A Novel High-Throughput Method for Molecular Detection of Human Pathogenic Viruses Using a Nanofluidic Real-Time PCR System.

Human enteric viruses are recognized as the main causes of food- and waterborne diseases worldwide. Sensitive and quantitative detection of human enteric viruses is typically achieved through quantitative RT-PCR (RT-qPCR). A nanofluidic real-time PCR system was used to develop novel high-throughput methods for qualitative molecular detection (RT-qPCR array) and quantification of human pathogenic viruses by digital RT-PCR (RT-dPCR). The performance of high-throughput PCR methods was investigated for detecting 19 human pathogenic viruses and two main process controls used in food virology. The conventional real-time PCR system was compared to the RT-dPCR and RT-qPCR array. Based on the number of genome copies calculated by spectrophotometry, sensitivity was found to be slightly better with RT-qPCR than with RT-dPCR for 14 viruses by a factor range of from 0.3 to 1.6 log10. Conversely, sensitivity was better with RT-dPCR than with RT-qPCR for seven viruses by a factor range of from 0.10 to 1.40 log10. Interestingly, the number of genome copies determined by RT-dPCR was always from 1 to 2 log10 lower than the expected copy number calculated by RT-qPCR standard curve. The sensitivity of the RT-qPCR and RT-qPCR array assays was found to be similar for two viruses, and better with RT-qPCR than with RT-qPCR array for eighteen viruses by a factor range of from 0.7 to 3.0 log10. Conversely, sensitivity was only 0.30 log10 better with the RT-qPCR array than with conventional RT-qPCR assays for norovirus GIV detection. Finally, the RT-qPCR array and RT-dPCR assays were successfully used together to screen clinical samples and quantify pathogenic viruses. Additionally, this method made it possible to identify co-infection in clinical samples. In conclusion, given the rapidity and potential for large numbers of viral targets, this nanofluidic RT-qPCR assay should have a major impact on human pathogenic virus surveillance and outbreak investigations and is likely to be of benefit to public health.


Introduction
Human enteric viruses constitute a serious public health concern, since they are capable of causing a variety of acute illnesses, including the most commonly reported acute gastrointestinal illness. They are mainly transmitted via the fecal-oral route either by person-to-person contact or by ingestion of contaminated water and food, particularly shellfish, soft fruits and vegetables. Enteric viruses are shed in enormous quantities in feces (10 9 to 10 10 /g) and have an infectious dose on the order of tens to hundreds of virions. Enteric viruses are host-specific and are not capable of replicating in the environment, but they survive for long periods of time on food or food contact surfaces or in water (ground, surface, and drinking water) [1]. These characteristics enable enteric viruses to play a significant role in food-and waterborne outbreaks. Aside from noroviruses, which have been recognized as the largest cause of outbreaks, the viruses most often implicated in outbreaks include hepatitis viruses (hepatitis A virus and hepatitis E virus), rotavirus, adenovirus (40,41), astrovirus, enterovirus [2,3,4,5,6,7]. Additional viruses of lesser epidemiologic importance include human bocavirus, cosavirus, parvovirus, sapovirus, tick-borne encephalitis virus (TBEV), Aichi virus, and coronavirus [8,9,10,11].
Tools for rapid detection of viral pathogens are important for analyzing clinical, environmental and food samples. Detection of these enteric viruses based on their infectivity is complicated by the absence of a reliable cell culture method and the low levels of contamination of food and environmental samples [12,13]. To date, real time RT-PCR has been one of the most promising detection methods due to its sensitivity, specificity, and speed. Recently, the ISO/TS 15216-1 and 15216-2 standards covering real time RT-PCR for both quantitative determination and qualitative detection of NoV and HAV in foodstuffs were published [14,15,16].
The aim of this study was to develop real time RT-PCR assays for detection of a total of 19 human enteric viruses (including 3 genogroupes of norovirus and 4 coronaviruses) and two control process viruses (mengovirus and murine norovirus) generally used for monitoring the recovery of viral foodstuff extraction methods. Limits of detection of the viral genomes were determined with the conventional RT-qPCR system and with the Fluidigm's BioMark System by using the qualitative nanofluidic real-time RT-PCR array and the quantitative digital RT-PCR array. The advantages of these new detection techniques were determined by detecting and quantifying pathogenic viruses in clinical samples.

