Hubbry Logo
Fecal coliformFecal coliformMain
Open search
Fecal coliform
Community hub
Fecal coliform
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Fecal coliform
Fecal coliform
Fecal coliform
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

A fecal coliform (British: faecal coliform) is a facultatively anaerobic, rod-shaped, gram-negative, non-sporulating bacterium. Coliform bacteria generally originate in the intestines of warm-blooded animals. Fecal coliforms are capable of growth in the presence of bile salts or similar surface agents, are oxidase negative, and produce acid and gas from lactose within 48 hours at 44 ± 0.5°C.[1] The term thermotolerant coliform is more correct and is gaining acceptance over "fecal coliform".[2]

Coliform bacteria include genera that originate in feces (e.g. Escherichia, Enterobacter, Klebsiella, Citrobacter). The fecal coliform assay is intended to be an indicator of fecal contamination; more specifically of E. coli which is an indicator microorganism for other pathogens that may be present in feces. Presence of fecal coliforms in water may not be directly harmful, and do not necessarily indicate the presence of feces.[1]

Fecal bacteria as indicator of water quality

[edit]

Background

[edit]

In general, increased levels of fecal coliforms provide a warning of failure in water treatment, a break in the integrity of the distribution system, possible contamination with pathogens. When levels are high there may be an elevated risk of waterborne gastroenteritis. Tests for the bacteria are cheap, reliable and rapid (1-day incubation).

Potential sources of bacteria in water

[edit]

The presence of fecal coliform in aquatic environments may indicate that the water has been contaminated with the fecal material of humans or other animals. Fecal coliform bacteria can enter rivers through direct discharge of waste from mammals and birds, from agricultural and storm runoff, and from human sewage. However, their presence may also be the result of plant material, and pulp or paper mill effluent.[1]

Human sewage

[edit]

Failing home septic systems can allow coliforms in the effluent to flow into the water table, aquifers, drainage ditches and nearby surface waters. Sewage connections that are connected to storm drain pipes can also allow human sewage into surface waters. Some older industrial cities, particularly in the Northeast and Midwest of the United States, use a combined sewer system to handle waste. A combined sewer carries both domestic sewage and stormwater. During high rainfall periods, a combined sewer can become overloaded and overflow to a nearby stream or river, bypassing treatment.

Agriculture

[edit]

Agricultural practices such as allowing livestock to graze near water bodies, spreading manure as fertilizer on fields during wet periods, using sewage sludge biosolids and allowing livestock watering in streams can all contribute to fecal coliform contamination.

Problems resulting from fecal contamination of water

[edit]

Human health hazards

[edit]

Large quantities of fecal coliform bacteria in water are not harmful according to some authorities, but may indicate a higher risk of pathogens being present in the water.[3] Some waterborne pathogenic diseases that may coincide with fecal coliform contamination include ear infections, dysentery, typhoid fever, viral and bacterial gastroenteritis, and hepatitis A.

Effects on the environment

[edit]

Untreated organic matter that contains fecal coliform can be harmful to the environment. Aerobic decomposition of this material can reduce dissolved oxygen levels if discharged into rivers or waterways. This may reduce the oxygen level enough to kill fish and other aquatic life. Reduction of fecal coliform in wastewater may require the use of chlorine and other disinfectant chemicals, or UV disinfection treatment. Such materials may kill the fecal coliform and disease bacteria. They also kill bacteria essential to the proper balance of the aquatic environment, endangering the survival of species dependent on those bacteria. So higher levels of fecal coliform require higher levels of chlorine, threatening those aquatic organisms.

Removal and treatment

[edit]

Fecal coliform, like other bacteria, can usually be inhibited in growth by boiling water, treating with chlorine, or UV disinfection. Washing thoroughly with soap after contact with contaminated water can also help prevent infections. Gloves should always be worn when testing for fecal coliform. Municipalities that maintain a public water supply will typically monitor and treat for fecal coliforms. It can also be removed by iodine.

Testing

[edit]

Public health risk monitoring

[edit]

In waters of the U.S., Canada and other countries, water quality is monitored to protect the health of the general public. Bacteria contamination is one monitored pollutant. In the U.S., fecal coliform testing is one of the nine tests of water quality that form the overall water-quality rating in a process used by U.S. EPA. The fecal coliform assay should only be used to assess the presence of fecal matter in situations where fecal coliforms of non-fecal origin are not commonly encountered.[1] EPA has approved a number of different methods to analyze samples for bacteria.[4]

Analysis

[edit]
Main article: Bacteriological water analysis

Bacteria reproduce rapidly if conditions are right for growth. Most bacteria grow best in dark, warm, moist environments with food. When grown on solid media, some bacteria form colonies as they multiply, and they may grow large enough to be seen. By growing and counting colonies of fecal coliform bacteria from a sample of water, the amount of bacteria originally present can be determined.

Membrane filtration is the method of choice for the analysis of fecal coliforms in water. Samples to be tested are passed through a filter of a particular pore size (generally 0.45 micrometre). The microorganisms present in the water remain on the filter surface. The filter is placed in a sterile Petri dish with a selective medium; growth of the desired organisms is encouraged, while other non-target organisms are suppressed. Each cell develops into a separate colony, which can be counted directly, and the initial inoculum size can be determined. Typically, sample volumes of 100 ml will be used for water testing and filtered to achieve a final desirable colony density range of 20 to 60 colonies per filter. Contaminated sources may require dilution to achieve a "countable" membrane. The filter is placed on a Petri dish containing M-FC agar and incubated for 24 hours at 44.5 °C (112.1 degrees F). This elevated temperature heat shocks non-fecal bacteria and suppresses their growth. As the fecal coliform colonies grow, they produce an acid (through fermenting lactose) that reacts with the aniline dye in the agar, thus giving the colonies their blue color.

Newer methods for coliform detection are based on specific enzyme substrates as indicators of coliforms. These assays use a sugar linked to a dye which, when acted on by the enzyme beta-galactosidase, produces a characteristic color. The enzyme beta-galactosidase is a marker for coliforms generally and may be assayed by hydrolysis of enzyme-specific glycosides such as o-nitrophenyl-beta-D-galactose. Assays typically include a second sugar linked to a different dye, which produces a fluorescent product when acted on by the enzyme beta-glucuronidase. Because E. coli produces both beta-galactosidase and beta-glucuronidase, combining two dyes makes it possible to differentiate and quantify coliforms and E. coli in the same pot.

