By COUNTY US INTERIOR Reports Center CONTENTS Page Abstract and Escherichia and Escherichia concentrations Escherichia from on Escherichia concentrations ILLUSTRATIONS Figure area Escheri ID: 953579
Download Pdf The PPT/PDF document "ESCHERICHIA AND" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
ESCHERICHIA AND By COUNTY U.S. INTERIOR Reports Center CONTENTS Page Abstract and Escherichia and Escherichia concentrations Escherichia from on Escherichia concentrations ILLUSTRATIONS Figure area Esc
herichia and between Escherichia and Escherichia and data Escherichia concentrations fecal-colifoTm/Escherichia regression ILLUSTRATIONS-Continued 7-8. Escherichia when data TABLES Table for Escherichia
and Escherichia and Escherichia and Escherichia concentrations Escherichia water-quality while IV ESCHERICHIA AND In Escherichia be contamination. E. concentration to E. or for the E. to E. to d
iffer E. criteria In E. and initially Anderson E. to E. and E. could from and Predictions E. concentrations E. to among mean E. standard E. standard. E. concentrations equation E. concentrations.ge
ometric-mean E. concentra bathing E. concentration E. concentration E. concentrations E. and E. and and relation E, and E. can bacteria INTRODUCTION In that Escherichia or bacteria E. and fecal-col
iform effects Because E. concentration illness rate, E. criteria E. criteria waters E. criteria E. is the E. criteria E. or E. or E. and Protection E. in E. and study cooperative the City Purpos
e This information E. and E. or standards. E. and E. and E. concentration were REVIEW Two E. and E. and outside E. criteria Epidemiological Since between shown. interviews of was value In cri
teria asked total swimmers coliforms, criteria for E. and the between E. and In E. or E. in y = x), (1) y is x is E. colonies E. concentration E. criteria E. criteria calculated from illness on
upper E. water-quality Recent After marine good. (r) = concentrations the including E. concentrations Table 5,000 Escherichia Geometric 126 than (r 0.38), (r 0.62) E. concen at compared Table
between [E. ND, E. General E. Freshwater r 0.08 r 0.38 r = Correlation -p)]. c for age with p-value level but not high E. concentrations (p 0.05), associated (p0.08) Kong E. concentration (table
Comparisons Escherichia and In E. as E. and E. con E. concentrations ratios E. and E. criteria. E. criteria E, to means, E. bathing-water criteria that E. criteria fecal-coliform that contaminated E
. criteria were E. criteria, exceeded. E. concentration that concentration E. concentration (R ) Table relations Escherichia and Eschericia FC, ND 0.283 R= R= R is between concentration at In E. criter
ia E. criteria E. and (R = could E. concentrations marine was fecal-coliform E. concentrations Therefore, E. as gastroenteritis cases, E. concentration E. could METHODS The E. to the Sample Sample
s from Cleveland USGS. Ohio were from 11 STUDY 39° Figure .--Locations 12 processed ORSANCO, E. and taken coli, the Although bacteria study E. methods E. method resuscitation E. method includes 2
0 E. Quality-assurance and laboratory filtered practices, E. and Statistical Before to E. were E. and statistically analyzed E. and E. concentration requiring depend residuals concentrations assum
ption for and waters plotted regression observed and use manner the data; y intercepts could E. concen E. concentrations from fecal-coliform E. concentrations E. concentrations for describing regresÂ
the E. concentration 14 geometric-mean m= a However, y intercept (a) and (b) are m^y/^ (mean y given E. concentration m(y/The E. concentration E. con E. concentration). E. concentration predictions
. E. and E. standards use-designation. RELATION ESCHERICHIA CONCENTRATIONS The representing E. and concentrations from E. and is E. can E. with E. concentration 1,000,000 100,000 Q H O Z 8§ Bs O S
