Hubbry Logo
Virus quantificationVirus quantificationMain
Open search
Virus quantification
Community hub
Virus quantification
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Virus quantification
Virus quantification
from Wikipedia

Virus quantification is counting or calculating the number of virus particles (virions) in a sample to determine the virus concentration. It is used in both research and development (R&D) in academic and commercial laboratories as well as in production situations where the quantity of virus at various steps is an important variable that must be monitored. For example, the production of virus-based vaccines, recombinant proteins using viral vectors, and viral antigens all require virus quantification to continually monitor and/or modify the process in order to optimize product quality and production yields and to respond to ever changing demands and applications. Other examples of specific instances where viruses need to be quantified include clone screening, multiplicity of infection (MOI) optimization, and adaptation of methods to cell culture.

There are many ways to categorize virus quantification methods. Here, the methods are grouped according to what is being measured and in what biological context. For example, cell-based assays typically measure infectious units (active virus). Other methods may measure the concentration of viral proteins, DNA, RNA, or molecular particles, but do not necessarily measure infectivity. Each method has its own advantages and disadvantages, which often determine which method is used for specific applications.[1]

Cell-based assays

[edit]

Plaque assay

[edit]
Viral Plaques of Herpes Simplex Virus

Plaque-based assays are a commonly used method to determine virus concentration in terms of infectious dose. Plaque assays determine the number of plaque forming units (PFU) in a virus sample, which is one measure of virus quantity. This assay is based on a microbiological method conducted in petri dishes or multi-well cell culture plates. Specifically, a confluent monolayer of host cells is infected by applying a sample containing the virus at varying dilutions and then covered with a semi-solid medium, such as agar or carboxymethyl cellulose, to prevent the virus infection from spreading indiscriminately, as would occur in a liquid medium. A viral plaque is formed after a virus infects a cell within the fixed cell monolayer.[2] The virus-infected cell will lyse and spread the infection to adjacent cells, where the infection-to-lysis cycle is repeated. This will create an area of infected, lysed cells (viral plaque) surrounded by uninfected, intact cells. The plaque can be seen with an optical microscope or visually using cell staining techniques (e.g., staining with a crystal violet solution to visualize intact vs. lysed cells).[3] Plaque formation can take 3–14 days, depending on the virus being analyzed. Plaques are generally counted manually, and the plaque count, in combination with the dilution factor of the infection solution (the sample initially applied to the cells), is used to calculate the number of plaque forming units per sample unit volume (PFU/mL). The PFU/mL number represents the concentration of infectious virus particles within the sample and is based on the assumption that each plaque formed is representative of an initial infection by one infectious virus particle.[4][5]

Focus forming assay (FFA)

[edit]
Cells infected by rotavirus (top) and uninfected cells (bottom)

The focus forming assay (FFA) is a variation of the plaque assay, but instead of depending on cell lysis in order to detect plaque formation, the FFA employs immunostaining techniques using fluorescently labeled antibodies specific for a viral antigen to detect infected host cells and infectious virus particles before an actual plaque is formed. The FFA is particularly useful for quantifying classes of viruses that do not lyse the cell membranes, as these viruses would not be amenable to the plaque assay. Like the plaque assay, host cell monolayers are infected with various dilutions of the virus sample and allowed to incubate for a relatively brief incubation period (e.g., 24–72 hours) under a semisolid overlay medium that restricts the spread of infectious virus, creating localized clusters (foci) of infected cells. Plates are subsequently probed with fluorescently labeled antibodies against a viral antigen, and fluorescence microscopy is used to count and quantify the number of foci. The FFA method typically yields results in less time than plaque assays or fifty-percent-tissue-culture-infective-dose (TCID50) assays (see below), but it can be more expensive in terms of required reagents and equipment. Assay completion time is also dependent on the size of area that the user is counting. A larger area will require more time but can provide a more accurate representation of the sample. Results of the FFA are expressed as focus forming units per milliliter, or FFU/mL.[6]

TCID50 endpoint dilution assay

[edit]

The TCID50 (50% tissue culture infectious dose) assay is the measure of infectious virus titer. This endpoint dilution assay quantifies the amount of virus required to infect 50% of infected hosts or to produce a cytopathic effect in 50% of inoculated tissue culture samples. This assay may be more common in clinical research applications where the lethal dose of the virus must be determined or if the virus does not form plaques.[citation needed] When used in the context of tissue culture, host cells are plated and serial dilutions of the virus are added. After incubation, the percentage of cell death (i.e. infected cells) is manually observed and recorded for each virus dilution, and results are used to mathematically calculate a TCID50 result.[6][7] Due to distinct differences in assay methods and principles, TCID50 and pfu/mL or other infectivity assay results are not equivalent. This method can take up to a week due to cell infectivity time.[8]

Two methods commonly used to calculate TCID50 (can also be used to calculate other types of 50% endpoint such EC50, IC50, and LD50) are:

  • Spearman–Kärber[9]
  • Reed–Muench method

The theoretical relationship between TCID50 and PFU is approximately 0.69 PFU = 1 TCID50 based on the Poisson distribution,[10] a probability distribution which describes how many random events (virus particles) occurring at a known average rate (virus titer) are likely to occur in a fixed space (the amount of virus medium in a well). However, it must be emphasized that in practice, this relationship may not hold even for the same virus + cell combination, as the two types of assay are set up differently and virus infectivity is very sensitive to various factors such as cell age, overlay media, etc. But the following reference defines the relationship differently:

From ATCC: "Assuming that the same cell system is used, that the virus forms plaques on those cells, and that no procedures are added which would inhibit plaque formation, 1 mL of virus stock would be expected to have about half of the number of plaque forming units (PFUs) as TCID50. This is only an estimate but is based on the rationale that the limiting dilution which would infect 50% of the cell layers challenged would often be expected to initially produce a single plaque in the cell layers which become infected. In some instances, two or more plaques might by chance form, and thus the actual number of PFUs should be determined experimentally.

"Mathematically, the expected PFUs would be somewhat greater than one-half the TCID50, since the negative tubes in the TCID50 represent zero plaque forming units and the positive tubes each represent one or more plaque forming units. A more precise estimate is obtained by applying the Poisson distribution. Where is the proportion of negative tubes and m is the mean number of infectious units per volume (PFU/ml), . For any titer expressed as a TCID50, . Thus and which is ~ 0.7.

"Therefore, one could multiply the TCID50 titer (per ml) by 0.7 to predict the mean number of PFU/ml. When actually applying such calculations, remember the calculated mean will only be valid if the changes in protocol required to visualize plaques do not alter the expression of infectious virus as compared with expression under conditions employed for TCID50.

"Thus as a working estimate, one can assume material with a TCID50 of 1 × 105 TCID50/mL will produce 0.7 × 105 PFUs/mL." [11]

Protein and antibody-based assays

[edit]

There are several variations of protein- and antibody-based virus quantification assays. In general, these methods quantify either the amount of all protein or the amount of a specific virus protein in the sample rather than the number of infected cells or virus particles. Quantification commonly relies on colorimetric or fluorescence detection. Some assay variations quantify proteins directly in a sample, while other variations require host cell infection and incubation to allow virus growth prior to quantification. The variation used depends primarily on the amount of protein (i.e. viral protein) in the initial sample and the sensitivity of the assay itself. If incubation and virus growth are required, cell and/or virus lysis/digestion are often conducted prior to analysis. Most protein-based methods are relatively fast and sensitive[citation needed] but require quality standards for accurate calibration, and quantify protein, not actual virus particle concentrations. Below are specific examples of widely used protein-based assays.

