Microbiological water purification without the use of chemical disinfection

Gerba, Charles P.; Naranjo, Jaime

doi:10.1580/1080-6032(2000)011[0012:mwpwtu]2.3.co;2

Cited by 24 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this study, only the poliovirus type 1 was used to reduce the cost of the testing and was based on our 30 years of experience with the USEPA protocol testing both rotavirus SA-11 and poliovirus type 1. Our previous studies have shown that if poliovirus type 1 is removed by 4 logs, so is the rotavirus SA-11 (Abbaszadegan et al 1997;Gerba et al 1997;Naranjo et al 1997;Gerba and Naranjo 2000;Abd-Elmaksoud et al 2013). This of course does not mean that there may be systems that would be less effective against poliovirus type 1 than rotavirus SA-11.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Coliphage Surrogates for Testing Drinking Water Treatment Devices

et al. 2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Test protocols have been developed by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the World Health Organization (WHO) to test water treatment devices/systems that are used at the individual and home levels to ensure the removal of waterborne viruses. The goal of this study was to assess if coliphage surrogates could be used in this testing in place of the currently required use of animal or human enteric viruses. Five different coliphages (MS-2, PRD1, ΦX-174, Qβ, and fr) were compared to the removal of poliovirus type 1 (LSc-2ab) by eight different water treatment devices/systems using a general case and a challenge case (high organic load, dissolved solids, and turbidity) test water as defined by the USEPA. The performance of the units was rated as a pass/fail based on a 4 log removal/inactivation of the viruses. In all cases, a failure or a pass of the units/system for poliovirus also corresponded to a pass/fail by all of the coliphages. In summary, in using pass/fail criteria as recommended under USEPA guidelines for testing water treatment device/systems, the use of coliphages should be considered as an alternative to reduce cost and time of testing such devices/systems.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Coliphage Surrogates for Testing Drinking Water Treatment Devices

et al. 2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The worst case water matrix with defined total dissolved solids (TDS = 1500 mg L −1 ), total organic carbon (TOC = 10 mg L −1 ), and turbidity (30 NTU) was prepared from sea salts, humic acid, and fine test dust, respectively, according to the standardized guide protocol (USEPA, 1987; Gerba and Naranjo, 2000). Sea salts (S9883; Sigma, St. Louis, MO) were prepared in distilled water, to which humic acid (H16752; Sigma‐Aldrich, St. Louis, MO) and fine test dust (ISO 12103‐1; Powder Technology Inc., Burnsville, MN) were added to standard TDS, TOC, and turbidity levels, as listed above.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The model used EPA worst case water, a defined medium originally developed and approved for testing point‐of‐use microbiological water purifiers (USEPA, 1987). Like effluent, the worst case water contained high levels of dissolved salts, organic carbon, and turbidity (Gerba and Naranjo, 2000). Control of Salmonella by phages was demonstrated in the worst case water model system and is believed to be a new application of worst case water tests.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

EPA Worst Case Water Microcosms for Testing Phage Biocontrol of Salmonella

McLaughlin

Brooks

2008

J of Env Quality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A microplate method was developed as a tool to test phages for their ability to control Salmonella in aqueous environments. The method used EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) worst case water (WCW) in 96-well plates. The WCW provided a consistent and relatively simple defined turbid aqueous matrix, high in total organic carbon (TOC) and total dissolved salts (TDS), to simulate swine lagoon effluent, without the inconvenience of malodor and confounding effects from other biological factors. The WCW was originally defined to simulate high turbidity and organic matter in water for testing point-of-use filtration devices. Use of WCW to simulate lagoon effluent for phage testing is a new and innovative application of this matrix. Control of physical and chemical parameters (TOC, TDS, turbidity, temperature, and pH) allowed precise evaluation of microbiological parameters (Salmonella and phages). In a typical application, wells containing WCW were loaded with Salmonella enterica susp. enterica serovar Typhimurium (ATCC14028) and treated with phages alone and in cocktail combinations. Mean Salmonella inactivation rates (k, where the lower the value, the greater the inactivation) of phage treatments ranged from -0.32 to -1.60 versus -0.004 for Salmonella controls. Mean log(10) reductions (the lower the value, the greater the reduction) of Salmonella phage treatments were -1.60 for phage PR04-1, -2.14 for phage PR37-96, and -2.14 for both phages in a sequential cocktail, versus -0.08 for Salmonella controls. The WCW microcosm system was an effective tool for evaluating the biocontrol potential of Salmonella phages.

