100 - 100 mL exceed4/ not - - 0/100 mL onal water followed in USA andMiddle East
r (Drinking Water Quality Standards) Quality (Drinking Water r
feasible mainly for the reasons the for mainly feasible not is this Nevertheless, disease. waterborne for factors risk evaluate and identify to and quality water microbiological measure to methods rapid and accurate requires diseases waterborne of (c) A certain incubation period is usually required usually is period incubation (c) A certain in rapidly out die will pathogens enteric The (b) excretes it, from suffering A(a) population, limited water will have already traveled a large a traveled already have will water of disease and before thisoccurs, the polluted symptoms typical to rise give to pathogens for thewaters due to unsuitable environment pathogens ° C of moreC of than (average) value 10-< 100 this bacteria from Free Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil < 100bacterial count/100ml method 10Membrane to filter water guidelines, 1996 Australian drinking - 0/100 mL0/100 209 Downloaded from http://journals.tums.ac.ir/ on Friday, August 24, 2012 210 indicator: microbial term the elucidate to order in groups 2001; and2001; Payment, 1998). indicator followsNHMRC, as is (WHO, 1996; appropriate an of choice final making for criterion organismsand (Metcalf Eddy, The2003). basic havecontaminants, been chosen indicator as of extent and nature the suggests and occurred has contamination that presumes presence whose origin, fecal of microorganisms Therefore, consumer. for water of safety complete ensure not becomes complex, unreliable and doesqualitatively the detectionThus, of pathogens waterborne WHO (2002) (e) Specific organisms of disease may be present be may disease of organisms Specific (e) is waters treated in pathogens of Presence (d) - It should be consistently present in fresh fecal fresh in present consistently be should It - infecally present be always should - An indicator - Index and model organisms: A group /or species /or A model organisms: and group Index - Aindicators: that Fecal of organisms group - A group indicators: microbial (process) General - o o o o of human enteric viruses. enteric human of models as coliphages F-RNA and Salmonella as such respectively, behavior and presence pathogen of indicative pathogens may be present. that infer they Hence, coli. E. or coliforms such theas bacterialgroups Thermotolerant contamination, presencefecal of the indicates disinfections. chlorine for coliforms total or bacteria heterotrophic total as such process a of efficiency the demonstrates that organisms of only occasionally. impossible cases in some and difficult isolation its renders which sparse distance waste and should be non-pathogenic. be should and waste water. contaminated It should not grow in natural waters. in natural grow not should It associated pathogens. length of time than pathogen. stress or treatment and persist for greater environmental to resistant more be should It organisms. indicator of identification the for detection,should enumeration exist and Simple, reliable, and inexpensive and Simple, reliable, methods It mustoccur ingreater numbersthan the
has recognized the following three following the recognized has Iran.J. Environ. Health. Sci.Vol. Eng., 2006, 3, 3, No. 205-216 pp. V. K. Tyagi, et al., E.coli as an index for an as ALTERNATIVE MICROBIAL INDICATORS... worldwide. focus of change been a has there coliforms, total of limitations the of acceptance and understanding growing a to response In reporting. compliance for quality, and water microbiological of measurement include a indicators as coliforms bacterial standards and guidelines quality wastewater and water international health significance. Most public adequate protection measurement in context with pathogens an not is of type all for indicator as quality. group Rely coliform upon bacterial water for established to meet ideal criteria all used currently indicators the conventional bacterial Winfield and Groisman,2003). As result, a (Horman reported been widely have methods of detection lowsensitivity and pathogens of presence the with correlation of levels low non-point), and (point contamination fecal of (Hurst great weakness2000), the to disinfection process (Desmarais tomultiply releasing after into water column (Scott (Savichtcheva and Okabi, 2006), body water in survival short including application with their associated limitations numerous However, pathogens. enteric with association possible and pollution fecal indicate may in water presence their and birds, and mammals higher from origin fecal of are microorganisms These pathogens. protozoan and viral bacterial, of presence of prediction for and water of impairment countriesa monitoring as toolfor microbiological coliformsand fecal have been used in many including total bacteria fecal