Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-pkt8n Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-15T22:24:56.527Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Bacteriology of fresh water: II. The distribution and types of coliform bacteria in lakes and streams

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

C. B. Taylor
Affiliation:
From the Freshwater Biological Association, Wray Castle, Ambleside, Westmorland
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. The distribution of coliform bacteria in lakes and streams has been studied. Weekly samples have been collected from different depths from the north and south basins of Windermere, from Thirlmere, and Bsthwaite Water, dnd from streams flowing into these lakes. Nearly 300 cultures have been isolated from positive tubes of MacConkey broth and their relationship to the coliform group has been studied and considered.

2. In relatively unpolluted streams the counts of coliform bacteria and the plate counts on sodium casemate agar tended to fluctuate in the same direction as river level, but in polluted streams the increased flow of water accompanying a higher river level reduced the numbers of bacteria per unit volume. Counts of coliform bacteria were, in general, much higher in summer than in winter, despite the lower rainfall in summer.

3. During the winter period of circulation of the water, samples of water from different depths in the lakes gave approximately the same count for coliform bacteria. When stratification of the water became established numbers of coliform bacteria in the hypolimnion (the lower stratum) dropped to very low figures and remained fairly constant; much higher counts were found in the epilimnion (the upper stratum).

Large fluctuations in numbers of coliform bacteria which occurred from week to week in the lakes were related to fluctuations in plate counts at only one of the seven sampling points, and were not related to previous rainfall. The count of coliform bacteria was greatest in summer and autumn, a phenomenon that was by no means entirely a result of the bacteria which were washed in being concentrated in the epilimnion. It is suggested that temperature may have affected viability and proliferation.

4. Of the total number of coliform organisms producing acid and gas from lactose at 37° C, approximately 70% were Bact. coli types I and II, and the remainder were members of the I.A.C. group. In the relatively pure waters of Thirlmere and its inflows Bact. coli, type I, made up 86 and 98% respectively of the total coliform cultures isolated, whereas in the relatively impure waters of Windermere and Esthwaite Water the percentages were 39 and 37 respectively. The differences were due to the greater proportions of Bact. aerogenes, type I, and of intermediate and irregular types in the impure waters. The significance of greater proportions of the I.A.C. group in polluted rather than in unpolluted water is discussed. The actual counts of coliform bacteria were very much lower in Thirlmere than in the other lakes examined.

5. Of the total cultures isolated from positive tubes of MacConkey broth 27% did not produce acid and gas in MacConkey broth at 37° C. Approximately one-half of these cultures, however, fermented lactose at 30° C, and gave varied results with the standard differential tests. The majority of these cultures could, by gradually increasing the incubation temperatures of successive inoculations, be “trained” to ferment lactose at 37° C but not at 40° C. They were more frequently isolated from the polluted lakes and inflows than from unpolluted waters. The remaining organisms isolated proved to be non-lactose-fermenting species belonging to the genera Proteus, Salmonella, Eberthella and Alkaligenes (Bergey).

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1941

References

REFERENCES

Atkinson, N. & Wood, E. J. F. (1938). The fake positive reaction in the presumptive test for B. coli in water. Aus. J. exp. Biol. med. Sei. 16, 111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bardsley, D. A. (1934). The distribution and sanitary significance of B. coli, B. lactis aerogenes and intermediate types of coliform bacilli in water, soil, faeces and icecream. J. Hyg., Camb., 34, 38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bardsley, D. A. (1938). A comparison of two methods for assessing the number of different types of coliform organisms in water. J. Hyg., Camb., 38, 309.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bergey, D. H. (1939). Manual of Determinative Bacteriology, 5th ed.Baltimore: The Williams and Wilkins Co..Google Scholar
Boyce, R. W., Grünbaum, A. S., MacConkey, A. & Hill, C. A. (1902). Investigation of the River Severn in the Shrewsbury District. Boy. Comm. Sewage Dis. 2 Rept. 91.Google Scholar
Clegg, L. F. L. (1940). Personal Communication.Google Scholar
Clemesha, W. W. (1912). The Bacteriology of Surface Waters in the Tropics. Calcutta and London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haines, R. B. (1934). The minimum temperatures of growth of some bacteria. J. Hyg., Camb., 34, 277.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harold, C. H. H. (1937). 32nd Ann. Rep. Met. Water Bd, Lond.Google Scholar
Harrisburg, , (1913). 25th Ann. Rep. of the Board of Commissioners of the Water and Lighting Dept. of the City of Harrisburg, Pa. (quoted by Prescott S. C., and Winslow C. E.), Elements of Water Bacteriology, 5th ed. 1931. J. Wiley, N.Y.Google Scholar
Levine, M. (1939). Bacteria from chlorinated waters. J. Amer. Waterwks Ass. 31, 1511.Google Scholar
Mackenzie, E. F. W. (1940). 33rd Ann. Rep. Met. Water Bd, Lond.Google Scholar
Malcolm, J. F. (1938). The classification of coliform bacteria. J. Hyg., Camb., 38, 395.Google ScholarPubMed
Ministry of Health (1939). Rep. Publ. Hlth Med. Subj., Lond., no. 71, rev. ed.Google Scholar
Mortimer, C. H. (1940). An apparatus for obtaining water from different depths for bacteriological examination. J. Hyg., Camb., 40, 641–6.Google ScholarPubMed
Parr, L. W. (1939). Coliform bacteria. Bad. Rev. 3, 1.Google ScholarPubMed
Stuart, C. A., Griffin, A. M. & Baker, M. E. (1938). Relationships of coliform organisms. J. Bact. 36, 391.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taylor, C. B. (1940). Bacteriology of fresh water. I. Distribution of bacteria in English lakes. J. Hyg., Camb., 40, 616–40.Google ScholarPubMed
Wilson, G. S., Twigg, R. S., Wright, R. C., Hendry, C. B., Cowell, M. P. & Maier, I. (1935). The bacteriological grading of milk. Med. Res. Coun., Spec. Rep. Ser., no. 206. H.M. Stationery Office, London.Google Scholar