Applied Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2021, Vol. 9, No.

7, 649-655
Available online at http://pubs.sciepub.com/aees/9/7/4
Published by Science and Education Publishing
DOI:10.12691/aees-9-7-4

Bacterial Population of Fish and Their Environment

in Ponds Utilized for Natural Purification of Wastewater
Sutapa Sanyal1,*, Samir Banerjee2
1
Krishnagar Govt College, Post Graduate Department of Zoology, Krishnagar, Nadia, West Bengal, PIN-741101, India
2
Department of Zoology, University of Calcutta, 35-Ballygunge Circular Road, Kolkata-700 019, West Bengal, India
*Corresponding author:

Received May 27, 2021; Revised July 05, 2021; Accepted July 14, 2021
Abstract Viable threats from waste-fed aquaculture have become a genuine subject of discussion presumably
since the initiation of such fishery. An aquaculture-based sewage treatment system, blending fish as biological
component was assessed in Bandipur, Titagarh, North 24 Parganas, West Bengal, India. The 5 MLD (million litres
per day) system receiving domestic sewage flow comprised of anaerobic ponds (areas-0.7 ha, depths-2.5m),
facultative ponds (areas-4.8 ha, depths-1.5m) and maturation ponds (areas-4.8 ha, depths-1m). The observation
revealed substantial aptitude of the system for biological sewage treatment, with respect to reduction of ammonia
nitrogen, BOD (Biological oxygen demand) and COD (Chemical Oxygen Demand). The TVC (Total Viable Count)
and enteric bacterial counts were detected in higher numbers from water and fish. Some of the members customarily
recovered in this study like Vibrio were established fish and human pathogens. Counts of faecal coliforms in fish
culture ponds were found to outstrip the World Health Organization (WHO) standards of ≤103 faecal coliforms per
100 ml of water to be used in aquaculture. High concentrations of pathogenic bacteria were reported to be present in
fish even at low numbers of indicatory bacteria. Estimated risk of bacteriological infection of fish for most of the
times crossed the guide line proposed by international commission on the microbiological specification of foods
(1995). Public health risks associated from fish and fishery products of Bandipur sewage fed farm clearly indicate
infelicity of wastewater treatment along with inappropriateness of treated waste water to be reused in aquaculture.
Keywords: aquaculture, wastewater, fish, health risks
Cite This Article: Sutapa Sanyal, and Samir Banerjee, “Bacterial Population of Fish and Their Environment
in Ponds Utilized for Natural Purification of Wastewater.” Applied Ecology and Environmental Sciences, vol. 9,
no. 7 (2021): 649-655. doi: 10.12691/aees-9-7-4.

