Treatability of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Contaminant Candidate List Viruses: Removal of Coxsackievirus and Echovirus using Enhanced Coagulation

Abstract

Enhanced coagulation was evaluated for removal efficacy of coxsackievirus and echovirus (Contaminant Candidate List [CCL] enteroviruses), poliovirus, four potential surrogate bacteriophages, and dissolved organic carbon (DOC). Viruses and DOC were effectively removed using enhanced coagulation, with removals generally improving as dose increased and pH decreased. Optimal enhanced coagulation conditions of 40 mg/L FeCl3 and pH between 5 and 6.5 resulted in a maximum removal of 3.0 logs of coxsackievirus B6, 1.75 logs of echovirus 12, 2.5 logs of poliovirus 1, 1.8 logs of fr, 1.3 logs of phi-X174, 0.36 logs of MS2, 0.29 logs of PRD1, and 41% DOC. Bacteriophages fr and phi-X174 appear to be the most representative surrogates for the physical removal of coxsackievirus, while MS2 and PRD1 are more conservative. For echovirus, MS2 and PRD1 appear to be the most appropriate surrogates. The relative removal profiles of the enteroviruses (greatest removal of coxsackievirus followed by poliovirus and then echovirus) suggest that studies of the physical removal of poliovirus may be extended to the CCL enteroviruses. These results contribute to evaluations of the CCL and regulatory status of coxsackievirus and echovirus and aid in building a database of the treatment efficiencies of enteroviruses and their surrogates.

Applicability of quantitative PCR for determination of removal efficacy of enteric viruses and Cryptosporidium by water treatment processes

“…The physical removal of coxsackievirus and echovirus (Mayer et al 2008) and adenovirus ) using enhanced coagulation was presented in the companion studies. Here, the removal efficacy of C. parvum oocysts is described.…”

“…To date, there are limited data on the physical removal of CCL viruses during water treatment processes Abbaszadegan et al 2007Abbaszadegan et al , 2008Mayer et al 2008). One reason for this limitation is the practical difficulty of performing bench-or pilot-scale experiments for the removal studies of microbial pathogens, particularly in microbial detection methods.…”

Virus Sensitivity Index of UV disinfection

“…[25] This is about 50% reduction of its sensitivity to UV disinfection compared to the VSI of X174 (phage) that is cultured in the host cell of E. coli ATCC 13706, which may result from larger surface areas of X174 (phage) as shown in the electromicroscopic scanning image. [33] A cumulative plot shows that more than 95% of virus will be more sensitive than MS2-phage. Therefore, MS2-phage is a very conservative surrogate virus in regulating the performance of UV disinfection systems.…”

Feasibility of in-line coagulation as a pretreatment for ceramic microfiltration to remove viruses

“…Although particle diameters and electrophoretic mobilities were almost the same for Qß and MS2 (Shirasaki et al 2009a), a marked difference in removal ratio was observed between total Qß and MS2. Abbaszadegan et al (2007) and Mayer et al (2008) reported that the removal ratio for MS2 was lower than that of adenoviruses, feline caliciviruses, coxsackieviruses, echoviruses and polioviruses by an enhanced coagulation process using ferrie chloride, and these researchers concluded that MS2 was an appropriate surrogate for enteric viruses. This difference was most likely the result of differences between the interactions of Qß and MS2 with the aluminium floe particles accumulated on the membrane surface as a cake layer.…”