How to Control Costs in Your Pollution Prevention Program, Judith A.Cichowicz
详细信息 查看全文
- 作者：Richardson ; G. Mark
- 刊名：Water, Air, and Soil Pollution
- 出版年：1998
- 出版时间：1998
- 年：1998
- 卷：106
- 期：1/2
- 页码：199-200
- 全文大小：11 KB
文摘
Most tidal creeks in North Carolina are closedor partially closed to shellfishing. These creeksoften remain closed due to the inability to determinesources of fecal pollution. This study was designedfor intensive fecal coliform monitoring of FutchCreek, N.C., to try and determine sources(s) of fecalpollution. Futch Creek is a mildly polluted tidalcreek, with marginal levels of fecal coliforms andcould potentially be reopened.Problems in interpreting levels of fecal coliforms andpollution risks are two fold and were extremelypronounced in this study. First, severalenvironmental factors have been shown to influencelevels of fecal coliforms. Therefore, effects oftemperature, salinity, tidal cycles, and rain eventson fecal coliform counts were examined. There werehigher fecal coliform levels in the warmertemperatures. There was a strong inverse relationshipwith salinity, with highest fecal coliform counts inthe 10–14 g L range for both the mFC and mTEC countswith no apparent source of pollution. This trend wasalso observed in three other tidal creeks. Tidalcycles did affect fecal coliform counts withsubstantially higher counts during low tide andappeared to be more important than rain events. It isapparent that when evaluating several stations in acreek, samples must be taken during the same tidalcycle stage in order to have comparative data.Counts obtained using the mTEC method wereconsistently higher than mFC counts in all salinityranges. Basic taxonomic tests were performed on fecalcoliforms isolated from three salinity regimes: 0 g L, 10–14 g L, and 23–26 g L. The mFC method in the10–14 g L (45%) and 23–26 g L (70%) salinity rangehad the highest incidence of false-positive counts(non E. coli). The mTEC method also had thehighest incidence of false-positive counts in the23–26 g L (27%) and 10–14 g L (24%), none as high asthe mFC method. Therefore, the mTEC method appears tobe the better of the two but is still not an ideal approach.