2023.08.04.37
							Files > Volume 8 > Vol 8 no 4 2023
						
High microbiological contamination in surface waters in the upper basin of the Choluteca River in Honduras
 Victoria Maldonado1,
						Keylin Mendoza1, Luis Rivera1, Tania Peña2,
						Marcio Chirinos-Escobar2, Lourdes Enríquez1, Gustavo Fontecha1
						and Bryan Ortiz1
1.    
						Instituto de
						Investigaciones en Microbiología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de Honduras
						(UNAH)
2.    
						Tegucigalpa
						11101, Honduras.
3.    
						Instituto
						Hondureño de Ciencias de la Tierra, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de Honduras
						(UNAH),Tegucigalpa 11101, Honduras.
Corresponding author:
						[email protected] Tel: +50433035342
Available
						from. http://dx.doi.org/10.21931/RB/2023.08.04.37
ABSTRACT 
Microorganisms with a high
						pathogenic potential for humans and animals can spread through water. This
						represents a severe threat to public health, particularly in low- and
						middle-income countries where sanitation conditions are often limited. Due to
						their constant presence in the intestine and feces of both people and animals,
						total coliforms, thermotolerant coliforms, and intestinal Enterococcus
						have historically been employed as indicators of fecal contamination to
						evaluate water quality for human use and consumption. Under no circumstances
						should water sources for human use and consumption have bacteria indicating
						fecal contamination. The objective of this study was to evaluate the
						microbiological quality of surface water from six sub-basins located in the
						upper basin of the Cholulteca River in Honduras and determine the Escherichia coli phylogroups isolated in these
						samples. Our results show high rates of fecal contamination, suggesting that
						surface waters in the upper Choluteca River basin are unsafe for human
						consumption. Phylogroups B1 and D were the most frequent among 29 E. coli
						isolates, while phylogroups C and F were the least frequent. Measures must be taken to raise awareness about sanitation
						and good practices for managing household waste and those generated by
						agro-industrial and livestock activities in the area. Surface water in the
						Choluteca River basin must be adequately treated before consumption because it
						may impact people's health. In addition, we encourage prompt decision-making by
						the health authorities. In conclusion, this study assessed the
						microbiological quality of water in the upper Choluteca River basin. Our
						findings show high rates of fecal contamination and the predominance of E. coli
						strains from phylogroups associated with fecal contamination, suggesting that
						these waters are unsafe for human consumption.
Keywords: fecal contamination; E. coli; phylogroups; surface water; Choluteca River basin; Honduras
Keywords: fecal contamination; E. coli; phylogroups; surface water; Choluteca River basin; Honduras
INTRODUCTION
Surface water is any body of water on the
						earth's surface. Surface waters can be lotic when they move in one direction,
						such as rivers, springs, and streams, or stagnant lentic waters, such as
						wetlands, lakes, ponds, and reservoirs 1, 2. Water is distributed
						quite unevenly on the surface of the world. Only 2.5% of surface water is
						freshwater, with most of the surface water (about 97%) concentrated in the
						seas.
Humans depend critically on surface waters.
						Surface water is essential for many daily activities, including livestock farming,
						agricultural irrigation, hydroelectricity generation, recreational activities,
						and industrial processes. In the same way, surface waters are usually an essential
						source of drinking water for human communities and domestic animals. They are a
						fundamental pillar for maintaining and developing ecological systems 3.
						
