Literature DB >> 21296945

Parameters affecting spore recovery from wipes used in biological surface sampling.

Sandra M Da Silva1, James J Filliben, Jayne B Morrow.   

Abstract

The need for the precise and reliable collection of potential biothreat contaminants has motivated research in developing a better understanding of the variability in biological surface sampling methods. In this context, the objective of this work was to determine parameters affecting the efficiency of extracting Bacillus anthracis Sterne spores from commonly used wipe sampling materials and to describe performance using the interfacial energy concept. In addition, surface thermodynamics was applied to understand and predict surface sampling performance. Wipe materials were directly inoculated with known concentrations of B. anthracis spores and placed into extraction solutions, followed by sonication or vortexing. Experimental factors investigated included wipe material (polyester, cotton, and polyester-rayon), extraction solution (sterile deionized water [H(2)O], deionized water with 0.04% Tween 80 [H(2)O-T], phosphate-buffered saline [PBS], and PBS with 0.04% Tween 80 [PBST]), and physical dissociation method (vortexing or sonication). The most efficient extraction from wipes was observed for solutions containing the nonionic surfactant Tween 80. The increase in extraction efficiency due to surfactant addition was attributed to an attractive interfacial energy between Tween 80 and the centrifuge tube wall, which prevented spore adhesion. Extraction solution significantly impacted the extraction efficiency, as determined by statistical analysis (P < 0.05). Moreover, the extraction solution was the most important factor in extraction performance, followed by the wipe material. Polyester-rayon was the most efficient wipe material for releasing spores into solution by rank; however, no statistically significant difference between polyester-rayon and cotton was observed (P > 0.05). Vortexing provided higher spore recovery in H(2)O and H(2)O-T than sonication, when all three wipe materials and the reference control were considered (P < 0.05).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21296945      PMCID: PMC3067451          DOI: 10.1128/AEM.01932-10

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol        ISSN: 0099-2240            Impact factor:   4.792


  38 in total

1.  Enhanced detection of surface-associated bacteria in indoor environments by quantitative PCR.

Authors:  M P Buttner; P Cruz-Perez; L D Stetzenbach
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 4.792

2.  The use of a model system to compare the efficiency of ultrasound and agitation in the recovery of Bacillus subtilis spores from polymer surfaces.

Authors:  E Dewhurst; D M Rawson; G C Steele
Journal:  J Appl Bacteriol       Date:  1986-10

3.  Wipe-rinse technique for quantitating microbial contamination on large surfaces.

Authors:  L E Kirschner; J R Puleo
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  1979-09       Impact factor: 4.792

4.  Comparative evaluation of the cotton swab and Rodac methods for the recovery of Bacillus subtilis spore contamination from stainless steel surfaces.

Authors:  R Angelotti; J L Wilson; W Litsky; W G Walter
Journal:  Health Lab Sci       Date:  1964-10

5.  Evaluation of skin cleansing procedures using the wipe-rinse technique.

Authors:  N J Petersen; D E Collins; J H Marshall
Journal:  Health Lab Sci       Date:  1974-07

6.  Macro- and nanoscale observations of adhesive behavior for several E. coli strains (O157:H7 and environmental isolates) on mineral surfaces.

Authors:  J B Morrow; R Stratton; H H Yang; B F Smets; D Grasso
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2005-09-01       Impact factor: 9.028

Review 7.  Urine nucleic acid amplification tests for the diagnosis of sexually transmitted infections in clinical practice.

Authors:  Charlotte A Gaydos; Thomas C Quinn
Journal:  Curr Opin Infect Dis       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 4.915

8.  Evaluation of sampling tools for environmental sampling of bacterial endospores from porous and nonporous surfaces.

Authors:  N B Valentine; M G Butcher; Y-F Su; K H Jarman; M Matzke; B-J Webb-Robertson; E A Panisko; B A B Seiders; K L Wahl
Journal:  J Appl Microbiol       Date:  2008-05-20       Impact factor: 3.772

9.  Norovirus on swabs taken from hands illustrate route of transmission: a case study.

Authors:  Ingeborg Boxman; Remco Dijkman; Linda Verhoef; Angelique Maat; Geert van Dijk; Harry Vennema; Marion Koopmans
Journal:  J Food Prot       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 2.077

10.  Wetting behavior of flax fibers as reinforcement for polypropylene.

Authors:  Ibon Aranberri-Askargorta; Thomas Lampke; Alexander Bismarck
Journal:  J Colloid Interface Sci       Date:  2003-07-15       Impact factor: 8.128

View more
  8 in total

1.  Impact of processing method on recovery of bacteria from wipes used in biological surface sampling.

Authors:  Autumn S Downey; Sandra M Da Silva; Nathan D Olson; James J Filliben; Jayne B Morrow
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2012-06-15       Impact factor: 4.792

2.  Effect of pH on the electrophoretic mobility of spores of Bacillus anthracis and its surrogates in aqueous solutions.

Authors:  Colin P White; Jonathan Popovici; Darren A Lytle; Noreen J Adcock; Eugene W Rice
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2012-09-21       Impact factor: 4.792

3.  False-negative rate and recovery efficiency performance of a validated sponge wipe sampling method.

Authors:  Paula A Krauter; Greg F Piepel; Raymond Boucher; Matt Tezak; Brett G Amidan; Wayne Einfeld
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2011-12-02       Impact factor: 4.792

4.  Suitability of Commercial Transport Media for Biological Pathogens under Nonideal Conditions.

Authors:  Kyle Hubbard; Gregory Pellar; Peter Emanuel
Journal:  Int J Microbiol       Date:  2011-10-30

5.  Factors influencing environmental sampling recovery of healthcare pathogens from non-porous surfaces with cellulose sponges.

Authors:  Laura J Rose; Hollis Houston; Marla Martinez-Smith; Amanda K Lyons; Carrie Whitworth; Sujan C Reddy; Judith Noble-Wang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-01-13       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  DNA extract characterization process for microbial detection methods development and validation.

Authors:  Nathan D Olson; Jayne B Morrow
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2012-12-03

7.  Storage Effects on Sample Integrity of Environmental Surface Sampling Specimens with Bacillus anthracis Spores.

Authors:  K Allison Perry; Heather A O'Connell; Laura J Rose; Judith A Noble-Wang; Matthew J Arduino
Journal:  Biosafety (Los Angel)       Date:  2013-01-17

Review 8.  Considerations for estimating microbial environmental data concentrations collected from a field setting.

Authors:  Erin E Silvestri; Cynthia Yund; Sarah Taft; Charlena Yoder Bowling; Daniel Chappie; Kevin Garrahan; Eletha Brady-Roberts; Harry Stone; Tonya L Nichols
Journal:  J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol       Date:  2016-02-17       Impact factor: 5.563

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.