Few restricted information [4,5,6,7,8] is available about

1. Introduction
Sewage input in aquaculture ponds spelling prosperity
of farmers, is actually a veritable threat to the environment.
In the majority of cases, the sewages containing unlimited
contaminants are applied untreated. This has added pollution
to the water and poison to the organisms. In developing
countries, excreta-related diseases are very usual, and
wastewater being a source of excreted pathogens like
bacteria, viruses, protozoa, and the helminths [1] cause
diseases in man. Many of the excreta related infections
have definite value in wastewater use schemes [2]. Fish in
wastewater is at perpetual risk of contamination by toxic
chemicals, heavy metals and pathogenic micro organisms.
Skin and digestive tract of fish get frequent contamination
and later also internal organs and muscles. Therefore,
health hazard to fish handlers and consumers from waste
fed fisheries is likely to be very high [3] which demands
repeated and extensive prophylactic survey of wastewater
fishery.
the risks connected to waste fed systems. Detail quality
characterization of wastewater is required for water
conservation through recycling of wastewater in agriculture,
aquaponics and aquaculture. Fish as a cheap source of
animal protein to the fish eating population of this country
deserves assessment of bacteria in their tissues to provide
appropriate information regarding the microbial contamination
in the biota and extension of pollution in the environment.
In addition to, bacteriological estimation from pathological
and toxicological points has predominant importance
and becomes crucial if the waste fed fishes are to be
commercialized for human consumption.
In view of the public health mater from waste fed
fishery and lack of information thereof, principle objective
of the present study was to assess the eco health of
wastewater aquaculture system. Therefore, the present
research work evaluated the bacteriological and chemical
contamination of sewage fed aquaculture system. Further,
fish can be a forerunner to the emergence of disease
epizootics. Hence, present study also scrutinized bacteria
present in waste fed fish.
 Applied Ecology and Environmental Sciences
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Site
Waste fed aquaculture system of Bandipur, Rahara,
North 24 Parganas, West Bengal, India (22°44'N Latitude
and 88º24'E Longitude) was considered for this study.
Sewage fed ecosystem consist of anaerobic ponds (the
retention times at the designflow-1day, pond areas-0.7 ha,
and depths-2.5m), facultative ponds (FP, the retention
times at the designflow-4day, pond areas-4.8 ha and
depths-1.5m), and maturation ponds (MP, the retention
times at the design flow-4 day, pond areas-4.8 ha and
depths-1m) [9]. Design capacity of the waste treatment
plant is 14.1 ML/d (million litre/ day) with an average
flow of 12 ML/d [9]. Presently wastewater flow is
around one- third of the design flow [10]. Ponds are
interconnected with cemented sluice gates. Raw sewage is
entirely of domestic origin, coming from adjacent Titagarh
town and parts of Barrackpore, municipal area of North
24 Parganas, West Bengal, India. Pisciculture is done in
both facultative and maturation ponds for the reduction of
BOD.
Fish ponds are engaged to raise table size Indian
major carps (IMC) viz. Labeo rohita, Catla catla and
Cirrhinus mrigala and exotic carps (EC) viz. Oreochromis
niloticus, Oreochromis mossambicus, Hypophthalmicthys
molitrix and to some extent Cyprinus carpio following
multiple stocking and multiple harvesting technique.
Fish culture operations are being done in 3 phases
in a year.
2.2. Collection and Preparation of Water and
Fish Samples
Water samples were collected from the inlet point of
the pond storing raw sewage, from facultative ponds and
also from maturation ponds for microbiological and
chemical characteristics of the samples. Each pond was
sampled monthly from June 2008 to May 2011. Water
samples were collected from sub–surface i.e., 15 to 20 cm
below the water surface to avoid surface contamination.
All the samples were brought to the laboratory in a thermo
insulated container at 4°C and examined immediately on
arrival.
Fish samples were caught with a net and were
immediately transferred to the laboratory in containers
with pond water. Indian Major Carps like Labeo sp.,
Cirrhinus sp. along with Oreochromis spp. were subjected
to bacteriological assay. Ten live fish of all the species
were randomly selected in each season from June 2014 to
May 2017.
2.3. Analysis of Physicochemical Parameters
of Water
Water samples were stored and fixed for estimation of
Temperature, pH, Dissolved oxygen (DO), Biological
Oxygen Demand (BOD), Chemical Oxygen Demand
(COD), Ammonia nitrogen (AN) and Nitrate Nitrogen
(NN) by the standard methods [11].
650
2.4. Preparation of Sample for Bacteriological
Analysis
Appropriate sample dilutions of water were made
(10-1-10-5) with sterile physiological saline (0.85% wt/vol
sodium chloride, NaCl) in deionized water.
Dissection, weighing, homogenization and serial
dilutions of homogenates of muscles and digestive tract
contents of fish were done following [12,13]. Time lag
from fish collection to the analyses did not exceed 6 hours.
2.5. Analysis of Indicator Bacteria
All samples (Fish and Water) were examined for the
presence of the following organisms: total viable counts
(TVC) at 37°C [11], total coliforms (TC) [11], faecal
coliforms (FC) [11], Escherichia coli (E.coli) [14] and
faecal streptococci (FS) [11].
2.6. Analysis of Pathogenic Bacteria
Fish and Water were also evaluated for the presence of
pathogenic bacteria like Salmonella spp., Shigella spp and
Vibrio spp. Presence / lack of Salmonella spp., Shigella
spp. and Vibrio spp. on enrichment media at 37°C for 24
hours followed by a selective media under same
incubation condition were used [11].
Speculative Vibrio spp., E.coli, Salmonella spp., and
Shigella spp. were isolated in pure culture and identified
by cultural and biochemical characters.
Tests were carried out on each isolate following the
procedures delineated by Prescott et al., [15] to enable
identification to the generic levels (Table 5) with the aid
of the Bergey’s Manual of Determinative Bacteriology
[16].
2.7. Statistical Analysis
Logarithmic transformation of bacterial counts was
used to normalize data before statistical analysis. All of
the results were expressed as mean ± standard errors (SE).
Single factor analysis of variance (one way ANOVA) was
performed to find the differences in the mean counts of
each physico chemical (water) and bacteriological
parameters among different treatments and fish species.
To determine the differences in the bacterial
concentrations mean values of various bacteria obtained
from fish tissues (muscles and digestive tract contents) as
well as from different treatments (water) were subjected to
a two way analysis of variance test (two way ANOVA).
In each test difference at P<0.05 was considered
significant. The data were analyzed in Excel 2003
(Microsoft Seattle, WA, USA) with the add-in software
Statcel 2 [17].
3. Results
Achievements of the waste stabilization ponds were
evaluated for the degree of elimination of unenviable
contaminants and infectious organisms from the raw
sewage. Entire study period was divided into three stages
651 Applied Ecology and Environmental Sciences