indicator Historically, 3.The New Zealand ministry of Health (NZMoH) Health of ministry Zealand New 3.The 2.Volume 2of 2 1.The European Union (EU) in 1998removed TC coliforms. Therational for the moveto E.coli total or coliforms on fecal relies nolonger and pollution, of fecal indicator bacterial a as E.coli only includes standards, quality water revised clostridia. reducing sulphate and enterococci as debates the merits of alternative indicators such and pollution fecal of indicator an as coliforms total of inadequacies the indetail discussed enterococci 2001). (NHMRC, added and indicator primary mandatory a as et al et et al et ., 2002), inab 2002), ., ., 2002; Simpson 2002; ., et al., et nd edition (WHO, 1996) however, 1996) (WHO, edition 2002; Solo-Gabriele ility to identify the source the toidentify ility et. al et. non-fecal source non-fecal ., 2002), ability 2002), ., et al et ., 2004; ., none of et al et ., Downloaded from http://journals.tums.ac.ir/ on Friday, August 24, 2012 Enterobacter and Citrobacter have been the been have Citrobacter and Enterobacter Klebsiella, pollution. fecal to unrelated totally environments aquatic and vegetation soil, from originate bacteria coliform many contrary, the On gp.). coliforms Fecal in considered Klebsiella including group bacterial of variety ofthe a presence from occur can coliform counts faecal coliform and total The climates. tropical in everywhere reported been has coliform fecal as can somecoliform bacteria suchas total and willand environment in notmultiply pathogens this to week. Viruses and parasites are obligate days few a of matter a die in will that pathogens most to contrary years to months for environment Viruses canparasites survive and inthe reliable. always not are coliforms considerably, differs microorganisms of types various the of in source waters. However,because the survival origin animal and human from level arising pollution establishing basic level knowledge on the fecal for tool best our remains probably coliforms Payment2005). and total (1998) that states fecal (Tallon origin in non-fecal were coliforms of strains 1000 over examined numbers total distribution systems.was It found 61% of that the in both the environment inand drinking water growth of capable are many because contamination fecal of indicators unreliable considered generally are coliform Total jurisdictions. review isunder health in public many for water reclaimed of safety the about information of mainsource the as organisms indicator on reliance the although FC, and TC are countries in developing resources water surface and facilities treatment wastewater of efficiency the monitoring for used presently organisms indicator The ii)E.coli health a removed as be coliform i)Total (NHMRC, guidelines water drinking 4.Australian compliance parameter for fecal contamination fecal for parameter compliance recommended1996) that: risk. health the indicate necessarily not does presence their and waters be can found innatural and FC TC both that the acknowledgement on based is parameter for fecal contamination. be retained as the primary compliance primary the as retained be , Citrobacter and Iran.J. Environ. Health. Sci.Vol. Eng., 2006, 3, 3, No. 205-216 pp. Enterobacter Eschrichia et al. et (not , , of coliform (other bacteria than presence the that evidence sufficient now is There purposes: major following have indicators bacterial for monitoring system source water drinking and system treatment Wastewater disposal wastewater of modes various for microbiological indicators (parameters) in treated Identification and recommendation for appropriate indicatorrisk assumes (FAO, a 2005). using only Thus the coliform ratio. this faecal between relationship strong a show to available no data are there Nevertheless, material. faecal all in occurs also which group, streptococcus faecal method tohelp define the use isto the source One origin. animal or human of is contamination water the whether tell not does detection and pollution of sources animal and human in both coliform measurement that is faecal coliform occur (Leclerc worldwide coliforms environmental predominant in fecal material and generally not elsewhere in elsewhere not generally and material in fecal numbers higher in present is it because pollution E.coli wastes. animal and human from contamination E.coli fecal indicator key enterococci- and (E.coli) coli Escherichia extracted. been have pollution water microbial of indicators significant most four review, literature extensive Coliphages (Clark Bifidobacteria, Bacteriophages (Phages) and (SRC), Clostridia streptococci ,enterococci, sulphite-reducing Coliforms, Thermotolerant Coliforms, including proposed been have microorganisms indicator fecal key The risk. health a of presence the of putative 4.To alert possiblefor contamination cross and cleanliness system general the monitor 3.To /or and treatment that demonstrate 2.To 1.To identify generalfecal contamination of contamination from open storages open from contamination effectively working are process disinfection waters source ’s presence is more representative of fecal of representative more is ’s presence
