Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39051617›Full record

ReviewMicrobial biotechnology2024

Microbial drinking water monitoring now and in the future.

Thomas Pluym, Fien Waegenaar, Bart De Gusseme, Nico Boon

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Microbial biotechnology, 2024. 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. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Microbes Saving Lives and Reducing Suffering.Microbial biotechnology · 2025
    Article
  7. Role of SiOScientific reports · 2024
    Article
  8. Review
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

4 authors.

Thomas PluymCenter for Microbial Ecology and Technology (CMET), Department of Biotechnology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-5700-3099
Fien WaegenaarCenter for Microbial Ecology and Technology (CMET), Department of Biotechnology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Bart De GussemeCenter for Microbial Ecology and Technology (CMET), Department of Biotechnology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Nico BoonCenter for Microbial Ecology and Technology (CMET), Department of Biotechnology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.

Funding

Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek 1S02022NFonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek 1S26823NFonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek S006221N
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over time, humanity has addressed microbial water contamination in various ways. Historically, individuals resorted to producing beer to combat the issue. Fast forward to the 19th century, and we witnessed a scientific approach by Robert Koch. His groundbreaking gelatine plating method aimed to identify and quantify bacteria, with a proposed limit of 100 colony-forming units per millilitre (CFU/mL) to avoid Cholera outbreaks. Despite considerable advancements in plating techniques through experimentation with media compositions and growth temperatures, the reliance on a century-old method for water safety remains the state-of-the-art. Even though most countries succeed in producing qualitative water at the end of the production centres, it is difficult to control, and guarantee, the same quality during distribution. Rather than focusing solely on specific sampling points, we propose a holistic examination of the entire water network to ensure comprehensive safety. Current practices leave room for uncertainties, especially given the low concentrations of pathogens. Innovative methods like flow cytometry and flow cytometric fingerprinting offer the ability to detect changes in the microbiome of drinking water. Additionally, molecular techniques and emerging sequencing technologies, such as third-generation sequencing (MinION), mark a significant leap forward, enhancing detection limits and emphasizing the identification of unwanted genes rather than the unwanted bacteria/microorganisms itself. Over the last decades, there has been the realization that the drinking water distribution networks are complex ecosystems that, beside bacteria, comprise of viruses, protozoans and even isopods. Sequencing techniques to find eukaryotic DNA are necessary to monitor the entire microbiome of the drinking water distribution network. Or will artificial intelligence, big data and machine learning prove to be the way to go for (microbial) drinking water monitoring? In essence, it is time to transcend century-old practices and embrace modern technologies to ensure the safety of our drinking water from production to consumption.

Indexed as

BacteriaDrinking WaterEnvironmental MonitoringHumansWater MicrobiologyDrinking Water

Identifiers

PMID39051617
PMCPMC11270321

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.