Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33376251›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2020

Survival of the enveloped bacteriophage Phi6 (a surrogate for SARS-CoV-2) in evaporated saliva microdroplets deposited on glass surfaces.

Aliza Fedorenko, Maor Grinberg, Tomer Orevi, Nadav Kashtan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 80 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
80citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

80 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Phage diversity in One Health.Essays in biochemistry · 2024
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Germicidal efficacy of continuous and pulsed ultraviolet-C radiation on pathogen models and SARS-CoV-2.Photochemical & photobiological sciences : Official journal of the European Photochemistry Association and the European Society for Photobiology · 2024
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

20 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

4 authors.

Aliza FedorenkoDepartment of Plant Pathology and Microbiology, Robert H. Smith Faculty of Agriculture, Food, and Environment, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 76100, Rehovot, Israel.
Maor GrinbergDepartment of Plant Pathology and Microbiology, Robert H. Smith Faculty of Agriculture, Food, and Environment, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 76100, Rehovot, Israel.
Tomer OreviDepartment of Plant Pathology and Microbiology, Robert H. Smith Faculty of Agriculture, Food, and Environment, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 76100, Rehovot, Israel.
Nadav KashtanDepartment of Plant Pathology and Microbiology, Robert H. Smith Faculty of Agriculture, Food, and Environment, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 76100, Rehovot, Israel. nadav.kashtan@mail.huji.ac.il.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Survival of respiratory viral pathogens in expelled saliva microdroplets is central to their transmission, yet the factors that determine survival in such microdroplets are not well understood. Here we combine microscopy imaging with virus viability assays to study survival of three bacteriophages suggested as good models for respiratory pathogens: the enveloped Phi6 (a surrogate for SARS-CoV-2), and the non-enveloped PhiX174 and MS2. We measured virus viability in human saliva microdroplets, SM buffer, and water following deposition on glass surfaces at various relative humidities (RH). Saliva and water microdroplets dried out rapidly, within minutes, at all tested RH levels (23%, 43%, 57%, and 78%), while SM microdroplets remained hydrated at RH ≥ 57%. Generally, the survival of all three viruses in dry saliva microdroplets was significantly greater than those in SM buffer and water under all RH (except PhiX174 in water under 57% RH survived the best among 3 media). Thus, atmosphere RH and microdroplet hydration state are not sufficient to explain virus survival, indicating that the virus-suspended medium, and association with saliva components in particular, likely play a role in virus survival. Uncovering the exact properties and components that make saliva a favorable environment for the survival of viruses, in particular enveloped ones like Phi6, is thus of great importance for reducing transmission of viral respiratory pathogens including SARS-CoV-2.

Indexed as

Microbial ViabilityBacteriophage phi 6Bacteriophage phi X 174COVID-19Environmental MicrobiologyHumansLevivirusSalivaSARS-CoV-2Viral Plaque AssayVirus Inactivation

Identifiers

PMID33376251
PMCPMC7772334

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.