Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25273229›Full record

ArticleMicrobes and environments2014

Impact of hydraulic well restoration on native bacterial communities in drinking water wells.

Clemens Karwautz, Tillmann Lueders

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Microbes and environments, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Dynamics of Biofilm Regrowth in Drinking Water Distribution Systems.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2016
    Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Clemens KarwautzInstitute of Groundwater Ecology, Helmholtz Zentrum München-German Research Center for Environmental Health.
Tillmann Lueders

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The microbial monitoring of drinking water production systems is essential to assure water quality and minimize possible risks. However, the comparative impact of microbes from the surrounding aquifer and of those established within drinking water wells on water parameters remains poorly understood. High pressure jetting is a routine method to impede well clogging by fine sediments and also biofilms. In the present study, bacterial communities were investigated in a drinking water production system before, during, and after hydraulic purging. Variations were observed in bacterial communities between different wells of the same production system before maintenance, despite them having practically identical water chemistries. This may have reflected the distinct usage practices of the different wells, and also local aquifer heterogeneity. Hydraulic jetting of one well preferentially purged a subset of the dominating taxa, including lineages related to Diaphorobacter, Nitrospira, Sphingobium, Ralstonia, Alkanindiges, Janthinobacterium, and Pseudomonas spp, suggesting their tendency for growth in well-associated biofilms. Lineages of potential drinking water concern (i.e. Legionellaceae, Pseudomonadaceae, and Acinetobacter spp.) reacted distinctly to hydraulic jetting. Bacterial diversity was markedly reduced in drinking water 2 weeks after the cleaning procedure. The results of the present study provide a better understanding of drinking water wells as a microbial habitat, as well as their role in the microbiology of drinking water systems.

Indexed as

BiotaBacteriaCluster AnalysisDNA, BacterialDNA, RibosomalDrinking WaterMolecular Sequence DataPhylogenyRNA, Ribosomal, 16SSequence Analysis, DNADNA, BacterialDNA, RibosomalDrinking WaterRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID25273229
PMCPMC4262359

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.