U.S. farmers' opinions on the use of nontraditional water sources for agricultural activities

Suri, Mayhah; Dery, Jessica L.; Pérodin, Joanne; Brassill, Natalie; He, Xin; Ammons, Samantha; Gerdes, Megan E.; Rock, Channah; Goldstein, Rachel E. Rosenberg

doi:10.1016/j.envres.2019.02.035

Cited by 34 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Likelihood of water testing was associated with farm scale, with 22% (n ϭ 18) of small farms versus 54% (n ϭ 13) of large farms reported testing their water in a survey of mid-Atlantic leafy greens and tomato growers (22). In a more recent study (2016 to 2018) of 263 mid-Atlantic growers, only 30% reported using surface water compared to 59% using groundwater (15). The decline in surface water use and increase in water testing indicate the growing unease around microbial safety concerns of using surface water for irrigation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fluctuations in rainfall and periods of drought, depletion of aquifers, and coastal saltwater intrusion have raised the need to identify microbiologically safe alternative sources of irrigation water to expand this precious resource. Farmers in the mid-Atlantic are concerned about water availability and are interested in tapping into alternative sources of irrigation water (15). This study characterized the microbial quality of typical rivers, ponds, and reclaimed water sources found in the mid-Atlantic region.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Longitudinal Assessment of the Dynamics of Escherichia coli, Total Coliforms, Enterococcus spp., and Aeromonas spp. in Alternative Irrigation Water Sources: a CONSERVE Study

Solaiman

Allard

Callahan

et al. 2020

Appl Environ Microbiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As climate change continues to stress freshwater resources, we have a pressing need to identify alternative (non-traditional) sources of microbially safe water for irrigation of fresh produce. This study is part of the center CONSERVE, which aims to facilitate the adoption of adequate agricultural water sources. A 26-month longitudinal study was conducted at 11 sites to assess the prevalence of bacteria indicating water quality, fecal contamination and crop contamination risk (Escherichia coli, total coliforms (TC), Enterococcus, Aeromonas). Sites included non-tidal freshwater rivers/creeks (NF), a tidal brackish river (TB), irrigation ponds (PW) and reclaimed water sites (RW). Water samples were filtered for bacterial quantification. E. coli, TC and enterococci (∼86%, 98% and 90% positive, respectively; n=333), and Aeromonas (∼98% positive; n=133) were widespread in water samples tested. Highest E. coli counts were in rivers, TC counts in TB rivers and enterococci in rivers and ponds (all p<0.001), compared to other water types. Aeromonas counts were consistent across sites. Seasonal dynamics were detected in NF and PW samples only. E. coli counts were higher in the vegetable crop-growing (May-October) than non-growing (November-April) season in all water types (p<0.05). Only one RW and both PW sites met the US Food Safety Modernization Act water standards. However, implementation of recommended mitigation measures of allowing time for microbial die-off between irrigation and harvest would bring all other sites into compliance within two days. This study provides comprehensive microbial data on alternative irrigation water and serves as an important resource for food safety planning and policy-setting. Importance Increasing demands for fresh fruit and vegetables, a variable climate impacting agricultural water availability and microbial food safety goals are pressing the need to identify new, safe, alternative sources of irrigation water. Our study generated microbial data collected over a two-year period from potential sources of irrigation (rivers, ponds and reclaimed water sites). Pond water was found to comply with Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) microbial standards for irrigation of fruit and vegetables. Bacterial counts in reclaimed water, a resource that is not universally allowed on fresh produce in the US, generally met microbial standards or needed minimal mitigation. We detected the most seasonality and the highest microbial loads in river water, which emerged as the water type that would require the most mitigation to be compliant with established FSMA standards. This dataset represents one of the most comprehensive, longitudinal analysis of alternative irrigation water sources in the United States.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Longitudinal Assessment of the Dynamics of Escherichia coli, Total Coliforms, Enterococcus spp., and Aeromonas spp. in Alternative Irrigation Water Sources: a CONSERVE Study

Solaiman

Allard

Callahan

et al. 2020

Appl Environ Microbiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cost-effective mitigation strategies improving the microbial quality of irrigation water may be of interest to fruit and vegetable farming operations with limited capital resources (Scharff, 2010). Survey results have shown that across the U.S., many farmers already use surface water as a primary irrigation water source and are interested in using additional sources of non-traditional irrigation water, provided that the microbial quality is acceptable at the point of use (Suri et al, 2019). Irrigation water withdrawals accounted for 42% of total freshwater withdrawals in the U.S., while 52% of irrigation water was obtained from surface water sources (Dieter et al, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Zero-Valent Iron-Sand Filtration Reduces Escherichia coli in Surface Water and Leafy Green Growing Environments

