Abstract
Two types of electropositive filters (1 MDS double sheet - Cuno and AS - Seitz) were compared for Poliovirus 1, Coxsackie virus B3, Coxsackie virus A9 and E.C.H.O. virus 1 recovery from tap water with different pH levels. For small volumes of tap water sampled, both adsorbents gave equally satisfactory recoveries of Poliovirus 1 (46% to 82%) at pH 6.7, 7.9, or 9. However, elution percentages using 3% beef-extract solution pH 9.5 were generally better for 1 MDS than for AS filters. As the volume of tap water sampled increased, increasing amounts of Poliovirus were unadsorbed onto both types of filters at pH 7, 7.9, or 9. Lowering the pH to 6 gave better Poliovirus 1 and Coxsackie B3 recoveries with AS (respectively 61% and 95%) and 1 MDS filters (respectively 67% and 91%). E.C.H.O. virus 1 recovery was not affected by acidification and was lower with 1 MDS (6%) than with AS filters (37%). Coxsackie virus A9 recovery was very low for both filters (≤11%). As for electronegative adsorbents, currently available methods for concentrating viruses using electropositive filters have to be optimized to recover most enteric viruses occurring in waters.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
