Literature DB >> 9373925

Field evaluation of endotoxin air sampling assay methods.

P S Thorne1, S J Reynolds, D K Milton, P D Bloebaum, X Zhang, P Whitten, L F Burmeister.   

Abstract

This study tested the importance of filter media, extraction and assay protocol, and bioaerosol source on the determination of endotoxin under field conditions in swine and poultry confinement buildings. Multiple simultaneous air samples were collected using glass fiber (GF) and polycarbonate (PC) filters, and these were assayed using two methods in two separate laboratories: an endpoint chromogenic Limulus amebocyte lysate (LAL) assay (QCL) performed in water and a kinetic chromogenic LAL assay (KQCL) performed in buffer with resistant-parallel line estimation analysis (KLARE). In addition, two aqueous filter extraction methods were compared in the QCL assay: 120 min extraction at 22 degrees C with vigorous shaking and 30 min extraction at 68 degrees C with gentle rocking. These extraction methods yielded endotoxin activities that were not significantly different and were very highly correlated. Reproducibility of endotoxin determinations from duplicate air sampling filters was very high (Cronbach alpha all > 0.94). When analyzed by the QCL method GF filters yielded significantly higher endotoxin activity than PC filters. QCL and KLARE methods gave similar estimates for endotoxin activity from PC filters; however, GF filters analyzed by the QCL method yielded significantly higher endotoxin activity estimates, suggesting enhancement of the QCL assay or inhibition of the KLARE asay with GF filters. Correlation between QCL-GF and QCL-PC was high (r = 0.98) while that between KLARE-GF and KLARE-PC was moderate (r = 0.68). Analysis of variance demonstrated that assay methodology, filter-type, barn-type, and interactions between assay and filter-type and between assay and barn-type were important factors influencing endotoxin exposure assessment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9373925     DOI: 10.1080/15428119791012298

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am Ind Hyg Assoc J        ISSN: 0002-8894


  12 in total

1.  Comparison of endotoxin exposure assessment by bioaerosol impinger and filter-sampling methods.

Authors:  C Duchaine; P S Thorne; A Mériaux; Y Grimard; P Whitten; Y Cormier
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 4.792

2.  Optimization of airborne endotoxin exposure assessment: effects of filter type, transport conditions, extraction solutions, and storage of samples and extracts.

Authors:  Suzanne Spaan; Dick J J Heederik; Peter S Thorne; Inge M Wouters
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2007-08-03       Impact factor: 4.792

3.  Workplace determinants of endotoxin exposure in dental healthcare facilities in South Africa.

Authors:  Tanusha S Singh; Braimoh Bello; Onnicah D Mabe; Kevin Renton; Mohamed F Jeebhay
Journal:  Ann Occup Hyg       Date:  2009-12-31

4.  Field Studies Measuring the Aerosolization of Endotoxin During the Land Application of Class B Biosolids.

Authors:  R F Herrmann; R J Grosser; D Farrar; R B Brobst
Journal:  Aerobiologia (Bologna)       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 2.410

5.  Assessment of swine worker exposures to dust and endotoxin during hog load-out and power washing.

Authors:  Patrick O'Shaughnessy; Thomas Peters; Kelley Donham; Craig Taylor; Ralph Altmaier; Kevin Kelly
Journal:  Ann Occup Hyg       Date:  2012-03-16

6.  Evaluation of the Limulus amebocyte lysate and recombinant factor C assays for assessment of airborne endotoxin.

Authors:  Peter S Thorne; Sarah S Perry; Rena Saito; Patrick T O'Shaughnessy; John Mehaffy; Nervana Metwali; Thomas Keefe; Kelley J Donham; Stephen J Reynolds
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2010-06-04       Impact factor: 4.792

7.  Evaluation of lot-to-lot repeatability and effect of assay media choice in the recombinant Factor C assay.

Authors:  Jennifer Helen McKenzie; K Udeni Alwis; Joanne E Sordillo; Kesava Srinivas Kalluri; Donald Kirby Milton
Journal:  J Environ Monit       Date:  2011-05-09

8.  Concentrations of bioaerosols, odors, and hydrogen sulfide inside and downwind from two types of swine livestock operations.

Authors:  Peter S Thorne; Anne C Ansley; Sarah Spencer Perry
Journal:  J Occup Environ Hyg       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 2.155

9.  Indoor and outdoor particulate matter and endotoxin concentrations in an intensely agricultural county.

Authors:  Brian T Pavilonis; T Renee Anthony; Patrick T O'Shaughnessy; Michael J Humann; James A Merchant; Genna Moore; Peter S Thorne; Clifford P Weisel; Wayne T Sanderson
Journal:  J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol       Date:  2013-01-16       Impact factor: 5.563

10.  Effect of extraction and assay media on analysis of airborne endotoxin.

Authors:  Suzanne Spaan; Gert Doekes; Dick Heederik; Peter S Thorne; Inge M Wouters
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2008-04-25       Impact factor: 4.792

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.