Hemagglutination assay

[edit]

The hemagglutination assay (HA) is a common non-fluorescence protein quantification assay specific for influenza. It relies on the fact that hemagglutinin, a surface protein of influenza viruses, agglutinates red blood cells (i.e. causes red blood cells to clump together). In this assay, dilutions of an influenza sample are incubated with a 1% erythrocyte solution for one hour and the virus dilution at which agglutination first occurs is visually determined. The assay produces a result of hemagglutination units (HAU), with typical PFU to HAU ratios in the 106 range.[12][13][14] This assay takes ~1–2 hours to complete.

The hemagglutination inhibition assay is a common variation of the HA assay used to measure flu-specific antibody levels in blood serum. In this variation, serum antibodies to the influenza virus will interfere with the virus attachment to red blood cells. Therefore, hemagglutination is inhibited when antibodies are present at a sufficient concentration.[15]

Bicinchoninic acid (BCA) assay

[edit]

The bicinchoninic acid assay (BCA; a.k.a. Smith assay) is based on a simple colorimetric measurement and is a commonly used protein quantification assay.[16]

BCA is similar to the Lowry or Bradford protein assays. The BCA assay reagent was first developed and made commercially by Pierce Chemical Company (now owned by Thermo Fisher Scientific) which held the patent until 2006.[17][18]

In the BCA assay, a protein's peptide bonds quantitatively reduce Cu2+ to Cu1+, which produces a light blue color. BCA chelates Cu1+ at a 2:1 ratio resulting in a more intensely colored species that absorbs at562 nm. Absorbance of a sample at 562 nm is used to determine the bulk protein concentration in the sample. Assay results are compared with known standard curves after analysis with a spectrophotometer or plate reader.[19] Total assay time is 30 minutes to one hour. While this assay is ubiquitous and fast, it lacks specificity to viral proteins since it counts all protein in the sample. Thus the virus preparation to be quantified must be highly purified, and free from host, serum, carrier or other proteins.

Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)

[edit]
ELISA Diagram

Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) is an antibody-based assay that utilizes an antigen-specific antibody chemically linked to an enzyme (or bound to a second antibody linked to an enzyme) to detect the presence of an unknown amount of the antigen (e.g., viral protein) in a sample. The antibody-antigen binding event is detected and/or quantified through the enzyme's ability to convert a substrate reagent to produce a detectable signal that can then be used to calculate the concentration of the target antigen in the sample.[20] Horseradish peroxidase (HRP) is a common enzyme utilized in ELISA schemes due to its ability to amplify signal and increase assay sensitivity.

There are many variations, or types of ELISA assays but they can generally be classified as either indirect, competitive, sandwich or reverse.[21] Importantly, an ELISA cannot distinguish between infectious or inactive viruses; therefore ELISA can quantify viral particles/proteins, but not viral potency or infectivity.

Single radial immunodiffusion (SRID) assay

[edit]

Single radial immunodiffusion assay (SRID), also known as the Mancini method, is a protein assay that detects the amount of specific viral antigen by immunodiffusion in a semi-solid medium (e.g. agar). The medium contains antiserum specific to the antigen of interest and the antigen is placed in the center of the disc. As the antigen diffuses into the medium it creates a precipitate ring that grows until equilibrium is reached. Assay time can range from 10 hours to days depending on equilibration time of the antigen and antibody. The zone diameter from the ring is linearly related to the log of protein concentration and is compared to zone diameters for known protein standards for quantification.[22] ELISA assays, which require less material and are easier to perform/interpret, have largely replaced immunodiffusion assays as a diagnostic tool.

DNA and RNA assays

[edit]

Quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR)

[edit]

Quantitative PCR utilizes polymerase chain reaction chemistry to amplify viral DNA or RNA to produce high enough concentrations for detection and quantification by fluorescence. In general, quantification by qPCR relies on serial dilutions of standards of known concentration being analyzed in parallel with the unknown samples for calibration and reference. Quantitative detection can be achieved using a wide variety of fluorescence detection strategies, including sequence specific probes or non-specific fluorescent dyes such as SYBR Green.[23] Sequence-specific probes, such as TaqMan Molecular Beacons, or Scorpion, bind only to the DNA of the appropriate sequence produced during the reaction. SYBR Green dye binds to all double-stranded DNA[24] produced during the reaction.

While SYBR Green is easy to use, its lack of specificity and lower sensitivity lead most labs to use probe-based qPCR detection schemes.[citation needed] There are many variations of qPCR including the comparative threshold method, which allows relative quantification through comparison of Ct values (PCR cycles that show statistically significant increases in the product) from multiple samples that include an internal standard.[25]

PCR amplifies all target nucleic acid, including ones originating from intact infectious viral particles, from defective viral particles as well as free nucleic acid in solution. Because of this, qPCR results (expressed in terms of genome copies/mL) are likely to be higher in quantity than TEM results. For viral quantification, the ratio of whole virions to copies of nucleic acid is seldom one to one. This is because during viral replication, the nucleic acid and viral proteins are not always produced in 1:1 ratio and viral assembly process results in complete virions as well as empty capsids and/or excess free viral genomes. In the example of foot-and-mouth disease virus, the ratio of whole virions to RNA copies within an actively replicating host cell is approximately 1:1000.[26] Advantages of titration by qPCR include quick turnaround time (1–4 hours) and sensitivity (can detect much lower concentration of viruses than other methods).

Particle Assays

[edit]

Tunable resistive pulse sensing (TRPS)

[edit]

Tunable resistive pulse sensing (TRPS) is a method that allows high-throughput single particle measurements of individual virus particles, as they are driven through a size-tunable nanopore, one at a time.[27] The technique has the advantage of simultaneously determining the size and concentration, of virus particles in solution with high resolution. This can be used in assessing sample stability and the contribution of aggregates, as well as total viral particle concentration (vp/mL).[28]

TRPS-based measurement occurs in an ionic buffer, and no pre-staining of samples is required prior to analysis, thus the technique is more rapid than those which require pre-treatment with fluorescent dyes, with a total preparation and measurement time of less than 10 minutes per sample.[citation needed] TRPS-bases virus analysis is commercially available through qViro-X systems, which have the ability to be decontaminated chemically by autoclaving after measurement has occurred.[citation needed]

Single Virus Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectroscopy (SV ICP-MS)

[edit]

This technique is similar to Single Particle Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectroscopy (SP ICP-MS) discovered by Degueldre and Favarger (2003)[29] and adapted later for other nanoparticles (e.g. gold colloids, see Degueldre et al. (2006)).[30] The SP ICP-MS was adapted for the analysis of Single Virus Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectroscopy (SV ICPMS) in a comprehensive study i.e. Degueldre (2021).[31] This study suggests to adapting this method for single viruses (SV) identification and counting. With high resolution multi-channel sector field (MC SF) ICP-MS records in SV detection mode, the counting of master and key ions can allow analysis and identification of single viruses. The counting of 2-500 virial units can be performed in 20 s. Analyses are proposed to be carried out in Ar torch for master ions: 12C+, 13C+, 14N+, 15N+, and key ions 31P+, 32S+, 33S+ and 34S+. All interferences are discussed in detail. The use of high resolution MC ICP-MS is recommended while options with anaerobic/aerobic atmospheres are explored to upgrade the analysis when using quadrupole ICP-MS. Application for two virus types (SARS-COV2 and bacteriophage T5) is investigated using time scan and fixed mass analysis for the selected virus ions allowing characterisation of the species using the N/C, P/C and S/C molar ratio's and quantification of their number concentration.[citation needed]

