Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 30, 2025

Comparative Analysis of Automatic Fecal Analyzer versus Direct Wet Smear Microscopy for Detecting Parasitic Infections in Stool Samples
Published on: April 25, 2025
Evaluating analytical approaches for smarter decision-making in faecal contamination monitoring and assessment
Yussi M Palacios Delgado1, Maghfira Saifuddaolah2, Rebekah Henry3
1Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Abstract:
Quantification of faecal indicator organism (FIO) is essential for surveillance monitoring, performance compliance and public health interventions. IDEXX's automated FIO detection technique, TECTATM, and IDEXX Colilert offer greater efficiency than traditional methods but have not been critically compared across diverse levels of faecal contamination or evaluated against key practical requirements and cost factors. This study compared the use of IDEXX Colilert and TECTA™ for measuring indicative contamination in 785 samples from drinking water, wells, surface water, greywater and a constructed wetland system, collected from Fijian and Indonesian informal settlements. Both methods ranked sample types in the same order in terms of indicative faecal contamination, and at Escherichia coli (E. coli) concentrations between <1-105 CFU or MPN/100 mL (municipal, shallow and deep well samples), both methods were highly correlated. However, at 102-109 CFU/100 mL (TECTA™) or 102-106 MPN/100 mL (IDEXX Colilert) E. coli (surface water samples), a moderate positive correlation was observed (R = 0.56, p = 2.2-13), and a high proportion of samples exceeded the detection limit of the IDEXX Colilert method. Greywater and septic tank samples exhibited total coliform mean values greater than 106 CFU/100 mL, with no correlation between IDEXX Colilert and TECTA™ results. TECTA™ required only one dilution for returning specific E. coli values, ideal for performance compliance and faecal contamination assessments, while IDEXX Colilert often needed two levels of dilution. For surveillance purposes, IDEXX Colilert may be more cost-effective given the higher initial setup costs of TECTA™; however, TECTA™'s faster turnaround times and automated results may offset expenses. This study presents a versatile decision analysis that enables laboratories worldwide to customise method comparisons based on their unique requirements, driving more effective implementation and global standardisation of these methods.
More Related Videos
12:14A Duplex Digital PCR Assay for Simultaneous Quantification of the Enterococcus spp. and the Human Fecal-associated HF183 Marker in Waters
Published on: March 9, 2016
12:50Colorimetric Paper-based Detection of Escherichia coli, Salmonella spp., and Listeria monocytogenes from Large Volumes of Agricultural Water
Published on: June 9, 2014
Related Concept Videos
Steps in Outbreak Investigation
Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
Serum Laboratory Studies, Stool Test, Breath Test