School of Microbiology, University of Antioquia, Cl 70 No. 52-21, Medellín, Colombia E-mail:
Diagnostic and Pollution Control Research Group (GDCON), School of the Environment, Faculty of Engineering, University Research Campus (SIU), University of Antioquia, Cl 62# 52-59, Medellin, Colombia.
J Water Health. 2021 Oct;19(5):775-784. doi: 10.2166/wh.2021.133.
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 AlCl, 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.
污水中 SARS-CoV 的检测已被提议作为在社区层面监测 COVID-19 的工具。尽管已经有许多关于在污水中检测病毒 RNA 及其存在与感染人群相关的报告,但尚未建立使用这种方法的适当分析方法。在这项研究中,我们比较了超滤、聚乙二醇沉淀、使用 AlCl 的絮凝和脱脂乳的絮凝对 SARS-CoV-2 的回收效果,使用来自 COVID-19 阳性诊断患者的 RNA 和假单胞菌噬菌体 φ6 作为对照。我们还评估了用于检测病毒的 E、RdRp 和 N 基因的引物,以及不同的储存时间。不同的浓缩方法的回收率存在明显差异,超滤和铝沉淀的效果最好,当病毒水平较高时,回收率分别为 42.0%和 30.0%。使用废水和去离子水的回收率以及不同储存时间之间存在显著差异,6 小时和 12 小时采样的回收率更好。在分析的所有样本中,仅检测到 E 基因。结果表明,尽管这种方法可以为研究大流行提供重要数据,但有必要制定明确的方案,以便调查结果具有可比性。