Differential MS2 Interaction with Food Contact Surfaces Determined by Atomic Force Microscopy and Virus Recovery

Abstract

ABSTRACT Enteric viruses are recognized as major etiologies of U.S. foodborne infections. These viruses are easily transmitted via food contact surfaces. Understanding virus interactions with surfaces may facilitate the development of improved means for their removal, thus reducing transmission. Using MS2 coliphage as a virus surrogate, the strength of virus adhesion to common food processing and preparation surfaces of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and glass was assessed by atomic force microscopy (AFM) and virus recovery assays. The interaction forces of MS2 with various surfaces were measured from adhesion peaks in force-distance curves registered using a spherical bead probe preconjugated with MS2 particles. MS2 in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) demonstrated approximately 5 times less adhesion force to glass (0.54 nN) than to PVC (2.87 nN) ( P < 0.0001). This was consistent with the virus recovery data, which showed 1.4-fold fewer virus PFU recovered from PVC than from glass after identical inoculations and 24 h of cold storage. The difference in adhesion was ascribed to both intrinsic chemical characteristics and the substrate surface porosity (smooth glass versus porous PVC). Incorporating a surfactant micellar solution of sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) into the PBS reduced the adhesion force for PVC (∼0 nN) and consistently increased virus recovery by 19%. With direct and indirect evidence of virus adhesion, this study illustrated a two-way assessment of virus adhesion for the initial evaluation of potential means to mitigate virus adhesion to food contact surfaces. IMPORTANCE The spread of foodborne viruses is likely associated with their adhesive nature. Virus attachment on food contact surfaces has been evaluated by quantitating virus recoveries from inoculated surfaces. This study aimed to evaluate the microenvironment in which nanometer-sized viruses interact with food contact surfaces and to compare the virus adhesion differences using AFM. The virus surrogate MS2 demonstrated less adhesion force to glass than to PVC via AFM, with the force-contributing factors including the intrinsic nature and the topography of the contact surfaces. This adhesion finding is consistent with the virus recoveries, which were determined indirectly. Greater numbers of viruses were recovered from glass than from PVC, after application at the same levels. The stronger MS2 adhesion onto PVC could be interrupted by incorporating a surfactant during the interaction between the virus and the contact surface. This study increases our understanding of the virus adhesion microenvironment and indicates ways to mitigate virus adhesion onto contact surfaces.