Field evaluation of a personal, bioaerosol cyclone sampler

Indoor Microbial Exposures and Chronic Lung Disease: From Microbial Toxins to the Microbiome

Effects of environmental microbial exposures on human health have long been of interest. Microbes were historically assumed to be harmful, but data have suggested that microbial exposures can modulate the immune system. We focus on the effects of indoor environmental microbial exposure on chronic lung diseases. We found contradictory data in bacterial studies using endotoxin as a surrogate for bacterial exposure. Contradictory data also exist in studies of fungal exposure. Many factors may modulate the effect of environmental microbial exposures on lung health, including coexposures. Future studies need to clarify which method of assessing environmental microbial exposures is most relevant.

Bioaerosol Sampling: Classical Approaches, Advances, and Perspectives

Bioaerosol sampling is an essential and integral part of any bioaerosol investigation. Since bioaerosols are very diverse in terms of their sizes, species, biological properties, and requirements for their detection and quantification, bioaerosol sampling is an active, yet challenging research area. This paper was inspired by the discussions during the 2018 International Aerosol Conference (IAC) (St. Louis, MO) regarding the need to summarize the current state of the art in bioaerosol research, including bioaerosol sampling, and the need to develop a more standardized set of guidelines for protocols used in bioaerosol research. The manuscript is a combination of literature review and perspectives: it discusses the main bioaerosol sampling techniques and then overviews the latest technical developments in each area; the overview is followed by the discussion of the emerging trends and developments in the field, including personal sampling, application of passive samplers, and advances toward improving bioaerosol detection limits as well as the emerging challenges such as collection of viruses and collection of unbiased samples for bioaerosol sequencing. The paper also discusses some of the practical aspects of bioaerosol sampling with particular focus on sampling aspects that could lead to bioaerosol determination bias. The manuscript concludes by suggesting several goals for bioaerosol sampling and development community to work towards and describes some of the grand bioaerosol challenges discussed at the IAC 2018.

Bioaerosol sampling: sampling mechanisms, bioefficiency and field studies

Investigations into the suspected airborne transmission of pathogens in healthcare environments have posed a challenge to researchers for more than a century. With each pathogen demonstrating a unique response to environmental conditions and the mechanical stresses it experiences, the choice of sampling device is not obvious. Our aim was to review bioaerosol sampling, sampling equipment, and methodology. A comprehensive literature search was performed, using electronic databases to retrieve English language papers on bioaerosol sampling. The review describes the mechanisms of popular bioaerosol sampling devices such as impingers, cyclones, impactors, and filters, explaining both their strengths and weaknesses, and the consequences for microbial bioefficiency. Numerous successful studies are described that point to best practice in bioaerosol sampling, from the use of small personal samplers to monitor workers' pathogen exposure through to large static samplers collecting airborne microbes in various healthcare settings. Of primary importance is the requirement that studies should commence by determining the bioefficiency of the chosen sampler and the pathogen under investigation within laboratory conditions. From such foundations, sampling for bioaerosol material in the complexity of the field holds greater certainty of successful capture of low-concentration airborne pathogens. From the laboratory to use in the field, this review enables the investigator to make informed decisions about the choice of bioaerosol sampler and its application.

Field evaluation of personal sampling methods for multiple bioaerosols

Ambient bioaerosols are ubiquitous in the daily environment and can affect health in various ways. However, few studies have been conducted to comprehensively evaluate personal bioaerosol exposure in occupational and indoor environments because of the complex composition of bioaerosols and the lack of standardized sampling/analysis methods. We conducted a study to determine the most efficient collection/analysis method for the personal exposure assessment of multiple bioaerosols. The sampling efficiencies of three filters and four samplers were compared. According to our results, polycarbonate (PC) filters had the highest relative efficiency, particularly for bacteria. Side-by-side sampling was conducted to evaluate the three filter samplers (with PC filters) and the NIOSH Personal Bioaerosol Cyclone Sampler. According to the results, the Button Aerosol Sampler and the IOM Inhalable Dust Sampler had the highest relative efficiencies for fungi and bacteria, followed by the NIOSH sampler. Personal sampling was performed in a pig farm to assess occupational bioaerosol exposure and to evaluate the sampling/analysis methods. The Button and IOM samplers yielded a similar performance for personal bioaerosol sampling at the pig farm. However, the Button sampler is more likely to be clogged at high airborne dust concentrations because of its higher flow rate (4 L/min). Therefore, the IOM sampler is a more appropriate choice for performing personal sampling in environments with high dust levels. In summary, the Button and IOM samplers with PC filters are efficient sampling/analysis methods for the personal exposure assessment of multiple bioaerosols.

[Methods of studying airborne pollen and pollen calendars]

INTRODUCTION

Pollen is a major cause of allergy and monitoring pollen in the air is relevant for diagnosis, treatment and prevention, as well as for biomedical and biological research. Many aero-biological studies have been conducted all over the world to ascertain aerial concentrations and seasonality of pollen grains.

BACKGROUND

Monitoring of airborne biological particles is carried out by various gravimetric, impaction, and suction sampling devices. The Hirst trap, later modified to Burkard(®) or Lanzoni(®) traps, is the most widely used sampler. Counting and identifying pollen grains is then performed under optical microscopy. Based on differences in airborne pollen recorded over several years of observation, pollen calendars have been drawn up as aids to allergy diagnosis and management but they could be replaced advantageously by allergy-risk calendars. Pollen counts also provide valuable information about the geographical origin of pollen grains.

VIEWPOINTS

Since the identifying and counting of pollen grains in ambient air samples is still a demanding and time-consuming task, there is an increasing interest in the automation of pollen monitoring. Furthermore, the divergence sometimes observed between clinical observations and pollen counts provides an incentive to collect aero-allergens directly. Lastly, pollen monitoring could be improved through the use of personal bioaerosol samplers.

CONCLUSIONS

Great progress has been made in aerobiology for over a century, but much remains to be accomplished, particularly in relation with the standardization of methods.

Molecular comparison of the sampling efficiency of four types of airborne bacterial samplers

In the present study, indoor and outdoor air samples were collected using four types of air samplers often used for airborne bacterial sampling. These air samplers included two solid impactors (BioStage and RCS), one liquid impinger (BioSampler), and one filter sampler with two kinds of filters (a gelatin and a cellulose acetate filter). The collected air samples were further processed to analyze the diversity and abundance of culturable bacteria and total bacteria through standard culture techniques, denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE) fingerprinting and quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) analysis. The DGGE analysis indicated that the air samples collected using the BioStage and RCS samplers have higher culturable bacterial diversity, whereas the samples collected using the BioSampler and the cellulose acetate filter sampler have higher total bacterial diversity. To obtain more information on the sampled bacteria, some gel bands were excised and sequenced. In terms of sampling efficiency, results from the qPCR tests indicated that the collected total bacterial concentration was higher in samples collected using the BioSampler and the cellulose acetate filter sampler. In conclusion, the sampling bias and efficiency of four kinds of air sampling systems were compared in the present study and the two solid impactors were concluded to be comparatively efficient for culturable bacterial sampling, whereas the liquid impactor and the cellulose acetate filter sampler were efficient for total bacterial sampling.