Answer
Non-enveloped viruses like SA11 are more stable on microplastic surfaces. 1
Rationale (stability = persistence, thus higher transmission risk → morbidity/mortality/QOL impact):
- Guidelines consistently note non-enveloped viruses persist longer than enveloped viruses in environmental matrices (e.g., wastewater, solids), reflecting greater structural robustness of the protein capsid versus fragile lipid envelopes 1.
- Enveloped viruses are more susceptible to environmental oxidants and surface-associated stressors (e.g., ozone-mediated lipid peroxidation), reducing their stability on materials including plastics 2.
- While some recent research suggests microplastics can aid adhesion and sometimes transport of both virus types, durability on surfaces under real-world conditions remains higher for non-enveloped viruses; enveloped-virus advantages are context-limited (e.g., cold temperatures, specific biofilm conditions) and less reliable for persistence 3, 4.
Pitfalls/caveats:
- Biofilms/eco-coronas on aged plastics can modulate adsorption and survival for both types; do not over-extrapolate from pristine lab polystyrene to weathered environmental microplastics 5.
- Specific experimental setups may show exceptions (e.g., enhanced low-temperature persistence for some enveloped viruses), but these are not the dominant real-world pattern for stability on plastics 6.