+ All Categories
Home > Documents > Evaluation of Methods for Enumerating Enterococci in Beach Sand · 3 10 4 g Sand 1 Sand 2 Sand 3...

Evaluation of Methods for Enumerating Enterococci in Beach Sand · 3 10 4 g Sand 1 Sand 2 Sand 3...

Date post: 24-Aug-2020
Category:
Upload: others
View: 2 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
13
Evaluation of Methods for Enumerating Enterococci in Beach Sand John Griffith Southern California Coastal Water Research Project
Transcript
Page 1: Evaluation of Methods for Enumerating Enterococci in Beach Sand · 3 10 4 g Sand 1 Sand 2 Sand 3 DohenyDoheny Miami Michigan City Results Blending produced lower numbers than sonication

Evaluation of Methods for

Enumerating Enterococci in

Beach Sand

John Griffith

Southern California Coastal Water Research Project

Page 2: Evaluation of Methods for Enumerating Enterococci in Beach Sand · 3 10 4 g Sand 1 Sand 2 Sand 3 DohenyDoheny Miami Michigan City Results Blending produced lower numbers than sonication

Background

Recent International interest in beach sand as a source or reservoir of fecal bacteria

Many published protocols for enumerating bacteria in sand

No standard method Prevents assessment of problem

Limits comparability of data between beaches

Goal: Identify a standard method for measuring enterococci in beach sand

Page 3: Evaluation of Methods for Enumerating Enterococci in Beach Sand · 3 10 4 g Sand 1 Sand 2 Sand 3 DohenyDoheny Miami Michigan City Results Blending produced lower numbers than sonication

Approach Bring together leading researchers in field

Process a common set of samples

Participants

Jenny Jay – UCLA Ali Boehm - Stanford

Richard Whitman – USGS Tom Edge- Environment Canada

Helena Solo-Gabriel - U of Miami Marty Getrich - OCPHL

Page 4: Evaluation of Methods for Enumerating Enterococci in Beach Sand · 3 10 4 g Sand 1 Sand 2 Sand 3 DohenyDoheny Miami Michigan City Results Blending produced lower numbers than sonication

Details

21 permutations of 4 treatments

Four replicates processed by each method

Duplicates by each of two researchers

Three sand samples

One sample processed each day

Analyze for enterococci using EPA Method 1600

Page 5: Evaluation of Methods for Enumerating Enterococci in Beach Sand · 3 10 4 g Sand 1 Sand 2 Sand 3 DohenyDoheny Miami Michigan City Results Blending produced lower numbers than sonication

Treatments

Hand Shaking

Mechanical Shaking

Sonication

Blending

Page 6: Evaluation of Methods for Enumerating Enterococci in Beach Sand · 3 10 4 g Sand 1 Sand 2 Sand 3 DohenyDoheny Miami Michigan City Results Blending produced lower numbers than sonication

Variables

Mass of sand

Duration of shaking

Settling time

Number of rinses

Eluant (PBS or DI water)

Surfactant (Tween 80 or metaphosphate)

Eluant collection (decant, pipette, vacuum)

Page 7: Evaluation of Methods for Enumerating Enterococci in Beach Sand · 3 10 4 g Sand 1 Sand 2 Sand 3 DohenyDoheny Miami Michigan City Results Blending produced lower numbers than sonication

Sand Sources

Doheny State Beach, Dana Point, CA

Hobie Cat Beach, Miami, FL

Washington Park Beach, Michigan City, IN

Page 8: Evaluation of Methods for Enumerating Enterococci in Beach Sand · 3 10 4 g Sand 1 Sand 2 Sand 3 DohenyDoheny Miami Michigan City Results Blending produced lower numbers than sonication

Enterococcus Concentration

101

102

103

104

Ente

roco

cci C

FU

/g

Sand 1 Sand 2 Sand 3DohenyDoheny Miami Michigan City

Page 9: Evaluation of Methods for Enumerating Enterococci in Beach Sand · 3 10 4 g Sand 1 Sand 2 Sand 3 DohenyDoheny Miami Michigan City Results Blending produced lower numbers than sonication

Results

Blending produced lower numbers than

sonication or shaking

Lower eluant to sand ratio led to reduced

recovery

Mechanical shaking produced lower numbers than

hand shaking

No effects noted for shaking time, sonication,

number of rinses, or settling time

Page 10: Evaluation of Methods for Enumerating Enterococci in Beach Sand · 3 10 4 g Sand 1 Sand 2 Sand 3 DohenyDoheny Miami Michigan City Results Blending produced lower numbers than sonication

Bottom Line

Hand-shaking performed as well or better

than more complex treatments

Simple

Inexpensive

Consistent

Page 11: Evaluation of Methods for Enumerating Enterococci in Beach Sand · 3 10 4 g Sand 1 Sand 2 Sand 3 DohenyDoheny Miami Michigan City Results Blending produced lower numbers than sonication

Method Recommended by Experts

10g sand

60ml PBS

2 min. hand shake

Settle 30s

Decant eluant

40ml PBS rinse

Settle 30s

Decant eluant

Page 12: Evaluation of Methods for Enumerating Enterococci in Beach Sand · 3 10 4 g Sand 1 Sand 2 Sand 3 DohenyDoheny Miami Michigan City Results Blending produced lower numbers than sonication

What Next?

Laboratory Intercalibration Exercise

Conducted November 2008

Test method on more challenging sands

High silt

High organic content

Page 13: Evaluation of Methods for Enumerating Enterococci in Beach Sand · 3 10 4 g Sand 1 Sand 2 Sand 3 DohenyDoheny Miami Michigan City Results Blending produced lower numbers than sonication

Instructional Video


Recommended