Next Article in Journal
Oropharyngeal Candidiasis in HIV Infection: Analysis of Impaired Mucosal Immune Response to Candida albicans in Mice Expressing the HIV-1 Transgene
Next Article in Special Issue
Occurrence and Control of Legionella in Recycled Water Systems
Previous Article in Journal
Pathogens Best Paper Awards for 2015
Previous Article in Special Issue
Opportunistic Premise Plumbing Pathogens: Increasingly Important Pathogens in Drinking Water
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Pathogens
Volume 4
Issue 2
10.3390/pathogens4020390
pathogens-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Environmental (Saprozoic) Pathogens of Engineered Water Systems: Understanding Their Ecology for Risk Assessment and Management

by
Nicholas J. Ashbolt
School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Rm 3-57D South Academic Building, Edmonton, AB T6G 2G7, Canada
Pathogens 2015, 4(2), 390-405; https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens4020390
Submission received: 22 May 2015 / Revised: 15 June 2015 / Accepted: 15 June 2015 / Published: 19 June 2015
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Waterborne Pathogens)
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Major waterborne (enteric) pathogens are relatively well understood and treatment controls are effective when well managed. However, water-based, saprozoic pathogens that grow within engineered water systems (primarily within biofilms/sediments) cannot be controlled by water treatment alone prior to entry into water distribution and other engineered water systems. Growth within biofilms or as in the case of Legionella pneumophila, primarily within free-living protozoa feeding on biofilms, results from competitive advantage. Meaning, to understand how to manage water-based pathogen diseases (a sub-set of saprozoses) we need to understand the microbial ecology of biofilms; with key factors including biofilm bacterial diversity that influence amoebae hosts and members antagonistic to water-based pathogens, along with impacts from biofilm substratum, water temperature, flow conditions and disinfectant residual—all control variables. Major saprozoic pathogens covering viruses, bacteria, fungi and free-living protozoa are listed, yet today most of the recognized health burden from drinking waters is driven by legionellae, non-tuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) and, to a lesser extent, Pseudomonas aeruginosa. In developing best management practices for engineered water systems based on hazard analysis critical control point (HACCP) or water safety plan (WSP) approaches, multi-factor control strategies, based on quantitative microbial risk assessments need to be developed, to reduce disease from largely opportunistic, water-based pathogens.

1. Introduction

John Snow was possibly the first to ascribe cholera as a drinking water disease in modern times [1] (noting first description of the agent by Pacini [2]), and the subsequent work of Robert Koch cemented the germ theory of disease [3]. This led to the very successful approach to control waterborne (enteric) diseases via centralized drinking water and sanitation treatment systems [4]. However, managing faecally-polluted source waters by way of drinking water treatment has both blinkered our view to and previously overshadowed the broader suite of environmental pathogens potentially present in engineered water systems. In addition to the classic faecal-water-oral route of transmission by waterborne pathogens, there are many more environmental, often opportunistic pathogens, which may colonize drinking water distribution systems (DWDSs) and the plumbing of buildings/homes (premise plumbing) [5]. For the purpose of this review, these systems are referred to as engineered water systems.
This review describes recent information on non-enteric, environmental (saprozoic) pathogens and their primary growth niche, the biofilms that form on pipe surfaces and sediment within engineered water systems; noting recent reviews in this field [6,7,8]. Furthermore this paper takes a risk assessment perspective intended to assist with potential management options—of particular value for hazard analysis critical control point (HACCP) or water safety plans like those recently drafted by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. (1791 Tullie Circle, N.E. Atlanta, GA, USA) [9] and recommended by the World Health Organization [10].

2. Non-Enteric Environmental (Saprozoic) Pathogens (that Cause Sapronoses)

As described by Hubálek [11], sapronoses (Greek “sapros” = decaying; “sapron” means in ecology a decaying organic substrate) are human diseases transmissible from largely abiotic environments (soil, water, decaying plants, or from development within animal corpses, excreta, and other substrata). In essence from plant, invertebrate, and microbial matter—hence saprozoic pathogens include microorganisms in biofilms [12] of engineered water systems [5]. Given their fundamentally different origins compared to enteric pathogens, the generic term “waterborne” originally described for enteric pathogen contamination of water (faecal-oral route) is not appropriate for saprozoic pathogens, rather the general term water-based is preferred; Indicating their water origin, which may also enhance recognition for different control measures (i.e. post centralized water treatment). A good example that highlights the need for this differentiation is seen from the current U.S. Environmental Protect Agency (EPA) safe drinking water act (SDWA). In the SDWA there is a goal to have zero Legionella within the DWDS, assumed to be possible, as for enteric pathogens via traditional drinking water treatment [13]. However, various legionellae may not only break through treatment within amoeba cysts and from growth in water [14], but enter post treatment, such as via dust into storage tanks where, unlike enteric pathogens, they may grow to high densities [15] and seed downstream biofilms. Depending on premise plumbing conditions, they may then grow to densities likely to impact on unintended bystanders and customer health [16].
Example sapronoses include various diseases possibly caused by amoebal viruses (e.g., Acanthamoeba polyphaga mimivirus pneumonia), bacteria (e.g., legionellosis, folliculitis), fungi (e.g., aspergillosis, candidiasis), and free-living protozoan (e.g., primary amoebic meningoencephalitis) [5]. However, obligate intracellular parasites of living (non-human) vertebrates (viruses, rickettsiae, and some chlamydiae) are not considered saprozoic, but rather “sapro-zoonoses” given vertebrate and environmental development sites [11]. And it gets more complicated with some pathogens, such as Campylobacter jejuni and Escherichia coli O157:H7 that are common to the gastrointestinal tract of vertebrates (i.e., enteric), but may also have natural reservoirs within environmental amoebae [17]; and others enterics like Acinetobacter baumannii and Aeromonas hydrophila that also grow in engineered water systems (i.e., these are all facultative saprozoic). In general, it can be assumed that saprozoic pathogens have evolved over millennia to grow in various environmental niches, and that human infection is largely accidental or a dead-end life-stage. For example, lung infections by Legionella pneumophila or various non-tuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) are almost exclusively not spread person-to-person [18,19], presumably ending the pathogens’ continued development. With increasing global climate impacts and demographic change, as with zoonoses, it is highly likely that there will be greater potential for new sapronoses, requiring a one-health approach to management [20]. It is therefore of interest to identify possible generic measures so as to minimize future sapronoses via water systems. Table 1 provides a listing of sapronoses relevant to engineered water systems (modified from [5]), and a sub-set are expanded upon in the follow subsections.

