Advertisement

Environmental Earth Sciences

, Volume 64, Issue 1, pp 47–55 | Cite as

Differences in pathogen indicators between proximal urban and rural karst springs, Central Kentucky, USA

  • Thomas M. Reed
  • Alan E. Fryar
  • Gail M. Brion
  • James W. Ward
Original Article

Abstract

Because of their architecture, karst aquifers are susceptible to contamination by fecal-derived pathogens. Previous studies have examined the behavior of bacterial indicators such as total coliforms (TC) and fecal coliforms (FC) in karst aquifers, but simple techniques for discriminating between human and non-human inputs are still needed. This study examines concentrations of TC, FC, atypical colonies (AC, which grow on the same media as TC), male-specific coliphage virus (MSP, an indicator of human feces), and nitrate at two springs in the Inner Bluegrass region of Kentucky (USA). Blue Hole Spring primarily drains the city of Versailles, whereas spring SP-2 drains pasture. Baseflow was monitored, usually biweekly, from December 2002 to March 2004, while storm flow was monitored in September 2003 and March 2004. At each spring, bacterial concentrations were highest in storm flow and lowest in “normal” baseflow (for which 72-h antecedent precipitation was negligible). Concentrations in baseflow tended to be highest during late spring and summer and lowest during autumn and winter. FC concentrations exceeded regulatory (contact) standards in storm-flow samples. For both storm flow and baseflow, AC concentrations were greater than TC, which in turn were greater than FC. Median AC and TC concentrations were greater in baseflow at Blue Hole than at SP-2. MSP was detected in most samples from Blue Hole but never at SP-2. The AC/TC ratio was typically <15 except for normal baseflow samples at Blue Hole, which is probably impacted by leakage from sanitary sewers, as suggested by MSP and nitrate results. Mobilization of sessile bacteria appears to reduce the AC/TC ratio during storm flow. Consequently, this ratio shows promise as a screening tool to identify sewage inputs in karst groundwater basins under baseflow conditions.

Keywords

Bacteria Fecal indicators Groundwater Karst Kentucky 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The research described herein was funded by the UK College of Agriculture through the Senate Bill 271 program and by the Kentucky NSF-EPSCoR program. Paul and Jerry Campbell (City of Versailles) and the UK ARC provided access to the springs. Todd Aseltyne and Todd McFarland assisted with field work; Alex Fogle (Kentucky Geological Survey) and Joseph Taraba (UK Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering) provided discharge data for SP-2; and Tricia Coakley (ERTL), Bob King (ERTL), and Jim Crutchfield (UK Plant and Soil Sciences) assisted with laboratory analyses. Larry McKay and two anonymous reviewers provided constructive comments on a prior version of the manuscript.

