Comparative Evaluation of Four Bacterial Assays for the Detection of Genotoxic Effects in the Dissolved Water Phases of Aqueous Matrices
详细信息 查看全文
- 作者：Christoph Helma ; Volker Mersch-Sundermann ; Virginia S. Houk ; Ursula Glasbrenner ; Carmen Klein ; Lu Wenquing ; Fekadu Kassie ; Rolf Schulte-Hermann ; and Siegfried Knasmü ; ller
- 刊名：Environmental Science & Technology
- 出版年：1996
- 出版时间：March 1996
- 年：1996
- 卷：30
- 期：3
- 页码：897 - 907
- 全文大小：306K
- 年卷期：v.30,no.3(March 1996)
- ISSN：1520-5851
文摘
The aim of this study was to evaluate the perfomanceof four bacterial short-term genotoxicity assays(Salmonella/microsome assay, SOS Chromotest, Microscreen phage-induction assay, differential DNArepair test) that are widely used and/or have a promisingpotential for the genotoxicity testing of water samples.Twenty-three samples of different origins (drinkingand bathing water, surface water, municipal andindustrial wastewater, pulp mill effluents, groundwater, and landfill leachates) were tested in these assays. In total, 20 samples were genotoxic: 13 inthe Salmonella/microsome assay, 13 in the SOSChromotest, 8 in the Microscreen phage-induction assay,and 19 in the differential DNA repair test. Althoughthe differential DNA repair test was the most sensitive system, positive results were obtained also withsome of the negative control samples, and it hadthe least power to detect different genotoxic potencies.The Microscreen assay was the least sensitive systemdue to nonlinear results and sample toxicity. TheSalmonella/microsome assay and the SOSChromotestwere of equal sensitivity, but the variance of theresults was higher in the Salmonella/microsomeassay.As the Salmonella/microsome assay also lackstoxicitycorrection for routine applications and ordinarilyutilizes two strains, the SOS Chromotest appears tobe the most promising test system for routinescreening of water samples. Based on the presentexperiments, the investigated water samples wereranked according to their genotoxic potency asfollows: landfill leachates > effluents from pulpproduction > wastewater > surface water > contaminated groundwater 
drinking and bathing water> control samples. The rankings obtained with theindividual test systems were generally in goodagreement. In addition, we present data on the impactof water treatment methods (activated sludge treatment, UV disinfection) and of alternativetechnologies (ozone vs ClO2 pulp bleaching) onthegenotoxicity of water samples.
drinking and bathing water> control samples. The rankings obtained with theindividual test systems were generally in goodagreement. In addition, we present data on the impactof water treatment methods (activated sludge treatment, UV disinfection) and of alternativetechnologies (ozone vs ClO2 pulp bleaching) onthegenotoxicity of water samples.