More recently, the chemistry behind enzymatic detection compounds has been updated so that the indicating component is redox active, as opposed to the more usual chromogenic format, allowing fecal indicator bacteria such as E. coli and E. faecalis to be detected electrochemically without any sample pre-treatment. Since the colour of the detection compound is of no consequence, this allows detection in deeply coloured matrices.[5]

US EPA testing requirements

[edit]

In 1989, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published its Total Coliform Rule (TCR), which imposed major monitoring changes for public water systems nationwide.[6] The testing requirements under the 1989 TCR were more thorough than the previous requirements. The number of routine coliform tests was increased, especially for smaller water utilities. The regulation also required automatic repeat testing from all sources that show a total coliform positive (known as triggered source water monitoring). In 2013, EPA revised the TCR,[7] with minor corrections in 2014.[8]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Additional resources

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Fecal coliform

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Fecal coliforms are thermotolerant capable of fermenting to produce acid and gas at 44.5°C, distinguishing them from total coliforms and linking them primarily to the intestinal tracts of animals, including humans, , and . This group encompasses species such as , , and certain strains, though not all are exclusively fecal in origin. Their detection relies on standardized culture-based methods that exploit this tolerance to infer recent fecal contamination in environmental samples. As indicator organisms, fecal coliforms signal potential health risks in water by proxying for enteric pathogens like Salmonella, Shigella, and viruses, which are harder and costlier to detect directly. They underpin regulatory standards for drinking water (e.g., zero tolerance under certain rules), recreational waters, and wastewater effluents, with counts guiding public health decisions such as beach closures or treatment requirements. However, empirical limitations include false positives from environmental thermotolerant non-fecal coliforms and inconsistent survival rates relative to true pathogens, prompting shifts toward E. coli-specific or enterococci-based metrics in updated guidelines. These shortcomings highlight that while fecal coliform testing provides a practical, correlative assessment of sanitary conditions, it does not equate to direct pathogen quantification.

Definition and Microbiology

Bacterial characteristics

Fecal coliform constitute a physiological group within the coliform family, defined by their ability to ferment , producing acid and gas, when incubated at 44.5°C for up to 48 hours. This thermotolerance differentiates them from total coliforms, which exhibit the same at 35–37°C, and reflects adaptation to the higher temperatures of animal intestines. They encompass rod-shaped () morphology, Gram-negative cell walls, and non-spore-forming nature, enabling survival in varied environments while remaining vulnerable to standard disinfectants like . These bacteria are facultatively anaerobic, capable of both aerobic respiration and fermentation under oxygen-limited conditions, and are oxidase-negative, which aids in their distinction from non-coliform enteric pathogens. Growth occurs in media containing bile salts or detergents, mimicking intestinal conditions and inhibiting non-enteric competitors. Principal taxa include Escherichia coli (the predominant fecal species), thermotolerant Klebsiella (e.g., K. pneumoniae), Enterobacter, and Citrobacter strains, though not all members of these genera qualify as fecal coliforms without thermotolerant confirmation. Biochemically, fecal coliforms demonstrate citrate utilization variability and indole production (especially in E. coli), with motility often present via peritrichous flagella in liquid media. Their peptidoglycan-rich envelopes confer Gram-negative staining, and they lack endospores, limiting long-term resilience compared to spore-formers like Clostridium. Detection relies on elevated-temperature enrichment, yielding yellow colonies on selective media like mFC agar, confirming thermotolerance and lactose catabolism via β-galactosidase. Fecal coliform represent a subset of the broader total coliform group, distinguished primarily by their thermotolerance—the ability to ferment with gas production at 44.5°C within 24 hours, compared to the standard 35°C incubation for total coliforms. This elevated requirement reflects adaptation to the higher internal temperatures of animal intestines, making fecal coliforms a more specific proxy for recent fecal than total coliforms, which encompass environmental from sources like , decaying vegetation, and non-fecal animal matter that do not exhibit this thermotolerance. While the term "fecal coliform" implies an exclusive intestinal origin, some thermotolerant coliforms (synonymous in testing protocols) belong to genera such as , , and , which can persist in non-fecal environments like plants or effluents, leading to occasional false positives for mammalian fecal . These distinctions arise because not all lactose-fermenting rods capable of growth at 44.5°C are obligate gut inhabitants; for instance, certain species thrive in nutrient-rich industrial settings without fecal input. The term "thermotolerant coliforms" is increasingly preferred in microbiological literature for precision, as it avoids overattributing environmental thermophiles to fecal sources. Fecal coliforms differ from (E. coli), a key within the group, in that fecal coliform tests detect a composite of thermotolerant organisms rather than E. coli specifically, which requires additional confirmation via production or other biochemical assays. E. coli constitutes the majority of fecal coliforms in and animal feces but excludes non-E. coli thermotolerants; regulatory shifts, such as the U.S. EPA's preference for E. coli enumeration since the 2013 Revised Total Coliform Rule, stem from its greater specificity to viable fecal pathogens over the broader fecal coliform metric, which can overestimate contamination from non-pathogenic environmental strains.

Historical Context

Early development of coliform testing

The coliform test originated in the late as a response to waterborne disease outbreaks, such as and typhoid, which underscored the need for feasible indicators of fecal contamination beyond culturing specific pathogens like or typhi. Bacteriologists recognized that certain gram-negative, rod-shaped prevalent in could ferment to produce acid and gas at body temperature (approximately 37°C), distinguishing them from many environmental microbes. This biochemical trait formed the basis of early detection methods, assuming coliforms' intestinal origin and limited environmental survival made them reliable proxies for enteric pathogens. A foundational advancement came in 1898 when British researcher Herbert Edward Durham introduced a quantitative technique using inverted fermentation tubes (Durham tubes) to capture and measure gas from lactose-fermenting coliforms in diluted water samples, enabling estimation of bacterial density via gas presence or absence across dilutions. This presumptive test laid groundwork for probabilistic , later refined into the most probable number (MPN) method. Standardization accelerated in the United States through the (APHA), which in 1897 adopted initial coliform testing protocols emphasizing lactose broth incubation at 37°C for gas production, followed by confirmation in selective media like salts to exclude non-coliform fermenters. These procedures were codified in the inaugural 1905 edition of Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, establishing the multi-phase test—presumptive (lactose fermentation), confirmed ( broth verification), and optional completed (pure culture identification)—as a benchmark for supplies. By 1912, APHA's efforts had influenced U.S. Department standards, mandating coliform limits (e.g., fewer than 100 per mL in finished ) to guide and chlorination efficacy. Early adoption reflected pragmatic trade-offs: coliform culturing was faster and less resource-intensive than pathogen isolation, with empirical correlations observed between high coliform counts and incidence in unfiltered sources. However, the test's reliance on total coliforms (including non-fecal species) introduced limitations from the outset, as and contributed to background levels, complicating fecal-specific attribution.