Viruses and cells
HAV strain HM175/18f, clone B (VR-1402), was obtained from the American Type Culture Collection (ATCC). This clone replicates rapidly and has cytopathic effects in cell culture [17]. HAV stock was produced by propagation in foetal rhesus monkey kidney (FRhK-4) cells (ATCC, CRL-1688) [18] and titrated by plaque assay [19]. The titer of viral production was established in HAV RNA genomic copies with an RT-qPCR standard curve obtained with the ten-fold diluted in vitro RNA transcripts. Based on this approach, HAV stocks had titres of 9.33 x 10 8 genome copies / mL.
Dr. H. Virgin from Washington University in the USA provided ANSES's Fougères Laboratory in France with MNV-1 (CW1 strain) which was then propagated in mouse leukemic monocyte macrophage (RAW 264.7, ATCC TIB-71) cell line [20]. MNV-1 stock was produced as previously described [21]. The extracted RNA was confirmed with RT-qPCR and quantified by measuring absorbance at 260 / 280 nm with a NanoDrop ND-1000. Based on this approach, the production stock of MNV-1 had titres of approximately 1.36 x 10 12 genome copies / mL. Mengovirus (strain MC 0 ) was obtained from clarified supernatant provided by Dr. Albert Bosch from the "Enteric Virus Group" of the University of Barcelona. Mengovirus stock was produced by propagation in HeLa cells (ATCC, CCL-2™) [22]. The extracted RNA was confirmed with RT-qPCR and quantified by measuring absorbance at 260 / 280 nm with a NanoDrop ND-1000. Based on this approach, the production stock of MNV-1 had titres of approximately 6.68 x 10 11 genome copies / mL.
Rotavirus strain Wa (human rotavirus) was obtained from the Pasteur Institute (Paris, France) and was propagated in MA-104 rhesus monkey epithelial cell line (ATCC CRL-2378) [23]. The extracted RNA was confirmed with RT-qPCR and quantified by measuring absorbance at 260 / 280 nm with a NanoDrop ND-1000. Based on this approach, the production stock of Wa had titres of approximately 3.21 x 10 11 genome copies / mL.

Viruses and stools
The study was conducted in accordance with the ethics principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Hepatitis A virus infection is a notifiable disease in France. The current system of mandatory reporting was approved by the Commission Nationale de l'Informatique et des Libertés (deliberation n°02-082, November 19 2002). Patients receive oral and written information on the finality of the notification and on the modalities of information recording. This information is available on line on the web site of the Institut de Veille Sanitaire (IVS) at http://www. invs.sante.fr/content/download/6498/42945/version/2/file/fiche_info_patient.pdf for HAV samples and on the web site of the NRC at www.cnr-ve.org for enteric virus samples. All clinical and biological parameters are treated anonymously. The virological surveillance of strain diversity is performed on stored samples obtained for hepatitis A diagnosis (no need for any additional blood draw). Diagnostic laboratories are asked to contribute to HAV and enteric virus strains surveillance by sending samples to the National Reference Centre (NRC). The study was not specifically approved by an ethics committee. Human samples were collected before the study and they are anonymously collected and analyzed.
The faecal samples were suspended in 1X Phosphate Buffered Saline (PBS), pH 7, to obtain a final 10% suspension (w/v), vortexed and centrifuged at 3000 g for 30 min at 4°C. Aliquots of 100 μL supernatant were kept frozen at -80°C for later use.
The extracted genomic RNA/DNA of adenovirus, astrovirus and rotavirus were confirmed with RT-qPCR and quantified by measuring absorbance at 260 / 280 nm with a NanoDrop ND-1000.
The extracted genomic RNA of norovirus GI, GII and GIV, sapovirus, Aichi virus, HAV and HEV were confirmed and quantified with RT-qPCR by using in vitro RNA standard curves (see "DNA and RNA standards").

