These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
417 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8264433)
1. Comparison of fluorogenic and conventional membrane filter media for enumerating coliform bacteria. Cenci G; De Bartolomeo A; Caldini G Microbios; 1993; 76(306):47-54. PubMed ID: 8264433 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. [A combined chromogenic-fluorogenic medium for the simultaneous detection of coliform groups and E. coli in water]. Manafi M; Kneifel W Zentralbl Hyg Umweltmed; 1989 Dec; 189(3):225-34. PubMed ID: 2697207 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparative performance of Colisure. McFeters GA; Broadaway SC; Pyle BH; Pickett M; Egozy Y J Am Water Works Assoc; 1997 Sep; 89(9):112-20. PubMed ID: 11540632 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Membrane filtration differentiation of E. coli from coliforms in the examination of water. Mates A; Shaffer M J Appl Bacteriol; 1989 Sep; 67(3):343-6. PubMed ID: 2693426 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison of the recoveries of Escherichia coli and total coliforms from drinking water by the MI agar method and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-approved membrane filter method. Brenner KP; Rankin CC; Sivaganesan M; Scarpino PV Appl Environ Microbiol; 1996 Jan; 62(1):203-8. PubMed ID: 8572697 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Rapid detection of fluorescent and chemiluminescent total coliforms and Escherichia coli on membrane filters. Van Poucke SO; Nelis HJ J Microbiol Methods; 2000 Nov; 42(3):233-44. PubMed ID: 11044567 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Fluorogenic detection of atypical coliforms from water samples. Cenci G; Caldini G; Sfodera F; Morozzi G Microbiologica; 1990 Apr; 13(2):121-9. PubMed ID: 2112678 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparative performance of Colisure (TM) and accepted methods in the detection of chlorine-injured total coliforms and E.coli. McFeters GA; Broadaway SC; Pyle BH; Pickett M; Egozy Y Water Sci Technol; 1995; 31(5-6):259-61. PubMed ID: 11539133 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Evaluation of the lactose Tergitol-7, m-Endo LES, Colilert 18, Readycult Coliforms 100, Water-Check-100, 3M Petrifilm EC and DryCult Coliform test methods for detection of total coliforms and Escherichia coli in water samples. Hörman A; Hänninen ML Water Res; 2006 Oct; 40(17):3249-56. PubMed ID: 16916531 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [MUG-lauryl sulfate bouillon--an optimal medium for the detection of total coliforms and fecal coliform bacteria in relation to hygienic evaluation of bathing waters according to the European Community Guideline 76/160 EWG]. Schindler PR Zentralbl Hyg Umweltmed; 1991 Apr; 191(4):438-44. PubMed ID: 1872943 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Comparative studies of fresh and seawater for the determination of total coliform and fecal coliform bacteria according to the European Economic Community guideline 76/160 (bathing water) by the use of the most-probable-number method with BRILA-MUG broth and differentiation according to the drinking water ordinance]. Havemeister G; Aleksic S; Bockemühl J; Heinemeyer EA; Müller HE; Von Pritzbuer E Zentralbl Hyg Umweltmed; 1991 May; 191(5-6):523-38. PubMed ID: 1883475 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Evaluation of MUG-supplemented media for the detection of E. coli in recreational water surveillance. Neidhardt S; Havemeister G; Höller C; Gundermann KO Zentralbl Hyg Umweltmed; 1995 Dec; 198(2):152-64. PubMed ID: 9353534 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Evaluation of the methods for enumerating coliform bacteria from water samples using precise reference standards. Wohlsen T; Bates J; Vesey G; Robinson WA; Katouli M Lett Appl Microbiol; 2006 Apr; 42(4):350-6. PubMed ID: 16599987 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison study of membrane filtration direct count and an automated coliform and Escherichia coli detection system for on-site water quality testing. Habash M; Johns R J Microbiol Methods; 2009 Oct; 79(1):128-30. PubMed ID: 19703500 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparison of BGB-MUG and LSTB-MUG in microbiological surveillance of recreational waters. Höller C; Havemeister G; Gundermann KO Zentralbl Hyg Umweltmed; 1995 Dec; 198(2):138-51. PubMed ID: 9353533 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Evaluation of Coli-ID and MUG Plus media for recovering Escherichia coli and other coliform bacteria from groundwater samples. Sueiro RA; Araujo M; Santos CJ; Gómez MJ; Garrido MJ Water Sci Technol; 2001; 43(12):213-6. PubMed ID: 11464759 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of media for enumeration of coliform bacteria and Escherichia coli in non-disinfected water. Pitkänen T; Paakkari P; Miettinen IT; Heinonen-Tanski H; Paulin L; Hänninen ML J Microbiol Methods; 2007 Mar; 68(3):522-9. PubMed ID: 17150268 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. [Experiences with the detection of E. coli and coliform bacteria with reference to the drinking water regulation of 1986]. Hübner I; Knoll C; Obst U Zentralbl Bakteriol Mikrobiol Hyg B Umwelthyg Krankenhaushyg Arbeitshyg Prav Med; 1989 Feb; 187(3):209-5. PubMed ID: 2494815 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Rapid detection of total and fecal coliforms in water by enzymatic hydrolysis of 4-methylumbelliferone-beta-D-galactoside. Berg JD; Fiksdal L Appl Environ Microbiol; 1988 Aug; 54(8):2118-22. PubMed ID: 3178215 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Distribution of indicator bacteria in Canyon Lake, California. Davis K; Anderson MA; Yates MV Water Res; 2005 Apr; 39(7):1277-88. PubMed ID: 15862327 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]