Three different methods were compared for their efficiency at detection of adenoviruses. The samples examined for viral analysis consisted of concentrates prepared from raw sewage, chosen as being representative of the spectrum of viruses being intestinally shed from a large population at any given time. When using one single cell line, HEp-2, the overall numbers of adenoviruses detected using cytopathogenicity and immunofluorescence were roughly equal. In-situ hybridization was approximately forty percent more sensitive than eital. In-situ hybridization was approximately forty percent more sensitive than either of these other methods as determined by average virus titers for the different samples, and also proved to be better by means of a nonparametric comparison. The 293 cell line was approximately five times more sensitive for detecting adenoviruses by cytopathogenicity as compared with the HEp-2 cell line, but proved unsuitable in our hands for quantitatively detecting indigenous adenoviruses by immunofluorescence. The relative number of indigenous adenoviruses present in the sewage concentrates we examined was, on average, ninty-four fold greater than that of enteroviruses. Assay of enteroviruses was performed by plaque assay in the BGM cell line.