BACKGROUND: Traditional fecal indicator bacteria (FIB) measurement is too slow (>18 h) for timely swimmer warnings. OBJECTIVES: Assess relationship of rapid indicator methods (qPCR) to illness at a marine beach impacted by urban runoff. METHODS: We measured baseline and two-week health in 9525 individuals visiting Doheny Beach 2007-08. Illness rates were compared (swimmers vs. non-swimmers). FIB measured by traditional (Enterococcus spp. by EPA Method 1600 or Enterolert™, fecal coliforms, total coliforms) and three rapid qPCR assays for Enterococcus spp. (Taqman, Scorpion-1, Scorpion-2) were compared to health. Primary bacterial source was a creek flowing untreated into ocean; the creek did not reach the ocean when a sand berm formed. This provided a natural experiment for examining FIB-health relationships under varying conditions. RESULTS: We observed significant increases in diarrhea (OR 1.90, 95% CI 1.29-2.80 for swallowing water) and other outcomes in swimmers compared to non-swimmers. Exposure (body immersion, head immersion, swallowed water) was associated with increasing risk of gastrointestinal illness (GI). Daily GI incidence patterns were different: swimmers (2-day peak) and non-swimmers (no peak). With berm-open, we observed associations between GI and traditional and rapid methods for Enterococcus; fewer associations occurred when berm status was not considered. CONCLUSIONS: We found increased risk of GI at this urban runoff beach. When FIB source flowed freely (berm-open), several traditional and rapid indicators were related to illness. When FIB source was weak (berm-closed) fewer illness associations were seen. These different relationships under different conditions at a single beach demonstrate the difficulties using these indicators to predict health risk. Copyright Â
BACKGROUND: Traditional fecal indicator bacteria (FIB) measurement is too slow (>18 h) for timely swimmer warnings. OBJECTIVES: Assess relationship of rapid indicator methods (qPCR) to illness at a marine beach impacted by urban runoff. METHODS: We measured baseline and two-week health in 9525 individuals visiting Doheny Beach 2007-08. Illness rates were compared (swimmers vs. non-swimmers). FIB measured by traditional (Enterococcus spp. by EPA Method 1600 or Enterolert™, fecal coliforms, total coliforms) and three rapid qPCR assays for Enterococcus spp. (Taqman, Scorpion-1, Scorpion-2) were compared to health. Primary bacterial source was a creek flowing untreated into ocean; the creek did not reach the ocean when a sand berm formed. This provided a natural experiment for examining FIB-health relationships under varying conditions. RESULTS: We observed significant increases in diarrhea (OR 1.90, 95% CI 1.29-2.80 for swallowing water) and other outcomes in swimmers compared to non-swimmers. Exposure (body immersion, head immersion, swallowed water) was associated with increasing risk of gastrointestinal illness (GI). Daily GI incidence patterns were different: swimmers (2-day peak) and non-swimmers (no peak). With berm-open, we observed associations between GI and traditional and rapid methods for Enterococcus; fewer associations occurred when berm status was not considered. CONCLUSIONS: We found increased risk of GI at this urban runoff beach. When FIB source flowed freely (berm-open), several traditional and rapid indicators were related to illness. When FIB source was weak (berm-closed) fewer illness associations were seen. These different relationships under different conditions at a single beach demonstrate the difficulties using these indicators to predict health risk. Copyright Â
Authors: R W Haile; J S Witte; M Gold; R Cressey; C McGee; R C Millikan; A Glasser; N Harawa; C Ervin; P Harmon; J Harper; J Dermand; J Alamillo; K Barrett; M Nides; G Wang Journal: Epidemiology Date: 1999-07 Impact factor: 4.822
Authors: Christopher D Sinigalliano; Jay M Fleisher; Maribeth L Gidley; Helena M Solo-Gabriele; Tomoyuki Shibata; Lisa R W Plano; Samir M Elmir; David Wanless; Jakub Bartkowiak; Rene Boiteau; Kelly Withum; Amir M Abdelzaher; Guoqing He; Cristina Ortega; Xiaofang Zhu; Mary E Wright; Jonathan Kish; Julie Hollenbeck; Troy Scott; Lorraine C Backer; Lora E Fleming Journal: Water Res Date: 2010-04-29 Impact factor: 11.236
Authors: Richard A Haugland; Shawn C Siefring; Larry J Wymer; Kristen P Brenner; Alfred P Dufour Journal: Water Res Date: 2004-12-24 Impact factor: 11.236
Authors: Timothy J Wade; Elizabeth Sams; Kristen P Brenner; Richard Haugland; Eunice Chern; Michael Beach; Larry Wymer; Clifford C Rankin; David Love; Quanlin Li; Rachel Noble; Alfred P Dufour Journal: Environ Health Date: 2010-10-31 Impact factor: 5.984
Authors: Timothy J Wade; Rebecca L Calderon; Kristen P Brenner; Elizabeth Sams; Michael Beach; Richard Haugland; Larry Wymer; Alfred P Dufour Journal: Epidemiology Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 4.822
Authors: Kathryn B Mika; Karina A Chavarria; Greg Imamura; Chay Tang; Robert Torres; Jennifer A Jay Journal: Water Air Soil Pollut Date: 2017-03-06 Impact factor: 2.520
Authors: Zhixuan Feng; Ad Reniers; Brian K Haus; Helena M Solo-Gabriele; Elizabeth A Kelly Journal: Mar Pollut Bull Date: 2016-02-15 Impact factor: 5.553
Authors: Melanie D Napier; Charles Poole; Jill R Stewart; David J Weber; Susan T Glassmeyer; Dana W Kolpin; Edward T Furlong; Alfred P Dufour; Timothy J Wade Journal: Environ Sci Technol Date: 2018-06-14 Impact factor: 9.028
Authors: Benjamin F Arnold; Timothy J Wade; Jade Benjamin-Chung; Kenneth C Schiff; John F Griffith; Alfred P Dufour; Stephen B Weisberg; John M Colford Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2016-07-26 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Stephanie DeFlorio-Barker; Dawn Holman; Robert Landolfi; Benjamin F Arnold; John M Colford; Stephen B Weisberg; Kenneth C Schiff; Elizabeth A Sams; Timothy J Wade Journal: Prev Med Date: 2020-03-03 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Marc Paul Verhougstraete; Sydney Brothers; Wayne Litaker; A Denene Blackwood; Rachel Noble Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-03-30 Impact factor: 3.240