↓ Skip to main content

Assessment of Sewer Source Contamination of Drinking Water Wells Using Tracers and Human Enteric Viruses

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Science & Technology, October 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Assessment of Sewer Source Contamination of Drinking Water Wells Using Tracers and Human Enteric Viruses
Published in
Environmental Science & Technology, October 2010
DOI 10.1021/es100698m
Pubmed ID
Authors

Randall J. Hunt, Mark A. Borchardt, Kevin D. Richards, Susan K. Spencer

Abstract

This study investigated the source, transport, and occurrence of human enteric viruses in municipal well water, focusing on sanitary sewer sources. A total of 33 wells from 14 communities were sampled once for wastewater tracers and viruses. Wastewater tracers were detected in four of these wells, and five wells were virus- positive by qRT-PCR. These results, along with exclusion of wells with surface water sources, were used to select three wells for additional investigation. Viruses and wastewater tracers were found in the groundwater at all sites. Some wastewater tracers, such as ionic detergents, flame retardants, and cholesterol, were considered unambiguous evidence of wastewater. Sampling at any given time may not show concurrent virus and tracer presence; however, given sufficient sampling over time, a relation between wastewater tracers and virus occurrence was identified. Presence of infectious viruses at the wellhead demonstrates that high-capacity pumping induced sufficiently short travel times for the transport of infectious viruses. Therefore, drinking-water wells are vulnerable to contaminants that travel along fast groundwater flowpaths even if they contribute a small amount of virus-laden water to the well. These results suggest that vulnerability assessments require characterization of "low yield-fast transport" in addition to traditional "high yield-slow transport", pathways.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 6%
Norway 1 2%
Unknown 47 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 25%
Researcher 10 20%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Professor 4 8%
Other 12 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 25%
Environmental Science 11 22%
Unspecified 10 20%
Engineering 9 18%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 4%
Other 6 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 July 2011.
All research outputs
#429,981
of 3,630,293 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Science & Technology
#735
of 3,909 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,627
of 55,742 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Science & Technology
#20
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 3,630,293 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,909 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 55,742 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 97 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.