Molecular tools for bathing water assessment in Europe: balancing social science research with a rapidly developing environmental science evidence-base

D.M. Oliver, Nicholas David Hanley, M. van Niekerk, D. Kay, A.L. Heathwaite, S.J.M. Rabinovici, J.L. Kinzelman, L.E. Fleming, J. Porter, S. Shaikh, R. Fish, S. Chilton, J. Hewitt, E. Connolly, A. Cummins, K. Glenk, C. McPhail, E. McRory, A. McVittie, A. GilesS. Roberts, K. Simpson, D. Tinch, T. Thairs, L.M. Avery, A.J.A. Vinten, B.D. Watts, R.S. Quilliam

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

The use of molecular tools, principally qPCR, versus traditional culture-based methods for quantifying microbial parameters (e.g., Fecal Indicator Organisms) in bathing waters generates considerable ongoing debate at the science–policy interface. Advances in science have allowed the development and application of molecular biological methods for rapid (~2 h) quantification of microbial pollution in bathing and recreational waters. In contrast, culture-based methods can take between 18 and 96 h for sample processing. Thus, molecular tools offer an opportunity to provide a more meaningful statement of microbial risk to water-users by providing near-real-time information enabling potentially more informed decision-making with regard to water-based activities. However, complementary studies concerning the potential costs and benefits of adopting rapid methods as a regulatory tool are in short supply. We report on findings from an international Working Group that examined the breadth of social impacts, challenges, and research opportunities associated with the application of molecular tools to bathing water regulations.
Original languageEnglish
JournalAmbio
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 21 Sept 2015

Keywords

  • Bathing Water Directive
  • Fecal indicator organism
  • Microbial pollution
  • Public perception
  • Recreational water quality
  • Risk communication

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Molecular tools for bathing water assessment in Europe: balancing social science research with a rapidly developing environmental science evidence-base'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this