2.1. The Key Niche, Biofilms in Engineered Water Systems

Common to moist surfaces is the development of a conditioning film of chemicals that rapidly leads to the development of bacterial biofilms [21], which subsequently support a range of free-living protozoa, metazoan, and other invertebrates in engineered water systems [21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29]. Given this ubiquitous growth of biofilms on moist surfaces, it seems fruitless to try to eliminate biofilm development simply by way of maintaining a residual disinfectant in drinking water systems. Rather, specific members may be controlled, such as trophozoites of the free-living protozoan pathogen Naegleria fowleri by a chlorine residual [30], or culturable (yet not necessarily all active cells [see VBNC below]) of L. pneumophila by monochloramine or copper/silver ions [31]. While biofilm heterotroph growth is generally governed by availability of organic carbon [32], yet sometimes N or P may be limiting [22,33,34,35], there is a complex interaction between residual disinfectant, pipe materials, and hydraulic regime influencing the microbial diversity of biofilms within engineered water systems, as discussed next. Also, upstream biofilm members appear to influence the composition of downstream biofilms [36], and certain phenotypic features of bacteria, such as the presence of fimbriae and autoaggregation influence biofilm formation by individual members [37,38,39]. Autoaggregation by intracellular pathogens like L. pneumophila may also increase their uptake by biofilm amoebae [40], leading to a higher likelihood of selecting for virulent biofilm community members [41].
Various approaches have been developed to study biofilms in engineered water systems [12,42,43,44], and what is clear is that both the type of disinfectant and residual concentration appear to influence biofilm microbial diversity, but not eliminate it [33,45,46,47]. A further influencing factor of biofilm community structure is the substratum (e.g. pipe material); for example, with generally greater biofilm growth on plastic pipes compared to copper, which, despite less biofilm copper may support members more likely to increase legionellae presence [48,49,50]. While expected, only recently have studies identified a further nuance of engineered water system biofilms, temporal dynamics of biofilm members due to changes in hydraulics and water chemistries [51,52]. Once transcriptomics become more readily available to study environmental biofilms, further dynamics in expression of functional genes will be evident (e.g. [53,54,55].
Table
Table 1. Potential Sapronoses from Pathogens in Engineered Water Systems.
Table 1. Potential Sapronoses from Pathogens in Engineered Water Systems.
Microbial GroupAgentProblematic NicheSapronoseRef.
BacteriaAcinetobacter baumannii*Free-living within biofilms of health-care settingsRange of nosocomial respiratory & other infections (via biofilms) from drinking water, breathing tubes & urinary catheters; antimicrobial resistant strains.[56]
Aeromonas hydrophila*Ubiquitous in aquatic environments, colonize engineered water systemsMost strains do not appear to be of health concern (including enteric members), but some biofilm colonizers may cause wound infections[57,58,59]
Chlamydiales:
Neochlamydia spp.,
Parachlamydia spp.,
Simkania negevensis,
Waddlia chondrophila		Obligate amoeba-resisting bacteria of environmental biofilmsCommunity acquired pneumonia Abortions in humans (and bovines)[60,61,62,63]
Legionella longbeacheae
L. micdadei
L. pneumophila		Free-living within biofilms, but important pathogens within biofilm amoebae & other protozoaLegionellosis (from mild Pontiac Fever to severe Legionnaires’ Disease); Community acquired pneumonia[15,64,65,66]
Non-tuberculous mycobacteria (NTM);
(1) rapid-growers:
Mycobacterium abscessus,
M. chelonae,
M. fortuitum;
(2) slow-growers:
M. avium complex (MAC),
M. ulcerans		Free-living within biofilms, some appear facultative within biofilm amoebae and other protozoaCommunity acquired pneumonia
Lymphadenopathy, skin and soft tissue infection		[19,66,67,68]
Pseudomonas aeruginosaUbiquitous in aquatic environments, colonize engineered water systemsFolliculitis from pools/spars and various nosocomial infections from plumbing biofilms[8,69,70,71]
Stenotrophomonas maltophiliaUbiquitous in aquatic environments, colonize engineered water systemsRange of nosocomial respiratory & other infections (via biofilms) in drinking water, breathing tubes & urinary catheters; antimicrobial resistant strains[72]
FungiAspergillus fumigatus
A. terreus		 Aspergillosis[73,74]
Candida albicans
C. parapsilosis		 Candidiasis[75]
Exophiala dermatitidis Dermatitidis[75]
ProtozoaAcanthamoeba spp.Many strains appear to only grow saprophyticly; ubiquitous to aquatic biofilm environmentsGranulomatous amoebic encephalitis; keratitis; lung & skin infections[30,76,77,78,79]
Balamuthia mandrillarisRelatively rare but present in source and treated waters of temperate regionsGranulomatous amoebic encephalitis; lung & skin infections
Hartmonella spp.
Vahlkampfia spp.		Many strains appear to only grow saprophyticly; ubiquitous to aquatic biofilm environmentsKeratitis
Naegleria fowleriRelatively rare but present in source and treated waters over 28 °C if inadequate residual disinfectantPrimary amoebic meningoencephalitis
VirusesMimivirus (Shan virus)
Mamavirus		Potentially in various biofilm amoebae, first described in A. polyphagaWeak pneumonia?[80,81,82]
*Facultative saprozoic.
A particular feature of many biofilm bacteria is the formation of various dormant states, yet the existence of viable (active) but non-culturable cells (VBNC) have been debated for over 30 years [83,84]. However, only recently have VBNC cells been explored by molecular tools within engineered water system biofilms [85]. A particular relevant point for environmental pathogens, and illustrated here for L. pneumophila, is that VBNC cells may remain infectious and can be resuscitated within amoebae/lung macrophages [86,87] even after 30–60 min at 70 °C [86]. Indeed, if VBNC forms are part of the normal cell lifecycle, particular care is needed in assaying the efficacy of disinfection systems, i.e., not just relying on agar plate culture-based methods [88,89,90,91].
Given the enhanced cell densities and proximity of different biofilm members, along with stressors such as metal pipes and residual drinking water disinfectants, biofilms within engineered water systems are likely to be a hot-spot for antimicrobial resistance transfer [92] and on-going evolution of sparozoic viral pathogens associated with gene exchange within biofilm amoebae (e.g. [93]). Hence, overall there is a need to develop higher-resolution molecular knowledge to enhance our ability to model and identify risk periods that need to be managed within engineered water systems [52].

2.1.1. Legionellae, Non-Tuberculous Mycobacteria (NTM) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa

The documented cases of severe pneumonia (Legionnaires’ Disease) to the less reported milder illnesses associated with Pontiac Fever [94], as with various wound and respiratory non-tuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) infections [68], are likely to be severely underreported. For both of these pathogen groups, water exposures are thought to be the only pathway of concern, whereas person-to-person spread dominates for enteric pathogens. Nonetheless, hospitalization insurance claims from legionellae and NTM infections in the U.S. far exceed all other identified drinking water pathogens [95]. The next most important water-based pathogen identified was P. aeruginosa, mainly due to otitis media, which may have a water-association, or the less-impacting but clearly water-related folliculitis [69]. Of increasing recognition, however, are nosocomial issues with multi-drug resistant P. aeruginosa from healthcare water systems [8]. The focus of this sub-section is on L. pneumophila and NTM characteristics relevant to engineered water systems.
Most clinical studies still utilize culture-based methods, so as to obtain isolates for molecular characterization/“fingerprinting” and drug susceptibility testing. However, for environmental studies, quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) methods are clearly superior in obtaining positive detects for legionellae (72% by qPCR vs culture’s 34% from a review of papers over the last ten years) [96], with similar findings for NTM [97]. In part, this loss of culturability may be related to the formation of a cyst-like state of the infectious form of L. pneumophila [98], or simply the slower growth rate/poorer competitiveness on artificial media of target cells [99]. Resuscitation by co-culture growth within amoebae may assist in identifying infectious cells from the environment and allow subsequent cell typing, but is not particularly reliable. Subsequent questions then arise as to how to interpret positive qPCR, given dead and alive cells being detected, and that pre-treatment with propidium monoazide (PMA) or similar reagents before qPCR to identify cell-membrane damage is not always conclusive [90,100].
A critical realization is that while various legionellae may grow freely within engineered biofilms, strains that grow within free-living amoebae appear to have enhanced pathogenicity [18] and would allow for rapid development of the high cell densities thought necessary for infections via aerosolized water [16]. Other natural hosts for L. pneumophila may also include ciliates [101] and nematodes [102]. While NTM may also grow in association with various types of amoebae [103], they also clearly represent a major fraction of the total biofilm biomass in drinking water systems [45,47,104]. What is much less clear is how to identify the sub-fraction that maybe opportunistic human pathogens. One option has been to just focus on the Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC), which are more likely to contain human pathogenic strains [105,106]. Nonetheless, it is unclear what characteristics may identify pathogenic strains within the MAC.

3. Risk Assessment and Risk Management of Engineered Water Systems

3.1. Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment (QMRA)

To identify, prioritize, and aid in the management of hazardous pathogen events within engineered water systems, QMRA is emerging as a useful tool to address enteric pathogens, and is beginning to be used for sapronoses [107,108]. The fundamental steps in undertaking a QMRA are to identify the hazards (pathogens) relevant to your system, characterize human exposures (doses), apply relevant dose-response equations for the estimated doses/pathways, and then characterize the risks [109]. It is also important to document uncertainties and undertake at least some form of sensitivity analysis to identify key QMRA model parameters. As is described above, there are very large uncertainties in estimating concentrations of relevant saprozoic pathogens, not only due to a limited sub-set, if any can be cultured from environmental samples, but that current PCR estimates also include infectious and non-infectious members. Further, there are very limited dose-response studies for L. pneumophila [16] and P. aeruginosa [69], with no available NTM dose-response equation yet.
Therefore, risk assessments for saprozoic pathogens are probably most useful in comparing options based on estimated exposure concentrations, rather than disease risk estimates. Nonetheless, estimates of L. pneumophila densities to cause Legionnaires’ Disease from drinking waters are likely to be very high (some millions of cells per liter) [16], with epidemiologic data indicating lesser numbers related to Pontiac Fever (thousands of cells per liter) [93]. Hence, the general expectation is that several orders of magnitude higher doses are probably required for saprozoic pathogens compared to enteric pathogens via drinking water [110]; with the possible exception of Naegleria fowleri [30] and Helicobacter pylori (<1 cell per liter) [111] that may accumulate (unclear if any growth) in drinking water biofilms [112].
A further advantage of undertaking QMRAs is that it helps to identify the most critical data gaps for managing sapronoses. For example, it is highly uncertain what the water to aerosol partitioning coefficients are for legionellae [16] versus NTM [113,114], and what density of amoebal hosts may be necessary to reach the high legionellae estimates versus densities of NTM growing freely within biofilms (and how close to the exposure point) to be released into the bulk water?

3.2. Management of Sapronoses from Engineered Water Systems

Management of saprozoic pathogens starts with minimizing biofilm build-up within your engineered water system, which means minimizing bioavailable carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus, as well as eliminating stagnation zones, and for legionellae and Naegleria fowleri, maintaining a disinfectant residual and temperature control (below 20 °C or above 55 °C) [30,64,87]. The value of a disinfectant residual for management of NTM is likely to be more problematic, as the fraction of NTM within biofilms appears to increase with a disinfectant residual [45,47]. However, specific data on the selection of pathogenic NTM by a disinfectant residual is still largely absent. What is known is that freely suspended NTM cells may be >600 times more resistant to free chlorine than E. coli [115], and amoeba-resisting pathogens like Simkania negevensis are also more chlorine resistant than legionellae [63]. Also, VBNC and persister state cells within biofilms mean that once established, there will be recalcitrant contamination by saprozoic pathogens that effectively are not possible to remove without pipe replacement or full sterilization. Hence, many recommend point-of-use filters in healthcare settings and demonstrate efficacy [116,117], yet NTM are well known to also colonize these filters [118] so regular replacement is necessary.
In summary, there is growing recognition that an integrated biofilm pathogen management approach is probably required for long-term control. This could include minimizing biofilm nutrients, and developing conditions that select for a biofilm microbiome that is actively antagonistic to saprozoic pathogens—a probiotic approach [119]. Furthermore, such a probiotic approach may mean keeping a dynamic system, given the nature of pathogens like Legionella to adapt to killing its predators [120]. Monitoring the efficacy of such a control strategy may also rely on keeping watch of keystone community members. For example, increasing concentrations of Acanthamoeba spp. and Vermamoeba vermiformis trophozoites may signal conditions favorable to explosive growth of L. pneumophila [121].

