Working toward improved monitoring of Cryptosporidium and Giardia (oo)cysts in water samples: testing alternatives to elution and immunomagnetic separation from USEPA Method 1623.1

5Citations
Citations of this article
12Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objective: This study was designed to find a method to enhance the recovery of Cryptosporidium spp. and Giardia spp. parasites from water samples for research purposes compared to the results that can be achieved with USEPA Method 1623.1. Four different approaches were used to test water samples that were artificially spiked with parasites. The approaches were: (i) Method 1623.1 itself, (ii) elution of Method 1623.1 combined with microfiltration, (iii) an elution technique based on grinding the filter membrane in a blender before the eluent was concentrated by immunomagnetic separation, and (iv) the blender elution followed by microfiltration. Fluorescence microscopy was used to determine which approach led to the highest parasite recovery rates. Results: Method 1623.1 gave the best results for Giardia, while all four approaches were statistically equivalent for Cryptosporidium. We evaluated the costs and laboratory time requirements for each protocol to give readers a complete comparison of the methods tested. Elution of Method 1623.1 combined with microfiltration resulted in lower costs and less laboratory work time without compromising the recovery of the parasites.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Fradette, M. S., & Charette, S. J. (2022). Working toward improved monitoring of Cryptosporidium and Giardia (oo)cysts in water samples: testing alternatives to elution and immunomagnetic separation from USEPA Method 1623.1. BMC Research Notes, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-022-06118-9

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free