Table 2.
Summary of different sampling methods for detection of pathogen from wastewater.
Sampling | Volume/Duration of Exposure | Pathogen | Detected Concentration/Positive Ratio | Ref. | Remarks |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Grab | - | SARS-CoV-2 | N1 gene-5.5 log 10 copies/L N2 gene-6.4 log 10 copies/L |
[58] | The grab samples, collected between 8 a.m. and 10 a.m., showed less variability than composite sample. |
Composite | Varied based on the wastewater flow rate. | SARS-CoV-2 | N1 gene-5.3 log 10 copies/L N2 gene-6.3 log 10 copies/L |
||
Passive sample using cotton buds, electronegative membranes, and medical gauze Composite sampling |
24 h 24 h |
SARS-CoV-2 | 25% 41% 31% 50% |
[50] | Passive samples made of affordable materials can be used as an economic alternative to expensive auto samplers. The author further used 3D-printed housing units to maintain the mass transfer efficiency. |
Composite sampling | 1 h |
|
log 10 Gene copies/mL
|
[57] | The author advocates that 24 h composite samples are likely to be superior to 1 h composite samples. |
Composite sampling | 24 h |
|
log 10 Gene copies/mL
|
||
Passive sampling using
|
One week | SARS-CoV-2 | Mean gene copies/L
|
[49] | The study depicts a positive correlation with composite samples, tested municipal WWTP, and passive samples collected at a city scale. |
Passive sampling using tampons | 24 h | SARS-CoV-2 | Median gene copies/day N2 = 1.29 × 109 N1 = 1.04 × 109 |
[54] | The author quantified viral RNA by two methods, N1 and N2, and recommends passive sampling approach due to its ease of operation. |
Passive sampling using
|
24 h | SARS-CoV-2 | E gene copies/24 h
|
[56] | The passive sample approach and the medium used was more suitable for other pathogen studies in the work (AdV and Influenza virus). |
Composite sample: 24 h composite sample |
24 h | E gene copies/24 h 5.4 × 107 |