AEM
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Tobin, R S
Right arrow Articles by Kushner, D J
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Tobin, R S
Right arrow Articles by Kushner, D J
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Tobin, R S
Right arrow Articles by Kushner, D J

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Appl Environ Microbiol. 1980 August; 40(2): 186-191

Comparison of nine brands of membrane filter and the most-probable-number methods for total coliform enumeration in sewage-contaminated drinking water.

R S Tobin, P Lomax and D J Kushner

ABSTRACT

Nine different brands of membrane filter were compared in the membrane filtration (MF) method, and those with the highest yields were compared against the most-probable-number (MPN) multiple-tube method for total coliform enumeration in simulated sewage-contaminated tap water. The water was chlorinated for 30 min to subject the organisms to stresses similar to those encountered during treatment and distribution of drinking water. Significant differences were observed among membranes in four of the six experiments, with two- to four-times-higher recoveries between the membranes at each extreme of recovery. When results from the membranes with the highest total coliform recovery rate were compared with the MPN results, the MF results were found significantly higher in one experiment and equivalent to the MPN results in the other five experiments. A comparison was made of the species enumerated by these methods; in general the two methods enumerated a similar spectrum of organisms, with some indication that the MF method was subject to greater interference by Aeromonas.


Appl Environ Microbiol. 1980 August; 40(2): 186-191




This article has been cited by other articles:




Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
J. Bacteriol. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. Eukaryot. Cell All ASM Journals

Copyright © 1980 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.