DNA and RNA standards
Sequences from reference strains were inserted into recombinant plasmids ( Table 1). The HEV, HAV, NoV GI and NoV GII cDNA were cloned in pGEM-T Easy vector (Promega, Charbonnières-les-Bains, France) and propagated in E. coli One Shot 1 TOP10F' (Life technologies, Saint Aubin, France). High-quality DNA plasmids containing HAV or NoV regions were purified using the Qiagen Plasmid midi kit (Qiagen, Courtaboeuf, France) according to the manufacturer's protocol. Then, NoV GI plasmid was digested with NCOI (Life technologies), and HEV DNA, HAV DNA and NoV GII DNA plasmids were digested with SpeI (Life technologies) and transcripts were obtained by using a MEGAscript 1 kit (Life technologies) according to the manufacturer's protocol. Synthesized RNA were treated with Turbo™ DNase (Life technologies) according to the manufacturer's protocol in order to remove the DNA template following transcription, and purified by using the MEGAclear™ kit (Life technologies). The synthesized DNA and RNA were confirmed with (RT)-qPCR and quantified by measuring absorbance at 260 / 280 nm with a NanoDrop ND-1000 (Thermoscientific, Courtaboeuf, France) and the free software available on the "http://endmemo.com/bio/dnacopynum.php" website. Aliquots of 10μL containing 10 9 genome copies / μL were kept frozen at -20°C for later use and used as standards.
Digested plasmids were transcribed by using the MEGAscript 1 kit (Life technologies) according to the manufacturer's protocol. Synthesized RNA was treated with Turbo™ DNase (Life technologies) according to the manufacturer's protocol in order to remove the DNA template following transcription, and purified by using the MEGAclear kit (Life technologies) according to manufacturer's instructions. The synthesized RNA was confirmed with RT-qPCR and quantified by measuring absorbance at 260 / 280 nm with a Nanodrop ND-100 (Thermoscientific, France) and the free software available on the "http://endmemo.com/bio/ dnacopynum.php" website. RNA stocks were diluted to contain 10 9 copies / μL. Aliquots of 10 μL were kept frozen at -20°C for later use as standards.
Bocavirus and parvovirus cDNA were cloned into the pBluescriptIISK+ vector by Genecust (Dudelange, Luxembourg). Both recombinant plasmids were purified by Genecust. DNA plasmids (0.5 μg) were digested with SpeI (Life technologies) to be linearized. The synthesized DNA was confirmed with qPCR and quantified by measuring absorbance at 260 / 280 nm with a Nanodrop ND-100 (Thermoscientific, France) and the free software available on the "http://endmemo.com/bio/dnacopynum.php" website. DNA stocks were diluted to contain 10 9 copies / μL. Aliquots of 10 μL were kept frozen at -20°C for later use as standards.

Primers and probes
The primers and probes used to detect all the viruses of this study are described in Table 2. Those used to detect NoV GI, NoV GII, HAV and mengovirus are described in ISO/ TS 15216-1 / 15216-2 (2013). All the primers and probes were purchased from Life Technologies or Eurofins MWG Operon (Les Ulis, France).

RT-qPCR with the CFX96™ real time PCR detection system
One-step RT-qPCR amplifications were performed on a CFX96™ real time PCR detection system from Bio-Rad (Marnes-la-Coquette, France). Reactions were performed in a 15 μL reaction mixture containing 1X of RNA UltraSense™ master mix and 0.63 μL of RNA Ultrasense™ enzyme mix, which are components of the RNA UltraSense™ One-Step Quantitative RT-PCR System (Life technologies), 2 U RNAse inhibitor (Life technologies), 5 μg of bovine serum albumin (Life Technologies), 500 nM of forward primer, 900 nM of reverse primer, 250 nM of probe, and 5 μL of RNA extract. A negative control containing all the reagents except the RNA template was included with each set of reaction mixtures.
The one-step RT-qPCR program involved 60 min reverse transcription of RNA at 55°C, followed by a 15 min denaturation step at 95°C, 45 cycles of 15 s at 95°C, 1 min at 60°C and 1 min at 65°C. Fluorescence was recorded by the apparatus at the end of the elongation steps (1 minute at 65°C) for each amplification cycle. All samples were characterised by a corresponding Ct value. Negative samples gave no Ct value. A standard curve for each target was generated with  Reactions were performed in a 10 μL reaction mixture containing 1X of RNA UltraSense™ master mix, 1X of ROX reference dye and 0.44 μL of RNA Ultrasense™ enzyme mix, which are components of the RNA UltraSense™ One-Step Quantitative RT-PCR System (Life Technologies), 1X of 20X GE Sample Loading Reagent (Fluidigm), 2 U RNAse inhibitor (Life Technologies), 500 nM of forward primer, 900 nM of reverse primer, 250 nM of probe, and 5.8 μL of RNA extract. A negative control containing all the reagents except the RNA template was included with each set of reaction mixtures. 6 μL out of ten reaction mix was charged onto the chip with the IFC controller MX, but 0.65 μL were effectively partitioned into the 770 chambers of one panel, including 0.38 μL of RNA extract.
The one-step RT-dPCR program involved 60 min reverse transcription of RNA at 55°C, followed by a 15 min denaturation step at 95°C, and lastly 45 cycles of 15 s at 95°C, 1 min at 60°C and 1 min at 65°C. Fluorescence was recorded by the apparatus at the end of the elongation steps (1 minute at 65°C) for each amplification cycle.
The Digital PCR Analysis software (Fluidigm) was used to count the number of positive chambers out of the total number of chambers per panel.
The Poisson distribution was used to estimate the average number of template copies per chamber in a panel [24,25]. All samples were characterised by a corresponding absolute quantity. No positive chambers were observed in negative samples.

