Rapid concentration and molecular enrichment approach for sensitive detection of Escherichia coli and Shigella species in potable water samples.

In this work, we used a rapid, simple, and efficient concentration-and-recovery procedure combined with a DNA enrichment method (dubbed CRENAME [concentration and recovery of microbial particles, extraction of nucleic acids, and molecular enrichment]), that we coupled to an Escherichia coli/Shigella-specific real-time PCR (rtPCR) assay targeting the tuf gene, to sensitively detect E. coli/Shigella in water. This integrated method was compared to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) culture-based Method 1604 on MI agar in terms of analytical specificity, ubiquity, detection limit, and rapidity. None of the 179 non-E. coli/Shigella strains tested was detected by both methods, with the exception of Escherichia fergusonii, which was detected by the CRENAME procedure combined with the E. coli/Shigella-specific rtPCR assay (CRENAME + E. coli rtPCR). DNA from all 90 E. coli/Shigella strains tested was amplified by the CRENAME + E. coli rtPCR, whereas the MI agar method had limited ubiquity and detected only 65 (72.2%) of the 90 strains tested. In less than 5 h, the CRENAME + E. coli rtPCR method detected 1.8 E. coli/Shigella CFU whereas the MI agar method detected 1.2 CFU/100 ml of water in 24 h (95% confidence). Consequently, the CRENAME method provides an easy and efficient approach to detect as little as one Gram-negative E. coli/Shigella cell present in a 100-ml potable water sample. Coupled with an E. coli/Shigella-specific rtPCR assay, the entire molecular procedure is comparable to U.S. EPA Method 1604 on MI agar in terms of analytical specificity and detection limit but provides significant advantages in terms of speed and ubiquity.

Method for rapid and sensitive detection of Enterococcus sp. and Enterococcus faecalis/faecium cells in potable water samples.

We have developed a rapid and robust technological solution including a membrane filtration and dissolution method followed by a molecular enrichment and a real-time PCR assay, for detecting the presence of Enterococcus sp. or Enterococcus faecalis/faecium per 100 mL of water in less than 5 h and we compared it to Method 1600 on mEI agar in terms of specificity, sensitivity, and limit of detection. The mEI and the Enterococcus sp.-specific assay detected respectively 73 (64.0%) and 114 (100%) of the 114 enterococcal strains tested. None of the 150 non-enterococcal strains tested was detected by both methods with the exception of Tetragenococcus solitarius for the Enterococcus sp. assay. The multiplexed E. faecalis/faecium assay efficiently amplified DNA from 47 of 47 (100%) E. faecalis and 27 of 27 (100%) E. faecium strains tested respectively, whereas none of the 191 non-E. faecalis/faecium strains tested was detected. By simultaneously detecting the predominant fecal enterococcal species, the E. faecalis/faecium-specific assay allows a better distinction between enterococcal strains of fecal origin and those provided by the environment than Method 1600. Our procedure allows the detection of 4.5 enterococcal colony forming units (CFU) per 100 mL in less than 5 h, whereas the mEI method detected 2.3 CFU/100 mL in 24 h (95% confidence). Thus, our innovative and highly effective method provides a rapid and easy approach to concentrate very low numbers of enterococcal cells present in a 100 mL water sample and allows a better distinction between fecal and environmental enterococcal cells than Method 1600.

Analytical limits of three beta-glucosidase-based commercial culture methods used in environmental microbiology, to detect enterococci.

The enzyme-based test methods Enterolert, Chromocult Enterococci agar, and mEI agar, used to assess water quality through the detection Enterococcus spp., have been compared in terms of their analytical specificity and their ability to detect various enterococcal strains. To achieve this goal, we have tested 110 different non-enterococcal bacterial strains and 101 strains of Enterococcus spp. isolated from diverse origins. The results obtained showed that 69 (68.3%), 84 (83.2%), and 89 (88.1%) of the 101 enterococcal strains tested respectively yielded a positive signal with Enterolert, mEI, and Chromocult Enterococci. Regarding the specificity, none of the non-Enterococcus spp. strains tested were detectable by any of the three culture methods, except for Granulicatella adiacens which turned out positive on Chromocult Enterococci. The results of this study showed that, based on our collection of strains, the Enterolert test method detected less enterococcal strains than the two other methods.

Analytical limits of four beta-glucuronidase and beta-galactosidase-based commercial culture methods used to detect Escherichia coli and total coliforms.

Colilert (Colilert), Readycult Coliforms 100 (Readycult), Chromocult Coliform agar ES (Chromocult), and MI agar (MI) are beta-galactosidase and beta-glucuronidase-based commercial culture methods used to assess water quality. Their analytical performance, in terms of their respective ability to detect different strains of Escherichia coli and total coliforms, had never been systematically compared with pure cultures. Here, their ability to detect beta-glucuronidase production from E. coli isolates was evaluated by using 74 E. coli strains of different geographic origins and serotypes encountered in fecal and environmental settings. Their ability to detect beta-galactosidase production was studied by testing the 74 E. coli strains as well as 33 reference and environmental non-E. coli total coliform strains. Chromocult, MI, Readycult, and Colilert detected beta-glucuronidase production from respectively 79.9, 79.9, 81.1, and 51.4% of the 74 E. coli strains tested. These 4 methods detected beta-galactosidase production from respectively 85.1, 73.8, 84.1, and 84.1% of the total coliform strains tested. The results of the present study suggest that Colilert is the weakest method tested to detect beta-glucuronidase production and MI the weakest to detect beta-galactosidase production. Furthermore, the high level of false-negative results for E. coli recognition obtained by all four methods suggests that they may not be appropriate for identification of presumptive E. coli strains.