is the best coliform indicator of fecal of indicator coliform best the is et al et Escherichia coli (E. coli) ., 2001). ., A disadvantage tothe faecal Clostridium perfringens, Clostridium et al. , 1996)., Based on E.coli ) isnot ) , fecal 211 Downloaded from http://journals.tums.ac.ir/ on Friday, August 24, 2012 Protection Agency (USEPA), European Union Environmental United States as bodies such International major fecal by contamination for E.coli including: advantages indicators as over coliforms total of number a have Enterococci pollution. of fecal indicators as regarded be enterococci can Generally, examination for water purposes faecium faecalis Streptococcus Enterococcus that formedwas by the splitting of streptococci “ as known bacteria of group functional coliform. The enterococci were included in the of alternatives as suggested often most been has that bacteria of group the are Enterococci The of fecal pollutionavailable (Edberg indicator sensitive most the as use continued their support environments other in present generally not are E.coli most sensitive indicator. The large numbers of be to seems it wastewater, treated and water of ofassessment public through health monitoringrisk (Hurst of100% coliform organismsisolated are E.coli. 90- feces, animal and human In environment. the 212 1.They generally do not grow in the environment in the grow not do generally 1.They (NHMRC-ARMCANZ, 1996; 1996; Tallon (NHMRC-ARMCANZ, feces Human type Sample Percentage distribution of
survive longer (Mcfeters (Mcfeters longer survive and they 1993) (WHO, have beenshown to
Yes High Poor/ growth Low Yes/no low Easy low Yes/no Low Poor/ growth High Yes pathogen Associated with Associated with Associated retained as primary compliance parameter compliance primary as retained present in human gut and the thatfact they pathogen pathogen et al (Schleifer and Klipper-Balz, 1984). Yes High Yes High Low long Yes/no low Easy ” and now largely belong to the genus the to belong nowlargely and ” ., 2002). componentthe As a of 2002). ., E.coli E.coli >94 94.1 96.8 (%) Reference Reference (%) water source No. in No. in source source in No. Criteria for selecting Enterococci water water V. K. Tyagi, et al., Iran.J. Environ. Health. Sci.Vol. Eng., 2006, 3, 3, No. 205-216 pp. E.coli Seyfried Harris (1990) and Allen andEdberg (1995) Dufour (1977) and Criteria for selecting et al et in human faeces et al. et Survival inenv. Survival Streptococcus ., 1974). ., et al., et Survival in Survival in , 2000). , env. 2005) ALTERNATIVE MICROBIAL INDICATORS... fecal E.coli
as an (Payment, 1998) indicator
Resistance to Resistance as an indicator (Payment, 1998) 1998) as an indicator(Payment, treatment treatment Resistance to treatment treatment pollution. Because pollution. Because of natural waternot subjectto pollution. The presence faeces ofhumans animals and rarely found but in ministry laboratories (FAO,2005). health and university most by understood widely and easy are methods the detection While plants. treatment wastewater on control process for or water irrigation of usability the assess to standards been usedin international most or national not has however, indicator, This waste. human of indicator the reliable most often as is cited count its material, faecal human most in species bacterial mostly mostly are organisms coliform fecal climates, temperate fecal contamination (Tallon recent for bacteria the as sole used indicator be to for recommendation a supports and not, was while water river non-polluted in growth of capable were coliforms total and thermotolerant Baudizsovafoundthe (1997) that other guidelines. water drinking Australian and (EU) species (Pinto fecal true were sources water polluted of variety a from isolated (84%) enterococci of majority the that showed pollution of indicator as streptococci faecal of relevance on the research recent More absence or presence of fecal pollution. fecal of presence or absence E.coli for measurement with combined When pollution. additional an as indicatorsubgroup) of fecal fecal streptococci (of which enterococci a are of use the recommends also (1996) WHO The 3.Rapid and simple methods based on on defined based methods simple and 3.Rapid detected be to enough numerous still are 2.They E.coli detection and enumeration of enterococci of enumeration and detection the for available are technology, substrate dilution significant after , the result is increased confidence in the confidence increased is result the , E.coli is regarded as definite proof faecal of proof definite