In recent times, the global use of water has
						grown steadily. In 2018, the world demand for water was estimated at 4,600 km3
						per year, and it is expected that with the increase in the world population,
						this will have an increase of up to 6,000 km3/year, representing an
						increase of up to 30% 4. This rise raises concerns about whether enough
						water will be available for a significant portion of the global population. Estimates
						indicate that by 2050, nearly 3.2 billion people will face acute water scarcity
						4, 5. In addition to the increase in the water demand, a continuous
						deterioration in its quality has been reported. An example is that about 80% of
						the total industrial and municipal wastewater is currently released into the
						environment without any prior treatment, and in developing countries, it can
						reach 95% 4. As a result of these practices, chemical and biological
						contaminants infiltrate water bodies, resulting in a detrimental impact on
						ecosystems 4, 6, 7. 
As a result of biological pollution, a variety
						of potentially hazardous microorganisms, such as bacteria, viruses, helminths,
						and protozoa, which are frequently present in the feces of humans and animals,
						may spread via surface water. Through leaching, septic tank leaks, sewage, and
						industrial waste, these pathogens can access surface water sources
						and reach community water supplies 8-10. In most cases, the
						transmission of these microorganisms occurs through the fecal-oral route, primarily
						through ingesting contaminated water. Less frequent transmission routes include
						inhalation or aspiration of water microdroplets and direct exposure by contact,
						skin, and mucous membranes during recreational activities 11. 
According to the World Health Organization
						(WHO), every year, more than 3.4 million people die as a result of
						water-related diseases 12. The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) data
						estimated that in 2015, an unsafe water source resulted in 1.2 million deaths
						and 71.7 million disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), including 1.1 million
						deaths and 61.1 million DALYs from diarrheal diseases 13. In the
						same way, 34% of the 1.4 million diarrhea-related deaths that took place in
						low- and middle-income countries in 2016 were caused by unclean water. Also,
						31% were linked to inadequate sewage systems, and 12% were related to
						unsanitary behavior. Therefore, access to safe water sources plays an important
						role in morbidity and mortality from infectious diseases 14, and fecal
						contamination of water bodies intended for human use and consumption
						constitutes one of the main health risks 9. Therefore, it is crucial
						to regularly assess the quality of surface water and decide how safe it is to
						use and consume 15, 16. 
Traditionally, bacteriological markers have
						been used to monitor and verify the quality of water intended for human use and
						consumption, including the presence and count of total coliforms (TC),
						thermotolerant coliforms (TtC) and intestinal enterococci (IE) 15-18.
						Among the thermotolerant coliforms, Escherichia coli has been considered
						the most robust fecal indicator 15, 16, 19-21. Furthermore, the
						phylogenetic distribution of E. coli has been suggested as a
						complementary analysis to help better understand its presence in waters 17.
						E. coli can be classified phylogenetically into 8 groups (A, B1, B2, C,
						D, E, F y G). Phylogroups A and B1 are associated with commensal and
						antibiotic-resistant strains, while phylogroups B2 and D have been related to
						human pathogenic strains 23, 24. B1 predominates in the intestinal
						microbiota of animals, while B2 has been identified as the main phylogroup in
						human feces. In contrast, E. coli isolates considered
						"naturalized," intestinal isolates that have adapted to the wild over
						time are classified primarily into cryptic clades 17. To the best of our knowledge, there is scarce information
						about the surface water quality in Honduras. This study aimed to determine the
						phylogenetic distribution of the E. coli isolates present in these waters and
						evaluate the microbiological quality of surface water from six sub-basins in
						the upper Choluteca River basin in the central part of Honduras.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
						
						
Sampling
						sites
The Choluteca River originates in
						central Honduras, flows through Francisco Morazán, El Paraíso, and Choluteca
						departments, and drains into the Gulf of Fonseca in the Pacific Ocean. The
						study area is located in the central-southern region of the country, with a dry
						forest transition climate. It is delimited by the upper part of the Choluteca
						River basin (Figure 1), encompassing the capital city, Tegucigalpa.
Water samples from surface sources
						were collected between October 2019 and April 2022 at 29 randomly chosen
						locations in six sub-basins spanning ten municipalities (Figure 1). The
						number of samples collected in each sub-basin was distributed as follows:
						Choluteca alta (n = 8), Yeguare (n = 7), Guacerique (n = 6), Río Chiquito (n =
						3), Río del Hombre (n = 3), San José (n = 2) (Figure 1). The water samples were
						collected following the indications of the Standard Methods for the Examination
						of Water and Wastewater, 23rd Edition 18. 500 mL of water
						was collected from each sampling location in sterile plastic bags, which were
						then transported in refrigerators at 4 °C until analysis.