Other assays

[edit]

Flow cytometry

[edit]

While most flow cytometers do not have sufficient sensitivity,[citation needed] there are a few commercially available flow cytometers that can be used for virus quantification. A virus counter quantifies the number of intact virus particles in a sample using fluorescence to detect colocalized proteins and nucleic acids. Samples are stained with two dyes, one specific for proteins and one specific for nucleic acids, and analyzed as they flow through a laser beam. The quantity of particles producing simultaneous events on each of the two distinct fluorescence channels is determined, along with the measured sample flow rate, to calculate a concentration of virus particles (vp/mL).[32] The results are generally similar in absolute quantity to a TEM result. The assay has a linear working range of 105–109 vp/mL and an analysis time of ~10 min with a short sample preparation time.[citation needed]

Transmission electron microscopy (TEM)

[edit]
Negative Stain TEM of Polio Virus, Bar = 50 nm
Tissue Embedded Section of Novel H1N1 Virions

TEM is a specialized type of microscopy that utilizes a beam of electrons focused with a magnetic field to image a sample. TEM provides imaging with 1000x greater spatial resolution than a light microscope (resolution down to 0.2 nm).[33] An ultrathin, negatively stained sample is required. Sample preparations involve depositing specimens onto a coated TEM grid and negative staining with an electron-opaque liquid.[34] Tissue embedded samples can also be examined if thinly sectioned. Sample preparations vary depending on protocol and user but generally require hours to complete. TEM images can show individual virus particles and quantitative image analysis can be used to determine virus concentrations. These high resolution images also provide particle morphology information that most other methods cannot. Quantitative TEM results will often be greater than results from other assays[citation needed] as all particles, regardless of infectivity, are quantified in the reported virus-like particles per mL (vlp/mL) result. Quantitative TEM generally works well for virus concentrations greater than 106 particles/mL. Because of high instrument cost and the amount of space and support facilities needed, TEM equipment is only available in a few laboratories.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
Virus quantification is the process of measuring the concentration or of particles, either infectious or total, in a biological sample, serving as a cornerstone of virological research and applications. This determination is essential for evaluating , , and burden, distinguishing viable virions capable of host cell infection from non-infectious particles. The practice is vital across multiple domains, including diagnostics for monitoring viral loads in infections such as HIV-1 and , where it informs treatment decisions and assesses therapeutic efficacy. In production and antiviral agent development, accurate quantification ensures product potency, safety, and , as well as supports the of viral vectors for . It also plays a key role in epidemiological studies and to track dissemination. Techniques for virus quantification fall into two primary categories: infectivity-based s, which measure functional viruses, and total particle enumeration methods, which detect all viral components irrespective of viability. assays include the plaque assay, which counts plaque-forming units (PFU) by observing cytopathic effects in cell monolayers, and the 50% infectious dose (TCID50), an endpoint dilution method estimating the dilution that infects 50% of cell cultures. These biological methods provide high specificity for replication-competent viruses but are time-consuming, often requiring days to weeks. Total particle quantification employs physical and molecular approaches for broader, faster assessments, such as quantitative PCR (qPCR) to amplify and count viral genomes with high sensitivity, or electron microscopy (EM) to visualize and enumerate virions directly. Other techniques include enzyme-linked immunosorbent (ELISA) for detection and (NTA) for sizing and counting particles in suspension. In contexts, like production, the single radial immunodiffusion (SRID) serves as a regulatory standard for measuring content, though it faces challenges with reagent preparation delays. Emerging methods, such as flow virometry and automated imaging-based plaque counting, aim to overcome limitations of traditional assays by offering rapid, reagent-independent quantification suitable for high-throughput applications in pandemic response and biomanufacturing. These innovations enhance precision while accommodating diverse viral types, from enveloped RNA viruses to non-enveloped DNA viruses, ensuring robust data for advancing virology.

Introduction

Definition and importance

Virus quantification is the process of measuring the concentration, , or load of viruses in a biological sample, typically by determining the number of infectious virions or viral particles per unit volume. This encompasses techniques to enumerate viable viruses capable of replication, distinguishing them from total particle counts, and is fundamental to assessing viral presence and activity in , and industrial contexts. Early methods for virus quantification emerged in and , driven by efforts to study pathogens like and amid rising epidemics. In 1941–1942, George K. Hirst developed the , which quantifies viruses by their ability to agglutinate red blood cells, providing a rapid means to measure viral titers without . By the early , adapted the plaque assay—originally used for bacteriophages—to animal viruses, including , enabling the precise enumeration of infectious units through visible plaques in cell monolayers and facilitating foundational work on viral genetics and vaccines. The importance of virus quantification spans multiple disciplines in and . In vaccine production, it ensures batch potency and safety by verifying infectious titers, such as those required for inactivated or live-attenuated formulations. Antiviral testing relies on it to quantify reductions in , guiding and efficacy evaluation. In , it supports outbreak tracking, as demonstrated during the where PCR-based measurements in wastewater and clinical samples enabled early detection and monitoring of spread. For , accurate dosing of viral vectors, like adeno-associated viruses, depends on precise quantification to deliver therapeutic genes effectively while minimizing risks. Challenges in virus quantification include differentiating infectious from non-infectious particles, as many samples contain defective virions that inflate total counts but lack replicative capacity. Sample variability, arising from differences in extraction , matrix interference, and handling, can introduce inconsistencies across measurements. Additionally, the absence of universal in protocols and reference materials impedes inter-laboratory comparability and regulatory approval of assays. Common units such as plaque-forming units per milliliter (PFU/mL) and 50% infectious dose (TCID50) reflect these distinctions by focusing on infectious potential.

Measurement units and principles

Virus quantification employs distinct measurement units to assess viral concentrations, broadly categorized by whether they gauge infectious potential or total particle presence. Infectious titers quantify viable viruses capable of replicating and causing observable effects in host cells, such as plaque-forming units (PFU) and tissue culture infectious dose 50 (TCID50). These units reflect only functional virions, excluding defective particles that cannot initiate infection. In contrast, total viral load measures all viral components, including non-infectious ones, using units like genome copies (GC) and particles per milliliter (PPM, also denoted as vp/mL). This distinction is critical because many viral preparations contain a mixture of infectious and defective particles, with ratios varying by virus type and preparation conditions; for instance, defective interfering particles can comprise up to 90% of the total in some stocks. PFU represents the number of infectious virions per volume, determined by counting discrete plaques formed by viral replication in a cell monolayer, where each plaque arises from a single infectious particle. TCID50 denotes the dilution of virus that infects 50% of inoculated cell cultures, typically expressed per milliliter, and serves as an endpoint measure of infectivity without direct visualization. GC quantifies viral nucleic acids via molecular methods like quantitative PCR, providing the number of genome equivalents per volume but not distinguishing intact from degraded genomes. PPM counts total physical virions, often via electron microscopy, nanoparticle tracking analysis, or light scattering, capturing all capsid-enclosed particles regardless of infectivity. These units enable direct counting (e.g., PPM via microscopy) or indirect inference (e.g., PFU or TCID50 from biological effects), with the latter relying on statistical models to estimate particle numbers. Dilution-based assays, such as those yielding TCID50, assume a random, uniform distribution of viral particles following the for rare events. The probability PP of infection in a given well is given by P=1emP = 1 - e^{-m} where mm is the mean number of infectious particles per well. At the TCID50 endpoint, where 50% of wells show infection, m0.693m \approx 0.693, derived from solving 0.5=1em0.5 = 1 - e^{-m}. This statistical foundation allows conversion between units; approximately 1 TCID50 corresponds to 0.69 PFU, accounting for the probabilistic nature of single-particle infection. However, these conversions are approximations and hold best under ideal conditions. Limitations arise in non-uniform samples, where viral aggregation or clumping deviates from Poisson statistics, overestimating or underestimating titers by altering particle distribution. For example, aggregates can lead to uneven probabilities, reducing accuracy by factors of 10- to 100-fold in severe cases, particularly for enveloped viruses prone to clustering. Such issues underscore the need for sample homogenization and validation against multiple units for reliable quantification.

