Assessment of bioaerosols in swine barns by filtration and impaction
Bioaerosol concentrations inside one naturally ventilated and one mechanically ventilated swine finishing barn were assessed by sampling air using membrane filtration and impaction (six-stage Andersen sampler), and assayed by culture method. The barns, located on the same commercial farm in northeas...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Current microbiology 2002-02, Vol.44 (2), p.136-140 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 140 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 136 |
| container_title | Current microbiology |
| container_volume | 44 |
| creator | PREDICALA, Bernardo Z URBAN, James E MAGHIRANG, Ronaldo G JEREZ, Sheryll B GOODBAND, Robert D |
| description | Bioaerosol concentrations inside one naturally ventilated and one mechanically ventilated swine finishing barn were assessed by sampling air using membrane filtration and impaction (six-stage Andersen sampler), and assayed by culture method. The barns, located on the same commercial farm in northeast Kansas, did not show any significant difference (p > 0.05) in concentrations of total and respirable airborne microorganisms. The overall mean total concentrations inside the two barns were 6.6 x 10(4) colony forming units (CFU)/m3 (SD = 3.8 x 10(4) CFU/m3 as measured by filtration and 8.6 x 10(4) CFU/m3 (SD = 5.1 x 10(4) CFU/m3) by impaction. The overall mean respirable concentrations were 9.0 x 10(3) CFU/m3 (SD = 4.1 x 10(3) CFU/m3) measured by filtration and 2.8 x 10(4) CFU/m3 (SD = 2.2 x 10(4) CFU/m3) by impaction. Total and respirable CFU concentrations measured by impaction were significantly (p < 0.05) higher than that by filtration. The persistent strains of microorganisms were various species of the following genera: Staphylococcus, Pseudomonas, Bacillus, Listeria, Enterococcus, Nocardia, Lactobacillus, and Penicillium. It appears that filtration sampling can be used for a qualitative survey of bioaerosols in swine barns while the Andersen sampler is suitable for both quantitative and qualitative assessments. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00284-001-0064-y |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71419359</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3070066691</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c419t-778da98c4c7f73b87270f2688b8111d6136c39acf316c78a30c14405a85bcac43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqF0c1q3DAUBWBRGpJpmgfoJghKSzdu77Vk_SxDkraBQDfJWsgaGRRseaLrIczbV8MMBLJoF0IIviuhcxj7hPAdAfQPAmiNbACwLiWb3Tu2QinaBqzF92wFQorGqA7P2Aeip-paC3jKzhANdqazK3ZzRRSJppgXPg-8T7OPZaZ5JJ4yp5eUI-99ycT7HR_SuBS_pDlzn9c8TRsf9qeP7GTwI8WL437OHn_ePlz_bu7__Lq7vrpvgkS7NFqbtbcmyKAHLXqjWw1Dq4zpDSKuFQoVhPVhEKiCNl5AQCmh86brgw9SnLOvh3s3ZX7eRlrclCjEcfQ5zltyGus7orP_hWhaBVZBhd_-DaVtVY1U6Uo_v6FP87bk-t-qBFota7hV4UGFmiKVOLhNSZMvO4fg9qW5Q2muluH2pbldnbk83rztp7h-nTi2VMGXI_AU_DgUn0OiVydb2UGN7y_F0Jzw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1431974290</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Assessment of bioaerosols in swine barns by filtration and impaction</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Springer Online Journals</source><creator>PREDICALA, Bernardo Z ; URBAN, James E ; MAGHIRANG, Ronaldo G ; JEREZ, Sheryll B ; GOODBAND, Robert D</creator><creatorcontrib>PREDICALA, Bernardo Z ; URBAN, James E ; MAGHIRANG, Ronaldo G ; JEREZ, Sheryll B ; GOODBAND, Robert D</creatorcontrib><description>Bioaerosol concentrations inside one naturally ventilated and one mechanically ventilated swine finishing barn were assessed by sampling air using membrane filtration and impaction (six-stage Andersen sampler), and assayed by culture method. The barns, located on the same commercial farm in northeast Kansas, did not show any significant difference (p > 0.05) in concentrations of total and respirable airborne microorganisms. The overall mean total concentrations inside the two barns were 6.6 x 10(4) colony forming units (CFU)/m3 (SD = 3.8 x 10(4) CFU/m3 as measured by filtration and 8.6 x 10(4) CFU/m3 (SD = 5.1 x 10(4) CFU/m3) by impaction. The overall mean respirable concentrations were 9.0 x 10(3) CFU/m3 (SD = 4.1 x 10(3) CFU/m3) measured by filtration and 2.8 x 10(4) CFU/m3 (SD = 2.2 x 10(4) CFU/m3) by impaction. Total and respirable CFU concentrations measured by impaction were significantly (p < 0.05) higher than that by filtration. The persistent strains of microorganisms were various species of the following genera: Staphylococcus, Pseudomonas, Bacillus, Listeria, Enterococcus, Nocardia, Lactobacillus, and Penicillium. It appears that filtration sampling can be used for a qualitative survey of bioaerosols in swine barns while the Andersen sampler is suitable for both quantitative and qualitative assessments.