Skip to main content
Microbiology Spectrum logoLink to Microbiology Spectrum
. 2024 Feb 2;12(3):e03141-23. doi: 10.1128/spectrum.03141-23

Bacterial diversity and resistome analysis of drinking water stored in cisterns from two First Nations communities in Manitoba, Canada

Anita Murdock 1, Sabrin Bashar 1, Dawn White 1, Miguel Uyaguari-Diaz 1, Annemieke Farenhorst 2, Ayush Kumar 1,
Editor: Bernadette J Connors3
PMCID: PMC10913478  PMID: 38305192

ABSTRACT

The microbiological content of water is an ongoing concern in First Nations communities in Canada. Many communities lack water treatment plants and continue to be under drinking water advisories. However, lack of access to treatment plants is only a part of the problem as poor water distribution systems also contribute to the failure to provide safe drinking water. Here, we studied the microbial diversity and antibiotic resistome from water stored in cisterns from two First Nations communities in Manitoba, Canada. We found that the cistern water contained a high number of bacteria and showed the presence of diverse antimicrobial resistance genes. Interestingly, the bacterial diversity and antimicrobial resistance genes varied considerably from that of the untreated source water, indicating that the origin of contamination in the cistern water came from within the treatment plant or along the delivery route to the homes. Our study highlights the importance of proper maintenance of the water distribution system in addition to access to water treatment facilities to ensure a supply of safe water to First Nations communities in Canada.

IMPORTANCE

The work described addresses a critical issue in First Nations communities in Canada—the microbiological content of water. Many of these communities lack access to water treatment plants and frequently experience drinking water advisories. This study focused on the microbial diversity and antibiotic resistome in water stored in cisterns within two First Nations communities in Manitoba, Canada. These findings reveal that cistern water, a common source of drinking water in these communities, contains a high number of bacteria and a wide range of antimicrobial resistance genes. This highlights a serious health risk as exposure to such water can lead to the spread of drug-resistant infections, posing a threat to the well-being of the residents.

KEYWORDS: bacteria, antibiotic resistance genes, water treatment, water storage

INTRODUCTION

Poor water quality within First Nations drinking water distribution systems is a well-known human rights concern that remains unresolved in Canada (1, 2). The most recent national assessment examining 740 of the 761 First Nations drinking water distribution systems classified 29% of the systems at high risk of negatively affecting drinking water quality and consequently the quality of life for community members (3). In the Province of Manitoba, Canada, surface water is the source for 50% of the drinking water distribution systems in First Nations communities (3), which has a greater risk than groundwater for chemical and bacteriological contamination by anthropogenic activities and wildlife. Additionally, 31% of the homes in First Nations communities in Manitoba require water delivery by truck for storage in cisterns (3). The quality of this stored water can deteriorate rapidly due to bacterial contamination as documented previously (46); so, even if the quality of the water is acceptable upon delivery, there is a need to monitor and maintain that quality during storage.

The global trend to overuse antibiotics in vital sectors (i.e., healthcare, agriculture, and veterinary medicine) has facilitated the development of antimicrobial resistance across many bacterial species. For example, carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) and extended spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Enterobacterales cause an alarming number of healthcare-associated infections that are resistant to antibiotic treatment. An estimated 13,100 and 197,400 cases of CRE- and ESBL-producing Enterobacterales, respectively, occurred in the USA in 2017 (7). Carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter was responsible for 8,500 hospitalizations in 2017; vancomycin-resistant enterococci caused 54,500 infections (7). In Canada, it is estimated that one out of nineteen deaths in 2018 was caused by antibiotic-resistant infections (8) and the 2021 surveillance report indicated increased resistance rates for three of the four monitored priority microorganisms (9). Neither report differentiates the data between indigenous and non-indigenous populations (information that is greatly lacking), but it is known that community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus affects First Nations people at a significantly higher rate than the remainder of the population (10, 11).

Microorganisms have always had the ability to acquire natural antibiotic-resistant determinants (12). It is now, since the introduction of manufactured antibiotics and their widespread use and subsequent flow into the environment, that antibiotics and antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) are found more abundantly in various environmental niches (1315). Constant exposure to antibiotics has forced bacteria to acquire ARGs—either through mobile genetic elements like plasmids or through the uptake of extracellular DNA—for their survival. Ultimately, this has led to the sharing of ARGs between bacteria (horizontal transfer) or with daughter cells (vertical transfer) and the consequential appearance of extensive antimicrobial resistance. The presence of ARGs in the environment, especially aquatic settings (including water treatment plants) (1517), has led to them being classified as “emerging contaminants” as their presence represents a threat to increased development of new resistant strains of bacteria (18).

