Evaluation of viral concentration methods from irrigation and processing water

► We compared four viral concentration methods for their recovery in water. ► MNV-1 and MS2 phages were used as surrogate viruses during this study. ► All methods were evaluated in processing water and four types of irrigation water. ► The best method used a negatively charged membrane with the Tr a...

Celý popis

Uloženo v:

Podrobná bibliografie
Vydáno v:	Journal of virological methods Ročník 187; číslo 2; s. 294 - 303
Hlavní autoři:	De Keuckelaere, Ann, Baert, Leen, Duarte, Alexandra, Stals, Ambroos, Uyttendaele, Mieke
Médium:	Journal Article
Jazyk:	angličtina
Vydáno:	Kidlington Elsevier B.V 01.02.2013 Elsevier
Témata:	Adsorption bacteriophages Biological and medical sciences filtration Filtration - methods Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology Hepatitis A virus Hepatitis A virus - isolation & purification Hepatovirus A humans irrigation irrigation water Levivirus - isolation & purification mice Microbiology Murine norovirus Norovirus Norovirus - isolation & purification pathogens rain Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction Real-time RT-PCR Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction river water Rotavirus Rotavirus - isolation & purification Specimen Handling - methods Techniques used in virology Viral Plaque Assay Virology Virology - methods Water Water Microbiology Real-time RT-PCR Water Hepatitis A virus Norovirus Rotavirus Murine norovirus Picornaviridae Rodentia Method Irrigation water Real time Reoviridae Hepatovirus Virus Vertebrata Mammalia Mouse Caliciviridae Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction
ISSN:	0166-0934, 1879-0984, 1879-0984
On-line přístup:	Získat plný text
Tagy:	Přidat tag Žádné tagy, Buďte první, kdo vytvoří štítek k tomuto záznamu!

Popis
Shrnutí:	► We compared four viral concentration methods for their recovery in water. ► MNV-1 and MS2 phages were used as surrogate viruses during this study. ► All methods were evaluated in processing water and four types of irrigation water. ► The best method used a negatively charged membrane with the Tr alk elution buffer. ► The best method was tested for its recovery of HAV, GI and GII NoV and RV. Four viral concentration methods were evaluated for their efficiency in recovering murine norovirus-1 (MNV-1) (surrogate for human noroviruses (NoV)) and MS2 bacteriophages from processing water (1L) and four different types of irrigation water (bore hole water, rain water, open well and river water) (2–5L). Three methods were based on the viral adsorption and elution principle, two methods using an electronegative HA-membrane (Katayama et al., 2002), one method using an electropositive Zetapor membrane according to CEN/TC275/WG6/TAG4 and the fourth method was based on size exclusion using a tangential flow filtration system. Detection of MNV-1 was achieved by real-time RT-PCR and detection of MS2 by double-layer plaque assay. For the recovery of MNV-1, the method using an electronegative HA-filter in combination with an elution buffer earlier optimized by Hamza et al. (2009) (Method 1) performed best for all types of water (recovery: 5.8–21.9%). In case of MS2 detection, the best method depended upon the type of water although Method 1 provided the most consistent recovery. To complete this evaluation, the Method 1 was evaluated further for the concentration of human enteric viruses (GI and GII NoV, hepatitis A virus (HAV) and rotaviruses) in the same five types of water. Although detection of rotaviruses (RV) was somewhat less efficient, Method 1 proved reliable for the detection of NoV and HAV in all water types. Mean recovery efficiencies ranging from 4.8% for detection of GI NoV in open well water to 32.1% for detection of HAV in bore hole water, depending on the water type and the viral pathogen analyzed.
Bibliografie:	http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jviromet.2012.11.028 ObjectType-Article-2 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-1 content type line 23 ObjectType-Undefined-3 ObjectType-Article-1 ObjectType-Feature-2
ISSN:	0166-0934 1879-0984 1879-0984
DOI:	10.1016/j.jviromet.2012.11.028