Infectivity assays

Plaque assay

The plaque assay is a classical cell-based method for quantifying infectious viruses by visualizing discrete zones of cell lysis, known as plaques, formed during in a culture. Developed by in 1952 for animal viruses, this technique relies on the (CPE) produced by lytic viruses that kill host cells, creating clear areas amid a stained cell lawn. It serves as a direct measure of viral infectivity, distinguishing viable particles capable of replication from total viral particles. The procedure begins with preparing a confluent monolayer of susceptible host cells, such as Vero cells for herpes simplex virus, in a Petri dish or multi-well plate. Serial dilutions of the virus sample (typically 10-fold) are prepared, and a small volume (e.g., 0.1-0.5 mL) of each dilution is inoculated onto the cell monolayer and allowed to adsorb for 1-2 hours at 37°C to enable viral attachment and entry. Following adsorption, the inoculum is removed, and the cells are overlaid with a semisolid medium, usually agar or agarose mixed with nutrient medium (e.g., 0.5-1% agarose in 2x MEM), to restrict viral spread to adjacent cells and promote localized infection foci. The cultures are then incubated for 2-7 days at an appropriate temperature, depending on the virus, until visible plaques develop due to progressive rounds of CPE. Finally, the overlay is removed, cells are fixed (e.g., with formalin), stained (e.g., with crystal violet), and plaques are counted under a microscope or by eye for dilutions yielding 20-100 plaques per well to ensure accuracy. Quantification yields the viral titer in plaque-forming units per milliliter (PFU/mL), where each plaque theoretically represents infection by a single infectious virion. The titer is calculated using the formula: PFU/mL=number of plaques counteddilution factor×volume of inoculum (mL)\text{PFU/mL} = \frac{\text{number of plaques counted}}{\text{dilution factor} \times \text{volume of inoculum (mL)}} For example, if 50 plaques are observed in a well inoculated with 0.1 mL of a 10^{-6} dilution, the titer is 50/(106×0.1)=5×10850 / (10^{-6} \times 0.1) = 5 \times 10^8 PFU/mL. Counts from multiple dilutions or replicates are averaged to improve precision, and the assay's Poisson distribution underpins the assumption of one PFU per plaque. This method's primary advantages include its specificity for infectious particles, providing a functional assessment of viral viability rather than mere presence, and its status as the gold standard for titering many lytic viruses, particularly enveloped ones like herpesviruses. However, it is labor-intensive, requiring manual and plaque , and demands 2-7 days of incubation, limiting throughput. The is virus-specific, necessitating cell lines permissive to the target virus and producing observable CPE, rendering it unsuitable for non-cytopathic or slow-replicating viruses without modifications.

TCID50 endpoint dilution assay

The TCID50 endpoint dilution assay is a cell culture-based method used to estimate the infectious titer of a by determining the dilution at which 50% of inoculated cell cultures exhibit cytopathic effects (CPE), providing a measure of viable, infectious particles. This relies on serial dilutions of the sample inoculated into multi-well plates containing susceptible host cells, followed by incubation and microscopic observation for signs of such as cell rounding, , or syncytia formation. It is particularly valuable for es that produce observable CPE in , offering a functional assessment of rather than total particle count. The procedure begins with preparing serial 10-fold dilutions of the stock, typically ranging from 10-1 to 10-8 or higher, in a maintenance medium. Each dilution (e.g., 0.1 mL) is inoculated into multiple replicate wells (usually 4–8 per dilution) of a 96-well plate pre-seeded with an appropriate cell line, such as Vero or MDCK cells at a of 1–2 × 105 cells/mL. The plates are incubated at 37°C with 5% CO2 for 3–10 days, depending on the virus replication kinetics, after which wells are scored as positive (CPE present) or negative (no CPE) under an . For viruses with subtle or delayed CPE, alternative readouts like or dye-based viability assays may be employed, but traditional scoring relies on visual endpoints. Quantification of the TCID50 (expressed as TCID50/mL) is achieved through statistical of the dilution , most commonly using the Reed-Muench method, which assumes a linear relationship between log dilution and proportion. The at each dilution is calculated as the proportion of positive wells, with cumulative values determined across dilutions to identify the 50% endpoint. The formula for the proportionate distance (PD) to the 50% point is: \text{PD} = \frac{50\% - \text{% infection at dilution with >50\% positive}}{\text{% infection at dilution with >50\% positive} - \text{% infection at dilution with <50\% positive}} The log TCID50 is then: logTCID50=log(dilution with >50% positive)+PD×log(dilution factor)\log \text{TCID}_{50} = \log(\text{dilution with >50\% positive}) + \text{PD} \times \log(\text{dilution factor}) The final titer is obtained by exponentiating and adjusting for inoculum volume (e.g., multiplying by 10 for 0.1 mL). The Spearman-Kärber method serves as an alternative, providing similar estimates via weighted averages of dilutions. These calculations can be performed manually or via software, yielding titers with inherent variability of approximately 0.5–1 log10. This offers several advantages, including high-throughput capability via multi-well formats, no requirement for direct enumeration of foci, and suitability for low-titer or heat-labile samples where plaque assays may fail. It is widely adopted for its simplicity and cost-effectiveness in routine labs. However, limitations include its reliance on a statistical estimate rather than direct counting, leading to potential over- or underestimation due to well-to-well variability in cell susceptibility or distribution; it also demands 3–10 days for completion and specialized facilities for handling infectious agents. Applications of the TCID50 are prominent in characterizing enveloped viruses like A and B, where it standardizes determination in and production, often using MDCK cells. It is also extensively used for coronaviruses, including , to quantify infectious virus in clinical isolates, therapeutic efficacy studies, and animal models, typically with Vero E6 cells.