References

  1. Aley T (1984) Groundwater tracing in water pollution studies. Nat Speleol Soc Bull 46:17–20Google Scholar
  2. APHA (American Public Health Association) (1998) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. APHA, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  3. Boyer DG, Kuczynska E (2003) Storm and seasonal distributions of fecal coliforms and Cryptosporidium in a spring. J Am Water Resour Assoc 39:1449–1456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brion GM, Mao HH (2000) Use of total coliform test for watershed monitoring with respects to atypicals. J Environ Eng 126:175–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brion GM, Mao HH, Lingireddy S (2000) New approach to use of total coliform test for watershed management. Water Sci Technol 42:65–69Google Scholar
  6. Brion GM, Meschke JS, Sobsey MD (2002) F-specific RNA coliphages: occurrence, types, and survival in natural waters. Water Res 36:2419–2425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Currens JC, Paylor RL, Ray JA (2002) Mapped karst ground-water basins in the Lexington 30 × 60 minute quadrangle. Kentucky Geological Survey Map and Chart 10. Series XII. University of Kentucky, LexingtonGoogle Scholar
  8. Davis RK, Hamilton S, Brahana JV (2005) Escherichia coli survival in mantled karst springs and streams, northwest Arkansas Ozarks, USA. J Am Water Resour Assoc 41:1279–1287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Droppo IG, Liss SN, Williams D, Nelson T, Jaskot C, Trapp B (2009) Dynamic existence of waterborne pathogens within river sediment compartments. Implications for water quality regulatory affairs. Environ Sci Technol 43:1737–1743CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dussart-Baptista L, Massei N, Dupont J-P, Jouenne T (2003) Transfer of bacteria-contaminated particles in a karst aquifer: evolution of contaminated materials from a sinkhole to a spring. J Hydrol 284:285–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Edwards DR, Coyne MS, Daniel TC, Vendrell PF, Murdoch JF, Moore PA (1997) Indicator bacteria concentrations of two northern Arkansas streams in relation to flow and season. Trans ASAE 40:103–109Google Scholar
  12. Field KG, Samadpour M (2007) Fecal source tracking, the indicator paradigm, and managing water quality. Water Res 41:3517–3538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ford DC, Williams PW (1989) Karst geomorphology and hydrology. Unwin Hyman, LondonGoogle Scholar
  14. Gunn J, Tranter J, Perkins J, Hunter C (1997) Sanitary bacterial dynamics in a mixed karst aquifer. In: Leibundgut C, Gunn J, Dassargues A (eds) Karst hydrology. Int Assoc Hydrol Sci Publ 247. IAHS Press, Wallingford, pp 61–70Google Scholar
  15. John DE, Rose JB (2005) Review of factors affecting microbial survival in groundwater. Environ Sci Technol 39:7345–7356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Keagy DM, Dinger JS, Fogle AW, Sendlein LVA (1993) Interim report on the occurrence of pesticides, nitrate, and bacteria on groundwater quality in a karst terrain—the Inner Blue Grass region, Woodford County, Kentucky. Kentucky Geological Survey Open-File Report OF-93-04. University of Kentucky, LexingtonGoogle Scholar
  17. Kentucky Division of Water (2007) Kentucky administrative regulations, surface water standards. http://www.lrc.ky.gov/kar/401/010/031.htm. Accessed April 2009
  18. Madigan MT, Martinko JM, Parker J (2003) Brock biology of microorganisms. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  19. Mahler BJ, Personné J-C, Lods GF, Drogue C (2000) Transport of free and particulate-associated bacteria in karst. J Hydrol 238:179–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Marshall D, Brahana JV, Davis RK (1998) Resuspension of viable sediment-bound enteric pathogens in shallow karst aquifers. In: Brahana JV, Eckstein Y, Ongley LK, Schneider R, Moore JE (eds) Gambling with groundwater—physical, chemical, and biological aspects of aquifer-stream relations. Proc Joint Meet XXVIII Congr Int Assoc Hydrogeol, Annu Meet Am Inst Hydrol. American Institute of Hydrology, St. Paul, pp 179–186Google Scholar
  21. Nieman J, Brion GM (2003) Novel bacterial ratio for predicting fecal age. Water Sci Technol 47:45–49Google Scholar
  22. Pasquarell GC, Boyer DG (1995) Agricultural impacts on bacterial water quality in karst groundwater. J Environ Qual 24:959–969CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Plummer JD, Long SC (2009) Identifying sources of surface water pollution: a toolbox approach. J AWWA 101:75–88Google Scholar
  24. Pronk M, Goldscheider N, Zopfi J (2007) Particle-size distribution as indicator for fecal bacteria contamination of drinking water from karst springs. Environ Sci Technol 41:8400–8405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Quinlan JF (1989) Ground-water monitoring in karst terranes: recommended protocols and implicit assumptions. Rep EPA/600/X-89/050. US Environmental Protection Agency, Las VegasGoogle Scholar
  26. Rantz SE (1982) Measurement and computation of streamflow, vol 1. Measurement of stage and discharge. US Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2175. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  27. Reed TM (2006) Suspended sediment and pathogen transport in two Inner Bluegrass karst ground-water basins, Woodford County, Kentucky. MS thesis, University of Kentucky. http://lib.uky.edu/ETD/ukygeol2006t00499/REED06.pdf. Accessed April 2009
  28. Reed TM, McFarland JT, Fryar AE, Fogle AW, Taraba JL (2010) Sediment discharges during storm flow from proximal urban and rural karst springs, central Kentucky, USA. J Hydrol 383:280–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rosner BA (2006) Fundamentals of biostatistics. Thomas Higher Education, BelmontGoogle Scholar
  30. Ryan M, Meiman J (1996) An examination of short-term variations in water quality at a karst spring in Kentucky. Ground Water 34:23–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sercu B, van de Werfhorst LC, Murray J, Holden PA (2009) Storm drains are sources of human fecal pollution during dry weather in three urban Southern California watersheds. Environ Sci Technol 43:293–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Simon KS, Gibert J, Petitot P, Laurent R (2001) Spatial and temporal patterns of bacterial density and metabolic activity in a karst aquifer. Arch Hydrobiol 151:67–82Google Scholar
  33. Thrailkill J, Spangler LE, Hopper WM Jr, McCann MR, Troester JW, Gouzie DR (1982) Groundwater in the Inner Bluegrass karst region, Kentucky. Water Resour Res Inst Res Rep 136. University of Kentucky, LexingtonGoogle Scholar
  34. University of Kentucky Agricultural Weather Center (2008) Climatology data. http://wwwagwx.ca.uky.edu/climdata.html. Accessed March 2008
  35. USEPA (US Environmental Protection Agency) (2001) EPA method 1602: Male-specific (F+) and somatic coliphage in water by single agar layer (SAL) procedure. Rep EPA/821/R-01/029. Office of Water, USEPA, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  36. US Census Bureau (2008) Census 2000 data for the state of Kentucky. http://www.census.gov/census2000/states/ky.html. Accessed April 2008
  37. Ward JW, Reed TM, Fryar AE, Brion GM (2009) Using the AC/TC ratio to evaluate fecal inputs in a karst groundwater basin. Environ Eng Geosci 15:57–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. White WB (1988) Geomorphology and hydrology of karst terrains. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas M. Reed
    • 1
  • Alan E. Fryar
    • 2
  • Gail M. Brion
    • 3
  • James W. Ward
    • 4
  1. 1.AMEC Earth and EnvironmentalLexingtonUSA
  2. 2.Department of Earth and Environmental SciencesUniversity of KentuckyLexingtonUSA
  3. 3.Department of Civil EngineeringUniversity of KentuckyLexingtonUSA
  4. 4.Department of PhysicsAngelo State UniversityASU Station #10904San AngeloUSA

Personalised recommendations