Abstract
This interlaboratory study was designed to evaluate protozoan test methods in water and to predict the major causes of deviation of the methods. Each of four laboratories with previous experience of protozoa analysis in water participated, and met the initial performance criteria of EPA 1623 method provided. The protozoan analysis procedure consists of filtrations, concentration, immunomagnetic separation, dyeing (staining) and counting with observation. We tested three different filtration equipments: capsule filter for 10 L of surface water, and high volume (HV) capsule filter and membrane filter for 100 L of finished water. When the recovery of each step of the procedure was evaluated with EasySeed, the commercial stock of each 100 Cryptosporidium and Giardia, immunomagnetic separation and filtration step were the most crucial steps affecting the stability of the recovery, especially for Cryptosporidium. There was no significant difference of recovery among the filtration methods. Recovery of protozoa from source water were evaluated with spiked EasySeed as matrix tests. The recoveries of Giardia increased significantly in the matrix tests compared those in the deionized water. We also applied red stained mixture stocks of Cryptosporidium and Giardia called ColorSeed as internal standards of water sample tests. The recoveries of both EasySeed and ColorSeed in samples tested were within the range of the criteria, however, the Giardia recoveries using ColorSeed decreased significantly. Further optimization study with ColorSeed will be necessary, considering the convenience of using the internal standard without additional sample analysis. The significant factors of the recovery variation were identified as the differences of laboratories as well as water quality and type of the stock for spiking. The results of this study emphasize the importance of the quality assurance program for protozoan analysis lab in water.
