MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4230214729 · doi:10.1149/ma2014-02/11/675

Use of Personal Glucose Meters for the Detection of E. Coli in Water

2014· article· en· W4230214729 on OpenAlexaff
Ravi Chavali, Naga Siva Kumar Gunda, Selvaraj Naicker, Sushanta K. Mitra

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiosensors and Analytical Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlucose meterContaminationGlucose oxidasePotable waterEnvironmental scienceWater qualityIndicator organismContaminated waterEscherichia coliPulp and paper industryChemistryBiosensorEnvironmental engineeringEnvironmental chemistryBiologyBiochemistryEcologyDiabetes mellitusEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Contamination of potable water with pathogenic bacteria such as Escherichia coli ( E.coli ) is a major concern in the developing countries. Often water is consumed without any prior treatment leading to several water borne ailments such as diarrhea. According to United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the total concentration of E.coli in potable water should be restricted to 0 Colony Forming Units (CFU) per 100 ml of water for potable water and 126 CFU /100 ml for recreational water. The conventional methods of pathogen detection generally involve transporting the contaminated water samples to centralized laboratories where detection and quantification techniques are based on instant culturing of bacteria, enzymatic reactions, and molecular (immunological or genetic) methods of detection. These processes often take 24 – 48 hours to produce results and are often expensive due to the additional requirements of resources and qualified personnel. Such a system for water monitoring is not suitable for low-resource settings. Rapid, easy to use and inexpensive detection systems need to be developed in order to empower individual households to regularly monitor their bacteriological water quality. One of the best examples of such rapid and simple detection systems is the Personal Glucose meter (PGM), which is used by patients with diabetes to regularly monitor their blood glucose levels. This system is based on an electrochemical reaction where in the glucose present in the sample is made to react with an enzyme electrode containing glucose oxidase and the resulting change in the current is measured, which in turn can be correlated to the concentration of the glucose. We have developed a simple method for the detection of E.coli and total coliform using PGMs by monitoring the consumption of glucose as a carbon source by E.coli during their growth cycle. Contaminated water samples with bacterial concentrations in the range of 2-2x10 8 CFU/mL were supplied with glucose solutions with known concentrations and Lauryl Tryptose (LT) broth as the growth medium in order to induce the consumption of glucose by E.coli . The drop in glucose concentrations in these samples was measured every hour with a PGM. It was observed that samples with very high concentrations of E.coli (2x10 6 - 2x10 8 CFU/mL) showed a drop in the glucose concentrations within an hour and samples with extremely low E.coli concentrations (2 CFU/mL) showed a drop in glucose concentrations within a maximum of 8 hours. This method can provide qualitative as well as quantitative results to determine the level of contamination in potable water. The time required to produce results with this method is much lower than the conventional colony counting method and the cost involved is quite less compared to the equipment required for ELISA plate readers. The current PGMs available in the market are portable and can produce reliable quantitative results. These systems are quite robust, simple and can be used by any untrained person. PGMs have also been recently integrated with smart phones thereby resulting in a further increase in their base of users. The E.coli detection kit presented here is simple, easy to use, reliable, cost effective and does not involve any toxic reagents or end products. This method doesn’t warrant any special training and can be used by any unskilled person on site at the source of water.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.110
Threshold uncertainty score0.163

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.191 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting AbstractsSame topicBiosensors and Analytical DetectionFrench-language works237,207