Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Volunteer monitoring of E. coli in streams of the upper Midwestern United States: a comparison of methods

  • Published:
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Fecal contamination of water is a public health concern for those using the water for drinking or recreation. The EPA recommends using Escherichia coli to evaluate recreational freshwaters for fecal contamination. With limited resources available, states have recently focused on training volunteers to expand data collection and resource assessment. Several bacteria testing methods are available for use by the public; however, few studies have comprehensively evaluated their use by volunteers. This study evaluated two E. coli monitoring methods used by volunteers: Coliscan Easygel® and 3MTM PetrifilmTM, incubated for 24 and 48 hours. The methods were assessed to determine how closely each matched results with EPA-approved laboratory analyses. Analysis of covariance results indicated that when used by volunteers to monitor surface water, 3MTM PetrifilmTM results were more similar to laboratory analyses than Coliscan Easygel®. Both test methods had similar overall accuracy of predicting if a sample exceeded or fell below the 235 cfu/100 mL EPA body contact standard for recreational surface waters. Two-thirds of volunteers preferred 3MTM PetrifilmTM.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • 3M (2008a). 3M PetrifilmTM Coliform Count plate interpretation guide. http://multimedia.3m.com/mws/mediawebserver?66666UuZjcFSLXTt4XMa4XM_EVuQEcuZgVs6EVs6E666666–. Accessed 16 December 2008.

  • Beloti, V., de Souza, J. A., de Aguiar Ferreira Barros, M., Nero, L. A., de Mattos, M. R., Gusmão, V. V., et al. (2003). Evaluation of PetrifilmTM EC and HS for total coliforms and Escherichia coli enumeration in water. Brazilian Journal of Microbiology, 34(4), 301–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Canfield, D. E., Jr., Brown, C. D., Bachmann, R. W., & Hoyer, M. V. (2002). Volunteer lake monitoring: testing the reliability of data collected by the Florida LAKEWATCH program. Lake and Reservoir Management, 18(1), 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, M. L., & Gamper, M. E. (2003). A synoptic study of fecal-indicator bacteria in the Wind River, Bighorn River, and Goose Creek Basins, Wyoming, June to July 2000. Water resources investigations report 03-4055. US Department of the Interior, US Geological Survey.

  • Cohn, J. P. (2008). Citizen science: Can volunteers do real research? BioScience, 58(3), 192–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costerton, J. W., Geesey, G. G., & Cheng, K. J. (1978). How bacteria stick? Scientific American, 238(1), 86–95.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, W. G., & Busby, A. L. (1999). Alabama water watch quality assurance plan for bacteriological monitoring. Alabama Water Watch, Auburn University, AL (63 pp). https://aww.auburn.edu/Docs/manuals/QABacManual99.pdf. Accessed February 25, 2010.

  • Ely, E., & Hamingson, E. (1998). National directory of volunteer environmental monitoring programs (5th Edn.). Washington, DC: United States Environmental Protection Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engel, S. R., & Voshell Jr., J. R. (2002). Volunteer biological monitoring: Can it accurately assess the ecological condition of streams? American Entomologist, 48(3), 164–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lear, G., Anderson, M. J., Smith, J. P., Boxen, K., & Lewis, G. D. (2008). Spatial and temporal heterogeneity of the bacterial communities in stream epilithic biofilms. FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 65(3), 463–473.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Micrology Laboratories (2008). Detection of waterborne coliforms and E. coli with Coliscan Easygel. http://www.micrologylabs.com/Home/Our_Methods/Coliscan_Easygel/Coliscan_Easygel_Instructions. Accessed 16 December 2008.

  • Nerbonne, J. F., & Vondracek, B. C. (2003). Volunteer macroinvertebrate monitoring: Assessing training needs through examining error and bias in untrained volunteers. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 22(1), 152–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noble, R. T., Weisberg, S. B., Leecaster, M. K., McGee, C. D., Ritter, K., Walker, K. O., et al. (2003). Comparison of beach bacterial water quality indicator measurement methods. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 81, 301–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien, E. (2006). Volunteers conduct bacteria methods study. The Volunteer Monitor, 18(1) 3–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Leary, N., Wagenet, L., Pfeffer, M., & Vawter, T. (2002). Linking science and the public: Monitoring water quality of streams. American Water Resources Association Annual Conference. Philadelphia, PA. November 4–7, 2002.