Focus-forming assay

The focus-forming assay (FFA) is a cell culture-based infectivity that quantifies infectious virus particles by detecting discrete clusters, or foci, of transformed or infected cells, making it particularly suitable for viruses that do not produce visible cytopathic effects in standard plaque assays. Originally developed for oncogenic retroviruses, the method relies on the morphological changes induced by viral infection, such as cell piling or altered growth patterns, which form countable foci after a period of incubation. This approach allows direct enumeration of infectious units, providing a measure of viral titer in focus-forming units (FFU) per milliliter. The procedure begins with preparing serial dilutions of the virus sample, which are then inoculated onto monolayers of susceptible host cells, often in the presence of enhancers like polybrene to facilitate viral entry. The cells are incubated under conditions that permit viral replication and focus development, typically for 5-14 days depending on the virus and cell type, with an overlay medium such as agarose or methylcellulose to limit viral spread and ensure discrete focus formation. Following incubation, the monolayers are fixed, and foci are visualized using immunostaining with virus-specific antibodies conjugated to fluorescent or enzymatic tags, or alternatively with dyes like crystal violet that stain transformed cells. Foci are then counted under a microscope, ensuring counts fall within 20-100 per well for accuracy to avoid overlapping or undetectable events. Quantification is achieved by calculating the viral titer as FFU/mL = (number of foci / dilution factor) × (1 / inoculum volume in mL), where the dilution factor accounts for the used, and the volume corrects for the amount of sample added per well. This direct counting method yields a precise estimate of infectious particles, with each focus representing the progeny from a single infectious virion. For example, in assays using chick embryo fibroblasts for , titers are determined from multiple replicates to ensure statistical reliability. The assay's primary advantages lie in its applicability to non-cytopathic viruses, such as retroviruses (e.g., ) and papillomaviruses (e.g., bovine papillomavirus type 1), where traditional plaque assays fail due to the absence of cell . It offers higher sensitivity compared to TCID50 endpoint dilution assays for these agents by enabling direct focus rather than probabilistic inference from cytopathic endpoints, potentially detecting lower viral loads through specific immunodetection. Additionally, the method can be adapted for neutralization studies or antiviral screening by incorporating antibodies or compounds during . Despite these strengths, the FFA has notable limitations, including the need for virus-specific antibodies for reliable detection in immunostaining-based variants, which can increase costs and complexity. The extended of 5-14 days allows for potential or cell overgrowth, and the remains semi-quantitative due to variability in focus size, morphology, and counting subjectivity, necessitating trained personnel and multiple replicates for robust results. It is also less suitable for high-throughput applications compared to molecular methods. The FFA was pioneered in the late for studying oncogenic viruses, with Howard Temin and Harry Rubin adapting techniques to quantify infectivity in chick embryo fibroblasts, marking a key advancement in retrovirology. Subsequent adaptations in the and extended its use to other transforming viruses, including murine sarcoma viruses and bovine papillomaviruses, solidifying its role in virological research.

Nucleic acid-based assays

Quantitative PCR

Quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR), also known as real-time PCR, is a amplification technique that enables the detection and quantification of viral genomes by monitoring the accumulation of amplified products in real time through fluorescence signals. For viruses, the procedure begins with reverse transcription of viral RNA into (cDNA) using enzymes, followed by PCR amplification of the target sequence. During amplification, fluorescent probes such as , which consist of a reporter dye and a quencher, are incorporated; the 5' activity of the cleaves the probe upon hybridization to the target, releasing the reporter dye and generating a measurable fluorescent signal proportional to the amount of amplified product. The cycle threshold (Ct) value, defined as the number of cycles required for the fluorescence signal to exceed a predefined background threshold, inversely correlates with the initial viral copy number in the sample—lower Ct values indicate higher starting concentrations. Quantification in qPCR typically employs the standard curve method, where Ct values from samples are compared to a calibration curve generated from serial dilutions of known viral copy number standards, often plotting Ct against the logarithm of the copy number. This allows of unknown sample concentrations, providing relative or absolute quantification depending on the standards used; for absolute quantification, standards with precisely determined copy numbers (e.g., transcribed ) are essential. The amplification efficiency (E) of the reaction is calculated from the slope of the standard curve using the formula: E=101/slope1E = 10^{-1 / \text{slope}} - 1 Ideal efficiencies range from 0.9 to 1.1 (90-110%), indicating reliable exponential amplification without inhibition or plateau effects. qPCR offers several advantages for virus quantification, including rapid turnaround times (typically 1-4 hours), high sensitivity capable of detecting 10-100 viral copies per reaction, and applicability to both DNA and RNA viruses without requiring live cells or culturing. It provides quantitative data expressed in genome copy units, such as copies per milliliter, serving as a proxy for viral load. However, limitations include its measurement of total viral genomes, encompassing both infectious and defective particles, thus offering no direct information on infectivity. Additionally, issues with primer and probe specificity can lead to cross-reactivity or failure to detect variants, and assay variability may arise from inhibitors in clinical samples. In clinical applications, qPCR has been pivotal for monitoring HIV-1 viral loads in plasma, where assays detect as low as 20-50 copies/mL to assess antiretroviral therapy efficacy and predict disease progression. Similarly, since early 2020, RT-qPCR targeting genes like the N or E region has become the gold standard for diagnostics, enabling rapid detection and quantification in respiratory samples with sensitivities down to 10 copies/reaction.

Digital PCR

Digital PCR (dPCR) is a partition-based nucleic acid amplification technique that enables absolute quantification of viral genomes by distributing the sample into numerous isolated reaction volumes, such as droplets or wells, where each partition undergoes an independent PCR reaction. In the droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) variant, a sample containing the viral target is emulsified into thousands to millions of oil-encapsulated aqueous droplets, typically around 20,000 per 20 μL reaction, using a droplet generator. Primers and probes specific to the viral sequence are included, and the is subjected to thermal cycling for endpoint PCR amplification. Following amplification, the droplets are analyzed using a droplet reader that detects signals from positive partitions containing the target, allowing direct counting of amplified viral without reliance on amplification efficiency assumptions. Quantification in dPCR relies on Poisson statistics to estimate the initial concentration of viral targets, as the random distribution of molecules across partitions follows a . The average number of target copies per partition, denoted as λ, is calculated as λ = -ln(1 - p), where p is the fraction of positive partitions. The total number of target copies in the original sample is then determined by multiplying λ by the total number of partitions and accounting for any dilution factors applied during : total copies = λ × N × DF, where N is the number of partitions and DF is the dilution factor. This approach provides direct, absolute measurement independent of standard curves, making it particularly suitable for low-titer viral samples where precise enumeration is critical. Key advantages of dPCR for virus quantification include its ability to deliver absolute quantification without external standards, offering higher precision and , especially for low-abundance viral targets that may be underrepresented in bulk reactions. It also demonstrates greater tolerance to PCR inhibitors commonly found in clinical or environmental samples, such as those from or , enhancing reliability in diverse matrices. Commercial ddPCR systems, first introduced by Bio-Rad in 2011, have facilitated widespread adoption by simplifying the partitioning and readout processes. Despite these benefits, dPCR has limitations, including higher per-sample costs due to specialized equipment and consumables compared to quantitative PCR, as well as reduced throughput since it processes fewer samples simultaneously. Additionally, like other nucleic acid-based methods, it quantifies total viral genomes rather than infectious particles, potentially overestimating viable loads. In , dPCR has been applied to quantify (AAV) vectors in gene therapy manufacturing, where it accurately measures titers and empty/full ratios essential for product potency assessment. It is also used for detecting rare mutations in viruses such as human papillomavirus (HPV), enabling sensitive monitoring of viral heterogeneity in clinical samples like plasma for cancer diagnostics.

