A constructed wetland for treatment of an impacted waterway and the influence of native waterfowl on its perceived effectiveness
•Culture and molecular fecal indicator levels in the wetland remained relatively consistent.•HF-183 signal absent in later wetland treatment stages suggesting treatment effect occurring.•GFD and Campylobacter were detected within the wetland treatment, suggesting avian input.•The only study to use G...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Ecological engineering 2019-03, Vol.128, p.48-56 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 56 |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 48 |
container_title | Ecological engineering |
container_volume | 128 |
creator | McMinn, Brian R. Klemm, Sara Korajkic, Asja Wyatt, Kimberly M. Herrmann, Michael P. Haugland, Richard A. Lu, Jingrang Villegas, Eric N. Frye, Craig |
description | •Culture and molecular fecal indicator levels in the wetland remained relatively consistent.•HF-183 signal absent in later wetland treatment stages suggesting treatment effect occurring.•GFD and Campylobacter were detected within the wetland treatment, suggesting avian input.•The only study to use GFD and HF183 MST marker to signal sources of contamination within a wetland.
A constructed, variable-flow treatment wetland was evaluated for its ability to reduce microbial loads from the Banklick Creek, an impacted recreational waterway in Northern Kentucky. For this study, levels of traditional (Escherichia coli and enterococci measured by culture and molecular techniques) and alternative fecal indicators (infectious somatic and F+ coliphage, Clostridium spp. and Clostridium perfringens by culture), potential pathogens (molecular signal of Campylobacter spp.) as well as various microbial source tracking (MST) markers (human fecal marker HF183 and avian fecal marker GFD) were monitored during the summer and early fall through five treatment stages within the Banklick Creek Wetland. No difference in concentrations of traditional or alternative fecal indicators were observed in any of the sites monitored. Microbial source tracking markers were employed to identify sources of fecal contamination within the wetland. Human marker HF183 concentrations at beginning stages of treatment were found to be significantly higher (P value range: 0.0016–0.0003) than levels at later stages. Conversely, at later stages of treatment where frequent bird activity was observed, Campylobacter and avian marker (GFD) signals were detected at significantly higher frequencies (P value range: 0.024 to |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2018.11.026 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6800712</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0925857418304439</els_id><sourcerecordid>2307393456</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c511t-3cdcaf0a0062ef5dbfaf41e6b5351c1df5965b44c67d4a5ebc7da8a7fe8fd8953</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkU-LFDEQxYMo7rj6EYSAFy_dJulOOn1RlsV_sOBFzyGdVHYz9CRjkp5hb3500_Qg6MVTHer3HlXvIfSakpYSKt7tWzBxhnDfMkJlS2lLmHiCdlQOrBHjyJ6iHRkZbyQf-iv0Iuc9IWRgfHyOrjoqOjr2cod-3WATQy5pMQUsPkOZdbDYxYRLAl0OEAqODuuA_eGoN0gXSGf9iFeyPAD2wc0LBAMrGXTxJ9ggF88zjlVaMj5CMlA3FoNzYFYoQM4v0TOn5wyvLvMa_fj08fvtl-bu2-evtzd3jeGUlqYz1mhHNCGCgeN2ctr1FMTEO04NtY6Pgk99b8Rge81hMoPVUg8OpLNy5N01er_5HpfpANbUv5Ke1TH5g06PKmqv_t4E_6Du40kJWWOjrBq8vRik-HOBXNTBZwNzzQvikhXryNCNXc9FRd_8g-7jkkJ9TzEqeS2ql0Ol-EaZFHNO4P4cQ4laO1Z7delYrR0rSlWVVt2HTQc1rpOHpLLxa_rWp5qrstH_x-E3JOS1kw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2185026487</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A constructed wetland for treatment of an impacted waterway and the influence of native waterfowl on its perceived effectiveness</title><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>McMinn, Brian R. ; Klemm, Sara ; Korajkic, Asja ; Wyatt, Kimberly M. ; Herrmann, Michael P. ; Haugland, Richard A. ; Lu, Jingrang ; Villegas, Eric N. ; Frye, Craig</creator><creatorcontrib>McMinn, Brian R. ; Klemm, Sara ; Korajkic, Asja ; Wyatt, Kimberly M. ; Herrmann, Michael P. ; Haugland, Richard A. ; Lu, Jingrang ; Villegas, Eric N. ; Frye, Craig</creatorcontrib><description>•Culture and molecular fecal indicator levels in the wetland remained relatively consistent.•HF-183 signal absent in later wetland treatment stages suggesting treatment effect occurring.•GFD and Campylobacter were detected within the wetland treatment, suggesting avian input.•The only study to use GFD and HF183 MST marker to signal sources of contamination within a wetland.
