Cargando…
Reproducibility and sensitivity of 36 methods to quantify the SARS-CoV-2 genetic signal in raw wastewater: findings from an interlaboratory methods evaluation in the U.S.
In response to COVID-19, the international water community rapidly developed methods to quantify the SARS-CoV-2 genetic signal in untreated wastewater. Wastewater surveillance using such methods has the potential to complement clinical testing in assessing community health. This interlaboratory asse...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8129921/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34017594 http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/d0ew00946f |
_version_ | 1783694403406135296 |
---|---|
author | Pecson, Brian M. Darby, Emily Haas, Charles N. Amha, Yamrot M. Bartolo, Mitchel Danielson, Richard Dearborn, Yeggie Di Giovanni, George Ferguson, Christobel Fevig, Stephanie Gaddis, Erica Gray, Donald Lukasik, George Mull, Bonnie Olivas, Liana Olivieri, Adam Qu, Yan |
author_facet | Pecson, Brian M. Darby, Emily Haas, Charles N. Amha, Yamrot M. Bartolo, Mitchel Danielson, Richard Dearborn, Yeggie Di Giovanni, George Ferguson, Christobel Fevig, Stephanie Gaddis, Erica Gray, Donald Lukasik, George Mull, Bonnie Olivas, Liana Olivieri, Adam Qu, Yan |
author_sort | Pecson, Brian M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | In response to COVID-19, the international water community rapidly developed methods to quantify the SARS-CoV-2 genetic signal in untreated wastewater. Wastewater surveillance using such methods has the potential to complement clinical testing in assessing community health. This interlaboratory assessment evaluated the reproducibility and sensitivity of 36 standard operating procedures (SOPs), divided into eight method groups based on sample concentration approach and whether solids were removed. Two raw wastewater samples were collected in August 2020, amended with a matrix spike (betacoronavirus OC43), and distributed to 32 laboratories across the U.S. Replicate samples analyzed in accordance with the project’s quality assurance plan showed high reproducibility across the 36 SOPs: 80% of the recovery-corrected results fell within a band of ±1.15 log(10) genome copies per L with higher reproducibility observed within a single SOP (standard deviation of 0.13 log(10)). The inclusion of a solids removal step and the selection of a concentration method did not show a clear, systematic impact on the recovery-corrected results. Other methodological variations (e.g., pasteurization, primer set selection, and use of RT-qPCR or RT-dPCR platforms) generally resulted in small differences compared to other sources of variability. These findings suggest that a variety of methods are capable of producing reproducible results, though the same SOP or laboratory should be selected to track SARS-CoV-2 trends at a given facility. The methods showed a 7 log(10) range of recovery efficiency and limit of detection highlighting the importance of recovery correction and the need to consider method sensitivity when selecting methods for wastewater surveillance. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8129921 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81299212022-01-20 Reproducibility and sensitivity of 36 methods to quantify the SARS-CoV-2 genetic signal in raw wastewater: findings from an interlaboratory methods evaluation in the U.S. Pecson, Brian M. Darby, Emily Haas, Charles N. Amha, Yamrot M. Bartolo, Mitchel Danielson, Richard Dearborn, Yeggie Di Giovanni, George Ferguson, Christobel Fevig, Stephanie Gaddis, Erica Gray, Donald Lukasik, George Mull, Bonnie Olivas, Liana Olivieri, Adam Qu, Yan Environ Sci (Camb) Article In response to COVID-19, the international water community rapidly developed methods to quantify the SARS-CoV-2 genetic signal in untreated wastewater. Wastewater surveillance using such methods has the potential to complement clinical testing in assessing community health. This interlaboratory assessment evaluated the reproducibility and sensitivity of 36 standard operating procedures (SOPs), divided into eight method groups based on sample concentration approach and whether solids were removed. Two raw wastewater samples were collected in August 2020, amended with a matrix spike (betacoronavirus OC43), and distributed to 32 laboratories across the U.S. Replicate samples analyzed in accordance with the project’s quality assurance plan showed high reproducibility across the 36 SOPs: 80% of the recovery-corrected results fell within a band of ±1.15 log(10) genome copies per L with higher reproducibility observed within a single SOP (standard deviation of 0.13 log(10)). The inclusion of a solids removal step and the selection of a concentration method did not show a clear, systematic impact on the recovery-corrected results. Other methodological variations (e.g., pasteurization, primer set selection, and use of RT-qPCR or RT-dPCR platforms) generally resulted in small differences compared to other sources of variability. These findings suggest that a variety of methods are capable of producing reproducible results, though the same SOP or laboratory should be selected to track SARS-CoV-2 trends at a given facility. The methods showed a 7 log(10) range of recovery efficiency and limit of detection highlighting the importance of recovery correction and the need to consider method sensitivity when selecting methods for wastewater surveillance. 2021-01-20 /pmc/articles/PMC8129921/ /pubmed/34017594 http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/d0ew00946f Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/This article is licensed under a CreativeCommonsAttribution-NonCommercial3.0UnportedLicence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Pecson, Brian M. Darby, Emily Haas, Charles N. Amha, Yamrot M. Bartolo, Mitchel Danielson, Richard Dearborn, Yeggie Di Giovanni, George Ferguson, Christobel Fevig, Stephanie Gaddis, Erica Gray, Donald Lukasik, George Mull, Bonnie Olivas, Liana Olivieri, Adam Qu, Yan Reproducibility and sensitivity of 36 methods to quantify the SARS-CoV-2 genetic signal in raw wastewater: findings from an interlaboratory methods evaluation in the U.S. |
title | Reproducibility and sensitivity of 36 methods to quantify the SARS-CoV-2 genetic signal in raw wastewater: findings from an interlaboratory methods evaluation in the U.S. |
title_full | Reproducibility and sensitivity of 36 methods to quantify the SARS-CoV-2 genetic signal in raw wastewater: findings from an interlaboratory methods evaluation in the U.S. |
title_fullStr | Reproducibility and sensitivity of 36 methods to quantify the SARS-CoV-2 genetic signal in raw wastewater: findings from an interlaboratory methods evaluation in the U.S. |
title_full_unstemmed | Reproducibility and sensitivity of 36 methods to quantify the SARS-CoV-2 genetic signal in raw wastewater: findings from an interlaboratory methods evaluation in the U.S. |
title_short | Reproducibility and sensitivity of 36 methods to quantify the SARS-CoV-2 genetic signal in raw wastewater: findings from an interlaboratory methods evaluation in the U.S. |
title_sort | reproducibility and sensitivity of 36 methods to quantify the sars-cov-2 genetic signal in raw wastewater: findings from an interlaboratory methods evaluation in the u.s. |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8129921/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34017594 http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/d0ew00946f |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pecsonbrianm reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus AT darbyemily reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus AT haascharlesn reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus AT amhayamrotm reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus AT bartolomitchel reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus AT danielsonrichard reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus AT dearbornyeggie reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus AT digiovannigeorge reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus AT fergusonchristobel reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus AT fevigstephanie reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus AT gaddiserica reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus AT graydonald reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus AT lukasikgeorge reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus AT mullbonnie reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus AT olivasliana reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus AT olivieriadam reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus AT quyan reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus AT reproducibilityandsensitivityof36methodstoquantifythesarscov2geneticsignalinrawwastewaterfindingsfromaninterlaboratorymethodsevaluationintheus |