Total coliform and escherichia coli counts in 99 florida lakes with relations to some common limnological factors

12Citations
Citations of this article
62Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

The degree of bacterial contamination of 99 Florida lakes was studied using total coliform and Escherichia coli (E. coli) counts as indicators. Over 75% of the 4055 samples analyzed for total colifoms and over 98% analyzed for E. coli were below Florida's state standards for total and fecal coliform bacteria, respectively. Thus, there is little evidence of widespread fecal contamination in the Florida lakes examined during this study. Future bacterial sampling in lake systems should consider the facts that open-water samples had significantly lower total coliform and E. coli counts than littoral samples, and that the variance in bacterial counts is greater among lakes over time than spatially within lakes. Additionally, lake trophic status and aquatic bird abundance were also positively related to both total coliform and E. coli counts, while lake surface area and percent area covered with aquatic macrophytes (PAC) showed no significant relations. The method of waste management around lakes is often a concern to many people citing septic tank systems for polluting aquatic systems. However, the data examined in this study showed no difference in bacterial counts between lakes managing waste with septic tanks and those with central waste water treatment systems. A routine, inexpensive bacterial monitoring program is recommended for lakes used for body-contact recreational activities to be safe and relieve concerns of the public about potential health problems. © 2006 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Hoyer, M. V., Donze, J. L., Schulz, E. J., Willis, D. J., & Canfield, D. E. (2006). Total coliform and escherichia coli counts in 99 florida lakes with relations to some common limnological factors. Lake and Reservoir Management, 22(2), 141–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/07438140609353891

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