Skip to main content
. 2021 Jun 15;10(6):754. doi: 10.3390/pathogens10060754

Table 1.

Differences in the infectious titer after continuous and pulsed DUV-LED irradiation for the UK, South African, and Brazilian strains irradiated with different patterns of DUV-LED light for 0, 1, 5, or 10 s.

Control
(No Irradiation)
DUV-LED Irradiation Time (n = 3, Each)
1 s 5 s 10 s
Continuous
Irradiation
Pulsed
Irradiation
Continuous
Irradiation
Pulsed
Irradiation
Continuous
Irradiation
Pulsed
Irradiation
UK strain PFU (PFU/mL) 3.5 × 104 1.3 × 103 1.9 × 103 <20 4.0 × 101 <20 <20
Log PFU ratio a - 1.5 ± 0.4 1.3 ± 0.1 >3.2 3.0 ± 0.3 >3.2 >3.2
Infectious titer reduction rate b (%) - 96.3 94.4 >99.9 99.9 >99.9 >99.9
South African strain PFU (PFU/mL) 5.3 × 104 2.9 × 103 3.5 × 103 <20 5.3 × 101 <20 <20
Log PFU ratio a - 1.3 ± 0.1 1.2 ± 0.1 >3.4 3.1 ± 0.4 >3.4 >3.4
Infectious titer reduction rate b (%) - 94.6 93.4 >99.9 99.9 >99.9 >99.9
Brazilian strain PFU (PFU/mL) 1.1 × 104 8.7 × 102 1.7 × 103 <20 <20 <20 <20
Log PFU ratio a - 1.1 ± 0.3 0.8 ± 0.0 >2.7 >2.7 >2.7 >2.7
Infectious titer reduction rate b (%) - 91.9 84.4 >99.8 >99.8 >99.8 >99.8

a log10 (Nt/N0) where Nt is the PFU count of the UV-irradiated sample and N0 is the PFU count of the sample without UV irradiation. Data are shown as mean ± SD. b (1 − 1/10log PFU ratio) × 100 (%).