Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32758945›Full record

ArticleThe Science of the total environment2020

Comparison of virus concentration methods for the RT-qPCR-based recovery of murine hepatitis virus, a surrogate for SARS-CoV-2 from untreated wastewater.

Warish Ahmed, Paul M Bertsch, Aaron Bivins, Kyle Bibby, Kata Farkas, Amy Gathercole, Eiji Haramoto, Pradip Gyawali, Asja Korajkic, Brian R McMinn and 7 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Science of the total environment, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 280 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
280citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
10.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

280 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 565 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Environmental surveillance of pathogens in Africa.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2026
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

220 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

17 authors at 11 institutions in 5 countries.

Warish AhmedCSIRO Land and Water, Ecosciences Precinct, 41 Boggo Road, Dutton Park, QLD, 4102, Australia. Electronic address: Warish.Ahmed@csiro.au.
Paul M BertschCSIRO Land and Water, Ecosciences Precinct, 41 Boggo Road, Dutton Park, QLD, 4102, Australia.
Aaron BivinsEnvironmental Change Initiative, University of Notre Dame, 721 Flanner Hall, Notre Dame, IN 46556, USA.
Kyle BibbyEnvironmental Change Initiative, University of Notre Dame, 721 Flanner Hall, Notre Dame, IN 46556, USA.
Kata FarkasSchool of Ocean Sciences, Bangor University, Menai Bridge, Anglesey LL59 5AB, UK.
Amy GathercoleComPath, South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia.
Eiji HaramotoInterdisciplinary Center for River Basin Environment, University of Yamanashi, 4 - 3 -11 Takeda, Kofu, Yamanashi 400-8511, Japan.
Pradip GyawaliInstitute of Environmental Science and Research Ltd. (ESR), Porirua 5240, New Zealand.
Asja KorajkicUnited States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, 26W Martin Luther King Jr. Drive, Cincinnati, OH 45268, USA.
Brian R McMinnUnited States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, 26W Martin Luther King Jr. Drive, Cincinnati, OH 45268, USA.
Jochen F MuellerQueensland Alliance for Environmental Health Sciences (QAEHS), University of Queensland, 20 Cornwall Street, Woolloongabba, QLD 4102, Australia.
Stuart L SimpsonCSIRO Land and Water, Lucas Heights, NSW 2234, Australia.
Wendy J M SmithCSIRO Agriculture and Food, Queensland Bioscience Precinct, St Lucia, QLD 4067, Australia.
Erin M SymondsCollege of Marine Science, University of South Florida, 140 Seventh Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701, USA.
Kevin V ThomasQueensland Alliance for Environmental Health Sciences (QAEHS), University of Queensland, 20 Cornwall Street, Woolloongabba, QLD 4102, Australia.
Rory VerhagenQueensland Alliance for Environmental Health Sciences (QAEHS), University of Queensland, 20 Cornwall Street, Woolloongabba, QLD 4102, Australia.
Masaaki KitajimaDivision of Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Hokkaido University, North 13 West 8, Kita-ku, Sapporo, Hokkaido 060-0032, Japan.
CSIRO Land and Water · AUThe University of Queensland · AUEnvironmental Protection Agency · USUniversity of Notre Dame · USBangor University · GBCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation · AUHokkaido University · JPNew Zealand Institute for Public Health and Forensic Science · NZSouth Australian Health and Medical Research Institute · AUTakeda (Japan) · JPUniversity of South Florida St. Petersburg · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is currently a clear benefit for many countries to utilize wastewater-based epidemiology (WBE) as part of ongoing measures to manage the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic. Since most wastewater virus concentration methods were developed and validated for nonenveloped viruses, it is imperative to determine the efficiency of the most commonly used methods for the enveloped severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Municipal wastewater seeded with a human coronavirus (CoV) surrogate, murine hepatitis virus (MHV), was used to test the efficiency of seven wastewater virus concentration methods: (A-C) adsorption-extraction with three different pre-treatment options, (D-E) centrifugal filter device methods with two different devices, (F) polyethylene glycol (PEG 8000) precipitation, and (G) ultracentrifugation. MHV was quantified by reverse-transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction and the recovery efficiency was calculated for each method. The mean MHV recoveries ranged from 26.7 to 65.7%. The most efficient methods were adsorption-extraction methods with MgCl

Indexed as

Coronavirus InfectionsMurine hepatitis virusPandemicsPneumonia, ViralVirusesAnimalsBetacoronavirusCOVID-19HumansMiceSARS-CoV-2WastewaterWastewaterConcentration methodCOVID-19Enveloped virusFiltrationMurine hepatitis virusRecoverySARS-CoV-2Untreated wastewater

Identifiers

PMID32758945
PMCPMC7273154
OpenAlexW3033800749

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.