Evolution to fecal-specific indicators

The limitations of total coliform testing, which included bacteria from non-fecal environmental sources such as soil and vegetation, became evident in the early as false positives undermined its reliability for detecting recent fecal contamination in water. This prompted efforts to refine indicators toward greater specificity, building on observations that coliforms of fecal origin, particularly , exhibit thermotolerance mimicking mammalian intestinal temperatures. The foundational concept emerged from Cornelis Eijkman's 1901 experiments, which showed that fecal coliforms ferment and produce gas at 46°C, while most environmental coliforms fail to do so; this led to the development of elevated-temperature incubation methods to isolate thermotolerant strains. By the mid-20th century, standardized fecal coliform tests—using 44.5°C incubation in EC broth for multiple-tube fermentation or mFC agar for membrane filtration—were adopted to enumerate these thermotolerant coliforms, comprising primarily E. coli (90-95% in human feces) alongside minor contributions from thermotolerant and . The membrane filter technique for fecal coliforms was formalized in 1965, enhancing quantification speed and accuracy for recreational and potable water monitoring. Parallel to fecal coliforms, fecal streptococci (later reclassified partly as enterococci) emerged as an alternative fecal-specific indicator in the 1930s-1940s, valued for their stricter association with animal intestines and greater environmental persistence compared to coliforms. These advancements reflected a causal shift: empirical linked thermotolerant indicators more closely to presence and gastrointestinal illness outbreaks, such as those from sewage-contaminated sources, than total coliforms alone. By the 1960s, U.S. regulatory frameworks, including EPA precursors, increasingly favored fecal-specific tests for distinguishing mammalian fecal pollution from background , though non-fecal thermotolerant sources (e.g., industrial effluents) required ongoing validation.

Sources and Environmental Fate

Primary anthropogenic sources

The primary anthropogenic sources of fecal coliform bacteria in water bodies originate from human fecal waste entering the environment through failures or inefficiencies in infrastructure. Municipal plants represent a major contributor, as effluents from these facilities, even after , can release residual fecal coliform densities ranging from 10^3 to 10^6 colony-forming units (CFU) per 100 mL into receiving waters, depending on treatment and dilution factors. overflows during heavy rainfall events exacerbate this by discharging untreated directly into streams and rivers, with studies documenting spikes in fecal coliform levels exceeding 10^7 CFU/100 mL post-overflow. Failing septic systems in suburban and rural areas constitute another significant pathway, where from overloaded or malfunctioning tanks contaminates and surface waters; research in watersheds has isolated septic-derived fecal pollution contributing up to 50% of total fecal coliform loads in affected streams. Leaking sewer lines and illicit connections between sanitary sewers and systems further propagate contamination, often leading to persistent low-level inputs that accumulate in dry weather flows. Land application of biosolids (treated ) on agricultural fields can also mobilize fecal coliform during runoff events, particularly under wet conditions, though regulatory standards aim to limit viable bacterial counts to below 10^6 CFU/g dry weight. Additional urban and recreational sources include boat pump-out discharges and effluents, which introduce human-derived fecal matter with potentially higher loads due to concentrated ; microbial source tracking has confirmed human-specific markers predominant in such inputs. Overall, these sources underscore the role of integrity in controlling fecal coliform dissemination, with empirical data from source tracking indicating as the dominant anthropogenic vector in populated watersheds.

Non-human sources and persistence factors

Fecal coliform bacteria originate from non-human sources including , , and avian species, which deposit directly into water bodies or via runoff, contributing to environmental loads independent of . such as , waterfowl, and feral swine are prominent contributors; for instance, gull contain enterococci (a related indicator) at densities of 10⁴ to 10⁹ CFU/g, dominating dry-weather contamination in coastal areas. , particularly and pigs, add substantial inputs through pasture runoff and direct stream access, with yielding enterococci levels exceeding 201 CFU/100 mL in affected waters, though associated profiles (e.g., E. coli O157:H7 at 3.1–8.4 log₁₀ CFU/g) pose lower illness risks than sources due to host specificity and dilution effects. In watershed assessments, non-human animal sources like and can each comprise approximately 25% of total fecal coliform loads, with birds such as and waterfowl amplifying levels during seasonal migrations or roosting. The persistence of fecal coliforms in aquatic systems varies by habitat and is governed by abiotic and biotic factors, with typical decay rates of -0.24 log₁₀ CFU/day in freshwater water columns but markedly slower at -0.02 log₁₀ CFU/day in sediments, which serve as protective reservoirs shielding bacteria from stressors. Lower temperatures (≤20°C) extend survival times, often by days to weeks, while nutrient enrichment—such as organic carbon above 7 mg/L or added phosphorus—promotes regrowth and reduces decay, contrasting with rapid inactivation under elevated temperatures (≥20°C) or in nutrient-poor conditions. Ultraviolet radiation from sunlight accelerates die-off in surface waters by damaging DNA (affecting up to 83% of cultured fecal indicators in exposed settings), and protozoan predation further hastens decline, causing up to 90% mortality in susceptible strains. Salinity elevates decay in marine environments (e.g., -2.9 log₁₀ CFU/day for fecal coliforms), exceeding freshwater rates, though sediment organic content correlates positively with prolonged viability across both matrices. These factors collectively determine detection durations, with coliforms outlasting enterococci in freshwater but showing parity in saltwater, underscoring sediments' role in sustaining non-human-derived populations over extended periods.

Role in Water Quality Monitoring

Indicator rationale and assumptions

Fecal coliform bacteria are employed as indicators of fecal contamination in water quality monitoring due to their abundance in the gastrointestinal tracts of humans and warm-blooded animals, where they are excreted in concentrations exceeding 10^6 to 10^9 colony-forming units per gram of feces, enabling detection even after significant dilution in environmental waters. Their thermotolerant properties, requiring growth at 44.5°C, selectively identify strains of fecal origin over those from soil or vegetation, theoretically linking their presence to recent inputs of enteric pathogens that pose health risks but are impractical to assay routinely due to low numbers, diversity, and analytical complexity. This approach originated in the mid-20th century, with U.S. Public Health Service adoption in the 1960s and EPA criteria in 1976 setting a geometric mean limit of 200 colony-forming units per 100 mL for recreational waters, predicated on epidemiological associations between indicator levels and gastrointestinal illness rates. Underlying assumptions include that fecal coliform densities correlate reliably with loads and associated health risks, supported by early studies showing positive relationships with swimming-related illnesses, though later analyses favored E. coli subsets for stronger predictive power (e.g., correlation coefficients r=0.929–0.984 between E. coli and fecal coliforms, but variable illness risk prediction). Another assumption holds that these exhibit decay rates in water approximating those of co-discharged pathogens, with fecal coliform persistence estimated at -0.24 per day in freshwater versus faster declines for some alternatives like enterococci (-0.73 per day), minimizing discrepancies from differential die-off. Detection assumes negligible regrowth during transit or incubation, enforced by holding times up to 8 hours at ≤4°C, and uniform fecal shedding across sources, though nonhuman origins (e.g., ) may inflate levels without equivalent risks. These premises, while foundational, face empirical challenges: strain-specific persistence in sediments (-0.02 per day for fecal coliforms) can overestimate acute contamination, and environmental factors like or alter survival relative to viruses or , potentially decoupling indicators from actual hazard.

