Biology Reference
In-Depth Information
these to waterborne pathogens. The same is true for microfluidics and min-
iaturized systems.
However, even excellent new technologies for waterborne pathogen
monitoring might struggle to reach the market. There are several barriers
to entry. One is evidently the cost of testing. Another factor, particularly
problematic in the highly regulated and conservative water industry, is the
validation of new methods. Alternative approaches to sample processing and
detection need to demonstrate scale-up from the laboratory, be repeatable
and reliable across a range of water sample types, and be easy to operate.
Access to water innovation parks or links with industry are likely to prove
vital for the developer of new technologies. At regional levels, the regula-
tors and governmental organizations could perhaps also help to stimulate
innovation in the area of pathogen detection by providing funding for water
innovation parks and for validation studies.
Looking ahead, it is challenging to predict how future waterborne
pathogen monitoring will take place. A vision of networked sensors report-
ing on microbial aspects of a water supply for operational decision mak-
ing still seems a long way from reality; it seems more likely that there will
first be the adoption of new laboratory tests/commercial systems in water
industry analytical facilities. However, it is clear that more direct detec-
tion of pathogens will be required and the methods described in this topic
will be needed to deliver on this requirement. Furthermore, more detailed
pathogen analysis is already sought after and techniques enabling simple
speciation and viability determination will prove popular. Many methods
are showing promise in delivering on sensitive, rapid direct detection or
detailed characterization. Few approaches, as yet, offer both advantages and
there is unlikely to be any one size fits all solution to either sample process-
ing or detection.