Table 2.
Virus recovery efficiency (%) obtained by two concentration methods and qPCR results (GC mL−1) in primary sludge samples.
| Concentration method* | HAdV | RV-A | NoV | HAV |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Method 1 | ||||
| Virus titers spiked | 4.2 × 106 | 7.9 × 106 | 1.0 × 105 | 6.6 × 105 |
| Recovery | 3.1 × 105 (± SD 3.0 × 105) | 1.0 × 104 (± SD 8.6 × 103) | 8.3 × 102 (± SD 1.4 × 102) | 4.3 × 104 (± SD 3.2 × 104) |
| Recovery efficiency (%) | 7.3 | 0.1 | 0.8 | 6.5 |
| Method 2 | ||||
| Virus titers spiked | 4.2 × 106 | 7.0 × 106 | 1.5 × 104 | 6.0 × 105 |
| Recovery | 1.8 × 105 (± SD 1.4 × 105) | 3.0 × 101 (± SD 5.2 × 101) | 0 | 0 |
| Recovery efficiency (%) | 4.2 | 0.0004 | 0 | 0 |
*
Methods were run in triplicate, SD= standard deviation.
Method 1 = ultracentrifugation, Method 2 = beef extract.