Spatial and Temporal Monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 in a Sewershed

In response to the global pandemic, Clean Water Services (Washington County, Oregon) monitored 4 wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) and 16 manholes over a period of 15 months to determine whether spatial and temporal trends in SARS-CoV-2 concentrations corresponded with reported COVID-19 cases. A total of 738 samples were analyzed for SARS-CoV-2 using reverse transcription droplet digital polymerase chain reaction (RT-ddPCR). SARS-CoV-2 concentrations at WWTPs appeared to be a leading indicator, with increases in wastewater observed two to three weeks before cases rose. Neighborhoods with high LatinX and high poverty populations also had higher SARS-CoV-2 concentrations. Additionally, outbreaks at local food processing plants corresponded with viral peaks in their associated manhole. Surprisingly, SARS-CoV-2 was rarely detected in hospital effluent despite the presence of known cases, and experiments revealed hospital disinfectants can destroy the RNA signal. Collectively, these findings demonstrate the value of wastewater-based epidemiology for monitoring the local burden of COVID-19. Copyright © 2021 Water Environment Federation

Impact of Sampling Type, Frequency, and Scale of the Collection System on SARS-CoV-2 Quantification Fidelity

With the rapid onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, wastewater-based epidemiology sampling methodologies for SARS-CoV2 were often implemented quickly and may not have considered the unique drainage catchment characteristics. This study assessed the impact of grab versus composite sampling on the detection and quantification of SARS-CoV-2 in four different catchment scales with flow rates ranging from high flow (wastewater treatment plant influent) to medium flow (neighborhood scale) to low -flow (city block scale) to ultralow flow (building scale). At the high -flow site, grab samples were comparable to 24 h composite samples with SARS-CoV-2 detected in all samples and differed in concentration from the composite by <1 log 10 unit. However, as the size of the catchment decreased, the percentage of negative grab samples increased despite all respective composites being positive, and the SARS-CoV-2 concentrations of grab samples varied from those of the composites by up to almost 2 log 10 units. At the ultra-low -flow site, increased sampling frequencies generated composite samples with higher fidelity to the 5 min composite, which is the closest estimate of the true SARS-CoV-2 composite concentration that could be measured. Thus, composite sampling is more likely to compensate for temporal signal variability while grab samples do not, especially as the catchment basin size decreases.