Figure 1. Map showing the geographic location
						of the sub-basins under study and sampling sites. Scale 1:150,000, geographic
						coordinate system, WGS 84 ellipsoid. 
Determination of Fecal Contamination Indicators
The water samples were processed
						within the first 6 hours after collection. Following the instructions of the
						Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 23rd
						Edition 18, the membrane filtration technique was used to isolate
						and count total coliforms (TC), thermotolerant coliforms (TtC), and intestinal Enterococcus
						(IE) present in the samples. 500 mL of water was collected from each sampling
						location in sterile conditions and passed through filters with cellulose
						nitrate membranes with pore sizes of 0.45 µm and a diameter of 47 mm (Millipore
						Inc®). 
Once the samples were filtered, the
						membranes were transferred to Petri dishes with m-Endo LES agar (Criterion™)
						for the search for TC. Moreover, mFC agar (Criterion™) was used to search for
						TtC and m-Enterococcus agar (Acumedia®) to search for intestinal
						enterococci. The incubation conditions were 24 h at 37 °C for TC, and 24 h at
						44.5 °C for TtC. The m-Enterococcus medium was incubated at 37 °C for 48 h.
						Once the incubation period had elapsed, the number of Colony Forming Units
						(CFU)/100 mL was determined.
Dark red colonies with a metallic
						luster were interpreted as TCs in the m-Endo medium. Blue colonies in the mFC
						medium were considered TtC; in the case of IE, any red colony was interpreted
						as Enterococcus spp.
E. coli phenotypic identification
Identification of bacterial species
						was carried out using previously reported protocols 22. Briefly, any
						characteristic colony presumptively identified as E. coli was selected
						randomly from each sample, cultured on MacConkey agar and blood agar media, and
						incubated at 37 °C for 18-24 h. A presumptive identification was made based on
						traditional biochemical tests Indole, Mobility, Voges Proskauer, and Simmons
						Citrate. All the biotypes that presented any of the patterns, (+ + – –) or (– +
						– –), were confirmed using the API 20 E identification system (BioMerieux,
						Marcy-l’Étoile, France). Bacteria identified as E. coli were inoculated
						into Brain Hearth Infusion (BHI) broth with 20% glycerol and stored at –80 °C
						for further studies.
DNA Extraction and Identification of Phylogenetic Groups
The strains were inoculated in
						Luria-Bertani liquid medium for DNA extraction and incubated for 24 h at 37 ºC.
						Subsequently, the genomic DNA was extracted using the extraction kit Wizard
						Genomic DNA Purification (Promega, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.), according to the
						manufacturer's instructions. Finally, the DNA was eluted in 100 μL of
						the buffer TE. The extracted DNA was stored at -20 °C until use.
The methodology previously described
						by Clermont et al. 2013 and Clermont et al. 2019 was used 23, 24 for
						identifying phylogenetic groups. This approach is based on detecting the genes arpA,
						chuA, yjaA, TspE4.C2, trpA, ybgD, and cfaB. PCR amplification
						reactions were performed according to previously published protocols 22.
						
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
In this study, 29 surface water sources located
						throughout the upper Choluteca River basin were tested for the presence of
						total coliforms (TC), thermotolerant coliforms (TtC), and intestinal Enterococcus
						(IE). Table 1 shows all TC, TtC, and IE counts by sub-basin and municipality.
The presence of TC was observed in 100% of the
						water samples. TC counts ranged from 1.3 × 101 CFU/100 mL to 4.2 ×
						107 CFU/100 mL. The highest TC count was observed in three samples from
						three subbasins (Guacerique, San José, and Choluteca Alta), collected during
						the rainy season of 2021. TC counts in these samples were higher than 1 × 107
						CFU/100 mL. On the other hand, two samples from the Río Chiquito and
						Yeguare sub-basins, which are in the municipalities of the Central District and
						Tatumbla, respectively, showed the lowest counts (1.3 × 101 and 7.6
						× 101 CFU/100 mL). 
 
 Table 1. Counts
						of Total Coliforms (TC), Thermotolerant Coliforms (TtC), and Intestinal Enterococcus
						(IE) and the result of the analysis of the TtC/IE ratio in the Choluteca River
						basin of Honduras
TC detection is a tool to assess the overall
						sanitary quality of water supplies 25. Detection of TC in surface
						waters suggests contamination from sewage discharges or decomposing matter,
						especially organic waste. These are usually associated with the lack of septic
						systems, sewage leaks, sewage systems in poor condition, or inadequate waste
						management from agriculture and livestock around sampling points 15, 21,
						26, 27. 
						
