Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-qsmjn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T20:44:01.577Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Methods for enumerating Escherichia coli in subtropical waters

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

W. H. S. Cheung ,
D. K. K. Ha ,
K. Y. Yeung  and
R. P. S. Hung
W. H. S. Cheung
Affiliation:
Environmental Protection Department, 28/F., Southorn Centre, Wanchai, Hong Kong
D. K. K. Ha
Affiliation:
Environmental Protection Department, 28/F., Southorn Centre, Wanchai, Hong Kong
K. Y. Yeung
Affiliation:
Environmental Protection Department, 28/F., Southorn Centre, Wanchai, Hong Kong
R. P. S. Hung
Affiliation:
Environmental Protection Department, 28/F., Southorn Centre, Wanchai, Hong Kong
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The standard membrane filtration method of the UK has been modified in order to improve its specificity for enumerating Escherichia coli in the subtropical waters of Hong Kong. This involves incorporating into the membrane lauryl sulphate (mLS) method either an in situ urease test (the mLS-UA method), or an in situ β-glucuronidase test (the mLS-GUD method). The false-positive errors of the mLS-UA and mLS-GUD methods are low, ranging from 3–5%. A comparison between the membrane filtration (mLS-UA) method and the multiple tube technique in testing E. coli in subtropical beach-waters has demonstrated that the former can give much more precise counts, and is the method of choice for such a purpose. The mLS-GUD method, for which automated counting of E. coli colonies is possible, is a good alternative to mLS-UA in routine enumeration of this bacterial indicator in environmental waters.

Type
Special Article
Information
Epidemiology & Infection , Volume 106 , Issue 2 , April 1991 , pp. 345 - 354
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

References

REFERENCES

1.Joint Committee of the Public Health Laboratory Service and the Standing Committee of Analysts. Membrane filtration media for the enumeration of coliform organisms and Escherichia coli in water: comparison of Tergitol 7 and lauryl sulphate with Teepol 610. J Hyg 1980; 85: 181–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Department of the Environment, Department of Health and Social Security, Public Health Laboratory Service. The bacteriological examination of drinking water supplies 1982, reports on public health and medical subjects No. 71, methods for the examination of waters and associated materials. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1983.Google Scholar
3.Stanfield, G, Irving, TE. A suitable replacement for Teepol 610 in the selective isolation of coliforms from marine waters and sewage. Water Res 1981; 15: 469–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Kelly, MT, Brenner, DJ, Farmer, JJ. Enterobacteriaceae. In: Lennette, EH, Balows, A, Hausler, WJ, Shadomy, HJ, eds. Manual of clinical microbiology. 4th ed.Washington DC: American Society For Microbiology, 1985; 263–77.Google Scholar
5.Wright, RC. A medium for the rapid enumeration of Escherichia coli in the presence of other faecal coliforms in tropical waters. J Hyg 1982; 88: 265–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Wright, RC. A new selective and differential agar medium for Escherichia coli and coliform organisms. J Bacteriol 1984; 56: 381–8.Google ScholarPubMed
7.Cheung, WHS. Standardization of methods for enumerating coliform bacteria in water: a review with recommendations for Hong Kong. Environmental Protection Agency, Hong Kong Government, 1983. EPA/TM26/83.Google Scholar
8.Cheung, WHS. Escherichia coli: A bacterial indicator of faecal pollution. In: Proceeding of the Joint Meeting of the Hong Kong Society of Microbiology and the Guangdong Society of Microbiology 2–5 June 1985; 1985: 30–43.Google Scholar
9.Dufour, AP, Cabelli, VJ. A membrane filter procedure for enumerating the component genera of the coliform group in seawater. Appl Microbiol 1975; 29: 826–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Feng, PCS, Hartman, PA. Fluorogenic assays for immediate confirmation of Escherichia coli. Appl Environ Microbiol 1982; 43: 1320–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Kilian, M, Bulow, P. Rapid diagnosis of Enterobacteriaceae. I. Detection of bacterial glycosidases. Acta Pathol Microbiol Scand Sect B 1976; 84: 245–51.Google Scholar
12.Trepeta, RW, Edberg, SC. Methylumbelliferyl-β-D-glucuronide-based medium for rapid isolation and identification of Escherichia coli. J Clin Microbiol 1984; 19: 172–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Freier, TA, Hartman, PA. Improved membrane filtration media for enumeration of total coliforms and Escherichia coli from sewage and surface water. Appl Environ Microbiol 1987; 53: 1246–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Joint Committee of the Public Health Laboratory Service and the Standing Committee of Analysts. A comparison between minerals-modified glutamate medium and lauryl tryptose broth for the enumeration of Escherichia coli and coliform organisms in water by the multiple tube method. J Hyg 1980; 85: 35–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Joint Committee of the Public Health Laboratory Service and the Standing Committee of Analysts. A comparison of confirmatory media for coliform organisms and Escherichia coli in water. J Hyg 1981; 87: 369–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Cheung, WHS, Chang, KCK, Hung, RPS, Kleevens, JWL. Health effects of beach-water pollution in Hong Kong. Epidemiol Infect 1990; 105: 139–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.Grabow, WOK, Hilner, CA, Coubrough, P. Evaluation of standard and modified M-FC, MacConkey, and Teepol media for membrane filtration counting of faecal coliforms in water. Appl Environ Microbiol 1981; 42: 192–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18.Jesus, SM, Hazen, TC. Comparison of four membrane filter methods for faecal coliform enumeration in tropical waters. Appl Environ Microbiol 1987; 53: 2922–8.Google Scholar