Literature DB >> 21288509

Bacterial diversity characterization of bioaerosols from cage-housed and floor-housed poultry operations.

Natasha Just1, Shelley Kirychuk, Yan Gilbert, Valérie Létourneau, Marc Veillette, Baljit Singh, Caroline Duchaine.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although bioaerosols from both cage-housed (CH) and floor-housed (FH) poultry operations are highly concentrated, workers from CH operations have reported a greater prevalence of respiratory symptoms.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to directly compare bacteria, both quantitatively and qualitatively, in bioaerosols from CH and FH poultry facilities.
METHODS: Bioaerosols were collected from fifteen CH and fifteen FH poultry operations, using stationary area samplers as well as personal sampling devices. Dust, endotoxin and bacteria were quantified and bacterial diversity was investigated using PCR followed by denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE).
RESULTS: Dust (p<0.001), endotoxin (p<0.05) and bacteria (p<0.05) were significantly higher in personal bioaerosols of FH poultry operations than CH bioaerosols. Although dust and endotoxin did not differ significantly between area and personal samples within each barn type, clustering analysis of DGGE profiles of bacteria revealed that area and personal samples shared less than 10% similarity. These data suggest that area samples are not representative of personal bacteria exposures, which may be affected by worker movement, bacteria carried on the worker and worker location. Personal DGGE profiles from CH and FH operations shared less than 20% similarity and composite analysis showed that bacteria were more prevalent in personal samples from CH bioaerosols than FH bioaerosols.
CONCLUSIONS: Bacteria concentration and diversity are significantly different between bioaerosols from CH and FH poultry operations.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21288509     DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2011.01.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Res        ISSN: 0013-9351            Impact factor:   6.498


  14 in total

1.  Bioaerosol exposure assessment in the workplace: the past, present and recent advances.

Authors:  Wijnand Eduard; Dick Heederik; Caroline Duchaine; Brett James Green
Journal:  J Environ Monit       Date:  2012-01-23

2.  Microbial communities present in the lower respiratory tract of clinically healthy birds in Pakistan.

Authors:  Muhammad Zubair Shabbir; Tyler Malys; Yury V Ivanov; Jihye Park; Muhammad Abu Bakr Shabbir; Masood Rabbani; Tahir Yaqub; Eric Thomas Harvill
Journal:  Poult Sci       Date:  2015-02-09       Impact factor: 3.352

3.  Recovery of Fungal Cells from Air Samples: a Tale of Loss and Gain.

Authors:  Hamza Mbareche; Marc Veillette; Wieke Teertstra; Willem Kegel; Guillaume J Bilodeau; Han A B Wösten; Caroline Duchaine
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2019-04-18       Impact factor: 4.792

4.  Characterization of bioaerosols from dairy barns: reconstructing the puzzle of occupational respiratory diseases by using molecular approaches.

Authors:  Pascale Blais Lecours; Marc Veillette; David Marsolais; Caroline Duchaine
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2012-02-24       Impact factor: 4.792

5.  Monitoring of bioaerosol inhalation risks in different environments using a six-stage Andersen sampler and the PCR-DGGE method.

Authors:  Zhenqiang Xu; Maosheng Yao
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2012-09-07       Impact factor: 2.513

6.  Field sampling of indoor bioaerosols.

Authors:  Jennie Cox; Hamza Mbareche; William G Lindsley; Caroline Duchaine
Journal:  Aerosol Sci Technol       Date:  2019-11-21       Impact factor: 2.908

7.  Effects of Microbial Aerosol in Poultry House on Meat Ducks' Immune Function.

Authors:  Guanliu Yu; Yao Wang; Shouguo Wang; Changmin Duan; Liangmeng Wei; Jing Gao; Tongjie Chai; Yumei Cai
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2016-08-17       Impact factor: 5.640

Review 8.  The Use of Bioaerosol Sampling for Airborne Virus Surveillance in Swine Production Facilities: A Mini Review.

Authors:  Benjamin D Anderson; John A Lednicky; Montserrat Torremorell; Gregory C Gray
Journal:  Front Vet Sci       Date:  2017-07-27

9.  High throughput genomic sequencing of bioaerosols in broiler chicken production facilities.

Authors:  Kate M O'Brien; Michael S Chimenti; Morgan Farnell; Tom Tabler; Thomas Bair; Joey L Bray; Matthew W Nonnenmann
Journal:  Microb Biotechnol       Date:  2016-07-28       Impact factor: 5.813

10.  PM2.5 in poultry houses synergizes with Pseudomonas aeruginosa to aggravate lung inflammation in mice through the NF-κB pathway.

Authors:  Meng Li; Xiuli Wei; Youzhi Li; Tao Feng; Linlin Jiang; Hongwei Zhu; Xin Yu; Jinxiu Tang; Guozhong Chen; Jianlong Zhang; Xingxiao Zhang
Journal:  J Vet Sci       Date:  2020-05       Impact factor: 1.672

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.