A Comparison of Persistence of SARS-CoV-2 Variants on Stainless Steel

  1. Thomas Pottage
  2. Isobel Garratt
  3. Okechukwu Onianwa
  4. Antony Spencer
  5. Susan Paton
  6. Jake Dunning
  7. Allan Bennett

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

The survival of newer variants of SARS-CoV-2 on a representative surface has been compared to the established UK circulating isolate to determine whether enhanced environmental stability could play a part in their increased transmissibility. Stainless-steel coupons were inoculated with liquid cultures of the three variants, with coupons recovered over seven days and processed for recoverable viable virus using plaque assay. After drying, there was no significant difference in inactivation rates between variants. Indicating there is no increased environmental persistence from the new variants.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.04.08.438833: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Cell Line Authenticationnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Experimental Models: Cell Lines
    SentencesResources
    The recovery media was thawed to room temperature, serially diluted and plaque assayed on Vero-E6 cells, before staining and enumeration of plaques.
    Vero-E6
    suggested: None
    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Statistical Analysis: All statistical analyse and data manipulation were completed in STATA (v16.1).
    STATA
    suggested: (Stata, RRID:SCR_012763)

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No funding statement was detected.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2021.04.08.438833 on bioRxiv