The ability to simultaneously concentrate diverse microbes is an important consideration for sample collection methods that are used for emergency response and environmental monitoring when drinking water may be contaminated with an array of unknown microbes. This study focused on developing a concentration method using ultrafilters and different combinations of a chemical dispersant (sodium polyphosphate [NaPP]) and surfactants. Tap water samples were seeded with bacteriophage MS2, Escherichia coli, Enterococcus faecalis, Cryptosporidium parvum, 4.5-m microspheres, Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium, Bacillus globigii endospores, and echovirus 1. Ten-liter tap water samples were concentrated to ϳ250 ml in 12 to 42 min, depending on the experimental condition. Initial experiments indicated that pretreating filters with fetal bovine serum or NaPP resulted in an increase in microbe recovery. The addition of NaPP to the tap water samples resulted in significantly higher microbe and microsphere recovery efficiencies. Backflushing of the ultrafilter was found to significantly improve recovery efficiencies. The effectiveness of backflushing was improved further with the addition of Tween 80 to the backflush solution. The ultrafiltration method developed in this study, incorporating the use of NaPP pretreatment and surfactant solution backflushing, was found to recover MS2, C. parvum, microspheres, and several bacterial species with mean recovery efficiencies of 70 to 93%. The mean recovery efficiency for echovirus 1 (49%) was the lowest of the microbes studied for this method. This research demonstrates that ultrafiltration can be effective for recovering diverse microbes simultaneously in tap water and that chemical dispersants and surfactants can be beneficial for improving microbial recovery using this technique.In the event of microbiological contamination of drinking water, even low concentrations of organisms can put water consumers at risk. Due to factors such as sampling delay, microbial die-off, and dilution, it is often the case that human pathogens and fecal microflora are present in environmental waters at sufficiently low concentrations such as to preclude the use of simple "grab sampling" for water testing. Thus, it is desirable to have rapid and robust methods for concentrating large volumes of drinking water to detect and quantify pathogens and other microbes in these samples. For situations where drinking water may be contaminated but no clinical data are available to identify the pathogen of concern, it is critical that a sample concentration technique that can simultaneously concentrate viruses, bacteria, and parasites is used. The benefits of simultaneous recovery techniques are also increasingly being recognized for those applications where cost-effective monitoring of microbial water quality for diverse microbe types is desired.Tangential flow ultrafiltration is a technique that can be used for the simultaneous concentration of diverse waterborne microbes in a single step (6,13,14). Ultrafil...

No abstract

Hollow-fiber ultrafiltration (UF) is a technique that is increasingly viewed as an effective alternative for simultaneously recovering diverse microbes (e.g., viruses, bacteria, parasites) from large volumes of drinking water. The USEPA has organism-specific methods, including Method 1623 for Cryptosporidium and Giardia and the virus adsorption-elution (VIRADEL) technique using 1MDS electropositive filters. In this study, we directly compare the performance of a previously published UF method to that of the USEPA Method 1623 (for recovering Cryptosporidium parvum and Giardia intestinalis) and the 1MDS VIRADEL method (for bacteriophages and echovirus) using 100-L dechlorinated tap water samples. The UF method produced significantly higher recoveries of C. parvum versus Method 1623 (83% mean recovery for UF versus 46% mean recovery for Method 1623), while recoveries for G. intestinalis were similar for both methods. Results of the virus method comparison showed the UF method (including secondary concentration using microconcentrators) to be very effective for the recovery of echovirus 1, bacteriophage MS2, and bacteriophage phi X174, with mean recovery efficiencies of 58, 100, and 77%, respectively. The VIRADEL technique (including secondary concentration by organic flocculation) recovered significantly less echovirus 1, and the bacteriophages could not be quantified by the method due to phage inactivation and/or assay inhibition. The results of this study demonstrate that the UF technique can be as effective, or more effective, than established USEPA methods for recovery of viruses and protozoan parasites from 100-L tap water samples.