RT-qPCR with the BioMark System
The 48.48 dynamic arrays were automatically loaded using an integrated fluidic circuit (IFC) controller (Fluidigm Corporation), and real-time reactions were performed and analyzed using a BioMark real-time PCR system and analysis software (Fluidigm Corporation), respectively. As a quality control, negative control samples were included on every array for each viral genome. RT reactions were performed in a 25 μL reaction mixture containing 1X of First-Strand Buffer, 10mM of DTT and 1 μL of SuperScript 1 III RT enzyme, which are components of SuperScript 1 III Reverse Transcriptase (Life technologies), 2 U RNAse inhibitor (Life technologies), 2μM of Random hexamer (Life technologies), 200 μM of dNTP (Life technologies), and 10 μL of nucleic acids. A negative control containing all the reagents except the RNA template was included with each set of reaction mixtures. The RT program involved 5 min at 25°C, followed by 60 min at 55°C, and lastly 15 min at 70°C. Aliquots were kept frozen at -80°C for later use.
Preamplification reactions were performed in a 10 μL reaction mixture containing 1X of SuperMix, a reagent of Perfecta Preamp SuperMix (Quanta), 0.2μl of 0.2X primer pool (1X = 500nM Forward and 900nM Reverse), and 5 μL of cDNA. A negative control containing all the reagents except the cDNA template was included with each set of reaction mixtures. The preamplification program involved 10 min at 95°C, followed by 14 cycles of 15 s at 95°C and 4 min at 6°C. Immediately after the pre-amplification PCR, products were diluted (1:4) and stored at -80°C prior to use in qPCR.
For the qPCR array, 48 x 6 μL reaction mixture containing 1X of RNA UltraSense™ master mix, 1X of ROX reference dye and 0.27 μL of RNA UltraSense™ enzyme mix, which are components of the RNA UltraSense™ One-Step Quantitative RT-PCR System (Life Technologies), 1X of 20X GE Sample Loading Reagent (Fluidigm) and 2.7 μL of DNA extract were charged on the right part of the "48.48 Dynamic Array IFC" plate (BioMark). Negative controls containing all the reagents except the DNA template were included with each set of reaction mixtures. In addition, 48 x 5 μl of a mix of 500 nM of forward primer, 900 nM of reverse primer and 250 nM of probe were deposited on the left part of the plate.
Nine nl of reaction volume mix were charged onto each of the 2304 chambers on the chip with the IFC controller MX.
The qPCR program involved a 15 min denaturation step at 95°C followed by 45 cycles of 15 s at 95°C, 1 min at 60°C and 1 min at 65°C. Fluorescence was recorded by the apparatus at the end of the elongation steps (1 minute at 65°C) for each amplification cycle. Negative samples gave no Ct value.

Conventional RT-qPCR and nanofluidic PCR (RT-dPCR, RT-qPCR array)
The sensitivity of conventional qPCR assays targeting 21 viral genomes was compared to the quantitative digital RT-PCR array and to the qualitative nanofluidic real-time PCR array performed on Fluidigm's BioMark System.

