Viral concentration method biases in the detection of viral profiles in wastewater

Viral detection methodologies used for wastewater-based epidemiology (WBE) studies have a broad range of efficacies. The complex matrix and low viral particle load in wastewater emphasize the importance of the concentration method. This study focused on comparing three commonly used virus concentration methods: polyethylene glycol precipitation (PEG), immuno-magnetic nanoparticles (IMNP), and electronegative membrane filtration (EMF). Influent and effluent wastewater samples were processed by the methods and analyzed by DNA/RNA quantification and sequencing for the detection of human viruses. SARS-COV-2, Astrovirus, and Hepatitis C virus were detected by all the methods in both sample types. PEG precipitation resulted in the detection of 20 types of viruses in influent and 16 types in effluent samples. The corresponding number of virus types detected was 21 and 11 for IMNP, and 16 and 8 for EMF. Certain viruses were unique to only one concentration method. For example, PEG detected three types of viruses in influent and six types in effluent compared to IMNP, which detected seven types in influent and one type in effluent samples. However, the EMF method appeared to be the least effective, detecting three types in influent and none in effluent samples. Rotavirus was detected in influent sample using IMNP method, whereas EMF and PEG methods failed to yield a similar outcome. Consequently, the potential false negative results pose a risk to the credibility of WBE applications. Therefore, implementation of a proper concentration technique is critical to minimize method biases and ensure accurate viral profiling in WBE studies.IMPORTANCEIn recent years, significant research efforts have been focused on the development of viral detection methodology for wastewater-based epidemiology studies, showing a range of variability in detection efficacies. A proper methodology is essential for an appropriate evaluation of disease prevalence and community health in such studies and necessitates designing a concentration method based on the target pathogenic virus. There remains a need for comparative performance evaluations of methods in the context of detection efficiencies. This study highlights the significant impact of sample matrix, viral structure, and nucleic acid composition on the efficacy of viral concentration methods. Assessing WBE techniques to ensure accurate detection and understanding of viral presence within wastewater samples is critical for revealing viral profiles in municipality wastewater samples.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Applied and Environmental Microbiology
Published
2024-12-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.01339-24
Citations
10
Primary Topic
SARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.89

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Viral concentration method biases in the detection of viral profiles in wastewater

Otakuye Conroy‐Ben, Absar Alum, Morteza Abbaszadegan, Efrem S. Lim et al.
10 citations
Applied and Environmental Microbiology
SARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
3.89
article

Viral concentration method biases in the detection of viral profiles in wastewater

Otakuye Conroy‐Ben, Absar Alum, Morteza Abbaszadegan, Efrem S. Lim, Matthew F. Smith, Naeema Cheshomi
article en
10 citations

Abstract

Viral detection methodologies used for wastewater-based epidemiology (WBE) studies have a broad range of efficacies. The complex matrix and low viral particle load in wastewater emphasize the importance of the concentration method. This study focused on comparing three commonly used virus concentration methods: polyethylene glycol precipitation (PEG), immuno-magnetic nanoparticles (IMNP), and electronegative membrane filtration (EMF). Influent and effluent wastewater samples were processed by the methods and analyzed by DNA/RNA quantification and sequencing for the detection of human viruses. SARS-COV-2, Astrovirus, and Hepatitis C virus were detected by all the methods in both sample types. PEG precipitation resulted in the detection of 20 types of viruses in influent and 16 types in effluent samples. The corresponding number of virus types detected was 21 and 11 for IMNP, and 16 and 8 for EMF. Certain viruses were unique to only one concentration method. For example, PEG detected three types of viruses in influent and six types in effluent compared to IMNP, which detected seven types in influent and one type in effluent samples. However, the EMF method appeared to be the least effective, detecting three types in influent and none in effluent samples. Rotavirus was detected in influent sample using IMNP method, whereas EMF and PEG methods failed to yield a similar outcome. Consequently, the potential false negative results pose a risk to the credibility of WBE applications. Therefore, implementation of a proper concentration technique is critical to minimize method biases and ensure accurate viral profiling in WBE studies.IMPORTANCEIn recent years, significant research efforts have been focused on the development of viral detection methodology for wastewater-based epidemiology studies, showing a range of variability in detection efficacies. A proper methodology is essential for an appropriate evaluation of disease prevalence and community health in such studies and necessitates designing a concentration method based on the target pathogenic virus. There remains a need for comparative performance evaluations of methods in the context of detection efficiencies. This study highlights the significant impact of sample matrix, viral structure, and nucleic acid composition on the efficacy of viral concentration methods. Assessing WBE techniques to ensure accurate detection and understanding of viral presence within wastewater samples is critical for revealing viral profiles in municipality wastewater samples.

Applied and Environmental MicrobiologyVol. 91(1)
Arizona State University (US)
Arizona State University, National Institutes of Health
Clean water and sanitation
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
SARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
3.89
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.