Empirical correlations with contamination

Fecal coliform concentrations in water have been empirically linked to fecal contamination, with studies showing moderate correlations with certain bacterial pathogens in untreated or surface waters, though these associations weaken in treated systems or with non-bacterial pathogens. In recreational waters, elevated fecal coliform levels often align with higher incidences of enteric such as and , particularly following precipitation events that mobilize non-point sources; for instance, systematic reviews indicate that fecal indicator density correlates with gastrointestinal illness risks under high-contamination scenarios, with relative risks increasing alongside indicator counts. However, these correlations are site-specific and influenced by environmental factors like and , limiting their universality. For viral pathogens, empirical data reveal poorer correlations, as fecal coliforms respond differently to disinfection and environmental stressors compared to enteric viruses like or adenovirus. In and effluents, coliform indicators detect fecal but fail to reliably predict viral presence; one analysis of disinfected found fecal coliforms in 27% of samples, while enteric viruses appeared in 31%, with no significant pairwise correlations between the indicator and specific pathogens like or . Coliphages, structurally akin to viruses, show nondetection rates up to 79% in treated , outperforming coliforms as viral proxies in some contexts, underscoring fecal coliforms' limitations for viral risk assessment. Health outcome studies further highlight inconsistencies, with meta-analyses of household revealing no significant association between fecal coliform presence and diarrheal disease risk ( 1.07, 95% CI: 0.79–1.45 across 14 studies), in contrast to stronger links for E. coli alone ( 1.54, 95% CI: 1.37–1.74). In , indicator-pathogen discordance persists, as multi-indicator panels predict pathogen absence with only 71–79% accuracy via discriminant analysis, often yielding false negatives where pathogens evade detection despite low coliform counts. These findings indicate that while fecal coliforms signal potential in raw waters, their proxy value diminishes post-treatment or in low-prevalence scenarios, prompting recommendations for complementary molecular markers or pathogen-specific assays.

Health Implications

Associated pathogens and diseases

Fecal coliform , primarily consisting of thermotolerant species like Escherichia coli, signal the presence of fecal contamination in water sources, which correlates with the introduction of enteric pathogens capable of causing gastrointestinal illnesses upon ingestion. These pathogens, originating from human or animal excreta, include , viruses, and that survive in aquatic environments under favorable conditions such as moderate temperatures and organic nutrient availability. Empirical studies have documented co-occurrences between elevated fecal coliform levels and detections of these agents in contaminated waters, underscoring the indicator's role in assessing risks from recreational, drinking, or shellfish-harvesting sites. Bacterial pathogens commonly associated with fecal coliform-indicated contamination include Salmonella spp., spp., , , and pathogenic strains of E. coli such as enterotoxigenic or Shiga toxin-producing variants. These organisms cause diseases like (characterized by fever, diarrhea, and abdominal cramps), (dysentery with bloody stools), (severe dehydration from watery diarrhea), campylobacteriosis (acute enteritis), and hemolytic uremic syndrome from certain E. coli strains. For instance, V. cholerae O1 has been linked to outbreaks where fecal coliform densities exceeded 10^3 CFU/100 mL in surface waters, leading to rapid transmission in inadequately treated supplies. Viral pathogens, including rotavirus, norovirus, and hepatitis A virus, are frequently implicated in fecal-contaminated waters alongside coliform indicators, as their low infectious doses amplify risks even at trace levels. Rotavirus primarily affects children, causing severe dehydrating diarrhea responsible for substantial global morbidity; norovirus triggers acute gastroenteritis outbreaks in recreational waters; and hepatitis A leads to liver inflammation with symptoms like jaundice and fatigue. Protozoan parasites such as Giardia lamblia and Cryptosporidium parvum resist chlorination and persist in coliform-positive environments, resulting in giardiasis (chronic malabsorption and diarrhea) and cryptosporidiosis (self-limiting but severe diarrhea in immunocompromised individuals). These associations highlight that while fecal coliforms themselves are rarely pathogenic, their detection necessitates targeted pathogen surveillance to mitigate disease burdens estimated at millions of cases annually from waterborne routes.

Quantitative risk assessments

Quantitative microbial risk assessments (QMRA) for fecal coliforms in water quality monitoring estimate health risks by correlating indicator concentrations with pathogen loads, incorporating exposure pathways such as incidental ingestion, and applying dose-response models for associated pathogens like Campylobacter, Salmonella, and pathogenic Escherichia coli strains. These assessments typically assume ratios of fecal coliforms to pathogens derived from empirical data on fecal shedding and environmental persistence, with risks calculated as probabilities of infection or illness per exposure event. For recreational waters, U.S. EPA analyses using forward QMRA and Monte Carlo simulations link fecal contamination—proxied by coliform-equivalent indicators—to gastrointestinal (GI) illness benchmarks, such as 8 highly credible GI cases per 1,000 primary contact exposures under 1986 criteria. Exposure estimates in these models often use log-normal distributions for water ingestion volumes, with geometric means of 18.5 mL (range 1–100 mL) for swimmers, adjusted for activity type and decay rates of indicators versus pathogens. Dose-response relationships employ models like beta-Poisson for bacterial , where the probability of PiP_i is given by Pi=1−e−D⋅rP_i = 1 - e^{-D \cdot r} (exponential) or more flexibly Pi=1−(1+D/β)αP_i = 1 - (1 + D/\beta)^\alpha (beta-Poisson, with DD as ingested dose, α\alpha and β\beta as shape parameters). Morbidity (illness given ) ranges from 0.1–0.7 depending on and host immunity. The following table summarizes key parameters for pathogens linked to fecal coliform contamination:
PathogenModelParametersMorbidity (IllnessInfection)
Beta-Poissonα=0.144\alpha = 0.144, β=7.59\beta = 7.590.1–0.6Prevalence up to 98% in ruminants
E. coli O157:H7Beta-Poissonα=0.4\alpha = 0.4, β=37.6\beta = 37.6 (ID50_{50}: 207 CFU)0.2–0.6Super-shedders elevate dose by 107^7 CFU/g
Beta-Poissonα=0.3126\alpha = 0.3126, β=2884\beta = 28840.2Gompertz alternatives for strain-specific fits
Exponentialr=0.09r = 0.09 (range 0.04–0.16)0.2–0.7Oocyst ID50_{50}: ~0.09
Canadian recreational water guidelines, informed by QMRA, set fecal indicator thresholds (e.g., ≤235 CFU/100 mL for E. coli, analogous to fecal coliform metrics) corresponding to 36 GI illnesses per 1,000 primary contacts or 8 highly credible GI cases, based on ingestion of 10–40 mL and epidemiological regressions. Risks differ markedly by fecal source: human sewage and ruminant (e.g., cattle) inputs yield median illness probabilities approaching 0.03 per event, while avian or swine sources are 4–300 times lower at equivalent indicator levels, due to lower pathogen prevalence and abundance (e.g., Campylobacter at 57–100% in chickens but with reduced shedding). In contexts, QMRA models for source waters contaminated with fecal coliforms predict elevated doses during events like runoff, with risks amplified by direct consumption volumes (e.g., 2 L/day), though treatment barriers reduce probabilities to below 10−4^{-4} illnesses per person-year under multi-barrier systems. Empirical QMRA validations highlight source-specific variability, with human-derived posing 10–6,000 times higher risks than at matched coliform densities, underscoring the indicator's utility in prioritizing human fecal inputs despite imperfect correlations.