Bacterial contamination of drinking water is commonly found in the tap water of homes in First Nations communities due to water treatment insufficiencies or prolonged storage in underground cisterns (46). Given that one in three First Nations homes in Manitoba relies on cisterns as the sole source of potable water, it is critical to identify and quantify ARGs in this water supply to provide preliminary information about the exposure of a large population to ARGs as a result of household water. In a previous study of First Nations source and drinking water samples, we specifically aimed to identify three ARGs [ampC, tet(A), and mecA] using quantitative PCR and screened them for multiple β-lactamase and carbapenemase genes (5). In this work, using shotgun metagenomics, we studied the microbial communities and all known and suspected ARGs in cistern-held water from two First Nations communities with the goal to better understand the potential health risks associated with this common water storage method.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Water samples

Water samples were collected from two First Nations reserves in Manitoba, designated as community B and community D (Table 1). Two source water samples were collected from the source water treatment plant (SWTP) prior to treatment (untreated) in each community (SWTP B and SWTP D). One post-treated water sample was collected from the kitchen tap of a home with an underground concrete cistern located in community B (Cistern B) and from a home with an underground fiberglass cistern located in community D (Cistern D). In addition, a water sample was collected from the Red River (RR) in the City of Winnipeg to serve as a reference for water heavily impacted by anthropogenic activities, including the release of wastewater treatment plant effluent and snowmelt runoff from agricultural land.

TABLE 1.

Description of the water samples used in this study

Sample Date Community Designation Sample description
Red River (September 2019) Winnipeg RR Direct grab sample of surface water providing an untreated, anthropogenically impacted reference sample.
Source water treatment plant October 2018 B and D SWTP B and SWTP D Source lake water taken at the water treatment plant drawn from a diversion pipe prior to treatment.
Concrete cistern (August 2018) B Cistern B Concrete constructed cistern housed underground external to the home. Intermittently filled by a water delivery truck. Exclusive to community B.
Fiberglass cistern October 2018 D Cistern D Fiberglass constructed cistern housed under the home. Intermittently filled by a water delivery truck. Exclusive to community D.

Sample collection

Sampling bottles were prepared at the University of Manitoba according to standard methods for sample bottle pre-treatment (17). Briefly, 1 L glass sampling bottles were sterilized using an autoclave at 121°C for 1 hour and opened only immediately prior to sampling. Samples were collected, preserved, and stored using recommended methods (17). A grab sample from the Red River was taken from the surface of the water; a sampling bottle was dipped until filled then sealed. Water samples from the treatment plants (SWTP) and the cisterns of community homes were taken from taps: any existing filters on the taps were removed and the surface of the tap was cleaned with a 90% ethanol wipe. Cold water was run for 3 minutes before filling the sampling bottles to ensure that the sample did not contain stagnant water from within the plumbing. These water sampling bottles were filled to 900 mL and 1 mL of a sterile 3% sodium thiosulfate solution was added to neutralize any residual chlorine and prevent bactericidal activity during transport to the laboratory. All samples were stored in coolers with ice packs during collection in the communities then at 4°C upon arrival on the same day at the University of Manitoba. Samples were processed <24 hours after collection.

DNA extraction and metagenomic sequencing

Up to 700 mL of each water sample (one sample each from the Red River, Cistern B, and Cistern D; two samples from each community’s water source) was filtered through a 0.22-µm, gridded, 47-mm sterile polyether sulfone membrane filter (Pall Corporation, Mississauga, ON, Canada) to capture all intact bacteria and extracellular DNA. The filters were stored at −20°C until further processing. DNA was extracted from the filters using the DNeasy PowerWater Kit (Qiagen, Germantown, MD, USA) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Concentration and purity of the purified DNA were determined using a Nanodrop 2000 spectrophotometer (Thermo Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). Shotgun metagenomic sequencing was carried out using an Illumina MiSeq with paired end reads (250 bp) by Génome Québec (Montreal, Québec, Canada). Sequence data are publicly available at the National Center for Biotechnology Information, BioProject number PRJNA1005677.

Data processing and visualization

Fastq sequence data files were uploaded to MetaStorm (19) for taxonomic and functional annotation using the read matching-based pipeline. Reads were trimmed and assessed for quality using Trimmomatic (20); Bowtie (21) was used for read alignment to bacterial reference genomes. Greengenes (22) was used to identify and annotate 16S rRNA gene sequences ahead of 16S rRNA normalization using the functional annotation pipeline in MetaStorm. The Comprehensive Antibiotic Resistance Database (CARD) v 3.0.2 (23) was used for ARG annotation against the sequences, leading to the calculation of ARG per copy of 16S rRNA. Data from Greengenes and CARD were exported into R (24) where RStudio (25) was applied to generate figures using ggplot2 (26). Principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) was calculated using microbial order composition and antibiotic class resistance and processed using the R packages vegan and stats (24); the Bray-Curtis dissimilarity index was calculated to show metric multidimensional scaling.

RESULTS

Resistome profile

The total resistome profile of samples taken from an SWTP and a home was established at each of the two communities using the absolute (Fig. 1) and relative (Fig. 2) ARG abundances expressed by resistance to antibiotic class. Overall, a total of 16 different antibiotic classes were observed. The top three most abundant classes were peptides, macrolides, and fluoroquinolones that were present in every sample (Fig. 1). This corresponded to an overall relative ARG abundance average of 61% for peptide resistance, 14% for macrolides resistance, and 10% for fluoroquinolone resistance in community B water samples and an abundance of 63% for peptide resistance, 16% for macrolides resistance, and 6% for fluoroquinolone resistance in community D water samples (Fig. 2). Antibiotic efflux pumps were the most prominent genes in the resistomes: of the 73 unique ARGs, 48 were related to various superfamilies of efflux pumps including the ATP-binding cassette, resistance nodulation division, and major facilitator efflux pump systems (Table 2).

Fig 1.

Fig 1

Determining the absolute resistome of two First Nations community water samples using the ratio of antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) to 16S rRNA copies. Site and sample names are abbreviated as follows: Winnipeg Red River, RR; untreated source water from community B, SWTP B-1, and SWTP B-2; concrete cistern from community B, Cistern B; untreated source water from community D, SWTP D-1 and SWTP D-2; fiberglass cistern from community D, Cistern D.

Fig 2.

Fig 2

Determining the relative resistome of two First Nations community water samples using the percent abundance of antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs). Site and sample names are abbreviated as follows: Winnipeg Red River, RR; untreated source water from community B, SWTP B-1 and SWTP B-2; concrete cistern from community B, Cistern B; untreated source water from community D, SWTP D-1 and SWTP D-2; fiberglass cistern from community D, Cistern D.

TABLE 2.

Unique resistance genes identified in resistome by samplea

Antibiotic class RR SWTP B-1 SWTP B-2 Cistern B SWTP D-1 SWTP D-2 Cistern D
Aminocoumarin mdtB mdtB mdtB mdtB
mdtC mdtC mdtC
novA
Aminoglycoside aac(3')-Ia
aac(6')-Iia
aac(6')-Iic
aph(3')-Ia
acrD acrD
smeB
smeR
Carbapenem FEZ-1
rm3
SPG-1
Cephalosporin OXA-21
OXA-119 OXA-119
OXA-205
Diaminopyrimidine dfrA14
dfrB6
Fluoroquinolone acrB acrB acrB
acrF acrF acrF
adeF adeF adeF adeF
ceoB ceoB
emrA
mexE
mexF mexF mexF mexF mexF mexF mexF
mexI mexI mexI mexI mexI
oprN oprN oprN
oqxB
Glycopeptide BRP(MBL)
vanSO
Macrolide axyY axyY axyY
CRP CRP
efrB
macB macB
mexB mexB mexB
mexC
mexD
mexK mexK mexK mexK mexK mexK
mexQ mexQ mexQ mexQ
mexW mexW mexW mexW mexW
mexY
mtrA mtrA mtrA mtrA mtrA mtrA
muxB muxB muxB muxB muxB
muxC muxC muxC muxC muxC
oleB
oleC oleC oleC oleC oleC
ompB
oprM oprM
smeD
smeE smeE smeE
Monobactam golS golS
mdsB mdsB mdsB
PER-2
TEM-126
Nitroimidazole msbA msbA msbA msbA msbA msbA msbA
Peptide arnA arnA arnA
bacA bacA bacA
bcrA bcrA bcrA bcrA
MCR-5
rosA rosA rosA
rosB rosB rosB
rpoB2 rpoB2 rpoB2 rpoB2 rpoB2 rpoB2 rpoB2
ugd ugd ugd ugd
Phenicol mexN mexN mexN
Pleuromutilin taeA taeA
Rifamycin efpA efpA efpA
rphA
rphB
Tetracycline otr(A)
otrC otrC
tetA(48) tetA(48)
Triclosan ompH
triC triC
a

Blank cells represent absence of the gene.

Resistance genes identified from untreated water samples displayed similar and less variable total resistomes than those from cistern-held water samples. The Red River sample had the least diverse antibiotic classes, with resistance to the peptide and macrolide classes comprising 88% of ARG abundance (Fig. 2). The untreated source water samples as well as the Red River samples showed the presence of approximately 0.4–0.7 ARG copies/16S rRNA copies in total (Fig. 1). Similarly, untreated source waters showed minor differences in total resistome composition and relative ARG abundance within duplicates. Each duplicate untreated source water sample in community B (SWTP B-1 and SWTP B-2) shared resistance against aminocoumarin, aminoglycoside, fluoroquinolone, macrolide, monobactam, nitroimidazole, peptide, and phenicol; however, SWTP B-2 did not contain carbapenem, cephalosporin, rifamycin, or tetracycline resistance as seen in SWTP B-1. Glycopeptide resistance, found at 0.06 and 0.008 ARG copies/16S rRNA copies respectively, was only found in the SWTP B-2 and Red River samples (Fig. 1 and 2). Community D samples, SWTP D-1 and SWTP D-2, both shared cephalosporin, diaminopyrimidine, phenicol, and rifamycin resistance; SWTP D-2 contained aminoglycoside, monobactam, pleuromutilin, and triclosan resistance (Fig. 1).

Resistome analysis showed that the absolute abundance in post-treated water from the concrete cistern in community B (Cistern B) was 0.7 ARG copies/16S rRNA copies; the fiberglass cistern in community D (Cistern D) had a value of 1.2 ARG copies/16S rRNA copies (Fig. 1). In the concrete cistern, ARGs indicated resistance to aminoglycoside, fluoroquinolone, macrolide, monobactam, nitroimidazole, peptides, rifamycin, tetracycline, and triclosan (Fig. 1). Even though triclosan resistance comprised ~2% of the ARG abundance from the cistern sample, it was not detected in the other samples from community B (SWTP B-1 and SWTP B-2). The ARGs found to be higher in the concrete cistern (Cistern B) compared to the source water (SWTP B-1 and SWTP B-2) were for fluoroquinolone (18% versus 6%), monobactam (3% versus 1–2%), and nitroimidazole (10% versus 1%–2%) (Fig. 2). In community D, ARGs in the fiberglass cistern (Cistern D) indicated resistance to aminocoumarin, aminoglycoside, carbapenem, cephalosporin, fluoroquinolone, macrolide, monobactam, nitroimidazole, and peptides. Comparing with the relative ARG abundance observed in the source water of community D, the fiberglass cistern did not show detectable triclosan (0.5% in SWTP D-2), tetracycline (1% SWTP D-1 and SWTP D-2), rifamycin (2% in SWTP D-1), pleuromutilin (1% in SWTP D-2), and phenicol (0.5% in SWTP D-1) (Fig. 2).

The primary resistance genes identified were components of efflux pump machinery, and common resistance genes included aminoglycoside acetyltransferase enzymes and rifampin phosphotransferases (Table 2). A few other ARGs were present but relatively less abundant, for example, OXA-119 (cephalosporin) and tetA(48) (tetracycline) were found in SWTP samples; OXA-21 and OXA-205 (cephalosporin), MCR-5 (peptide), SPG-1 (carbapenem), and TEM-126 (monobactam) were detected in cistern samples.

Microbial community profile

The microbial composition of untreated water samples was compared with the microbial presence in cistern samples—water that had been treated, transported, and stored (Fig. 3). The microbial community profile across all water samples identified 18 different orders of bacteria (Fig. 3). Overall, the microbial community at the taxonomy level of order did not deviate between the duplicates of the untreated water samples collected from the diversion pipe at the water treatment plant (i.e., SWTP B-1 versus SWTP B-2) in either community. In community B, prominent bacterial orders included Enterobacterales, Actinomycetales, and Rickettsiales; in community D, the dominant bacterial orders were Enterobacterales, Actinomycetales, and Burkholderiales.

Fig 3.

Fig 3

Determining the microbial community profile of two First Nations community water samples via the relative abundance of order-level bacteria normalized by 16S rRNA. The scale bar represents normalized abundance. Site and sample names are abbreviated as follows: Winnipeg Red River, RR; untreated source water from community B, SWTP B-1 and SWTP B-2; concrete cistern from community B, Cistern B; untreated source water from Ccmmunity D, SWTP D-1 and SWTP D-2; fiberglass cistern from community D, Cistern D.

The microbial composition of each of the cistern-held water samples (Cistern B and Cistern D) was markedly different than that of the corresponding untreated water samples (SWTP) but, interestingly, similar to each other despite the difference in cistern composition and geographical location of the communities (Fig. 3). In both communities, on average, Enterobacterales was more abundant in the SWTP samples than the cistern water samples. Conversely, Rhodobacterales and Rhodospirillales were more dominant in the cistern water samples, on average, than the SWTP samples.

ARG and microbial community analysis

Having identified the total resistome and microbial communities in each water sample, the presence of persistent ARGs and microbial orders was used to evaluate the degree of dissimilarity and, therefore, contamination of cisterns by source water (Fig. 4). The PCoA plot accounted for 78.7% of the variation in the samples using PC1 (66.7%) and PC2 (12%). The concrete (Cistern B) and fiberglass (Cistern D) cistern water samples showed some diversity relative to each other and were exceptionally distinct from their matched community SWTP water samples and the reference river water sample (RR).

Fig 4.

Fig 4

Principal coordinate analysis showing dissimilar relation of untreated source water (raw and untreated water) and post-treated cistern water samples from two First Nations communities. Site and sample names are abbreviated as follows: Winnipeg Red River, RR; untreated source water from community B, SWTP B-1 and SWTP B-2; concrete cistern from community B, Cistern B; untreated source water from community D, SWTP D-1 and SWTP D-2; fiberglass cistern from community D, Cistern D.

DISCUSSION

In previous work, we showed that cistern water in First Nations reserves in the Province of Manitoba can contain high levels of fecal bacteria and ARGs even though these communities have fully functional water treatment plants (46). In a study in Nunavut, Canada, the detection of Escherichia coli in a cistern water sample collected from a household was attributed to the time delay between the cistern running dry and being refilled (27) suggesting that cisterns can pose a greater risk to the community if they are not refreshed and cleaned on a regular basis. The placement of cisterns can also impact their rate of contamination. For example, a study that included three First Nations reserves in Manitoba demonstrated that above-ground polyethylene cisterns provided safer drinking water than below-ground concrete or fiberglass cisterns (28). Common ARGs have frequently been reported in drinking water (5, 6, 29), but little is known about the greater antibiotic resistome. In this study, we expanded upon previous work on fecal indicator organisms and common, targeted resistance genes by determining the complete antibiotic resistome and microbial community profile of cistern-held water and its source water. This information will help us better understand where the contamination is coming from and point to potential solutions.

Untreated waters

Thirty-two unique ARGs were identified in the untreated water samples (SWTP) from community B, and 40 were identified in SWTP samples from community D. Using the CARD database (23), five were recognized as clinically relevant—ARGs that play a mechanistic role in antibiotic resistance to known, employed antibiotics (30). The SWTP samples from community B contained four relevant ARGs, specifically OXA-119 (cephalosporin resistance), FEZ-1 (carbapenem resistance), PER-2 (monobactam resistance), and tetA(48) (tetracycline resistance); only one, OXA-119, was found in the SWTP samples from community D (Table 2) (23).

The resistome profile of each community’s SWTP samples showed higher ARG abundance (measure against 16S rRNA copy number) (Fig. 1) and greater ARG diversity (Fig. 2) compared to the reference water sample from the Red River (RR), which did not contain carbapenem-, cephalosporin-, or monobactam-associated resistance genes as the SWTP samples did (Table 1). This suggests that the water distribution system within each First Nations community that we studied is a point where ARGs can be introduced or enriched. Other studies have had similar observations. For example, as study from Brazil showed an increase in the abundance of pathogens between the raw water source (5%) and the final tap water source (18%) (31). However, this study also showed that the ARG composition was identical when comparing raw and tap water samples: β-lactams (19%), macrolides (13%), fluoroquinolones (9%), and glycopeptides (3%) were most prevalent, and there was a greater ARG diversity in the raw water sample versus the tap water sample (31). Similarly, an increase in pathogen detection was reported after water treatment in two rural Saskatchewan, Canada, villages (32). Taken together, water distribution systems may be an important source of pathogen contamination that then leads to issues where the water is delivered.

Cistern water

The concrete cistern of community B harbored 24 ARGs but only one clinically significant gene, MCR-5 (colistin resistance). Thirty-two ARGs were identified in the fiberglass cistern of community D, four of which are clinically relevant: SPG-1 (carbapenem resistance), OXA-205 and OXA-21 (cephalosporin resistance), and TEM-126 (monobactam resistance) (Table 2). The absolute ARG abundance within each cistern water sample was equivalent or greater than the ARG abundance of its matched SWTP water sample (Fig. 1) suggesting that water treatment might not be removing the source of the ARGs originating from the raw water, and/or ARGs are being re-introduced during water distribution. Previous studies have shown that the level of normalized ARGs/bacterial count in concrete and fiberglass cisterns was comparable to the level determined in anthropogenically impacted raw water (33) and that ARG levels from cisterns were considerably lower than that quantified in wastewater effluents (34). This study cannot confirm the sources of the observed high abundance of ARGs in cistern water in the two communities, but previous studies have indicated that contamination may be due to inadequate chlorine residuals, external contamination introduced during maintenance or repair, contamination by sewage or heavy rainfall (35), or human activity in and around the cistern (pets and children) (36).

β-Lactamase ARGs appeared in both pre- and post-treated (cistern) water samples. OXA β-lactamases are categorized by molecular structure into four groups, A through D, according to the Ambler class system (37). Class D enzymes are predominantly plasmid-encoded β-lactamases in Gram-negative bacteria that are able to hydrolyze oxacillin and penicillin (38); they were the only class identified in our water samples. We found OXA-119 in samples SWTP B-1 and SWTP D-1 (prior to treatment) and OXA-21 and OXA-205 in Cistern D (post-treatment). The presence of β-lactamase genes in drinking water has been reported previously. For example, one study reported β-lactam resistance gene abundance of 34% in treated water samples yet to be distributed and of 76% in tap water samples (39). Another study showed that OXA-related genes comprised 19.6% of the total ARGs detected in raw, disinfected, and tap waters (31). Each of the blaoxa genes identified in our study has reported to be present on mobile genetic elements. OXA-119 (with 96% homology to OXA-205) was isolated from an integron in Burkholderia cepacia (40); OXA-205 was isolated from an imipenem-resistant isolate of Pseudomonas aeruginosa containing the class 1 integron In671 (40), and OXA-21 was the first example of an OXA-related gene occurring outside of P. aeruginosa, discovered during a hospital respiratory disease outbreak caused by Acinetobacter baumannii (41). The presence of blaoxa genes, potentially in mobile genetic elements, poses an additional risk of transfer of these genes to other organisms present in the water samples.

Analysis of the 16S rRNA sequence data from the metagenomes revealed the presence of bacteria from multiple orders across all of our water samples. While Enterobacterales was consistently abundant in SWTP water samples, this order was nearly absent in each of the cistern water samples (Fig. 3). Concrete cisterns, as seen in community B, can harbor high fecal coliform counts (6), yet in this study, Enterobacterales (which includes coliforms) was not the most abundant order found. A recent environmental study of water resources found the ubiquitous presence of many bacteria belonging to the order Enterobacterales in source and treated water as well as in tap water provided through a piped infrastructure (42). This and our data suggest that although E. coli and other coliforms are being monitored at water treatment plants, other bacteria (as well as viruses) across many orders may be unaccounted for, underplaying the real risk to the water supply. What could be of great utility is studying First Nations water supplies from a quantitative microbial risk assessment (QMRA) perspective. This approach uses mathematical models to integrate factors like distribution, rate of occurrence, and concentration of a water contaminant of interest (protozoans, viruses, or bacteria) from the source water to the end user into an assessment that calculates the rate of risk of illness or infection (43, 44). Broadening the reference bacteria (and possibly including ARGs) in a QMRA may point to effective corrective measures that can be implemented to ensure an overall safer water supply in First Nations communities.

Cisterns often experience water stagnation between fillings that causes residual chlorine levels to fall thereby allowing bacterial growth (6, 28) and possibly explains why we observed very different microbial profiles between the cisterns and their matched water sources—along with cistern capacity, time water had been held in each cistern (data we were not able to obtain) and seasonal variation. While cisterns are not well represented in water distribution studies, water stagnation has been evaluated at other points along the water distribution system. In China, residential drinking water was shown to have increased levels of Acinetobacter, Methylotenera, Pseudomonas, and Sphingomonas species after only 12 hours of stagnation in municipal pipes (45). In the US, 1-week-stagnant water in residential plumbing showed increased biofilm formation and bacterial cell counts with a concomitant decrease in bacterial diversity (35). The cistern samples analyzed here contained many orders of bacteria including Burkholderales, Rhizobiales, and Sphingomondales (Fig. 3). Unfortunately, the opportunity for stagnation in cisterns is high as families, including the First Nations households participating in this study, persevere to conserve water so to not run out before the delivery of new water (4, 46). This lack of water movement and refreshment leads to the dissipation of the residual chlorine, bacterial regrowth, and potentially unsafe drinking water.

In this study, the two cisterns were located in geographically distinct regions in Manitoba and made from different materials. We observed that the concrete cistern had a higher abundance of Enterobacterales, Rhodobacterales, Pseudomonadales, Sphingobacterales, and Flavobacteriales compared to the fiberglass cistern. Cisterns in general carry a known level of contamination risk that can be due to improper maintenance or insufficient management of the supply water (47), factors and conditions that are fixable. There are very little empirical data on risk associated with cistern material (46, 28). It is important to expand this study to include more cisterns and locations to be able to make any clear conclusions.

Conclusions

Previously, we demonstrated that water stored in cisterns in First Nations Communities can be highly contaminated with E. coli and fecal coliforms (5, 6, 28). The aim of this study was to determine if the poor quality of cistern water was due to the improper treatment of the source water at the water treatment plants, or if the cisterns were otherwise becoming contaminated; consequently, deficiencies within the water distribution and storage systems were also highlighted.

Despite access to water treatment plants, the households with cisterns in both communities B and D consumed water that contained a variety of bacteria from many different orders and showed the presence of diverse antimicrobial resistance genes [expectedly dominated by efflux pump encoding genes (8)]. Metagenomic analysis of the total resistome showed a difference in ARG abundance and diversity between the untreated source water and the cistern water, suggesting that the contamination seen in cistern water was not due to improper treatment of the source water; this was verified through PCoA.

We are aware that the restricted number of samples that we were able to collect from these remote communities due to the COVID-19 pandemic is a limitation of our study. However, this study importantly contributes to the small body of literature on overall water quality on First Nations reserves in Canada and specifically highlights that prolonged water storage in cisterns could be a major factor contributing to poor quality drinking water in First Nations households in Manitoba. This study and future work will help in the design of long-term solutions along the entire water distribution chain that will ensure the delivery of safe water to hundreds of thousands of First Nations people and end the water crisis.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This work would not have been possible without the help from the members of communities B and D. The authors are grateful for their cooperation during the study as well as their wonderful hospitality.

This work is supported by a Project Grant from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research to A.K. and A.F. (152945), as well as by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) through its Collaborative Research and Training Experience program (CREATE grant #432009-2013) to A.F. and collaborators.

Contributor Information

Ayush Kumar, Email: ayush.kumar@umanitoba.ca.

Bernadette J. Connors, Dominican University New York, Orangeburg, New York, USA

REFERENCES

  • 1. Bradford LEA, Okpalauwaekwe U, Waldner CL, Bharadwaj LA. 2016. Drinking water quality in indigenous communities in Canada and health outcomes: a scoping review. Int J Circumpolar Health 75:32336. doi: 10.3402/ijch.v75.32336 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Rajapakse J, Hudson B, Brown C. 2022. Poor water quality and related health issues in remote indigenous populations of some of the world’s wealthiest nations. In Rajapakse J (ed), Safe water and sanitation for a healthier world. Sustainable development goals series. Springer, Cham. [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Indian and Northern Affairs Canada . 2003. National assessment of water and wastewater systems in First Nations communities: summary report
  • 4. Farenhorst A, Li R, Jahan M, Tun HM, Mi R, Amarakoon I, Kumar A, Khafipour E. 2017. Bacteria in drinking water sources of a First Nation reserve in Canada. Sci Total Environ 575:813–819. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.09.138 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Fernando DM, Tun HM, Poole J, Patidar R, Li R, Mi R, Amarawansha GEA, Fernando WGD, Khafipour E, Farenhorst A, Kumar A. 2016. Detection of antibiotic resistance genes in source and drinking water samples from a First Nations community in Canada. Appl Environ Microbiol 82:4767–4775. doi: 10.1128/AEM.00798-16 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Mi R, Patidar R, Farenhorst A, Cai Z, Sepehri S, Khafipour E, Kumar A. 2019. Detection of fecal bacteria and antibiotic resistance genes in drinking water collected from three First Nations communities in Manitoba, Canada. FEMS Microbiol Lett 366:fnz067. doi: 10.1093/femsle/fnz067 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention . 2019. Antibiotic resistance threats in the United States. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services C, Atlanta, GA. [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Canadian Council of Academies . 2019. When antibiotics fail: the expert panel on the potential socio-economic impacts of antimicrobial resistance in Canada. Ottawa (ON, Canada) [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Public Health Agency of Canada . 2021. Canadian antimicrobial resistance surveillance system report. Ottawa (ON, Canada) [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Ofner-Agostini M, Simor AE, Mulvey M, Bryce E, Loeb M, McGeer A, Kiss A, Paton S, Canadian Nosocomial Infection Surveillance Program, Health Canada . 2006. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in Canadian aboriginal people. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 27:204–207. doi: 10.1086/500628 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Jeong D, Nguyen HNT, Tyndall M, Schreiber YS. 2020. Antibiotic use among twelve Canadian First Nations communities: a retrospective chart review of skin and soft tissue infections. BMC Infect Dis 20:118. doi: 10.1186/s12879-020-4842-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. D’Costa VM, King CE, Kalan L, Morar M, Sung WWL, Schwarz C, Froese D, Zazula G, Calmels F, Debruyne R, Golding GB, Poinar HN, Wright GD. 2011. Antibiotic resistance is ancient. Nature 477:457–461. doi: 10.1038/nature10388 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Sanderson H, Fricker C, Brown RS, Majury A, Liss SN. 2016. Antibiotic resistance genes as an emerging environmental contaminant. Environ Rev 24:205–218. doi: 10.1139/er-2015-0069 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Wright GD. 2007. The antibiotic resistome: the nexus of chemical and genetic diversity. Nat Rev Microbiol 5:175–186. doi: 10.1038/nrmicro1614 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Sivalingam P, Poté J, Prabakar K. 2020. Extracellular DNA (eDNA): neglected and potential sources of antibiotic resistant genes (ARGs) in the aquatic environments. Pathogens 9:874. doi: 10.3390/pathogens9110874 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Pruden A, Pei R, Storteboom H, Carlson KH. 2006. Antibiotic resistance genes as emerging contaminants: studies in northern Colorado. Environ Sci Technol 40:7445–7450. doi: 10.1021/es060413l [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Rice EW, Baird RB, Eaton AB, Clesceri LS.. 2012. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 22nd edition. American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association, Water Environment Federation. [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Niu L, Liu W, Juhasz A, Chen J, Ma L. 2022. Emerging contaminants antibiotic resistance genes and microplastics in the environment: introduction to 21 review articles published in CREST during 2018-2022. Critical Rev in Environmental Sci and Tech 52:4135–4146. doi: 10.1080/10643389.2022.2117847 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Arango-Argoty G, Singh G, Heath LS, Pruden A, Xiao W, Zhang L. 2016. MetaStorm: a public resource for customizable metagenomics annotation. PLoS One 11:e0162442. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0162442 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Bolger AM, Lohse M, Usadel B. 2014. Trimmomatic: a flexible trimmer for illumina sequence data. Bioinformatics 30:2114–2120. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu170 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Langmead B, Salzberg SL. 2012. Fast gapped-read alignment with Bowtie 2. Nat Methods 9:357–359. doi: 10.1038/nmeth.1923 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22. DeSantis TZ, Hugenholtz P, Larsen N, Rojas M, Brodie EL, Keller K, Huber T, Dalevi D, Hu P, Andersen GL. 2006. Greengenes, a chimera-checked 16S rRNA gene database and workbench compatible with ARB. Appl Environ Microbiol 72:5069–5072. doi: 10.1128/AEM.03006-05 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. McArthur AG, Waglechner N, Nizam F, Yan A, Azad MA, Baylay AJ, Bhullar K, Canova MJ, De Pascale G, Ejim L, et al. 2013. The comprehensive antibiotic resistance database. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 57:3348–3357. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00419-13 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. R Core Team . 2021. R: a language and environmnet for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. [Google Scholar]