pre monsoon (March to May), monsoon (June to October) Salmonella (16% of the tested samples) but almost
and post monsoon (November to February). complete absence of Shigella (Figure 1).
Table 2. Trends of removal of different indicator bacteria at
3.1. Physicochemical Parameters of Water different steps of treatment in Bandipur sewage fed pond. Values are
Mean ± SE (standard error) of twenty four times analysis. Different
Generally the range of variation of water temperature superscripts in the same column indicate statistically significant
was 26°C in post monsoon to 33°C in pre monsoon. Water differences between means at P<0.05
in the experimental ponds was slightly alkaline (Table 1). Faecal Bacteria Total
The mean pH values recorded for all sampling points were log MPN 100ml-1 Bacteria
Treatments
within the WHO pH tolerance limit of between 6.00 and TVC
TC FC E.coli FS
log CFU ml-1
9.00 for wastewater to be discharged into environment Raw 7.36 7.36 7.16 8.36 6.58
[18]. Lower concentration of dissolved oxygen was observed Sewagea ± 1.00c ±1.00e ±1.1g ±0.01i ±0.10k
in studied sewage fed pond (Table 1). The level of BOD 4.43 3.94 3.1 3.63 5.41
FPb
removal was 84% at the facultative ponds and reached ±034d ±0.31f ±0.30h ±0.44j ±0.30l
87% at maturation ponds (Table 1). The removal efficiency 4.12 3.51 2.56 2.55 4.49
MPb
±0.41d ±0.41f ±0.48h ±0.69j ±0.27m
of COD was 72% at facultative ponds and reached 81% at
maturation ponds (Table 1). The ANOVA, P<0.05 for
ammonia nitrogen showed that there was significant 120 Vibrio spp.

