U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Guidelines on Recreational Water Quality: Volume 1 Coastal and Fresh Waters [Internet]. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2021.

Cover of Guidelines on Recreational Water Quality

Guidelines on Recreational Water Quality: Volume 1 Coastal and Fresh Waters [Internet].

Show details

7Beach sand

Beaches consist of the unconsolidated sediment that lies at the junction between water (oceans, lakes and rivers) and land; they are usually composed of sand, mud or pebbles. Sand beaches are sought after for recreation. In some cases, especially at higher latitudes, a significant proportion of time is spent on the beach rather than in the water. Activities involving sand may include beachside sports and playing with sand, which have health benefits through exercise and recreation.

Microorganisms are a significant component of beach sand – bacteria, fungi, parasites and viruses have all been isolated from beach sand, and some are potential pathogens. Accordingly, concern has been expressed that beach sand or similar sediments may act as reservoirs or vectors of infection, as well as a source of water contamination (Whitman et al., 2014; Solo-Gabriele et al., 2016; Weiskerger et al., 2019).

This chapter describes microorganisms in beach sand, links to human health and recommended management actions.

Other hazards that affect beach sand quality include chemical contaminants (refer to Chapter 8), and the presence of solid wastes, plastics, insects and sea wrack on the beach (refer to Chapter 9).

7.1. System assessment

7.1.1. Pathogens of relevance for beach sand

Table 7.1 provides data on infectivity and concentrations observed in beach sand for selected microorganisms.

Faecal indicator organisms

Faecal indicator organisms (FIOs; refer to section 4.2.3.1) are nonpathogenic microorganisms that are used to indicate the degree of faecal contamination of the environment. FIOs include intestinal enterococci, Escherichia coli, bacteriophages, Candida albicans and clostridia. Intestinal enterococci are the recommened FIO for beach sand; guideline values are shown in section 7.2.1.

Thermotolerant coliforms and intestinal enterococci have been isolated from beach sand (Figueras et al., 1992; Signorile et al., 1992; Ghinsberg et al., 1994), and correlations have been found between contamination of beaches and contamination of adjacent seawaters (Oshiro & Fujioka, 1995; Aulicino, Volterra & Donati, 1985; Roses Codinachs et al., 1988; Badilla-Aguilar & Mora-Alvarado, 2019).

Numbers of FIOs in recreational waters correlate with the numbers of FIOs in adjacent beach sand (Phillips et al., 2011). For recreational beaches, improved sand quality is often associated with improved water quality.

Bacteria

Staphylococcus aureus

The origin of Staphylococcus aureus (refer to section 6.1.1.4) in beach sand is human activity. Its occurrence correlates with the number of swimmers on the beach (Papadakis et al., 1997; Plano et al., 2011). Many studies in the USA have demonstrated the presence of S. aureus in beach sand, including methicillin-resistant S. aureus, at both marine beaches (e.g. Soge et al., 2009; Plano et al., 2011; Shah et al., 2011; Goodwin et al., 2012) and freshwater beaches (Thapaliya et al., 2017). A study conducted at 10 beaches in South Africa found that 100% of the S. aureus isolates evaluated showed multiple antibiotic-resistance patterns (resistant to three or more antibiotics) (Akanbi et al., 2017).

Table 7.1. Selected microorganisms in beach sand.

Table 7.1

Selected microorganisms in beach sand.

Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Vibrio spp.

P. aeruginosa (refer to section 6.1.1.3) has been isolated from beach sand in a number of countries (Ghinsberg et al., 1994; Mendes et al., 1998; Esiobu et al., 2013; Elmanama et al., 2005; Tugrul-Icemar & Topaloglu, 2011). Vibrio species (refer to section 6.1.1.5) have also been detected in beach sand (Elmanama et al., 2005; Abdelzaher et al., 2010; Shah et al., 2011; Viji et al., 2019).

Other bacteria

Other bacteria that can be zoonotic, such as Campylobacter spp. and Salmonella spp., which mainly cause gastrointestinal infections in humans, have been isolated from wet and dry sand at beaches in a number of countries (Bolton et al., 1999; Shatti & Abdullah, 1999; Vieira et al., 2001; Elmanama et al., 2005; Byappanahalli et al., 2009; Yamahara et al., 2012; Kahn et al., 2013). Bird faeces may be an important source of these pathogens (Whitman et al., 2014).

Viruses

Viruses that have been detected in beach sand include enteric viruses, hepatitis A virus and human adenovirus (Nestor et al., 1984; Pianetti et al., 2004; Monteiro et al., 2016). Relatively little work has been done on the presence in beach sand of enteric viruses that cause diarrhoea in humans.

Protozoa

The zoonotic and human protozoan parasites Cryptosporidium spp. and Giardia spp. have both been detected in beach sand (Zanoli Sato et al., 2005; Abdelzaher et al., 2010; Shah et al., 2011). These organisms cause gastrointestinal illness in humans.

Helminths

Beach sand has been found to contain eggs and/or larvae of the human and zoonotic parasites Toxocara spp. (roundworm), Ancylostoma spp. (hookworm) and Trichuris spp. (whipworm) (Schöttler, 1998; Silva et al., 2009; Bojar & Klapeć, 2018); Ascaris lumbricoides (roundworm) has also been detected (Silva et al., 2009). Most helminths are transmitted via oral exposure; however, hookworms can penetrate skin that is in contact with sand (e.g. when walking or sitting on the beach).

Infections with these helminths are generally asymptomatic when people are infected with a few worms; however, when infected with large numbers of worms, people may suffer from gastrointestinal disease (Ascaris, Trichuris, human Ancylostoma), and children’s growth may be stunted (Ascaris, Trichuris). Toxocara larvae travel through the organs of infected people, causing fever, coughing, enlarged liver and pneumonia. Animal hookworms remain in the epidermis, causing cutaneous larva migrans presenting as pruritic rash (Heukelbach & Feldmeier, 2008).

Transmission of parasites to humans from beach settings has been documented during an outbreak of Ancylostoma spp. (feline hookworm) (Mann, 2010). The outbreak was linked to overpopulation of feral cats due to illicit feeding stations. Sporadic travel-associated and endemic cases have been reported from both tropical and temperate regions (Heukelbach & Feldmeier, 2008; Sow et al., 2017). Lithuania included helminths in its recreational water regulation in 2018 (Ministry of Health of the Republic of Lithuania, 2007).

Fungi

Exposure to environmental fungi may lead to opportunistic infections, especially in immunocompromised people (de Hoog et al., 2000). Superficial fungal infections are estimated to affect 20–25% of the world’s population (Male, 1990); the responsible fungal species and prevalence vary by country and region (Havlickova, Czaika & Friedrich, 2008). Some health problems favour the invasive process of serious fungal infections (Bongomin et al., 2017) – for example, asthma, cystic fibrosis, AIDS, cancer, organ transplantation and corticosteroid therapies. It is therefore desirable to limit exposure to fungi.

Dermatophytes (considered pathogenic and a dominant cause of superficial fungal infections) have been detected at beaches in Portugal (Sousa, 1990). Higher densities of beach users lead to higher levels of dermatophytes during the summer months (Brandão et al., 2002).

