4.3 Article

Comparison of Methods for Evaluating the Thermal Stability of Human Enteric Viruses

Journal

FOOD AND ENVIRONMENTAL VIROLOGY
Volume 7, Issue 1, Pages 14-26

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12560-014-9178-9

Keywords

Human enteric virus; Human norovirus; Murine norovirus; Surrogates; Thermal inactivation; Thermal stability

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Human enteric viruses have been identified as one of the predominant causative agents of food-borne illnesses in developed countries, and it is estimated that human norovirus accounts for a majority of these illnesses each year. Not all of these viruses can be cultured and hence relatively little is known about their pathogenesis and physicochemical properties. To overcome this, researchers have utilized different virus surrogates for the study of non-cultivable human enteric viruses. In this review, we discuss various methods utilized for the evaluation of the thermal stability of human enteric viruses, compare the results of these methods, and examine how researchers may move toward a single standard approach (i.e., temperatures, virus concentrations, volume/weight of matrices, etc.) for determining thermal inactivation profiles of human enteric viruses and their surrogates. Based on our review, we found that temperature, time of exposure, type of matrix, analysis type, type of heat application, and the concentration and volume of virus used in the experiments were highly variable across virus surrogates even for the same surrogates. Because of these differences-along with the inherent limitations of using surrogate viruses-comparison of these methods and how the results may be extrapolated to human enteric viruses is quite challenging. As a result, we discuss how researchers may move toward a single standard approach for determining thermal inactivation profiles of human enteric viruses and their surrogates.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available