do Nascimento Mariah C A, Smith Wendy J M, Liu Yawen, da Costa Vivaldo Gomes, Simpson Stuart L, Bivins Aaron, Rahal Paula, Ahmed Warish
CSIRO Environment, Ecosciences Precinct, 41 Boggo Road, Brisbane, QLD 4102, Australia.
Department of Biology, São Paulo State University - UNESP, São José do Rio Preto, São Paulo 15054-000, Brazil.
J Water Health. 2025 Jun;23(6):701-714. doi: 10.2166/wh.2025.327. Epub 2025 May 5.
This study assessed the accuracy, field suitability, and cost-effectiveness of colorimetric LAMP (c-LAMP) assays using six heating instruments: Electric Kettle, Water Bath, Heating Block, miniPCR, Thermocycler, and Genie® III. Bacteroides HF183 (HF183), SARS-CoV-2, and Aichi virus A (AiV-A) were tested using control materials and wastewater samples, comparing cLAMP with qPCR/RT-qPCR detection. qPCR/RT-qPCR reliably detected HF183 and AiV-A genetic fragments at dilutions as low as 1 × 10 pg/μL, corresponding to 1.24 and 1.49 log GC/reaction. cLAMP/RT-cLAMP detected these fragments at 1 × 10 pg/μL (2.28 and 2.63 log GC/reaction), though Electric Kettle, miniPCR, and Genie® III occasionally produced false negatives. RT-qPCR reliably detected SARS-CoV-2 fragments at 1 × 10 GC/μL (1.86 log GC/reaction), with cLAMP/RT-cLAMP performing similarly across most instruments except Thermocycler. No significant differences (p > 0.05) were observed among instruments, though inconsistencies appeared at lower concentrations. The findings offer valuable insights into heating instrument performance for cLAMP/RT-cLAMP assays, guiding their application in wastewater-based pathogen detection.
本研究评估了使用六种加热仪器(电热水壶、水浴锅、加热块、miniPCR、热循环仪和Genie® III)的比色环介导等温扩增(c-LAMP)检测方法的准确性、现场适用性和成本效益。使用对照材料和废水样本对拟杆菌HF183(HF183)、严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2(SARS-CoV-2)和爱知病毒A(AiV-A)进行了检测,将cLAMP与定量聚合酶链反应/逆转录定量聚合酶链反应(qPCR/RT-qPCR)检测进行比较。qPCR/RT-qPCR能够可靠地检测到低至1×10 pg/μL稀释度的HF183和AiV-A基因片段,分别对应于1.24和1.49 log GC/反应。cLAMP/RT-cLAMP在1×10 pg/μL(2.28和2.63 log GC/反应)时检测到这些片段,不过电热水壶、miniPCR和Genie® III偶尔会产生假阴性结果。RT-qPCR能够可靠地检测到1×10 GC/μL(1.86 log GC/反应)的SARS-CoV-2片段,除热循环仪外,cLAMP/RT-cLAMP在大多数仪器上的表现相似。各仪器之间未观察到显著差异(p>0.05),不过在较低浓度时出现了不一致情况。这些发现为cLAMP/RT-cLAMP检测的加热仪器性能提供了有价值的见解,指导其在基于废水的病原体检测中的应用。