Optimization of the skimmed-milk flocculation method for recovery of adenovirus from sludge

Assis, Andrêssa Silvino Ferreira; Otênio, Marcelo Henrique; Drumond, Betânia Paiva; Fumian, Túlio Machado; Miagostovich, Marize Pereira; Silva, Maria Luzia da Rosa e

doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.01.045

Cited by 18 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Four previously published concentration methods were evaluated for obtaining SARS-CoV-2 RNA from wastewater: flocculation with aluminum chloride (Randazzo et al 2020), precipitation with polyethylene glycol (PEG); (Wu et al 2020), flocculation with skim milk (Assis et al 2017), and ultrafiltration (Barril et al 2020). The recovery efficiency for each concentration method was calculated based on the number of copies quantified by RT-qPCR as follows:…”

Section: Sample Concentrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in wastewater is influenced by sampling time, concentration method, and target analyzed

Pino

Rodríguez

Cano

et al. 2021

Journal of Water and Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The detection of SARS-CoV in wastewater has been proposed as a tool for monitoring COVID-19 at the community level. Although many reports have been published about detecting viral RNA in wastewater and its presence has been linked to infected people, appropriate analytical methodologies to use this approach have not yet been established. In this study, we compared ultrafiltration, polyethylene glycol precipitation, flocculation using AlCl3, and flocculation with skim milk for the recovery of SARS-CoV-2, using RNA from patients with positive diagnoses for COVID-19 and Pseudomonas phage φ6 as the control. We also evaluated the primers for detecting the E, RdRp, and N genes of the virus, as well as different storage times. Differences in the recovery efficiencies were evident with the different concentration methods, the best being ultrafiltration and precipitation with aluminum, which had recovery rates of 42.0% and 30.0%, respectively, when virus was present at high levels. Significant differences were found between the recoveries using wastewater and deionized water and between different storage times, with better recoveries for 6 and 12 h samplings. The E gene was the only one detected in all the samples analyzed. The results show that although this approach can provide important data for studying the pandemic, clear protocols are necessary for investigations to be comparable. HIGHTLIGHTS RNA of SARS-CoV-2 was used to evaluate the recovery of different methods in wastewater. The utility of phage φ6 of Pseudomonas as a control for evaluation of recovery methods of SARS-CoV-2 from wastewater was demonstrated. Differences due to the target selected for the detection of SARS was demonstrated. The results show that it is possible to detect SARS RNA in wastewater, however its epidemiological usefulness will depend on the correct validation of the technique used for detection.

show abstract

Section: Sample Concentrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in wastewater is influenced by sampling time, concentration method, and target analyzed

Pino

Rodríguez

Cano

et al. 2021

Journal of Water and Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…AdVs were detected at 10 11 gc/l concentration in wastewater influent, in Pisa, Italy in 2009e2010 (Carducci and Verani, 2013). In other studies using the same primer and probe set (Hernroth et al, 2002), the concentration of AdV was lower, between 10 3 and 10 9 gc/ l with the highest concentrations measured in other wastewater treatment plants in Italy (La Rosa et al, 2010), followed by peak concentrations of 10 8 gc/l in Rome, Italy (Muscillo et al, 2008), Barcelona, Spain (Bofill-Mas et al, 2006), and in Minas Gerais and Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (Assis et al, 2017). Similar peak concentrations (10 8 gc/l) were observed when AdV groups A-G were targeted in Germany (Hamza et al, 2009a) and in Queensland, Australia (Sidhu et al, 2017b).…”

Section: Criterion 3: Presence In Wastewater At High Concentrationsmentioning

confidence: 82%

Viral indicators for tracking domestic wastewater contamination in the aquatic environment

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Shake it at 200 ×g for 2 h at room temperature and centrifuge it at 2,000 ×g for 30 min. The precipitate was resuspended in 0.01 M PBS and stored at −80 °C ( Assis et al, 2017 ; Calgua et al, 2008 ). The PEG-NaCl method was to add 15% PEG8000 (1363GR; BioFroxx, Hangzhou, China) and 0.2 M NaCl to 40 ml of eluent.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of different factors on the influence of glass wool concentration for detection of main swine viruses in water samples

Fan,

Chen,

Song

et al. 2023

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Viruses existed in wastewaters might pose a biosecurity risk to human and animal health. However, it is generally difficult to detect viruses in wastewater directly as they usually occur in low numbers in water. Therefore, processing large volumes of water to concentrate viruses in a much smaller final volume for detection is necessary. Glass wool has been recognized as an effective material to concentrate multiple in water, and in this study, we assessed the use of glass wools on concentrating pseudorabies virus (PRV), African swine fever virus (ASFV), and porcine epidemic diarrhea virus (PEDV) in water samples. The influence of pH values, water matrix, water volume, filtration rate, temperature on the effect of the method concentrating these viruses for detection was evaluated in laboratory. Our results revealed that glass wool was suitable for the concentration of above-mentioned viruses from different water samples, and demonstrated a good application effect for water with pH between 6.0–9.0. Furthermore, glass wool also showed a good recovery effect on concentrating viral nucleic acids and viral particles, as well as living viruses. In addition, combining use of glass wool with skim milk, polyethylene glycol (PEG)-NaCl, or ultracentrifuge had good effects on concentrating ASFV, PRV, and PEDV. Detection of wastewater samples (n = 70) collected from 70 pig farms in 13 regions across Hubei Province in Central China after glass-wool-concentration determined one sample positive for ASFV, eighteen samples positive for PRV, but no sample positive for PEDV. However, these positive samples were detected to be negative before glass wool enrichment was implemented. Our results suggest that glass wool-based water concentration method developed in this study represents an effective tool for detecting viruses in wastewater.

show abstract

Optimization of the skimmed-milk flocculation method for recovery of adenovirus from sludge

Cited by 18 publications

References 40 publications

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in wastewater is influenced by sampling time, concentration method, and target analyzed

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in wastewater is influenced by sampling time, concentration method, and target analyzed

Viral indicators for tracking domestic wastewater contamination in the aquatic environment

Assessment of different factors on the influence of glass wool concentration for detection of main swine viruses in water samples

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About