• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Applied and Environmental Microbiology >Detection of Infectious Enteroviruses Enterovirus Genomes Somatic Coliphages and Bacteroides fragilis Phages in Treated Wastewater
【2h】

Detection of Infectious Enteroviruses Enterovirus Genomes Somatic Coliphages and Bacteroides fragilis Phages in Treated Wastewater

机译：在处理后的废水中检测感染性肠病毒肠病毒基因组体膜毛虫和脆弱拟杆菌噬菌体

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务，本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文，但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁，仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况，如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

In this study, three types of treated wastewater were tested for infectious enteroviruses, the enterovirus genome, somatic coliphages, and Bacteroides fragilis phages. The aim of this work was to determine whether the presence of the two types of bacteriophages or of the enterovirus genome was a good indicator of infectious enterovirus contamination. The enterovirus genome was detected by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction. Infectious enteroviruses were quantified by cell culturing (BGM cells), and the bacteriophages were quantified by plaque formation on the host bacterium (Escherichia coli or B. fragilis) in agar medium. Forty-eight samples of treated wastewater were analyzed. Sixteen samples had been subjected to a secondary treatment for 8 to 12 h (A), 16 had been subjected to a secondary treatment for 30 h (B1), and 16 had been subjected to both secondary and tertiary treatments (B2). The mean concentrations of somatic coliphages were 4.9 × 104 PFU · liter−1 for treatment line A, 9.8 × 103 PFU · liter−1 for B1, and 1.4 × 103 PFU · liter−1 for B2, with all the samples testing positive (100%). The mean concentrations of B. fragilis phages were 1.7 × 103 PFU · liter−1 for A (100% positive samples), 17 to 24 PFU · liter−1 for B1 (44% positive samples), and 0.8 to 13 PFU · liter−1 for B2 (6% positive samples). The mean concentrations of infectious enteroviruses were 4 most probable number of cytopathogenic units (MPNCU) · liter−1 for A (31% positive samples) and <1 MPNCU · liter−1 for B1 and B2 (0% positive samples). The percentages of samples testing positive for the enterovirus genome were 100% for A, 56% for B1, and 19% for B2. The percentages of samples testing positive for the enterovirus genome were significantly higher than those for infectious enteroviruses. This finding may have been due to the presence of noninfectious enteroviruses or to the presence of infectious enteroviruses that do not multiply in BGM cell cultures. However, under our experimental conditions, nondetection of the genome implies the absence of infectious viruses. There was a significant correlation between the concentration of somatic coliphages or B. fragilis phages and the presence of infectious enteroviruses or the presence of the enterovirus genome. However, the somatic coliphage concentration did not lead to fluctuations in the infectious enterovirus concentration, whereas the B. fragilis phage concentration did.
机译：在这项研究中，对三种类型的处理过的废水进行了感染性肠道病毒，肠道病毒基因组，体细胞噬菌体和脆弱拟杆菌噬菌体的测试。这项工作的目的是确定两种噬菌体或肠病毒基因组的存在是否是感染性肠病毒污染的良好指标。通过逆转录-聚合酶链反应检测肠病毒基因组。通过细胞培养（BGM细胞）定量感染性肠病毒，并通过琼脂培养基中宿主细菌（大肠杆菌或脆弱芽孢杆菌）上噬菌斑的形成来定量噬菌体。分析了四十八个处理过的废水样品。 16个样品进行了8至12小时的二次处理（A），16个样品进行了30小时的二次处理（B1），16个样品进行了二次和三次处理（B2）。治疗品系A的体细胞噬菌体平均浓度为4.9×10 4 PFU·升 -1 ，9.8×10 3 PFU·升< B1的sup> -1 和B2的1.4×10 3 PFU·升 -1 ，所有样品的检测结果均为阳性（100％）。 A（100％阳性样品）的脆弱博来噬菌体平均浓度为1.7×10 3 PFU·升 −1 ，17至24 PFU·升 B1为-1 （阳性样本为44％），B2为0.8到13 PFU·升 -1 （6％阳性样本）。传染性肠病毒的平均浓度为A（31％阳性样本）的最可能的细胞致病单位数（MPNCU）·升 -1 4个，<1 MPNCU·升 -1 >对于B1和B2（0％阳性样品）。肠病毒基因组呈阳性的样品百分率为：A为100％，B1为56％，B2为19％。肠病毒基因组检测呈阳性的样品百分比显着高于感染性肠病毒。该发现可能是由于存在非感染性肠病毒或存在于BGM细胞培养物中不繁殖的感染性肠病毒所致。但是，在我们的实验条件下，未检测到基因组意味着没有感染性病毒。体细胞噬菌体或脆弱的B.噬菌体的浓度与感染性肠病毒的存在或肠病毒基因组的存在之间存在显着的相关性。然而，体细胞中的噬菌体浓度并没有导致传染性肠病毒浓度的波动，而脆弱的B. gilgilis噬菌体浓度却引起了波动。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号