% of reduction of pathogenic bacteria

difference in the mean values among the treatments which
was an indication of efficient removal of ammonia from
source to out let (Table 1). The ANOVA, P>0.05 (Table 1)
for nitrate nitrogen of raw sewage and maturation ponds
revealed inefficiency of the treatment system. Nitrate is
essentially harmless till its level in the pond water should
be controlled to avoid eutrophication [19].
Table 1. Mean±SE (standard error) of physicochemical characteristics
of the raw sewage and waste stabilization ponds of the Bandipur.
Different superscripts in the same row indicate statistically
significant differences between means at P<0.05 (n=12)
Facultative Maturation
Parameters Raw Sewage
Ponds Ponds
pH 7.37±0.03a 7.76±0.07b 7.92±0.05b
DO(mg/l) 0.55± 0.99c 2.85±0.21d 3.28±0.16d
BOD (mg/l) 101.5±7.5e 16.06±0.62f 13.4±0.83f
COD (mg/l) 303.5±0.5g 85.5±3.5h 56.5±15.5i
AN (mg/l) 4.15± 0.10j 1.52±0.49k 0.8±0.05l
NN (mg/l) 1.60±0.86m 5.24±0.57n 2.21±0.52m
3.2. Bacteriological Parameter of Water
Present research found a marked reduction of TVC, TC,
FC, E.coli and FS counts as the effluent passed through
the different stabilization ponds (Table 2). The sharp
reduction in the E.coli counts, which is the most widely
used indicator of faecal contamination, represented 70%
removal efficiency (Table 2). The two way ANOVA,
P<0.05 showed that there was significant difference
between bacterial concentrations of various treatment
systems (Table 2). Besides, the single factor ANOVA,
P<0.05 showed significant difference for each individual
bacterial parameters from source to maturation ponds
(Table 2). This was further an indication of treatment
efficiency. Most of the samples examined for TVC and
coliforms in the raw sewage did not comply the WHO
guideline [20] (less than 105 FC /100ml for wastewater
reuse for aquaculture), but that of the final effluents were
very close to WHO levels (Table 2). In entrance points,
raw sewage samples were contaminated with Vibrio
(100% of tested samples), Salmonella (100% of tested
samples) and Shigella (20% of the tested samples),
whereas, in exit points bacteriological examination proved
the presence of Vibrio (54.5% of tested samples) and
Salmonella spp.
100
Shigella spp.
80
60
40
20
0
RS FP MP
Pond Types
Figure 1. Trends of removal of different pathogenic bacteria (%) at
different steps of treatment in Bandipur sewage fed pond
3.3. Indicator Bacteria in Fish
Faecal indicator bacteria like coliforms and streptococci
had been isolated frequently from intestinal tract of
various fish species (Table 3). These bacteria are not
usually associated with the normal gut flora of fish.
Present study showed high faecal coliform labels in fish
fillets amounting from 102 to 105 FC/100 g in Labeo sp.
(2.4±0.74 to 5.97±0.43 log MPN 100g-1, Table 3) and
Oreochromis spp. (2.66±0.90 to 5.14±0.32 log MPN 100g-1,
Table 3) and 103 to 105 FC/100 g in Cirrhinus sp.
(2.98±0.79 to 5.02±0.66 log MPN 100g-1, Table 3). High
numbers of E.coli were obtained from flesh of all the three
fish (Table 3). Fish flesh was also noted to be
contaminated by sufficient amount of faecal streptococci
(Table 3). TVC of the fish flesh was found in the range of
104–105 cfu/g (Table 3) even at very little faecal coliform
penetration. This observation seems to follow the report of
[10,12].
No statistical significant differences (Single factor
anova P>0.05) were established between the values of
different indicator bacterial parameters obtained from
muscles of tilapia and carp, the pattern seemed to be
similar (Figure 2a. and Figure 3a). Same findings were
reported by [12,21]. Similar relationship was observed
(Single factor anova P>0.05) for all indicator bacterial in
digestive tract contents of the three fish species except for
faecal streptococci (Figure 2b. and Figure 3b.).
 Applied Ecology and Environmental Sciences 652

Table 3. Recovery of bacteria (Mean ± SE, n=24) from individual fish organs
Fish species Tissue Type Seasons Parameters
TC FC E.coli FS TVC
log MPN 100ml-1 log MPN 100ml-1 log MPN 100ml-1 log MPN 100ml-1 log CFU ml-1
PRM j 3.87±0.83a 2.66±0.90c 1.87±0.85e 2.55±0.69g 5.62±0.64h
Muscles Mk 6.03±0.35b 5.14±0.32d 2.92±1.06e 2.84±1.30g 6.02±0.22h
Oreochromis POMl 3.03±0.56a 1.53±0.53c 0.24±0.01f 1.80±0.50g 4.63±0.16i
spp. PRMk 7.34±0.47a 6.70±0.47c 4.47±0.89e 4.57±0.73g 7.50±0.53j
Digestive tract
Mk 7.21±0.26a 6.54±0.40c 5.31±0.42e 3.47±1.21g 7.68±0.33j
contents
POMl 4.68±0.94b 3.61±0.99d 2.15±1.02f 1.93±0.60h 6.33±0.30j
PRMl 2.86±0.72a 2.42±0.74c 1.06±0.62f 3.63±0.55h 6.13±0.37j
Muscles Mm 6.16±0.46b 5.97±0.43d 4.30±1.03g 4.35±0.98h 6.50±0.46j
POMl 2.09±0.97a 0.73±0.01e 0.89±0.01f 2.01±0.56i 5.08±0.26k
Labeo sp.
PRMj 7.07±0.83a 5.70±1.05cd 5.40±0.98ef 5.91±0.58g 7.9±0.41i
Digestive tract
Mj 6.56±0.43a 5.92±0.37c 5.43±0.35e 5.59±0.61g 6.63±0.66i
contents
POMk 5.26±0.52b 4.45±0.91d 3.68±1.08f 2.99±0.95h 7.21±0.44i
PRMm 4.05±0.80b 2.98±0.79e 2.41±0.76g 3.84±0.83j 5.64±0.31l
Muscles Mm 5.36±0.57b 5.02±0.66d 1.45±0.57fg 5.49±0.49h 7.73±0.92k
POMn 1.66±1.1a 0.89±0.01c 0.72±0.01f 1.22±0.79i 4.92±0.32l
Cirrhinus sp.
PRMi 5.51±1.03a 5.08±0.97c 4.42±0.97e 6.01±0.87 gf 6.94±0.34h
Digestive tract
Mi 5.19±1.40 a 4.73±1.27bc 3.61±0.61de 5.69±0.66g 7.12±0.61h
contents
POMj 3.69±1.34 a 2.88±1.38b 1.88±1.19d 4.89±0.26 f 6.42±0.41h
PRM=Pre monsoon, M= Monsoon and POM=Post monsoon.

