4.6 Article

Inactivation of poliovirus 1 and F-specific RNA phages and degradation of their genomes by UV irradiation at 254 nanometers

Journal

APPLIED AND ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY
Volume 72, Issue 12, Pages 7671-7677

Publisher

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/AEM.01106-06

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Several models (animal caliciviruses, poliovirus 1 [PV1], and F-specific RNA bacteriophages) are usually used to predict inactivation of nonculturable viruses. For the same UV fluence, viral inactivation observed in the literature varies from 0 to 5 logs according to the models and the methods (infectivity versus molecular biology). The lack of knowledge concerning the mechanisms of inactivation due to UV prevents us from selecting the best model. In this context, determining if viral genome degradation may explain the loss of infectivity under UV radiation becomes essential. Thus, four virus models (PV1 and three F-specific RNA phages: MS2, GA, and Q beta) were exposed to UV radiation from 0 to 150 mJ (.) cm(-2). PVI1 is the least-resistant virus, while MS2 and GA phages are the most resistant, with phage QP having an intermediate sensitivity; respectively, 6-log, 2.3-log, 2.5-log, and 4-log decreases for 50 mJ (.) cm(-2). In parallel, analysis of RNA degradation demonstrated that this phenomenon depends on the fragment size for PV1 as well as for MS2. Long fragments (above 2,000 bases) for PV1 and MS2 fell rapidly to the background level (> 1.3-log decrease) for 20 mJ (.) cm(-2) and 60 mJ (.) cm(-2), respectively. Nevertheless, the size of the viral RNA is not the only factor affecting UV-induced RNA degradation, since viral RNA was more rapidly degraded in PVI than in the MS2 phage with a similar size. Finally, extrapolation of inactivation and UV-induced RNA degradation kinetics highlights that genome degradation could fully explain UV-induced viral inactivation.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available