SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant saliva viral load is 15-fold higher than wild-type strains
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 Delta variants has escalated COVID-19 cases globally due to their high transmissibility. Since saliva is crucial for SARS-CoV-2 transmission, we hypothesized that a higher viral load of Delta variants in saliva than their parental wild-type strains contributed to the high transmissibility in the first place. However, studies have not reported this particular comparison done with viral copy numbers. Twenty-two genetically confirmed -positive saliva samples for wild-type strain and 32 Delta variants were statistically compared for viral copy number per milliliter determined by real-time qPCR combined with synthesized viral RNA and Poisson’s null distribution equation between the groups of wild and variant strains and between whole saliva and centrifugal supernatant in each group. We found that the copy number of the Delta variants was 15.1 times higher than wild-type strains of the whole saliva. In addition, the viral load of both strains in the whole saliva was higher than the pertinent supernatant, indicating that most viruses in the whole saliva are associated with host cells. Meanwhile, more than a million virions per milliliter of the viral load of the variants in the supernatants were 4.0 times higher but not significant than wild-type strains. Humanity must share our findings; the simple but concrete note that Delta variant viral load is abundant in the saliva is critical for preventing the spread of infection.
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.29.21266980: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics Field Sample Permit: To determine viral load as viral copy number, extraction of viral RNA and real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) were conducted referring to a method provided by the National Institute of Infectious Diseases of Japan (4). Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
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 …SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.29.21266980: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics Field Sample Permit: To determine viral load as viral copy number, extraction of viral RNA and real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) were conducted referring to a method provided by the National Institute of Infectious Diseases of Japan (4). Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
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 found bar graphs of continuous data. We recommend replacing bar graphs with more informative graphics, as many different datasets can lead to the same bar graph. The actual data may suggest different conclusions from the summary statistics. For more information, please see Weissgerber et al (2015).
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.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.
-