A constructed, variable-flow treatment wetland was evaluated for its ability to reduce microbial loads from the Banklick Creek, an impacted recreational waterway in Northern Kentucky. For this study, levels of traditional (Escherichia coli and enterococci measured by culture and molecular techniques) and alternative fecal indicators (infectious somatic and F+ coliphage, Clostridium spp. and Clostridium perfringens by culture), potential pathogens (molecular signal of Campylobacter spp.) as well as various microbial source tracking (MST) markers (human fecal marker HF183 and avian fecal marker GFD) were monitored during the summer and early fall through five treatment stages within the Banklick Creek Wetland. No difference in concentrations of traditional or alternative fecal indicators were observed in any of the sites monitored. Microbial source tracking markers were employed to identify sources of fecal contamination within the wetland. Human marker HF183 concentrations at beginning stages of treatment were found to be significantly higher (P value range: 0.0016–0.0003) than levels at later stages. Conversely, at later stages of treatment where frequent bird activity was observed, Campylobacter and avian marker (GFD) signals were detected at significantly higher frequencies (P value range: 0.024 to <0.0001), and both signals were strongly correlated (P = 0.0001). Our study suggests constructed wetlands are an effective means for removal of microbial contamination in ambient waters, but reliance on general fecal indicators is not ideal for determining system efficacy or assessing appropriate remediation efforts.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0925-8574</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1872-6992</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2018.11.026</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31631948</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Amsterdam: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Artificial wetlands ; Bacteria ; Biological contamination ; Campylobacter ; Coastal inlets ; Contamination ; Correlation analysis ; Culture ; E coli ; Fecal coliforms ; Fecal indicator ; Feces ; Indicators ; Markers ; Microbial contamination ; Microbial source tracking ; Microorganisms ; Pathogens ; Removal ; Tracking ; Waterfowl ; Wetland ; Wetlands</subject><ispartof>Ecological engineering, 2019-03, Vol.128, p.48-56</ispartof><rights>2018 Elsevier B.V.</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier BV Mar 2019</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c511t-3cdcaf0a0062ef5dbfaf41e6b5351c1df5965b44c67d4a5ebc7da8a7fe8fd8953</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c511t-3cdcaf0a0062ef5dbfaf41e6b5351c1df5965b44c67d4a5ebc7da8a7fe8fd8953</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2018.11.026$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>McMinn, Brian R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Klemm, Sara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Korajkic, Asja</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wyatt, Kimberly M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Herrmann, Michael P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Haugland, Richard A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lu, Jingrang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Villegas, Eric N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Frye, Craig</creatorcontrib><title>A constructed wetland for treatment of an impacted waterway and the influence of native waterfowl on its perceived effectiveness</title><title>Ecological engineering</title><description>•Culture and molecular fecal indicator levels in the wetland remained relatively consistent.•HF-183 signal absent in later wetland treatment stages suggesting treatment effect occurring.•GFD and Campylobacter were detected within the wetland treatment, suggesting avian input.•The only study to use GFD and HF183 MST marker to signal sources of contamination within a wetland.
