Auburn, Nov. 9---While Americans need to be aware of the potential bioterrorist threats to the drinking water supply and other sources, they should also take comfort in the fact that science is rising to meet this challenge, says one expert.

(Left: A network constructed from mouse embryo cells and attached to electrodes may help water systems and other facilities monitor for bioterrorist attacks.  Photo courtesy of the University of Texas Center for Network Neuroscience.)

"The good news is that scientists from a variety of disciplines are developing a whole new array of monitoring devices that will provide almost instantaneous detection of bioterrorist attacks in the water supply and other sources," says Dr. Jim Hairston, water quality coordinator for the Alabama Cooperative Extension System.

Currently, the only way to detect biological contamination and a possible biological threat to the water supply is by periodic culture sampling of the water – a slow, plodding process that often takes 3 or 4 days.

A recent Pentagon study confirms that open societies like the United States are vulnerable to many forms of nontraditional warfare such as bioterrorism. The study also showed that while the nation is well-equipped to respond and retaliate after a bioterrorist attack, it is generally ill-equipped in detection and prevention techniques.

One especially promising, instantaneous detection method is being developed by Dr. Guenther Gross, a University of North Texas researcher who has already received $2 million from the U.S. Department of Defense to perfect his technique.

Cells from mouse embryos are extracted and compressed between two glass plates within a 5-centimeter square loaded with tiny electrodes. The cells are then connected to a life support system and monitored by computer. Like any functioning cell, they react instantly to harmful chemicals.

"In effect, what you have is a monitoring system operated by living cells," Hairston says. "The device, in fact, is able to identify the nature of an attack by reacting in the same way humans would when exposed to a biological or chemical agent."

Gross is not the only expert exploring the use of animals to monitor environmental threats.

"It stands to reason that waiting for people to fall ill or even die is neither an efficient or a humane way to combat the bioterrorism risk," Hairston says.

That, he says, explains the growing fascination among many scientists for an approach that was originally adopted in the 19^th century, when canaries were used in coal mine shafts to monitor for methane and other poisonous gases.

"It was based on a very simple premise," Hairston says. "If the bird keeled over, miners knew danger was afoot."

The Nov. 6 edition of The New York Times reports that Dr. Bruce Weniger, an epidemiologist with the Centers for Disease Control, became especially intrigued with using animals as sentinels after reviewing research that showed several small animals were susceptible to exposure from anthrax spores.

"Why couldn’t some of these small animals, such as guinea pigs, laboratory mice and New Zealand rabbits, be used in government facilities as sentinels in the event of a future bioterrorist attack?" Weniger wondered.

Research, for example, shows guinea pigs die about 2 days earlier from exposure to anthrax spores than humans and may be especially well-suited for use in ongoing efforts to monitor for anthrax.

The Times report also noted that health workers in Florida monitoring for outbreaks of West Nile Virus are already using birds as early warning detection systems. Likewise, veterinarians monitor cattle and other animals for naturally occurring anthrax outbreaks.

By some estimates, it would cost about $2.5 million annually to feed and care for guinea pig sentinels placed in all of Washington’s 300 government offices, according to The Times report.

Even so, the approach is fraught with problems.

A number of the animals, for example, would die from causes other than anthrax exposure, and many experts fear this would lead to overburdened laboratories as each dead animal is submitted for autopsy and microbiological testing.

Many experts believe effective monitoring for the presence of anthrax will require an anthrax sensor, similar to a smoke alarm, placed in every government building and, ultimately, in every home in the United States.

That may explain why many experts are so excited about Gross’ detection technology. So far Gross has developed a suitcase-sized version of the technology. Utilizing the same technology, he hopes to develop a handheld detector that will also be especially useful in U.S. embassies where the threat of bioterrorism is especially acute.