Assessment of two types of passive sampler for the efficient recovery of SARS-CoV-2 and other viruses from wastewater

Allbwn ymchwil: Cyfraniad at gyfnodolynErthygladolygiad gan gymheiriaid

StandardStandard

Assessment of two types of passive sampler for the efficient recovery of SARS-CoV-2 and other viruses from wastewater. / Kevill, Jessica L.; Lambert-Slosarska, Kathryn; Pellett, Cameron et al.
Yn: Science of the Total Environment, Cyfrol 838, Rhif 4, 156580, 10.09.2022.

Allbwn ymchwil: Cyfraniad at gyfnodolynErthygladolygiad gan gymheiriaid

HarvardHarvard

APA

CBE

MLA

VancouverVancouver

Kevill JL, Lambert-Slosarska K, Pellett C, Woodhall N, Richardson-O'Neill I, Pantea I et al. Assessment of two types of passive sampler for the efficient recovery of SARS-CoV-2 and other viruses from wastewater. Science of the Total Environment. 2022 Medi 10;838(4):156580. Epub 2022 Meh 9. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.156580

Author

Kevill, Jessica L. ; Lambert-Slosarska, Kathryn ; Pellett, Cameron et al. / Assessment of two types of passive sampler for the efficient recovery of SARS-CoV-2 and other viruses from wastewater. Yn: Science of the Total Environment. 2022 ; Cyfrol 838, Rhif 4.

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Assessment of two types of passive sampler for the efficient recovery of SARS-CoV-2 and other viruses from wastewater

AU - Kevill, Jessica L.

AU - Lambert-Slosarska, Kathryn

AU - Pellett, Cameron

AU - Woodhall, Nick

AU - Richardson-O'Neill, India

AU - Pantea, Igor

AU - Alex-Sanders, Natasha

AU - Farkas, Kata

AU - Jones, Davey L.

PY - 2022/9/10

Y1 - 2022/9/10

N2 - Wastewater-based epidemiology (WBE) has proven to be a useful surveillance tool during the ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, and has driven research into evaluating the most reliable and cost-effective techniques for obtaining a representative sample of wastewater. When liquid samples cannot be taken efficiently, passive sampling approaches have been used, however, insufficient data exists on their usefulness for multi-virus capture and recovery. In this study, we compared the virus-binding capacity of two passive samplers (cotton-based tampons and ion exchange filter papers) in two different water types (deionised water and wastewater). Here we focused on the capture of wastewater-associated viruses including Influenza A and B (Flu-A & B), SARS-CoV-2, human adenovirus (AdV), norovirus GII (NoVGII), measles virus (MeV), pepper mild mottle virus (PMMoV), the faecal marker crAssphage and the process control virus Pseudomonas virus phi6. After deployment, we evaluated four different methods to recover viruses from the passive samplers namely, (i) phosphate buffered saline (PBS) elution followed by polyethylene glycol (PEG) precipitation, (ii) beef extract (BE) elution followed by PEG precipitation, (iii) no-elution into PEG precipitation, and (iv) direct extraction. We found that the tampon-based passive samplers had higher viral recoveries in comparison to the filter paper. Overall, the preferred viral recovery method from the tampon passive samplers was the no-elution/PEG precipitation method. Furthermore, we evidenced that non-enveloped viruses had higher percent recoveries from the passive samplers than enveloped viruses. This is the first study of its kind to assess passive sampler and viral recovery methods amongst a plethora of viruses commonly found in wastewater or used as a viral surrogate in wastewater studies.

AB - Wastewater-based epidemiology (WBE) has proven to be a useful surveillance tool during the ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, and has driven research into evaluating the most reliable and cost-effective techniques for obtaining a representative sample of wastewater. When liquid samples cannot be taken efficiently, passive sampling approaches have been used, however, insufficient data exists on their usefulness for multi-virus capture and recovery. In this study, we compared the virus-binding capacity of two passive samplers (cotton-based tampons and ion exchange filter papers) in two different water types (deionised water and wastewater). Here we focused on the capture of wastewater-associated viruses including Influenza A and B (Flu-A & B), SARS-CoV-2, human adenovirus (AdV), norovirus GII (NoVGII), measles virus (MeV), pepper mild mottle virus (PMMoV), the faecal marker crAssphage and the process control virus Pseudomonas virus phi6. After deployment, we evaluated four different methods to recover viruses from the passive samplers namely, (i) phosphate buffered saline (PBS) elution followed by polyethylene glycol (PEG) precipitation, (ii) beef extract (BE) elution followed by PEG precipitation, (iii) no-elution into PEG precipitation, and (iv) direct extraction. We found that the tampon-based passive samplers had higher viral recoveries in comparison to the filter paper. Overall, the preferred viral recovery method from the tampon passive samplers was the no-elution/PEG precipitation method. Furthermore, we evidenced that non-enveloped viruses had higher percent recoveries from the passive samplers than enveloped viruses. This is the first study of its kind to assess passive sampler and viral recovery methods amongst a plethora of viruses commonly found in wastewater or used as a viral surrogate in wastewater studies.

KW - COVID-19 surveillance

KW - Sewage sampling

KW - Viral capture method

KW - Public health risk

KW - Environmental monitoring

U2 - 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.156580

DO - 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.156580

M3 - Article

VL - 838

JO - Science of the Total Environment

JF - Science of the Total Environment

SN - 0048-9697

IS - 4

M1 - 156580

ER -