Figure 2. Faecal bacterial counts in muscles (a) and digestive tract contents (b) of different fish species (Similar alphabets represent no significant
difference within dataset, n= No. of samples)

Figure 3. Total bacterial counts in muscles (a) and digestive tract contents (b) of different fish species (Similar alphabets represent no significant
difference within dataset, n= No. of sample)
653 Applied Ecology and Environmental Sciences

3.4. Pathogenic Bacteria in Fish Table 5. Biochemical characteristics of different bacteria from waste
fed fish farm
3.4.1. Vibrio spp Salmonella Shigella Vibrio
Characteristics E.coli
spp spp. spp.
Vibrio spp. were detected in flesh and digestive tract Lactose + -/+ -/+ +/-
contents of all three types of fish (Figure 4 and Figure 5). Sucrose +/- - -/+ +/-
Prevalence of Vibrio spp. were high in gut of Cirrhinus sp.
Citrate - + - +/-
than Labeo sp. and Oreochromis spp. (Table 4).
MR + + + +
Simultaneously flesh of Labeo sp. and Cirrhinus sp. was
more contaminated by Vibrio spp. than Oreochromis spp. VP/Vi - - - -/+
(Table 4). Gelatin - +/- - +
H2S - + - -
3.4.2. Salmonella spp. and Shigella spp. Indole + - -/+ +/-
Pathogenic bacteria like Salmonella spp. and Shigella LDC + + - +/-
spp. were almost completely absent in pond water and fish ODC + + -/+ +/-
samples (Table 4 and Figure 4 and Figure 5). Urease - - - -
PA - - - ND
Catalase + + + +
Oxidase - - - +
Starch - - -/+
Motility + + - +
OF ND ND ND +

Mannitol ND ND +/- +
Growth in 0% Nacl ND ND ND +/-
3% Nacl ND ND ND +
6% Nacl ND ND ND +/-
8% Nacl ND ND ND +/-
10% Nacl ND ND ND +/-