Environmental Effects

Impacts on aquatic ecosystems

Fecal pollution, indicated by elevated fecal coliform levels, disrupts the structure and function of aquatic microbial communities by reducing , particularly in anthropogenically influenced lotic systems. In urban streams with high anthropogenic fecal inputs, microbial communities exhibit significantly lower diversity (p < 0.0001) and are dominated by Firmicutes phyla associated with human gut microbiota, contrasting with more diverse profiles in less polluted, zoogenic sites featuring phyla like Verrucomicrobia and Actinobacteria. This shift alters community composition, with up to 184 genera differing markedly between polluted and reference sites, potentially impairing nutrient cycling and organic matter decomposition essential to ecosystem processes. Interactions between fecal coliform bacteria, such as Escherichia coli, and algae or aquatic vegetation further influence ecosystem dynamics. Algae modify E. coli survival through nutrient provision, substrate attachment, and release of inhibitory toxins or antibiotics, while vegetation alters light penetration and water chemistry, creating secondary habitats that enhance bacterial persistence. These associations can promote horizontal gene transfer and antibiotic resistance dissemination within microbial assemblages, reshaping community structures and grazer interactions across trophic levels. Fecal contamination contributes to nutrient loading, exacerbating eutrophication in aquatic systems via phosphorus and nitrogen from fecal matter. In experimental streams, additions of fecal material analogous to wildlife inputs reduced dissolved oxygen concentrations by 0.06 mg L⁻¹ h⁻¹ per gram of feces, promoting hypoxic conditions that stress aerobic organisms. Sewage and fecal discharges, as nutrient sources, drive algal blooms and benthic regeneration, sustaining elevated phosphorus levels that favor eutrophic states and reduce habitat suitability for sensitive species. At higher trophic levels, pathogens associated with fecal coliform indicate risks to fish and shellfish health, including bacterial infections leading to gill hyperplasia, fin erosion, and systemic diseases. Microbiological pollution from fecal sources compromises fish immune responses and increases mortality in contaminated waters, with documented cases of E. coli-related septicemia in wild and cultured populations. Overall, these cascading effects diminish biodiversity, alter food webs, and impair ecosystem resilience in polluted habitats.

Interactions with other pollutants

Fecal coliform bacteria exhibit enhanced persistence and potential regrowth in aquatic environments enriched with nutrients such as organic carbon, ammonium, and phosphate, which are often introduced via agricultural runoff or wastewater. Experimental additions of these nutrients have demonstrated stimulation of fecal coliform abundance beyond baseline decay rates, as the bacteria utilize the carbon and nitrogen sources to support metabolism and division under favorable conditions like moderate temperatures. This interaction amplifies the ecological footprint of fecal pollution by prolonging bacterial viability, thereby exacerbating risks to downstream ecosystems through sustained organic loading and potential pathogen dissemination. Conversely, certain heavy metals exert inhibitory effects on fecal coliform survival, with copper demonstrating bactericidal activity at concentrations as low as 195 μg/L for Escherichia coli and 300 μg/L for total coliforms, thresholds commonly encountered in mining-impacted or industrially polluted waters. Iron exhibits similar suppression at higher levels around 1200 μg/L, disrupting cellular processes and accelerating die-off rates independent of predation or UV exposure. Such metal-induced reductions can confound environmental assessments by underestimating true fecal contamination levels in co-polluted systems, where metal toxicity selectively diminishes indicator bacteria while pathogens or resistant strains may persist. Agrochemicals like pesticides and fertilizers generally show minimal direct impacts on fecal coliform survival in water columns or sediments, though indirect effects via altered algal growth or suspended solids may modulate bacterial attachment and transport. In eutrophic conditions compounded by fecal inputs, these interactions contribute to synergistic degradation of water quality, including heightened biochemical oxygen demand and shifts in microbial community structure that favor opportunistic pathogens over native biota. Overall, pollutant mixtures alter fecal coliform dynamics in ways that intensify hypoxic zones and bioaccumulation pathways, underscoring the need for integrated monitoring of biological and chemical stressors in impaired watersheds.

Detection and Analysis Methods

Traditional culture-based techniques

Traditional culture-based techniques for detecting fecal coliforms in water rely on the selective growth and enumeration of thermotolerant coliform bacteria, defined as those capable of fermenting lactose to produce gas and acid at 44.5°C within 24-48 hours, distinguishing them from non-fecal coliforms. These methods, established since the mid-20th century, include the multiple-tube fermentation (MTF) technique, also known as the most probable number (MPN) method, and the membrane filtration (MF) technique, both of which target viable cells through differential media and incubation conditions. They form the basis of regulatory monitoring under standards like those from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), providing quantitative estimates of contamination levels in drinking, recreational, and wastewater sources. The MTF technique uses a serial dilution series of sample aliquots inoculated into tubes containing lactose-based broth, such as lauryl tryptose broth for the presumptive phase at 35°C, followed by confirmation in brilliant green lactose bile (BGLB) broth and, for fecal coliforms specifically, elevated-temperature confirmation in EC broth or A-1 medium at 44.5°C. Gas production within the Durham tubes during incubation indicates positive fermentation, with results statistically interpreted via MPN tables to estimate density per 100 , typically ranging from <2 to >1,600 organisms. This probabilistic approach accommodates variable sample volumes (e.g., 10 , 1 , 0.1 replicates) and is particularly suited for turbid or low-volume samples where direct counting is impractical, though it requires 24-96 hours total and can overestimate due to non-coliform gas producers. In contrast, the MF technique filters a known volume of (e.g., 100 mL) through a 0.45-μm pore-size , which retains , then places the filter on selective like mFC medium supplemented with blue indicator. Incubation occurs at 44.5±0.2°C for 22-24 hours in a submerged bath to ensure thermotolerance selectivity, yielding countable blue colonies corresponding to fecal coliforms, reported as colony-forming units (CFU) per 100 mL. This direct enumeration method processes larger volumes rapidly (results in 24 hours post-filtration) and is EPA-approved for ambient waters under Method 9222D, offering higher precision for low-density samples compared to MTF, but it demands sterile equipment and is less effective in highly turbid waters that clog filters. Both techniques emphasize sterility, quality controls like positive/negative blanks, and verification steps to confirm coliform identity via biochemical tests (e.g., production, citrate utilization), ensuring specificity amid potential interference from environmental . Adopted widely since the , these methods underpin compliance with limits such as the EPA's historical fecal coliform standard of 200 CFU/100 mL for marine recreational waters, though they have been partially supplanted by E. coli-specific assays due to greater pathogen correlation.