						On the other hand, the presence of TtC was
						observed in all samples. Their count varied between 3 CFU/100 mL to 3.4 × 106
						CFU/100 mL. The highest count of TtC was observed in the San José and
						Guacerique sub-basins, located in the municipality of the Central District. The
						counts at these points were equal to or greater than 1 × 107. In
						contrast, four samples from the Yeguare (n = 2), Río Chiquito (n = 1), and Río
						del Hombre (n = 1) sub-basins showed the lowest TtC counts, with values of less
						than 1 × 101 CFU/100 mL. The distribution of TC, TtC, and IE depends
						on sub-basin, is shown in Figure 2. 
						
						
Figure 2. Counts of total coliforms (green bars),
						thermotolerant coliforms (blue bars), and intestinal Enterococcus (yellow bars)
						by sampling point distributed by sub-basin: (a) Choluteca alta, (b) Guacerique,
						(c) Río Chiquito, (d) Río del Hombre, (e) Yeguare. 
						
						It has been established that E. coli
						accounts for around 95% of TtC isolates in waters 25, 28, 29. For
						this reason, E. coli is an accurate indicator of fecal contamination due
						to its constant presence in the intestine and feces of warm-blooded animals.
						The presence of TtC in any body of water has a high predictive value for the
						potential presence of other pathogenic microorganisms for humans 19-21, 30.
						On
						the other hand, it has been suggested that the presence of IE might be used as
						a supplementary test for assessing water quality. In this investigation, 90% of
						the sampling locations revealed the presence of IE. IE counts ranged from 9
						CFU/100 mL to 5 × 105 CFU/100 mL. On the other hand, the IE count
						was 0 in three sampling locations from the Choluteca Alta, Guacerique, and
						Yeguare sub-basins. 
						
						According to various hypotheses, human
						excretion of TtC, IE, and E. coli differs significantly from that of
						animals in quantity 31-34. According to what was previously proposed
						by Geldreich et al. 32, we assessed the source of microbiological
						contamination through the relationship between thermotolerant coliforms and
						intestinal enterococci (TtC / IE) in this study. In brief, a TtC/IE ratio
						greater than 4.0 indicates contamination with a human origin, while a ratio
						less than 0.7 indicates contamination with an animal origin. On the other hand,
						mixed contamination is considered to exist when the TtC/IE ratio ranges from
						0.7 to 4.0 32. Following this criterion, the origin of the
						contamination was determined for those sites whose IE counts were more
						significant than or equal to 1 CFU/100 mL. 90% (n=26) of the 29 samples
						examined had levels higher than or equal to 1 CFU/100 mL. The analysis of the
						microbiological contamination source is shown in Table 1. The most frequent
						source of contamination was determined to be of mixed origin in 19.2% of the
						samples. In comparison, the TtC/IE ratio suggested human contamination in 34.6%
						of the cases and animal origin in 46.1% of the 26 samples studied.
						
						The potential health risks associated with
						using and consuming water from the various sampling locations were also
						explored in this study. The WHO has established four categories of potential
						health risks related to E. coli or thermotolerant coliform (TtC)
						concentrations. These risk categories are low (<1 CFU/100 mL), intermediate
						(1–10 CFU/100 mL), high (11–100 CFU/100 mL), and very high (>100 CFU/100 mL)
						15.  Our findings indicate
						that 100% of the samples did not meet the WHO drinking water quality recommendations
						and that 58.6% constituted a high risk for human consumption. Likewise, 10.3%
						were categorized as high risk, while 13.7% were intermediate risk. No sampling
						point was suitable for consumption following the WHO risk guidelines. 
						
						The phylogenetic distribution of the E. coli
						strains isolated from the various sample points was also examined. The
						predominant phylogenetic group was A (31%), followed by D (24.2%), clade I
						(17.2%), B1 (13.8%), B2 (10.3%) and phylogroup E with 3.4%. Intestinal E.
						coli isolates that are "naturalized," or to have adapted to
						natural habitats, are primarily grouped in cryptic clades 17. Therefore,
						the low prevalence of these cryptic clades and many phylogroups associated with
						animals and humans suggests a high anthropogenic activity close to the sampling
						points. 
						
