available for download.
Transcription
available for download.
Digging into human impacts at beaches Elizabeth Halliday, Ph.D. Marine Science Faculty, Coastal Studies for Girls [email protected] Coastal Studies for Girls Freeport, ME Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Dr. Rebecca Gast’s Microbial Ecology Lab Viruses Norovirus Bacteria Salmonella Campylobacter Protists Giardia Cryptosporidia Health consequences: annually $300 MILLION Ralston et al. 2011 4 Fecal Indicator Bacteria (FIB) are monitored at beaches to protect bathers from pathogens • • • Ken Kostel, WHOI FIB present in human and animal feces More FIB in water = more bather illness When bacteria exceed the water quality standard, warning issued and water tested again – Enterococcus is measured at marine beaches, limited to 104 Colony Forming Units (CFU)/100mL 5 Limited sampling and the time lag prevents realtime protection of bather health The concentration of fecal indicator in the water yesterday is not necessarily representative of the concentration today. Sunday Monday Tuesday Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Site 5 6 Evidence from fresh and marine beaches that fecal indicator bacteria persist in the environment – Old assumption: fecal indicator bacteria are representative of recent contamination events – First epidemiological studies suggest increased interaction with sands leads to increased outcomes of illness Yamahara et al., 2007 7 Halliday and Gast, 2010 Environmental Science and Technology Stormwater: ENT in beach sands and waters peak differently Wells, ME Five day consecutive time series monitoring waters in the harbor and barrier beaches begins July 23 2009 On second day (July 24), 63mm rainfall in ten hours preceding sample CFU in sand and water at Wells, ME water wet sand dry sand Provincetown Harbor, MA 11 History of weekly sampling at Provincetown by Barnstable County Health Department shows that: 2-3 closures every summer 58% wet weather (stormwater) 41% dry weather (unknown) 12 Sampling strategy • Day-to-day monitoring – 12 days for preliminary data in 2009, 33 days over 11 weeks in 2010 – Sampled Sunday, Monday and Tuesday at 8am • Collect water, wet sand, dry sand – Water at mid-calf depth – Wet sand at water line – Dry sand at high tide line (spatially fixed location) • Collected environmental data from water: salinity, temperature, DO, turbidity • Autonomous data loggers collecting wind speed and direction, air temperature, relative humidity, solar insolation • Culture and qPCR methods used to measure Enterococcus 13 2009 and 2010: Case studies in wet and dry weather • Temperature – Air (July) • 2009 avg 20°C • 2010 avg 23.4°C Water Temperature, 2010 – Water (beginning July) • 2009 was <18°C • 2010 was already 22°C • Precipitation (July) • 2009: 12.7 cm • 2010: 4cm June August 14 Distribution of Enterococcus in July at Provincetown, MA water wet sand dry sand 15 ENT abundance increases across exposed intertidal sands Sand Moisture Enterococcus 16 ENT log10(CFU/100ml or 100g) Variation with Tidal Range water wet sand Neap Spring Neap Spring dry sand 4 3 2 1 0 Neap Spring Neap Spring Significant differences in water ENT (p=0.02) and in dry sand ENT (p<0.001) between spring and neap 17 Next step: can a combination of environmental variables be used to describe Enterococcus abundance at the beach? 18 Variables: • Approach: Multiple Linear Regression – Individual regression models developed for sand and water ENT – Offer all environmental variables as potential predictors, use step-wise variable selection – Select combination of independent environmental variables to maximize adjusted R2 – Control for multicollinearity • Variance Inflationary Factors <2 Water temperature Dissolved Oxygen Salinity Turbidity Moisture content of sand Temperature of sand Tidal range Water level Ebb/flood Precip in last hr/24h/48h Solar insolation Air temperature Relative Humidity Wind direction Wind speed Gust speed 24h avg, 4h avg, time of sample 19 MLR: culturable ENT in dry sand • Variation in daily average ENT in dry sand described by : – Tidal Range (strongly positively correlated to moisture content) – Average solar insolation (strongly negatively correlated to relative humidity) =0.66 RR22=0.66 20 MLR: culturable ENT in water • Variation of daily average ENT in water described by: – Water temperature – Water level – 24h avg wind speed R2=0.62 – Note: alternative regression based on turbidity alone also strong (R2= 0.54) 21 Variability of ENT over tidal cycle Ebb High Low Ebb High Flood Low Flood Dry Sand Wet Sand Ebb High Flood Low Water 22 Same pattern with water turbidity 1.8 1.6 Average NTU 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 4 3 2 1 5 6 1 23 Logistic regression: predict exceedances from tidal velocity • Predictor: tidal velocity (rate of change in water level hour before sampling) – Categorical variable, binned at intervals of 0.5ft/hr • Response: Sample exceeds 104CFU/100mL? (Y/N) • R2 = 0.88 (p<0.001) – When velocity is <0.5ft/hr, exceedance probability = 0.08 – When velocity is >2.0 ft/hr, exceedance probability = 0.55 24 Beyond Enterococcus: total community pyrosequencing (Halliday et al. 2014, PLOS One) • Deep sequencing of bacteria DNA samples Sand sample Extract total DNA Short, unique sequences Library-based ID of bacteria Community composition ATCGCT ATCGCT closed clean – Elucidate similarities and differences among total community, fecal bacteria, and potential pathogens – Compare profiles from environmental samples with sewage samples 25 Sequencing Samples – Three days (9 composite samples) from Avalon, CA, a consistent “beach bum” with frequent water quality violations – Five days (15 samples) from Provincetown – Generated 742,747 sequence tags taxonomically identified to bacterial phyla or beyond 26 Bacterial Community Diversity: significantly lower at site with more violations Examining differences in communities • Nonmetric Multidimensional Scaling: distance between points represents similarity • Similarity based on sample type: the bacterial communities in sand are more similar to communities in sand at different locations than to bacterial communities in the local water. 28 Alternative fecal indicators McLellan et al. (2010) identified bacteria within the orders Bacteroidales, Clostridiales and Bifidobacteriales that are abundant in human feces, sewage influent and effluent, and detectable in surface waters (lake and riverine) Extracted sequences identified to these orders from our data, used ANOSIM to test differences between groups When grouped by location, groups were significantly different from one another (Global R=0.545 (p=0.001)) When grouped by sample type, the global R was small but significant (Global R=0.298 (p=0.001)) 29 Summary: • Sand likely host “naturalized” FIB populations, and can be a source of FIB to local waters. • Small variations in moisture content important to enterococci abundance in dry sand • Probability of exceedance events related to tidal cycle • Widespread availability of environmental parameters highlights potential to develop predictive models • Fecal Indicators are only part of the story… 30 Acknowledgements • Maine Healthy Beaches and Keri Kaczor: invitation to speak, food for thought • WHOI Academic Programs Office, WHOI Coastal Ocean Institute, WHOI Ocean Venture Fund WHOI Center for Ocean and Human Health (NSF OCE-0430724, NIEHS P50ES012742) • • Collaborators – Dave Ralston, WHOI AOP&E – Linda Amaral-Zettler and Mitch Sogin (MBL), Sandra McLellan (UWM) • The Southern California Coastal Water Research Program • • • John Griffith For their assistance at the Wells Estuarine Research Reserve: Michelle Dionne, Jeremy Miller, Meri Ratzel and Cayce Dalton Provincetown Center for Coastal Studies Amy Costa, Cape Cod Bay Monitoring Program Barnstable County Health Department George Heufelder, Bethany Sadlowski 31 Questions? [email protected]