Regulatory standards and compliance

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations requires that public water systems produce and distribute water free from fecal contamination, with fecal coliform presence indicating a serious violation necessitating immediate corrective action, though the Revised Total Coliform Rule (RTCR) of 2013 emphasizes E. coli as the primary fecal indicator with a maximum contaminant level goal of zero. For total coliform monitoring, which includes fecal coliforms, no more than 5% of routine monthly samples may test positive, with systems required to conduct repeat sampling and assessments upon any positive result. Compliance involves certified laboratory analysis using EPA-approved methods such as multiple-tube fermentation technique (e.g., Standard Methods 9221E) or membrane filtration, with sampling frequency scaled to population served, ranging from monthly for small systems to over 1,000 samples per month for large ones. In recreational waters, EPA's 1986 Ambient Water Quality Criteria recommended a geometric mean of no more than 200 fecal coliform colony-forming units (cfu) per 100 mL, with no sample exceeding 400 cfu/100 mL, though 2012 updates prioritize E. coli (126 cfu/100 mL ) and enterococci due to superior with gastrointestinal illness risks. Some U.S. states retain fecal coliform criteria for legacy permits, requiring monitoring via grab samples analyzed by certified methods, with exceedances triggering public advisories or beach closures under Section 305(b) reporting. For discharges under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), fecal coliform limits are site-specific and tied to receiving classifications, often set as a monthly of 200–1,000 organisms per 100 mL during primary contact seasons (May–October) and higher (e.g., 2,000/100 mL) in winter, with instantaneous maxima not exceeding 400–10 times the mean to protect downstream uses. Permit holders must monitor weekly or monthly using or multiple-tube methods, report averages quarterly to EPA or states, and implement best management practices like disinfection (e.g., chlorination) if limits are violated. Internationally, the World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines for drinking-water quality stipulate that thermotolerant (fecal) coliforms or E. coli must be undetectable in any 100 mL sample post-disinfection, serving as a treatment efficacy benchmark rather than a routine compliance metric. Compliance in member states often mirrors this through national adaptations, with verification via accredited labs employing ISO-standardized culture-based assays, though enforcement varies by infrastructure capacity. Overall, while fecal coliform standards persist in wastewater and transitional contexts, regulatory shifts toward pathogen-specific indicators like E. coli reflect empirical evidence of improved public health protection.

Limitations and Criticisms

Methodological flaws and false signals

Fecal coliform tests, which detect thermotolerant coliforms capable of at 44.5°C, encompass not only from fecal sources but also environmental bacteria such as originating from soil, vegetation, and decaying plant matter, thereby generating false positives for fecal pollution. These non-fecal thermotolerant strains can proliferate under test conditions mimicking intestinal temperatures, overestimating contamination risks in ambient waters where environmental inputs predominate. Environmental persistence and regrowth of fecal coliforms in sediments, soils, and columns further decouple indicator levels from recent fecal inputs, as can survive for extended periods—up to 91 days at 8°C—and multiply under favorable conditions like availability and temperatures above 30°C, leading to false signals of ongoing or animal waste . Studies document up to 5-log increases in E. coli densities within days in tropical and temperate sediments, with naturalized populations in pristine ecosystems like rainforests indicating extra-enteric origins rather than sanitary failures. This regrowth, observed across freshwater, estuarine, and coastal environments but not marine water columns, compromises the temporal specificity of culture-based methods. Methodological limitations in detection exacerbate false signals; for instance, assays like Colilert-18 can yield positives from marine bacteria unrelated to , with verification showing citrate-positive, indole-negative strains as common interferents. Moreover, inconsistent correlations between fecal coliform densities and enteric pathogens or health outcomes—varying by site, precipitation, and decay differentials—undermine reliability, as indicators may exceed standards without corresponding risks or fail to detect pathogens during die-off mismatches. In tropical regions, elevated environmental baselines amplify these issues, prompting critiques that standards overestimate hazards and drive unnecessary interventions.

Evidence-based challenges to reliability

Fecal coliform indicators suffer from frequent false positives arising from non-fecal sources, such as thermotolerant Klebsiella pneumoniae associated with vegetation, soil, and industrial effluents like pulp and paper mill wastewaters. In a 1984 study of Wisconsin mill waters, up to 90% of detected thermotolerant Klebsiella in treated effluents were non-fecal in origin, leading to erroneous indications of fecal pollution. Similarly, environmental growth of fecal coliforms has been documented in pristine settings, such as tropical rainforest streams, where detections occur without evident fecal inputs, inflating perceived contamination risks. Reliability is undermined by inconsistent correlations between fecal coliform levels and actual enteric s, including viruses and , which often fail to co-occur predictably in ambient waters. Studies from 2011 and 2018 highlight this disconnect, showing poor alignment with pathogen presence despite elevated indicator counts. Health risk assessments based on these indicators thus overestimate dangers in some scenarios, as non-pathogenic coliforms dominate while true hazards like persist independently. Differential persistence across environments further complicates interpretations, with fecal coliforms exhibiting lower decay rates than alternatives like enterococci in (decay rate of -0.24 day⁻¹ versus -0.73 day⁻¹) and prolonged survival in compared to columns. This variability, observed in subtropical experiments, obscures the timing and sources of , as regrowth or sediment resuspension can mimic recent fecal inputs. In saltwater, decay rates align more closely (-2.9 day⁻¹ for both), but overall persistence confounds microbial source tracking efforts. Methodological flaws in enumeration, such as reliance on most probable number (MPN) or colony-forming units (CFU), introduce variability tied to sample aliquots and techniques rather than true concentrations, leading to inconsistent compliance assessments under standards. Analysis of Newport River data from 2000–2005 revealed sites compliant by MPN metrics yet exceeding concentration-based thresholds with >10% probability, highlighting how indicator metrics inadequately link to risks or endpoints. These issues have prompted regulatory shifts away from fecal coliforms toward more specific markers like E. coli, which better exclude non-fecal thermotolerants. Source attribution remains problematic, as fecal coliforms cannot reliably differentiate human from animal or environmental origins, with limited data on varying health risks from non-human feces. This limitation persists despite advances in molecular tracking, as traditional culture-based tests lack specificity for human pathogens.

Alternatives and Advances

Superior indicators like E. coli

Escherichia coli (E. coli) serves as a more precise indicator of fecal contamination in water than the broader fecal coliform group, as it is predominantly found in the intestines of warm-blooded animals and rarely survives outside such environments. This specificity contrasts with fecal coliforms, which include thermotolerant species like Klebsiella and Enterobacter that can originate from non-fecal sources such as decaying vegetation, soil, or industrial effluents, leading to potential overestimation of mammalian fecal pollution. Consequently, E. coli provides a stronger correlation with the presence of enteric pathogens and gastrointestinal illness risks in recreational and drinking waters. Epidemiological data support E. coli's superiority, with studies showing it as a better predictor of swimming-associated gastrointestinal illness than fecal coliform counts; for instance, U.S. EPA analyses in the indicated dose-response relationships where E. coli levels aligned more closely with reported illness rates at freshwater beaches. In response, the EPA's 1986 Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria recommended E. coli as the primary indicator for freshwater, setting limits of 126 CFU/100 mL and single-sample maxima of 235 CFU/100 mL to minimize health risks. For detection, E. coli-specific methods employ chromogenic or fluorogenic substrates targeting β-D-glucuronidase activity, unique to most E. coli strains, enabling differentiation from other coliforms in as little as 24 hours via tests like Colilert or MI agar. These assays yield higher specificity (over 95% in validated studies) compared to traditional fecal coliform enrichment at 44.5°C, which can detect non-fecal thermotolerants. Regulatory frameworks, including the EPA's Revised Total Coliform Rule (effective 2016), designate E. coli positives as acute violations requiring immediate public notification, underscoring its role in safeguarding by signaling direct fecal ingress. Despite these advantages, E. coli monitoring requires careful consideration of strain variability, as not all are pathogenic, though its fecal exclusivity minimizes environmental false alarms prevalent in coliform tests. Adoption of E. coli has improved compliance targeting, with data from U.S. watersheds showing reduced over-regulation of non-fecal influences once shifted from fecal coliform metrics.