A constructed, variable-flow treatment wetland was evaluated for its ability to reduce microbial loads from the Banklick Creek, an impacted recreational waterway in Northern Kentucky. For this study, levels of traditional (Escherichia coli and enterococci measured by culture and molecular techniques) and alternative fecal indicators (infectious somatic and F+ coliphage, Clostridium spp. and Clostridium perfringens by culture), potential pathogens (molecular signal of Campylobacter spp.) as well as various microbial source tracking (MST) markers (human fecal marker HF183 and avian fecal marker GFD) were monitored during the summer and early fall through five treatment stages within the Banklick Creek Wetland. No difference in concentrations of traditional or alternative fecal indicators were observed in any of the sites monitored. Microbial source tracking markers were employed to identify sources of fecal contamination within the wetland. Human marker HF183 concentrations at beginning stages of treatment were found to be significantly higher (P value range: 0.0016–0.0003) than levels at later stages. Conversely, at later stages of treatment where frequent bird activity was observed, Campylobacter and avian marker (GFD) signals were detected at significantly higher frequencies (P value range: 0.024 to <0.0001), and both signals were strongly correlated (P = 0.0001). Our study suggests constructed wetlands are an effective means for removal of microbial contamination in ambient waters, but reliance on general fecal indicators is not ideal for determining system efficacy or assessing appropriate remediation efforts.</description><subject>Artificial wetlands</subject><subject>Bacteria</subject><subject>Biological contamination</subject><subject>Campylobacter</subject><subject>Coastal inlets</subject><subject>Contamination</subject><subject>Correlation analysis</subject><subject>Culture</subject><subject>E coli</subject><subject>Fecal coliforms</subject><subject>Fecal indicator</subject><subject>Feces</subject><subject>Indicators</subject><subject>Markers</subject><subject>Microbial contamination</subject><subject>Microbial source tracking</subject><subject>Microorganisms</subject><subject>Pathogens</subject><subject>Removal</subject><subject>Tracking</subject><subject>Waterfowl</subject><subject>Wetland</subject><subject>Wetlands</subject><issn>0925-8574</issn><issn>1872-6992</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkU-LFDEQxYMo7rj6EYSAFy_dJulOOn1RlsV_sOBFzyGdVHYz9CRjkp5hb3500_Qg6MVTHer3HlXvIfSakpYSKt7tWzBxhnDfMkJlS2lLmHiCdlQOrBHjyJ6iHRkZbyQf-iv0Iuc9IWRgfHyOrjoqOjr2cod-3WATQy5pMQUsPkOZdbDYxYRLAl0OEAqODuuA_eGoN0gXSGf9iFeyPAD2wc0LBAMrGXTxJ9ggF88zjlVaMj5CMlA3FoNzYFYoQM4v0TOn5wyvLvMa_fj08fvtl-bu2-evtzd3jeGUlqYz1mhHNCGCgeN2ctr1FMTEO04NtY6Pgk99b8Rge81hMoPVUg8OpLNy5N01er_5HpfpANbUv5Ke1TH5g06PKmqv_t4E_6Du40kJWWOjrBq8vRik-HOBXNTBZwNzzQvikhXryNCNXc9FRd_8g-7jkkJ9TzEqeS2ql0Ol-EaZFHNO4P4cQ4laO1Z7delYrR0rSlWVVt2HTQc1rpOHpLLxa_rWp5qrstH_x-E3JOS1kw</recordid><startdate>20190301</startdate><enddate>20190301</enddate><creator>McMinn, Brian R.</creator><creator>Klemm, Sara</creator><creator>Korajkic, Asja</creator><creator>Wyatt, Kimberly M.</creator><creator>Herrmann, Michael P.</creator><creator>Haugland, Richard A.</creator><creator>Lu, Jingrang</creator><creator>Villegas, Eric N.</creator><creator>Frye, Craig</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><general>Elsevier BV</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H97</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20190301</creationdate><title>A constructed wetland for treatment of an impacted waterway and the influence of native waterfowl on its perceived effectiveness</title><author>McMinn, Brian R. ; Klemm, Sara ; Korajkic, Asja ; Wyatt, Kimberly M. ; Herrmann, Michael P. ; Haugland, Richard A. ; Lu, Jingrang ; Villegas, Eric N. ; Frye, Craig</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c511t-3cdcaf0a0062ef5dbfaf41e6b5351c1df5965b44c67d4a5ebc7da8a7fe8fd8953</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Artificial wetlands</topic><topic>Bacteria</topic><topic>Biological contamination</topic><topic>Campylobacter</topic><topic>Coastal inlets</topic><topic>Contamination</topic><topic>Correlation analysis</topic><topic>Culture</topic><topic>E coli</topic><topic>Fecal coliforms</topic><topic>Fecal indicator</topic><topic>Feces</topic><topic>Indicators</topic><topic>Markers</topic><topic>Microbial contamination</topic><topic>Microbial source tracking</topic><topic>Microorganisms</topic><topic>Pathogens</topic><topic>Removal</topic><topic>Tracking</topic><topic>Waterfowl</topic><topic>Wetland</topic><topic>Wetlands</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>McMinn, Brian R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Klemm, Sara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Korajkic, Asja</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wyatt, Kimberly M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Herrmann, Michael P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Haugland, Richard A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lu, Jingrang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Villegas, Eric N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Frye, Craig</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 3: Aquatic Pollution & Environmental Quality</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Ecological engineering</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>McMinn, Brian R.