						Here, we have evidence of high microbiological
						contamination in the surface waters of the upper Choluteca River basin, with a
						high anthropogenic influence. Human and animal waste, improper wastewater
						management practices, and runoff from nearby metropolitan areas and the agricultural
						sector are all potential sources of water contamination. Microorganisms that
						suggest fecal contamination should never be present in water intended for human
						consumption 15, 18, 25. The presence of microorganisms with the
						potential to cause disease in drinking water usually results in significant adverse
						effects on public health. The most common waterborne organisms, such as
						cholera, bacillary dysentery, typhoid fever, gastroenteritis, leptospirosis,
						amoebic dysentery, cryptosporidiosis, giardiasis, and balantidiasis, could be
						transmitted through water surface of the upper Choluteca River basin.
						
						On the other hand, surface waters are not
						isolated components of the hydrological system. The hydrologic interactions
						between surface and subsurface waters occur by subsurface lateral flow through
						the soil and infiltration into or exfiltration from the saturated zones. In
						this regard, a high load of microbial contaminants in surface waters may impact
						groundwater 35, 36. The 2030 sustainable development agenda's goal
						of achieving universal and equitable access to drinking water is significantly
						hampered by such contamination 37 since groundwater is the primary
						source of drinking water for half of the world's population 38, 39.
						This potential pathway for cross-contamination between surface water and
						groundwater could explain previously published results of high rates of fecal
						contamination found in groundwater in the upper Choluteca River basin 22.  
						
						These data should not go unnoticed since about
						1.5 million people, representing more than 14% of the country's total
						population, benefit directly or indirectly from the surface and groundwater of
						the upper Choluteca River basin. In summary, due to the high rates of fecal
						pollution found in our study, which most likely result from biological waste
						from people and animals, immediate local and state-level action is required to
						monitor and control the water quality.
						
						CONCLUSIONS
						
						The microbiological quality of the water in the
						upper basin of the Choluteca River was evaluated in this study. Our results
						indicate that these waters are inappropriate for human consumption due to the
						high rates of fecal contamination and the prevalence of E. coli strains
						from phylogroups linked to fecal contamination. Actions must be taken to raise
						public awareness of sanitation-related challenges and effective procedures for
						handling waste from households, livestock, and the agricultural sector.
						Additionally, as the water in the Honduran Choluteca River basin can
						potentially impact people's health, it must be safely treated before
						consumption. Likewise, we suggest prompt intervention by decision-makers
						
						Author
						Contributions: LE, KM, GF and TP conceptualized the
						study; VM, KM, BO, M.C.-E. and LR obtained the isolates and performed the
						experiments; BO, KM, LR and GF organized and cured the data; writing and
						original draft preparation, BO and GF; all the authors contributed with
						writing, review, and editing the manuscript; supervision, project
						administration, and funding acquisition, KM, TP and LE All authors have read
						and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
						
						Funding: This research was funded by Fondo Global
						para el Medio Ambiente (Global Environmental Facility: GEF)/Programa de las
						Naciones Unidas (PNUD), Project "Adaptación basada en Ecosistemas en el
						Corredor Boscoso Central", grant number 00094142. APC was covered by DICIHT, UNAH.
						
						Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable
						
						Acknowledgments: Not applicable
						
						Conflicts of
						Interest: The authors declare no conflict of
						interest. 
						
						REFERENCES
1.         Winter TC. Groundwater and surface
						water: a single resource: Diane Publishing; 2000.
						
						2.         Hayashi M, Rosenberry DO. Effects of
						Ground Water Exchange on the Hydrology and Ecology of Surface Water.
						Groundwater. 2002;40(3):309-16.
						
						3.         Centers for Disease Control and
						Prevention Waterborne Disease. The Many Uses of Water 2021 [Available
						from: https://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/other/index.html, (accessed on 13
						February 2023).
						
						4.         WWAP (United Nations World Water
						Assessment Programme)The United Nations World Water Development Report 2018
						Nature-Based Solutions for Water. Paris,. Unesco, Paris; 2017.
						
						5.         Burek P, Satoh Y, Fischer G, Kahil M,
						Scherzer A, Tramberend S, et al. Water futures and solution-fast track
						initiative. 2016.
						
						6.         Ślósarczyk K, Jakóbczyk-Karpierz S,
						Różkowski J, Witkowski AJ. Occurrence of Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care
						Products in the Water Environment of Poland: A Review. Water. 2021;13(16):2283.
						
						7.         Kurwadkar S. Occurrence and
						distribution of organic and inorganic pollutants in groundwater. Water Environ
						Res. 2019;91(10):1001-8.
						
