Technology


Talking Point Heading


Faster detection of contaminated bathing water points to a shift in microbiological monitoring xxxxx@reply-direct.com


Copy


As urbanisation and climate change drive more people toward swimming in canals, harbours and urban beaches, the limits of conventional bathing water monitoring are becoming harder to ignore. Many of these sites sit close to treated wastewater and stormwater discharges, where short-lived contamination events can expose swimmers to bacteria, viruses and other pathogens before routine tests return results.


Researchers in Sweden have now demonstrated a method that significantly shortens response times, cutting detection from days to hours. Tested in Helsingborg by a collaboration between Lund University, Sweden Water Research and Kristianstad University, the approach signals a potential shift away from single-indicator testing toward more dynamic, microbiome-based water quality assessment.


The problem with culture-based indicators


Bathing water monitoring in Europe and elsewhere still relies heavily on culturing Escherichia coli as an indicator organism. While well established and regulatory accepted, culture-based methods typically take several days to deliver results. During that window, contaminated water may remain accessible, or conversely, sites may be closed unnecessarily based on outdated conditions.


Indicator bacteria such as E. coli are used as proxies for broader microbial risk, but their delayed detection limits their usefulness in fast- changing urban waters, where contamination from rainfall, sewer overflows or operational discharges can appear and dissipate within hours.


A microbiome-based alternative


The Swedish research team tested a different approach: analysing the entire bacterial community in a water sample rather than targeting a single organism. The method combines flow cytometry — a laser-based technique for rapidly scanning cells and particles in liquids — with machine learning models trained to associate changes in bacterial community structure with E. coli presence and concentration.


Flow cytometry generates a high-dimensional “fingerprint” of the microbiological content of a sample within minutes. Machine learning algorithms then interpret this fingerprint and estimate E. coli levels with around 80 per cent reliability, based on correlations observed during calibration.


The result is a system capable of analysing a sample in roughly 20 minutes, orders of magnitude faster than culture-based methods.


Instrumentation and operational advantages


From a monitoring perspective, the advantages are primarily operational. The method requires fewer reagents and less manual handling than PCR-based techniques and can be fully automated. Once set up, a flow cytometer can process samples at intervals as short as every 30 minutes, enabling near-real-time tracking of water quality trends.


The researchers also highlight sustainability benefits, as the approach uses fewer consumables and chemicals than many molecular methods. Importantly for utilities and regulators, the software underpinning the analysis is open source, lowering barriers to adoption and adaptation.


Access to a flow cytometer remains a limiting factor, placing the method firmly in the domain of utilities, laboratories and research organisations rather than citizen monitoring. However, flow cytometry is already well established in many water and microbiology labs, making integration more feasible than deploying entirely new platforms.


Beyond E. coli: identifying contamination sources


One of the more significant implications of the approach is its ability to detect change even when E. coli is absent. Because it tracks whole bacterial communities, the system can flag anomalies that traditional indicator tests would miss.


In principle, different contamination sources leave distinct microbiome signatures. Treated wastewater, stormwater runoff and bird droppings, for example, host different


bacterial assemblages. Over time, this opens the possibility not just of detecting contamination quickly, but of inferring its likely origin — a capability that current bathing water frameworks largely lack.


For water quality professionals, this shifts microbiological monitoring from a binary pass/ fail exercise toward a diagnostic tool that could inform operational responses upstream.


Towards automated decision-making


The researchers envisage a future in which microbiome-based measurements feed directly into decision-support systems. Routine, automated monitoring could trigger bathing water warnings in near real time, while slower, more expensive methods such as PCR are reserved for confirmation, characterisation or regulatory reporting.


Such tiered monitoring architectures mirror developments in other parts of environmental sensing, where rapid screening tools are paired with targeted, high-specificity analyses.


Implications for bathing water regulation


While the method is not yet a regulatory replacement for culture-based E. coli testing, it


highlights a growing mismatch between current standards and real-world exposure dynamics. Urban bathing waters are increasingly variable, and climate-driven changes in rainfall and temperature are likely to amplify short-duration contamination events.


For regulators and monitoring professionals, microbiome-level approaches raise questions about how bathing water safety is defined, measured and communicated. Faster detection may ultimately demand faster decision-making — and regulatory frameworks capable of acting on probabilistic, real-time data rather than delayed confirmations.


A signal of where microbiological monitoring is heading


The Helsingborg trials do not render existing methods obsolete, but they do point to a future in which microbiological water quality monitoring is faster, more automated and more information-rich.


For the environmental monitoring community, the work underscores a broader trend: moving away from single-parameter indicators toward systems that interpret complex biological signals using advanced instrumentation and data analytics. In the context of increasingly urban and climate-stressed waters, that shift may prove essential rather than optional.


Have your say on the matter. Join the conversation jed@envirotechpubs.com


Four water lines in one instrument Water / Wastewater


bNovate has introduced BactoSwitch, which by offering four water sampling lines for its proven BactoSense analyser, now creates a highly efficient multi-source monitoring hub.


Significantly advancing BactoSense’s capacity and precision whilst greatly reducing site work, BactoSwitch provides broader visibility with fewer resources for more data, better decisions and optimum operational control.


bNovate’s CTO, Luigino Grasso, said: “This important launch of BactoSwitch shows how


we can continuously improve the capabilities of our BactoSense analysers so that in the digital age, we provide the very best in rapid, automated solutions for water monitoring and analysis.”


Connecting up to four inlet streams to a single BactoSense instrument, BactoSwitch’s integrated flow regulation handles 0.1 to 5 bar with precision. With no manual intervention required, operating costs can be reduced by 35%.


Expanding coverage with enhanced stage-by-


stage insights across water treatment plants, bNovate’s BactoSense, with new BactoSwitch, also tracks microbial quality in springs/ catchments and validates pre and post treatment with log reduction valves.


Installation is fast in less than one hour, because the simple push-in fittings remove the need for complex plumbing.


More information online: ilmt.co/PL/VG9q 66278pr@reply-direct.com


38


IET - JANUARY / FEBRUARY 2026


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60