  • Obrecht, D. V., Milanick, M., Perkins, B. D., Ready, D., & Jones, J. R. (1998). Evaluation of data generated from lake samples collected by volunteers. Lake and Reservoir Management, 14(1), 21–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pope, M. L., Bussen, M., Feige, M. A., Shadix, L., Gonder, S., Rodgers, C., et al. (2003). Assessment of the effects of holding time and temperature on Escherichia coli densities in surface water samples. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 69(10), 6201–6207.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, D. M., Weigel, B. M., & Graczyk, D. J. (2008). Nutrient concentrations and their relations to the biotic integrity of nonwadeable rivers in Wisconsin: US Geological Survey Professional Paper 1754, p. 81.

  • Selvakumar, A., Borst, M., Boner, M., & Mallon, P. (2004). Effects of sample holding time on concentrations of microorganisms in water samples. Water Environment Research, 76(1), 67–72.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Umble, A. K., Kolo, L. E., Newvine, L. A., Roth, G. N. & Roth, J. N. (1999). Coliform counts. Water Environment & Technology, 11(4), 57–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • USEPA (1986a). Quality criteria for water—1986. EPA-440/5-86-001, Washington, DC.

  • USEPA (1986b). Ambient water quality criteria for bacteria—1986. US Environmental Protection Agency. EPA-440/5-84-002.

  • USEPA (1999). Action plan for beaches and recreational waters: reducing exposures to waterborne pathogens. EPA/600/R-98/079. Washington, DC: Office of Water, US Environmental Protection Agency.

  • USEPA (2000). Beaches Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health Act of 2000. Public law 106–284. http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/beaches/files/beachbill.pdf. Accessed March 29, 2010.

  • USEPA (2002). Method 1603: Escherichia coli (E. coli) in water by membrane filtration using modified membrane-thermotolerant Escherichia coli agar (modified mTEC). EPA 821-R-02-023. Washington, DC: Office of Water, US Environmental Protection Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • USEPA (2003). Bacterial water quality standards for recreational waters (freshwater and marine waters) status report. http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/beaches/local/statrept.pdf. Accessed 1 September 2009.

  • USEPA (2006a). Overview of current total maximum daily load—TMDL—program and regulations. http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/. Accessed 30 June 2008.

  • USEPA. (2006b). Method 1103.1: Escherichia coli (E. coli) in water by membrane filtration using membrane-thermotolerant Escherichia coli Agar (mTEC). EPA-821-R-06-010. Washington, DC: Office of Water, US Environmental Protection Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vail, J. H., Morgan, R., Merino, C. R., Gonzales, F., Miller, R., & Ram, J. L. (2003). Enumeration of waterborne Escherichia coli with Petrifilm plates: comparison to standard methods. Journal of Environmental Quality, 32, 368–373.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Environmental Resources Center, University of Wisconsin—Extension, Room 202, 445 Henry Mall, Madison, WI, 53706, USA

    Kristine F. Stepenuck

  2. Institute of Water Research and Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State University, 101 Manly Miles Bldg, East Lansing, MI, 48823, USA

    Lois G. Wolfson

  3. University of Minnesota Water Resources Center, 173 McNeal Hall, 1985 Buford Avenue, St. Paul, MN, 55108, USA

    Barbara W. Liukkonen

  4. Ohio State University Extension, 280 West Union, Athens, OH, 45701, USA

    Jerome M. Iles

  5. Educational Psychology Department, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1059 Educational Sciences, 1025 W Johnson St, Madison, WI, 53706, USA

    Timothy S. Grant

Authors
  1. Kristine F. Stepenuck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lois G. Wolfson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Barbara W. Liukkonen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jerome M. Iles
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Timothy S. Grant
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kristine F. Stepenuck.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Stepenuck, K.F., Wolfson, L.G., Liukkonen, B.W. et al. Volunteer monitoring of E. coli in streams of the upper Midwestern United States: a comparison of methods. Environ Monit Assess 174, 625–633 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-010-1483-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-010-1483-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation