Abstract
The surface pore morphology of two brands of membrane filters was studied by using scanning electron microscopy. The differences observed are presented as a possible explanation for reported discrepancies in coliform recovery from water.
Full text
PDF
Images in this article
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Dutka B. J., Jackson M. J., Bell J. B. Comparison of autoclave and ethylene oxide-sterilized membrane filters used in water quality studies. Appl Microbiol. 1974 Sep;28(3):474–480. doi: 10.1128/am.28.3.474-480.1974. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hufham J. B. Evaluating the membrane fecal coliform test by using Escherichia coli as the indicator organism. Appl Microbiol. 1974 Apr;27(4):771–776. doi: 10.1128/am.27.4.771-776.1974. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Presswood W. G., Brown L. R. Comparison of Gelman and Millipore membrane filters for enumerating fecal coliform bacteria. Appl Microbiol. 1973 Sep;26(3):332–336. doi: 10.1128/am.26.3.332-336.1973. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Schaeffer D. J., Long M. C., Janardan K. G. Statistical analysis of the recovery of coliform organisms on Gelman and Millipore membrane filters. Appl Microbiol. 1974 Oct;28(4):605–607. doi: 10.1128/am.28.4.605-607.1974. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Sladek K. J., Suslavich R. V., Sohn B. I., Dawson F. W. Optimum membrane structures for growth of coliform and fecal coliform organisms. Appl Microbiol. 1975 Oct;30(4):685–691. doi: 10.1128/am.30.4.685-691.1975. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]