as regarded is Pathogenic Cost Enumeration Enumeration Cost Pathogenic , whichare always found in the et al. et ahgncCs Enumeration Pathogenic Cost , 1999). , E.coli is the predominant et al. et , 2005). In 2005). , E.coli E.coli Downloaded from http://journals.tums.ac.ir/ on Friday, August 24, 2012 were reported. bacteriophages and intensity of fecal contamination between the certain presence of correlations direct The indicators. viral enteric and fecal as proposed been previously has of viruses group Harwood contaminated withhuman faeces 1996; (NHMRC, riskto water consumersif health a water pose that has been viruses enteric human of those resemble characteristics survival and morphology alternative indicator forenteric viruses, an as as their proposed been have Bacteriophages phages. generally more or coliphages, as known are coliforms infect that those and bacteria infect that viruses are Bacteriophages Bacteriophages 2002). WHO, 1978; (Cabelli, water of quality sanitary the of indicator possible a considered as seriously organism micro- forming, non- motile, strictly anaerobic rods, enteric spore reducing, sulphite +ve, gram are These Clostridium perfringens human bacterialpathogens. of model organisms appropriate as used be can al. et (Tallon tested individual the of 9-70% of faeces the in found being common, less were coliforms thermotolerant non-E.coli, whilethe 100%, 94- of faeces the in found being tested, individuals and enterococci weremore common among the bacteria. pathogenic enteric of presence the reflect to expected is conditions environmental of behavior the Thus, by (Gleeson and Gray, 1997). The spores produced column ( in water groups pathogen of the to any correlated significantly group indicator only the were and pollution of fecal indicator best the as identified standards. quality water recreational inestablishing use for proposed being is and contamination fecal of indicator reliable
C. perfringens Associated with Associated with , 2005). As aresult, E.coli andenterococci pathogen yes low Very Y/N long high low Easy et al. et Giardia sp , 2005). Bacteriophages, 2005). , a wide are very resistantto disinfection C. perfringensC. source No. in water E.coli C. perfringens C. . and Criteria for selecting Iran.J. Environ. Health. Sci.Vol. Eng., 2006, 3, 3, No. 205-216 pp. and enterococci under enterococci and Aeromonas sp Survival Survival in env. spores were isthe only C. perfringens E.coli to treatment to treatment Resistance .)
environment. in survival long its to due individually not nature) andfresh waters due to its facultative anaerobic wastewaters both for coliforms (used fecal and with only inconjunction used be should it (Tallon contamination faecal recent of indicators good be to enduring too allow detection are that form but spores Somatic coliphages (Bitton, Hurst 2002; assessment quality of water aspects various for considered potentialmicroorganisms as model Three mainofgroups bacteriophages have been human pathogenic protozoans. pathogenic human model of the presence a for as organism used be can it Therefore, cysts. Giardia and oocysts shown to beuseful indicator for Cryptosporidium 1998). (Payment, factors environmental to resistant extremely are bacteria anaerobic of spores and growth their for suitable conditions anaerobic because environment the 1993). Franco, and (Payment contamination of cause suspected viruses and protozoa parasitic when sewage the is perfringens C. al. et (Leeming blooded animals warm inother absent or lower generally is and humans than dogs as such animals of feces the in concentrations in higher inefficiencies. treatment in filtered supplies may be an indication of presence their that suggests (1996) the and WHO asan indicator 1998) (Payment, - - - - Considering the difference in origin and ecology and inorigin difference the Considering the gut. outside potential replication their is coliphages somatic of drawbacks the of One hrs. in 4 obtained be may results and themsimple very is detect to methodology The systems and sewage effluents. water in various viruses enteric of presence the with correlation direct their to due pollution sewage fecal of indicators as used Commonly of viruses Specific , 1998). There is evidence to show that show to evidence is There 1998). , ahgncCs Enumeration Pathogenic Cost Clostridium perfringens Clostridium may be suitable indicator a for C. perfringens C. et al. et E.coli et al. et C. perfringens C. , 2002). , , 2005). Nonetheless, 2005). , C. perfringens C. rarely multiply in multiply rarely has been has present is E.coli can 213 Downloaded from http://journals.tums.ac.ir/ on Friday, August 24, 2012 214 (Puig (Puig Bacteriophages infecting Bacteriodes fragilis because: coliphages RNA F-specific the is indicator quality water a as use for coliphages review of literature indicates thethat most likely