MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Maximizing viral nucleic acid yield from passive samplers: Evaluating elution and extraction protocols

2024· article· en· W4404873375 on OpenAlexaff
Madison Gouthro, Emalie K. Hayes, Graham A. Gagnon

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Science of The Total Environment · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNucleic acidElutionYield (engineering)ChromatographyExtraction (chemistry)ChemistrySolid phase extractionBiochemistryMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic has underscored the need for effective viral tracking in aqueous environments, particularly for non-enteric viruses. Despite advances in wastewater monitoring, surveillance of viruses in freshwater remains limited due to traditional sampling challenges. This study refines GAC-based passive sampling protocols by determining optimal extraction and elution methods for enhancing the recovery of viral nucleic acids in freshwater. Three commercially available total nucleic acid (TNA) extraction kits and four elution buffers were assessed for their ability to recover SARS-CoV-2 and bacteriophage MS2 from GAC-based samplers. The Promega Wizard® Enviro Total Nucleic Acid Kit, paired with a Tween®20-based buffer, provided the highest virus recovery efficiency for GAC-based passive sampling. Field-scale applications demonstrated the effectiveness of GAC-based passive samplers in capturing SARS-CoV-2, INFA, RSV, and MeV using the optimized protocols. The combination of the Tween®20 based buffer and the Promega kit led to increased detection frequencies in grab samples, which remained lower in recovery than passive sampling. This study underscores the importance of selecting appropriate TNA extraction kits and elution buffers to maximize virus recovery from passive samples. By optimizing these protocols, we enhance the sensitivity and reliability of viral surveillance in freshwater ecosystems.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.221

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Science of The Total EnvironmentSame topicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testingFrench-language works237,207