Efficiency of several micro-fiber glass filters for recovery of poliovirus from tape water

Concentration and recovery of viruses from water: a comprehensive review

Enteric viruses are a cause of waterborne disease worldwide, and low numbers in drinking water can present a significant risk of infection. Because the numbers are often quite low, large volumes (100-1,000 L) of water are usually processed. The VIRADEL method using microporous filters is most commonly used today for this purpose. Negatively charged filters require the addition of multivalent salts and acidification of the water sample to effect virus adsorption, which can make large-volume sampling difficult. Positively charged filters require no preconditioning of samples, and are able to concentrate viruses from water over a greater pH range than electronegative filters. The most widely used electropositive filter is the Virosorb 1MDS; however, the Environmental Protection Agency has added the positively charged NanoCeram filters to their proposed Method 1615. Ultrafilters concentrate viruses based on size exclusion rather than electrokinetics, but are impractical for field sampling or processing of turbid water. Elution (recovery) of viruses from filters following concentration is performed with organic (e.g., beef extract) or inorganic solutions (e.g., sodium polyphosphates). Eluates are then reconcentrated to decrease the sample volume to enhance detection methods (e.g., cell culture infectivity assays and molecular detection techniques). While the majority of available filters have demonstrated high virus retention efficiencies, the methods to elute and reconcentrate viruses have met with varying degrees of success due to the biological variability of viruses present in water.

Chapter 9 The Detection of Waterborne Viruses

Viruses in water are usually present in concentrations too low for detection by direct analysis. Virological investigation of water samples is always a multi-stage process involving concentration of viruses present followed by an appropriate detection procedure. There are several approaches to detection of viruses. Part or all of the concentrate may be inoculated into cell cultures to detect infectious cytopathogenic virus, and if this is done in a quantitative fashion the virus can be enumerated, the count being reported as plaque-forming units, the tissue culture infectious dose, or most probable number units. The virus may be isolated and identified from the cell cultures. Viruses that multiply without producing an identifiable cytopathic effect in culture may sometimes be detected by immunoperoxidase or immunofluorescence staining. The concentrate may also be analyzed by molecular biological procedures (usually polymerase chain reaction (PCR) or real-time-PCR). The problem then is that such techniques do not usually detect the infectious virus, and novel approaches have been made recently to meet this challenge.

Elution and reconcentration of polioviruses adsorbed on coal from water samples

Viruses adsorbed on coal particles in the form of coal bed could efficiently be recovered with elution of 6% beef extract solution in Mcllvaine buffer at pH 7.1. Significant reduction in large volume of eluate could be achieved by employing modified organic flocculation technique to obtain virus concentrate. Modified organic flocculation technique involves addition of 0.02% bovine albumin in eluate. Enteroviruses were adsorbed to flocs which were formed at pH 3.5 and were recovered by centrifugation followed by solublization of flocs in a small volume of 0.15 M disodium hydrogen phosphate solution at pH 9.5. The recovery of viruses ranged from 87.9% to 97.3% with an average of 92.2%.

Detecting Viruses in Water

Various and divergent approaches that have been used to concentrate and assay viruses from tap water and environmental freshwaters are summarized and briefly explained. The basic principles behind the different methodologies and descriptions of the most recent developments are emphasized. Comparisons help demonstrate the relative sensitivities of different concentration and assay techniques.

Optimum pH levels for eluting enteroviruses from sludge solids with beef extract

This study demonstrates that elution of enteroviruses from a mixture of primary- and activated-sludge solids with beef extract at pH 9.2 +/- 0.2 may be less efficient than elution with beef extract at pH 7.2 +/- 0.2 and that elution of enteroviruses from extended-aeration-sludge solids with beef extract is at best no more efficient at pH 9.2 +/- 0.2 than at pH 7.2 +/- 0.2. Thus, the common practice of adjusting the pH of beef extract used for eluting enteroviruses from the natural neutral level of the elutant to alkaline levels is unnecessary and probably undesirable.

Use of bituminous coal as an alternative technique for field concentration of waterborne viruses

A filter system that sandwiches a bituminous coal preparation between two prefilters was comparable to those presently used to recover human viruses from large volumes of water. This filter was effective over a pH range of 3.0 to 7.0. Poliovirus type 1 recoveries from 100-liter seeded samples of Cincinnati tap water did not vary significantly when compared with those of identical samples processed through Filterite and Millipore filters. In studies with raw domestic sewage, virus recoveries were nearly identical from comparable samples filtered through coal and Millipore disk filters. Thus, the availability of coal makes this filter system an inexpensive analytical tool, especially in developing nations, for virus concentration.