4.3 Article

Efficacy of the solar water disinfection method in turbid waters experimentally contaminated with Cryptosporidium parvum oocysts under real field conditions

Journal

TROPICAL MEDICINE & INTERNATIONAL HEALTH
Volume 14, Issue 6, Pages 620-627

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-3156.2009.02281.x

Keywords

SODIS; natural sunlight; PET bottles; turbid waters; Cryptosporidium; viability

Funding

  1. European Union [FP6-INCO-CT-2006-031650-SODISWATER]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE To investigate the efficacy of the solar water disinfection (SODIS) method for inactivating Cryptosporidium parvum oocysts in turbid waters using 1.5 l polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles under natural sunlight. METHODS All experiments were performed at the Plataforma Solar de Almeria, located in the Tabernas Desert (Southern Spain) in July and October 2007. Turbid water samples [5, 100 and 300 nephelometric turbidity units (NTU)] were prepared by addition of red soil to distilled water, and then spiked with purified C. parvum oocysts. PET bottles containing the contaminated turbid waters were exposed to full sunlight for 4, 8 and 12 h. The samples were then concentrated by filtration and the oocyst viability was determined by inclusion/exclusion of the fluorogenic vital dye propidium iodide. RESULTS After an exposure time of 12 h (cumulative global dose of 28.28 MJ/m(2); cumulative UV dose of 1037.06 kJ/m(2)) the oocyst viabilities were 11.54%, 25.96%, 41.50% and 52.80% for turbidity levels of 0, 5, 100 and 300 NTU, respectively, being significantly lower than the viability of the initial isolate (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS SODIS method significantly reduced the potential viability of C. parvum oocysts on increasing the percentage of oocysts that took up the dye PI (indicator of cell wall integrity), although longer exposure periods appear to be required than those established for the bacterial pathogens usually tested in SODIS assays.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available