Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Water Res. 2015 Dec 15;87:79-86. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2015.09.006. Epub 2015 Sep 9.

Variability in the recovery of a virus concentration procedure in water: Implications for QMRA.

Author information

1
Water & Health Pty Ltd. P.O. Box 648, Salamander Bay 2317, Australia; Department of Mathematical Sciences and Technology, Faculty of Environmental Science and Technology, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Campus Ås, P.O. Box 5003, N-1432 ÅS, Norway. Electronic address: s.petterson@waterandhealth.com.au.
2
Department of Food Safety and Infection Biology, Faculty of Veterinary Science and Biomedicine, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Campus Adamstuen, P.O. Box 8146 Dep., N-0033 Oslo, Norway.
3
Department of Mathematical Sciences and Technology, Faculty of Environmental Science and Technology, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Campus Ås, P.O. Box 5003, N-1432 ÅS, Norway.

Abstract

Methods for analysing water for viruses are known to have variable and relatively poor recovery efficiencies. Quantitative method recovery data are needed to correct virus enumeration results so that estimates of virus concentrations in surface waters for QMRA are not too low. Obtaining quantitative data representing method recoveries for different pathogenic viruses is a significant challenge. In this study, we investigated the use of mengovirus process control data for quantifying recovery efficiency of human adenovirus (AdV) and noroviruses GI (NoVGI) and GII (NoVGII) from surface waters. Samples were collected from the inlet to a drinking water treatment plant on the Glomma River, Norway. Performance of the sample concentration procedure was quantified by comparing the virus concentrations found in concentrated and unconcentrated samples. The mean recovery of viruses (1.2%, 0.31%, 0.15% and 0.053% for mengovirus (n = 86), AdV (n = 20), NoVGI (n = 33) and NoVGII (n = 21) respectively) estimated in this study were lower than expected, and the between sample variability in estimated recovery was very high, spanning around 6 orders of magnitude for mengovirus. Within-sample correlation between the estimated recovery of mengovirus and human viruses was poor, and therefore sample specific mengovirus data could not be used to correct all human virus concentrations. Instead beta distributions were fitted to human virus-specific recovery estimates. The magnitude and variability of virus concentration when corrected for the variable recovery efficiency was orders of magnitude higher than the uncorrected concentration. Better estimates of virus concentration could be achieved if a sample-specific spiking control could be developed that mimicked closely the behaviour of human viruses in environmental samples.

KEYWORDS:

Adenovirus; Norovirus; QMRA; Recovery efficiency; River water; Virus concentration

PMID:
26383122
DOI:
10.1016/j.watres.2015.09.006
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center