Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Environ Monit Assess ; 116(1-3): 335-44, 2006 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-16779600

RESUMO

More than 30 laboratories routinely monitor water along southern California's beaches for bacterial indicators of fecal contamination. Data from these efforts frequently are combined and compared even though three different methods (membrane filtration (MF), multiple tube fermentation (MTF), and chromogenic substrate (CS) methods) are used. To assess data comparability and quantify variability within method and across laboratories, 26 laboratories participated in an intercalibration exercise. Each laboratory processed three replicates from eight ambient water samples employing the method or methods they routinely use for water quality monitoring. Verification analyses also were conducted on a subset of wells from the CS analysis to confirm or exclude the presence of the target organism. Enterococci results were generally comparable across methods. Confirmation revealed a 9% false positive rate and a 4% false negative rate in the CS method for enterococci, though these errors were small in the context of within- and among-laboratory variability. Fecal coliforms also were comparable across all methods, though CS underestimated the other methods by about 10%, probably because it measures only E. coli, rather than the larger fecal coliform group measured by MF and MTF. CS overestimated total coliforms relative to the other methods by several fold and was found to have a 40% false positive rate in verification. Across-laboratory variability was small relative to within- and among-method variability, but only after data entry errors were corrected. One fifth of the laboratories committed data entry errors that were much larger than any method-related errors. These errors are particularly significant because these data were submitted in a test situation where laboratories were aware they would be under increased scrutiny. Under normal circumstances, it is unlikely that these errors would have been detected and managers would have been obliged to issue beach water quality warnings.


Assuntos
Enterobacteriaceae/isolamento & purificação , Água do Mar/microbiologia , Microbiologia da Água/normas , California , Contagem de Colônia Microbiana , Intervalos de Confiança , Fezes/microbiologia
2.
Environ Monit Assess ; 81(1-3): 301-12, 2003.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-12620023

RESUMO

Three methods (membrane filtration, multiple tube fermentation, and chromogenic substrate technology kits manufactured by IDEXX Laboratories, Inc.) are routinely used to measure indicator bacteria for beach water quality. To assess comparability of these methods, quantify within-laboratory variability for each method, and place that variability into context of variability among laboratories using the same method, 22 southern California laboratories participated in a series of intercalibration exercises. Each laboratory processed three to five replicates from thirteen samples, with total coliforms, fecal coliforms or enterococci measured depending on the sample. Results were generally comparable among methods, though membrane filtration appeared to underestimate the other two methods for fecal coliforms, possibly due to clumping. Variability was greatest for the multiple tube fermentation method. For all three methods, within laboratory variability was greater than among laboratories variability.


Assuntos
Monitoramento Ambiental/métodos , Poluentes da Água/análise , Calibragem , California , Meio Ambiente , Fermentação , Filtração , Controle de Qualidade , Valores de Referência
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...