To date, relatively few studies outside Europe have looked at fungal contamination of beach sand. However, endemic fungal pathogens may be present in some regions, especially in inland water masses (Kidd et al., 2004; Kantarcioglu et al., 2017; Miceli & Krishnamurthy, 2019). Human migratory movements or expansion of habitats of fungi (e.g. due to climate change) are expected to occur with increasing frequency, thus promoting global spread (Datta et al., 2009; Weiskerger et al., 2019).

Candida albicans and other Candida spp. have been detected in sand beaches around the world. Emerging pathogens should be considered when addressing beach sand and possible deposition by nearing waters – for example, the multidrug-resistant and higher-salinity-tolerant Candida auris (Jeffery-Smith et al., 2018). Some emerging species, and even some well-characterized and long-reported species, show increasing resistance to antimicrobials – for example, several species in the Aspergillus section Fumigati (Alcazar-Fuoli et al., 2008), a common beach sand contaminant that has reportedly caused infections in hospitalized patients in the Netherlands (Warris et al., 2003).

Information on infection resulting from fungal inhalation specifically from sand is unavailable. However, exposure to fungal spores can trigger an immune response (Buskirk et al., 2014; Tanaka et al., 2015). The public should be informed about the presence of allergenic fungi.

7.1.2. Dispersion and fate of microorganisms in beach sand

Fig. 7.1 shows a conceptualization of the dispersion and fate of microorganisms in beach sand.

Red spots in Fig. 7.1 represent the distribution of FIOs within the beach. The panel on the left emphasizes the distribution of various sources; the panel on the right emphasizes transport along the wave-impacted shoreline, including the freshwater definition of the foreshore and the marine water definition of the intertidal zone. The figure illustrates the seepage face for times when the mean surface water elevation is below the groundwater table (shown by the dotted lines). It shows infiltration that occurs when the surface water level rises above the groundwater table (shown by dashed lines), as typically occurs during wave run-up. The inverted triangles mark the lines that define the water table for each of these conditions.

Sources of microorganisms

Microorganisms are natural inhabitants of beach sands. Levels of pathogenic microorganisms in beach sands can increase through direct deposition from humans and animals (e.g. dogs, birds, wildlife). Microorganisms can also be introduced to sand from runoff and other sources introduced through water, such as from sewage, septic tank effluent and faecal sludge, or shedding by recreational water users, which can be carried onto the sand by waves and tides (Whitman et al., 2014). River-based beaches may have a dynamic of their own (Whitman, Nevers & Byappanahalli, 2006). Atmospheric processes may also carry microorganisms from local faecal sources (e.g. farms, wastewater plants) and from the global circulation of dust (Kellog & Griffin, 2003).

Proliferation of microorganisms

Once introduced, microorganisms can persist and potentially multiply in the beach environment in response to environmental factors, including availability of moisture, sunlight and nutrients. The availability of nutrients can be influenced by the presence of submerged vegetation and wrack along the shore (Imamura et al., 2011; Weiskerger et al., 2019). Temperature influences survival of bacteria in sand: FIO concentrations can increase over temperature ranges from 4 to 44.5 °C (Byappanahalli et al., 2003; Alm, Burke & Hagan, 2006; Byappanahalli et al., 2007).

Fig. 7.1. Conceptualization of dispersion and fate of microorganisms in beach sand.

Fig. 7.1

Conceptualization of dispersion and fate of microorganisms in beach sand. Note: The vertical aspect is intentionally exaggerated.

The persistence and proliferation of microorganisms in beach sands may be facilitated by the formation of biofilms (Piggot et al., 2012), formed from bacterial secretions. Biofilms create microenvironments that can benefit microorganisms by providing access to nearby nutrients, and protection from harmful chemical and biological agents.

The environmental conditions conducive to survival and proliferation mean that background levels of microorganisms, including FIOs, may be higher in tropical and subtropical climates than in temperate regions (Fujioka et al., 1999; Fujioka, 2001), but this concept has been challenged by Byappanahalli et al. (2003b).

Influence of environmental factors

Various physical and geomorphological factors may encourage the survival and dispersion of FIOs and pathogens on beach sand. These include waves and tidal phenomena (refer to Fig. 7.1). Higher levels of sand microorganisms are observed at beaches with low-energy wave conditions (Gao, Falconer & Lin, 2015; Feng et al., 2016). Thus, enclosed beaches generally accumulate more microorganisms in the sand than direct ocean-facing beaches.

Waves lead to infiltration of large quantities of surface water and associated constituents (e.g. FIOs and nutrients across the beach face; Vogel et al., 2016). During periods of extreme wave conditions, such as hurricanes, the sediments are washed out and eroded, resulting in exposure of sand with lower microorganism levels (Roca, Brown & Solo-Gabriele, 2019). If the waves carry pollutants, the opposite may be observed immediately after hurricane conditions (Suzuki et al., 2018), but there may be a delay in the migration of the contaminants in either direction due to cumulative effects.

Tidal fluctuations (or, in freshwater systems, water fluctuations due to lake standing waves) also drive water across the beach face. Infiltration captures FIOs in the upper intertidal region, and exfiltration leads to FIO loss at the lower tide mark (Gast, Elgar & Raubenheimer, 2015; Wu et al., 2017). The area with the highest levels of FIOs on tidally influenced beaches is the sand just above the high tide mark (Abdelzaher et al., 2010; Whiley et al., 2018); for lakes, it is the backshore (Cloutier & McLellan, 2017; refer to Fig. 7.1 for locations). These areas may have ideal moisture conditions for prolonged persistence. As a result, the sand has been identified as the source of bacteria to the adjacent waters in many studies; levels of bacteria in water decrease with distance from shore (e.g. Tyner et al., 2018).

Urbanization in the vicinity of the beach and periods of heavy beachgoer use have been associated with higher microorganism levels (Aragonés et al., 2016; Villacampa et al., 2017; León-López et al., 2018).

Sediment type may also affect microorganism levels (Hernandez et al., 2014; Abreu et al., 2016; Villacampa et al., 2017). The presence of microplastics in sand has been associated with elevated pathogen levels (Curren & Leong, 2019).

7.1.3. Linking human health to beach sand quality

Methods to relate sand quality to human health include epidemiological studies and risk assessments.

Epidemiological studies

Evidence exists to link beach activities, beach sand quality and human health impacts. Example 7.1 describes an outbreak associated with sand (Brandão et al., 2020). Other epidemiological studies have linked sand contact with gastrointestinal illness (Bonilla et al., 2007; Heaney et al., 2009, 2012; Lamparelli et al., 2015) and skin symptoms (Esiobu et al., 2013; Praveena et al., 2016).