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0343-8651</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1432-0991</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00284-001-0064-y</identifier><identifier>PMID: 11815859</identifier><identifier>CODEN: CUMIDD</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, NY: Springer</publisher><subject>Aerosols - analysis ; Aerosols - isolation & purification ; Airborne microorganisms ; Animals ; bioaerosols ; Biological and medical sciences ; Colony Count, Microbial - instrumentation ; Commercial farms ; Farm buildings ; Filtration ; Food industries ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Gram-Negative Bacteria - isolation & purification ; Gram-Positive Bacteria - isolation & purification ; Housing, Animal ; Meat and meat product industries ; Membrane filtration ; Microbiology ; Microorganisms ; Studies ; Swine ; Swine - microbiology ; Ventilation ; Ventilation - standards</subject><ispartof>Current microbiology, 2002-02, Vol.44 (2), p.136-140</ispartof><rights>Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 2002</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c419t-778da98c4c7f73b87270f2688b8111d6136c39acf316c78a30c14405a85bcac43</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=14245061$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11815859$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>PREDICALA, Bernardo Z</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>URBAN, James E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MAGHIRANG, Ronaldo G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>JEREZ, Sheryll B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>GOODBAND, Robert D</creatorcontrib><title>Assessment of bioaerosols in swine barns by filtration and impaction</title><title>Current microbiology</title><addtitle>Curr Microbiol</addtitle><description>Bioaerosol concentrations inside one naturally ventilated and one mechanically ventilated swine finishing barn were assessed by sampling air using membrane filtration and impaction (six-stage Andersen sampler), and assayed by culture method. The barns, located on the same commercial farm in northeast Kansas, did not show any significant difference (p > 0.05) in concentrations of total and respirable airborne microorganisms. The overall mean total concentrations inside the two barns were 6.6 x 10(4) colony forming units (CFU)/m3 (SD = 3.8 x 10(4) CFU/m3 as measured by filtration and 8.6 x 10(4) CFU/m3 (SD = 5.1 x 10(4) CFU/m3) by impaction. The overall mean respirable concentrations were 9.0 x 10(3) CFU/m3 (SD = 4.1 x 10(3) CFU/m3) measured by filtration and 2.8 x 10(4) CFU/m3 (SD = 2.2 x 10(4) CFU/m3) by impaction. Total and respirable CFU concentrations measured by impaction were significantly (p < 0.05) higher than that by filtration. The persistent strains of microorganisms were various species of the following genera: Staphylococcus, Pseudomonas, Bacillus, Listeria, Enterococcus, Nocardia, Lactobacillus, and Penicillium. It appears that filtration sampling can be used for a qualitative survey of bioaerosols in swine barns while the Andersen sampler is suitable for both quantitative and qualitative assessments.</description><subject>Aerosols - analysis</subject><subject>Aerosols - isolation & purification</subject><subject>Airborne microorganisms</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>bioaerosols</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Colony Count, Microbial - instrumentation</subject><subject>Commercial farms</subject><subject>Farm buildings</subject><subject>Filtration</subject><subject>Food industries</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Gram-Negative Bacteria - isolation & purification</subject><subject>Gram-Positive Bacteria - isolation & purification</subject><subject>Housing, Animal</subject><subject>Meat and meat product industries</subject><subject>Membrane filtration</subject><subject>Microbiology</subject><subject>Microorganisms</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Swine</subject><subject>Swine - microbiology</subject><subject>Ventilation</subject><subject>Ventilation - standards</subject><issn>0343-8651</issn><issn>1432-0991</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2002</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqF0c1q3DAUBWBRGpJpmgfoJghKSzdu77Vk_SxDkraBQDfJWsgaGRRseaLrIczbV8MMBLJoF0IIviuhcxj7hPAdAfQPAmiNbACwLiWb3Tu2QinaBqzF92wFQorGqA7P2Aeip-paC3jKzhANdqazK3ZzRRSJppgXPg-8T7OPZaZ5JJ4yp5eUI-99ycT7HR_SuBS_pDlzn9c8TRsf9qeP7GTwI8WL437OHn_ePlz_bu7__Lq7vrpvgkS7NFqbtbcmyKAHLXqjWw1Dq4zpDSKuFQoVhPVhEKiCNl5AQCmh86brgw9SnLOvh3s3ZX7eRlrclCjEcfQ5zltyGus7orP_hWhaBVZBhd_-DaVtVY1U6Uo_v6FP87bk-t-qBFota7hV4UGFmiKVOLhNSZMvO4fg9qW5Q2muluH2pbldnbk83rztp7h-nTi2VMGXI_AU_DgUn0OiVydb2UGN7y_F0Jzw</recordid><startdate>20020201</startdate><enddate>20020201</enddate><creator>PREDICALA, Bernardo Z</creator><creator>URBAN, James E</creator><creator>MAGHIRANG, Ronaldo G</creator><creator>JEREZ, Sheryll B</creator><creator>GOODBAND, Robert D</creator><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H95</scope><scope>H98</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20020201</creationdate><title>Assessment of bioaerosols in swine barns by filtration and impaction</title><author>PREDICALA, Bernardo Z ; URBAN, James E ; MAGHIRANG, Ronaldo G ; JEREZ, Sheryll B ; GOODBAND, Robert D</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c419t-778da98c4c7f73b87270f2688b8111d6136c39acf316c78a30c14405a85bcac43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2002</creationdate><topic>Aerosols - analysis</topic><topic>Aerosols - isolation & purification</topic><topic>Airborne