Literature DB >> 21968260

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

Kejun Li1.   

Abstract

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.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21968260     DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2011.09.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Total Environ        ISSN: 0048-9697            Impact factor:   7.963


  6 in total

Review 1.  Fungi in the indoor air of critical hospital areas: a review.

Authors:  Jenyffie A Belizario; Leonardo G Lopes; Regina H Pires
Journal:  Aerobiologia (Bologna)       Date:  2021-05-14       Impact factor: 2.410

Review 2.  Challenges and opportunities of airborne metagenomics.

Authors:  Hayedeh Behzad; Takashi Gojobori; Katsuhiko Mineta
Journal:  Genome Biol Evol       Date:  2015-05-06       Impact factor: 3.416

3.  Non-selective Separation of Bacterial Cells with Magnetic Nanoparticles Facilitated by Varying Surface Charge.

Authors:  Xin-Lei Gao; Ming-Fei Shao; Yi-Sheng Xu; Yi Luo; Kai Zhang; Feng Ouyang; Ji Li
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2016-12-01       Impact factor: 5.640

4.  Bioaerosol biomonitoring: Sampling optimization for molecular microbial ecology.

Authors:  Robert M W Ferguson; Sonia Garcia-Alcega; Frederic Coulon; Alex J Dumbrell; Corinne Whitby; Ian Colbeck
Journal:  Mol Ecol Resour       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 7.090

5.  The efficient method for simultaneous monitoring of the culturable as well as nonculturable airborne microorganisms.

Authors:  Barbara Hubad; Aleš Lapanje
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-12-20       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 6.  Aerosol-Transmitted Infections-a New Consideration for Public Health and Infection Control Teams.

Authors:  Julian W Tang; Peter Wilson; Nandini Shetty; Catherine J Noakes
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Infect Dis       Date:  2015-07-23
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.