Kim

Bradshaw

Kulkarni

et al. 2020

Front. Sustain. Food Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Surface water is used for irrigation by farmers. However, surface waters may be a source of bacterial foodborne pathogens which contaminate fresh produce intended for human consumption. Proposed but not finalized standards for microbial quality of irrigation water through the Produce Safety Rule (PSR) of the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) in the US emphasize the need for effective reduction of levels of pathogens in surface water intended to be used on fruit and vegetable crops. This study evaluated a zero-valent iron (ZVI)-sand filtration system to reduce E. coli populations in pond water and those transferred to growing spinach plants in a field trial. Six filtration events were conducted with the same ZVI-sand or sand (S) laboratory filtration systems. Filtration systems were constructed by connecting 4 PVC pipes (1.25 L) together. ZVI-sand filters contained 50% ZVI/50% sand (0.43-0.60 mm particle size), while sand filters contained 100% sand (0.45-55 mm particle size). In each event, autoclaved pond water (PW) inoculated with E. coli (ca. 4 log CFU/ml)−8 L-was pumped (1 L/min) through each filter followed by uninoculated autoclaved PW (15 L) with samples taken throughout the filtering process for enumeration of E. coli. Data were fit to a linear model to determine reductions of E. coli levels. ZVI-sand filtration removed significantly (p < 0.05) more E. coli (1.1 log CFU) compared to sand filtration. For ZVI-sand-filtered water, there was a statistically significant (p < 0.05) difference of E. coli removal from early trials (trials 1-3, average removal 96%) than in later trials (trial 4-6, average removal 44%), suggesting that age of the ZVI-sand filters influences E. coli inactivation. Overall, ZVI-sand and sand filtration reduced E. coli populations by 70 and −10%, respectively, indicating that ZVI filtration lowered or inactivated E. coli populations while sand filters accumulated E. coli. Field trials showed that soil and spinach plants irrigated with ZVI-sand-filtered water had significantly lower E. coli levels than soils/plants irrigated with sand-filtered water or unfiltered control water. Overall, ZVI-sand filtration significantly reduced E. coli populations in water compared to sand filtration.

show abstract

“…Among them, Rice (2016) commented on this conclusion [17]. The results of the study were the most significant, while Suri (2019) and Dean and Fielding (2016) held the opposite view, believing that the elderly were more inclined to accept the use of recycled water [40,56], and their contradictory results further confirmed the applicability of the meta-analysis method.…”

Section: Descriptive Statisticsmentioning

confidence: 94%

Supporter Profiling in Recycled Water Reuse: Evidence from Meta-Analysis

Duan

2020

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recycled water is considered as a viable alternative water source, and its use is of great significance in dealing with the shortage of water resources. However, it is often rejected by the public during its promotion. To identity the common social attributes of proponents of recycled water, it is essential to study the profiled customers’ willingness to accept recycled water during the most difficult initial stage of promoting recycled water use projects. A meta-analysis was conducted in this study to deal with data concerning the influence of different social demographic factors on the public’s acceptance of recycled water use. Three steps of meta-analysis were mainly used in this paper. First, a random-effect model was used to measure the effect size of influencing factors, such as age, gender, and education. It was found that younger women were more likely to accept recycled water use than older men, and individuals with higher education were more willing to accept recycled water. Then, a cumulative meta-analysis showed that it was feasible to select young women with higher education as target profile customers in the initial stage of recycled water promotion. Finally, according to a meta-regression analysis, it was revealed that different research areas and selected model methods have important regulatory effects on the intention of the target population to use recycled water.

show abstract

U.S. farmers' opinions on the use of nontraditional water sources for agricultural activities

Cited by 34 publications

References 11 publications

Longitudinal Assessment of the Dynamics of Escherichia coli, Total Coliforms, Enterococcus spp., and Aeromonas spp. in Alternative Irrigation Water Sources: a CONSERVE Study

Longitudinal Assessment of the Dynamics of Escherichia coli, Total Coliforms, Enterococcus spp., and Aeromonas spp. in Alternative Irrigation Water Sources: a CONSERVE Study

Zero-Valent Iron-Sand Filtration Reduces Escherichia coli in Surface Water and Leafy Green Growing Environments

Supporter Profiling in Recycled Water Reuse: Evidence from Meta-Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About