Targeted community wastewater surveillance for SARS-CoV-2 and Mpox virus during a festival mass-gathering event

Brighton, Keegan; Fisch, Samuel; Wu, Huiyun; Vigil, Katie; Aw, Tiong Gim

doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.167443

Cited by 12 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 67 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…viral aggregation, cation bridging). The viral recovery percentiles were comparable with those derived from PEG precipitation and ultrafiltration concentration methods, as determined previously (Farkas et al 2022 ) and slightly lower for SARS-CoV-2 compared to a similar study using NMP (Brighton et al 2024 ).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

“…Overall, our results show that the NMP method is suitable for certain WBE applications. For example, in situations where the speed of results (rapid need for determination of presence or absence, for instance) outweighs the need for detailed quantification, the beads offer a rapid concentration method, which can be automated if the sample volume is lowered to 10 ml, enabling high throughput testing (Karthikeyan et al 2021 , Brighton et al 2024 ), however, small sample volumes may prevent the detection of low abundant viruses. For cases where quantification is important, our results show that PEG precipitation applied on high-volume samples is better able to detect less abundant viruses in RT-qPCR, and facilitates the detection of a greater range of variants in SARS-CoV-2 variant sequencing.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparative assessment of Nanotrap and polyethylene glycol-based virus concentration in wastewater samples

Farkas,

Kevill,

Williams

et al. 2024

FEMS Microbes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wastewater-based epidemiology is now widely used in many countries for the routine monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 and other viruses at a community level. However, efficient sample processing technologies are still under investigation. In this study, we compared the performance of the novel Nanotrap® Microbiome Particles (NMP) concentration method to the commonly used polyethylene glycol (PEG) precipitation method for concentrating viruses from wastewater and their subsequent quantification and sequencing. For this, we first spiked wastewater with SARS-CoV-2, influenza and measles viruses and norovirus and found that the NMP method recovered 0.4–21% of them depending on virus type, providing consistent and reproducible results. Using the NMP and PEG methods, we monitored SARS-CoV-2, influenza A and B viruses, RSV, enteroviruses and norovirus GI and GII and crAssphage in wastewater using quantitative PCR (qPCR)-based methods and next-generation sequencing. Good viral recoveries were observed for highly abundant viruses using both methods; however, PEG precipitation was more successful in the recovery of low-abundance viruses present in wastewater. Furthermore, samples processed with PEG precipitation were more successfully sequenced for SARS-CoV-2 than those processed with the NMP method. Virus recoveries were enhanced by high sample volumes when PEG precipitation was applied. Overall, our results suggest that the NMP concentration method is a rapid and easy virus concentration method for viral targets that are abundant in wastewater, whereas PEG precipitation may be more suited to the recovery and analysis of low-abundance viruses and for next generation sequencing.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%