Bacteriological Effectiveness of Some Treatments on the Quality of Borehole and Well Water Sources

A significant portion of the African population relies on well and borehole water for drinking and other domestic purposes. This study evaluated the effectiveness of four treatment methods; treatment with 'watercare’ disinfectant, alum coagulation, Bridelia ferruginea leaf extract, and filtration sedimentation on the quality of these water sources, with treatment contact times of 30 minutes and 1 hour. Physicochemical and bacteriological analyses were conducted on both well and borehole water samples before and after treatment. The results indicated that disinfection with ‘watercare’ and alum treatment met the World Health Organization (WHO) and Nigerian Standard for Drinking Water Quality (NSDWQ) guidelines, except for the alum treatment, which lowered the pH to an acidic level. Bacteriological assessments, using the pour plate technique for enumerating total bacterial count and coliforms, revealed that none of the samples met the WHO and NSDWQ bacteriological standards. Total bacterial counts ranged from 1.5 x 10² CFU/ml in borehole water to 8.9 x 10² to 1.6 x 10³ CFU/ml in well water. The identified microorganisms were predominantly Gram-negative rods, including Acinetobacter baumannii, Serratia maltophilia, Myroides odoratus, and Burkholderia cepacia. Gram-positive organisms identified included Micrococcus sp., Corynebacterium sp., and Bacillus sp. While ‘watercare’ disinfection and alum treatment achieved significant reductions in bacterial and coliform loads, the Bridelia extract had no significant effect. The study concludes that the water samples are unsafe for drinking, emphasizing the necessity of combining filtration, sedimentation, and disinfection for adequate water treatment.