Journal of Advances in Environmental Health Research

Journal of Advances in Environmental Health Research

Transfer/Retention of Escherichia coli Cells from Exponential Phase in Acidic and Alkaline Percolating Water Through Sterilized/Unsterilized Sandy Soil

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
Arnaud Kassing 1
Edith B. Mouafo Tamnou 1
Mwanzo Wavindu 2
Yves Poutoum Yogne 3
Paul Alain Nana 4
Geneviève Bricheux 5
Télesphore Sime-Ngando 5
Moïse Nola 6
1 Laboratory of Hydrobiology and Environment, Faculty of Sciences, University of Yaounde I, P.O. Box 812 Yaounde, Cameroon
2 Central Research Laboratory, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Catholic University of Graben, DR Congo
3 Faculty of Sciences, University of Yaounde I
4 Institute of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, University of Douala
5 Laboratoire "Microorganismes: Génome et Environnement" (LMGE), UMR CNRS 6023, Université Clermont Auvergne, Campus Universitaire des Cézeaux, 1 Impasse Amélie Murat, TSA 60026 - CS 60026, 63178 Aubière Cedex, France
6 Department of animal biology and physiology, University of Yaoundé I
10.34172/jaehr.1452
Abstract
Introduction: Little is known about E. coli transfer and retention in acidic or alkaline water through sandy soils, and the role of sand sterilization. This study evaluated the transfer and retention of exponential-phase E. coli cells in acidic or alkaline water seeping through sterilized or unsterilized sand.
Methods: Sterilized and unsterilized sand of three size ranges was poured into pipe fragments. Cells from the exponential phase were inoculated into sterile NaCl solution (8.5 g/L) contained in Erlenmeyer flasks (concentration 7 × 107 CFU/mL) at a given pH. Water percolation tests were then carried out by allowing bacteria‑contaminated water to fall above the sand column. Bacteriological analysis of the percolated water was subsequently performed.
Results: Cell abundance in percolated water was lower than influent, with temporal variations depending on sand treatment and grain size. Smallest grains retained cells most efficiently. Few differences in retention efficiency occurred among sterilized sand sizes, but several differences occurred among unsterilized sizes. For pH 5 percolates, cell abundances differed significantly from pH 6, 8, and 9 (P < 0.05) for both sand types, but no differences were observed among pH > 5.
Conclusion: Cells are more retained in acidic influent than in alkaline influent, and also more retained through unsterilized sand grains than through sterilized sand. For a given pH value, the cell retention percentage increases relatively as sand grain size decreases.
Keywords
Bacteria-contaminated water
Acidic/alkaline pH
Percolation
Sterilized/unsterilized sand
Cells transfer/retention
Percolated water
Subjects
1.       Pokharel P, Dhakal S, Dozois CM. The diversity of Escherichia coli pathotypes and vaccination strategies against this versatile bacterial pathogen. Microorganisms 2023;11(2):344. doi:10.3390/microorganisms11020344
2.       Geurtsen J, de Been M, Weerdenburg E, Zomer A, McNally A, Poolman J. Genomics and pathotypes of the many faces of Escherichia coli. FEMS Microbiol Rev 2022;46(6):fuac031. doi:10.1093/femsre/fuac031
3.       World Health Organization (WHO). Drinking-Water. WHO; 2023. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/drinking-water. Accessed July 17, 2025.