Example 7.1A sand related outbreak in Azores, Portugal

Thirty people (mostly children) experienced an episode of skin rash days after a sand-sifting beach operation at Porto Pim Beach in Faial, Azores, during June 2019. An environmental and epidemiological investigation was conducted to identify the cause of the outbreak. The epidemiological investigation found that some of the patients experiencing symptoms had never entered the beach water. During the pollution period and throughout the epidemiological investigation, faecal indicator bacteria levels in water remained under the limits used for an “excellent” designation for coastal bathing water. Thus, sand contact was considered as a likely primary exposure route. Sand microbiological analysis for FIOs and electron microscopy strongly suggested faecal contamination. Gas chromatography and subsequent free chlorine analysis suggested the presence of sodium hypochlorite. Inspection of the toilet facilities and sewage disposal system revealed a leaking sewage distribution box. Collectively, results suggest that the cause of the outbreak was the leaking underground sewage distribution box that serviced the beach toilet facilities, where sodium hypochlorite was used for cleaning and disinfection. This sewage then contaminated the surficial sands to which beachgoers were exposed. Chlorine, an irritant substance, was believed to have been the cause of the symptoms, given the sudden presentation and dissipation of skin rashes. No gastrointestinal illness was reported during this episode and during the following 30 days.

Source: Brandão et al. (2020).

Quantitative microbial risk assessment

Quantitative microbial risk assessment (QMRA) provides an alternative to epidemiological studies for assessing health risks from beach-associated pathogens (Haas, Rose & Gerba, 1999; Ashbolt et al., 2010; Jang & Liang, 2017). QMRA methods are generally less expensive and less time-consuming than epidemiological studies; however, the relationships needed for calculating risks and disease rates are not always available (e.g. dose–response relationships for some microorganisms).

QMRA has been applied to estimate health risks from exposure to beach sand. Applying a set level of risk of gastrointestinal illness (19 cases per 1000 swimmers) to beach sand, Shibata & Solo-Gabriele (2012) calculated acceptable risks at <10 oocysts/g sand for Cryptosporidium, <5 MPN (most probable number)/g sand for enterovirus, and <106 CFU (colony forming units)/g sand for Staphylococcus aureus. Sabino et al. (2011) recommended maximum levels of 15 CFU/g for yeasts, 17 CFU/g for potential pathogenic fungi, 8 CFU/g for dermatophytes, 25 CFU/g for E. coli and 10 CFU/g for enterococci.

7.2. Monitoring

7.2.1. Guideline values

The recommended provisional guideline value for beach sand is 60 CFU/g of intestinal enterococci, based on the derivation below.

Assessing the relative risk of exposure to sand versus water requires setting an equivalency between the uptake of microorganisms from water versus uptake from sand. The equivalency would correspond to the 200 CFU/100 mL for intestinal enterococci via water ingestion. Values of water and sediment consumed are available in the literature. Seawater ingestion rates by children during swimming have been estimated at 30 mL (Schets, Schijven & de Roda Husman, 2011). Estimated sand ingestion rates for children are variable, depending on whether the children have pica tendencies (i.e. an above-normal tendency to consume soil). The low end of soil consumption for a child with pica tendencies is estimated at 1000 mg/day (USEPA, 2011). For children without pica tendencies, the consumption rate is estimated at 190 mg/day (Van Wijnen, Clausing & Brunekreff, 1990). The equivalent enterococci concentrations in sediments would correspond to 60 CFU/g, assuming sand consumption rates for children with pica tendencies. With assumptions about ingestion rates of seawater and sand, a very rough estimate of acceptable levels of enterococci in sand, Cs (units of CFU per mass of sand), can be established using the following equation:

Cs=CwVwMs
where Cw is the concentration in the water, Vw is the volume of water consumed, and Ms is the mass of sediment consumed per beach visit. However, the above expression depends on a significant assumption: that the ratios and uptake of enterococci and pathogens are the same for water and sand. The 60 CFU/g (wet weight) is within the same order of magnitude as the 10 CFU/g level recommended by Sabino et al. (2011) (refer to section 7.1.3.2). Assuming equivalent pathogen ratios and uptake rates, these values can be used provisionally as a rule of thumb to determine whether beach sand is in need of improved management to reduce FIOs.

Although no set guideline values can be provided for other microorganisms in beach sand, local epidemiological and QMRA studies are encouraged to establish such values (risk-based and local characterization approaches). Recently, a pan-European initiative has established 90 CFU/g of sand as a site-blind average value for fungi (Brandão et al., 2021). Further work on fungi and other biological groups is necessary to establish actual exposure thresholds to use in analytical recommendations. In the absence of guideline values, efforts should focus on preventive measures. Management, education and communication (refer to section 7.3) are important precautionary measures, as are components of local water safety plans (refer to Chapter 2).

7.2.2. Operational monitoring

Operational monitoring of sand – through visual inspections of the beach and potential sources of contamination identified in the sanitary survey – is a relatively simple and cost-effective approach to complement periodic microbial testing to verify sand quality. For example:

  • Are open defecation or discharges of faecal sludge prevalent at this site? Are public toilets available and clean?
  • Are measures to manage animal faeces, particularly from dogs and cats, consistently applied?
  • Are there signs of contamination by industrial or agricultural discharges, such as oils or tar?
  • Are measures to manage litter, debris and macroalgae (refer to Chapter 9) consistently applied?

In 2017, Argentina included in its recreational water regulation a set of locally relevant “yes or no” sand quality parameters for operational monitoring of industrial discharges, agricultural drainage, navigation pollution, superficial urban runoff, plastic residue, tar, seaweeds, and other residues and chemical contaminants (Departamento de Salud Ambiental, 2017).

7.2.3. Sampling and analysis

Sand is a heterogeneous matrix, so sampling requires collection of fractions (aliquots) to build a representative whole (composite), which should include problematic spots – that is, a worse-case scenario (Brandão, 2019). Sabino et al. (2011) analysed composites of three supratidal equidistant grab samples that were combined and homogenized. This option may be mildly representative of an entire beach, compared with incremental sampling as described by Hadley & Petrisor (2013). However, the history of monitoring a site will eventually define a normal pattern and identify outliers, regardless of the sampling frequency or number of fractions used. Sites with no history might require more intense sampling, both in the number of grab samples and in frequency, until a pattern can be established.

Typically, sample analysis requires enumeration of the microorganisms in a specific mass of sand, on either a gross weight or a dry weight basis. To report microorganism concentrations on a dry weight basis, a separate aliquot of the sand is analysed for moisture content. The most common method to enumerate microorganisms in sand is through extraction.

Historical analytical results may establish an initial water quality assessment of microorganism concentrations that will help detect sporadic pollution events (Brandão, 2019).

Box 7.2 describes recommended sampling and extraction procedures.

Box 7.2Beach sand sampling and analysis

Sampling of beach sand

  • Select the sand area of the beach that is mostly used (usually the supratidal area of the foreshore of the beach – refer to Fig. 7.1 for definitions).
  • Use sterile sampling spoons to collect several shallow aliquots from the surface in the target area (up to 10 cm deep). If more control over sand depth is necessary, shallow cores can also be used instead of scoops to ensure a uniform sampling depth.
  • Place the aliquots in a sterile container.
  • Thoroughly mix each aliquot before selecting a subsample for analysis.
  • Use of standardized methods for sample collection is encouraged (e.g. parts 9, 12, 15 and 19 of ISO 5667: Water quality – sampling).

