Donor and recipient counter selection was evaluated by selecting bacteria that received plasmid RP4 by conjugation on filters and in lake water microcosms. Three counter selection systems were compared; (i) Use of antibiotic-resistant recipients, (ii) use of an auxotrophic donor, and (iii) use of a donor with chromosomal suicide genes. Transfer efficiencies of transconjugants per recipient obtained with the three different counter selection systems in filter-matings were not significantly different. Some nalidixic acid-resistant recipients became partly sensitive to nalidixic acid after receiving the plasmid. Use of an auxotrophic donor was a feasible and easy way to recover indigenous transconjugants. A strain with two copies of the suicide gene gef was successfully eliminated in filter-matings, but elimination of the donor in microcosms by induction of the suicide genes did not succeed. Thus, this counter selection system was not usable in microcosm experiments.