4.       Banares-de-Dios G, Macia MJ, de Carvalho GM, Arellano G, Cayuela L. Soil and climate drive floristic composition in tropical forests: a literature review. Front Ecol Evol 2022;10:866905. doi:10.3389/fevo.2022.866905
5.       Pernes-Debuyser A, Tessier D. pH effect on soils properties: long time experiment of 42 plots in Versailles. J Water Sci 2002;15:27-39. doi:10.7202/705484ar
6.       Abanyie SK, Apea OB, Abagale SA, Amuah EEY, Sunkari ED. Sources and factors influencing groundwater quality and associated health implications: a review. Emerg Contam 2023;9(2):100207. doi:10.1016/j.emcon.2023.100207
7.       Gamar A, Khiya Z. Hydrogeochemical characterization using Piper diagram of the groundwater surrounding the wild dump of the El Hajeb town, Morocco. J Adv Environ Health Res 2025;13(2):104-13. doi:10.34172/jaehr.1373
8.       Tahir S, Marschner P. Clay addition to sandy soil: effect of clay concentration and ped size on microbial biomass and nutrient dynamics after addition of low C/N ratio residue. J Soil Sci Plant Nutr 2016;16(4):864-75. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/s0718-95162016005000061
9.       Sepehrnia N, Abbasi Teshnizi F, Hallett P, Coyne M, Shokri N, Peth S. Modeling bacterial transport and fate: insight into the cascading consequences of soil water repellency and contrasting hydraulic conditions. Sci Total Environ 2024;954:176196. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.176196
10.   Sepehrnia N, Gorakifard M, Hallett PD, Hajabbasi MA, Shokri N, Coyne M. Contrasting transport and fate of hydrophilic and hydrophobic bacteria in wettable and water-repellent porous media: straining or attachment? Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 2023;228:113433. doi:10.1016/j.colsurfb.2023.113433
11.   Lai H, Deng S, Cui M, Zheng S, Zheng J, Liu R, et al. Effect of particle size on migration and retention of bacteria in sand and its biomineralization. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng 2026;18(2):1496-503. doi:10.1016/j.jrmge.2025.05.008
12.   Razatos A, Ong YL, Sharma MM, Georgiou G. Molecular determinants of bacterial adhesion monitored by atomic force microscopy. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1998;95(19):11059-64. doi:10.1073/pnas.95.19.11059
13.   Egan AJ, Cleverley RM, Peters K, Lewis RJ, Vollmer W. Regulation of bacterial cell wall growth. FEBS J 2017;284(6):851-67. doi:10.1111/febs.13959
14.   Alawad OA, Alhozaimy A, Jaafar MS, Abdul Aziz FN, Al-Negheimish A. Effect of autoclave curing on the microstructure of blended cement mixture incorporating ground dune sand and ground granulated blast furnace slag. Int J Concr Struct Mater 2015;9(3):381-90. doi:10.1007/s40069-015-0104-9
15.   Garcia DC, Lima KU, Wang K, Figueiredo RB. Evaluating the effect of autoclave curing on the microstructure and compressive strength evaluation of a high strength concrete. Matéria (Rio J) 2022;27(2):e13201. doi:10.1590/s1517-707620220002.1301
16.   Bruni GN, Weekley RA, Dodd BJT, Kralj JM. Voltage-gated calcium flux mediates Escherichia coli mechanosensation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2017;114(35):9445-50. doi:10.1073/pnas.1703084114
17.   Benarroch JM, Asally M. The microbiologist’s guide to membrane potential dynamics. Trends Microbiol 2020;28(4):304-14. doi:10.1016/j.tim.2019.12.008
18.   Terradot G, Krasnopeeva E, Swain PS, Pilizota T. Escherichia coli maintains pH via the membrane potential. PRX Life 2024;2(4):043015. doi https://doi.org/10.1103/PRXLife.2.043015
19.   Gonzalez JM, Aranda B. Microbial growth under limiting conditions-future perspectives. Microorganisms 2023;11(7):1641. doi:10.3390/microorganisms11071641
20.   Rohde M. The gram-positive bacterial cell wall. Microbiol Spectr 2019;7(3):10.1128/microbiolspec.gpp3-0044-2018. doi:10.1128/microbiolspec.GPP3-0044-2018
21.   Mukherjee A, Huang Y, Oh S, Sanchez C, Chang YF, Liu X, et al. Bacterial cell wall biosynthesis is controlled by growth rate dependent modulation of turgor pressure in E. coli. bioRxiv [Preprint]. May 13, 2025. Available from: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2023.08.31.555748v7.
22.   Basavaraju M, Gunashree BS. Escherichia coli: an overview of main characteristics. In: Starčič Erjavec M, ed. Escherichia coli-Old and New Insights. IntechOpen; 2022. doi:10.5772/intechopen.105508
23.   Veselovsky VA, Dyachkova MS, Bespiatykh DA, Yunes RA, Shitikov EA, Polyaeva PS, et al. The gene expression profile differs in growth phases of the Bifidobacterium longum culture. Microorganisms 2022;10(8):1683. doi:10.3390/microorganisms10081683
24.   UNEP/GRID-Geneva. What is Sand? Result from a UNEP/GRID-Geneva Expert Discussion. UNEP; 2022. doi:10.13097/archive-ouverte/unige:160291
25.   Holt JG, Krieg NR, Sneath PHA, Staley JT, Williams ST. Bergey’s Manual of Determinative Bacteriology. 9th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2000.
26.   Ashigye DA, Ekeleme IK, Obiekezie SO. Occurrence of Escherichia coli from environmental effluent during rainy and dry season in Kefi metropolis, Nasarawa state. Microbiol Arch Int J 2025;7(1):35-9. doi:10.51470/ma.2025.7.1.35
27.   Rodier J, Legube B, Merlet N, Mialocq JC, Leroy P, Houssin M, et al. L’analyse de l’eau. 9th ed. Paris: Dunod; 2009.
28.   Mira P, Yeh P, Hall BG. Estimating microbial population data from optical density. PLoS One 2022;17(10):e0276040. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0276040
29.   Gross MJ, Albinger O, Jewett DG, Logan BE, Bales RC, Arnold RG. Measurement of bacterial collision efficiencies in porous media. Water Res 1995;29(4):1151-8. doi:10.1016/0043-1354(94)00235-Y
30.   Ng W, Ting YP. Bacterial surface charge in “layers”: revealed by wash buffers of different ionic strength. PeerJ Prepr 2018;6:e2086v4. doi:10.7287/peerj.preprints.2086v4
31.   Claessens J, van Lith Y, Laverman AM, Van Cappellen P. Acid-base activity of live bacteria: Implications for quantifying cell wall charge. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 2006;70(2):267-76. doi:10.1016/j.gca.2005.09.006
32.   Ramstedt M, Leone L, Persson P, Shchukarev A. Cell wall composition of Bacillus subtilis changes as a function of pH and Zn²+ exposure: insights from cryo-XPS measurements. Langmuir 2014;30(15):4367-74. doi:10.1021/la5002573
33.   Kanamala M, Wilson WR, Yang M, Palmer BD, Wu Z. Mechanisms and biomaterials in pH-responsive tumour targeted drug delivery: a review. Biomaterials 2016;85:152-67. doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2016.01.061
34.   Lund PA, De Biase D, Liran O, Scheler O, Mira NP, Cetecioglu Z, et al. Understanding how microorganisms respond to acid pH is central to their control and successful exploitation. Front Microbiol 2020;11:556140. doi:10.3389/fmicb.2020.556140
35.   Meyer-Rosberg K, Scott DR, Rex D, Melchers K, Sachs G. The effect of environmental pH on the proton motive force of Helicobacter pylori. Gastroenterology 1996;111(4):886-900. doi:10.1016/s0016-5085(96)70056-2
36.   Dogsa I, Kriechbaum M, Stopar D, Laggner P. Structure of bacterial extracellular polymeric substances at different pH values as determined by SAXS. Biophys J 2005;89(4):2711-20. doi:10.1529/biophysj.105.061648
37.   Mozaheb N, Rasouli P, Kaur M, Van Der Smissen P, Larrouy-Maumus G, Mingeot-Leclercq MP. A mildly acidic environment alters Pseudomonas aeruginosa virulence and causes remodeling of the bacterial surface. Microbiol Spectr 2023;11(4):e0483222. doi:10.1128/spectrum.04832-22
38.   Kayoumu M, Wang H, Duan G. Interactions between microbial extracellular polymeric substances and biochar, and their potential applications: a review. Biochar 2025;7(1):62. doi:10.1007/s42773-025-00452-4