Extraction of microorganisms from beach sand

FIO (Boehm et al., 2009)
  • Use a 10:1 ratio of eluent volume (usually 100 mL) to sand weight; the eluent is phosphate-buffered saline or deionized water.
  • Shake by hand for 2 minutes.
  • Allow to settle for 30 seconds.
  • Analyse the eluent in a similar way to water.
Fungi
  • Use gentle orbital shaking (Sabino et al., 2014) in extraction fluids such as water or saline solutions; extraction cannot be violent because of the risk of hypha breakage (generating extra colony forming units).
  • Use of Tween may aid extraction of less hydrophilic species, such as Penicillium and dermatophytes.

7.3. Management and communication

Pollution sources for beach sand should be included in the system description and sanitary survey for recreational water safety plans (refer to Chapter 2) to identify potential sources of faecal contamination of sand, and appropriate monitoring, management and communication actions.

7.3.1. Management actions

Animal excreta – including that of dogs, birds and other locally significant animals – increases FIO levels and introduces pathogens to beach sands. Exercising of dogs should be avoided in beach areas and should be kept separate from areas used by people during bathing seasons. Sections of the coast should be designated for this particular purpose. Access to the beach should also be limited for feral animals, such as cats, using humane and culturally sensitive methods. Management plans should be put in place for managing birds, whether native (protective measures) or non-native (deterrent measures). Increased public awareness may help to reduce exposure to feral animals and birds, and minimize feeding of these animals. Beach cleaning may remove some animal excreta, but it is more often undertaken for aesthetic reasons, or to remove litter or sharp materials, such as broken glass.

Other management strategies for beaches include proper design of solid waste disposal facilities, provision of toilet facilities and appropriate stormwater drainage (Kelly et al., 2018).

  • Garbage disposal should be available in designated areas; the garbage should be covered to minimize access by animals and should be protected from rain.
  • Proper solid waste management will help to minimize the presence of non-native bird species that can contribute FIOs to the beach sand environment.
  • The availability of toilet facilities at the beach can minimize FIO impacts from humans who visit the beach, and will also encourage proper hygiene practices, such as more frequent handwashing, during beach visits.
  • Drainage systems should be appropriately designed at beach areas; drainage from parking lots and nearby areas should not be permitted to flow directly onto the beach.
  • Direct stormwater drainage from surrounding communities onto the beach should be discouraged. If outdated infrastructure allows drainage of stormwater onto the beach, access to waters downstream should be restricted to avoid contact by beachgoers.

In some countries, particularly at resort areas, mechanical sand cleaning or beach grooming is used to eliminate visible solid waste mixed with sand. This reduces the amount of organic matter such as seaweed and therefore reduces development of microorganisms. Care should be taken in choosing the beach grooming strategy to minimize impacts on the sand quality (Kinzelman et al., 2004) and ecology (Llewellyn & Shackley, 1996).

Disinfection of sand (e.g. with chlorine, iodine, ultraviolet irradiation or thermal treatment) is not recommended because of negative impacts on native flora and fauna. Alternative simpler methods, such as sifting and aeration, could be applied (Figueras et al., 1992), together with beach supervision to minimize inputs and sources.

Beach sand renourishment is practised at some sites to build artificial beaches and restore natural beaches that are subject to erosion. This consists of fortifying a beach with sand translocated from an external site – offshore sources, sand quarries or another beach. The source of the sand and its quality should be considered in developing a beach renourishment plan, to preserve native ecosystems and avoid importing non-endemic arthropods. Quality considerations for the imported sand should include its microbiological and chemical quality, and mineralogy.

Human faeces are the major risk factor in areas without safe sanitation services. Sewage should not be dumped near recreational areas.

Example 7.3Beach sand classification under the Blue Flag award in Portugal

The Blue Flag organization is incorporating sand in the list of awarding criteria during the 2021 bathing season in Portugal. The classification is based on three parameters: all fungi, enterococci and E. coli per gram of sand.

For fungi, guidance is set at a mean value of 89 CFU/g of total fungi in sand (as determined by Brandão et al., 2021), and a rejection limit at the 80% percentile of 490 CFU/g. For example, in five sampling events, only one is allowed to exceed the value for total fungal count of 490 CFU/g.

For enterococci, the guideline value of 60 CFU/g or MPN/g of sand (section 7.2.1) is used as the compliance criterion for all sampling events. The value is considered provisional, as it is the result of QMRA that does not consider the native flora of a beach.

E. coli is used as an extra faecal indicator to connect with the European Bathing Water Directive parameter, using as compliance cut-off a reference value of 25 CFU/g (as described in Sabino et al., 2011).

7.3.2. Communication

Education and communication campaigns can include signage about policies concerning dogs, feeding of wildlife and disposal of trash. The location of toilet facilities should be identified. Beachgoers should be encouraged to practise good hygiene, such as using clean towels while on the beach, washing their hands before eating and showering immediately after beach visits. They should be encouraged to wear shoes to minimize cuts when walking during beach visits. Use of the beach should be discouraged if an individual has significant wounds; minor wounds can be covered with waterproof bandages.

More details about dissemination of educational materials are provided in Chapter 3; Box 7.4 provides some suggestions.

Box 7.4Suggested communication messages for the general public and beach managers

Communication for the general public

  • When visiting the beach, leave nothing behind but your footprints. You may even help clean up if you see an item of solid waste.
  • Shower thoroughly when you get home, but also use the showers at the beach. Make sure you wash off sand from your skin and from the inside of your ears.
  • If you have wounds, dress them properly with waterproof bandages before you go to the beach and avoid exposure to water; otherwise, the wound may get infected.
  • Don’t rub your eyes if you have sand in them; rinse with clean water instead. Rubbing may cause abrasions that might result in infections.
  • Do not take pets to the beach. Take them to non-bathing areas instead.

Communication for beach managers

  • Conduct sanitary inspections to identify possible sources of contaminants and develop a plan to manage these sources.
  • Keep litter contained, and make sure it is removed at the end of the day, to avoid foraging by feral animals during the night.
  • Develop a management plan for controlling birds and feral animals.
  • Develop a policy concerning dogs and enforce the policy.
  • If ecologically acceptable, develop an appropriate sand grooming plan.
  • Provide signage for beachgoers to encourage appropriate beach use and inform them about possible health risks.

7.4. Research needs

Studies are needed to establish beach guideline values for acceptable levels of microorganisms in beach sands. Epidemiological studies that include sand measures, detailed documentation of child play activities, and follow-up concerning possible health outcomes would be ideal to establish the relationships needed to confirm acceptable levels of FIOs for beach sands. This is particularly the case for emerging concerns such as opportunistic fungi, which are not addressed in current water quality recommendations. More information about non-point sources of contamination – including birds, macroalgae, forest and agricultural runoff, and storm runoff – is desirable. The ability of sand to convey contaminated groundwater remains obscure and unsettled.

