MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3200171908 · doi:10.1101/2021.09.11.21263417

Successful Application of Wastewater-Based Epidemiology in Prediction and Monitoring of the Second Wave of COVID-19 in India with Fragmented Sewerage Systems- A Case Study of Jaipur (India)

2021· preprint· en· W3200171908 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sudipti Arora, Aditi Nag, Aakanksha Kalra, Vikky Sinha, Ekta Meena, Samvida Saxena, Devanshi Sutaria, Manpreet Kaur, Tamanna Pamnani, Komal Sharma, Sonika Saxena, S. K. Shrivastava, Akhilendra Bhushan Gupta, Xuan Li, Guangming Jiang

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian Research CouncilCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsEffluentWastewaterSewage treatmentChlorineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)SewerageMoving bed biofilm reactorSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Veterinary medicineEnvironmental scienceChemistryMedicineEnvironmental engineeringBiologyBiofilmBacteriaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The present study tracked the city-wide dynamics of severe acute respiratory syndrome-corona virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA in the wastewater from nine different wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) in Jaipur during second wave of COVID-19 out-break in India. A total of 164 samples were collected weekly between February 19 th and June 8 th , 2021. SARS-CoV-2 was detected in 47.2% (52/110) influent samples and 37% (20/54) effluent samples. The increasing percentage of positive influent samples correlated with the city’s increasing active clinical cases during the second wave of COVID-19 in Jaipur. Furthermore, WBE based evidence clearly showed early detection of about 20 days (9/9 samples reported positive on April 20 th , 2021) prior to the maximum cases & maximum deaths reported in the city on May 8 th , 2021. The present study further observed the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in treated effluents at the time window of maximum active cases in the city even after tertiary disinfection treatments of UV & Chlorine. The average genome concentration in the effluents and removal efficacy of six commonly used treatments; Activated Sludge Treatment + Chlorine disinfection (ASP + Cl 2) , Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor (MBBR) with Ultraviolet radiations disinfection (MBBR + UV), MBBR + Chlorine (Cl 2 ), Sequencing Batch Reactor (SBR) and SBR + Cl 2 were compared with removal efficacy of SBR + Cl 2 (81.2%)> MBBR + UV (68.8%) > SBR (57.1%) > ASP (50%) > MBBR + Cl 2 (36.4%). The study observed the trends & prevalence of four genes (E, RdRp, N, and ORF1ab gene) based on two different kits and found that prevalence of N> ORF1ab >RdRp> E gene, suggested that the effective genome concentration should be calculated based on the presence/absence of multiple genes. Hence, it is imperative to say that using a combination of different detection genes (E, N, RdRp & ORF1ab genes) reduce false positives in WBE. Graphical Abstract Highlights Successful application of WBE with prediction of 14-20 days for COVID-19 in Jaipur A comparison of SARS-CoV-2 RNA removal efficacy of 9 WWTPs was investigated SBR showed better performance than MBBR with SARS-CoV-2 RNA removal from wastewater Presence of SARS-CoV-2 in effluents even after UV and Chlorine disinfection Using a combination of different detection genes reduce false positives in WBE

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.172
Threshold uncertainty score0.867

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testingFrench-language works237,207