show abstract

“…From this, it is apparent that no single combination of adsorbent/adsorption conditions exists to give optimum reduction of all viruses for all water qualities (reference 12). Increasing electrostatic and or hydrophobic interactions by the addition of chemicals such as magnesium sulfate (reference 13) or by specially treating the filter to promote a positive charge at natural water pH will increase virus retention (references [14][15][16][17]. One study investigating coliphage reduction by a 0.2 µm microporous filter, showed reduction based on adsorption as well as size exclusion (reference 9).…”

Section: Role Of Pathogen In Filtration Separation Mechanismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Filtration in the Use of Individual Water Purification Devices

Lundquist¹,

Clarke²,

Bettin³

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PURPOSEThis information paper provides an in-depth review of filtration (including adsorption and ion exchange) as a pathogen and particulate reduction mechanism when treating natural waters. This paper is intended to assist the reader in evaluating the capabilities of Individual Water Purification Devices (IWPDs) using size exclusion, adsorption, and/or ion exchange to reduce disease-causing bacteria, virus, and protozoan cyst populations, as well as turbidity causing particulate matter. REFERENCESAppendix A contains a list of references. INTRODUCTION BackgroundUnderstanding the ability of filtration to reduce disease-causing microorganisms is important in protecting Soldiers, who are considering using this technology, from acute health threats posed by these microorganisms. Soldiers deployed beyond traditional field drinking water supplies must have access to potable water. Using IWPDs is one way to provide microbiologically safe water in these situations. These IWPDs must protect the Soldier from acute microbial health threats. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Guide Standard and Protocol for Testing Microbiological Water Purifiers (reference 1) provides performance standards by which an IWPD using filtration can be evaluated. The performance standards are a minimum 6-log reduction/inactivation of bacteria, 4-log reduction/inactivation of viruses, and 3-log reduction/ inactivation of protozoan cysts (typically Giardia or Cryptosporidium). IWPDs meeting these standards are considered effective at reducing disease causing bacteria, viruses, and protozoan cysts. Some IWPD manufacturers test their devices using this protocol. This is considered the best way to evaluate the IWPDs pathogen reduction capabilities. In the absence of that testing data, this information paper can be used to gain an understanding of the advantages as well as limitations of filtration and help determine if an IWPD using filtration could successfully meet the EPA Guide's minimum performance standards. Origin of Filtration for Water TreatmentFor the purpose of this paper, filtration will be used broadly to incorporate separation by (1) granular media, (2) size exclusion (e.g., membranes), (3) electrochemical adsorption (e.g., activated carbon), and (4) ion exchange (e.g., anion, cation exchange). Filtration is a well- Report Documentation PageForm Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subje...

show abstract

Microbiological water purification without the use of chemical disinfection

Abstract: These units comply with the criteria guidelines for microbial removal under the United States Environmental Protection Agency's "Guide Standard and Protocol for Testing Microbiological Water Purifiers."

Cited by 24 publications

References 5 publications

Assessment of Coliphage Surrogates for Testing Drinking Water Treatment Devices

Assessment of Coliphage Surrogates for Testing Drinking Water Treatment Devices

EPA Worst Case Water Microcosms for Testing Phage Biocontrol of Salmonella

Filtration in the Use of Individual Water Purification Devices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About