Corrigendum: Evaluation of the SARS-CoV-2 Inactivation Efficacy Associated With Buffers From Three Kits Used on High-Throughput RNA Extraction Platforms.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fcimb.2021.716436.].

Evaluation of the SARS-CoV-2 Inactivation Efficacy Associated With Buffers From Three Kits Used on High-Throughput RNA Extraction Platforms.

Rapid and demonstrable inactivation of SARS-CoV-2 is crucial to ensure operator safety during high-throughput testing of clinical samples. The inactivation efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 was evaluated using commercially available lysis buffers from three viral RNA extraction kits used on two high-throughput (96-well) RNA extraction platforms (Qiagen QIAcube HT and the Thermo Fisher KingFisher Flex) in combination with thermal treatment. Buffer volumes and sample ratios were chosen for their optimised suitability for RNA extraction rather than inactivation efficacy and tested against a representative sample type: SARS-CoV-2 spiked into viral transport medium (VTM). A lysis buffer mix from the MagMAX Pathogen RNA/DNA kit (Thermo Fisher), used on the KingFisher Flex, which included guanidinium isothiocyanate (GITC), a detergent, and isopropanol, demonstrated a minimum inactivation efficacy of 1 × 105 tissue culture infectious dose (TCID)50/ml. Alternative lysis buffer mixes from the MagMAX Viral/Pathogen Nucleic Acid kit (Thermo Fisher) also used on the KingFisher Flex and from the QIAamp 96 Virus QIAcube HT Kit (Qiagen) used on the QIAcube HT (both of which contained GITC and a detergent) reduced titres by 1 × 104 TCID50/ml but did not completely inactivate the virus. Heat treatment alone (15 min, 68°C) did not completely inactivate the virus, demonstrating a reduction of 1 × 103 TCID50/ml. When inactivation methods included both heat treatment and addition of lysis buffer, all methods were shown to completely inactivate SARS-CoV-2 inactivation against the viral titres tested. Results are discussed in the context of the operation of a high-throughput diagnostic laboratory.

Aerosol and Surface Deposition Characteristics of Two Surrogates for Bacillus anthracis Spores.

Spores of an acrystalliferous derivative of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki, termed Btcry-, are morphologically, aerodynamically, and structurally indistinguishable from Bacillus anthracis spores. Btcry- spores were dispersed in a large, open-ended barn together with spores of Bacillus atrophaeus subsp. globigii, a historically used surrogate for Bacillus anthracis Spore suspensions (2 × 1012 CFU each of B. atrophaeus subsp. globigii and Btcry-) were aerosolized in each of five spray events using a backpack misting device incorporating an air blower; a wind of 4.9 to 7.6 m s-1 was also flowing through the barn in the same direction. Filter air samplers were situated throughout the barn to assess the aerosol density of the spores during each release. Trays filled with a surfactant in aqueous buffer were placed on the floor near the filter samplers to assess spore deposition. Spores were also recovered from arrays of solid surfaces (concrete, aluminum, and plywood) that had been laid on the floor and set up as a wall at the end of the barn. B. atrophaeus subsp. globigii spores were found to remain airborne for significantly longer periods, and to be deposited on horizontal surfaces at lower densities, than Btcry- spores, particularly near the spray source. There was a 6-fold-higher deposition of Btcry- spores than of B. atrophaeus subsp. globigii spores on vertical surfaces relative to the surrounding airborne density. This work is relevant for selecting the best B. anthracis surrogate for the prediction of human exposure, hazard assessment, and hazard management following a malicious release of B. anthracis IMPORTANCE: There is concern that pathogenic bacteria could be maliciously disseminated in the air to cause human infection and disruption of normal life. The threat from spore-forming organisms, such as the causative agent of anthrax, is particularly serious. In order to assess the extent of this risk, it is important to have a surrogate organism that can be used to replicate the dispersal characteristics of the threat agent accurately. This work compares the aerosol dispersal and deposition behaviors of the surrogates Btcry- and B. atrophaeus subsp. globigii Btcry- spores remained in the air for a shorter time, and were markedly more likely to adhere to vertical surfaces, than B. atrophaeus subsp. globigii spores.

Evaluation of two multiplex real-time PCR screening capabilities for the detection of Bacillus anthracis, Francisella tularensis and Yersinia pestis in blood samples generated from murine infection models.

Two multiplex PCR screening capabilities (TaqMan Array Cards and FilmArray) were evaluated for their ability to detect Bacillus anthracis, Francisella tularensis and Yersinia pestis in blood samples obtained from respective murine infection models. Blood samples were obtained from infected mice at 24 h intervals after exposure. Multiplex PCR results were compared with standard blood culture and singleplex real-time PCR. Across all three models, 71 mice were tested in total, within which a subset of 43 samples was shown to contain an infecting agent by at least one of the detection technologies. Within this subset of positive samples, for each model studied, the detection rates of each technology were compared. The B. anthracis model blood culture (14 of 15 agent-containing samples tested) and FilmArray PCR (12 of 15) were shown to have equivalent detection rates, which were significantly higher (at the 95 % confidence level) than singleplex (five of 14) or Array Card (two of 14) PCRs. The F. tularensis model blood culture (12 of 12) was shown to have a significantly higher (at 95 % confidence level) detection rate than all PCR technologies, with FilmArray (seven of 11) and singleplex (seven of 12) PCRs shown to have significantly higher (at 95 % confidence level) detection rates than the Array Card PCR (two of 11). Within the Y. pestis model, there was no significant difference in detection rates between blood culture (10 of 16), singleplex PCR (14 of 16), Array Card PCR (10 of 16) and FilmArray PCR (10 of 13).