						8.         Sharma S, Sachdeva P, Virdi JS.
						Emerging waterborne pathogens. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology. 2003;61(5):424-8.
						
						9.         Ashbolt NJ. Microbial Contamination of
						Drinking Water and Human Health from Community Water Systems. Curr Environ
						Health Rep. 2015;2(1):95-106.
						
						10.       Mahmud ZH, Islam MS, Imran KM, Hakim SAI,
						Worth M, Ahmed A, et al. Occurrence of Escherichia coli and faecal coliforms in
						drinking water at source and household point-of-use in Rohingya camps,
						Bangladesh. Gut Pathog. 2019;11(1):1-11.
						
						11.       World Health Organization. Guidelines for
						safe recreational water environments. Volume 2, Swimming pools and similar
						environments: World Health Organization; 2006.
						
						12.       World Health Organization. Water for
						health: taking charge. World Health Organization (WHO); 2001.
						
						13.       Forouzanfar MH, Afshin A, Alexander LT,
						Anderson HR, Bhutta ZA, Biryukov S, et al. Global, regional, and national
						comparative risk assessment of 79 behavioural, environmental and occupational,
						and metabolic risks or clusters of risks, 1990–2015: a systematic analysis for
						the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. Lancet. 2016;388(10053):1659-724.
						
						14.       Prüss-Ustün A, Wolf J, Bartram J, Clasen
						T, Cumming O, Freeman MC, et al. Burden of disease from inadequate water,
						sanitation and hygiene for selected adverse health outcomes: an updated
						analysis with a focus on low-and middle-income countries. Int J Hyg Environ
						Health. 2019;222(5):765-77.
						
						15.       Guidelines for drinking-water quality.
						Vol. 3, Surveillance and control of community supplies. Vol. 3,
						Vigilancia y control de los abastecimientos de agua a la comunidad. 2nd ed.
						Geneva: World Health Organization; 1997.
						
						16.       Ministerio
						de Salud Republica de Honduras. Norma tecnica para la calidad del agua potable
						Honduras. Available
						online:
						http://www.aguasdesiguatepeque.com/imagenes/Archivos%20PDF/Norma%20Tecnica%20calidad%20del%20agua%20potable.pdf.
						(accessed on  18 march 2023). 1995.
						
						17.       Devane ML, Moriarty E, Weaver L, Cookson
						A, Gilpin B. Fecal indicator bacteria from environmental sources; strategies
						for identification to improve water quality monitoring. Water Res. 2020;185:116204.
						
						18.       Baird R, & Bridgewater, L. . Standard
						methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 23rd
						edition. Washington, DC: American Public Health Association. 2017.
						
						19.       Ramos‐Ramírez
						LdC, Romero‐Bañuelos CA, Jiménez‐Ruíz EI, Palomino‐Hermosillo YA,
						Saldaña‐Ahuactzi Z, Martínez‐Laguna Y, et al. Coliform bacteria in san Pedro
						lake, western Mexico. Water Environ Res. 2021;93(3):384-92.
						
						20.       Castro
						Fernández MF, Cárdenas Manosalva IR, Colmenares Quintero RF, Montenegro Marín
						CE, Diaz Cuesta YE, Escobar Mahecha D, et al. Multitemporal Total Coliforms and
						Escherichia coli Analysis in the Middle Bogotá River Basin,
						2007–2019. Sustainability. 2022;14(3):1769.
						
						21.       Ercumen A, Pickering AJ, Kwong LH, Arnold
						BF, Parvez SM, Alam M, et al. Animal feces contribute to domestic fecal
						contamination: evidence from E. coli measured in water, hands, food, flies, and
						soil in Bangladesh. Environ Sci Technol. 2017;51(15):8725-34.
						
						22.       Mendoza
						K, Ortiz B, Rivera L, Peña T, Chirinos-Escobar M, Enríquez L, et al. Monitoring of Microbial
						Contamination of Groundwater in the Upper Choluteca River Basin, Honduras.
						Water. 2023;15(11):2116.
						
						23.       Clermont O, Christenson JK, Denamur E,
						Gordon DM. The Clermont Escherichia coli phylo-typing method revisited:
						improvement of specificity and detection of new phylo-groups. Environ Microbiol
						Rep. 2013;5(1):58-65.
						
