Comparison of the ColiPlate™ Kit with Two Common E. coli Enumeration Methods for Water
Department of Environmental Health Science, Eastern Kentucky University, Richmond, KY 40475, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editor: Anu Kumar
Water 2021, 13(13), 1804; https://doi.org/10.3390/w13131804
Received: 15 May 2021 / Revised: 20 June 2021 / Accepted: 24 June 2021 / Published: 29 June 2021
(This article belongs to the Section Water and One Health)
Quantitatively assessing fecal indicator bacteria in drinking water from limited resource settings (e.g., disasters, remote areas) can inform public health strategies for reducing waterborne illnesses. This study aimed to compare two common approaches for quantifying Escherichia coli (E. coli) density in natural water versus the ColiPlate™ kit approach. For comparing methods, 41 field samples from natural water sources in Kentucky (USA) were collected. E. coli densities were then determined by (1) membrane filtration in conjunction with modified membrane-thermotolerant E. coli (mTEC) agar, (2) Idexx Quanti-Tray® 2000 with the Colilert® substrate, and (3) the Bluewater Biosciences ColiPlate kit. Significant correlations were observed between E. coli density data for all three methods (p < 0.001). Paired t-test results showed no difference in E. coli densities determined by all the methods (p > 0.05). Upon assigning modified mTEC as the reference method for determining the World Health Organization-assigned “very high-risk” levels of fecal contamination (>100 E. coli CFU/100 mL), both ColiPlate and Colilert exhibited excellent discrimination for screening very high-risk levels according to the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (~89%). These data suggest ColiPlate continues to be an effective monitoring tool for quantifying E. coli density and characterizing fecal contamination risks from water.
View Full-Text
Keywords:
fecal indicator bacteria; water quality; E. coli; ColiPlate; Colilert; environmental microbiology
▼
Show Figures
Figure 1
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited
- Supplementary File 1:
ZIP-Document (ZIP, 9 KiB)
-
Externally hosted supplementary file 1
Doi: 10.5281/zenodo.4763795
Description: Excel data file for comparing results of ColiPlate, Colilert, and membrane filtration with modified mTEC agar.
MDPI and ACS Style
Gibson, C.J.; Maritim, A.K.; Marion, J.W. Comparison of the ColiPlate™ Kit with Two Common E. coli Enumeration Methods for Water. Water 2021, 13, 1804. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13131804
AMA Style
Gibson CJ, Maritim AK, Marion JW. Comparison of the ColiPlate™ Kit with Two Common E. coli Enumeration Methods for Water. Water. 2021; 13(13):1804. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13131804
Chicago/Turabian StyleGibson, Cassi J., Abraham K. Maritim, and Jason W. Marion 2021. "Comparison of the ColiPlate™ Kit with Two Common E. coli Enumeration Methods for Water" Water 13, no. 13: 1804. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13131804
Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.