4. Conclusions

There is still much to be understood before long-term, resilient management options are more common place to deal with what is probably the highest health burden pathogen group via urban water exposures in developed regions, i.e., water-based pathogens that cause sapronoses. Nonetheless, excellent progress has been made over the last decade in regions where water safety management protocols have specifically focused on key members, such as Legionella spp. [9,10,122,123]. Combining an understanding of microbial ecology, efficacy of engineering controls, and molecular monitoring approaches is finally progressing this much-needed field of public health management.

Acknowledgments

The author would like to acknowledge the excellent research undertaken by many students, postdocs, research fellows, and collaborators who have contributed to research into the ecology of saprozoic pathogens and their risk assessments; many of whom are cited within the reference list, but include, Michael Storey, Jonas Långmark, Jacquie Thomas, Susan Petterson, Helen (Lau) Buse, Jingrang Lu, Mary Schoen, Sébastien Faucher, David Roser, Scott Rice, Thor Axel Stenström, Gilbert Greub, Jean-François Loret, Randy Revetta, Vicente Gomez-Alvarez and Jorge Santo Domingo. This work was funded via Alberta Innovates Health Solutions via the author’s Translational Chair in Disease Prevention.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Snow, J. On the Mode of Communication of Cholera, 2nd ed.; much enlarged; John Churchill: London, UK, 1855. [Google Scholar]
  2. Pacini, F. Osservazioni microscopiche e deduzioni patologiche sul cholera asiatico (microscopic observations and pathological deductions on asiatic cholera). Gazz. Med. Ital. 1854, 4, 405–412. (In Italian) [Google Scholar]
  3. Koch, R. An address on cholera and its bacillus. Br. Med. J. 1884, 2, 453–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Black, M.; Fawcett, B. The Last Taboo. Opening the Door on the Global Sanitation Crisis; Earthscan Publications Ltd.: London, UK, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  5. Ashbolt, N.J. Microbial contamination of drinking water and human health from community water systems. Curr. Environ. Health Rep. 2015, 2, 95–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Falkinham, J.O., 3rd; Hilborn, E.D.; Arduino, M.J.; Pruden, A.; Edwards, M.A. Epidemiology and ecology of opportunistic premise plumbing pathogens: Legionella pneumophila, mycobacterium avium, and pseudomonas aeruginosa. Environ. Health Perspect. 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Proctor, C.R.; Hammes, F. Drinking water microbiology-from measurement to management. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 2015, 33, 87–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Bloomfield, S.; Exner, M.; Flemming, H.C.; Goroncy-Bermes, P.; Hartemann, P.; Heeg, P.; Ilschner, C.; Krämer, I.; Merkens, W.; Oltmanns, P.; et al. Lesser-known or hidden reservoirs of infection and implications for adequate prevention strategies: Where to look and what to look for. GMS Hyg. Infect. Control 2015. [CrossRef]
  9. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. (ASHRAE). Standard 188p Proposed New Standard 188, Prevention of Legionellosis Associated with Building Water Systems (Complete Draft for Full Review); American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. (ASHRAE): Atlanta, GA, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  10. Cunliffe, D.; Ashbolt, N.; D’Anglada, L.; Greiner, P.; Gupta, R.; Hearn, J.; Jayaratne, A.; Cheong, K.; O’Connor, N.; Purkiss, D.; et al. Water Safety in Distribution Systems, WHO/FWC/WSH/14.03; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  11. Hubálek, Z. Emerging human infectious diseases: Anthroponoses, zoonoses, and sapronoses. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2003, 9, 403–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Douterelo, I.; Boxall, J.B.; Deines, P.; Sekar, R.; Fish, K.E.; Biggs, C.A. Methodological approaches for studying the microbial ecology of drinking water distribution systems. Water Res. 2014, 65, 134–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US-EPA). Drinking water; national primary drinking water regulations; filtration, disinfection, turbidity, Giardia lamblia, viruses, Legionella, and heterotrophic bacteria. Fed. Regist. 1989, 54, 27485–27541. [Google Scholar]
  14. Loret, J.F.; Greub, G. Free-living amoebae: Biological by-passes in water treatment. Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health 2010, 213, 167–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Lu, J.; Struewing, I.; Yelton, S.; Ashbolt, N.J. Molecular survey of occurrence and quantity of Legionella spp., Mycobacterium spp., Pseudomonas aeruginosa and amoeba hosts in municipal drinking water storage tank sediments. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2015, 119, 278–288. [Google Scholar]
  16. Schoen, M.E.; Ashbolt, N.J. An in-premise model for Legionella exposure during showering events. Water Res. 2011, 45, 5826–5836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Vaerewijck, M.J.M.; Baré, J.; Lambrecht, E.; Sabbe, K.; Houf, K. Interactions of foodborne pathogens with free-living protozoa: Potential consequences for food safety. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2014, 13, 924–944. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Abu Khweek, A.; Fernandez Dávila, N.S.; Caution, K.; Akhter, A.; Abdulrahman, B.A.; Tazi, M.; Hassan, H.; Novotny, L.A.; Bakaletz, L.O.; Amer, A.O. Biofilm-derived Legionella pneumophila evades the innate immune response in macrophages. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 2013, 3, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Kendall, B.A.; Winthrop, K.L. Update on the epidemiology of pulmonary nontuberculous mycobacterial infections. Semin. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2013, 34, 87–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Shomaker, T.S.; Green, E.M.; Yandow, S.M. Perspective: One health: A compelling convergence. Acad. Med. 2013, 88, 49–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Stewart, P.S. Biophysics of biofilm infection. Pathog. Dis. 2014, 70, 212–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Wu, H.; Zhang, J.; Mi, Z.; Xie, S.; Chen, C.; Zhang, X. Biofilm bacterial communities in urban drinking water distribution systems transporting waters with different purification strategies. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2015, 99, 1947–1955. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Jin, J.; Wu, G.; Guan, Y. Effect of bacterial communities on the formation of cast iron corrosion tubercles in reclaimed water. Water Res. 2015, 71, 207–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Van Lieverloo, J.H.M.; van der Kooij, D.; Hoogenboezem, W. Invertebrates and protozoa (free-living) in drinking water distribution systems. In Encylopedia of Environmental Microbiology; Bitton, G., Ed.; John Wiley & Sons: New York, NY, USA, 2002; pp. 1718–1733. [Google Scholar]