inability to replicate in thewater ecosystem. been of theirbecause has proposed, indicators A theseusepollutionThe fecal of as phages F-SpecificBacteriophages RNA quality because: quality water of indicator good a as proposed been have The phages whichinfect group of this bacteria in high concentrations in human intestinal tracts. fragilis Bacteriodes - A standardized method for the detection and detection the for method A standardized - waters in environmental found concentration Its - which more are stable viruses, represents It - The comprises group similar virusesin size, - - Phages against this strain are human specific human are strain this against Phages - results can be obtained in twelve hours. in twelve obtained be can results enumeration of now thisphage is available; 1988). Pot-Hogeboom, and (Havelaar contamination has been reported tocorrelate with sewage disinfections. to resistant more and waters environmental in enteroviruses human than diseases. waterborne the of most for responsible are which viruses, enteric human to makeup, genetic and shape, (Morinigo (Morinigo indicator viral as bein used situations all could successfully phagethis group that doubtful between enteric coliphage, virus and S. it is warm-blooded animals. warm-blooded isolated from not the feces are of and other
aeseii ys ne ln Itreit n itr inter inter no Intermediate long Inter yes Male specific Coliphages Somatic Somatic Organism et al et ., 1999; 1999; Jofre., et al et Associated with Associated with ., 1992). ., Pathogens Pathogens Yes/no High Long/growth Inte is a strict is a anaerobe, found Criteria forCriteria selecting bacteriophages as an indicator (Payment, 1998) et al et Iran.J. Environ. Health. Sci.Vol. Eng., 2006, 3, 3, No. 205-216 pp. V. K. Tyagi, et al., ., 1986). ., Source No. in water ALTERNATIVE MICROBIAL INDICATORS... Survival in Env.
effects. wastewater treatment plants and monitoring health of efficiency removal microbial waters, perfringnes of human enteric viruses. enteric human of and its presence reflect the possible occurrence present in faeces ofhuman humani.e. specific Generally, 1991). Cabelli, and (Debartolomeis quality of mostlaboratories water resources relatively simple and within the and capability recover coliphagesfrom environmentalwaters is methods to The laboratory. inthe enumerated and cultured readily be can and humans, to non-pathogenic considered are Bacteriophages E.coli, is suggestedit thethat four selected indicators- pathogens, of absence or presence possible v) and effects health possible iv) contamination system distribution iii) efficiency treatment wastewater and water ii) quality water source i) evaluate seeking to sufficientto provide all the answersthat we are be not will indicator single As health. public efficacy of treatment processes in order to protect and pathogens borne water of presence possible the reveal will indicators cumulative these of study that state we can Thus, viruses. pathogenic human for model organism appropriate an as use - A relatively simple standardized method is now is method standardized simple A relatively - In modelexperiments no replication ofthese - - pollution the to related are phages of levels The - hours. 18 in obtained be can results discussed; being conditions. environmental beenhas phages observed under simulated enteric viruses. B. fragilis degree. Resistance to Resistance treatment treatment enterococci, coliphages and and coliphages enterococci, mdaen inter inter rmediate no may be used in monitoring source phages always outnumber human always phages ahgncEueain Cost Enumerationpathogenic
Consequently,be it can Clostridium Downloaded from http://journals.tums.ac.ir/ on Friday, August 24, 2012 http://www.civil.port.ac.usa/enviro/pathogens.html Horman, A., Rimhanen-Finne, Maunula,R., L., von Havelaar, A. H. and Pot- Hogeboom, W. M. (1988). F-specific Harwood, V. J., Levine, A. D., Scott, T. M., Chivukula, V., Chivukula, M., T. Scott, A. D., Levine, V. J., Harwood, Gleeson, C. and Gray, N. (1996). In: The coliform index and George, I., Crop, P., Servais, P., (2002). F G., D. Mara, R. and Feachem, H., Garelick, Bradley, J., D. J., and Allen, J. M. E. W., Rice, R. Karlin, C., S. Edberg, J., C. Palmer, and M. H. Gabriele, Solo R., T. Desmarais, Debartolomeis,Cabelli, J., V.Evaluation an(1991). J., of CPCB (1999). In: (1999). CPCB WaterQuality Status and Statistics Clark, R.M.