Limits...
Early Days of Food and Environmental Virology.

Cliver DO - Food Environ Virol (2010)

Bottom Line: Detection of viruses was most often attempted by inoculation of primary primate cell cultures, with observation for plaque formation or cytopathic effects.The FRI group was the World Health Organization's Collaborating Center for Food Virology for many years.Many laboratories around the world have taken up food and environmental virology since 1962, with the result that a dedicated journal has been launched.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: University of California, VM:PHR, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616 USA.

ABSTRACT
In July 1962, the author joined the Food Research Institute (FRI), then at the University of Chicago, to become its food virologist. There was a limited record of waterborne viral disease outbreaks at the time; recorded data on foodborne outbreaks were fewer still. Laboratory environmental (water and wastewater) virology was in its infancy, and food virology was in gestation. Detection of viruses was most often attempted by inoculation of primary primate cell cultures, with observation for plaque formation or cytopathic effects. Focus was initially on enteroviruses and reoviruses. Environmental and food samples had to be liquefied if not already in liquid form; clarified to remove solids, bacteria, and fungi; and concentrated to a volume that could be tested in cell culture. Cytotoxicity was also a concern. Studies at the FRI and some other laboratories addressed all of these challenges. The FRI group was the World Health Organization's Collaborating Center for Food Virology for many years. Other topics studied were virus inactivation as functions of temperature, time, matrix, disinfectants, and microbial action; peroral and ex-vivo infectivity; and the suitability of various virus surrogates for environmental monitoring and inactivation experiments. Detection of noroviruses and hepatitis A virus required molecular methods, most often RT-PCR. When it was found that inactivated virus often gave the same RT-PCR signal as that of infectious virus, sample treatments were sought, which would prevent false-positive test results. Many laboratories around the world have taken up food and environmental virology since 1962, with the result that a dedicated journal has been launched.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Inactivation, by 60Co gamma rays, of poliovirus and HAV experimentally inoculated into clams (Mercenaria mercenaria)
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2837245&req=5

Fig1: Inactivation, by 60Co gamma rays, of poliovirus and HAV experimentally inoculated into clams (Mercenaria mercenaria)

Mentions: We were offered a small grant by the International Atomic Energy Agency to look further into this process. With this and limited support from other sources, we planned to produce the viruses in Madison and send them to Lowell to be inoculated into the shellfish and irradiated as was done in the earlier study, with the soft tissue shipped back frozen for assay in our laboratory. Extraction of the virus was to be done by our “Cat-Floc” method (Kostenbader and Cliver 1981). Because of the high cost of irradiation, we mixed poliovirus 1 (PO1) with HAV, so that they could be inoculated and irradiated together. When the virus mixtures were inoculated onto FRhK-4 cell monolayers, PO1 plaques were seen within 5 days; however, if the mixture was treated with anti-PO1 antiserum before inoculation, then HAV plaques were seen at approximately 16 days of incubation, and the PO1 was not expressed. This also worked with the shellfish extracts—to our knowledge, this approach has not been used by others, although mutually exclusive host systems have permitted inactivation studies on mixtures of two animal viruses and two phages (Olivieri et al. 1983). The first shipment of viruses was lost in transit to Lowell, so another had to be sent. Eventually, the samples arrived back in Madison for extraction and assay. Calculated D10 values for viruses in clams (PO1, 5.43 kGy; HAV, 5.95 kGy) were higher than those reported by others (Fig. 1), perhaps due to matrix effects and the different extraction procedure. Unfortunately, the laboratorian (Kenneth D. Kostenbader, Jr.) developed a fatal illness, and the oyster samples were not assayed, nor have the results presented here been published elsewhere.Fig. 1


Early Days of Food and Environmental Virology.

Cliver DO - Food Environ Virol (2010)

Inactivation, by 60Co gamma rays, of poliovirus and HAV experimentally inoculated into clams (Mercenaria mercenaria)
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2837245&req=5

Fig1: Inactivation, by 60Co gamma rays, of poliovirus and HAV experimentally inoculated into clams (Mercenaria mercenaria)
Mentions: We were offered a small grant by the International Atomic Energy Agency to look further into this process. With this and limited support from other sources, we planned to produce the viruses in Madison and send them to Lowell to be inoculated into the shellfish and irradiated as was done in the earlier study, with the soft tissue shipped back frozen for assay in our laboratory. Extraction of the virus was to be done by our “Cat-Floc” method (Kostenbader and Cliver 1981). Because of the high cost of irradiation, we mixed poliovirus 1 (PO1) with HAV, so that they could be inoculated and irradiated together. When the virus mixtures were inoculated onto FRhK-4 cell monolayers, PO1 plaques were seen within 5 days; however, if the mixture was treated with anti-PO1 antiserum before inoculation, then HAV plaques were seen at approximately 16 days of incubation, and the PO1 was not expressed. This also worked with the shellfish extracts—to our knowledge, this approach has not been used by others, although mutually exclusive host systems have permitted inactivation studies on mixtures of two animal viruses and two phages (Olivieri et al. 1983). The first shipment of viruses was lost in transit to Lowell, so another had to be sent. Eventually, the samples arrived back in Madison for extraction and assay. Calculated D10 values for viruses in clams (PO1, 5.43 kGy; HAV, 5.95 kGy) were higher than those reported by others (Fig. 1), perhaps due to matrix effects and the different extraction procedure. Unfortunately, the laboratorian (Kenneth D. Kostenbader, Jr.) developed a fatal illness, and the oyster samples were not assayed, nor have the results presented here been published elsewhere.Fig. 1

Bottom Line: Detection of viruses was most often attempted by inoculation of primary primate cell cultures, with observation for plaque formation or cytopathic effects.The FRI group was the World Health Organization's Collaborating Center for Food Virology for many years.Many laboratories around the world have taken up food and environmental virology since 1962, with the result that a dedicated journal has been launched.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: University of California, VM:PHR, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616 USA.

ABSTRACT
In July 1962, the author joined the Food Research Institute (FRI), then at the University of Chicago, to become its food virologist. There was a limited record of waterborne viral disease outbreaks at the time; recorded data on foodborne outbreaks were fewer still. Laboratory environmental (water and wastewater) virology was in its infancy, and food virology was in gestation. Detection of viruses was most often attempted by inoculation of primary primate cell cultures, with observation for plaque formation or cytopathic effects. Focus was initially on enteroviruses and reoviruses. Environmental and food samples had to be liquefied if not already in liquid form; clarified to remove solids, bacteria, and fungi; and concentrated to a volume that could be tested in cell culture. Cytotoxicity was also a concern. Studies at the FRI and some other laboratories addressed all of these challenges. The FRI group was the World Health Organization's Collaborating Center for Food Virology for many years. Other topics studied were virus inactivation as functions of temperature, time, matrix, disinfectants, and microbial action; peroral and ex-vivo infectivity; and the suitability of various virus surrogates for environmental monitoring and inactivation experiments. Detection of noroviruses and hepatitis A virus required molecular methods, most often RT-PCR. When it was found that inactivated virus often gave the same RT-PCR signal as that of infectious virus, sample treatments were sought, which would prevent false-positive test results. Many laboratories around the world have taken up food and environmental virology since 1962, with the result that a dedicated journal has been launched.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus