Biofilms in Drinking Water Distribution Systems

Batté, M.; Appenzeller, Brice; Grandjean, Dominique; Fass, S.; Gauthier, Vincent; Jorand, F.; Mathieu, Laurence; Boualam, Marc; Saby, Sébastien; Block, J. C.

doi:10.1023/b:resb.0000040456.71537.29

Cited by 65 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Nutrients, chemical parameters (pH, biocides, etc. ) and hydrodynamics seem to be the most important factors that condition biofilm growth rates (Pedersen, 1990;Bott, 1995;Kerr et al, 1999;Batté et al, 2003), except when there is significant release of nutrients from the surface material to the water (Lethola et al, 2004(Lethola et al, , 2005.…”

Section: Suspended Cells Versus Biofilm Cellsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The flow rate inside the pipe was controlled by the rotation speed of the propeller and the residence time is proportional to the fresh inlet flow rate. Detailed features of this reactor can be found in Batté et al (2003). The Flow Cell had a semi-circular cross section with an internal diameter of 3.2 cm and contained the coupons on its flat surface.…”

Section: Biofilm Monitoring Reactorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dynamics of drinking water biofilm in flow/non-flow conditions

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A B S T R A C TDrinking water biofilm formation on polyvinyl chloride (PVC), cross-linked polyethylene (PEX), high density polyethylene (HDPE) and polypropylene (PP) was followed in three different reactors operating under stagnant or continuous flow regimes. After one week, a quasi-steady state was achieved where biofilm total cell numbers per unit surface area were not affected by fluctuations in the concentration of suspended cells. Metabolically active cells in biofilms were around 17-35% of the total cells and 6-18% were able to form colony units in R 2 A medium. Microbiological analysis showed that the adhesion material and reactor design did not affect significantly the biofilm growth. However, operating under continuous flow (0.8-1.9 Pa) or stagnant water had a significant effect on biofilm formation: in stagnant waters, biofilm grew to a less extent. By applying mass balances and an asymptotic biofilm formation model to data from biofilms grown on PVC and HDPE surfaces under turbulent flow, specific growth rates of bacteria in the biofilm were found to be similar for both materials (around 0.15 day À1) and much lower than the specific growth rates of suspended bacteria (around 1.8 day À1 ).

show abstract

Section: Suspended Cells Versus Biofilm Cellsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Biofilm Monitoring Reactorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamics of drinking water biofilm in flow/non-flow conditions

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…iofilms are present in every drinking water distribution system (DWDS), and they are attached to the surface of tubing material of the distribution network (3). Biofilms can be of great relevance for public health, because many potentially pathogenic bacteria are not located in the bulk water but are in the biofilm of the pipes, where they are more protected against adverse environmental conditions, such as disinfection measures (7,38,41,44).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cultivation-independent methods have been developed using 16S rRNA gene-based approaches to identify bacterial species and assess their abundances within drinking water communities (3,6). For example, molecular fingerprints using single-strand confirmation polymorphism (SSCP) electrophoresis allow a rapid and economic overview of the bacterial core community, i.e., the bacterial species with relatively high abundances (e.g., a detection limit of 0.1% for single members of the bacterial community is currently assumed for fingerprints [14]).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Structure and Composition of Bacterial Core Communities in Mature Drinking Water Biofilms and Bulk Water of a Citywide Network in Germany

Henne

Kahlisch

Brettar

et al. 2012

Appl Environ Microbiol

133

123

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACTThe bacterial core communities of bulk water and corresponding biofilms of a more than 20-year-old drinking water network were compared using 16S rRNA single-strand confirmation polymorphism (SSCP) fingerprints based on extracted DNA and RNA. The structure and composition of the bacterial core community in the bulk water was highly similar (>70%) across the city of Braunschweig, Germany, whereas all biofilm samples contained a unique community with no overlapping phylotypes from bulk water. Biofilm samples consisted mainly ofAlphaproteobacteria(26% of all phylotypes),Gammaproteobacteria(11%), candidate division TM6 (11%),Chlamydiales(9%), andBetaproteobacteria(9%). The bulk water community consisted primarily ofBacteroidetes(25%),Betaproteobacteria(20%),Actinobacteria(16%), andAlphaproteobacteria(11%). All biofilm communities showed higher relative abundances of single phylotypes and a reduced richness compared to bulk water. Only biofilm communities sampled at nearby sampling points showed similar communities irrespective of support materials. In all of our bulk water studies, the community composition determined from 16S rRNA was completely different from the 16S rRNA gene-based community composition, whereas in biofilms both molecular fractions resulted in community compositions that were similar to each other. We hypothesize that a higher fraction of active bacterial phylotypes and a better protection from oxidative stress in drinking water biofilms are responsible for this higher similarity.

show abstract

“…Chlorine is also used to provide a residual disinfectant in the DS to prevent water recontamination and to maintain the standards achieved at the first point of disinfection (4). Once a biofilm is established, however, bacteria are more resistant than planktonic populations to disinfectants, including chlorine (16,20,32,44), and antibiotics (25).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%