Figure 4. Seasonal load of pathogenic bacteria (%) in muscles of fish

4. Discussions
The ponds being inter connected, the water temperature
remained almost same in all ponds under investigation.
The fluctuations in temperature did not make any lethal
effect on organisms [22] and remained within the normal
range of fish growth [23]. Relatively higher values of pH
in Bandipur sewage fed ponds might be due to low rate of
sewage input and decrease rate of CO2 production. Fish
mortality due to low dissolved oxygen was not observed.
During utmost low concentration of dissolved oxygen fish
were aptly noticed at surface for oxygenation averting
the stressed condition in the deeper water. Maximum limit
of BOD and COD of sewage should be 20 mg/l and
250 mg/l for its discharge into rivers [24]. According to
these recommendations, present sewage could be easily
discharged into the river. The average ammonia content of
Figure 5. Seasonal load of pathogenic bacteria (%) in digestive tract the studied fish ponds had crossed the maximum limit of
contents of fish ammonia toxicity without any adverse effects on fish
Table 4. Frequency of recovery of pathogenic bacteria from fish behaviour. Presence of a significant high level of nitrate
species in the present study suggests that nitrification was
Fish sp Tissue Types Parameters (%)
probably the principal removal mechanism of nitrogen
Vibrio Salmonella Shigella
in the studied system. Further, bacterial load in wastewater
Oreochromis
Muscles spp. spp spp. clearly indicates that treatment minimizes but does
Digestive 63.15 13.33 13.33 not assure the complete eradication of a putative
spp.
tract contents
77.7 6.66 6.66 contamination with bacteria.
Muscles 100 14.28 7.14 The occurrence of faecal coliforms in fish could be an
Labeo sp. Digestive impression of pollution of their aquatic environment in
tract contents 94.11 21.42 NF*
addition to their feeding habits. Moreover, there is
Muscles 100 NF* 10
Cirrhinus sp. Digestive affirmation that these bacteria can survive and even
tract contents 100 12.5 12.5 multiply with in favorable temperature conditions. Water
temperature in the studied pond (26°C to 34°C) was close
 Applied Ecology and Environmental Sciences
to optimum temperature for many mesophilic bacteria
resulted in high resumption of pollution indicator bacteria
in intestine of fish. High bacterial load in intestine of fish
might be due to high metabolic activity of fish associated
with increased feeding rates in the suitable range of water
temperature of the studied pond. Similar findings were
reported by [25]. Bacterial growth might occur in intestine
with the detention of faecal excreta which is further linked
to gut motility. High concentration of phagocytic cells in
the intestine, which comprises one of the safeguard to
restrict foreign organisms from penetrating the fish, might
be another cause for high rate recovery of bacteria from
intestine.
Many times coliforms and faecal coliforms were not
detected in the muscles of the fish, while other bacteria
were recovered. The role of faecal coliform bacteria as
indicator in this particular situation is therefore questionable.
The detection of significant lower concentration of faecal
streptococci in digestive tract contents of Oreochromis
spp. than Labeo sp. and Cirrhinus sp. indicates that
Oreochrmis is less sensitive to the accumulation of this
bacterium than carps. When stressful conditions like low
dissolved oxygen or high organic matter concentration
occurred in the pond, tilapia appeared to be less affected
than carp [12]. High rate recovery of Vibrio from gut of
Cirrhinus sp is mainly for its detritivorous feeding habit
(bottom feeder) for which it consumes free-living and
particle bound bacteria (usually associated with detritus)
[26]. Reduced infection of Vibrio in muscles of
oreochromis than carps indicates sterile and stress
resistant nature of the former fish. [27] showed that
aqueous extracts from the skin of both the high saline and
freshwater tilapia possessed antimicrobial factors that are
antagonistic to luminous Vibrio. Frequent availability of
Vibrio in wastewater may be due to halophilic nature of
Vibrio spp. as well as suitable temperature of the water as
the most important factor of Vibrio distribution [28].
Population density of Vibrio related to the faecal pollution
level [29]. [30] reported Vibrio sp. as a stressor in fish
growth. Furthermore, anaerobic ponds are worthwhile in
removing Vibrio, the classic pathogen that exhibits
resistance to the otherwise environmental conditions in
facultative and maturation ponds [31]. In fact accumulated
sludge from the ponds of the Bandipur sewage fed farm
has never been cleaned since the plant was established in
1995 [9]. At present anaerobic ponds filled with accumulated
sludge are not working properly. Thus, inability of
anaerobic ponds in studied waste fed system might be the
reason of high prevalence of Vibrio spp. [32] reported
fish as possible reservoirs of Vibrio cholerae. Moreover,
