Cargando…

Comparison of RT-dPCR and RT-qPCR and the effects of freeze–thaw cycle and glycine release buffer for wastewater SARS-CoV-2 analysis

Public health efforts to control the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic rely on accurate information on the spread of the disease in the community. Acute and surveillance testing has been primarily used to characterize the extent of the disease. However, obtaining...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Huge, Bonnie Jaskowski, North, Devin, Mousseau, C. Bruce, Bibby, Kyle, Dovichi, Norman J., Champion, Matthew M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9709738/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36450877
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-25187-1
_version_ 1784841222854017024
author Huge, Bonnie Jaskowski
North, Devin
Mousseau, C. Bruce
Bibby, Kyle
Dovichi, Norman J.
Champion, Matthew M.
author_facet Huge, Bonnie Jaskowski
North, Devin
Mousseau, C. Bruce
Bibby, Kyle
Dovichi, Norman J.
Champion, Matthew M.
author_sort Huge, Bonnie Jaskowski
collection PubMed
description Public health efforts to control the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic rely on accurate information on the spread of the disease in the community. Acute and surveillance testing has been primarily used to characterize the extent of the disease. However, obtaining a representative sample of the human population is challenging because of limited testing capacity and incomplete testing compliance. Wastewater-based epidemiology is an agnostic alternative to surveillance testing that provides an average sample from the population served by the treatment facility. We compare the performance of reverse transcription quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) and reverse transcription digital droplet PCR (RT-dPCR) for analysis of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in a regional wastewater treatment facility in northern Indiana, USA from the earliest stages of the pandemic. 1-L grab samples of wastewater were clarified and concentrated. Nucleic acids were extracted from aliquots and analyzed in parallel using the two methods. Synthetic viral nucleic acids were used for method development and generation of add-in standard-curves. Both methods were highly sensitive in detecting SARS-CoV-2 in wastewater, with detection limits as low as 1 copy per 500 mL wastewater. RT-qPCR and RT-dPCR provided essentially identical coefficients of variation (s/[Formula: see text]  = 0.15) for triplicate measurements made on wastewater samples taken on 16 days. We also observed a sevenfold decrease in viral load from a grab sample that was frozen at – 80 °C for 92 days compared to results obtained without freezing. Freezing samples before analysis should be discouraged. Finally, we found that treatment with a glycine release buffer resulted in a fourfold inhibition in RT-qPCR signal; treatment with a glycine release buffer also should be discouraged. Despite their prevalence and convenience in wastewater analysis, glycine release and freezing samples severely and additively (~ tenfold) degraded recovery and detection of SARS-CoV-2.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9709738
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97097382022-11-30 Comparison of RT-dPCR and RT-qPCR and the effects of freeze–thaw cycle and glycine release buffer for wastewater SARS-CoV-2 analysis Huge, Bonnie Jaskowski North, Devin Mousseau, C. Bruce Bibby, Kyle Dovichi, Norman J. Champion, Matthew M. Sci Rep Article Public health efforts to control the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic rely on accurate information on the spread of the disease in the community. Acute and surveillance testing has been primarily used to characterize the extent of the disease. However, obtaining a representative sample of the human population is challenging because of limited testing capacity and incomplete testing compliance. Wastewater-based epidemiology is an agnostic alternative to surveillance testing that provides an average sample from the population served by the treatment facility. We compare the performance of reverse transcription quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) and reverse transcription digital droplet PCR (RT-dPCR) for analysis of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in a regional wastewater treatment facility in northern Indiana, USA from the earliest stages of the pandemic. 1-L grab samples of wastewater were clarified and concentrated. Nucleic acids were extracted from aliquots and analyzed in parallel using the two methods. Synthetic viral nucleic acids were used for method development and generation of add-in standard-curves. Both methods were highly sensitive in detecting SARS-CoV-2 in wastewater, with detection limits as low as 1 copy per 500 mL wastewater. RT-qPCR and RT-dPCR provided essentially identical coefficients of variation (s/[Formula: see text]  = 0.15) for triplicate measurements made on wastewater samples taken on 16 days. We also observed a sevenfold decrease in viral load from a grab sample that was frozen at – 80 °C for 92 days compared to results obtained without freezing. Freezing samples before analysis should be discouraged. Finally, we found that treatment with a glycine release buffer resulted in a fourfold inhibition in RT-qPCR signal; treatment with a glycine release buffer also should be discouraged. Despite their prevalence and convenience in wastewater analysis, glycine release and freezing samples severely and additively (~ tenfold) degraded recovery and detection of SARS-CoV-2. Nature Publishing Group UK 2022-11-30 /pmc/articles/PMC9709738/ /pubmed/36450877 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-25187-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
Huge, Bonnie Jaskowski
North, Devin
Mousseau, C. Bruce
Bibby, Kyle
Dovichi, Norman J.
Champion, Matthew M.
Comparison of RT-dPCR and RT-qPCR and the effects of freeze–thaw cycle and glycine release buffer for wastewater SARS-CoV-2 analysis
title Comparison of RT-dPCR and RT-qPCR and the effects of freeze–thaw cycle and glycine release buffer for wastewater SARS-CoV-2 analysis
title_full Comparison of RT-dPCR and RT-qPCR and the effects of freeze–thaw cycle and glycine release buffer for wastewater SARS-CoV-2 analysis
title_fullStr Comparison of RT-dPCR and RT-qPCR and the effects of freeze–thaw cycle and glycine release buffer for wastewater SARS-CoV-2 analysis
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of RT-dPCR and RT-qPCR and the effects of freeze–thaw cycle and glycine release buffer for wastewater SARS-CoV-2 analysis
title_short Comparison of RT-dPCR and RT-qPCR and the effects of freeze–thaw cycle and glycine release buffer for wastewater SARS-CoV-2 analysis
title_sort comparison of rt-dpcr and rt-qpcr and the effects of freeze–thaw cycle and glycine release buffer for wastewater sars-cov-2 analysis
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9709738/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36450877
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-25187-1
work_keys_str_mv AT hugebonniejaskowski comparisonofrtdpcrandrtqpcrandtheeffectsoffreezethawcycleandglycinereleasebufferforwastewatersarscov2analysis
AT northdevin comparisonofrtdpcrandrtqpcrandtheeffectsoffreezethawcycleandglycinereleasebufferforwastewatersarscov2analysis
AT mousseaucbruce comparisonofrtdpcrandrtqpcrandtheeffectsoffreezethawcycleandglycinereleasebufferforwastewatersarscov2analysis
AT bibbykyle comparisonofrtdpcrandrtqpcrandtheeffectsoffreezethawcycleandglycinereleasebufferforwastewatersarscov2analysis
AT dovichinormanj comparisonofrtdpcrandrtqpcrandtheeffectsoffreezethawcycleandglycinereleasebufferforwastewatersarscov2analysis
AT championmatthewm comparisonofrtdpcrandrtqpcrandtheeffectsoffreezethawcycleandglycinereleasebufferforwastewatersarscov2analysis