Abstract

Bacteria monitoring is a critical part of wastewater management. At tropical wastewater stabilization ponds (WSPs) in north Australia, sanitation is assessed using the standard fecal indicator bacteria (FIB) Escherichia coli and Enterococci. However, these bacteria are poor surrogates for enteric pathogens. A focus on FIB misses the majority of pond-bacteria and how they respond to the tropical environment. Therefore, we aimed to identify the unknown pond bacteria and indicators that can complement E. coli to improve monitoring. Over two years, we measured the bacterial community in 288 wastewater samples during the wet and dry seasons. The WSP community was spatially and temporally dynamic. Standard pond-water physicochemical measures like conductivity poorly explained these community shifts. Cyanobacteria represented >6% of the WSP bacterial population, regardless of sample timing and location. Fecal bacteria were abundant in the first pond. However, in downstream ponds, these bacteria were less abundant, and instead, environmental taxa were common. For each pond, we identified a bacterial fingerprint that included new candidate bacterial indicators of fecal waste and processes like nitrogen removal. Combining the new indicators with standard FIB monitoring represents a locally relevant approach to wastewater monitoring that facilitates new tests for human fecal pollution within tropical climates.

Highlights

  • A key goal for a wastewater utility is efficient and cost-effective sanitation

  • Bacterial composition in the wastewater stabilization ponds (WSPs) changed over years, wet and dry seasons and between ponds 1, 2 and 5 (Figure 2)

  • The year had the greatest influence on bacterial composition (Table 1)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Wastewater stabilization ponds (WSPs) are favored because they remove enteric pathogens using a simple hydraulic design without chemical intervention [1]. These systems rely on natural processes like sunlight disinfection, coupled with long hydraulic retention times to treat raw influent [2]. Before the construction of a WSP, utilities need to consider whether the site can accommodate the system’s large spatial footprint and mitigate undesirable cyanobacterial blooms and sludge build-up in the ponds [1,4]. Sludge-filled ponds are inefficient because they are prone to ‘dead zones’ (pockets of stagnant/anoxic water) and treatment short-circuiting when exposed to wind shear [5]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.