| Literature DB >> 28295001 |
Akebe Luther King Abia1, Chris James2, Eunice Ubomba-Jaswa3, Maggy Ndombo Benteke Momba4.
Abstract
Resuspension of sediment-borne microorganisms (including pathogens) into the water column could increase the health risk for those using river water for different purposes. In the present work, we (1) investigated the effect of sediment disturbance on microbial resuspension from riverbed sediments in laboratory flow-chambers and in the Apies River, Gauteng, South Africa; and (2) estimated flow conditions for sediment-borne microorganism entrainment/resuspension in the river. For mechanical disturbance, the top 2 cm of the sediment in flow-chambers was manually stirred. Simulating sudden discharge into the river, water (3 L) was poured within 30 s into the chambers at a 45° angle to the chamber width. In the field, sediment was disturbed by raking the riverbed and by cows crossing in the river. Water samples before and after sediment disturbance were analysed for Escherichia coli. Sediment disturbance caused an increase in water E. coli counts by up to 7.9-35.8 times original values. Using Shields criterion, river-flow of 0.15-0.69 m³/s could cause bed particle entrainment; while ~1.57-7.23 m³/s would cause resuspension. Thus, sediment disturbance in the Apies River would resuspend E. coli (and pathogens), with possible negative health implications for communities using such water. Therefore, monitoring surface water bodies should include microbial sediment quality.Entities:
Keywords: Escherichia coli; alternative water sources; public health risk; riverbed sediment disturbance; sediment microbial quality; sediment resuspension; water resource management; water resources monitoring
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28295001 PMCID: PMC5369142 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph14030306
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Map of study sites (Source: Google Earth). DAS: wastewater treatment plant; AP1–AP4, AP8: sites included in entrainment/resuspension parameters estimation; AP5, AP6, AP7: sediment and water collection sites for laboratory experiments; AP6 (raking site) and AP9 (cow-crossing site): field experiments.
Figure 2Schematic representation of sediment chambers used for the laboratory resuspension experiments (Figure modified from Abia et al. [38]).
Figure 3Escherichia coli (solid lines) and turbidity (dashed lines) results in the water column for the mechanical sediment disturbance experiment in the laboratory for the three experimental rounds (TR1–TR3); BR: before resuspension.
Figure 4E. coli (solid lines) and turbidity (dashed lines) results in the water column for the sediment disturbance experiment through increased flow in the laboratory for the two experimental rounds (TR1–TR2).
Figure 5E. coli concentration (solid lines) and turbidity (dashed lines) of the water column before resuspension (BR), followed by (a) after raking and (b) after cow-crossing.
Correlation coefficients and significance values for the regression analysis between E. coli and turbidity in the laboratory and field experiments.
| Experiment | AP5 (High Clay) | AP6 (High Silt) | AP7 (High Sand) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lab Manual | R1 | R2 | R3 | R1 | R2 | R3 | R1 | R2 | R3 |
| 0.867 | 0.840 | 0.694 | 0.894 | 0.885 | 0.888 | 0.995 | 0.956 | 0.994 | |
| 0.022 * | 0.029 * | 0.080 | 0.015 * | 0.017 * | 0.017 * | 0.000 * | 0.004 * | ||
| Lab Flow | R1 | R2 | R1 | R2 | R1 | R2 | |||
| 0.748 | 0.256 | 0.793 | 0.942 | 0.893 | 0.922 | ||||
| 0.058 | 0.385 | 0.043 * | 0.006 * | 0.015 * | 0.009 * | ||||
| Field | AP6 | AP9 | |||||||
| 0.383 | 0.673 | ||||||||
| 0.102 | 0.013 * | ||||||||
TR1–TR3: experimental rounds (replicates); *: p < 0.05; AP5, AP6, AP7: Sediment and water collection sites for laboratory experiments; AP6 (raking site) and AP9 (cow-crossing site): Field experiment.
River parameters measured at the sampling sites on the Apies River.
| Site | Median Sand Size (mm) | Channel Gradient | Width (m) | Depth (m) | Bed Shear Stress (N/m2) | Near-Bed Flow Velocity (m/s) * |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AP1 | 0.46 | 0.0040 | 12.0 | 0.45 | 18 | 0.60 |
| AP2 | 0.43 | 0.0040 | 11.5 | 0.45 | 18 | 0.20 |
| AP6 | 0.18 | 0.0030 | 14.4 | 0.78 | 23 | 0.30 |
| AP7 | 0.5 | 0.0020 | 23.5 | 0.28 | 5.5 | 0.40 |
| AP8 | 0.52 | 0.0020 | 11.7 | 0.27 | 5.3 | 0.60 |
| AP9 | 0.25 | 0.0020 | 14.5 | 0.25 | 4.9 | 0.30 |
* Measured at the centre of the river cross-section. AP1, 2, 8: Additional river sites which were accessed by the inhabitants for bathing and other purposes.
Estimated sediment mobilisation and suspension flow conditions for sampling sites on the Apies River.
| Site | Mobilisation | Suspension | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Depth (m) | Velocity (m/s) | Bed Shear Stress (N/m2) | Discharge (m3/s) | Depth (m) | Velocity (m/s) | Bed Shear Stress (N/m2) | Discharge (m3/s) | |
| AP1 | 0.006 | 0.11 | 0.25 | 0.008 | 0.15 | 0.90 | 5.96 | 1.64 |
| AP2 | 0.006 | 0.10 | 0.24 | 0.007 | 0.15 | 0.90 | 5.96 | 1.57 |
| AP6 | 0.006 | 0.09 | 0.17 | 0.008 | 0.02 | 0.18 | 0.50 | 0.04 |
| AP7 | 0.013 | 0.12 | 0.26 | 0.004 | 0.30 | 1.01 | 5.96 | 7.23 |
| AP8 | 0.014 | 0.13 | 0.27 | 0.021 | 0.30 | 1.01 | 5.96 | 3.60 |
| AP9 | 0.009 | 0.10 | 0.18 | 0.013 | 0.30 | 1.01 | 5.96 | 4.46 |