2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.jviromet.2018.10.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Viral tools for detection of fecal contamination and microbial source tracking in wastewater from food industries and domestic sewage

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Recoveries of spiked whole process control ranged 3.6-40.9% (Lab1) and 3.2-66.6% (Lab2) (Table 4) suggesting that the method was suitable for viral concentration (Haramoto et al 2018;ISO 15216-1:2017). Overall, previous studies showed similar wide recovery ranges in surface and waste waters by using different viruses as process control such as MgV (Farkas et al 2018;Miura et al 2016), PP7 bacteriophage, or AdV (Kundu et al 2013;Prevost et al 2015;Barrios et al 2018). Average recovery percentages ranging from 38 to 49% were obtained in different studies by using adsorption-elution on electro-charged (either positive or negative) filters and summarized in Cashdollar and Wymer (2013)'s review.…”
Section: Interlaboratory Study For the Detection And Quantification Of Potentially Infectious Enteric Viruses In Influent And Effluent Wamentioning
confidence: 82%
“…Recoveries of spiked whole process control ranged 3.6-40.9% (Lab1) and 3.2-66.6% (Lab2) (Table 4) suggesting that the method was suitable for viral concentration (Haramoto et al 2018;ISO 15216-1:2017). Overall, previous studies showed similar wide recovery ranges in surface and waste waters by using different viruses as process control such as MgV (Farkas et al 2018;Miura et al 2016), PP7 bacteriophage, or AdV (Kundu et al 2013;Prevost et al 2015;Barrios et al 2018). Average recovery percentages ranging from 38 to 49% were obtained in different studies by using adsorption-elution on electro-charged (either positive or negative) filters and summarized in Cashdollar and Wymer (2013)'s review.…”
Section: Interlaboratory Study For the Detection And Quantification Of Potentially Infectious Enteric Viruses In Influent And Effluent Wamentioning
confidence: 82%
“…dPCR quantifies the viral genome and its population count in wastewaters without depending on known and calibrated standards [134] , [135] . RT-PCR, RT-qPCR, and nested PCR use specific primers and probes for detection and quantification [136] . The detection rates depend on the primer and probes used to detect target virus which should be revised frequently to assure the novel strain detection [77] .…”
Section: Detection Of Virus In Environmental Matricesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Human JC (JCPyV) and BK (BKPyV) polyomaviruses were quantitively detected by qPCR using the oligonucleotides and reaction conditions described by Barrios et al (2018). On the other hand, a fragment of the gene encoding for the human Ribonuclease P (RNase P) was quantitively detected by qPCR using the system described by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC, 2020).…”
Section: Normalization With Human Polyomaviruses (Hpyv) and Ribonuclease P (Rnase P) As Human Input Indicatorsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Table 1. Oligonucleotides: forward (F) and reverse (R) primers and Taq-Man® probes (P) used for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 N gene (CDC, 2020), HPyV (Barrios et al, 2018) and RNase P gene (CDC, 2020). All the extracted nucleic acids from the concentrated water samples were analyzed for HPyV and RNaseP, by duplicate, using positive (plasmid) and negative (ultrapure water) controls.…”
Section: Normalization With Human Polyomaviruses (Hpyv) and Ribonuclease P (Rnase P) As Human Input Indicatorsmentioning
confidence: 99%