Immunological assays

Hemagglutination assay

The is a functional method used to estimate titers by exploiting the ability of certain es, particularly enveloped ones expressing (HA) proteins, to bind receptors on red blood cells (RBCs), leading to visible . Developed in the early 1940s for studies, this assay was first described by George K. Hirst, who observed that allantoic fluid from -infected chick embryos agglutinated RBCs, providing a simple way to detect and quantify viral presence without requiring or advanced equipment. The procedure involves preparing serial twofold dilutions of the sample in (PBS) across a 96-well U-bottom microtiter plate, typically starting at 1:2 and extending to 1:256 or higher. To each well, 50 μL of the diluted sample is added, followed by 50 μL of a standardized 0.5% RBC suspension (e.g., RBCs for es). The plate is incubated at for 20-30 minutes, allowing particles to RBCs into a lattice formation in wells with sufficient viral HA activity; unaugmented wells show a compact "button" of sedimented RBCs. Results are read visually: complete (+) appears as a diffuse red layer, incomplete (I) as partial spreading, and no (-) as a tight . For , or RBCs are commonly used due to their compatible linkages. Quantification in the hemagglutination assay is expressed in hemagglutination units (HAU), defined as the reciprocal of the highest dilution showing complete or 50% agglutination, indicating the endpoint where one HAU per well is present. This unit approximates the functional HA protein concentration, with 1 HAU typically corresponding to 10^4 to 10^6 virions per mL, depending on the virus strain and assay conditions, though it measures aggregate binding capacity rather than individual infectious particles. The assay is standardized such that 4-8 HAU are often used in related inhibition tests, but for direct virus titration, the endpoint dilution provides a rapid estimate of viral load in hours. Key advantages of the include its simplicity, low cost, and speed, requiring no specialized equipment, cell cultures, or lengthy incubation beyond settling, making it ideal for resource-limited settings and of HA-expressing viruses like , parainfluenza, and Newcastle disease virus. It specifically detects functional HA proteins on intact virions, offering a functional readout distinct from or particle counts. However, limitations are notable: the assay is restricted to viruses with or similar agglutinating glycoproteins, excluding many non-enveloped or non-HA viruses; it does not distinguish infectious from defective particles, potentially overestimating viable virus; results can be subjective due to operator interpretation of patterns and variability from RBC quality, species, or storage; and sensitivity is lower than molecular methods like qPCR, with inter-assay variability up to twofold dilutions.

Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay

The (ELISA) is a widely used immunological method for the detection and quantification of viral antigens or antibodies in biological samples, leveraging the specific binding between antigens and antibodies combined with enzymatic signal amplification. In , it enables the measurement of viral proteins or immune responses without requiring infectious , making it suitable for diagnostic, , and applications. Developed in the early 1970s, ELISA has become a cornerstone technique due to its versatility in formats tailored to different viral targets. The core procedure of a sandwich , the most common variant for viral antigen quantification, begins with immobilizing a capture on the surface of a microtiter plate well, typically via passive adsorption in an alkaline buffer. The sample containing the viral is then added, allowing the to bind specifically to the capture , forming an - complex. After to remove unbound material, an enzyme-conjugated detection (e.g., or alkaline phosphatase-linked) is introduced, which binds to a distinct on the captured , creating a "sandwich" structure. Unbound detection is washed away, and an appropriate substrate (such as tetramethylbenzidine for peroxidase) is added, producing a colorimetric signal upon enzymatic reaction; the optical density (OD) is measured at a like 450 nm, where signal intensity correlates directly with concentration. This process typically requires 4-6 hours and can be performed in 96-well plates for high-throughput analysis. Quantification in ELISA relies on generating a standard by assaying serial dilutions of a known concentration alongside the samples; the OD values are plotted against log-transformed concentrations, often yielding a sigmoidal from which unknown sample concentrations are interpolated within the linear range using models like four-parameter . Variants such as indirect ELISA, which uses an unlabeled primary followed by an enzyme-linked secondary , are preferred for detection in (e.g., assessing vaccine-induced immunity), while direct ELISA employs enzyme-conjugated primary antibodies for simpler assays but with potentially lower amplification. These adaptations allow ELISA to achieve detection limits in the nanogram per milliliter range for many viral proteins. ELISA offers several advantages for virus quantification, including high due to the dual-antibody recognition in sandwich formats, which minimizes off-target binding, and its quantitative output enables precise measurement of levels across a broad . The is adaptable for using plate readers and washers, facilitating large-scale screening, and it requires only standard laboratory equipment without the need for radioactive labels. Additionally, it supports for multiple viral targets when combined with bead-based systems. Despite these strengths, ELISA has limitations, such as potential between and similar viral epitopes, which can lead to false positives, and it does not assess viral since it targets structural antigens rather than functional viability. The method demands high-quality, matched pairs, which can be costly and time-intensive to develop or validate, and results may vary with sample matrix effects like serum interference. Furthermore, while sensitive, detection thresholds may not suffice for ultra-low viral loads without signal amplification techniques. In applications, is prominently used for detecting HIV-1 p24 in plasma for early during the acute phase of , where it provides rapid quantification with sensitivities down to picograms per milliliter in optimized kits. It also evaluates vaccine immunogenicity by measuring antibody titers against viral , such as in or vaccine trials, and supports in viral vaccine production by quantifying content in batches. These uses highlight ELISA's role in both clinical diagnostics and epidemiological surveillance.

Single radial immunodiffusion assay

The single (SRID) assay, developed by Mancini and colleagues in , is a quantitative immunological method that measures the concentration of soluble viral through the formation of precipitin rings in a gel matrix. This technique relies on the passive of into an antibody-containing gel, where an insoluble immune complex precipitates at the zone of antigen-antibody equivalence, enabling precise determination of levels without the need for enzymatic amplification. The assay is strain-specific, requiring monospecific antibodies tailored to the viral of interest. In the procedure, wells are punched into a thin layer of (typically 1-2% concentration) that has been uniformly mixed with a specific raised against the target viral . A known volume of sample containing the is pipetted into each well, and the plate is incubated at an optimal (usually 20-37°C) in a humid chamber to allow radial . As the diffuses outward, it forms a visible white precipitin ring with the antibodies; the ring's diameter increases over time until equilibrium is reached, typically after 18-48 hours. Quantification in the SRID assay is based on the principle that the area of the precipitin ring is directly proportional to the concentration. The ring rr is measured, and the area is calculated as πr2\pi r^2, which is plotted against a standard curve prepared from serial dilutions of a reference standard. Area=πr2\text{Area} = \pi r^2 This Mancini method allows for accurate of unknown sample concentrations, often expressed in micrograms per milliliter. Key advantages of the SRID assay include its simplicity, as it requires only basic laboratory equipment like and incubators, and its ability to yield stable, reproducible results that reflect biologically active . Additionally, by quantifying specific antigens relative to total protein content, it facilitates purity assessment in viral preparations, ensuring minimal contaminants in formulations. Despite these strengths, the has notable limitations, including low throughput due to the manual setup of multiple plates and the extended incubation time of 24-48 hours, which can delay results. Furthermore, the production of strain-specific antisera requires 2-3 months, which can hinder timely potency testing for seasonal vaccines. It is less sensitive than alternative methods, with limits of quantification often 200-700 times higher, and is restricted to soluble antigens that can diffuse freely in the gel. In , the SRID has been a cornerstone for quality control, adopted by the since the late 1970s to standardize quantification in inactivated vaccines, ensuring consistent potency across strains.