References

  • Abdelzaher AM, Wright ME, Ortega C, Solo-Gabriele HM, Miller G, Elmir S, et al. (2010). Presence of pathogens and indicator microbes at a non-point source subtropical recreational marine beach. Appl Environ Microbiol. 76(3):724–32. [PMC free article: PMC2812993] [PubMed: 19966020]
  • Abreu R, Figueira C, Romao D, Brandao J, Freitas MC, Andrade C, et al. (2016). Sediment characteristics and microbiological contamination of beach sand: a case-study in the archipelago of Madeira. Sci Total Environ. 573:627–38. [PubMed: 27585431]
  • Akanbi OE, Njom HA, Fri J, Otigbu AC, Clarke AM (2017). Antimicrobial susceptibility of Staphylococcus aureus isolated from recreational waters and beach sand in Eastern Cape Province of South Africa. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 14(9):1001. [PMC free article: PMC5615538] [PubMed: 28862669]
  • Alcazar-Fuoli L, Mellado E, Alastruey-Izquierdo A, Cuenca-Estrella M, Rodriguez-Tudela JL (2008). Aspergillus section Fumigati: antifungal susceptibility patterns and sequence-based identification. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 52(4):1244–51. [PMC free article: PMC2292508] [PubMed: 18212093]
  • Alm EW, Burke J, Hagan E (2006). Persistence and potential growth of the fecal indicator bacteria, Escherichia coli, in shoreline sand at Lake Huron. J Great Lakes Res. 32:401–5.
  • Aragonés L, López I, Palazón A, López-Ubeda R, García C (2016). Evaluation of the quality of coastal bathing waters in Spain through fecal bacteria Escherichia coli and Enterococcus. Science Total Environ. 566–567:288–97. [PubMed: 27232959]
  • Ashbolt NJ, Schoen ME, Soller JA, Roser DJ (2010). Predicting pathogen risks to aid beach management: the real value of quantitative microbial risk assessment (QMRA). Water Res. 44:4692–703. [PubMed: 20638095]
  • Aulicino FA, Volterra L, Donati G (1985). Faecal contamination of shore-line sands. Bollettino della Società Italiana di Biologia Sperimentale. 61(10):1469–76. [PubMed: 4096850]
  • Badilla-Aguilar A, Mora-Alvarado DA (2019). Analysis of the bacteriological quality of two tropical beaches: relationship of indicators of fecal contamination between seawater and sands. Technology in March Magazine. 2019:37–45.
  • Boehm AB, Griffith J, McGee C, Edge TA, Solo-Gabriele HM, Whitman R, et al. (2009). Faecal indicator bacteria enumeration in beach sand: a comparison study of extraction methods in medium to coarse sands. J Appl Microbiol. 107(5):1740–50. [PMC free article: PMC2810257] [PubMed: 19659700]
  • Bojar H, Kłapeć T (2018). Contamination of selected recreational areas in Lublin Province, Eastern Poland, by eggs of Toxocara spp., Ancylostoma spp. and Trichuris spp. Ann Agric Environ Med. 25(3):460–3. [PubMed: 30260190]
  • Bolton FJ, Surman SB, Martin K, Wareing DR, Humphrey TJ (1999). Presence of Campylobacter and Salmonella in sand from bathing beaches. Epidemiol Infect. 122(1):7–13. [PMC free article: PMC2809581] [PubMed: 10098779]
  • Bongomin F, Gago S, Oladele RO, Denning DW (2017). Global and multi-national prevalence of fungal diseases: estimate precision. J Fungi. 3:57. [PMC free article: PMC5753159] [PubMed: 29371573]
  • Bonilla TD, Nowosielski K, Cuvelier M, Hartz A, Green M, Esiobu N, et al. (2007). Prevalence and distribution of fecal indicator organisms in south Florida beach sand and preliminary assessment of health effects associated with beach sand exposure. Mar Pollut Bull. 54:1472–82. [PubMed: 17610908]
  • Brandão J (2019). Microorganisms in beach sands: what do we still not know? In: Nriagu J, editor. Encyclopedia of environmental health. Elsevier, 390–2.
  • Brandão J, Veríssimo C, Rosado ML, Falcão ML, Giraldes A, Rosado C, et al. (2002). Qualidade microbiológica de areias de praias litorais: relatório final. In: Ambiente Id, editor. Associação Bandeira Azul da Europa.
  • Brandão J, Albergaria I, Albuquerque J, José S, Grossinho J, Ferreira FC, et al. (2020). Untreated sewage contamination of beach sand from a leaking underground sewage system. Sci Total Environ. 740:140237. [PubMed: 32927553]
  • Brandão J, Gangneux JP, Arikan-Akdagli S, Barac A, Bostanaru AC, Brito S, et al. (2021). Mycosands: fungal diversity and abundance in beach sand and recreational waters – relevance to human health. Sci Total Environ. 781:146598. [PubMed: 33812107]
  • Buskirk AD, Green BJ, Lemons AR, Nayak AP, Goldsmith WT, Kashon ML, et al. (2014). A murine inhalation model to characterize pulmonary exposure to dry Aspergillus fumigatus conidia. PloS One. 9(10):e109855. [PMC free article: PMC4207673] [PubMed: 25340353]
  • Byappanahalli MN, Shively DA, Nevers MB, Sadowsky MJ, Whitman RL (2003a). Growth and survival of Escherichia coli and enterococci populations in the macro-alga Cladophora (Chlorophyta). FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 46:203–11. [PubMed: 19719574]
  • Byappanahalli M, Fowler M, Shively D, Whitman R (2003b). Ubiquity and persistence of Escherichia coli in a midwestern coastal stream. Appl Environ Microbiol. 69(8):4549–55. [PMC free article: PMC169135] [PubMed: 12902241]
  • Byappanahalli MN, Whitman RL, Shively DA, Ferguson J, Ishii S, Sadowsky MJ (2007). Population structure of Cladophora-borne Escherichia coli in nearshore water of Lake Michigan. Water Res. 41:3649–54. [PubMed: 17451778]
  • Byappanahalli MN, Sawdey R, Ishii S, Shively DA, Ferguson JA, Whitman RL, Sadowsky MJ (2009). Seasonal stability of Cladophora-associated Salmonella in Lake Michigan watersheds. Water Res. 43(3):806–14. [PubMed: 19059626]
  • Cloutier DD, McLellan SL (2017). Distribution and differential survival of traditional and alternative indicators of fecal pollution at freshwater beaches. Appl Environ Microbiol. 83(4):e02881–16. [PMC free article: PMC5288815] [PubMed: 27940538]
  • Curren E, Leong SCY (2019). Profiles of bacterial assemblages from microplastics of tropical coastal environments. Sci Total Environ. 655:313–20. [PubMed: 30471599]
  • Datta K, Bartlett KH, Baer R, Byrnes E, Galanis E, Heitman J, et al. (2009). Spread of Cryptococcus gattii into Pacific Northwest region of the United States. Emerg Infect Dis. 15(8):1185–91. [PMC free article: PMC2815957] [PubMed: 19757550]
  • de Hoog GS, Guarro J, Gené J, Figueras MJ (2000). Atlas of clinical fungi, second edition. Utrecht: Centrallbureau voor Schimmelcultures.
  • Departamento de Salud Ambiental (2017). Directrices sanitarias para uso seguro de aguas recreativas. Modulo II: Directrices sanitarias para enteropatógenos y microorganismos oportunistas en agua ambiente. Argentina: Ministerio de Salud, Departamento de Salud Ambiental (https://www​.argentina​.gob.ar/sites/default​/files/directrices​_sanitarias_para_enteropatogenos.pdf, accessed 20 May 2021).
  • Elmanama AA, Fahd MI, Afifi S, Abdallah S, Bahr S (2005). Microbiological beach sand quality in Gaza Strip in comparison to seawater quality. Environ Res. 99(1):1–10. [PubMed: 16053922]
  • Esiobu N, Green M, Echeverry A, Bonilla TD, Stinson CM, Hartz A, et al. (2013). High numbers of Staphylococcus aureus at three bathing beaches in south Florida. Int J Environ Health Res. 23(1):46–57. [PubMed: 22924435]
  • Feng Z, Reniers A, Haus BK, Solo-Gabriele HM, Kelly EA (2016). Wave energy level and geographic setting correlate with Florida beach water quality. Mar Pollut Bull. 104(1–2):54–60. [PMC free article: PMC4804752] [PubMed: 26892203]
  • Figueras MJ, Guarro J, Soler L, Inza I, Polo F (1992). Estudio piloto sobre la contamination de las playas del litoral Catalan. [A pilot study on the contamination of Catalonian beaches.] In: Proceedings of the 1st Congreso Nacional del Medio Ambiente, Madrid.
  • Fujioka RS (2001). Monitoring coastal marine waters for spore-forming bacteria of faecal and soil origin to determine point from non-point source pollution. Water Sci Technol. 44(7):181–8. [PubMed: 11724486]
