ArticleCurrent microbiology2012
Recovery comparison of two virus concentration methods from wastewater using cell culture and real-time PCR.
Article in Current microbiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Detection of echovirus 7 in effluent sewage treatment plant Ahvaz city, Iran.Iranian journal of microbiology · 2026Article
- Viral concentration method biases in the detection of viral profiles in wastewater.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2025Article
- Environmental surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 in municipal wastewater to monitor COVID-19 status in urban clusters in Malaysia.Archives of microbiology · 2023Article
- Article
- SARS-CoV-2 in wastewater: From detection to evaluation.Materials today. Advances · 2022Review
- Methods Evaluation for Rapid Concentration and Quantification of SARS-CoV-2 in Raw Wastewater Using Droplet Digital and Quantitative RT-PCR.Food and environmental virology · 2021Article
- Evaluation of Two Methods to Concentrate SARS-CoV-2 from Untreated Wastewater.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Viruses in wastewater: occurrence, abundance and detection methods.The Science of the total environment · 2020Review
- Multidrug-Resistant Bacteria Isolated from Surface Water in Bassaseachic Falls National Park, Mexico.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2016Article
- Comparison of Two Concentration Methods for the Molecular Detection of Enteroviruses in Raw and Treated Sewage.Current microbiology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Enteric viruses are shed in the feces and may be present in environmental waters. Their detection in wastewater, even at low concentration, is a major challenge. In this study, recoveries of Echovirus 7 (EV7), virions and RNA in wastewater, using virus concentration methods were determined to evaluate the detection of infectious viruses and the possibility of recovering viral genomes. Two virus concentration methods, PEG precipitation method and two-phase separation method, were applied to recovery experiments of EV7-virions from wastewater, in parallel with recovery experiments of EV7 RNA. The titration of EV7 virions was carried out by cell culture using human rhabdomyosarcoma tumor tissue and the EV7 RNA quantification was performed by real-time PCR. The mean recovery yields of EV7 virions using the PEG precipitation method and the two-phase separation method were 78.5 ± 10.99 and 83.1 ± 0.28 %, respectively. Besides, EV7 RNA recoveries obtained using the PEG precipitation method were four times higher than those using the two-phase separation method. According to our results, the two methods enable to concentrate both infectious viruses and viral genomes. Moreover, considering the protocol time and cost together with the ratio of the EV7 virion recovery to the EV7 RNA recovery, the two-phase separation method (83.1/2.71 %, or 30.6) seems to be more appropriate for selective concentration of viral virions than the PEG precipitation method (78.5/10.33 %, or 7.6).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.