Physical particle detection methods

(TEM) enables direct visualization and quantification of particles by imaging ultrathin samples at high resolution, providing morphological details essential for confirming identity and integrity during quantification. In this technique, viral suspensions are prepared for imaging through , which embeds particles in a heavy metal salt to enhance contrast against a light background, allowing enumeration of individual virions without reliance on or genetic amplification. The standard procedure involves applying a small drop (typically 5-10 μL) of diluted viral sample onto a formvar- or carbon-coated copper grid, allowing adsorption for 1-3 minutes, blotting excess liquid with filter paper, and then adding a drop of negative stain such as 1-2% phosphotungstic acid (pH 7.0) or uranyl acetate for 30-60 seconds before final blotting and air-drying. The grid is then inserted into the TEM, where samples are imaged under vacuum at magnifications ranging from 10,000× to 100,000×, depending on virus size, using an accelerating voltage of 80-120 kV to achieve resolutions of 1-10 nm for detailed particle morphology. For enhanced accuracy in low-titer samples, immunogold labeling or ultracentrifugation concentration may precede staining. Quantification is achieved by manually or semi-automatically counting viral particles across multiple microscopic fields (typically 10-20 fields per grid), followed by calculation using the : total particles per milliliter = (average particles per field × grid area factor × dilution factor) / sample volume applied. The grid area factor accounts for the imaged portion relative to the total grid surface (e.g., ~1.4 × 10^{-3} cm² for a standard 3 mm grid hole), enabling estimates in the range of 10^7 to 10^{12} particles/mL with using known standards like gold nanoparticles for precision. This method yields physical particle counts (e.g., particles per milliliter) that reflect total virion counts, including non-infectious forms. Key advantages of TEM include its ability to visually confirm , shape, and structural integrity—such as in like adenoviruses—without amplification biases that affect molecular assays, making it ideal for validating other quantification results. It requires minimal sample volume (micrograms) and can detect multiple types in mixed infections simultaneously. However, limitations are significant: the technique demands specialized equipment and trained personnel, resulting in high costs and low throughput (processing ~10-20 samples per day), while can introduce artifacts like or distortion from . Moreover, it enumerates all physical particles, not distinguishing infectious from defective ones, and has a of approximately 10^5-10^6 particles/mL without enrichment. TEM has been a cornerstone of virus quantification since the , when it was first applied to image particles, revealing their rod-like morphology and enabling early estimates of in plant infections.

Flow virometry

Flow virometry is an adaptation of techniques specifically optimized for the detection, characterization, and sorting of individual viral particles at the nanoscale. In this method, viruses are first isolated and concentrated from samples, often using techniques like tangential flow filtration, before being stained with fluorescent dyes or antibodies targeting viral components such as lipids, nucleic acids, or surface proteins. The labeled viral suspension is then passed through a flow cytometer equipped with a narrow sheath fluidics system and high-powered (typically 405 nm or 488 nm), where individual particles are hydrodynamically focused into a single-file stream and interrogated by . Detection relies on (FSC) for size estimation, side scatter (SSC) for internal complexity, and signals to identify specific markers, allowing for event-by-event of thousands to millions of particles per second. This approach emerged in its modern form around , building on earlier pioneering work, and gained prominence with nanoparticle-optimized protocols in the early . As of 2025, advancements in flow virometry include enhanced protocols and best practices for studying human viruses, improving throughput, specificity, and applications in viral phenotyping. Quantification in flow virometry is achieved by counting discrete events corresponding to viral particles within a defined sample volume, typically calibrated using fluorescent reference beads or light scatter standards to report concentrations in particles per milliliter. Gating strategies based on FSC/SSC profiles and intensity thresholds distinguish viral events from , , or non-viral nanoparticles, enabling absolute quantification in the range of 10^6 to 10^9 particles/mL for many viruses. For example, human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) pseudoparticles have been quantified at sensitivities down to approximately 80 particles/mL after dilution to prevent event swarming. with molecules of equivalent soluble fluorochrome (MESF) units further standardizes measurements, ensuring reproducibility across instruments. Key advantages of flow virometry include its single-particle resolution, which allows for high-throughput phenotyping of viral populations, such as distinguishing enveloped from non-enveloped viruses based on dye uptake or surface expression. It also supports fluorescence-activated (FACS)-like isolation of viable subpopulations, facilitating downstream functional studies, and provides multiparametric on (down to ~40 nm with advanced cytometers), , and heterogeneity in a single run. However, limitations persist, including the need for sample concentration to achieve detectable event rates, a practical detection limit of around 20-40 nm due to optical constraints, and the high cost of specialized instrumentation like nanoscale flow cytometers. Potential interference from extracellular vesicles or low density on sparse virions can further complicate analysis without rigorous controls. Applications of flow virometry are particularly valuable in studying complex viral systems, such as exosome-like viral particles and HIV-1 envelope glycoprotein dynamics, where it has revealed host protein incorporation (e.g., at 20-24 MESF units per particle) and sorted infectious quasispecies for genomic sequencing. It has also been employed in vaccine development to monitor particle integrity and in environmental virology for quantifying viruses in water samples, offering insights beyond bulk methods like PCR or electron microscopy.

Tunable resistive pulse sensing

Tunable resistive pulse sensing (TRPS) is a nanopore-based electrical technique that quantifies viral particles by detecting changes in ionic current as pass through a tunable . The method relies on the Coulter principle, where an applied electrophoreses particles through a embedded in an elastomeric membrane, such as , causing transient volume exclusion that generates measurable resistive pulses. The frequency of these pulses corresponds to particle count, while the amplitude reflects based on the degree of resistance change. Pore size is adjusted by stretching the membrane, allowing detection across a range of viral dimensions. In TRPS quantification, viral particle concentration is determined by analyzing events over a defined period, calibrated against known standards like nanoparticles. The core calculation is given by C=NtfC = \frac{N}{t \cdot f}, where CC is the concentration, NN is the number of events, tt is the time, and ff is the flow rate (controlled via applied , often measured at multiple pressures for accuracy). distributions are derived from amplitude histograms, enabling differentiation of viral aggregates from monomers. For example, studies on vesicular virus have used TRPS to measure total particle concentrations and compare them to infectious titers, yielding ratios around 2.91 for enveloped viruses such as VSV. ensures , with typical measurements involving 200-500 s per run for statistical reliability. As of 2025, nanopore-based methods like TRPS have advanced with AI integration for rapid single-virus identification and classification based on electrical signals. TRPS offers several advantages for virus quantification, including its label-free nature, real-time monitoring, and ability to provide full size distributions from 10 nm to 1000 nm, which helps distinguish viral aggregates and subpopulations. It is particularly useful for analyzing complex samples like extracellular vesicles or viral preparations without prior purification, as it detects all particles irrespective of . The tunable pore design mitigates clogging by allowing temporary stretching to dislodge blockages, enhancing operational flexibility. However, TRPS has limitations, including susceptibility to pore clogging from high-concentration or sticky samples, which can interrupt measurements, and a relatively low throughput of approximately 10510^5 particles per hour, limiting its use for ultra-high-volume analyses. It lacks virus-specific identification, relying solely on physical properties like and charge, so it cannot differentiate between viral types or distinguish viruses from similar-sized contaminants without additional orthogonal methods. Detection sensitivity is constrained by pore geometry, with smaller viruses below 70 nm challenging for standard configurations. TRPS was developed primarily by Izon Science Ltd. and commercialized around 2011 with instruments like the qNano platform, building on earlier resistive pulse sensing principles to enable tunability for biological nanoparticles, including viruses and exosomes. Early applications focused on viral sizing and enumeration, with seminal work demonstrating its utility for adenoviruses and rotaviruses by the mid-2010s.