Emerging molecular approaches

Quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) has emerged as a primary molecular tool for detecting and quantifying fecal coliform and related fecal indicator (FIB) in samples, targeting genes such as lacZ (encoding ) or uidA (specific to E. coli). Unlike culture-based methods, qPCR enables rapid, culture-independent detection by amplifying and quantifying DNA in real-time, often within hours, with sensitivity down to 10-100 gene copies per reaction. This approach provides absolute quantification without relying on viable cell growth, addressing limitations of traditional techniques that miss non-culturable but potentially viable organisms. High-throughput qPCR platforms, including microfluidic systems, further advance detection by simultaneously assaying multiple FIB markers, such as those for E. coli, enterococci, and host-specific , in a single run, reducing processing time and labor while improving throughput for large-scale monitoring. Validation studies have demonstrated these systems' precision, with limits of detection as low as 10^2 copies/L and correlations exceeding 0.9 with culture methods for known positives. Additionally, digital PCR variants offer enhanced accuracy for absolute quantification without standard curves, mitigating qPCR's reliance on calibration and PCR efficiency assumptions, particularly useful in complex environmental matrices with inhibitors. Next-generation sequencing (NGS), including 16S rRNA amplicon and shotgun , represents a broader emerging paradigm for fecal coliform assessment by profiling entire microbial communities rather than targeting single taxa. Full-length 16S rRNA sequencing achieves species-level resolution, identifying coliform presence alongside and enabling source attribution via host-associated markers, as applied in evaluations detecting E. coli and other at low abundances. NGS detects genetic markers of fecal even in low-biomass samples, outperforming qPCR in diversity assessment but requiring bioinformatics for interpretation. Recent integrations, such as NGS panels for multiplex and indicator detection, have quantified coliforms alongside 18+ targets in spiked water at 10^5-10^8 CFU equivalents. These molecular methods collectively enhance regulatory compliance and by providing viability-irrelevant but genetically precise indicators, though challenges like DNA persistence post-inactivation necessitate paired viability assays (e.g., PMA-qPCR) for live/dead discrimination. Ongoing refinements, including portable point-of-care qPCR devices, promise field-deployable monitoring for real-time fecal contamination tracking.

Treatment and Control Measures

Wastewater and source management

Wastewater treatment plants employ multi-stage processes to reduce fecal coliform levels, beginning with primary sedimentation that removes solids-bound bacteria, followed by secondary biological treatment such as activated sludge, which achieves reductions of up to 99% through microbial competition and predation. Tertiary treatments, including sand filtration and UV disinfection, further eliminate culturable fecal coliforms by inactivating remaining viable cells, with UV proving particularly effective post-activation sludge due to its non-chemical nature and avoidance of disinfection byproducts. Chlorination of effluents targets persistent coliforms in tailwaters, though it requires careful dosing to balance pathogen inactivation against byproduct formation. Source management strategies focus on minimizing fecal inputs upstream, such as separating overflows to prevent untreated discharge during storms and upgrading septic systems to reduce leakage from failing onsite treatments. In agricultural settings, applying according to the 4Rs—right source, rate, time, and place—prevents runoff carrying coliforms from waste into waterways, with buffers and exclusion fencing further limiting animal access to surface waters. Urban controls, including source identification via microbial tracking to distinguish from animal origins, enable targeted interventions like pet waste ordinances and illicit discharge detection to curb non-point . These integrated approaches, validated through empirical monitoring, prioritize causal reduction at origins over end-of-pipe reliance, as incomplete source control can overwhelm treatment capacities during high-flow events.

Disinfection and removal technologies

Chlorination remains the predominant disinfection method for fecal coliform in wastewater effluents, employing gas, , or to generate , which penetrates bacterial cells and disrupts metabolic processes. Studies demonstrate removal efficiencies of 98-99% for total and fecal coliform under controlled contact times of 15-30 minutes at doses of 5-20 mg/L, though efficacy diminishes in turbid or ammonia-rich waters due to chlorine demand. This approach, standardized in U.S. since the early 20th century, requires dechlorination prior to discharge to mitigate toxicity to aquatic life. Ultraviolet (UV) irradiation inactivates fecal coliform by inducing dimers in DNA, preventing replication, and achieves log reductions of 3-4 (99.9-99.99%) at fluences of 20-40 mJ/cm² in low-turbidity effluents. Field evaluations of systems in plants report average 99% fecal coliform removal, though photoreactivation by repair enzymes can reduce persistence post-exposure, necessitating medium-pressure lamps or post-UV . avoids chemical residuals and byproducts but demands pre-filtration to maintain above 60%. Ozonation utilizes gas dissolved in as a potent oxidant, rapidly oxidizing cell walls and nucleic acids of fecal coliform, with pilot studies showing 72-78% removal at doses of 10-20 mg/L and contact times under 10 minutes. EPA assessments confirm 's superiority over for inactivation but note higher energy costs and the absence of residual disinfection in distribution systems. Bromate formation in bromide-containing waters poses a regulatory challenge. Advanced removal technologies include membrane filtration, such as or , which physically exclude fecal coliform (>0.2-1 µm size) achieving near-100% rejection in tertiary treatment, often combined with disinfection for redundancy. (PAA), an alternative oxidant, controls fecal coliform at 0.7 ppm doses without persistent residuals, offering 99% inactivation in full-scale applications. Emerging solar disinfection leverages UV-A and for batch inactivation in resource-limited settings, though scalability limits its wastewater use. Selection depends on effluent quality, regulatory limits (e.g., <200 CFU/100 mL for U.S. discharges), and byproduct risks.