</au><au>Klemm, Sara</au><au>Korajkic, Asja</au><au>Wyatt, Kimberly M.</au><au>Herrmann, Michael P.</au><au>Haugland, Richard A.</au><au>Lu, Jingrang</au><au>Villegas, Eric N.</au><au>Frye, Craig</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A constructed wetland for treatment of an impacted waterway and the influence of native waterfowl on its perceived effectiveness</atitle><jtitle>Ecological engineering</jtitle><date>2019-03-01</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>128</volume><spage>48</spage><epage>56</epage><pages>48-56</pages><issn>0925-8574</issn><eissn>1872-6992</eissn><abstract>•Culture and molecular fecal indicator levels in the wetland remained relatively consistent.•HF-183 signal absent in later wetland treatment stages suggesting treatment effect occurring.•GFD and Campylobacter were detected within the wetland treatment, suggesting avian input.•The only study to use GFD and HF183 MST marker to signal sources of contamination within a wetland.
A constructed, variable-flow treatment wetland was evaluated for its ability to reduce microbial loads from the Banklick Creek, an impacted recreational waterway in Northern Kentucky. For this study, levels of traditional (Escherichia coli and enterococci measured by culture and molecular techniques) and alternative fecal indicators (infectious somatic and F+ coliphage, Clostridium spp. and Clostridium perfringens by culture), potential pathogens (molecular signal of Campylobacter spp.) as well as various microbial source tracking (MST) markers (human fecal marker HF183 and avian fecal marker GFD) were monitored during the summer and early fall through five treatment stages within the Banklick Creek Wetland. No difference in concentrations of traditional or alternative fecal indicators were observed in any of the sites monitored. Microbial source tracking markers were employed to identify sources of fecal contamination within the wetland. Human marker HF183 concentrations at beginning stages of treatment were found to be significantly higher (P value range: 0.0016–0.0003) than levels at later stages. Conversely, at later stages of treatment where frequent bird activity was observed, Campylobacter and avian marker (GFD) signals were detected at significantly higher frequencies (P value range: 0.024 to <0.0001), and both signals were strongly correlated (P = 0.0001). Our study suggests constructed wetlands are an effective means for removal of microbial contamination in ambient waters, but reliance on general fecal indicators is not ideal for determining system efficacy or assessing appropriate remediation efforts.</abstract><cop>Amsterdam</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><pmid>31631948</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ecoleng.2018.11.026</doi><tpages>9</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0925-8574 |
ispartof | Ecological engineering, 2019-03, Vol.128, p.48-56 |
issn | 0925-8574 1872-6992 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6800712 |
source | Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier) |
subjects | Artificial wetlands Bacteria Biological contamination Campylobacter Coastal inlets Contamination Correlation analysis Culture E coli Fecal coliforms Fecal indicator Feces Indicators Markers Microbial contamination Microbial source tracking Microorganisms Pathogens Removal Tracking Waterfowl Wetland Wetlands |
title | A constructed wetland for treatment of an impacted waterway and the influence of native waterfowl on its perceived effectiveness |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-02T18%3A40%3A50IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20constructed%20wetland%20for%20treatment%20of%20an%20impacted%20waterway%20and%20the%20influence%20of%20native%20waterfowl%20on%20its%20perceived%20effectiveness&rft.jtitle=Ecological%20engineering&rft.au=McMinn,%20Brian%20R.&rft.date=2019-03-01&rft.volume=128&rft.spage=48&rft.epage=56&rft.pages=48-56&rft.issn=0925-8574&rft.eissn=1872-6992&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2018.11.026&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2307393456%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2185026487&rft_id=info:pmid/31631948&rft_els_id=S0925857418304439&rfr_iscdi=true |