Quantitative detection by conventional and digital real time RT-PCR assays
Digital RT-PCR's potential for sensitive and accurate quantification was assessed on 10-fold dilution series of 21 viral genomes ( Table 3). The sensitivity was slightly better with RT-qPCR than with RT-dPCR for ten viruses by a factor ranging from 0.3 to 0.9 log 10 and for four viruses by a factor ranging from 1.3 to 1.6 log 10 . Conversely, sensitivity was better with RT-dPCR than with RT-qPCR for seven viruses by a factor ranging from 0.1 to 1.4 log 10 .
The expected numbers of genome copies calculated via the standard curve by RT-qPCR were close to the direct measurement of the target concentrations by RT-dPCR only by testing DNA from plasmids. By testing RNA transcripts, the numbers of genome copies as determined by direct RT-dPCR measurement of the target concentrations were 0.9 to 2.1 log 10 lower than Table 3. Comparison of RT-qPCR, RT-dPCR and RT-PCR array assays. Characteristics of standard curves based on the RT-qPCR assays and limit of detection (LOD) of viral targets by RT-qPCR, by RT-dPCR and RT-PCR array assays. The differences between relative quantification (by RT-qPCR) and absolute quantification (by RT-dPCR) were indicated. Nanofluidic PCR System for Enteric Virus Detection the expected copy numbers calculated via the standard curve by RT-qPCR. Similarly, by testing genomes from viruses in stools and RNA from virus production in cells, the limit of detection (LOD) as determined by RT-dPCR was respectively 1.5 to 3.4 log 10 and 1.6 to 2.1 log 10 lower than the expected copy numbers calculated via the standard curve by RT-qPCR.

Sensitive and accurate detection by RT-qPCR array
The potential of the RT-PCR array for sensitive detection was assessed on a dilution series of 21 viral genomes ( Table 3). The limits of detection obtained with RT-qPCR array assays ranged from 1 to 10 3 genome copies / μl of RNA / DNA extracts for 11 viruses and from 10 4 to 10 5 genome copies / μl of RNA extracts for the others. RT-qPCR array assays commonly showed a slightly lower sensitivity than conventional RT-qPCR. The sensitivity of both RT-qPCR and RT-qPCR array assays was found to be similar for two viruses (enterovirus, adenovirus 41), and was slightly better with the RT-qPCR than with the RT-qPCR array for 18 viruses by a factor ranging from 0.7 to 3.0 log 10 . Conversely, sensitivity was only 0.3 log 10 higher with the RT-qPCR array than with conventional RT-qPCR assays for norovirus GIV detection.

Viral screening by RT-qPCR array and quantitative detection of clinical samples by RT-dPCR
The nanofluid-based (RT)-PCR assays developed were applied to characterize 25 samples (4 culture supernatants and 21 clinical samples previously characterized by NRC) for detection of hepatitis (HAV, HEV) and enteric virus genomes. First, the samples were tested on the RT-PCR array to perform a qualitative screening of the 19 viral genomes. Then the viral-positive samples were specifically quantified by RT-dPCR and by conventional RT-qPCR. Results are shown on Table 4. RT-qPCR array assays detected the previously determined viruses in 100% of the samples. Furthermore, positivity for more than one virus was found in two clinical samples. A stool previously identified as positive for HAV IB was found positive for HAV and Aichi virus and a stool identified as positive for Aichi virus was found positive for Aichi virus, adenovirus and astrovirus. The stool previously identified as co-infected by NoV GII.13 and NoV GIV was confirmed positive for both viruses.
Following the viral screening of 25 samples, the 29 detected viral genomes were successfully quantified by both RT-qPCR and RT-dPCR. The number of genome copies determined for 28 viruses was lower by RT-dPCR with a difference of quantification comprised between 0 and 1 log 10 for 7 out of the 29 samples (24%), between 1 and 2 log 10 for 17 out of the 29 samples (59%) and higher than 2 log 10 for 4 out of the 29 samples (14%). So the numbers of genome copies calculated by absolute quantification (RT-dPCR) were lower than the expected numbers of genome copies calculated by using standard curve of RT-qPCR except in the sample coinfected with NoV GII and NoV GIV. In the latter sample, the NoV GII quantification was 0.4 log 10 higher by RT-dPCR than by the RT-qPCR assays (1 out of the 29 samples, i.e. 3%).

