Fecal Coliform Bacteria Loading from the Polecat Creek Watershed in Virginia, USA

Polecat Creek 유역의 분변성 대장균 배출 부하 특성

  • Mostaghimi, Saied (Biological Systems Engineering Department Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State Univ) ;
  • Im, Sang-Jun (Water Resources Research Department KICT)
  • ;
  • 임상준 (한국건설기술연구원 수자원연구부)
  • Published : 2004.03.31

Abstract

Fecal coliform bacteria is one of the most common cause of water quality impairments in Virginia, USA. Instream concentrations of fecal coliform (FC) bacteria were routinely monitored to assess surface water quality of the Polecat Creek watershed. Median concentration in water samples collected from 1995 to 2000 ranged from 80 cfu/100 mL to t 70 cfu/100 mL, while geometric mean concentrations ranged from 81 cfu/100 mL to 141 cfu/100 mL. The dilution and deposition by Lake Caroline may cause to lower FC concentration at monitoring site QPB, as compared FC concentration at QPD. Higher in-stream FC concentration occurred during the summer period(June-August), and lower concentration typically occurred during the winter period (December-February). This is due to more cattle in streams, and greater survival and regrowth of FC bacteria under warmer condition. The findings of this study can be helpful in planning the water quality monitoring program to avoid the inaccurate assessment of water quality due to the timing of sample collection.

분변성 대장균(Fecal coliform bacteria)은 미국 버지니아주의 수체에 있어서 주요 오염원 중의 하나이다. 1995년부터 2000년까지의 Polecat creek유역의 4개 측정지점에 대하여 하천수의 분변성대장균 농도를 조사하였다. 조사기간 동안에 측정된 분변성 대장균 농도의 중앙값은 80 cfu/100mL부터 170 cfu/100mL까지 변화하였으며, 기하평균은 81cfu/100mL부터 141 cfu/100mL의 범위를 보였다. Caroline호의 수체에 의한 희석과 침전 등의 영향으로 측정지점 QPB의 분변성 대장균 농도가 주변의 측정지점인 QPD보다 낮게 나타났다. 계절별로는 여름철(6${\sim}$8월)에 비교적 높은 농도를 보인 반면에 겨울철(12${\sim}$82월)에는 상대적으로 분변성 대장균의 농도가 낮게 조사되었다. 이는 여름철 기간동안에 가축과 야생동물들이 하천에서 보내는 시간이 많기 때문에 이들 동물의 분비물이 직접 하천으로 유입되며, 낮은 온도보다는 높은 온도에서 대장균의 생장과 번식이 활발하기 때문이다. 본 연구의 결과로부터 분변성 대장균과 같은 미생물의 조사는 조사목적에 따라 측정시기를 결정하는 것이 측정에 의한 오차를 배제할 수 있을 것으로 판단되었다.

Keywords

References

  1. APHA, AWWA, WEF. 1998. Microbiological Exami-nation. In: Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 20th Ed., American Public Health Association, Washington D.C
  2. Baxter-Potter, W.R. and M.W. Gilliland. 1988. Bac-terial Pollution in Runoff from Agricultural Lands. J. Environ. Qual. 17: 27-34
  3. Edwards, D.R., M.S. Coyne, T.C. Daniel, P.F. Vendrell, J.F. Murdoch and P.A. Moore. 1997. Indica-tor Bacteria Concentrations of Two Northwest Arkansas Streams in Relation to Flow and Sea-son. Trans. ASAE 40(1): 103-109
  4. Howell, J.M., M.S. Coyne and P.L. Cornelius. 1995. Fecal Bacteria in Agricultural Waters of the Blue-grass Region of Kentucky. J. Environ. Qual. 24(3):411-419
  5. Mostaghimi, S., J. Wynn and J. Car. 2001. The Pole-cat Creek Watershed Water Quality Monitoring Project, Report No. PC0902, Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department, Richmond, VA
  6. Niemi, R.M. and J.S. Niemi. 1991. Bacteria Pollution of Waters in Pristine and Agricultural Lands. J. Environ. Qual. 20: 620-627
  7. Socolofsky, S.A. 1997. Hydrologic and Bacteria Mod-eling of the Upper Charles River Watershed using HSPF, M.S. Thesis, MIT
  8. SWCB. 2003. Water Quality Standards, Statutory Authority: $\S$62.1-44.15 (3a) of the Code of Virginia. Effective date: January 15, 2003, State Water Control Board, Richmond, VA., Available at http://www.deq.state.va.us/wqs/(accessed June 2003)
  9. US Census Bureau. 2000. Census 2000 Data for the State of Virginia, Available at http://www.census.gov/(accessed June 2003)
  10. Valiela, I., M. Alber and M. LaMontagne. 1991. Fecal Coliform Loadings and Stocks in Buttermilk Bay, Massachusetts, USA, and Management Implica-tions. Environmental Management 12(5): 659-674
  11. VaDEQ. 2002. 303 (d) Report on Impaired Water, Virginia Department of Environmental Quality: Richmond, VA, 2002