						24.       Clermont O, Dixit OVA, Vangchhia B,
						Condamine B, Dion S, Bridier-Nahmias A, et al. Characterization and rapid
						identification of phylogroup G in Escherichia coli, a lineage with high virulence and
						antibiotic resistance potential. Environ Microbiol. 2019;21(8):3107-17. 
						
						25.       Water S, Organization WH. WHO guidelines
						for drinking water quality: training pack. 2000.
						
						26.       Valenzuela M, Lagos B, Claret M, Mondaca
						MA, Pérez C, Parra O. Fecal contamination of groundwater in a small rural
						dryland watershed in central Chile. Chilean Journal of Agricultural Research. 2009;69(2):235-43.
						
						27.       Akpataku KV, Gnazou MD, Nomesi TYA, Nambo
						P, Doni K, Bawa LM, et al. Physicochemical and Microbiological Quality of
						Shallow Groundwater in Lomé, Togo. Journal of Geoscience and Environment
						Protection. 2020;8(12):162.
						
						28.       Bartram J, Ballance R. Water quality
						monitoring: a practical guide to the design and implementation of freshwater
						quality studies and monitoring programmes: CRC Press; 1996.
						
						29.       Quality F-PWGoRW, Health C, Canada W.
						Guidelines for Canadian Recreational Water Quality: Health and Welfare Canada; 1992.
						
						30.       Barrantes
						K, Chacón L, Morales E, Rivera-Montero L, Pino M, Jiménez AG, et al. Occurrence of pathogenic
						microorganisms in small drinking-water systems in Costa Rica. J Water Health. 2022;20(2):34455.
						
						31.       Borrego A, Romero P. Study of the
						microbiological pollution of a Malaga littoral area II. Relationschip between
						fecal coliforms and fecal streptococci VIèJournée Étude Pollutions, Cannes,
						France. 1982:561-9.
						
						32.       Geldreich EE, Kenner BA. Concepts of
						fecal streptococci in stream pollution. Journal (Water Pollution Control
						Federation). 1969:R336-R52.
						
						33.       Bisimwa AM, Kisuya B, Kazadi ZM, Muhaya
						BB, Kankonda AB. Monitoring faecal contamination and relationship of
						physicochemical variables with faecal indicator bacteria numbers in Bukavu
						surface waters, tributaries of Lake Kivu in Democratic Republic of Congo.
						Hygiene and Environmental Health Advances. 2022;3:100012.
						
						34.       Coyne MS, Howell J. The fecal
						coliform/fecal streptococci ratio (FC/FS) and water quality in the bluegrass
						region of Kentucky. 1994.
						
						35.       Sophocleous M. Interactions between
						groundwater and surface water: the state of the science. Hydrogeology Journal. 2002;10(1):52-67.
						
						36.       Some S, Mondal R, Mitra D, Jain D, Verma
						D, Das S. Microbial water pollution with special reference to coliform bacteria
						and their nexus with environment. Energy Nexus. 2021;1:100008.
						
						37.       Cepal
						N. Agenda 2030 y los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible: una oportunidad para
						América Latina y el Caribe. 2018.
						
						38.       Velis M, Conti KI, Biermann F.
						Groundwater and human development: synergies and trade-offs within the context
						of the sustainable development goals. Sustain Sci. 2017;12:1007-17.
						
						39.       Morris BL, Lawrence AR, Chilton P, Adams
						B, Calow RC, Klinck BA. Groundwater and its susceptibility to degradation: a
						global assessment of the problem and options for management. 2003.
						
						Received: 26 September 2023 / Accepted:
						15 April 2023 / Published:15 December 2023
						
						Citation: Maldonado V,. Mendoza K, Rivera L, Peña T, Chirinos-Escobar M,
						Enríquez L, Fontecha G and  Ortiz B. High microbiological
						contamination in surface waters in the upper basin of the Choluteca River in
						Honduras. Revis Bionatura 2023;8
						(4) 37. http://dx.doi.org/10.21931/RB/2023.08.04.37
						
						Publisher's Note: Bionatura stays
						neutral concerning jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional
						affiliations.
						
						 Copyright: © 2023 by
						the authors. Submitted for possible open-access publication under the terms and
						conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license
						(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