(1996). J. Water Serv.Res. Technol., indicators: bacterial anaerobic Obligate (1978). Cabelli, V.J., CPCB (2004). In: CPCB Water Quality in India, Statusand Trend Baudizsova,Evaluation (1997). D., of Escherichia coli as REFERENCES literature. providing necessary facilities to reviewthe of for Technology, Roorkee Institute Indian Library, Central Librarian, The to also and project the sponsoring for New-Delhi Board, Control Pollution of Central due theto are authority Thanks ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Appl. Environ. Microbiol., Finland, insouthwestern in surface water sp., Cryptosporidium M. L., (2004). Bonsdorff, H.,C. Torvela, Heikinheimo, N., A.,Hanninen, ecological aspects. Water Sci. Technol. Technol. Sci. Water aspects. ecological hygiene: water in viruses model as bacteriophages RNA- Env. Micro., reclaimedin water and public health protection. Appl. reduction pathogen for paradigm organism indicator the Lukasik, J., Farrah, S. R., Rose, J. B., (2005). Validity of (UK). London Spon, Fand N E disease. borne water and enzymatic methods. Water methods. Res., enzymatic and plants treatment studied wastewater in by platecounts Sons, N. Y. USA. Wiley John Excreta wastewater management. and and In:D., (1983). Sanitation andDisease: Health Aspectsof (2000). Appl. environment. subtropical tidally influenced (2002). Influence of soilon fecal indicator organisms in a bacteriophages. J. Appl. Environ. Microbiol., E.coli Resources Series: MINARS/ 17/2002- Delhi. 2003, and 1997). Science, Arbor, Ann MI, In indicators of in viruses and food. water 88 Appl J. protection. health public for indicator Microbiol., (1990- 2001) 35 the main indicator faecalof pollution. Water Sci. Tech., : 106- 116. , 33- 336. host strain for enumeration of F-male specific for enumeration strain host Escherichia coli Escherichia
New Delhi: Central Pollution Control Board, 403. Board, Control Pollution Central Delhi: New 68 71 , : 1165–1172. Monitoring of Indian National National of Aquatic Indian Monitoring : 3163-3170. Campylobacter sp., Giardia sp., Campylobacter sp.,Giardia Noroviruses, and indicator organisms indicator and Noroviruses, : the best best :biologicalwater the drinking 171-200. 70 Iran.J. Environ. Health. Sci.Vol. Eng., 2006, 3, 3, No. 205-216 pp. : 87–95. ecal coliform removal 36 20 : 2607- 2617. : 399- 407. 57 , 1301-1305. 2000–2001. 45 . Ann Arbor Microbiol., : 171-183.
Environ.
(1996 Rose, J. B., (1990). Emerging issues for the microbiology of the for issues Emerging (1990). B., J. Rose, Diversity J., (1999). Araujo, R., Jofre, N., Puig, A., Queralt, Pinto, B.,Pierotti, R.,Canale, G.,Reali, D.,(1999). parasites: and Waterviruses P., borne (1998). Payment, perfringens Clostridium (1993). E., P. Franco, and Payment, quality: water of indicators Microbial In: (2001). NHMRC Morinigo,M. A., Wheeler,D., Berry, Jones,Munoz,C., C., McFeters, G. A.,Bissonnette, G.K., Jezeski, J. (1974). J., Leeming, R., Nichols, P. D. and Ashbolt, N. J.,(1998). C. D. Struijk, and A. Mossel, H., S. C. A., Leclerc, Edberg, LeChevallier, M. W.,Coliform (1990). regrowth in drinking an of investigation Epidemiological P., (1996). A. Kulkarni, Koivunen, J., Siitonen, A. and Tanski, H. H. (2003). C. Tartera, A.A.,and Girones, Lucena, A., Bosch, J., Jofre, Savichtcheva, O., Okabe, S., (2006). indicators Alternative (2006). S., Okabe, O., Savichtcheva, Hurst, J., C. Crawford, L., R. Knudsen, G. R., McInerney, drinkingwater. Water Eng. Manage., 1772–1776. polluted wastewater. Appl. Environ. Microbiol., fecally from and wastes and animal human from phages of Microbiol., faecal pollution and distribution; Environ. Appl. of as indicators streptococci fecal of Characterization Interlaken., Workshop Molecular Methods for Safe Drinking Water, resistancetreatment to anddisinfections.OCED, Microbiol., Environ. Appl. drinking watertreatment for viruses and protozoan cysts. of efficiency the of indicators as coliphages somatic and Medical Research Council, Commonwealth of Australia. Discussion an NHMRC, paper,National and Health Res., contaminated naturalwaters Southern in England,Water of different bacteriophage groups as fecal indicators in Evaluation (1992). J., J. Borrego, and R. M. A., Cornax, 823- 829. Microbiol., in water. well Appl. Environ. pathogens Comparative of survival indicator enteric bacteria and of Melbourne. Services Association Australia, Water 204, No. Report Research indicators. fecal microbial sterol waters and using and coastal inland biomarkers of fecalpollution in sources AustralianDistinguishing safety.Microbiol.,Rev. Annu. water of microbial suitabilityTheir as markers group: coliform the of bacteriology the in Advances (2001). B., review.Am. J. a water: Dis., outbreak of enteric fever in Commun. Maharashtra. J. Res., Water units. filtration tertiary and treatment wastewater biologicalin chemical bacteria enteric of Elimination Technol. as indicators of the virological quality of water. Water Sci. Evaluation(1986) of Bacteroides fragilisbacteriophages Washington, DC. of fecal pollution: Relation pathogenswith and Environmental Microbiology., 2 Microbiology., Environmental Manual of and Stetzenbach, D. (2002). J. M. L. Bacteroides fragilis fragilis Bacteroides 28 26 37 : 117- 121. : 267-271. : 690- 698. 18
29 : 167- 177. 98 : 258- 263. : 1-11.
