The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Far-UVC light (222 nm) efficiently and safely inactivates airborne human coronaviruses
Open accessAbstract
A direct approach to limit airborne viral transmissions is to inactivate them within a short time of their production. Germicidal ultraviolet light, typically at 254 nm, is effective in this context but, used directly, can be a health hazard to skin and eyes. By contrast, far-UVC light (207–222 nm) efficiently kills pathogens potentially without harm to exposed human tissues. We previously demonstrated that 222-nm far-UVC light efficiently kills airborne influenza virus and we extend those studies to explore far-UVC efficacy against airborne human coronaviruses alpha HCoV-229E and beta HCoV-OC43. Low doses of 1.7 and 1.2 mJ/cm 2 inactivated 99.9% of aerosolized coronavirus 229E and OC43, respectively. As all human coronaviruses have similar genomic sizes, far-UVC light would be expected to show similar inactivation efficiency against other human coronaviruses including SARS-CoV-2. Based on the beta-HCoV-OC43 results, continuous far-UVC exposure in occupied public locations at the current regulatory exposure limit (~3 mJ/cm 2 /hour) would result in ~90% viral inactivation in ~8 minutes, 95% in ~11 minutes, 99% in ~16 minutes and 99.9% inactivation in ~25 minutes. Thus while staying within current regulatory dose limits, low-dose-rate far-UVC exposure can potentially safely provide a major reduction in the ambient level of airborne coronaviruses in occupied public locations.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Aerosol and surface stability of SARS-CoV-2 as compared with SARS-CoV-1
van Doremalen, N., Bushmaker, T., Morris, D. H., Holbrook, M. G., Gamble, A., Williamson, B. N., Tamin, A., Harcourt, J. L., Thornburg, N. J., Gerber, S. I., et al. (2020) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmc2004973 · Cited by 9,951
A Simple Test for Heteroscedasticity and Random Coefficient Variation
Breusch, T. S., & Pagan, A. R. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1911963 · Cited by 5,647
The size distribution of droplets in the exhaled breath of healthy human subjects
PAPINENI, R. S., & ROSENTHAL, F. S. (1997) · Journal of Aerosol Medicine · doi:10.1089/jam.1997.10.105 · Cited by 690
Effect of ultraviolet germicidal irradiation on viral aerosols
Walker, C. M., & Ko, G. (2007) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es070056u · Cited by 308
Cited by
Airborne transmission of respiratory viruses
Wang, C. C., Prather, K. A., Sznitman, J., Jimenez, J. L., Lakdawala, S. S., Tufekci, Z., & Marr, L. C. (2021) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.abd9149 · Cited by 1,543
Liu, C., Kim, J., Kwak, S. S., Hourlier‐Fargette, A., Avila, R., Vogl, J., Tzavelis, A., Chung, H. U., Lee, J. Y., Kim, D. H., et al. (2021) · Advanced Healthcare Materials · doi:10.1002/adhm.202100383 · Cited by 57
UVC inactivation of pathogenic samples suitable for cryo-EM analysis
Depelteau, J. S., Renault, L., Althof, N., Cassidy, C. K., Mendonça, L. M., Jensen, G. J., Resch, G. P., & Briegel, A. (2022) · Communications Biology · doi:10.1038/s42003-021-02962-w · Cited by 10
Metadata
- Authors
- Buonanno, M., Welch, D., Shuryak, I., & Brenner, D. J.
- Venue
- Scientific Reports
- Published
- 2020-06-24
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 10285-10285
- ISSN
- 2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3034395227
- Cited by
- 686
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 55.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Far-UVC light (222 nm) efficiently and safely inactivates airborne human coronaviruses. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/s41598-020-67211-2
- The paper
- Buonanno, M., Welch, D., Shuryak, I., & Brenner, D. J. (2020). Far-UVC light (222 nm) efficiently and safely inactivates airborne human coronaviruses. Scientific Reports. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-67211-2
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.