Genotype-dependent kinetics of enterovirus inactivation by free chlorine and ultraviolet (UV) irradiation

A Roadmap for Building Waterborne Virus Traps

“…Several studies have demonstrated that even small differences between viruses, often from the same family, exhibit striking differences in their inactivation kinetics, 16,17 interactions at interfaces, 44,45 and purification efficiencies. 46,47 Therefore, obtaining meaningful results without having to run virus filtration/inactivation studies using all relevant human viruses, which is literally impossible, remains a challenge.…”

“…Most bacteriophages pose no health risks to humans, they can be propagated to very high concentrations, and their infectivity can often be readily assessed within less than 24 h; culturable human viruses, on the other hand, require between 2–14 days to assess their infectivity. , Figure b shows some of the well-studied bacteriophages, among which MS2 and other viruses from the Leviviridae family are the most commonly used for filtration/inactivation research. , The advantages offered by using bacteriophages must be considered with a caveat in mind: knowledge obtained using one virus is not directly transferable to another virus; this does not only apply to knowledge transfer from bacteriophages to human viruses, but also among bacteriophages and human viruses themselves. Several studies have demonstrated that even small differences between viruses, often from the same family, exhibit striking differences in their inactivation kinetics, , interactions at interfaces, , and purification efficiencies. , Therefore, obtaining meaningful results without having to run virus filtration/inactivation studies using all relevant human viruses, which is literally impossible, remains a challenge.…”

“…Disinfection is typically conducted using chemical disinfectants or UV light. While regarded as one of the most effective approaches against viruses, disinfection still shows varying efficiencies, even among closely related viruses with very subtle genetic and structural differences. − Additionally, disinfection byproducts, especially when using chlorine-based disinfectants in the presence of natural organic matter (NOM), are toxic to the environment and humans. , Consequently, it is necessary to completely purify the water from NOMs to avoid the production of these toxic byproducts, which in itself constitutes a major challenge. Moreover, the efficacy of disinfection approaches is largely compromised by the aggregation of viruses. − Both chemical and UV disinfection come at high operational costs and expertise, making their accessibility limited to a small portion of the global population.…”

“…While regarded as one of the most effective approaches against viruses, disinfection still shows varying efficiencies, even among closely related viruses with very subtle genetic and structural differences. 15 − 17 Additionally, disinfection byproducts, especially when using chlorine-based disinfectants in the presence of natural organic matter (NOM), are toxic to the environment and humans. 18 , 19 Consequently, it is necessary to completely purify the water from NOMs to avoid the production of these toxic byproducts, which in itself constitutes a major challenge.…”

Observed Kinetics of Enterovirus Inactivation by Free Chlorine Is Host Cell-Dependent

“…To evaluate the virucidal efficacy of various disinfectants, methods relying on the infection of a host cell are utilized (e.g., plaque assay and endpoint dilution assay). Buffalo green monkey kidney (BGMK) cells 11 are most commonly used for enterovirus titration to assess the efficacy of disinfection in water treatment 4,7,8,12–17 . This is assumingly because BGMK cells are the most efficient for enterovirus isolation 18 and are employed to perform EPA method 1615 19,20 which quantifies “total culturable virus” in water samples.…”