Babler Kristina M, Amirali Ayaaz, Sharkey Mark E, Williams Sion L, Boone Melinda M, Cosculluela Gabriella A, Currall Benjamin B, Grills George S, Laine Jennifer, Mason Christopher E, Reding Brian D, Schürer Stephan C, Stevenson Mario, Vidovic Dusica, Solo-Gabriele Helena M
Department of Chemical, Environmental and Materials Engineering, Coral Gables, FL USA.
Department of Medicine, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL USA.
ACS ES T Water. 2022 Nov 11;2(11):2004-2013. doi: 10.1021/acsestwater.2c00047. Epub 2022 May 17.
Methods of wastewater concentration (electronegative filtration (ENF) versus magnetic bead-based concentration (MBC)) were compared for the analysis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), beta-2 microglobulin, and human-coronavirus OC43. Using ENF as the concentration method, two quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (qPCR) analytical methods were also compared: Volcano 2 Generation (V2G)-qPCR and reverse transcriptase (RT)-qPCR measuring three different targets of the virus responsible for the COVID-19 illness (N1, modified N3, and ORF1ab). Correlations between concentration methods were strong and statistically significant for SARS-CoV-2 (r=0.77, p<0.001) and B2M (r=0.77, p<0.001). Comparison of qPCR analytical methods indicate that, on average, each method provided equivalent results with average ratios of 0.96, 0.96 and 1.02 for N3 to N1, N3 to ORF1ab, and N1 to ORF1ab and were supported by significant (p<0.001) correlation coefficients (r =0.67 for V2G (N3) to RT (N1), r =0.74 for V2G (N3) to RT (ORF1ab), r = 0.81 for RT (N1) to RT (ORF1ab)). Overall results suggest that the two concentration methods and qPCR methods provide equivalent results, although variability is observed for individual measurements. Given the equivalency of results, additional advantages and disadvantages, as described in the discussion, are to be considered when choosing an appropriate method.
比较了废水浓缩方法（阴性电滤法（ENF）与基于磁珠的浓缩法（MBC））用于严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2（SARS-CoV-2）、β2微球蛋白和人冠状病毒OC43的分析。以ENF作为浓缩方法时，还比较了两种定量聚合酶链反应（qPCR）分析方法：Volcano 2 Generation（V2G）-qPCR和逆转录酶（RT）-qPCR，它们用于检测导致COVID-19疾病的病毒的三个不同靶标（N1、修饰的N3和ORF1ab）。SARS-CoV-2（r = 0.77，p < 0.001）和B2M（r = 0.77，p < 0.001）的浓缩方法之间的相关性很强且具有统计学意义。qPCR分析方法的比较表明，平均而言，每种方法提供的结果相当，N3与N1、N3与ORF1ab、N1与ORF1ab的平均比率分别为0.96、0.96和1.02，并且得到了显著（p < 0.001）相关系数的支持（V2G（N3）与RT（N1）的r = 0.67，V2G（N3）与RT（ORF1ab）的r = 0.74，RT（N1）与RT（ORF1ab）的r = 0.81）。总体结果表明，尽管个别测量存在变异性，但两种浓缩方法和qPCR方法提供的结果相当。鉴于结果的等效性，在选择合适的方法时，应考虑讨论中所述的其他优缺点。