Nanoparticle tracking analysis

Nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA) is a light-scattering-based technique that quantifies and characterizes viral particles in liquid suspension by directly visualizing and tracking their individual trajectories. Developed in the early and commercialized by NanoSight (now Malvern Panalytical), NTA has become a standard tool for virus particle enumeration, particularly for non-enveloped viruses like adenoviruses and parvoviruses. In the procedure, a diluted sample is injected into a flow cell, where a focused beam illuminates the particles, causing them to scatter light visible to a high-speed CCD camera mounted perpendicular to the beam. The camera captures video frames of the scattered light spots, and identifies and tracks the random displacements of each particle over multiple frames, typically for 30–60 seconds per measurement. Optimal settings, such as camera level, detection threshold, and focus, are adjusted to minimize noise and ensure clear particle detection, with samples often diluted to 10^7–10^9 particles/mL to avoid overlap. Quantification relies on analyzing the tracked trajectories to compute the mean squared displacement and derive the diffusion coefficient DD, from which particle size and concentration are obtained. The concentration CC is determined by the formula C=N×DFV×tC = \frac{N \times DF}{V \times t}, where NN is the number of particles tracked per frame, DFDF is the dilution factor, VV is the effective observation volume, and tt is the video duration; size is calculated via the Stokes-Einstein relation D=kT6πηrD = \frac{kT}{6\pi\eta r}, with kk as Boltzmann's constant, TT as absolute temperature, η\eta as medium viscosity, and rr as hydrodynamic radius. This approach yields total particle counts independent of infectivity, with reported accuracy within 15% of reference methods for viruses like adenovirus 5 and influenza. Key advantages of NTA include its rapidity, completing analyses in under 5 minutes without dyes or labels, provision of polydispersity and aggregation data through size distributions, and applicability to particles from 10 to 1000 nm, encompassing most viral sizes. It excels in assessing native particle states in solution, unlike fixation-based methods. Limitations encompass potential underestimation in high-concentration samples due to particle overlap or tracking errors, an assumption of that may bias non-spherical viruses, and sensitivity to background contaminants or bubbles that increase . Inter-day is around 14%, necessitating standardized protocols. Since the 2010s, NTA has been prominently applied to (AAV) vector titering in manufacturing, where it delivers minute-scale total counts that correlate well with qPCR titers and monitor stability under stress. For instance, gold-labeling enhancements have enabled detection of small AAV particles (~25 nm), supporting process optimization and purity assessment.

Advanced and emerging techniques

Single virus ICP-MS

Single virus (ICP-MS) is an advanced analytical technique that enables the detection and quantification of individual viral particles by leveraging the high sensitivity of ICP-MS to elemental signals. In this method, viral particles are typically labeled with metal-tagged antibodies or nanoparticles, such as gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) conjugated to specific antibodies targeting viral surface proteins, to enhance detectability since viruses have low inherent metal content. The labeled sample is diluted to ensure single-particle events and nebulized into the plasma of the ICP-MS instrument, where each virus particle is atomized and ionized, producing a transient "pulse" or ion cloud corresponding to the metal tag. These pulses are recorded in time-resolved mode, allowing for the identification and counting of individual events based on signal intensity and frequency. The procedure begins with immunolabeling: antibodies specific to viral antigens (e.g., spike protein in SARS-CoV-2) are conjugated to metal-containing tags, such as AuNPs or lanthanide ions chelated to polymers, and incubated with the virus suspension to form labeled complexes. Excess unbound tags are removed via centrifugation or magnetic separation if using magnetic nanoparticles as carriers. The suspension is then introduced via pneumatic nebulization at low flow rates (typically 0.1–1 mL/min) into the ICP torch, operating at temperatures around 6000–10000 K, which vaporizes and ionizes the sample. High-resolution sector field or time-of-flight ICP-MS instruments are used to resolve the short-lived signals (microseconds to milliseconds) from interfering background ions, monitoring specific masses like ^{197}Au^{+} for gold tags or lanthanide isotopes (e.g., ^{165}Ho^{+}) for multiplexed detection. For characterization, the elemental ratios or signal intensities can distinguish virus types based on tag composition. Quantification relies on counting the number of discrete particle events per unit time, which directly corresponds to the virus concentration after calibration with known standards. The intensity of each pulse is proportional to the amount of metal per particle, enabling estimation of labeling efficiency or particle size; for example, aggregation of AuNP-labeled probes upon virus binding shifts pulse frequencies and amplitudes, allowing indirect virus counting. Sensitivity reaches attomolar levels (e.g., 90 zmol for HBV DNA equivalents, adaptable to particles) or single-particle detection limits of ~10–100 particles/mL, depending on the instrument and tag. Calibration curves are linear over 5–1000 pM for aggregated systems, with recoveries of 94–110% in complex matrices like serum. This technique offers significant advantages, including absolute particle counting without fluorescent dyes or enzymatic amplification in some setups, high sensitivity for rare viral events in clinical samples, and multiplexing capability by using distinct metal isotopes for different viruses (e.g., simultaneous detection of , HAV, and HBV). It provides through elemental signatures, surpassing optical methods in complex biological fluids. However, limitations include the necessity for prior labeling, which may introduce or incomplete binding; the requirement for specialized, high-resolution ICP-MS systems costing over $500,000; destructive sample ; and challenges with matrix interferences or low plasma dwell times for small viruses (~20–200 nm). Primarily a tool, it is not yet routine for diagnostics due to setup complexity. Development of single virus ICP-MS builds on single-particle ICP-MS pioneered in the early for inorganic nanoparticles, with adaptations for biological entities advancing in the through enhanced detectors and collision cells to handle low-signal organic matrices. Seminal work in the 2020s extended it to viruses, exemplified by applications to RNA/protein detection via AuNP aggregation and natural of bacteriophages like T5, achieving counts of 2–500 particles in seconds.

Microfluidic digital assays

Microfluidic digital assays enable the absolute quantification of infectious viruses by partitioning serial dilutions of viral samples into thousands of isolated nanoliter- or picoliter-scale compartments, such as droplets or microwells, using microfluidic devices. These platforms integrate cell-based models or reporter systems to assess viral infectivity directly, offering a high-throughput alternative to traditional plaque or TCID50 assays. The procedure involves generating uniform droplets or loading microwells with a mixture of host cells (e.g., MDCK cells for ) and diluted , followed by sealing the compartments with oil to prevent cross-infection. Incubation occurs for 24 hours at 37°C to permit , after which positive compartments are identified via fluorescence-based detection of viral antigens or reporter expression using automated . For example, in digital focus assays, staining targets viral in infected cells within each nanowell. Quantification is achieved by applying Poisson statistics to the fraction of positive compartments (p̂), where the average number of infectious units per compartment (λ) is calculated as λ = -ln(1 - p̂), yielding absolute titers in plaque-forming units per milliliter (PFU/mL) without requiring curves. This approach mirrors digital PCR for nucleic acids but measures functional , with detection limits around 103–105 PFU/mL depending on compartment volume (e.g., 9.6 nL per well). Digital principles from droplet digital PCR have been adapted here to ensure single-hit events for accurate counting. These provide key advantages, including scalability to over 1,000 parallel reactions per chip, reduced sample and consumption by approximately 10-fold, completion in hours rather than days, and for reproducible readout. Examples include microfluidic droplet for single-cell influenza A infections, which quantify viral output while isolating replication events, and digital microwell platforms that match plaque accuracy for clinical nasal swab samples. Limitations include the elevated costs of microfluidic device fabrication and operation, restrictions to viruses compatible with the encapsulated cell types, and ongoing needs for broader validation against gold-standard methods. Statistical precision also diminishes at occupancy extremes (p̂ < 0.10 or > 0.96), potentially requiring multiple dilutions. Post-2020 developments have accelerated for SARS-CoV-2, with 2023–2025 studies adapting digital focus assays to quantify infectious titers from respiratory specimens in under 24 hours, supporting rapid vaccine and therapeutic evaluation during pandemics. These advances emphasize integration with clinical workflows for enhanced outbreak response.

References

Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.