Saddleback Journal of Biology - Saddleback College
Saddleback Journal of Biology - Saddleback College
Saddleback Journal of Biology - Saddleback College
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Fall 2009 <strong>Biology</strong> 3B Paper<br />
are applied too lavishly. Some <strong>of</strong> these chemicals are<br />
biodegradable and quickly decay into harmless or less<br />
harmful forms, while others are non-biodegradable and<br />
remain dangerous for a long time.<br />
When animals consume plants that have been<br />
treated with certain non-biodegradable chemicals, such<br />
as chlordane and dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane<br />
(DDT), these chemicals are absorbed into the tissues or<br />
organs <strong>of</strong> the animals. When other animals ingest the<br />
contaminated animals, the chemicals are passed up the<br />
food chain. The concentration <strong>of</strong> the pollutant<br />
accumulates at each succeeding level <strong>of</strong> the food web.<br />
This process is called biomagnification or<br />
bioaccumulation (Hart 2008).<br />
What seems to be the most talked about health<br />
threat today is a pathogen that is water borne and also<br />
lies within several <strong>of</strong> our food items known as E. coli.<br />
E. coli, is a common type <strong>of</strong> bacteria that can get into<br />
foods such as beef and vegetables. If the water that<br />
people or animals and plants are exposed to contains<br />
any human waste, it can carry the E. coli bacteria.<br />
Someone who has E. coli infection may have these<br />
symptoms: bad stomach cramps and belly pain,<br />
vomiting, diarrhea, sometimes with blood in it. One<br />
strain <strong>of</strong> E. coli was found in fresh spinach in 2006 and<br />
some fast-food hamburgers in 1993 (Nichols 2008).<br />
Beef can contain E. coli because the bacteria <strong>of</strong>ten<br />
infect cattle. It can be in meat that comes from cattle<br />
and it's also in their feces. This can occur if the manure<br />
is used for fertilizer (a common practice to help crops<br />
grow) or if water contaminated with E. coli is used to<br />
irrigate the crops.<br />
Investigators decided to test the water quality<br />
at the popular beach in Southern California named<br />
Doheny State Beach. A total <strong>of</strong> thirty sample bottles <strong>of</strong><br />
water were collected from the coast. Ten were<br />
collected from 100 meters south <strong>of</strong> Salt Creek, which<br />
runs directly into the ocean water at the beach, then ten<br />
more were taken from the direct line <strong>of</strong> the creek to the<br />
ocean, and another ten were taken from 100 meters<br />
north <strong>of</strong> the creek. Investigators hypothesized that there<br />
would be a great difference in fomenters and gas<br />
producers between the locations <strong>of</strong> the samples taken.<br />
E. coli, which is found in large numbers in the feces <strong>of</strong><br />
all animals, lives longer in water than most intestinal<br />
pathogens do. Therefore, if no E. coli are present, there<br />
should be no intestinal pathogens present in the water<br />
sample. This is why testing for coliform organisms are<br />
performed as a daily ritual by water departments and<br />
waste-water (sewage) treatment plants. It is regularly<br />
tested for in coastal sea water samples, as well as<br />
run<strong>of</strong>f water. The first bacterial test is a screening test<br />
to sample water for the presence <strong>of</strong> coliform<br />
organisms. A series <strong>of</strong> lactose fermentation tubes are<br />
inoculated with the water sample. If the presumptive<br />
test is negative, no further testing is performed, and the<br />
water source is considered microbiologically safe. If,<br />
however, any tube in the series shows acid and gas, the<br />
water is considered unsafe and the confirmed test is<br />
performed on the tube displaying a positive reaction.<br />
The presumptive test is also designed to estimate the<br />
concentration <strong>of</strong> coliform organisms, called the most<br />
probably number (MPN) in the water sample.<br />
Materials & Methods<br />
Thirty water samples were collected on the<br />
night <strong>of</strong> October 25 th , 2009 at 9:30 pm during high tide<br />
at Doheny State Beach. Ten sample bottles were filled<br />
at 100 meters South and North <strong>of</strong> the San Juan Creek<br />
as well as another ten collected in the direct line from<br />
the creek to the ocean. Each bottle was then labeled<br />
with the sample number and location. Ten milliliters <strong>of</strong><br />
every sample was placed into three, triple strength<br />
lactose tubes, 1 ml <strong>of</strong> each sample into three regular<br />
strength lactose tubes, and 0.1 ml in three more regular<br />
strength lactose tubes. Each tube was then labeled<br />
using a grease pencil to note the number <strong>of</strong> the sample,<br />
the amount <strong>of</strong> sample water included, as well as<br />
whether it was triple or single strength lactose. The<br />
tubes were incubated at about 40̊ C for twenty-four<br />
hours. After the incubation period, investigators were<br />
then able to record the results. The presence <strong>of</strong> gas or<br />
acids in the tubes after the incubation period indicates<br />
the presence <strong>of</strong> coliform bacteria in the sample. A layer<br />
<strong>of</strong> bubbles atop the sample would indicate that the<br />
water sample held bacteria that formed gasses. If the<br />
sample held any fermenters, the water sample in the<br />
incubated tube would turn from green to a distinct<br />
yellow color. The most probable number (MPN) was<br />
then calculated in order to determine the concentration<br />
<strong>of</strong> coliform organisms at each location.<br />
Results<br />
Water samples were collected from a midpoint<br />
at Doheny State Beach, and from one-hundred meters<br />
north <strong>of</strong> that point, and one-hundred meters south. The<br />
MPN was calculated from each <strong>of</strong> the test tubes, and<br />
the mean MPN was calculated for each location. The<br />
North mean MPN was 1018; Middle mean MPN was<br />
1124; South mean MPN was 591.2. A single-factor<br />
ANOVA test was conducted to compare the means.<br />
The ANOVA is appropriate because it compares more<br />
than two means at once and yields one p-value for the<br />
means, collectively. There was no difference; a<br />
Bonferroni Correction will not be needed.<br />
133<br />
<strong>Saddleback</strong> <strong>Journal</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Biology</strong><br />
Spring 2010