  25. Ingerson-Mahar, M.; Reid, A. Microbes in Pipes: The Microbiology of the Water Distribution System. A Report on An Amercian Academy of Microbiology Colloquium April 2012, Boulder, Colorado; American Academy of Microbiology: Washington, DC, USA, 2013; p. 28. [Google Scholar]
  26. Shen, Y.; Monroy, G.L.; Derlon, N.; Janjaroen, D.; Huang, C.; Morgenroth, E.; Boppart, S.A.; Ashbolt, N.J.; Liu, W.T.; Nguyen, T.H. Role of biofilm roughness and hydrodynamic conditions in legionella pneumophila adhesion to and detachment from simulated drinking water biofilms. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 4274–4282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Hwang, G.; Liang, J.; Kang, S.; Tong, M.; Liu, Y. The role of conditioning film formation in Pseudomonas aeruginosa PAO1 adhesion to inert surfaces in aquatic environments. Biochem. Eng. J. 2013, 76, 90–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Lautenschlager, K.; Hwang, C.; Ling, F.; Liu, W.T.; Boon, N.; Koster, O.; Egli, T.; Hammes, F. Abundance and composition of indigenous bacterial communities in a multi-step biofiltration-based drinking water treatment plant. Water Res. 2014, 62, 40–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Buse, H.Y.; Lu, J.; Lu, X.; Mou, X.; Ashbolt, N.J. Microbial diversities (16S and 18S rRNA gene pyrosequencing) and environmental pathogens within drinking water biofilms grown on the common premise plumbing materials unplasticized polyvinylchloride and copper. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 2014, 88, 280–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Cope, J.R.; Ratard, R.C.; Hill, V.R.; Sokol, T.; Causey, J.J.; Yoder, J.S.; Mirani, G.; Mull, B.; Mukerjee, K.A.; Narayanan, J.; et al. The first association of a primary amebic meningoencephalitis death with culturable Naegleria fowleri in tap water from a us treated public drinking water system. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2015, 60, e36–e42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Lin, Y.E.; Stout, J.E.; Yu, V.L. Controlling Legionella in hospital drinking water: An evidence-based review of disinfection methods. Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 2011, 32, 166–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Liu, G.; Bakker, G.L.; Li, S.; Vreeburg, J.H.; Verberk, J.Q.; Medema, G.J.; Liu, W.T.; van Dijk, J.C. Pyrosequencing reveals bacterial communities in unchlorinated drinking water distribution system: An integral study of bulk water, suspended solids, loose deposits, and pipe wall biofilm. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2014, 48, 5467–5476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Inkinen, J.; Kaunisto, T.; Pursiainen, A.; Miettinen, I.T.; Kusnetsov, J.; Keinanen-Toivola, M.M.; Riihinen, K. Drinking water quality and formation of biofilms in an office building during its first year of operation, a full scale study. Water Res. 2014, 49, 83–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Lehtola, M.J.; Juhna, T.; Miettinen, I.T.; Vartiainen, T.; Martikainen, P.J. Formation of biofilms in drinking water distribution networks, a case study in two cities in Finland and Latvia. J. Ind. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2004, 31, 489–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Park, S.-K.; Hu, J.Y. Interaction between phosphorus and biodegradable organic carbon on drinking water biofilm subject to chlorination. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2010, 108, 2077–2087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Lu, J.; Buse, H.; Gomez-Alvarez, V.; Struewing, I.; Santo Domingo, J.; Ashbolt, N.J. Impact of drinking water conditions and copper materials on downstream biofilm microbial communities and Legionella pneumophila colonization. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2014, 117, 905–918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Ramalingam, B.; Sekar, R.; Boxall, J.B.; Biggs, C.A. Aggregation and biofilm formation of bacteria isolated from domestic drinking water. Water Sci. Technol. Water Supply 2013, 13, 1016–1023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Basson, A.; Flemming, L.A.; Chenia, H.Y. Evaluation of adherence, hydrophobicity, aggregation, and biofilm development of Flavobacterium johnsoniae-like isolates. Microb. Ecol. 2008, 55, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Korea, C.G.; Badouraly, R.; Prevost, M.C.; Ghigo, J.M.; Beloin, C. Escherichia coli K-12 possesses multiple cryptic but functional chaperone-usher fimbriae with distinct surface specificities. Environ. Microbiol. 2010, 12, 1957–1977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Abdel-Nour, M.; Duncan, C.; Prashar, A.; Rao, C.; Ginevra, C.; Jarraud, S.; Low, D.E.; Guyard, C.; Ensminger, A.W.; Terebiznik, M.R. The Legionella pneumophila collagen-like protein mediates sedimentation, autoaggregation, and pathogen-phagocyte interactions. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2014, 80, 1441–1454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Lau, H.Y.; Ashbolt, N.J. The role of biofilms and protozoa in Legionella pathogenesis: Implications for drinking water. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2009, 107, 368–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Gomes, I.B.; Simões, M.; Simões, L.C. An overview on the reactors to study drinking water biofilms. Water Res. 2014, 62, 63–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  43. Deines, P.; Sekar, R.; Husband, P.S.; Boxall, J.B.; Osborn, A.M.; Biggs, C.A. A new coupon design for simultaneous analysis of in situ microbial biofilm formation and community structure in drinking water distribution systems. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2010, 87, 749–756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Neu, T.R.; Lawrence, J.R. Advanced techniques for in situ analysis of the biofilm matrix (structure, composition, dynamics) by means of laser scanning microscopy. Methods Mol. Biol. 2014, 1147, 43–64. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  45. Revetta, R.P.; Gomez-Alvarez, V.; Gerke, T.L.; Santo Domingo, J.W.; Ashbolt, N.J. Changes in microbial community structure associated with monochloramine-treated drinking water biofilms. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 2013, 86, 404–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Baron, J.L.; Vikram, A.; Duda, S.; Stout, J.E.; Bibby, K. Shift in the microbial ecology of a hospital hot water system following the introduction of an on-site monochloramine disinfection system. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e102679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Gomez-Alvarez, V.; Humrighouse, B.W.; Revetta, R.P.; Santo Domingo, J.W. Bacterial composition in a metropolitan drinking water distribution system utilizing different source waters. J. Water Health 2015, 13, 140–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Liu, R.; Zhu, J.; Yu, Z.; Joshi, D.; Zhang, H.; Lin, W.; Yang, M. Molecular analysis of long-term biofilm formation on pvc and cast iron surfaces in drinking water distribution system. J. Environ. Sci. China 2014, 26, 865–874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Buse, H.Y.; Lu, J.; Struewing, I.T.; Ashbolt, N.J. Preferential colonization and release of Legionella pneumophila from mature drinking water biofilms grown on copper versus unplasticized polyvinylchloride coupons. Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health 2014, 217, 219–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Gião, M.S.; Wilks, S.A.; Keevil, C.W. Influence of copper surfaces on biofilm formation by Legionella pneumophila in potable water. Biometals 2015, 28, 329–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Sekar, R.; Deines, P.; Machell, J.; Osborn, A.M.; Biggs, C.A.; Boxall, J.B. Bacterial water quality and network hydraulic characteristics: A field study of a small, looped water distribution system using culture-independent molecular methods. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2012, 112, 1220–1234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Pinto, A.J.; Schroeder, J.; Lunn, M.; Sloan, W.; Raskin, L. Spatial-temporal survey and occupancy-abundance modeling to predict bacterial community dynamics in the drinking water microbiome. mBio 2014, 5, e01135–e01114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Lu, J.; Struewing, I.; Buse, H.Y.; Kou, J.; Shuman, H.A.; Faucher, S.P.; Ashbolt, N.J. Legionella pneumophila transcriptional response following exposure to CuO nanoparticles. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2013, 79, 2713–2720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Aliaga Goltsman, D.S.; Comolli, L.R.; Thomas, B.C.; Banfield, J.F. Community transcriptomics reveals unexpected high microbial diversity in acidophilic biofilm communities. ISME J. 2015, 9, 1014–1023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Landstorfer, R.; Simon, S.; Schober, S.; Keim, D.; Scherer, S.; Neuhaus, K. Comparison of strand-specific transcriptomes of enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli O157:H7 EDL933 (EHEC) under eleven different environmental conditions including radish sprouts and cattle feces. BMC Genomics 2014, 15, 353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Weigel, K.M.; Jones, K.L.; Do, J.S.; Melton Witt, J.; Chung, J.H.; Valcke, C.; Cangelosi, G.A. Molecular viability testing of bacterial pathogens from a complex human sample matrix. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e54886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Kühn, I.; Allestam, G.; Huys, G.; Janssen, P.; Kersters, K.; Krovacek, K.; Stenström, T.-A. Diversity, persistence, and virulence of Aeromonas strains isolated from drinking water distribution systems in Sweden. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1997, 63, 2708–2715. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  58. Borchardt, M.A. Aeromonas isolates from human diarrheic stool and groundwater compared by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2003, 9, 224–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Van der Kooij, D. Nutritional requirements of aeromonads and their multiplication in drinking water. Experientia 1991, 47, 444–446. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  60. Codony, F.; Fittipaldi, M.; Lopez, E.; Morato, J.; Agusti, G. Well water as a possible source of Waddlia chondrophila infections. Microbes Environ. 2012, 27, 529–532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  61. Corsaro, D.; Feroldi, V.; Saucedo, G.; Ribas, F.; Loret, J.F.; Greub, G. Novel Chlamydiales strains isolated from a water treatment plant. Environ. Microbiol. 2009, 11, 188–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Perez, L.M.; Codony, F.; Rios, K.; Penuela, G.; Adrados, B.; Fittipaldi, M.; de Dios, G.; Morato, J. Searching Simkania negevensis in environmental waters. Folia Microbiol. Praha 2012, 57, 11–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Donati, M.; Cremonini, E.; di Francesco, A.; Dallolio, L.; Biondi, R.; Muthusamy, R.; Leoni, E. Prevalence of Simkania negevensis in chlorinated water from spa swimming pools and domestic supplies. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2015, 118, 1076–1082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Buse, H.Y.; Schoen, M.E.; Ashbolt, N.J. Legionellae in engineered systems and use of quantitative microbial risk assessment to predict exposure. Water Res. 2012, 46, 921–933. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Wingender, J.; Flemming, H.C. Biofilms in drinking water and their role as reservoir for pathogens. Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health 2011, 214, 417–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Whiley, H.; Keegan, A.; Fallowfield, H.; Bentham, R. The presence of opportunistic pathogens, Legionella spp., L. pneumophila and Mycobacterium avium complex, in south australian reuse water distribution pipelines. J. Water Health 2014, 13, 553–561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Behr, M.A.; Falkinham, J.O., 3rd. Molecular epidemiology of nontuberculous mycobacteria. Future Microbiol. 2009, 4, 1009–1020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Brode, S.K.; Daley, C.L.; Marras, T.K. The epidemiologic relationship between tuberculosis and non-tuberculous mycobacterial disease: A systematic review. Int. J. Tuberc. Lung Dis. 2014, 18, 1370–1377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Roser, D.J.; van Den Akker, B.; Boase, S.; Haas, C.N.; Ashbolt, N.J.; Rice, S.A. Dose-response algorithms for water-borne Pseudomonas aeruginosa folliculitis. Epidemiol. Infect. 2015, 143, 1524–1537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Makovcova, J.; Slany, M.; Babak, V.; Slana, I.; Kralik, P. The water environment as a source of potentially pathogenic mycobacteria. J. Water Health 2014, 12, 254–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. Exner, M.; Kramer, A.; Lajoie, L.; Gebel, J.; Engelhart, S.; Hartemann, P. Prevention and control of health care-associated waterborne infections in health care facilities. Am. J. Infect. Control 2005, 33, S26–S40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Guyot, A.; Turton, J.F.; Garner, D. Outbreak of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia on an intensive care unit. J. Hosp. Infect. 2013, 85, 303–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Pereira, V.J.; Marques, R.; Marques, M.; Benoliel, M.J.; Barreto Crespo, M.T. Free chlorine inactivation of fungi in drinking water sources. Water Res. 2013, 47, 517–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Van der Wielen, P.W.; van der Kooij, D. Nontuberculous mycobacteria, fungi, and opportunistic pathogens in unchlorinated drinking water in the netherlands. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2013, 79, 825–834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Heinrichs, G.; Hubner, I.; Schmidt, C.K.; de Hoog, G.S.; Haase, G. Analysis of black fungal biofilms occurring at domestic water taps. I: Compositional analysis using tag-encoded FLX amplicon pyrosequencing. Mycopathologia 2013, 175, 387–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Thomas, J.M.; Ashbolt, N.J. Do free-living amoebae in treated drinking water systems present an emerging health risk? Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45, 860–869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Thomas, V.; McDonnel, G.; Denyer, S.P.; Maillard, J.-Y. Freeliving amoebae and their intracellular pathogenic microorganisms: Risk for water quality. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 2010, 34, 231–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Baquero, R.A.; Reyes-Batlle, M.; Nicola, G.G.; Martin-Navarro, C.M.; Lopez-Arencibia, A.; Guillermo Esteban, J.; Valladares, B.; Martinez-Carretero, E.; Pinero, J.E.; Lorenzo-Morales, J. Presence of potentially pathogenic free-living amoebae strains from well water samples in guinea-bissau. Pathog. Glob. Health 2014, 108, 206–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Magnet, A.; Fenoy, S.; Galván, A.L.; Izquierdo, F.; Rueda, C.; Fernandez Vadillo, C.; del Aguila, C. A year long study of the presence of free living amoeba in spain. Water Res. 2013, 47, 6966–6972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  80. Boratto, P.V.; Dornas, F.P.; Andrade, K.R.; Rodrigues, R.; Peixoto, F.; Silva, L.C.; la Scola, B.; Costa, A.O.; de Almeida, G.M.; Kroon, E.G.; et al. Amoebas as mimivirus bunkers: Increased resistance to uv light, heat and chemical biocides when viruses are carried by amoeba hosts. Arch. Virol. 2014, 159, 1039–1043. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  81. Colson, P.; Fancello, L.; Gimenez, G.; Armougom, F.; Desnues, C.; Fournous, G.; Yoosuf, N.; Million, M.; la Scola, B.; Raoult, D. Evidence of the megavirome in humans. J. Clin. Virol. 2013, 57, 191–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Saadi, H.; Reteno, D.G.; Colson, P.; Aherfi, S.; Minodier, P.; Pagnier, I.; Raoult, D.; la Scola, B. Shan virus: A new mimivirus isolated from the stool of a tunisian patient with pneumonia. Intervirology 2013, 56, 424–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Li, L.; Mendis, N.; Trigui, H.; Oliver, J.D.; Faucher, S.P. The importance of the viable but non-culturable state in human bacterial pathogens. Front. Microbiol. 2014, 5, 258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Su, X.; Chen, X.; Hu, J.; Shen, C.; Ding, L. Exploring the potential environmental functions of viable but non-culturable bacteria. World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2013, 29, 2213–2218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Pinto, D.; Santos, M.A.; Chambel, L. Thirty years of viable but nonculturable state research: Unsolved molecular mechanisms. Crit. Rev. Microbiol. 2013, 41, 61–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Epalle, T.; Girardot, F.; Allegra, S.; Maurice-Blanc, C.; Garraud, O.; Riffard, S. Viable but not culturable forms of Legionella pneumophila generated after heat shock treatment are infectious for macrophage-like and alveolar epithelial cells after resuscitation on Acanthamoeba polyphaga. Microb. Ecol. 2015, 69, 215–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. Bédard, E.; Fey, S.; Charron, D.; Laferrière, C.; Cantin, P.; Dolcé, P.; Laferriere, C.; Déziel, E.; Prévost, M. Temperature diagnostic to identify high risk areas and optimize Legionella pneumophila surveillance in hot water distribution systems. Water Res. 2015, 71, 244–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  88. Manina, G.; McKinney, J.D. A single-cell perspective on non-growing but metabolically active (ngma) bacteria. Curr. Top. Microbiol. Immunol. 2013, 374, 135–161. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  89. Gião, M.S.; Azevedo, N.F.; Wilks, S.A.; Vieira, M.J.; Keevil, C.W. Interaction of Legionella pneumophila and Helicobacter pylori with bacterial species isolated from drinking water biofilms. BMC Microbiol. 2011, 11, 57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  90. Chiao, T.H.; Clancy, T.M.; Pinto, A.; Xi, C.; Raskin, L. Differential resistance of drinking water bacterial populations to monochloramine disinfection. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2014, 48, 4038–4047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  91. Fittipaldi, M.; Codony, F.; Adrados, B.; Camper, A.K.; Morató, J. Viable real-time pcr in environmental samples: Can all data be interpreted directly? Microb. Ecol. 2011, 61, 7–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  92. Ashbolt, N.J.; Amézquita, A.; Backhaus, T.; Borriello, S.P.; Brandt, K.; Collignon, P.; Coors, A.; Finley, R.; Gaze, W.H.; Heberer, T.; et al. Human health risk assessment (HHRA) for environmental development and transfer of antibiotic resistance. Environ. Health Perspect. 2013, 121, 993–1001. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  93. Moliner, C.; Fournier, P.E.; Raoult, D. Genome analysis of microorganisms living in amoebae reveals a melting pot of evolution. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 2010, 34, 281–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Tossa, P.; Deloge-Abarkan, M.; Zmirou-Navier, D.; Hartemann, P.; Mathieu, L. Pontiac fever: An operational definition for epidemiological studies. BMC Public Health 2006, 6, 112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Collier, S.A.; Stockman, L.J.; Hicks, L.A.; Garrison, L.E.; Zhou, F.J.; Beach, M.J. Direct healthcare costs of selected diseases primarily or partially transmitted by water. Epidemiol. Infect. 2012, 140, 2003–2013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  96. Whiley, H.; Taylor, M. Legionella detection by culture and qPCR: Comparing apples and oranges. Crit. Rev. Microbiol. 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Whiley, H.; Keegan, A.; Fallowfield, H.; Bentham, R. Detection of Legionella, L. neumophila and Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) along potable water distribution pipelines. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2014, 11, 7393–7405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  98. Pitre, C.A.; Tanner, J.R.; Patel, P.; Brassinga, A.K. Regulatory control of temporally expressed integration host factor (IHF) in Legionella pneumophila. Microbiology 2013, 159, 475–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  99. Hussein, Z.; Landt, O.; Wirths, B.; Wellinghausen, N. Detection of non-tuberculous mycobacteria in hospital water by culture and molecular methods. Int. J. Med. Microbiol. 2009, 299, 281–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  100. Yáñez, M.A.; Nocker, A.; Soria-Soria, E.; Múrtula, R.; Martínez, L.; Catalán, V. Quantification of viable Legionella pneumophila cells using propidium monoazide combined with quantitative pcr. J. Microbiol. Methods 2011, 85, 124–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  101. Berk, S.G.; Garduño, R.A. The Tetrahymena and Acanthamoeba model systems. Methods Mol. Biol. 2013, 954, 393–416. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  102. Brassinga, A.K.; Kinchen, J.M.; Cupp, M.E.; Day, S.R.; Hoffman, P.S.; Sifri, C.D. Caenorhabditis is a metazoan host for Legionella. Cell. Microbiol. 2010, 12, 343–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  103. Delafont, V.; Mougari, F.; Cambau, E.; Joyeux, M.; Bouchon, D.; Hechard, Y.; Moulin, L. First evidence of amoebae-mycobacteria association in drinking water network. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2014, 48, 11872–11882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  104. Feazel, L.M.; Baumgartner, L.K.; Peterson, K.L.; Frank, D.N.; Harris, J.K.; Pace, N.R. Opportunistic pathogens enriched in showerhead biofilms. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2009, 106, 16393–16399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  105. Falkinham, J.O., 3rd. Hospital water filters as a source of Mycobacterium avium complex. J. Med. Microbiol. 2010, 59, 1198–1202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  106. Falkinham, J.O.I.; Iseman, M.D.; de Haas, P.; van Soolingen, D. Mycobacterium avium in a shower linked to pulmonary disease. J. Water Health 2008, 6, 209–213. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  107. Sales-Ortells, H.; Medema, G. Screening-level microbial risk assessment of urban water locations: A tool for prioritization. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2014, 48, 9780–9789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  108. Schoen, M.E.; Xue, X.; Hawkins, T.R.; Ashbolt, N.J. Comparative human health risk analysis of coastal community water and waste service options. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2014, 48, 9728–9736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  109. US-EPA; USDA/FSIS. Microbial Risk Assessment Guideline: Pathogenic Microorganisms with Focus on Food and Water; EPA/100/J-12/001, USDA/FSIS/2012–001; Prepared by the interagency microbiological risk assessment guideline workgroup; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); U.S. Department of Agriculture/Food Safety and Inspection Service (USDA/FSIS): Washington, DC, USA, 2012.
  110. Teunis, P.F.; Xu, M.; Fleming, K.K.; Yang, J.; Moe, C.L.; LeChevallier, M.W. Enteric virus infection risk from intrusion of sewage into a drinking water distribution network. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2010, 44, 8561–8566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  111. Ryan, M.; Hamilton, K.; Hamilton, M.; Haas, C.N. Evaluating the potential for a Helicobacter pylori drinking water guideline. Risk Anal. 2014, 34, 1651–1662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  112. Gião, M.S.; Azevedo, N.F.; Wilks, S.A.; Vieira, M.J.; Keevil, C.W. Persistence of Helicobacter pylori in heterotrophic drinking-water biofilms. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2008, 74, 5898–5904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  113. Angenent, L.T.; Kelley, S.T.; St Amand, A.; Pace, N.R.; Hernandez, M.T. Molecular identification of potential pathogens in water and air of a hospital therapy pool. PNAS 2005, 102, 4860–4865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  114. Parker, B.C.; Ford, M.A.; Gruft, H.; Falkinham, J.O., 3rd. Epidemiology of infection by nontuberculous mycobacteria. IV. Preferential aerosolization of Mycobacterium intracellulare from natural waters. Am. Rev. Respir. Dis. 1983, 128, 652–656. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  115. Lee, E.S.; Yoon, T.H.; Lee, M.Y.; Han, S.H.; Ka, J.O. Inactivation of environmental mycobacteria by free chlorine and uv. Water Res. 2010, 44, 1329–1334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Sheffer, P.J.; Stout, J.E.; Wagener, M.M.; Muder, R.R. Efficacy of new point-of-use water filter for preventing exposure to Legionella and waterborne bacteria. Am. J. Infect. Control 2005, 33, S20–S25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  117. Barna, Z.; Antmann, K.; Pászti, J.; Bánfi, R.; Kádár, M.; Szax, A.; Németh, M.; Szegö, E.; Vargha, M. Infection control by point-of-use water filtration in an intensive care unit—A Hungarian case study. J. Water Health 2014, 12, 858–867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  118. Holinger, E.P.; Ross, K.A.; Robertson, C.E.; Stevens, M.J.; Harris, J.K.; Pace, N.R. Molecular analysis of point-of-use municipal drinking water microbiology. Water Res. 2014, 49, 225–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  119. Wang, H.; Edwards, M.A.; Falkinham, J.O., 3rd; Pruden, A. Probiotic approach to pathogen control in premise plumbing systems? A review. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2013, 47, 10117–10128. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  120. Amaro, F.; Wang, W.; Gilbert, J.A.; Roger Anderson, O.; Shuman, H.A. Diverse protist grazers select for virulence-related traits in Legionella. ISME J. 2015. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  121. Codony, F.; Pérez, L.M.; Adrados, B.; Agustí, G.; Fittipaldi, M.; Morató, J. Amoeba-related health risk in drinking water systems: Could monitoring of amoebae be a complementary approach to current quality control strategies? Future Microbiol. 2012, 7, 25–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  122. South Australian Dept. of Health. Control of Legionella in Manufactured Water Systems in South Australia. SA Health: Adelaide, Australia, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  123. Health and Safety Executive (HSE). Legionnaires’ Disease. The Control of Legionella Bacteria in Water Systems. Approved Code of Practice and Guidance. Health and Safety Executive: London, UK, 2013. [Google Scholar]

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Ashbolt, N.J. Environmental (Saprozoic) Pathogens of Engineered Water Systems: Understanding Their Ecology for Risk Assessment and Management. Pathogens 2015, 4, 390-405. https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens4020390

AMA Style

Ashbolt NJ. Environmental (Saprozoic) Pathogens of Engineered Water Systems: Understanding Their Ecology for Risk Assessment and Management. Pathogens. 2015; 4(2):390-405. https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens4020390

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ashbolt, Nicholas J. 2015. "Environmental (Saprozoic) Pathogens of Engineered Water Systems: Understanding Their Ecology for Risk Assessment and Management" Pathogens 4, no. 2: 390-405. https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens4020390

APA Style

Ashbolt, N. J. (2015). Environmental (Saprozoic) Pathogens of Engineered Water Systems: Understanding Their Ecology for Risk Assessment and Management. Pathogens, 4(2), 390-405. https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens4020390

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop