to battle E . c o li pollution in the Distr ic t of Columbia Amir - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
to battle e
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

to battle E . c o li pollution in the Distr ic t of Columbia Amir - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Jun 14, 2023 370 likes •724 views

Mic r obial Sour c e T r ac king to battle E . c o li pollution in the Distr ic t of Columbia Amir S harifi, PhD Nov 21 2019 @ DOEE_DC Pre se nta tio n o ve rvie w 1. Microbial Pollution in the District of Columbia 2. MS T basics

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Mic r

  • bial Sour

c e T r ac king to battle E

. c o li pollution in

the Distr ic t of Columbia

Amir S harifi, PhD

Nov 21 2019

@ DOEE_DC

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Pre se nta tio n o ve rvie w

@DOE E _DC

  • 1. Microbial Pollution in the District of Columbia
  • 2. MS

T basics

  • 3. DOEE / EP

A MS T Proj ect

slide-3
SLIDE 3

F e c a l Po llutio n is a Na tio nwide Cha lle ng e

@DOE E _DC

Pathogens are the No.1 cause of impairments to the Rivers/ streams of the US .

ht t ps:/ / ofmpub.epa.gov/ wat ers10/ at t ains_nat ion_cy.cont rol#causes

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Mic ro b ia l Po llutio n in the Distric t o f Co lumb ia

@DOE E _DC

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Mic ro b ia l Po llutio n in the Distric t o f Co lumb ia

@DOE E _DC

  • Blue Plains WTP and CS

O (Combined

S ewer Overflow) ~95%

bacterial load

  • MS

4 (Municipal S

eparate S torm S ewer S ystem)

~ 5% bacterial load

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Co mmo n so urc e s o f E . c o li in MS4

@DOE E _DC

  • Illegal sanitary sewer connections to

the storm drain

  • S

anitary sewer exfiltration via groundwater seepage

  • Wildlife, such as birds and deer
  • Pets - especially dogs
slide-7
SLIDE 7

DC Wa te r Qua lity Sta nda rds fo r E . c o li

@DOE E _DC

ht t ps:/ / www.epa.gov/ wqs-t ech/ wat er-qualit y-st andards- regulat ions-washingt on-dc

Water quality standards for

  • E. coli in District specify that:
  • No single sample shall exceed

410 MPN/100 mL

  • The 30-day geometric mean

should not exceed 126 MPN/100 mL

slide-8
SLIDE 8

So urc e o f F e c a l Po llutio n is I mpo rta nt

@DOE E _DC

  • E. coli data alert to the total pollution level, however, does not provide

information about the cause or source of pollutants

  • Public health risk can vary by source
  • Mitigation strategies can vary by source
  • S
  • urce information improves water quality management and public safety
slide-9
SLIDE 9

DNA-Ba se d Mic ro b ia l So urc e T ra c king

@DOE E _DC

  • There are specialist microbes closely associated

with a given pollution source

  • Host and gut microbes co-evolve
  • Physiological differences of the gut
  • Dietary differences between hosts
  • MS

T provides a set of tools to characterize sources of contamination

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Adva nta g e s o f q PCR fo r MST

@DOE E _DC

  • “ Gold standard” for MS

T

  • No cultivation requirement
  • Highly reproducible when standardized
  • Established quality control guidelines
  • S

pecialized reagents for environmental testing

qPCR = quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction Procedure for the measurement of host- associated gene sequences isolated from environmental water samples

slide-11
SLIDE 11

E PA Na tio na lly Va lida te d Me tho ds

@DOE E _DC

  • Dr. Orin Shanks

U.S. EPA Office of Research & Development (ORD)

slide-12
SLIDE 12

MST with Qua ntita tive re a l-time PCR (q PCR)

@DOE E _DC

Sample Collection Sample Concentration Data Analysis DNA Isolation qPCR Amplification

U.S. EPA- ORD Cincinnati, OH

slide-13
SLIDE 13

DC MST Study Ob je c tive s

@DOE E _DC

13

1. Characterize fecal source trends in select District outfalls to improve urban stormwater management 2. Develop procedure for future MS 4 outfall fecal pollution source characterization with MS T qPCR

  • District
  • EP

A Region 3

  • National
slide-14
SLIDE 14

@DOE E _DC

14

Se le c te d Site s

  • East side of Anacostia River
  • First order catchments
  • Size 13 to 123 ha
  • 32 MS4 outfalls across sites
  • Historic E. coli data (n = 202; since 2008)
  • Chronic fecal pollution

(median E. coli geometric mean > 126 MPN/100ml)

  • No known CSO impact
  • Range of land use

(100% parkland to 100% urban)

  • Dry weather MS4 outflows at

most sites

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Sa mpling Pla n

@DOE E _DC

Dry weather

 12-16 months  2x per month  Receiving water  MS

4 dry flow

  • utfalls

 6-8 events  Receiving water  MS

4 dry flow

  • utfalls only
  • Precipitation
  • Flow Information
  • Water Quality Metrics
  • E. coli (IDEXX Colilert)
  • Turbidity, Temperature, DO, pH
  • MS

T qPCR Methods

  • Human-associated (HF183/ BacR287 and

HumM2)

  • Ruminant-associated (Rum2Bac)
  • Dog-associated (DG3)
  • Avian-associated (GFD)

Wet weather

slide-16
SLIDE 16

E vide nc e -Ba se d Hypo the sis T e sting

@DOE E _DC

H1: E. coli concentrations downstream of MS 4 outfalls will be higher during wet weather compared to dry weather conditions H2: Human sources will be more prevalent during dry weather

  • utfalls compared to wet weather

H3: Non-human sources will be more prevalent during wet weather

  • utfalls compared to dry weather conditions

H4: S patial and temporal trends will vary by pollution source and subwatershed land use practices

slide-17
SLIDE 17

E . c o li mo nito ring , 7 e ve nts

@DOE E _DC

https:/ / public.tableau.com/ profile/ amir.sharifi3095#!/ vizhome/ Graphs-mst/ Dashboard2

Parks Low Density Residential Fort Davis 54% 24% Texas Run 60% 18%

slide-18
SLIDE 18

E . c o li mo nito ring , 08-08-2019

slide-19
SLIDE 19

E . c o li mo nito ring , 08-21-19

@DOE E _DC

slide-20
SLIDE 20

E . c o li mo nito ring , 09-05-2019

@DOE E _DC

slide-21
SLIDE 21

E . c o li mo nito ring , 09-18-19

@DOE E _DC

slide-22
SLIDE 22

E . c o li mo nito ring , 10-02-19

@DOE E _DC

slide-23
SLIDE 23

10-15-19

@DOE E _DC

slide-24
SLIDE 24

E . c o li mo nito ring , 10-16-19 (we t we a the r e ve nt)

@DOE E _DC

1.35” total rainfall

slide-25
SLIDE 25

E . c o li mo nito ring , 10-31-19

@DOE E _DC

slide-26
SLIDE 26

E . c o li mo nito ring , 11-14-19

@DOE E _DC

slide-27
SLIDE 27

Ca se Study: T illa mook Ba sin, OR

@DOE E _DC

Applied human-associated qPCR methods (HF183/ BacR287 and HumM2), along with procedures for ruminant (Rum2Bac), cattle (CowM2 and CowM3), canine (DG3 and DG37), and avian (GFD) fecal pollution sources to characterize trends in fecal pollution sources in the research area.

Li X, S ivaganesan M, KeltyCA, Zimmer-FaustA, ClintonP, ReichmanJR, et al. (2019)Large- scaleimplementationof standardizedquantitative real-timePCR fecal sourceidentificationprocedures in the TillamookBayWatershed.PLoS ONE 14(6):e0216827.https:/ / doi.org/ 10.1371/ j ournal.pone.0216827

slide-28
SLIDE 28

@DOE E _DC

slide-29
SLIDE 29

Avia n Pollution Spa tia l a nd T e mpora l T re nds

Potential bird migration water quality impact

Heat map: estimated log10 copies per reaction color coding and frequency information.

slide-30
SLIDE 30

@DOE E _DC

Human Pollution Spatial and T e mpor al T r e nds

River systems exhibit different temporal trends

slide-31
SLIDE 31

Huma n F e c a l Co nta mina tio n Sc o re (HF S)

@DOE E _DC

Proj ect Level Probabilistic Modeling that can be used to prioritize sampling sites for remediation based

  • n measured human

waste levels.

slide-32
SLIDE 32

Huma n F e c a l Co nta mina tio n sc o re (HF S)

@DOE E _DC

BMP performance can be assessed through HFS

slide-33
SLIDE 33

@DOE E _DC

Thank you for your attention!