Microbial and metal water quality in rain catchments compared with traditional drinking water sources in the East Sepik Province, Papua New Guinea

Abstract

In Papua New Guinea, a significant portion of morbidity and mortality is attributed to water-borne diseases. To reduce incidence of disease, communities and non-governmental organizations have installed rain catchments to provide drinking water of improved quality. However, little work has been done to determine whether these rain catchments provide drinking water of better quality than traditional drinking water sources, and if morbidity is decreased in villages with rain catchments. The specific aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of water produced by rain catchments in comparison with traditional drinking water sources in rural villages in the East Sepik Province. Fifty-four water sources in 22 villages were evaluated for enterococci and Escherichia coli densities as well as 14 health-relevant metals. In addition, we examined how the prevalence of diarrhoeal illness in villages relates to the type of primary drinking water source.The majority of tested metals were below World Health Organization safety limits. Catchment water sources had lower enterococci and E. coli than other water sources. Individuals in villages using Sepik River water as their primary water source had significantly higher incidence of diarrhoea than those primarily using other water sources (streams, dug wells and catchments).

Efficacy of Waterless Hand Hygiene Compared with Handwashing with Soap: A Field Study in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania

“…These analysis methods for dealing with data below and above the detection limit are well documented in the literature. 27,[39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46] Tests were not performed to confirm E. coli or fecal streptococci. Thus, concentrations and reductions reported in this paper should be viewed as those of presumptive E. coli and fecal streptococci.…”

Temporal and thematic trends in water, sanitation and hygiene (WaSH) research in Pacific Island Countries: a systematic review

“…The impacts documented ranged from catastrophic loss of whole villages, through destruction of water and sanitation infrastructure, to changes in source water quantity and/or quality (Mosley et al 2004;White et al 2007;Keim 2010). Studies have examined aquifer contamination from storm surge in atoll communities (Keim 2010; and changes in water quality across rainwater tanks, wells and streams (Terry et al 2001;Horak et al 2010). …”

“…Mourits and Kumar (1995), in the context of rainwater harvesting in Fiji, showed the importance of understanding the cultural setting with respect to supporting individual actions (like establishing household water harvesting schemes), as resources are often shared at the village level. Such cultural issues and the need to understand social structures prior to intervention were cited by many authors as reasons for project failure (see also (Kuruppu 2009;Greenwell et al 2013; Guerrier et al Several studies reported assessments of water quality and contamination across multiple water source types (Mourits & Kumar 1995;Beatty et al 2004;Horak et al 2010;Psutka et al 2013). This is relevant in the context of global WaSH surveys that assess the primary water source of each household, despite the growing evidence that many households use a variety of sources for different uses (MacDonald et al 2016).…”

“…Importantly, some studies showed that source water quality, per se, does not necessarily drive acceptance and patterns of use. For example, Horak et al (2010) showed how rainwater tank water quality was vastly better than water quality in wells and streams in PNG, yet was not the preferred source for drinking and cooking. Households were not using scientific water quality measurements to guide their decision-making and patterns of use, so more work linking perceptions of water safety to measures of water safety would aid our understanding of how PIC communities value and use their water.…”

Water Quality Monitoring and Hydraulic Evaluation of a Household Roof Runoff Harvesting System in France

“…Although this solution appears attractive from an ecological point of view, it is necessary to measure the quality of harvested rainwater due to the potential for health risks as a result of chemical and microbiological contaminants. Over the last decades, studies in numerous countries including USA, Nigeria, New-Zealand, India, Zambia, Brazil, Canada, Australia, Jordan, New Guinea and South Korea, have investigated the quality of harvested rainwater (Crabtree et al 1996;Uba and Aghogho 2000;Simmons et al 2001;Kulshrestha et al 2003;Handia 2005;May and Prado 2006;Al-Khashman 2009;Despins et al 2009;Evans et al 2009;Horak et al 2010;Lee et al 2010). In Europe, rainwater quality assessment was studied by Förster 1999;Albrechtsen 2002;Polkowska et al 2002;Fewtrell and Kay 2007;Melidis et al 2007;Oesterholt et al 2007;Sazakli et al 2007;Schriewer et al 2008;Tsakovski et al 2010.…”