[Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The removal of triclocarban (TCC) in aqueous solution by dielectric barrier discharge (DBD) plasma combined with TiO2 coated activated carbon fibers (TiO2/ACFs) catalysts was investigated at atmospheric pressure and room temperature. The effects of output power, initial concentration, radius of TiO2/ACFs catalysts and recyclability of catalysts on the removal rate of triclocarban were explored. The results showed that the addition of TiO2/ACFs catalysts with radius of 3 cm into DBD plasma reactor could improve mineralization efficiency of TCC by 12% as compared with sole DBD system and the acute toxicity of TCC solution decreased from 64% to 32% after 30 min degradation in DBD/TiO2/ACFs system. The mechanism experiments indicated that oxygen and OH radical played an important role during the degradation process. Moreover, a possible reaction pathway was proposed based on stable products identified by gas chromatography–mass spectrometer. The results confirmed that DBD/TiO2/ACFs might be a promising method for effectively removing TCC from water.
- "Among various PPCPs, triclocarban (TCC) is a broad spectrum antimicrobial agents in a large number of medicines and personal-hygiene products (e.g., soaps, deodorants and toothpaste) . The widely used products containing TCC have resulted in the entry of TCC into the environment . Triclocarban has been found in the ng L À1 level in surface water and up to 7 lg L À1 in USA water resources and STPs [10,11]. The existence of TCC in aquatic ecosystem has significant effects on microbial composition and biofilm communities. "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The quality of surface waters/groundwater of a geographical region can be affected by anthropogenic activities, land use patterns and fecal pollution sources from humans and animals. Therefore, the development of an efficient fecal pollution source tracking toolbox for identifying the origin of the fecal pollution sources in surface waters/groundwater is especially helpful for improving management efforts and remediation actions of water resources in a more cost-effective and efficient manner. This review summarizes the updated knowledge on the use of fecal pollution source tracking markers for detecting, evaluating and characterizing fecal pollution sources in receiving surface waters and groundwater. The suitability of using chemical markers (i.e. fecal sterols, fluorescent whitening agents, pharmaceuticals and personal care products, and artificial sweeteners) and/or microbial markers (e.g. F+RNA coliphages, enteric viruses, and host-specific anaerobic bacterial 16S rDNA genetic markers) for tracking fecal pollution sources in receiving water bodies is discussed. In addition, this review also provides a comprehensive approach, which is based on the detection ratios (DR), detection frequencies (DF), and fate of potential microbial and chemical markers. DR and DF are considered as the key criteria for selecting appropriate markers for identifying and evaluating the impacts of fecal contamination in surface waters/groundwater. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
- "HHCB and AHTN) acting as potential chemical markers to detect treated and untreated wastewater contamination in receiving surface water bodies. Similarly, Young et al. (2008) found that the two hydrophobic PPCPs, TCS and TCC, could act as good chemical markers to identify and evaluate the fecal contamination in receiving surface water bodies as these compounds showed higher correlation coefficients with fecal indicator bacteria than those of CF, a hydrophilic marker. However, it is noted that the use of hydrophobic PPCPs as chemical markers of microbial risks derived from wastewater contamination has some limitations related to the environmental fate of these hydrophobic markers. "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: We analyzed pepper mild mottle virus (PMMoV) in 36 samples taken from surface water, wastewater, groundwater, tap water and bottled water in Hanoi, Vietnam. We then compared the occurrence and fates of PMMoV with pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs), which are known wastewater tracers. PMMoV was detected in 94% of the surface water samples (ponds, water from irrigated farmlands and rivers) and in all the wastewater samples. The PMMoV concentration ranged from 5.5×106–7.2×106 copies/L in wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) influents, 6.5×105–8.5×105 copies/L in WWTP effluents and 1.0×104–1.8×106 copies/L in surface water. Among the sixty PPCPs analyzed, caffeine and carbamazepine had high detection rates in surface water (100% and 88%, respectively). In surface water, the concentration ratio of PMMoV to caffeine remained unchanged than that in WWTP influents, suggesting that the persistence of PMMoV in surface water was comparable to that of caffeine. The persistence and the large concentration ratio of PMMoV in WWTP influents to the method detection limit would account for its ubiquitous detection in surface water. In comparison, human enteric viruses (HEV) were less frequently detected (18–59%) than PMMoV in surface water, probably because of their faster decay. Together with the reported high human feces-specificity, our results suggested that PMMoV is useful as a sensitive fecal indicator for evaluating the potential occurrence of pathogenic viruses in surface water. Moreover, PMMoV can be useful as a moderately conservative fecal tracer for specifically tracking fecal pollution of surface water. PMMoV was detected in 38% of the groundwater samples at low concentrations (up to 19 copies/L). PMMoV was not detected in the tap water and bottled water samples. In groundwater, tap water and bottled water samples, the occurrence of PPCPs and HEV disagreed with that of PMMoV, suggesting that PMMoV is not suitable as an indicator or a tracer in those waters.
- "The two PPCPs, however, were not detected in surface water samples. This would be because the two PPCPs largely partitioned to particle phase (Young et al., 2008), whereas the dissolved phase was used for PPCP analyses, and/or because the consumption of the two PPCPs was small. In groundwater, tap water and bottled water, PPCPs were detected at lower concentrations and less frequently than those in surface water and wastewater (Table 2,Fig. "