Grantee Research Project Results
2005 Progress Report: Evaluating Microbial Indicators and Health Risks Associated with Bank Filtration
EPA Grant Number: R829785Title: Evaluating Microbial Indicators and Health Risks Associated with Bank Filtration
Investigators: Frost, Floyd
Institution: Lovelace Clinic Foundation
EPA Project Officer: Page, Angela
Project Period: July 1, 2002 through July 31, 2005 (Extended to June 30, 2006)
Project Period Covered by this Report: July 1, 2004 through July 31, 2005
Project Amount: $524,840
RFA: Microbial Risk in Drinking Water (2001) RFA Text | Recipients Lists
Research Category: Drinking Water , Water , Human Health
Objective:
The objectives of this research project are to: (1) identify approaches to collecting sera from similar populations in different geographic locations so that rates of serological responses can be compared; (2) pilot test the approach in three different geographical locations collecting sera from cities that use bank filtration and nearby cities that use high-quality groundwater for a drinking water source; (3) analyze the sera for serological responses to Cryptosporidium and Giardia antigens and compare the frequency and intensity of responses between the bank filtration cities and the groundwater cities; and (4) compare serological responses in the same cities at times when bank filtration efficacy is likely to be optimal and when it is likely to be least effective.
Sera from 50 people from each of three communities (users of bank filtered and chlorinated, bank filtered plus direct filtration plus ozonation, and chlorinated groundwater) will be collected at baseline and at five follow-up blood draws. A questionnaire on risk factors will be collected at each blood draw. Sera will be tested for the presence of antibody responses to two Cryptosporidium antigens (15/17-kDa and 27-kDa) and for serological changes (seroconversion). The baseline level of serological responses as well as the rates of seroconversion will be compared for each population (50 baseline and 250 periods for estimating rates of seroconversion) for each population. Comparisons will adjust for collected risk factor data from each individual. For purposes of extrapolating these results to other locations, a series of source and finished water quality indicators will be measured for each water source.
Progress Summary:
Six blood draws have been completed. Western Blot analyses for Cryptosporidia have been completed. Data analysis is underway.
Future Activities:
We will complete the final report with presentations at the site area. The distribution systems analysis will be completed.
Supplemental Keywords:
water, exposure assessment, Midwest, EPA Region 7, filtration efficacy, groundwater, bank filtration, geographic locations, populations, drinking water, water source,, RFA, Health, Scientific Discipline, PHYSICAL ASPECTS, Geographic Area, Waste, Water, Midwest, Contaminated Sediments, Environmental Chemistry, Risk Assessments, Environmental Microbiology, Environmental Monitoring, Physical Processes, Drinking Water, EPA Region, microbial indicators, bank filtration, microbial risk assessment, clostridium, groundwater disinfection, microbial contamination, pathogens, river water , monitoring, ecological risk assessment, disinfection byproducts, aquifer characteristics, microbiological organisms, water quality parameters, waterborne disease, exposure and effects, exposure, disinfection byproducts (DPBs), contaminated sediment, Region 7, cryptosporidium , drinking water distribution system, particle counts, treatment, human exposure, water quality, other - risk management, drinking water contaminants, drinking water treatment, Giardia, water treatment, riverbank filtrationRelevant Websites:
http://www.lrri.org/staff/directoryofscientists/frost.html Exit
http://www.LCFresearch.org Exit
Progress and Final Reports:
Original AbstractThe perspectives, information and conclusions conveyed in research project abstracts, progress reports, final reports, journal abstracts and journal publications convey the viewpoints of the principal investigator and may not represent the views and policies of ORD and EPA. Conclusions drawn by the principal investigators have not been reviewed by the Agency.