Comparison of two elution buffers used in an adsorption-elution method with a negatively charged membrane to recover Norovirus from lettuce (Lactuca sativa)

Authors

  • Marcelo Luiz Lima Brandão INCQS/Fiocruz Author
  • Davi de Oliveira Almeida Inmetro Author
  • Victor Augustus Marin Unirio Author
  • Marize Pereira Miagostovich IOC/Fiocruz Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3395/vd.v2n3.195

Keywords:

Norovirus, Filtration, Lettuce, PP7 Bacteriophage, Internal Control Process

Abstract

Phosphate saline buffer (PBS) and glycine buffer (GB) were evaluated as elution buffers in an adsorption-elution method using a negatively charged membrane associated with quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) and seminested PCR for detection of Norovirus genogroup II (NoV GII) from lettuce. In this methodology, PP7 bacterio-phage was used as a virus sample for process control. The qPCR showed more sensitivity than semi-nested PCR for NoV GII detection. The recovery efficiency, using PBS and GB, ranged from 24.72 to 60.78% and 19.48 to 137.26% for NoV GII, and from 0.01 to 0.15% and 0.13 to 6.04% for PP7 bacteriophage, respectively. Elution with GB was more effi-cient for PP7 bacteriophage recovery (p = 0.03), but no difference was seen for NoV GII (p = 0.57). The GB performed better than PBS as an eluent solution and can be consid-ered a methodological improvement.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

  • Marcelo Luiz Lima Brandão, INCQS/Fiocruz
    Departamento de Microbiologia / Setor de Alimentos
  • Davi de Oliveira Almeida, Inmetro
    Pesquisador bolsista /Dimav-laboratório de bioengenharia
  • Victor Augustus Marin, Unirio
    Nutrição
  • Marize Pereira Miagostovich, IOC/Fiocruz
    Laboratório de Virologia Comparada e Ambiental

Downloads

Additional Files

Published

2014-08-28

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Comparison of two elution buffers used in an adsorption-elution method with a negatively charged membrane to recover Norovirus from lettuce (Lactuca sativa). (2014). Health Surveillance under Debate: Society, Science & Technology , 2(3), 58-63. https://doi.org/10.3395/vd.v2n3.195

Most read articles by the same author(s)