ABSTRACT
Wastewater-based epidemiology (WBE) provides an early warning and trend analysis approach for determining the presence of COVID-19 in a community and complements clinical testing in assessing the population level, even as viral loads fluctuate. Here, we evaluate combinations of two wastewater concentration methods (i.e., ultrafiltration and composite supernatant-solid), four pre-RNA extraction modifications, and three nucleic acid extraction kits using two different wastewater sampling locations. These consisted of a quarantine facility containing clinically confirmed COVID-19-positive inhabitants and a university residence hall. Of the combinations examined, composite supernatant-solid with pre-RNA extraction consisting of water concentration and RNA/DNA shield performed the best in terms of speed and sensitivity. Further, of the three nucleic acid extraction kits examined, the most variability was associated with the Qiagen kit. Focusing on the quarantine facility, viral concentrations measured in wastewater were generally significantly related to positive clinical cases, with the relationship dependent on method, modification, kit, target, and normalization, although results were variable-dependent on individual time points (Kendall's Tau-b (tau) = 0.17 to 0.6) or cumulatively (Kendall's Tau-b (tau) = -0.048 to 1). These observations can support laboratories establishing protocols to perform wastewater surveillance and monitoring efforts for COVID-19.
ABSTRACT
Wastewater-based epidemiology (WBE) has become a complimentary surveillance tool during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Viral concentration methods from wastewater are still being optimised and compared, whilst viral recovery under different wastewater characteristics and storage temperatures remains poorly understood. Using urban wastewater samples, we tested three viral concentration methods; polyethylene glycol precipitation (PEG), ammonium sulphate precipitation (AS), and CP select™ InnovaPrep® (IP) ultrafiltration. We found no major difference in SARS-CoV-2 and faecal indicator virus (crAssphage) recovery from wastewater samples (n = 46) using these methods, PEG slightly (albeit non-significantly), outperformed AS and IP for SARS-CoV-2 detection, as a higher genome copies per litre (gc/l) was recorded for a larger proportion of samples. Next generation sequencing of 8 paired samples revealed non-significant differences in the quality of data between AS and IP, though IP data quality was slightly better and less variable. A controlled experiment assessed the impact of wastewater suspended solids (turbidity; 0-400 NTU), surfactant load (0-200 mg/l), and storage temperature (5-20 °C) on viral recovery using the AS and IP methods. SARS-CoV-2 recoveries were >20% with AS and <10% with IP in turbid samples, whilst viral recoveries for samples with additional surfactant were between 0-18% for AS and 0-5% for IP. Turbidity and sample storage temperature combined had no significant effect on SARS-CoV-2 recovery (p > 0.05), whilst surfactant and storage temperature combined were significant negative correlates (p < 0.001 and p < 0.05, respectively). In conclusion, our results show that choice of methodology had small effect on viral recovery of SARS-CoV-2 and crAssphage in wastewater samples within this study. In contrast, sample turbidity, storage temperature, and surfactant load did affect viral recovery, highlighting the need for careful consideration of the viral concentration methodology used when working with wastewater samples.