  • Fujioka R, Sian-Denton C, Borja M, Castro J, Morphew K (1999). Soil: the environmental source of Escherichia coli and enterococci in Guam’s streams. J Appl Microbiol (Symposium Supplement). 85(28):83S–89S. [PubMed: 21182696]
  • Gao GH, Falconer RA, Lin BL (2015). Modelling the fate and transport of faecal bacteria in estuarine and coastal waters. Mar Pollut Bull. 100:162–8. [PubMed: 26384864]
  • Gast RJ, Elgar S, Raubenheimer B (2015). Observations of transport of bacterial-like microspheres through beach sand. Cont Shelf Res. 97:1–6.
  • Ghinsberg RC, Leibowitz P, Witkin H, Mates A, Seinberg Y, Bar DL, et al. (1994). Monitoring of selected bacteria and fungi in sand and seawater along the Tel-Aviv coast. In: Mediterranean action plan. Athens: United Nations Environment Programme, 65–81 (MAP Technical Reports Series No. 87).
  • Goodwin KD, McNay M, Cao Y, Ebentier D, Madison M, Griffith JF (2012). A multi-beach study of Staphylococcus aureus, MRSA, and enterococci in seawater and beach sand. Water Res. 46(13):4195–207. [PubMed: 22652414]
  • Haas CN, Rose JB, Gerba CP (1999). Quantitative microbial risk assessment. John Wiley & Sons.
  • Hadley PW, Petrisor IG (2013). Incremental sampling: challenges and opportunities for environmental forensics. Environ Forensics. 14(2):109–20.
  • Havlickova B, Czaika VA, Friedrich M (2008). Epidemiological trends in skin mycoses worldwide. Mycoses. 51:2–15. [PubMed: 18783559]
  • Heaney CD, Sams E, Wing S, Marshall S, Brenner K, Dufour AP, et al. (2009). Contact with beach sand among beachgoers and risk of illness. Am J Epidemiol. 170(2):164–72. [PubMed: 19541858]
  • Heaney CD, Sams E, Dufour AP, Brenner KP, Haugland RA, Chern E, et al. (2012). Fecal indicators in sand, sand contact, and risk of enteric illness among beachgoers. Epidemiol. 23(1):95–106. [PMC free article: PMC3240855] [PubMed: 22157306]
  • Hernandez RJ, Hernandez Y, Jimenez NH, Piggot AM, Klaus JS, Feng Z, et al. (2014). Effect of full-scale beach renovation on fecal indicator levels in shoreline sand and water. Water Res. 48:579–91. [PMC free article: PMC3915934] [PubMed: 24183401]
  • Heukelbach J, Feldmeier H (2008). Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of hookworm-related cutaneous larva migrans. Lancet Infect Dis. 8(5):302–9. [PubMed: 18471775]
  • Imamura GJ, Thompson RS, Boehm AB, Jay JA (2011). Wrack promotes the persistence of fecal indicator bacteria in marine sands and seawater. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 77:40–9. [PubMed: 21385189]
  • Jang C, Liang C (2017). Characterizing health risks associated with recreational swimming at Taiwanese beaches by using quantitative microbial risk assessment. Water Sci Technol. 77(1–2):534–47. [PubMed: 29377838]
  • Jeffery-Smith A, Taori SK, Schelenz S, Jeffery K, Johnson EM, Borman A, et al. (2018). Candida auris: a review of the literature. Clin Microbiol Rev. 31(1):e00029–17. [PMC free article: PMC5740969] [PubMed: 29142078]
  • Kantarcioglu AS, Guarro J, De Hoog S, Apaydin H, Kiraz N (2017). An updated comprehensive systematic review of Cladophialophora bantiana and analysis of epidemiology, clinical characteristics, and outcome of cerebral cases. Med Mycol. 55(6):579–604. [PubMed: 28007938]
  • Kellogg CA, Griffin DW (2003). African dust carries microbes across the ocean: are they affecting human and ecosystem health? Reston, Virginia: United States Geological Survey (USGS Open-File Report 03-028).
  • Kelly E, Feng Z, Gidley M, Sinigalliano C, Kumar N, Donahue AG, et al. (2018). Effect of beach management policies on recreational water quality. J Environ Manage. 212:266–77. [PMC free article: PMC5844856] [PubMed: 29448181]
  • Khan IU, Hill S, Nowak E, Edge TA (2013). Effect of incubation temperature on the detection of thermophilic Campylobacter species from freshwater beaches, nearby wastewater effluents, and bird fecal droppings. Appl Environ Microbiol. 79(24):7639–45. [PMC free article: PMC3837823] [PubMed: 24077717]
  • Kidd SE, Hagen F, Tscharke RL, Huynh M, Bartlett KH, Fyfe M, et al. (2004). A rare genotype of Cryptococcus gattii caused the cryptococcus outbreak on Vancouver Island (British Columbia, Canada). Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 101(49):17258–63. [PMC free article: PMC535360] [PubMed: 15572442]
  • Kinzelman J, Pond K, Longmaid KD, Bagley RC (2004). The effect of two mechanical beach grooming strategies on Escherichia coli density in beach sand at a southwestern Lake Michigan beach. Aquat Ecosyst Health Manag. 7(3):425–32.
  • Lamparelli CC, Pogreba-Brown K, Verhougstraete M, Sato MIZ, de Castro Bruni A, Wade TJ, et al. (2015). Are fecal indicator bacteria appropriate measures of recreational water risks in the tropics: a cohort study of beach goers in Brazil? Water Res. 87:59–68. [PubMed: 26378732]
  • León-López CE, Arreola-Lizárraga JA, Padilla-Arredondo G, Chávez-Villalba JE, Mendoza-Salgado RA, Méndez-Rodríguez LC, et al. (2018). Temporal variability of enterococci and associated sources at three subtropical recreational beaches. Oceanol Hydrobiol Stud. 47(4):327–36.
  • Llewellyn PJ, Shackley SE (1996). The effects of mechanical beach-cleaning on invertebrate populations. British Wildlife. 7:147–55.
  • Male O (1990). The significance of mycology in medicine. In: Hawksworth DL, editor. Frontiers in mycology. Wallingford: CAB International, 131–56.
  • Mann P (2010). Feline hookworks and human cutaneous larva migrans. Powerpoint presentation prepared by Miami-Dade County Health Department.
  • Maziarz EK, Perfect JR (2016). Cryptococcosis. Infect Dis Clin North Am. 30(1):179–206. [PMC free article: PMC5808417] [PubMed: 26897067]
  • Mendes B, Urbano P, Alves C, Morais J, Lapa N, Oliveira JS (1998). Fungi as environmental microbiological indicators. Water Sci Technol. 38(12):155–62.
  • Miceli A, Krishnamurthy K (2019). Blastomycosis. In: StatPearls [website]. Treasure Island, Florida: StatPearls Publishing (https://www​.ncbi.nlm​.nih.gov/books/NBK441987/, accessed 20 May 2021).
  • Ministry of Health of the Republic of Lithuania (2007). Lithuanian hygiene standard HN 92: 2018 – Beaches and their bathing water quality (https://e-seimas​.lrs​.lt/portal/legalAct/lt/TAD/TAIS​.311976/wTyZKKekTr, accessed 20 May 2021).
  • Monteiro S, Brondani G, Brandão J, Santos R (2016). Viruses in beach sand. Fifth Food and Environmental Virology Congress, Kusatsu , Japan, September 2016.
  • Nestor I, Costin-Lazar L, Sovrea D, Ionescu N (1984). Detection of enteroviruses in sea water and beach sand. Zentralbl Bakteriol Mikrobiol Hyg B. 178(5–6):527–34. [PubMed: 6326428]
  • Oshiro R, Fujioka R (1995). Sand, soil, and pigeon droppings: sources of indicator bacteria in the waters of Hanauma Bay, Oahu, Hawaii. Water Sci Technol. 31:251–4.
  • Papadakis JA, Mavridou A, Richardson SC, Lampiri M, Marcelou U (1997). Bather-related microbial and yeast populations in sand and seawater. Water Res. 31(4):799–804.
  • Pianetti A, Bruscolini F, Sabatini L, Colantoni P (2004). Microbial characteristics of marine sediments in bathing area along Pesaro-Gabicce coast (Italy): a preliminary study. J Appl Microbiol. 97(4):682–9. [PubMed: 15357717]
  • Phillips MC, Solo-Gabriele HM, Piggot AM, Klaus JS, Zhang Y (2011). Relationships between sand and water quality at recreational beaches. Water Res. 45(20):6763–9. [PMC free article: PMC3228632] [PubMed: 22071324]
  • Piggot AM, Klaus JS, Johnson S, Phillips MC, Solo-Gabriele HM (2012). Relationship between enterococcal levels and sediment biofilms at recreational beaches in South Florida. Appl Environ Microbiol. 78:5973–82. [PMC free article: PMC3416616] [PubMed: 22706061]
  • Plano LR, Garza AC, Shibata T, Elmir SM, Kish J, Sinigalliano CD, et al. (2011). Shedding of Staphylococcus aureus and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus from adult and pediatric bathers in marine waters. BMC Microbiol. 11(1):5. [PMC free article: PMC3025831] [PubMed: 21211014]
