Skip to main content
. 2011 Jun;77(12):3975–3981. doi: 10.1128/AEM.02692-10

Table 2.

Rates of recovery of inoculated PV1 from a sediment sample using indirect methodsa

Method Elution buffer Concn method (reference) Total (flow 1)
Elution and concnb recovery rate (%) Extraction and RT-qPCR (flow 2)
No. of samples
No. of copies detected/no. of inoculated copies Recovery rate (%)
No. of copies detected/no. of inoculated copies Recovery rate (%)
GM GSD GM GSD
A Glycine-NaOH Filtration (5) 1.9 × 106/1.1 × 108 1.8 0.17 1.8 1.7 × 108/1.1 × 108 165 0.06 3
B Glycine-NaOH Filtration (12) 5.7 × 106/1.1 × 108 5.4 0.53 5.4 1.2 × 108/1.1 × 108 112 0.20 9
C TE + Laureth-12 Filtration (12) 6.5 × 105/1.1 × 108 0.61 0.11 0.61 1.4 × 108/1.1 × 108 135 0.05 3
D Glycine-NaOH PEG precipitation 0/1.1 × 108 Unknown 0/1.1 × 108 3
E TE + Laureth-12 PEG precipitation 1.9 × 105/1.1 × 108 0.18 0.11 0.18 1.1 × 108/1.1 × 108 106 0.02 3
a

GM, geometric mean; GSD, geometric standard deviation; —, not detected.

b

Recovery rates in the elution and concentration steps were calculated on the basis of the assumption that the recovery rate for the extraction and RT-qPCR steps was 100%.