microorganisms</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>bioaerosols</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Colony Count, Microbial - instrumentation</topic><topic>Commercial farms</topic><topic>Farm buildings</topic><topic>Filtration</topic><topic>Food industries</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Gram-Negative Bacteria - isolation & purification</topic><topic>Gram-Positive Bacteria - isolation & purification</topic><topic>Housing, Animal</topic><topic>Meat and meat product industries</topic><topic>Membrane filtration</topic><topic>Microbiology</topic><topic>Microorganisms</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Swine</topic><topic>Swine - microbiology</topic><topic>Ventilation</topic><topic>Ventilation - standards</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>PREDICALA, Bernardo Z</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>URBAN, James E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MAGHIRANG, Ronaldo G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>JEREZ, Sheryll B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>GOODBAND, Robert D</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health and Medical</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>PML(ProQuest Medical Library)</collection><collection>ProQuest research library</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Journals</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 1: Biological Sciences & Living Resources</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Aquaculture Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Current microbiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>PREDICALA, Bernardo Z</au><au>URBAN, James E</au><au>MAGHIRANG, Ronaldo G</au><au>JEREZ, Sheryll B</au><au>GOODBAND, Robert D</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Assessment of bioaerosols in swine barns by filtration and impaction</atitle><jtitle>Current microbiology</jtitle><addtitle>Curr Microbiol</addtitle><date>2002-02-01</date><risdate>2002</risdate><volume>44</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>136</spage><epage>140</epage><pages>136-140</pages><issn>0343-8651</issn><eissn>1432-0991</eissn><coden>CUMIDD</coden><abstract>Bioaerosol concentrations inside one naturally ventilated and one mechanically ventilated swine finishing barn were assessed by sampling air using membrane filtration and impaction (six-stage Andersen sampler), and assayed by culture method. The barns, located on the same commercial farm in northeast Kansas, did not show any significant difference (p > 0.05) in concentrations of total and respirable airborne microorganisms. The overall mean total concentrations inside the two barns were 6.6 x 10(4) colony forming units (CFU)/m3 (SD = 3.8 x 10(4) CFU/m3 as measured by filtration and 8.6 x 10(4) CFU/m3 (SD = 5.1 x 10(4) CFU/m3) by impaction. The overall mean respirable concentrations were 9.0 x 10(3) CFU/m3 (SD = 4.1 x 10(3) CFU/m3) measured by filtration and 2.8 x 10(4) CFU/m3 (SD = 2.2 x 10(4) CFU/m3) by impaction. Total and respirable CFU concentrations measured by impaction were significantly (p < 0.05) higher than that by filtration. The persistent strains of microorganisms were various species of the following genera: Staphylococcus, Pseudomonas, Bacillus, Listeria, Enterococcus, Nocardia, Lactobacillus, and Penicillium. It appears that filtration sampling can be used for a qualitative survey of bioaerosols in swine barns while the Andersen sampler is suitable for both quantitative and qualitative assessments.</abstract><cop>New York, NY</cop><pub>Springer</pub><pmid>11815859</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00284-001-0064-y</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0343-8651 |
| ispartof | Current microbiology, 2002-02, Vol.44 (2), p.136-140 |
| issn | 0343-8651 1432-0991 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71419359 |
| source | MEDLINE; Springer Online Journals |
| subjects | Aerosols - analysis Aerosols - isolation & purification Airborne microorganisms Animals bioaerosols Biological and medical sciences Colony Count, Microbial - instrumentation Commercial farms Farm buildings Filtration Food industries Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology Gram-Negative Bacteria - isolation & purification Gram-Positive Bacteria - isolation & purification Housing, Animal Meat and meat product industries Membrane filtration Microbiology Microorganisms Studies Swine Swine - microbiology Ventilation Ventilation - standards |
| title | Assessment of bioaerosols in swine barns by filtration and impaction |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T08%3A06%3A21IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Assessment%20of%20bioaerosols%20in%20swine%20barns%20by%20filtration%20and%20impaction&rft.jtitle=Current%20microbiology&rft.au=PREDICALA,%20Bernardo%20Z&rft.date=2002-02-01&rft.volume=44&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=136&rft.epage=140&rft.pages=136-140&rft.issn=0343-8651&rft.eissn=1432-0991&rft.coden=CUMIDD&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00284-001-0064-y&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3070066691%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1431974290&rft_id=info:pmid/11815859&rfr_iscdi=true |