Discussion
Enteric viruses are able to persist for long periods in the environment and can be transmitted with a low infectious dose by human contact, water, food and fomites [26]. They pose a significant public health concern. They are associated with gastroenteritis in humans, but also with hepatitis and other diseases including respiratory infections, conjunctivitis, aseptic meningitis, encephalitis, myocarditis, and paralysis which have high mortality rates, particularly in immunocompromised individuals [27]. Commonly studied groups of enteric viruses include noroviruses and hepatitis viruses, but new tools for detecting the full range of pathogenic viruses are Table 4. Screening and viral quantification in clinical samples (stools and viral supernatants from cell culture) by RT-qPCR and novel nanofuidic approaches (RT-qPCR and RT-dPCR). Samples were firstly screened by RT-PCR array and then quantified by RT-dPCR. Absolute viral quantification (by RT-dPCR) was compared to relative quantification (by RT-qPCR). needed for their surveillance in the environment, food samples and for outbreak investigations [28]. Microfluidic digital PCR (RT-dPCR) is an accurate endpoint-sensitive absolute quantification approach that makes it possible to determine the number of target copies without a standard curve. Digital PCR ((RT)-dPCR) was compared to real-time (RT)-PCR for quantifying 19 human enteric viruses and two control process viruses. For detecting viral RNA and cDNA, RT-dPCR assays were often found to be comparable in terms of sensitivity to RT-qPCR.
The number of RNA genome copies determined by digital RT-PCR was often lower than the number of copies expected using spectrophotometry. One potential cause of discrepancy between relative and absolute quantification could be errors introduced by spectrophotometric determination of the nucleic acid concentration, leading to an overestimation of the copy genome number [29,30]. This could explain why samples from viral stocks and stools potentially containing cellular genomes (non-target RNA) and degraded (non-amplified) targets were particularly affected by quantification discrepancies. Both quantification methods were close when DNA targets were tested. One other potential cause of discrepancy might be the RT step, which is not 100% effective, so that all the RNA may not be transcribed into cDNA and therefore is not quantified by the digital PCR.
Digital RT-PCR may provide more accurate measurements than RT-qPCR, as it is not dependent on amplification efficiency. Moreover, the advantage of this novel technology is that it is more tolerant to inhibitory substances and may reduce the difficulty of quantifying viruses when inhibitors linked to the matrix-type components analysed in food or environmental virology are present [31,32,33].
Recent innovations in PCR miniaturization made it possible to conduct high-throughput qPCR in which the reactional volumes are reduced to a nanolitre, leading to a decrease in the cost per assay per sample. Recently, a microfluidic quantitative PCR (MFQPCR) system was developed to simultaneously quantify 11 major human viral pathogens and two process controls (murine norovirus, mengovirus). This system included a specific target amplification (STA) reaction to increase the amount of target genes prior to MFQPCR [34]. In this study, the RT-qPCR array assays were developed and enabled simultaneous detection of 48 samples with 22 targeted virus assays. The preamplification step was also necessary because low amounts of target molecules had to be detected in very small volumes of reaction (9nl). Thus, RT-qPCR array assays involve three separate steps (RT, preamplification and PCR).
Nineteen enteric viruses and two control process viruses (MNV and mengovirus) were targeted. The sensitivity of the RT-qPCR array assays was lower (by 0.8 to 3.8 log 10 ) than the limits of detection obtained with conventional RT-qPCR and RT-dPCR. However, all the clinical samples tested with the RT-qPCR array assays were identified and matched the NRC results. Moreover, two stools contained more than one viral genome, and these results completed the NRC analysis. This assay is therefore useful for rapid sample screening.
In conclusion, a combination of RT-qPCR array and RT-dPCR assays could be applied to screen contaminated samples and quantify pathogenic viruses in case of outbreaks investigation and surveillance. The choice of techniques should take into account the aim of analysis, the number of targets involved and the analytical costs. To date, the RT-qPCR array includes enteric viruses frequently reported as the causes of foodborne outbreaks and some additional viruses of lesser epidemiologic importance. In future, this technology could be updated by extending the range of viral targets to gain information during epidemiological studies. For this purpose, BioMark real-time PCR system (Fluidigm) can be also used for high-throughput microfluidic real-time PCR amplification with 96.96 dynamic arrays (Fluidigm) leading to an increase of detected targets. Concerning RT-dPCR assays, it could be helpful for standardizing the quantification of enteric viruses in samples and might be extended to the quantification of other human microbiological pathogens in foods.