JUJ O £q CO 1,000 10 A. log 0.065 100 EC Escherichia EF 10,000 1,000,000 100,000 b tt 8| O oL S 1,000 10 10 B. OLENTANGY log (log Escherichia FC 100 1,000,000 Figure 2.--Regression Escherichia co//a
nd (B) in Survey 16 10,000,000 £s 88 Sw , Uj §8 01 100,000 C. SCIOTO log EC Escherichia FC 10 100 100,000 co 88 tc 00 01 10,000,000 log D. EC Escherichia FC 100 10,000,000 Figure 2.--Regression E
scherichia co//and 17 1,000 ft Z zi Q S* A O S o: 100 A. WATER CREEK 10 Escherichia FC 100 1,000 10,000 t Z 1! OLU ° I Uj 100 10 B. log Escherichia FC 100 Figure 3.--Regression Escherichia co//and
River 18 10,000 2 Q H a 8 O 100 C. log EC Escherichia FC bacteria 100 Figure 3.~Regression Escherichia and 0.918 River were y intercept E. that y intercepts y intercepts y intercept _ The (R ) E
. concentra- 2 tion R ranged 0.863 E. con Table Escherichia and The (r) measures E. and The regression residuals, E. from The y intercepts y intercept (Rof E. concentrations coli concentration Data S (p
ercent) y intercept y intercept R U.S. Cuyahoga vyitiiLdiiei y ixi OV/lv/lAJ 29 f\Q 91 ^ 0.959 OHIO A Cincinnati ToiTnf*T"c C**r{*{*\r Pnnlff! OQ - QM. 34.9 1A. 1 0.994 079 -9T? 0.095 Q9Q Regressio
n differences E. con from ratios any considered PPCC that residuals equations and y intercepts. two y intercepts three model over E. to organization (table y intercepts show E, concentration grea
ter Table Escherichia and T f\ 1 £ UMjb Pooled y intercept Rvalues of E. concentration y intercepts were the y intercept y intercept PREDICTIONS ESCHERICHIA FROM Regression for E. concentra E.
concentrations E. concentrations 22 w 8§ LU O co 10,000,000 100,000 10,000 10 Pooled FC) Escherichia FC Survey 10 COLONIES Figure 4.--Regression between Escherichia fecal-coliform Water Commission E. c
oncentrations E. concentrations prediction from recreation E. concentrations for 5 and E. concentration from E. concentration 23 Table geometric-mean Escherichia concentrations [E. Fecal USGS, E. Geo
 E. geometric E. to 7,000 i. m s 3: EC Escherichia FC percent INTERVAL 4,000 COLONIES Figure 5.--Confidence Escherichia concentrations coli regression the primary-contact the both E. to and wate
r-quality E. single-sample 25 z «: IN z 8 Q 5,000 4,ooo ^ EC Escherichia FC log S R 5,000 COLONIES 6,000 Figure 6.--Confidence Escherichia concentrations orm/Escherichia regression For E. concentrat
ion to E. concentration bathing-water E. concentration E. to 0.51, the E. concentration concentration 26 For the much 90-percent E. standards E. than standard E, was E. was the E. was concentrati
ons E. was concentrations met E. water-quality were E. was single-sample E. was were E. were data. RISK ESCHERICHIA CONCENTRATIONS To E. concentrations, E. concentrations equation E. concentration gene
rate illness E. standard and basis E. pro 27 Table Escherichia water-quality [Effective than The E. geometric-mean the E. concentrations E. concentration E. concentration (primary- bathing-water E
. cri 28 10,000 log 10,000 EXPLANATION Area for Escherichia (126 Escherichia (126 Figure /.--Samples standards Escherichia when 29 log 10,000 EXPLANATION Area standard Escherichia co// Escherichia (126
Figure 8.--Samples standards Escherichia when Water SUMMARY In E. be gastrointestinal E. concentration study E. is E. or Ohio E. could E. and E. concentrations E. concentra from not statistical E
. and waters prediction E. concentrations on one the coliforms 31 site EC/PC ratio. test ORS geometric- E. geometric-mean were E. standard the E. stan not E. predictions E. and E. standards betwee
n E. concentra were concentrations suggested E. criteria E. concentrations USGS between E. and rather the E. in E. criteria E. and E. can E. con E. and 32 REFERENCES American American Federati
on, R.H., p. for Klebsiella from Klebsiella in effects Klebsiella from Federation, bacteria Quality, indicators E. and no. 33 Iman, coli, enterococci, no. p. in EPA/ASTM Journal Escherichia and