  • Plano LRW, Shibata T, Garza AC, Kish J, Fleisher J, Sinigalliano CD, et al. (2013). Human-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus from a subtropical recreational marine beach. Microb Ecol. 65(4):1039–51. [PubMed: 23553001]
  • Praveena SM, Shamira SS, Ismail SNS, Aris AZ (2016). Fecal indicator bacteria in tropical beach sand: baseline findings from Port Dickson coastline, Strait of Malacca (Malaysia). Mar Pollut Bull. 110(1):609–12. [PubMed: 27289286]
  • Roca MA, Brown R, Solo-Gabriele HM (2019). Fecal indicator bacteria levels at beaches in the Florida Keys after Hurricane Irma. Mar Pollut Bull. 138:266–73. [PubMed: 30660273]
  • Roses Codinachs M, Isern Vins AM, Ferrer Escobar MD, Fernandez Perez F (1988). Microbiological contamination of the sand from the Barcelona city beaches. Rev Sanid Hig Publica (Madr). 62(5–8):1537–44. [PubMed: 3273878]
  • Sabino R, Veríssimo C, Cunha MA, Wergikoski B, Ferreira FC, Rodrigues R, et al. (2011). Pathogenic fungi: an unacknowledged risk at coastal resorts? New insights on microbiological sand quality in Portugal. Mar Pollut Bull. 62(7):1506–11. [PubMed: 21550072]
  • Sabino R, Rodrigues R, Costa I, Carneiro C, Cunha M, Duarte A, et al. (2014). Routine screening of harmful microorganisms in beach sands: implications to public health. Sci Total Environ. 472:1062–9. [PubMed: 24355396]
  • Schets FM, Schijven JF, de Roda Husman AM (2011). Exposure assessment for swimmers in bathing waters and swimming pools. Water Res. 45(7):2392–400. [PubMed: 21371734]
  • Schöttler G (1998). [Incidence of Toxocara ova: especially ova of visceral larva migrans in beach sand of Warnemünde in 1997]. Gesundheitswesen. 60(12):766–7. [PubMed: 10024778]
  • Shah AH, Abdelzaher AM, Phillips M, Hernandez R, Solo-Gabriele HM, Kish J, et al. (2011). Indicator microbes correlate with pathogenic bacteria, yeasts and helminthes in sand at a subtropical recreational beach site. J Appl Microbiol. 110(6):1571–83. [PubMed: 21447014]
  • Shatti JA, Abdullah THA (1999). Marine pollution due to wastewater discharge in Kuwait. Water Sci Technol. 40(7):33–9.
  • Shibata T, Solo-Gabriele HM (2012). Quantitative microbial risk assessment of human illness from exposure to marine beach sand. Environ Sci Technol. 46(5):2799–805. [PMC free article: PMC9785598] [PubMed: 22296573]
  • Signorile G, Montagna MT, Sena G, Cavallo RA (1992). Bacteriological surveys in waters and sands of Taranto coastal areas. L’Igiene Moderna. 98(3):475–83.
  • Silva PF, Cavalcanti IM, Irmão JI, Rocha FJ (2009). Common beach sand contamination due to enteroparasites on the southern coast of Pernambuco State, Brazil. Rev Inst Med Trop Sao Paulo. 51(4):217–18. [PubMed: 19739002]
  • Soge OO, Meschke JS, No DB, Roberts MC (2009). Characterization of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative Staphylococcus spp. isolated from US west coast public marine beaches. J Antimicrob Chemother. 64:1148–55. [PMC free article: PMC2782242] [PubMed: 19837712]
  • Solo-Gabriele H, Harwood V, Kay D, Fujioka R, Sadowsky M, Whitman R, et al. (2016). Beach sand and the potential for infectious disease transmission: observations and recommendations. J Mar Biol Assoc U K. 96(1):101–20.
  • Sousa MLR (1990). Micoses [Fungi]. Lisbon: National Institute of Health, Centre of Epidemiologic Surveillance of Transmissible Diseases (Epidemiology Bulletin No. 5).
  • Sow D, Soro F, Javelle E, Simon F, Parola P, Gautret P (2017). Epidemiological profile of cutaneous larva migrans in travelers returning to France between 2003 and 2015. Travel Med Infect Dis. 20:61–4. [PubMed: 28624508]
  • Suzuki Y, Teranishi K, Matsuwaki T, Nukazawa K, Ogura Y (2018). Effects of bacterial pollution caused by a strong typhoon event and the restoration of a recreational beach: transitions of fecal bacterial counts and bacterial flora in beach sand. Sci Total Environ. 640–641:52–61. [PubMed: 29852447]
  • Tanaka RJ, Boon NJ, Vrcelj K, Nguyen A, Vinci C, Armstrong-James D, et al. (2015). In silico modeling of spore inhalation reveals fungal persistence following low dose exposure. Sci Rep. 5:13958. [PMC free article: PMC4568477] [PubMed: 26364644]
  • Thapaliya D, Hellwig EJ, Kadariya J, Grenier D, Jefferson AJ, Dalman M (2017). Prevalence and characterization of Staphylococcus aureus and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus on public recreational beaches in northeast Ohio. Geohealth. 1(10):320–32. [PMC free article: PMC7007083] [PubMed: 32158979]
  • Tugrul-Icemer G, Topaloglu A (2011). Levels of yeast mold and Pseudomonas spp. in Antalya beaches. J Coast Res. 61:452–7.
  • Tyner EH, Jensen P, Ngochera M, Bootsma HA (2018). Escherichia coli (E. coli) distribution in the Lake Malawi nearshore zone. J Great Lakes Res. 44:1281–8.
  • USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency) (2011). Exposure factors handbook. Washington, DC: National Center for Environmental Assessment (EPA/600/R-09/052F).
  • Van Wïjnen JH, Clausing P, Brunekreff B (1990). Estimated soil ingestion by children. Environ Res. 51(2):147–62. [PubMed: 2335156]
  • Vieira RHSF, Rodrigues DP, Menezes EA, Evangelista NSS, Reis EMF, Barreto LP, et al. (2001). Microbial contamination of sand from major beaches in Fortaleza, Ceará State, Brazil. Braz J Microbiol. 32(2):77–80.
  • Viji R, Shrinithivihahshini ND, Santhanam P, Balakrishnan S, Yi Y, Rajivgandhi G (2019). Biomonitoring of the environmental indicator and pathogenic microorganisms assortment in foremost pilgrimage beaches of the Bay of Bengal, southeast coast, India. Mar Pollut Bull. 149:110548. [PubMed: 31550576]
  • Villacampa Y, López I, Aragonés L, García C, López M, Palazón A (2017). Water quality of the beach in an urban and not urban environment. Int J Sustain Dev Plann. 12(4):713–23.
  • Vogel LJ, O’Carroll DM, Edge TA, Robinson CE (2016). Release of Escherichia coli from foreshore sand and pore water during intensified wave conditions at a recreational beach. Environ Sci Technol. 50:5676–84. [PubMed: 27120087]
  • Warris A, Klaassen CHW, Meis JFGM, De Ruiter MT, De Valk HA, Abrahamsen TG, et al. (2003). Molecular epidemiology of Aspergillus fumigatus isolates recovered from water, air, and patients shows two clusters of genetically distinct strains. J Clin Microbiol. 41(9):4101–6. [PMC free article: PMC193792] [PubMed: 12958232]
  • Weiskerger CJ, Brandão J, Ahmed W, Aslan A, Avolio L, Badgley BD, et al (2019). Impacts of a changing earth on microbial dynamics and human health risks in the continuum between beach water and sand. Water Res. 162:456–70. [PubMed: 31301475]
  • Whiley H, Austin J, da Silva GM, Ross K (2018). Faecal indicator bacteria present in sand at South Port Beach, South Australia. J Coast Res. 34:215–19.
  • Whitman RL, Nevers MB, Byappanahalli MN (2006). Examination of the watershed-wide distribution of Escherichia coli along southern Lake Michigan: an integrated approach. Appl Environ Microbiol. 72(11):7301–10. [PMC free article: PMC1636137] [PubMed: 16980417]
  • Whitman RL, Harwood VJ, Edge TA, Nevers M, Byappanahalli M, Vijayavel K, et al. (2014). Microbes in beach sands: integrating environment, ecology and public health. Rev Environ Sci Biotechnol. 13:329–68. [PMC free article: PMC4219924] [PubMed: 25383070]
  • Wu MZ, O’Carroll DM, Vogel LJ, Robinson CE (2017). Effect of low energy waves on the accumulation and transport of fecal indicator bacteria in sand and pore water at freshwater beaches. Environ Sci Technol. 51:2786–94. [PubMed: 28186740]
  • Yamahara KM, Sassoubre LM, Goodwin KD, Boehm AB (2012). Occurrence and persistence of bacterial pathogens and indicator organisms in beach sand along the California coast. Appl Environ Microbiol. 78(6):1733–45. [PMC free article: PMC3298156] [PubMed: 22247142]
  • Zanoli Sato MI, Di Bari M, Lamparelli CC, Truzzi AC, Coelho MCLS, Hachich EM (2005). Sanitary quality of sands from marine recreational beaches of São Paulo, Brazil. Braz J Microbiol. 36(4):321–6.
© World Health Organization 2021.

Sales, rights and licensing. To purchase WHO publications, see http://apps.who.int/bookorders. To submit requests for commercial use and queries on rights and licensing, see http://www.who.int/about/licensing.

Third-party materials. If you wish to reuse material from this work that is attributed to a third party, such as tables, figures or images, it is your responsibility to determine whether permission is needed for that reuse and to obtain permission from the copyright holder. The risk of claims resulting from infringement of any third-party-owned component in the work rests solely with the user.

Some rights reserved. This work is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 IGO licence (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO; https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/igo).

Under the terms of this licence, you may copy, redistribute and adapt the work for non-commercial purposes, provided the work is appropriately cited, as indicated below. In any use of this work, there should be no suggestion that WHO endorses any specific organization, products or services. The use of the WHO logo is not permitted. If you adapt the work, then you must license your work under the same or equivalent Creative Commons licence. If you create a translation of this work, you should add the following disclaimer along with the suggested citation: “This translation was not created by the World Health Organization (WHO). WHO is not responsible for the content or accuracy of this translation. The original English edition shall be the binding and authentic edition”.

Any mediation relating to disputes arising under the licence shall be conducted in accordance with the mediation rules of the World Intellectual Property Organization (http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/mediation/rules/).

Bookshelf ID: NBK572636
Contents

Views

In this Page

Other titles in this collection

Related information

  • PMC
    PubMed Central citations
  • PubMed
    Links to PubMed

Recent Activity

ClearTurn OffTurn On

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...