Assessment of oxidative and UV-C treatments for inactivating bacterial biofilms from groundwater wells

  • Kyle E. Murray
  • Erin I. Manitou-Alvarez
  • Enos C. Inniss
  • Frank G. Healy
  • Adria A. Bodour
Research Article

Abstract

Microorganisms are ubiquitous in natural environments and in water supply infrastructure including groundwater wells. Sessile-state microorganisms may build up on well surfaces as biofilms and, if excessive, cause biofouling that reduces well productivity and water quality. Conditions can be improved using biocides and other traditional well rehabilitation measures; however, biofilm regrowth is inevitable given the continuous introduction of microorganisms from the surrounding environment. Alternative and less invasive well maintenance approaches are desirable for reducing biofilm densities while also minimizing harmful disinfection-byproducts. The primary objective of this research was to evaluate effectiveness of alternative treatments for inactivating microorganisms comprising biofilms. A novel approach was designed for in situ growth of biofilms on steel coupons suspended from ‘chandeliers’. After more than 100 days of in situ growth, biofilms were harvested, sampled, and baseline biofilm densities quantified through cultivation. Ultraviolet-C (UV-C) and oxidative treatments including hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), ozone (O3) and mixed oxidants were then applied to the biofilms in laboratory-scale treatments. Microbial inactivation was assessed by comparing treated versus baseline biofilm densities. H2O2 was the most effective treatment, and decreased density below baseline by as much as 3.1 orders of magnitude. Mixed oxidants were effective for the well having a lower density biofilm, decreasing density below baseline by as much as 1.4 orders of magnitude. Disparity in the response to treatment was apparent in the wells despite their spatial proximity and common aquifer source, which suggests that microbiological communities are more heterogeneous than the natural media from which they originate.

