The DOI matches its Crossref record; 94 of the 94 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Flow cytometric bacterial cell counts challenge conventional heterotrophic plate counts for routine microbiological drinking water monitoring
Open accessAbstract
Drinking water utilities and researchers continue to rely on the century-old heterotrophic plate counts (HPC) method for routine assessment of general microbiological water quality. Bacterial cell counting with flow cytometry (FCM) is one of a number of alternative methods that challenge this status quo and provide an opportunity for improved water quality monitoring. After more than a decade of application in drinking water research, FCM methodology is optimised and established for routine application, supported by a considerable amount of data from multiple full-scale studies. Bacterial cell concentrations obtained by FCM enable quantification of the entire bacterial community instead of the minute fraction of cultivable bacteria detected with HPC (typically < 1% of all bacteria). FCM measurements are reproducible with relative standard deviations below 3% and can be available within 15 min of samples arriving in the laboratory. High throughput sample processing and complete automation are feasible and FCM analysis is arguably less expensive than HPC when measuring more than 15 water samples per day, depending on the laboratory and selected staining procedure(s). Moreover, many studies have shown FCM total (TCC) and intact (ICC) cell concentrations to be reliable and robust process variables, responsive to changes in the bacterial abundance and relevant for characterising and monitoring drinking water treatment and distribution systems. The purpose of this critical review is to initiate a constructive discussion on whether FCM could replace HPC in routine water quality monitoring. We argue that FCM provides a faster, more descriptive and more representative quantification of bacterial abundance in drinking water.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Standard methods: For the examination of water and waste water
(1990) · Analytical Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/0003-2697(90)90598-4 · Cited by 72,091
Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater
(2012) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.49-6910 · Cited by 14,205
Reagent and laboratory contamination can critically impact sequence-based microbiome analyses
Salter, S. J., Cox, M. J., Turek, E. M., Calus, S. T., Cookson, W. O., Moffatt, M. F., Turner, P., Parkhill, J., Loman, N. J., & Walker, A. W. (2014) · BMC Biology · doi:10.1186/s12915-014-0087-z · Cited by 3,463
Shapiro, H. M. (2003) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/0471722731 · Cited by 2,671
A new medium for the enumeration and subculture of bacteria from potable water
Reasoner, D. J., & Geldreich, E. E. (1985) · Applied and Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1128/aem.49.1.1-7.1985 · Cited by 2,300
A new view of the tree of life
Hug, L. A., Baker, B. J., Anantharaman, K., Brown, C. T., Probst, A. J., Castelle, C. J., Butterfield, C. N., Hernsdorf, A. W., Amano, Y., Ise, K., et al. (2016) · Nature Microbiology · doi:10.1038/nmicrobiol.2016.48 · Cited by 2,039
Nadkarni, M. A., Martin, F. E., Jacques, N. A., & Hunter, N. (2002) · Microbiology · doi:10.1099/00221287-148-1-257 · Cited by 1,938
Inactivation credit of UV radiation for viruses, bacteria and protozoan (oo)cysts in water: A review
Hijnen, W. A. M., Beerendonk, E. F., & Medema, G. J. (2006) · Water Research · doi:10.1016/j.watres.2005.10.030 · Cited by 1,591
Staley, J. T., & Konopka, A. (1985) · Annual Review of Microbiology · doi:10.1146/annurev.mi.39.100185.001541 · Cited by 1,570
Isolating "Uncultivable" Microorganisms in Pure Culture in a Simulated Natural Environment
Kaeberlein, T., Lewis, K., & Epstein, S. S. (2002) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1070633 · Cited by 1,237
Cited by
Improving End-User Trust in the Quality of Commercial Probiotic Products
Jackson, S. A., Schoeni, J. L., Vegge, C., Pane, M., Stahl, B., Bradley, M., Goldman, V. S., Burguière, P., Atwater, J. B., & Sanders, M. E. (2019) · Frontiers in Microbiology · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2019.00739 · Cited by 192
Methods to quantify biological contaminants in microalgae cultures
Di Caprio, F. (2020) · Algal Research · doi:10.1016/j.algal.2020.101943 · Cited by 87
Travnickova, E., Mikula, P., Oprsal, J., Bohacova, M., Kubac, L., Kimmer, D., Soukupova, J., & Bittner, M. (2019) · AMB Express · doi:10.1186/s13568-019-0909-z · Cited by 74
Metadata
- Authors
- Van Nevel, S., Koetzsch, S., Proctor, C. R., Besmer, M. D., Prest, E. I., Vrouwenvelder, J. S., Knezev, A., Boon, N., & Hammes, F.
- Venue
- Water Research
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-04
- Volume
- 113
- Pages
- 191-206
- ISSN
- 0043-1354 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2586171209
- Cited by
- 256
- References
- 94
- FWCI
- 14.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Flow cytometric bacterial cell counts challenge conventional heterotrophic plate counts for routine microbiological drinking water monitoring. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.watres.2017.01.065
- The paper
- Van Nevel, S., Koetzsch, S., Proctor, C. R., Besmer, M. D., Prest, E. I., Vrouwenvelder, J. S., Knezev, A., Boon, N., & Hammes, F. (2017). Flow cytometric bacterial cell counts challenge conventional heterotrophic plate counts for routine microbiological drinking water monitoring. Water Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2017.01.065
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.