This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Reprints and Permissions Copyright Information Books from ASM Press MicrobeWorld Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Herrmann, J. E. Articles by Cliver, D. O. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Herrmann, J. E. Articles by Cliver, D. O. Agricola Articles by Herrmann, J. E. Articles by Cliver, D. O.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Appl Environ Microbiol. 1968 April; 16(4): 595-602
Copyright © 1968 American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Food-borne Virus: Detection in a Model System

Food Research Institute, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin 53706
Department of Bacteriology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin 53706

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to develop methods for detection and quantitation of food-borne virus. Samples (25 g) of cottage cheese, contaminated with various quantities of coxsackievirus type A9, comprised the model system. Two of the methods presented have at least a 50% probability of detecting virus at levels below 5 plaque-forming units/25-g sample. Noteworthy aspects of these methods include use of a glycine-NaOH buffer (pH 8.8) containing approximately 1 M MgCl₂ as the diluent in which the sample is slurried, treatment of the slurry with Freon TF and bentonite to facilitate centrifuge clarification, and concentration of the clarified sample extract by a two-stage process employing polyethylene glycol followed by ultracentrifugation. Virus in the final 0.5-ml sample concentrate was detected and quantitated by the plaque technique in rhesus monkey kidney cell cultures. Processing of the sample requires approximately 2 days, and the inoculated cultures may have to be observed for as long as 7 days thereafter. If these levels of sensitivity are desired, and if 12 samples per day are tested on a routine basis, the cost savings achieved by employing these methods rather than testing sample extracts without concentration may range from 75 to 90%.