Keywords

aquifer biofouling hydrogen peroxide sustainability well rehabilitation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Robertson J B, Edberg S C. Natural protection of spring and well drinking water against surface microbial contamination. I. Hydrogeological parameters. Critical Reviews in Microbiology, 1997, 23(2): 143–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Craun M F, Craun G F, Calderon R L, Beach M J. Waterborne outbreaks reported in the United States. Journal ofWater and Health, 2006, 4(Suppl 2): 19–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    LeChevallier M W, Cawthon C D, Lee R G. Inactivation of biofilm bacteria. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 1988, 54(10): 2492–2499Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Batterman S, Zhang L, Wang S. Quenching of chlorination disinfection by-product formation in drinking water by hydrogen peroxide. Water Research, 2000, 34(5): 1652–1658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Toor R, Mohseni M. UV-H2O2 based AOP and its integration with biological activated carbon treatment for DBP reduction in drinking water. Chemosphere, 2007, 66(11): 2087–2095CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lakretz A, Ron E Z, Mamane H. Biofilm control in water by a UVbased advanced oxidation process. Biofouling, 2011, 27(3): 295–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hall-Stoodley L, Costerton J W, Stoodley P. Bacterial biofilms: from the natural environment to infectious diseases. Nature Reviews. Microbiology, 2004, 2(2): 95–108Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Allison D G, Ruiz B, SanJose C, Jaspe A, Gilbert P. Extracellular products as mediators of the formation and detachment of Pseudomonas fluorescens biofilms. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 1998, 167(2): 179–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wimpenny J, Manz W, Szewzyk U. Heterogeneity in biofilms. FEMS Microbiology Reviews, 2000, 24(5): 661–671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Allison D G. Exopolysaccharide production in bacterial biofilms. Biofilm Journal, 1998, 3, paper 2Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Costerton J W, Cheng K J, Geesey G G, Ladd T I, Nickel J C, Dasgupta M, Marrie T J. Bacterial biofilms in nature and disease. Annual Review of Microbiology, 1987, 41(1): 435–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Watnick P, Kolter R. Biofilm, city of microbes. Journal of Bacteriology, 2000, 182(10): 2675–2679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Craun G F, Brunkard J M, Yoder J S, Roberts V A, Carpenter J, Wade T, Calderon R L, Roberts JM, Beach MJ, Roy S L. Causes of outbreaks associated with drinking water in the United States from 1971 to 2006. Clinical Microbiology Reviews, 2010, 23(3): 507–528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kenny J F, Barber N L, Hutson S S, Linsey K S, Lovelace J K, Maupin MA. Estimated use of water in the United States in 2005. U. S. Geological Survey Circular 1344, Denver, CO, 2009, 52Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Flemming H C. Biofouling in water systems—cases, causes and countermeasures. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 2002, 59(6): 629–640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Page D, Miotliński K, Dillon P, Taylor R, Wakelin S, Levett K, Barry K, Pavelic P. Water quality requirements for sustaining aquifer storage and recovery operations in a low permeability fractured rock aquifer. Journal of Environmental Management, 2011, 92(10): 2410–2418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pavelic P, Dillon P J, Barry K E, Vanderzalm J L, Correll R L, Rinck-Pfeiffer S M. Water quality effects on clogging rates during reclaimed water ASR in a carbonate aquifer. Journal of Hydrology (Amsterdam), 2007, 334(1–2): 1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Momba M N B, Makala N. Comparing the effect of various pipe materials on biofilm formation in chlorinated and combined chlorine-chloraminated water systems. Water S.A., 2004, 30(2): 175–182Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yu J, Kim D, Lee T. Microbial diversity in biofilms on water distribution pipes of different materials. Water Science and Technology, 2010, 61(1): 163–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Murray K E, Yosko L S. Multi-observation well aquifer test case study: is recovery coincident with the cessation of pumping? Environmental Earth Sciences, 2013, 68(7): 1955–1965CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Brockman F J, Murray C J. Subsurface microbiological heterogeneity: current knowledge, descriptive approaches and applications. FEMS Microbiology Reviews, 1997, 20(3–4): 231–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tang J, Johannesson K H. Controls on the geochemistry of rare earth elements along a groundwater flow path in the Carrizo Sand aquifer, Texas, USA. Chemical Geology, 2006, 225(1–2): 156–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Eaton A D, Clesceri L S, Rice EW, Greenberg A E, Franson MAH. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water & Wastewater (Centennial Edition), American Public Health Association (APHA), American Water Works Association (AWWA), Washington, D C: Water Environment Federation (WEF), 2005Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hawkins N J. Culturing and characterization of microorganisms in groundwater well biofilms using water chemistry and 16S ribosomal DNA sequencing. Dissertation for the Master Degree. San Antonio: University of Texas at San Antonio, 2007Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Manitou-Alvarez E I. Laboratory-scale treatment and microbial profiling of biofilms grown in water supply wells. Dissertation for the Master Degree. San Antonio: University of Texas at San Antonio, 2008Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    DeQueiroz G A, Day D F. Antimicrobial activity and effectiveness of a combination of sodium hypochlorite and hydrogen peroxide in killing and removing Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms from surfaces. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 2007, 103(4): 794–802CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ishizaki K, Sawadaishi K, Miura K, Shinriki N. Effect of ozone on plasmid DNA of Escherichia coli in situ. Water Research, 1987, 21(7): 823–827CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wolfe R L. Ultraviolet disinfection of potable water. Environmental Science & Technology, 1990, 24(6): 768–773CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Gonzalez C. On site mixed oxidants demonstrate benefits in Puerto Rico. Water Conditioning & Purification, 2002, 44(9): 62–65Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    HijnenWA M, Beerendonk E F, Medema G J. Inactivation credit of UV radiation for viruses, bacteria and protozoan (oo)cysts in water: a review. Water Research, 2006, 40(1): 3–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Xu P, Janex M L, Savoye P, Cockx A, Lazarova V. Wastewater disinfection by ozone: main parameters for process design. Water Research, 2002, 36(4): 1043–1055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Bodour A A, Wang J M, Brusseau M L, Maier R M. Temporal change in culturable phenanthrene degraders in response to longterm exposure to phenanthrene in a soil column system. Environmental Microbiology, 2003, 5(10): 888–895CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Weisburg W G, Barns S M, Pelletier D A, Lane D J. 16S ribosomal DNA amplification for phylogenetic study. Journal of Bacteriology, 1991, 173(2): 697–703Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Gino E, Starosvetsky J, Kurzbaum E, Armon R. Combined chemical-biological treatment for prevention/rehabilitation of clogged wells by an iron-oxidizing bacterium. Environmental Science & Technology, 2010, 44(8): 3123–3129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    EPA. Drinking Water Guidance on Disinfection By-Products, Advice Note No. 4, version 2, Disinfection By-Products in Drinking Water, Office of Environmental Enforcement: 2012, http://www.epa.ie/pubs/advice/drinkingwater/DrinkingWaterGuide4_v8.pdf Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    EPA. National Primary DrinkingWater Regulations, Date Accessed: Jan 15, 2014, http://water.epa.gov/drink/contaminants/index.cfm
  37. 37.
    Schmeisser C, Stöckigt C, Raasch C, Wingender J, Timmis K N, Wenderoth D F, Flemming H C, Liesegang H, Schmitz R A, Jaeger K E, Streit W R. Metagenome survey of biofilms in drinking-water networks. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2003, 69(12): 7298–7309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Vílchez R, Pozo C, Gómez M A, Rodelas B, González-López J. Dominance of sphingomonads in a copper-exposed biofilm community for groundwater treatment. Microbiology-SGM, 2007, 153(Pt 2): 325–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Norton C D, LeChevallier M W. A pilot study of bacteriological population changes through potable water treatment and distribution. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2000, 66(1): 268–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Viera M R, Guiamet P S, de Mele M F L, Videla H A. Use of dissolved ozone for controlling planktonic and sessile bacteria in industrial cooling systems. International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation, 1999, 44(4): 201–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Neyens E, Baeyens J, Dewil R, De heyder B. Advanced sludge treatment affects extracellular polymeric substances to improve activated sludge dewatering. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2004, 106(2–3): 83–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Pignatello J J, Oliveros E, MacKay A. Advanced oxidation processes for organic contaminant destruction based on the Fenton reaction and related chemistry. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology, 2006, 36(1): 1–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Wang J L, Xu L J. Advanced oxidation processes for wastewater treatment: Formation of hydroxyl radical and application. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology, 2011, 42(3): 251–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Mead J F. Free radical mechanisms of lipid damage and consequences for cellular membranes. In: Pryor WA, eds. Free Radicals in Biology. New York: Academic Press Inc., 1976, 51–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Storz G, Christman M F, Sies H, Ames B N. Spontaneous mutagenesis and oxidative damage to DNA in Salmonella typhimurium. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 1987, 84(24): 8917–8921CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Wolff S P, Garner A, Dean R T. Free radicals, lipids and protein degradation. Trends in Biochemical Sciences, 1986, 11(1): 27–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Prince E L, Muir A V G, Thomas W M, Stollard R J, Sampson M, Lewis J A. An evaluation of the efficacy of Aqualox for microbiological control of industrial cooling tower systems. Journal of Hospital Infection, 2002, 52(4): 243–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Zhou H D, Smith D W. Ozone mass transfer in water and wastewater treatment: experimental observations using a 2D laser particle dynamics analyzer. Water Research, 2000, 34(3): 909–921CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Elasri M O, Miller R V. Study of the response of a biofilm bacterial community to UV radiation. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 1999, 65(5): 2025–2031Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kyle E. Murray
    • 1
  • Erin I. Manitou-Alvarez
    • 2
  • Enos C. Inniss
    • 3
  • Frank G. Healy
    • 4
  • Adria A. Bodour
    • 5
  1. 1.Oklahoma Geological SurveyUniversity of OklahomaNormanUSA
  2. 2.ERA Environmental ConsultingDollard des OrmeauxMontrealCanada
  3. 3.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringUniversity of Missouri-Columbia??USA
  4. 4.Department of BiologyTrinity UniversitySan AntonioUSA
  5. 5.Air Force Center for Engineering and the Environment (AFCEE)San AntonioUSA

Personalised recommendations