  • 25. R Core Team . 2020. RStudio: integrated development for R. RStudio, PBC, Boston, MA. http://www.rstudio.com. [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Wickham H. 2016. ggplot2: elegenat graphics for data analysis. Springer-Verlag, New York. http://ggplot2.tidyverse.org. [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Daley K, Truelstrup Hansen L, Jamieson RC, Hayward JL, Piorkowski GS, Krkosek W, Gagnon GA, Castleden H, MacNeil K, Poltarowicz J, Corriveau E, Jackson A, Lywood J, Huang Y. 2018. Chemical and microbial characteristics of municipal drinking water supply systems in the Canadian arctic. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 25:32926–32937. doi: 10.1007/s11356-017-9423-5 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Amarawansha GEA, Zvomuya F, Farenhorst A. 2021. Water delivery system effects on coliform bacteria in tap water in first nations reserves in Manitoba, Canada. Environ Monit Assess 193:339. doi: 10.1007/s10661-021-09114-x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Coleman BL, Louie M, Salvadori MI, McEwen SA, Neumann N, Sibley K, Irwin RJ, Jamieson FB, Daignault D, Majury A, Braithwaite S, Crago B, McGeer AJ. 2013. Contamination of Canadian private drinking water sources with antimicrobial resistant Escherichia coli. Water Res 47:3026–3036. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2013.03.008 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Jian Z, Zeng L, Xu T, Sun S, Yan S, Yang L, Huang Y, Jia J, Dou T. 2021. Antibiotic resistance genes in bacteria: occurrence, spread, and control. J Basic Microbiol 61:1049–1070. doi: 10.1002/jobm.202100201 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Dias MF, da Rocha Fernandes G, Cristina de Paiva M, Christina de Matos Salim A, Santos AB, Amaral Nascimento AM. 2020. Exploring the resistome, virulome and microbiome of drinking water in environmental and clinical settings. Water Res 174:115630. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2020.115630 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32. Zanacic E, McMartin DW, Stavrinides J. 2017. From source to filter: changes in bacterial community composition during potable water treatment. Can J Microbiol 63:546–558. doi: 10.1139/cjm-2017-0077 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Uyaguari-Díaz MI, Croxen MA, Luo Z, Cronin KI, Chan M, Baticados WN, Nesbitt MJ, Li S, Miller KM, Dooley D, Hsiao W, Isaac-Renton JL, Tang P, Prystajecky N. 2018. Human activity determines the presence of integron-associated and antibiotic resistance genes in southwestern British Columbia. Front Microbiol 9:852. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.00852 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34. Flores-Orozco D, Patidar R, Levin DB, Sparling R, Kumar A, Çiçek N. 2020. Effect of mesophilic anaerobic digestion on the resistome profile of dairy manure. Bioresour Technol 315:123889. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2020.123889 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35. Hrudey SE, Payment P, Huck PM, Gillham RW, Hrudey EJ. 2003. A fatal waterborne disease epidemic in Walkerton, Ontario: comparison with other waterborne outbreaks in the developed world. Water Sci Technol 47:7–14. doi: 10.2166/wst.2003.0146 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Bradford L, Waldner C, McLaughlin K, Zagozewski R, Bharadwaj L. 2018. A mixed-method examination of risk factors in the truck-to-cistern drinking water system on the Beardy’s and Okemasis First Nation reserve, Saskatchewan. Can Water Resour J 43:383–400. doi: 10.1080/07011784.2018.1474139 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Ambler RP. 1980. The structure of β-lactamases. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 289:321–331. doi: 10.1098/rstb.1980.0049 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38. Evans BA, Amyes SG. 2014. OXA β-lactamases. Clin Microbiol Rev 27:241–263. doi: 10.1128/cmr.00117-13 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39. Shi P, Jia S, Zhang X-X, Zhang T, Cheng S, Li A. 2013. Metagenomic insights into chlorination effects on microbial antibiotic resistance in drinking water. Water Res. 47:111–120. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2012.09.046 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40. Krasauskas R, Labeikytė D, Markuckas A, Povilonis J, Armalytė J, Plančiūnienė R, Kavaliauskas P, Sužiedėlienė E. 2015. Purification and characterization of a new β-lactamase OXA-205 from Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob 14:52. doi: 10.1186/s12941-015-0113-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41. Vila J, Navia M, Ruiz J, Casals C. 1997. Cloning and nucleotide sequence analysis of a gene encoding an OXA-derived β-lactamase in Acinetobacter baumannii. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 41:2757–2759. doi: 10.1128/AAC.41.12.2757 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42. Vaz-Moreira I, Nunes OC, Manaia CM. 2017. Ubiquitous and persistent proteobacteria and other Gram-negative bacteria in drinking water. Sci Total Environ 586:1141–1149. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.02.104 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43. Health Canada . 2019. Guidance on the use of quantitative microbial risk assessment in drinking water. Ottawa, ON, Canada [Google Scholar]
  • 44. Jaidi K, Barbeau B, Carrière A, Desjardins R, Prévost M. 2009. Including opernational data in QMRA model: development and impact of model inputs. J Water Health 7:77–95. doi: 10.2166/wh.2009.133 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45. Zhang M, Xu M, Xu S, Zhang L, Lin K, Zhang L, Bai M, Zhang C, Zhou H. 2020. Response of the bacterial community and antibiotic resistance in overnight stagnant water from a municipal pipeline. Int J Environ Res Public Health 17:1995. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17061995 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46. Martin C, Simonds VW, Young SL, Doyle J, Lefthand M, Eggers MJ. 2021. Our relationship to water and experience of water insecurity among Apsáalooke (Crow Indian) people, Montana. Int J Environ Res Public Health 18:582. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18020582 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47. Baird JM, Summers R, Plummer R. 2013. Cisterns and safe drinking water in Canada. Can Water Resour J 38:121–134. doi: 10.1080/07011784.2013.780790 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Microbiology Spectrum are provided here courtesy of American Society for Microbiology (ASM)

RESOURCES