Literature DB >> 30217848

Bioaerosol Sampler Choice Should Consider Efficiency and Ability of Samplers To Cover Microbial Diversity.

Hamza Mbareche1,2, Marc Veillette1, Guillaume J Bilodeau3, Caroline Duchaine4,2.   

Abstract

Bioaerosol studies aim to describe the microbial content and increase understanding of the aerosolization processes linked to diseases. Air samplers are used to collect, identify, and quantify bioaerosols. Studies comparing the performances of air samplers have typically used a culture approach or have targeted a specific microorganism in laboratory settings. The objective of this study was to use environmental field samples to compare the efficiencies of 3 high-airflow-rate samplers for describing bioaerosol diversity using a next-generation sequencing approach. Two liquid cyclonic impactors and one electrostatic filter dry sampler were used in four wastewater treatment plants to target bacterial diversity and in five dairy farms to target fungal diversity. The dry electrostatic sampler was consistently more powerful in collecting more fungal and bacterial operational taxonomic units (OTUs). Substantial differences in OTU abundances between liquid and dry sampling were revealed. The majority of the diversity revealed by dry electrostatic sampling was not identified using the cyclonic liquid impactors. The findings from this work suggest that the choice of a bioaerosol sampler should include information about the efficiency and ability of samplers to cover microbial diversity. Although these results suggest that electrostatic filters result in better coverage of the microbial diversity among the tested air samplers, further studies are needed to confirm this hypothesis. While it is difficult to determine a single universally optimal air sampler, this work provides an in-depth look at some of the considerations that are essential when choosing an air sampler for studying the microbial ecology of bioaerosols.IMPORTANCE Associating bioaerosol exposure and health problems is challenging, and adequate exposure monitoring is a priority for scientists in the field. Conclusions that can be drawn from bioaerosol exposure studies are highly dependent on the design of the study and the methodologies used. The air sampling strategy is the first methodological step leading to an accurate interpretation of what is present in the air. Applying new molecular approaches to evaluate the efficiencies of the different types of samplers used in the field is necessary in order to circumvent traditional approaches and the biases they introduce to such studies. The results and conclusions provided in this paper should be taken in consideration when conducting a bioaerosol study.
Copyright © 2018 American Society for Microbiology.

Keywords:  air samplers; microbial diversity; next-generation sequencing; sampling biases

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30217848      PMCID: PMC6238049          DOI: 10.1128/AEM.01589-18

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol        ISSN: 0099-2240            Impact factor:   4.792


  56 in total

Review 1.  Bioaerosol health effects and exposure assessment: progress and prospects.

Authors:  J Douwes; P Thorne; N Pearce; D Heederik
Journal:  Ann Occup Hyg       Date:  2003-04

Review 2.  Application of multivariate statistical techniques in microbial ecology.

Authors:  O Paliy; V Shankar
Journal:  Mol Ecol       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 6.185

Review 3.  Airborne transmission of disease in hospitals.

Authors:  I Eames; J W Tang; Y Li; P Wilson
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2009-10-14       Impact factor: 4.118

4.  Exposure-affecting factors of dairy farmers' exposure to inhalable dust and endotoxin.

Authors:  Ioannis Basinas; Torben Sigsgaard; Mogens Erlandsen; Nils T Andersen; Hisamitsu Takai; Dick Heederik; Øyvind Omland; Hans Kromhout; Vivi Schlünssen
Journal:  Ann Occup Hyg       Date:  2014-04-18

5.  Fungal aerosols at dairy farms using molecular and culture techniques.

Authors:  Hamza Mbareche; Marc Veillette; Guillaume J Bilodeau; Caroline Duchaine
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2018-10-26       Impact factor: 7.963

6.  Evidence of airborne transmission of the severe acute respiratory syndrome virus.

Authors:  Ignatius T S Yu; Yuguo Li; Tze Wai Wong; Wilson Tam; Andy T Chan; Joseph H W Lee; Dennis Y C Leung; Tommy Ho
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2004-04-22       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Airborne influenza virus detection with four aerosol samplers using molecular and infectivity assays: considerations for a new infectious virus aerosol sampler.

Authors:  P Fabian; J J McDevitt; E A Houseman; D K Milton
Journal:  Indoor Air       Date:  2009-05-26       Impact factor: 5.770

8.  Fungal bioaerosols in biomethanization facilities.

Authors:  Hamza Mbareche; Marc Veillette; Marie-Ève Dubuis; Bouchra Bakhiyi; Geneviève Marchand; Joseph Zayed; Jacques Lavoie; Guillaume J Bilodeau; Caroline Duchaine
Journal:  J Air Waste Manag Assoc       Date:  2018-08-27       Impact factor: 2.235

9.  Physical collection efficiency of filter materials for bacteria and viruses.

Authors:  Nancy Clark Burton; Sergey A Grinshpun; Tiina Reponen
Journal:  Ann Occup Hyg       Date:  2006-10-14

10.  Challenges in homology search: HMMER3 and convergent evolution of coiled-coil regions.

Authors:  Jaina Mistry; Robert D Finn; Sean R Eddy; Alex Bateman; Marco Punta
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2013-04-17       Impact factor: 16.971

View more
  8 in total

1.  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

2.  Bioaerosol Sampling: Classical Approaches, Advances, and Perspectives.

Authors:  Gediminas Mainelis
Journal:  Aerosol Sci Technol       Date:  2019-10-04       Impact factor: 4.809

3.  Airborne SARS-CoV-2 surveillance in hospital environment using high-flowrate air samplers and its comparison to surface sampling.

Authors:  Alicia Xy Ang; Irvan Luhung; Bintou A Ahidjo; Daniela I Drautz-Moses; Paul A Tambyah; Chee Keng Mok; Kenny Jx Lau; Sai Meng Tham; Justin Jang Hann Chu; David M Allen; Stephan C Schuster
Journal:  Indoor Air       Date:  2021-09-14       Impact factor: 6.554

4.  Bioaerosols Play a Major Role in the Nasopharyngeal Microbiota Content in Agricultural Environment.

Authors:  Hamza Mbareche; Marc Veillette; Jonathan Pilote; Valérie Létourneau; Caroline Duchaine
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2019-04-16       Impact factor: 3.390

Review 5.  SARS-CoV-2: a systematic review of indoor air sampling for virus detection.

Authors:  João Tito Borges; Liane Yuri Kondo Nakada; Milena Guedes Maniero; José Roberto Guimarães
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2021-02-25       Impact factor: 5.190

6.  Performance evaluation of high-volume electret filter air samplers in aerosol microbiome research.

Authors:  Kari Oline Bøifot; Jostein Gohli; Gunnar Skogan; Marius Dybwad
Journal:  Environ Microbiome       Date:  2020-07-28

7.  A fieldable electrostatic air sampler enabling tuberculosis detection in bioaerosols.

Authors:  Nuno Rufino de Sousa; Niklas Sandström; Lei Shen; Kathleen Håkansson; Rafaella Vezozzo; Klas I Udekwu; Julio Croda; Antonio Gigliotti Rothfuchs
Journal:  Tuberculosis (Edinb)       Date:  2019-12-24       Impact factor: 3.131

8.  Comparison of the performance of ITS1 and ITS2 as barcodes in amplicon-based sequencing of bioaerosols.

Authors:  Hamza Mbareche; Marc Veillette; Guillaume Bilodeau; Caroline Duchaine
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2020-02-17       Impact factor: 2.984

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.