Monitoring waves of the COVID-19 pandemic: Inferences from WWTPs of different sizes

Wastewater based epidemiology was employed to track the spread of SARS-CoV-2 within the sewershed areas of 10 wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) in Catalonia, Spain. A total of 185 WWTPs inflow samples were collected over the period consisting of both the first wave (mid-March to June) and the second wave (July to November). Concentrations of SARS-CoV-2 RNA (N1 and N2 assays) were quantified in these wastewaters as well as those of Human adenoviruses (HAdV) and JC polyomavirus (JCPyV), as indicators of human faecal contamination. SARS-CoV-2 N gene daily loads strongly correlated with the number of cases diagnosed one week after sampling i.e. wastewater levels were a good predictor of cases to be diagnosed in the immediate future. The conditions present at small WWTPs relative to larger WWTPs influence the ability to follow the pandemic. Small WWTPs (<24,000 inhabitants) had lower median loads of SARS-CoV-2 despite similar incidence of infection within the municipalities served by the different WWTP (but not lower loads of HAdV and JCPyV). The lowest incidence resulting in quantifiable SARS-CoV-2 concentration in wastewater differed between WWTP sizes, being 0.11 and 0.82 cases/1000 inhabitants for the large and small sized WWTP respectively.

Evaluation of two rapid ultrafiltration-based methods for SARS-CoV-2 concentration from wastewater

Quantitative measurements of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in raw wastewater have been implemented worldwide since the beginning of the pandemic. Recent efforts are being made to evaluate different viral concentration methodologies to overcome supplier shortages during lockdowns. A set of 22-wastewater samples seeded with murine hepatitis virus (MHV), a member of the Coronaviridae family, and the bacteriophage MS2, were used to characterize and compare two ultrafiltration-based methods: a centrifugal ultrafiltration device (Centricon® Plus-70) and the automated concentrating pipette CP-Select™. Based on the recovery efficiencies, significant differences were observed for MHV, with Centricon® Plus-70 (24%) being the most efficient method. Nevertheless, concentrations of naturally occurring SARS-CoV-2, Human adenoviruses and JC polyomaviruses in these samples did not result in significant differences between methods suggesting that testing naturally occurring viruses may complement the evaluation of viral concentration methodologies. Based on the virus adsorption to solids and the necessity of a pre-centrifugation step to remove larger particles and avoid clogging when using ultrafiltration methods, we assessed the percentage of viruses not quantified after ultrafiltration. Around 23% of the detected SARS-CoV-2 would be discarded during the debris removal step. The CP-Select™ provided the highest concentration factor (up to 333×) and the lowest LoD (6.19 × 10³ GC/l) for MHV and proved to be fast, automatic, highly reproducible and suitable to work under BSL-2 measures.