Vibrio cholerae isolates have the ability to degrade chitin,
indicating a commensal relationship between Vibrio
cholerae and fish [33]. Evidences were found from the
literature correlating the source of cholera diseases with
fish [34]. In the present investigation presence of Vibrio
spp. in muscles necessarily implies a health risks. This
creates the vital need to assess the species level detection
of Vibrios as well as cholera causing O1/O139 or non-
O1/O139 serogroups. Rare occurrence of Salomonella and
Shigella infection owed to either low excreted load or low
survival time of them in environment.
654
5. Conclusions
It is evident from the investigation that the system
offers considerable potential for biological sewage
treatment, with respect to reduction of ammonia nitrogen,
BOD and COD. The TVC and enteric bacterial counts
were detected in higher numbers and some of the
members recovered in this study like Vibrio are potential
fish and human pathogens. High rate recovery of E.coli
from the water of the sewage works also imposes threats
because of their pathogenic potentiality or toxin producing
ability. Coliforms isolated from fish culture pond were an
indication of contamination of pond water with faecal
materials, which may result in the presence of pathogenic
organisms. Prevalence of faecal streptococci in the pond
water might have resulted from pollution by poultry and
cattles. Pathogenic bacteria like Vibrio spp. were found
frequently in pond water. The organism is ubiquitous in
aqueous environments; thus its presence does not
necessarily imply a health risk, although non-cholera
strains may cause illness in man [35]. In fact, wastewater
treatment reduced the number of pathogenic
microorganisms but did not remove all the pathogens.
Persistence of these pathogenic bacteria, even after
wastewater treatment, constitutes a potential risk to cause
gastrointestinal diseases. High rate recovery of both
indicator as well as pathogenic bacteria in fish muscles
could indicate a decrease in the immune response of the
fishes living in water with severe environmental quality
degradation. Presence of human pathogens such as
Escherichia, Salmonella and Vibrio in fish tissues is
definitely of prime concern especially in countries with
less restriction on release of waste into water bodies, and
in use of untreated wastewater for aquaculture. Moreover,
Escherichia coli is reported to survive in precooked and
uncooked fish when kept in ice. The digestive tract of fish
in this study showed concentrations of pathogens.
Handling and cleaning of such contaminated fish can
result in contamination of the hands of farm workers and
through them to their family members and others. Further,
pathogens reside in digestive tracts can cross-contaminate
fish flesh or other edible parts during processings. Quick
spoilage of fish after catching might be due to the high
density of these bacteria. Presence of faecal coliform may
affect humans more than it does aquatic organisms. In
India most of the fish consumed is bought directly from
the fishermen and do not pass through any health-safety
checks. Bacteria contaminated fish examined in this study
exceeded the acceptable limit recommended by [36] and
indicate human health risk.
Acknowledgements
The authors are thankful to the Head of the Department
of Zoology of University of Calcutta who permitted the
research work to be conducted in the department. The
author is grateful to Prof. Samir Banerjee for his guidance
and invaluable constructive criticism during manuscript
preparation.
655 Applied Ecology and Environmental Sciences
References
[1] Tchobanoglous, G., Burton, F.L. and Stensel. H.D, Wastewater
Engineering; Treatment and Reuse, Metcalf and Eddy, Inc, Fourth
edition, Mcgraw-Hill, New York, 2003.
[2] Strauss, M, Human Waste (Excreta and Wastewater) Reuse,
08/2000, EAWAG/SANDEC, Duebendorf, Switzerland, 2000.
[3] Geldreich, B.F. and Clarke, N.A, “Bacterial pollution indicators in
intestinal tract of fresh water fish”, Applied Microbiology, 14(2).
429-437. May. 1966.
[4] Niewolak, S. and Tucholski, S, “Ability of bacteriological self
purification of Common carp, Tench and Crucian carp fingerlings
reared in pond receiving the discharge from sewage treatment
plant and then kept in running water of different quality”, Archives
of Polish Fisheries, 8(2).49-61.2000.
[5] Ampofo, J.A. and Clerk, G.C, “Diversity of bacteria in sewage
treatment plant used as fish culture pond in southern Ghana”
Aquaculture Research, 34.667-675. Jul.2003.
[6] Rajasekaran, P, “Enterobacteriaceae group of organisms in
Sewage-Fed Fishes” Advanced Biotech, 2.4. Aug. 2008.
[7] Miruka, D.O., Wandili, S., Kakai, R. and Eliud, N.W, “Isolation of
Salmonella and Shigella from fish harvested from the Winam Gulf
of Lake Victoria, Kenya Onyango” Journal of Infection in
Developing Countries, 3(2). 99-104. Mar. 2009.
[8] Ampofo, J.A. and Clerk, G.C, “Diversity of Bacteria
Contaminants in Tissues of Fish Cultured in Organic Waste-
Fertilized Ponds: Health Implications” The Open Fish Science
