Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31811032›Full record

ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology2020

UV Inactivation of Rotavirus and Tulane Virus Targets Different Components of the Virions.

Elbashir Araud, Miyu Fuzawa, Joanna L Shisler, Jianrong Li, Thanh H Nguyen

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied and environmental microbiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Elbashir AraudDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois, USA.
Miyu FuzawaDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois, USA.
Joanna L ShislerDepartment of Microbiology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4833-1557
Jianrong LiDepartment of Veterinary Biosciences, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Thanh H NguyenDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois, USA thn@illinois.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-5461-5233
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign · USThe Ohio State University · US

Funding

A novel lactic acid bacteria-based norovirus vaccineR01AI123661 · NIAID · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI BOYAKA, PROSPER N, HE, XIAOMING · 2016 to 2020
$3.0M
NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI123661
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Enteric viruses are shed in fecal material by humans and other animals and are common contaminants in wastewater and surface water. Wastewater treatment plants often disinfect this effluent with low-pressure and medium-pressure UV lamps, which emit 254-nm and 220- to 280-nm irradiation, respectively. It is not known whether this treatment is efficacious against enteric viruses or how such treatments may inactivate these enteric viruses. This study examined UV disinfection for two enteric viruses: rotavirus (RV) (strain OSU with double-stranded RNA and a three-layer capsid) and Tulane virus (TV) (a cultivable surrogate for human norovirus with single-stranded RNA and a single-layer capsid). Viruses were treated with UV irradiation at 220 or 254 nm under conditions relevant to wastewater stabilization ponds, whose water is often used for irrigation. TV was susceptible to 220- or 254-nm UV at similar levels. It appears that UV irradiation inactivated TV by mutagenizing both its genome and capsid binding proteins. RV was more susceptible to UV at 220 nm than to UV at 254 nm. UV irradiation of RV at either 220 or 254 nm resulted in a virus that retained its ability to bind to its host cell receptor. After 220-nm treatment, the VP7 segment of the RV genome could not be amplified by PCR, suggesting that this treatment mutagenized the viral genome. However, this correlation was not observed when UV at 254 nm was used. Thus, RV and TV, with different genome and capsid contents, are targeted by UV irradiation in different ways.

Indexed as

DisinfectionUltraviolet RaysVirus InactivationWaste Disposal, FluidCaliciviridaeRotavirusVirionWater PurificationnorovirusesrotavirusUV disinfection

Identifiers

PMID31811032
PMCPMC6997730
OpenAlexW2993731737

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.