References

  1. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8834472/
  2. https://www.fda.gov/media/182572/download
  3. https://www.health.ny.gov/environmental/water/drinking/coliform_bacteria.htm
  4. https://mi.water.usgs.gov/h2oqual/BactHOWeb.html
  5. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-10/documents/rwqc2012.pdf
  6. https://extension.psu.edu/coliform-bacteria/
  7. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/veterinary-science-and-veterinary-medicine/fecal-coliform
  8. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7458903/
  9. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5043024/
  10. https://www.knowyourh2o.com/outdoor-4/fecal-coliform-bacteria-in-water
  11. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/agricultural-and-biological-sciences/coliform-bacteria
  12. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/microbiology/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2016.01549/full
  13. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/immunology-and-microbiology/coliform-bacterium
  14. https://odh.ohio.gov/wps/wcm/connect/gov/513dde19-ca1f-473f-bb90-a8676712de50/totalfecalcoliform.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CONVERT_TO=url&CACHEID=ROOT
  15. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC91564/
  16. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1470160X12001343
  17. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3768823/
  18. https://www.epa.gov/region8-waterops/addressing-total-coliform-positive-or-e-coli-positive-sample-results-epa-region-8
  19. https://doh.wa.gov/community-and-environment/drinking-water/contaminants/coliform
  20. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7870561/
  21. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK215658/
  22. https://awwa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/awwa.2505
  23. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-08/documents/method_1681_2006.pdf
  24. https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/pdf/10.2105/AJPH.54.4.609
  25. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2019-03/documents/ambient-wqc-bacteria-1986.pdf
  26. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772427121000085
  27. https://adoptastream.georgia.gov/sites/adoptastream.georgia.gov/files/related_files/document/B_Ch_1.pdf
  28. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309696734_Isolating_the_impact_of_septic_systems_on_fecal_pollution_in_streams_of_suburban_watersheds_in_Georgia_United_States
  29. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9279616/
  30. https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-07/tsm-nonhuman-sources-revised_073024_508c.pdf
  31. https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/swamp/docs/cwt/guidance/3415.pdf
  32. https://apps.ecology.wa.gov/publications/documents/0210010.pdf
  33. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1151827/
  34. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7405076/
  35. https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/programs/consultation-guidelines-recreational-water-quality-fecal-contamination/document.html
  36. https://pubs.usgs.gov/wri/1993/4083/report.pdf
  37. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.8b01948
  38. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.71.6.3163-3170.2005
  39. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0107429
  40. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6313479/
  41. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6005870/
  42. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7126529/
  43. https://iwaponline.com/washdev/article/15/4/322/107531/Assessing-health-risks-and-disease-burden-from
  44. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-11/documents/quantitiave-microbial-risk-fecal.pdf
  45. https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/hc-sc/documents/services/publications/healthy-living/recreational-water-quality-guidelines-indicators-fecal-contamination/recreational-water-quality-guidelines-indicators-fecal-contamination.pdf
  46. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-56058-x
  47. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0043135421011465
  48. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5956076/
  49. http://www.sacep.org/pdf/Scoping_study_on_Nutrient_loading_in_SAS_Region.pdf
  50. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306453692_Effect_of_Microbiological_Contamination_and_Pollution_of_Water_on_the_Health_Status_of_Fish
  51. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0043135413002716
  52. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9642020/
  53. https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4441/14/21/3471
  54. https://journals.plos.org/water/article?id=10.1371/journal.pwat.0000230
  55. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3233103/
  56. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0043135420307417
  57. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-12/documents/9131.pdf
  58. https://www.epa.gov/hw-sw846/sw-846-test-method-9131-total-coliform-multiple-tube-fermentation-technique
  59. https://www.nemi.gov/methods/method_summary/5588/
  60. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC106820/
  61. https://www.nemi.gov/methods/method_summary/5587/
  62. https://downloads.regulations.gov/EPA-HQ-OW-2014-0408-0017/content.pdf
  63. https://www.fs.usda.gov/t-d/programs/im/coliform/Fecal_06.shtml
  64. https://www.epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking-water/national-primary-drinking-water-regulations
  65. https://floridadep.gov/water/source-drinking-water/content/microbiological-contaminants
  66. https://www.epa.gov/dwreginfo/revised-total-coliform-rule-and-total-coliform-rule
  67. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40/chapter-I/subchapter-D/part-141/subpart-C/section-141.21
  68. https://www.epa.gov/wqc/recreational-water-quality-criteria-and-methods
  69. https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/0901627
  70. https://19january2021snapshot.epa.gov/sites/static/files/2020-02/documents/owm505.pdf
  71. https://files.dep.state.pa.us/water/wastewater%2520management/EDMRPortalFiles/Permits/PA0026743_FACT_SHEET_20241203_DRAFT_V2.pdf
  72. https://19january2021snapshot.epa.gov/sites/static/files/2013-11/documents/npdes_reporting_requirements_handbook.pdf
  73. https://www.deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/water-quality-permitting/npdes-wastewater
  74. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK535301/table/ch8.tab3/
  75. https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/publications/healthy-living/guidelines-canadian-drinking-water-quality-guideline-technical-document-total-coliforms.html
  76. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/coliforms
  77. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-11/documents/asssessment-fecal-indicator-ambient-waters.pdf
  78. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC126722/
  79. https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/pdf/10.2105/AJPH.74.11.1273
  80. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.00028-17
  81. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.71.6.3041-3048.2005
  82. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/es703144k
  83. https://ohiowea.org/docs/Fecal_coliform_and_E.coli_analysis_by_Quanti_Tray_in_ww_and_water_presentation.pdf
  84. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0043135407004253
  85. https://deq.mt.gov/files/Water/SurfaceWater/UseAssessment/Documents/EcoliAssessmentMethod_WQDWQPBWQA-01v1_Final.pdf
  86. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10880185/
  87. https://journals.asm.org/doi/abs/10.1128/aem.00546-14
  88. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/microbiology/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2017.00108/full
  89. https://academic.oup.com/femsec/article/67/1/6/518537
  90. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsestwater.3c00169
  91. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969724037513
  92. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11380787/
  93. https://iwaponline.com/jwh/article/22/8/1429/103807/Metagenomic-evaluation-of-bacteria-in-drinking
  94. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4585245/
  95. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/microbiology/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2023.1179934/full
  96. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41545-024-00368-9
  97. https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12940-017-0256-y
  98. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12153028/
  99. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0043135401004754
  100. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X23006684
  101. https://www.epa.gov/biosolids/pathogens-and-vector-attraction-sewage-sludge
  102. https://www.whatcomcounty.us/Faq.aspx?QID=636
  103. https://apps.ecology.wa.gov/publications/documents/99345.pdf
  104. https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/bacteria_in_stormwater
  105. https://floridadep.gov/sites/default/files/Restoring_Bacteria-Impaired_Waters_Toolkit_082018.pdf
  106. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13201-023-01922-5
  107. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0043135484901970
  108. https://www.norweco.com/learning-center/technical-resources/disinfection-of-water-and-wastewater/
  109. https://iwaponline.com/jwh/article/17/1/113/65173/Fecal-coliform-concentrations-in-effluent-from
  110. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/14/11262
  111. https://www.aypotech.com/career-central/uv-disinfection-in-wastewater-treatment
  112. https://www.scirp.org/html/3-9401740_41982.htm
  113. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-06/documents/ozon.pdf
  114. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0045653524020253
  115. https://www.yasa.ltd/post/coliform-bacteria-in-water-and-sewage-how-to-remove-it
  116. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2019-08/documents/disinfection_-_paa_fact_sheet_-_2012.pdf
  117. https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4441/12/3/639
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.