Table 1.
Primers used for real-time qPCR.
Fig 1.
Higher sampling flow rates result in higher viral recovery.
(A) Concentration of viruses recovered from air (including total viral load and infectious viral load) with different sampling flow rates (n = 3). Lower flow rates (6 L/min & 4 L/min) resulted in less viral particles recovered compared to higher flow rates (11.5 L/min & 9 L/min). Infectious viral load across the sampling flow rates did not show significant variation (p > 0.05). (B) Peak particle sizes in the particle size distribution were < 5 μm, which confirms the presence of Phi6-laden aerosols.
Fig 2.
Persistence of aerosolized Phi6 in air.
(A) Effect of relative humidity (RH) on the infectivity of aerosolized Phi6 follows a characteristic V-shape which varies over time. (B) The infectious viruses recovered as a function of exposure time under tested humidity conditions. (C) Size distribution of Phi6-laden aerosols. All conditions were tested in duplicate.
Fig 3.
Persistence of Phi6 on materials.
(A) Phi6 is pre-loaded on materials as conventional droplets (n = 3). (B) Phi6 is aerosolized followed by deposition on materials (n = 6). Dashed lines indicate the limit of detection. (C) RH changes within an absorptive material (gypsum wallboard as an example). (D) Deposited viral load on materials in the full-scale chamber (n = 3).
Fig 4.
A schematic depicting the risk of infection from deposited virus-laden droplets and aerosols on porous fomites.