Is there any thing can i used to detect an bacteria or viruses for iot project?

Hello everyone, I have an project on internet of things First off all plase pardon me for my english!

I want to make a device that can detect a viruses or bacteria, then can automatically controlled over internet. The Idea is That The device should be placed on the river nowhere in my country, then it should upload the data about the condition of the water in that river..

Is there any Sensor maybe can i use? or i need to make it ? Thanks for your time

I want to make a device that can detect a viruses or bacteria

Bacteria and viruses are essentially everywhere, so any sensor that works would always detect them.

The only exceptions would be extremely carefully sterilized environments, or fires, ovens, molten metals etc. where temperatures exceed about 150C.

Making such a detector is not an Arduino project.

Find a volunteer who will be drinking the water from the river. He/she will press a button once per hour. Arduino will detect the pressing the button and send a message via internet (sigfox or lora for example) to your computer, for example "I am still alive". When you stop receiving the messages, the water contains viruses and bacteria.

I love how so many people think that inventing means dreaming up some possible use case and then grabbing an Arduino and asking around for a sensor.

The reason something like this doesn't exist is surely not because nobody thought of it yet. If you want to be an inventor then try to invent that sensor. Combining it with an Arduino is then just an application, not an invention.

I think that the Star Trek TV and movie series led to the idea that there is a sensor for everything.

"No life forms on that planet, Captain!"

Bacteria fluoresce when you shine UV light on them. A probe that includes a light source, and a detector at a 90 degree angle will detect that fluorescence. You will need to calibrate the sensor, and it won't detect viruses.

ChrisTenone: Bacteria fluoresce when you shine UV light on them.

Only a subset. Definitely not all of them.

Delta_G: Only a subset. Definitely not all of them.

True, however polluted water is populated by fluorescing bacteria. They make fiber optic probes to test water for bacteria content that way. Here's an article.

ChrisTenone: True, however polluted water is populated by fluorescing bacteria. They make fiber optic probes to test water for bacteria content that way. Here's an article.

I spent 5 years running a company that made apps for flow cytometers to measure bacterial loads in water. (My avatar is a space filling model of a rabbit antibody to E. coli) I've got a TON of experience in these various methods of trying to get a number. There must be 10,000 half ass ways to get an answer on how many germs are in a water sample and with almost all of them you'll still end up drinking coliforms. This is just another of them. Under rigorous testing against good standard methods they all fall down. Even the flow cytometer methods. Hence the reason we shut that down and started testing by rtPCR.

The only true test is to either grow them out or do PCR.

Delta_G: ...

The only true test is to either grow them out or do PCR.

"True test" - dna, of course. But I don't think that's what the OP was looking for. They stated "I want to make a device that can detect a viruses or bacteria". I believe the fluorescence detector (with enzymatic preparation) does exactly that.

I don't know of a way to detect viruses, but my student, Mo Elzein, got his degree by developing this e.coli sensor. I don't claim expertise, but I did work with him to support his research. It's since been commercialized, and is currently being used to monitor waster sources. I'm convinced it works.

Here's another article based on Mo's dissertation.

That's not bacteria fluorescing. That's bacteria producing a fluorescent product by enzymatic action. I've done literally thousands of MUG tests. It was one of the methods we used to compare against. Against the flow instrument it would fall apart at really low levels. It's also completely useless against any strain that's b-gal negative. It gets used for coliforms, so you hardly see b-gal negative coliforms in nature. But I'd be careful calling it generic for all bacteria.

I'm not taking anything away from them. In certain applications MUG works great. I thought you were talking about the bugs fluorescing themselves.

The thing about bacterial detection that makes it such a bear is that as soon as you get a good method someone finds a matrix it can't work in or a strain it doesn't catch. That's why I say PCR is the only thing for sure. And even PCR I can shoot holes in if we got enough time. I'd have to go dig into old research notes for more details. I lost 6 million dollars chasing the rapid microbial detection dragon. I'm fairly convinced that we will never have a real method that always works for everything. I may just be bitter though.

I know how it works, and this is indeed several steps from my initial statement that "bacteria fluoresce". You are likely right that there will never be an instant bacteria identifier. But I think the OP just wants to know if there is poop in the water.

Indeed taking a long road to a dead end sucks. Perhaps a thing that tells folks if their water is potable would be a hit though. You know, iot...

Boil water for 30 minutes to inactivate all organisms, including bacteria and viruses. The water still might not be potable.

Sample into a microscope cell, robotic microscope using CV methods assays the types of cells. Doesn't work for viruses though, probably hopeless at low concentrations without some sort of microfluidic filtering system to preprocess significant volumes.

I think the consensus is there is no cheap way to do anything like a good job. Pay people to take samples regularly and post them to a lab.

If you want to measure how hazy the water is, that's another matter!

Grab an Arduino jar and weigh it empty. Then fill the Arduino jar up with the river water and weigh it again. After that use the Arduino water heater to evaporate all of the water. Using your Arduino scale measure the weight without water. There should be a delta weight. The new weight is how much not water is in the jar. Next using the Arduino furnace raise the temp to burn off non plant organics. Weight it again. That's how much bacteria was in the jar. To finish though you have to once again use your Arduino kiln to melt all of it and measure the gas chromographies flying out with your Arduinichrome. What's left is Corona.

Gravimeter much?

I ran a harmonised water quality lab on behalf of the EU.

"Water condition" covers chemical, physical and micro-organisms. The number of tests to get a reasonably good picture ran into hundreds, and cost a fortune to do.

Bacteria (E-Coli and faecal coliforms) were always counted on cultured plates. Viruses weren't of great interest then. The bacteria gave a good indication of waste water treatment works performance.

If I had to pick just one parameter for water quality, it would be the clarity or turbidity of the water.

Almost always, a high turbidity indicated a waste water works not operating correctly.

Turbidity is a robust measurement that can run unattended for weeks or months.

If additional measurements were needed, they would include dissolved oxygen level, temperature, pH and conductivity.

Even 30 to 40 years ago, dial-up modems were used to interrogate the data, but still required regular physical checks and calibrations.