Validity of fecal coliforms, total coliforms, and fecal streptococci as indicators of viruses in chlorinated primary sewage effluents

Abstract

Quantities of combined chlorine that usually destroyed more than 99.999% of the indigenous fecal coliforms, total coliforms, and fecal streptococci in primary sewage effluents destroyed only 85 to 99% of the indigenous viruses present. Viruses were recovered from five of eight chlorinated primary effluents from which fecal coliforms were not recovered by standard most-probable-number procedures. The limited volumes of such chlorinated effluents that can be tested for indicator bacteria with currently available multiple-tube and membrane filter techniques restrict the value of fecal coliforms, fecal streptococci, and even total coliforms as indicators of viruses in these effluents. Although fecal coliforms and fecal streptococci are useful indicators of viruses in effluents from which these bacteria are recovered, the absence of these bacteria and even total coliforms from disinfected effluents (in standard tests) does not assure that viruses are also absent.

Pathogenic indicators in lake kinneret, Israel

“…The coliphages are another proposed indicator since they have a higher survival rate than bacteria in water, chlorinated effluents, and treatment with ultraviolet light (Berg et al, 1978;Chang et al, 1985). They might also serve as a n indicator of viral pollution (Borrego et al, 1987;Havelaar et al, 1987) since they were better correlated with enteroviruses then total and fecal coliforms and fecal streptococci (Stetler, 1984).…”

Indicator organisms for estuarine and marine waters

“…Fecal coliforms and total coliforms have been used as indicators of contamination by domestic sewage, and therefore of the risk associated with exposure to bacterial and viral pathogens. However, in fresh water and waste water effluents [148][149][150][151][152][153][154], marine waters [133,152,[155][156][157], and in shellfish meats [152,158,159], the total coliform and fecal coliform counts cannot be used to indicate the presence of enteroviruses. The lack of association of these 69 indicators with enteric viruses is due to the fact that the latter survive longer in the 'recoverable' stage than fecal coliforms in fresh water [148,1.50] and marine water [160], resulting in continuously changing ratios of viruses to the fecal indicators.…”

“…Grabow et al [153] reported that hepatitis A virus was more sensitive to chlorination than Mycobacterium fortuitum, coliphage V1, and poliovirus type 2, but more resistant than E. coil, Streptococcus faecalis, coliphage MS2, reovirus type 3, and rotavirus SA11. Total and fecal coliforms are also destroyed by chlorine more quickly than viruses [149]. Cold temperatures and factors associated with gross pollution appear to prolong virus survival in rivers [150].…”

Persistence and diversity of faecal coliform and enterococci populations in faecally polluted waters

“…The aim of this work was to assess the persistence of the MST indicators derived from the above-mentioned study: FM, FS and HIR (for ENT), and ECP and CNFC (for FC) in faecally polluted river water. Most studies on microbial ecology focus on one or few inactivation parameters such as pH, light, temperature, presence of nutrients and chlorination (Berg et al 1978;Barcina et al 1990;Curtis et al 1992) to explain the differences in bacterial populations' composition. Nevertheless, there are a wide variety of factors to bear in mind when dealing with complex aquatic systems.…”