Journal, 3. 142-146. Jun.2010.
[9] Uddin, N, 2005. Status of Sewage Treatment in India. A report by
Central Pollution Control Board, Parivesh Bhawan, East Arjun
Nagar, Delhi-110032.
[10] Mara, D.D, Design Manual for Waste Stabilisation Ponds in India,
Ministry of Environment and Forests, National River Conservation
Directorate (India) and Dept. for International Development,
London, UK, 1997.
[11] APHA, Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
Wastewater, 20th Edition, APHA (American Public Health
Association), Washington, USA, 1998.
[12] Buras, N., Duek, L., Niv, S., Hepher, B. and Sandbank, E,
“Microbiological aspects of fish grown in treated wastewater”,
Water Research, 21(1).1-10. Jan.1987.
[13] Sanyal, S. and Banerjee, S, “Transferable drug resistant coliforms
in fish exposed to sewage”, Archives of Polish fisheries, 21.29-
39.Mar.2013.
[14] APHA, Compendium of Methods for the Microbiological
Examination of Foods, 4th Edition APHA (American Public
Health Association), Frances P. Downes and Keith Ito (eds.).,
Washington, USA, 2001.
[15] Prescott, L.M., Harley, J.P. and Klein, D.A, Microbiology New-
York McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2005.
[16] Holt, J.G., Krieg, N., Sneath, P.H.A. and Williams, S.T, Bergey’s
Manual of determinative bacteriology, 9th Edn, Williams and
Wilkins Co. Baltimore, USA, 1994.
[17] Yanai, H. Statcel – the Useful Add-in Software Forms on Excel,
2nd edn, OMS, Tokyo, Japan, 2004.
[18] Akin, J.C, “Physicochemical Determination of Pollutants in
Wastewater and Vegetable Samples along the Jakara Wastewater
Channelin Kano Metropolis, Kano State, Nigeria”, European
Journal of Scientific Research, 23(1).122-133. Nov.2008.
© The Author(s) 2021. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
[19] Manahan, S.E, Fundamentals of Environmental Chemistry, 2nd
edition, CRC Press Ltd., Florida, 2001, 124-129.
[20] WHO, Health guidelines for the use of wastewater in agriculture
and aquaculture, Technical Reports Series No.778, World Health
Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, 1989.
[21] Buras, N., Duek, L. and Niv, S, “Reactions of Fish to
Microorganisms in Wastewater”, Applied Environmental
Microbiology, 50.989-995. Oct.1985.
[22] Manna, N.K., Banerjee, S. and Bhowmik, M.L, “Seasonal
diversity of some physico-chemical complexes in running water
waste treatment ponds”, Environment and Ecology, 15(4).
917-923. 1997.
[23] Jhingran, V.G, Fish and Fisheries of India, Hindustan Publishing
Corporation, New Delhi, India, 1985, 954.
[24] Government of India, An action plan for prevention of pollution of
the Ganga, New Delhi: Department of Environment, 1985.
[25] Maria, C.G., Maria, D.L.A.B., Lucia, M.T. and Ruben, D.G,
“Recovery of Escherichia coli in fresh water fish Jenysia
multidentata and Bryconamericus iheringi,” Water Research, 38.
2368-2374. May.2004.
[26] Balasubramanian, S., Rajan, M.R. and Raj, S.P, “Microbiology of
Fish Grown in a Sewage-Fed Pond” Bioresource Technology, 40.
63-66. 1992.
[27] Christopher, M.A.C., Pedro, A., Rande, D. and Cecilia, J.J,
“Moderate Inhibition of Luminous Vibrio harveyi by Aqueous
Extracts Obtained from the Skin of Tilapia Oreochromis sp”,
Philippine Journal of Science, 140(2).173-178. Dec. 2011.
[28] Chen, Y., Liu, X.M., Yan, J.W., Li, X.G., Mei, L.L., Fa, Q.M. and
Fa, Y, “Food borne pathogens in retail oysters in south China”,
Biomedical and Environmental Sciences, 23.32-36. Feb.2010.
[29] Almasi, A, “An investigation on pathogenic Vibrios Distribution
in domestic wastewater”, Iranian Journal of Environmental
Health and Science Engineering, 2(3).153-157. 2005.
[30] Bhakta, J.N. and Jana, B.B, “Wastewater Influencing Pathogenic
Bacterial Population and Biochemical Alterations in Fish”, Asian
Journal of Experimental Sciences, 20(2). 253-259. 2006.
[31] Chimwemwe, B.G, 2003. Modern Design of Waste Stabilization
Ponds in Warm Climates: Comparison with Traditional Design
Methods. Dissertation submitted in accordance with the
requirements for the degree of Master of Science (Engineering) in
Environmental Engineering and Project Management. University
of Leedes.
[32] Senderovich, Y., Izhaki, I. and Halpern, M, “Fish as Reservoirs
and Vectors of Vibrio cholera”, Plos One, 5(1).e8607. Jan.2010.
[33] Pruzzo, C., Vezzulli, L. and Colwell, R.R, “Global impact of
Vibrio cholera interactions with chitin”, Environmental
Microbiology, 10.1400-1410. Jun.2008.
[34] Schu¨ rmann, D., Ebert, N., Kampf, D., Baumann, B. and Frei, U,
“Domestic cholera in Germany associated with fresh fish imported
from Nigeria”, European Journal of Clinical Microbiology and
Infectious Diseases, 21. 827-828. Nov.2002.
[35] Jesudason, M.V. and Jacob, J.T, “Major shift in the prevalence of
non-01 and El Tor Vibrio cholera”, Lancet, 341(8852). 1090-1091.
April.1993.
[36] ICMSF, Sampling for Microbiological Analysis: Principles and
Specific Applications, In: Micro-Organisms in Food (Chapt. 2),
The International Commission on Microbiological Specifications
for Food, Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1995.