strains in their capacity to recover capacity to their in strains Water Work. Asc., Asc., Work. Water 59 : 2418-2424 55 : 201- 234. th 137 Ed. ASM Press, : 23- 26. 82 . : 74-86. 215 65 27 : : Downloaded from http://journals.tums.ac.ir/ on Friday, August 24, 2012 216 Tallon, P.,Magajna, Lofranco, B., Leung, C., (2005). K., T. R., Desmarais, A., M. Wolfert, M., H. Gabriele, Solo Simpson, J. M., Santo Domingo,J. W., Reasoner, D. J. (2002). Scott, T., Rose, J.B., Jenkins, T. M.,Farrah, S. R., Lukasik, Schleifer, K. H., Kilpper Balz, R., (1984). Transfer of Transfer (1984). R., Balz, Kilpper H., K. Schleifer, current perspective. Water Air Soil Pollut., WaterPollut., Soil Air perspective. current Microbial indicators of fecal contamination in water: a 230–237. Microbiol., Appl. Environ. environment. subtropical Palmer, C. J., (2000). Sources of E. coli in a coastal Sci. Technol. Technol. Sci. Microbial source tracking: state of the science.Environ. 5796–5803. and future directions. Appl. Environ directions. future and methodology current tracking: Microbial source (2002). J., sys. Bact., sys. Bact., Water Res Water perspectives. application future and monitoring pathogen conventional indicators,current methodologies for direct comb. nov. and Rev. as nom. Enterococcus genus Streptococcus faecalis ., 34
40 24 : 31-34. : 2463- 2476. : 5279–5288. Enterococcus faecium Enterococcus and and Streptococcus faecium Iran.J. Environ. Health. Sci.Vol. Eng., 2006, 3, 3, No. 205-216 pp. V. K. Tyagi, et al., Enterococcus faecalis Enterococcus comb. nov. . Microbiol., Microbiol., 166 : 139- 166. ALTERNATIVE MICROBIAL INDICATORS... to the Int 68 66 . J. : : Yates, M. V., (1998). Pathogens in Reclaimed Wastewater.Reclaimed in Pathogens V.,Yates, M. (1998). www.timessofindia.com WorldHealth Organization,In: (2001-2002). Water Quality: World Health Organization, (1996). Guidelinesfor drinking World Health Organization, (1993). Guidelinesfor drinking World Health Organization, (1989, Health1992). Guidelines of Role E. (2003). A., Groisman, and M. D. Winfield, United States Environmental Protection Agency, (1992). University of California. of University London. www.timesofindia.com Guidelines, Health. IWA Standards and Publishing, Geneva. other supporting information, World Health Organization, water quality. Second Edition, vol. 2, Health criteria and World Health Organization, Geneva. water quality. SecondEdition, vol.1Recommendations, WHO. 778.Geneva: series report Technical and Aquaculture. in of Waste Use Agriculture water the for coli. Appl.Environ.Microbiol., nonhost environment in the lifestyle of Salmonella andE. Cincinnati: USEPA. Guidelinesfor Water Reuse,EPA/625/R-92/004. 69 : 3687–3694.