Wastewater monitoring has been used throughout the Omicron surge by scientists in New York City, Boston and elsewhere. They have been able to identify impending surges of cases in certain neighborhoods even before a variant has been identified from test swabs. The opposite is also true: In Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minn., for example, officials who witnessed a drop in the amount of virus in wastewater were able to predict that Omicron’s peak had passed.
Far less attention has been paid to testing air samples, at least until recently. Chinese officials have developed a detection system they will reportedly use to collect and test air samples from venues at the Beijing 2022 Winter Olympics. In the United States, a partnership between the city of Davis, Calif., and the University of California at Davis is monitoring air filters in elementary schools for the virus.
So far scientists have mostly used environmental samples like these to track trends in coronavirus concentrations and identify hot spots for response. But these samples can also provide a window into the dynamics of a concerning new variant in the broader community, quicker and more accurately than any sample from a single person. A virus sample from a nasal or saliva swab offers information on one person; a single wastewater or air sample offers information on many people, and in the case of the former, up to thousands of people. Leaning more heavily on these methods could provide the world additional time to respond before variants become widespread.
Still, some practical challenges remain. Environmental samples can contain a lot of background noise, including myriad other viruses, bacteria and fungi found in human waste. Determining what’s important and what isn’t can be tough. Coordination is another issue; the world needs to develop a consensus on how to analyze environmental sequences and create a hub that, as GISAID does for clinical sequencing, enables near-real-time information sharing and insights across countries.
As these initiatives are pursued and funded, it’s also important that the public be made aware of how environmental testing and sequencing works in order to avoid some of the misinformation and misunderstandings that have affected other tools like vaccines. Organizers must make clear that environmental samples are anonymous: They do not confirm who shed the virus, only that the coronavirus is in a community.