Translate this page to:
In JoVE (1)
- שינוי שיטת EPA 1623 שמשתמש תזרים משיק הולו סיבים Ultrafiltration ומחממים צעדים ניתוק לזהות waterborne
Other Publications (1)
This translation into Hebrew was automatically generated.
English Version | Other Languages
Articles by Eric R. Rhodes in JoVE
שינוי שיטת EPA 1623 שמשתמש תזרים משיק הולו סיבים Ultrafiltration ומחממים צעדים ניתוק לזהות waterborne
Eric R. Rhodes1, Leah Fohl Villegas2, Nancy J. Shaw2, Carrie Miller3, Eric N. Villegas1
1National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, 2Shaw Environmental & Infrastructure, 3Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water, US Environmental Protection Agency
פרוטוקול זה מתאר את השימוש זרימת משיק חלול סיבים מערכת ultrafiltration מדגם ריכוז דיסוציאציה חום כמו צעדים חלופיים עבור זיהוי של waterborne
Other articles by Eric R. Rhodes on PubMed
Evaluation of Hollow-fiber Ultrafiltration Primary Concentration of Pathogens and Secondary Concentration of Viruses from Water
Journal of Virological Methods. Sep, 2011 | Pubmed ID: 21664379
Tangential flow hollow-fiber ultrafiltration (HFUF) was evaluated for virus and Cryptosporidium parvum concentration from water. Recovery of viruses at a low filtration rate was found to be significantly greater than at a higher filtration rate, with the recoveries of bacteriophage MS2 at high and low filtration rates shown to be 64.7% and 98.7%, respectively. Poliovirus recoveries from tap water were similar to MS2, with recoveries of 62.9% and 104.5% for high and low filtration rates, respectively. C. parvum, which was only tested at high filtration rates, had an average recovery was 105.1%. In addition to the optimization of the primary concentration technique, this study also compared several secondary concentration procedures. The highest recovery (89.5%) of poliovirus from tap water concentrates was obtained when a beef extract-celite method was used and the virus was eluted from the celite with phosphate buffered saline, pH 9.0. When HFUF primary concentration and the optimal secondary concentration methods were combined, an average recovery of 97.0 ± 35.6% or 89.3 ± 19.3%, depending on spike level, was achieved for poliovirus. This study demonstrated that HFUF primary concentration method is effective at recovering MS2, poliovirus and C. parvum from large volumes of water and that beef extract-celite method is an effective secondary concentration method for the poliovirus tested.