39.   Jyoti K, Soni K, Chandra R. Optimization of the production of exopolysaccharide (EPS) from biofilm-forming bacterial consortium using different parameters. Microbe 2024;4:100117. doi:10.1016/j.microb.2024.100117
40.   Jin Q, Kirk MF. pH as a primary control in environmental microbiology: 1. Thermodynamic perspective. Front Environ Sci 2018;6:21. doi:10.3389/fenvs.2018.00021
41.   Flemming HC, Wingender J. The biofilm matrix. Nat Rev Microbiol 2010;8(9):623-33. doi:10.1038/nrmicro2415
42.   Zhang M, Wu Y, Qu C, Huang Q, Cai P. Microbial extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) in soil: from interfacial behaviour to ecological multifunctionality. Geo-Bio Interfaces 2024;1:e4. doi:10.1180/gbi.2024.4
43.   Huang L, Jin Y, Zhou D, Liu L, Huang S, Zhao Y, et al. A review of the role of extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) in wastewater treatment systems. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2022;19(19):12191. doi:10.3390/ijerph191912191
44.   Oliva RL, Khadka UB, Camenzind T, Dyckmans J, Joergensen RG. Constituent of extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) produced by a range of soil bacteria and fungi. BMC Microbiol 2025;25(1):298. doi:10.1186/s12866-025-04034-z
45.   Nola M, Noah Ewoti OV, Nougang ME, Moungang LM, Chihib NE, Krier F, et al. The growth of Escherichia coli in soil layers separating the soil surface from the underground water table, in Central Africa: the hierarchical influence of the soil chemical characteristics. Res J Environ Earth Sci 2012;4(2):196-206.
46.   Kreve S, Dos Reis AC. Bacterial adhesion to biomaterials: What regulates this attachment? A review. Japanese Dental Science Review 2021;57:85-96. doi:10.1016/j.jdsr.2021.05.003
47.   Zheng S, Bawazir M, Dhall A, Kim HE, He L, Heo J, et al. Implication of surface properties, bacterial motility, and hydrodynamic conditions on bacterial surface sensing and their initial adhesion. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 2021;9:643722. doi:10.3389/fbioe.2021.643722
48.   Yazıcı H, Deniz E, Baradan B. The effect of autoclave pressure, temperature and duration time on mechanical properties of reactive powder concrete. Constr Build Mater 2013;42:53-63. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.01.003
49.   Yazal A, Kavas T, Soyal AD. Effects of different autoclaving pressure on mechanical properties of AAC. ce/papers 2018;2(4):591-4. doi:10.1002/cepa.829
50.   Ahmerkamp S, Marchant HK, Peng C, Probandt D, Littmann S, Kuypers MM, et al. The effect of sediment grain properties and porewater flow on microbial abundance and respiration in permeable sediments. Sci Rep 2020;10(1):3573. doi:10.1038/s41598-020-60557-7
51.   Cescon A, Jiang JQ. Filtration process and alternative filter media material in water treatment. Water 2020;12(12):3377. doi:10.3390/w12123377
52.   Abdiyev K, Azat S, Kuldeyev E, Ybyraiymkul D, Kabdrakhmanova S, Berndtsson R, et al. Review of slow sand filtration for raw water treatment with potential application in less-developed countries. Water 2023;15(11):2007. doi:10.3390/w15112007
53.   Wu H, Lei X, Chen X, Shen J, Wang X, Ma T. Study on effect of particle size distribution on water-retention capacity of coral sand from macro and micro perspective. J Mar Sci Eng. 2024;12(2):341. doi:10.3390/jmse12020341
Journal of Advances in Environmental Health Research
Volume 14, Issue 2
Spring 2026
Pages 114-122