About: Comparing the performance of 3 bioaerosol samplers for influenza virus

Facets (new session)
Description
Metadata
Settings
- owl:sameAs
- Inference Rule:

About: Comparing the performance of 3 bioaerosol samplers for influenza virus Goto Sponge NotDistinct Permalink

An Entity of Type : schema:ScholarlyArticle, within Data Space : wasabi.inria.fr associated with source document(s)

Attributes	Values
type	Academic Article research paper schema:ScholarlyArticle
isDefinedBy	Covid-on-the-Web dataset
has title	Comparing the performance of 3 bioaerosol samplers for influenza virus
Creator	Babcock, Hilary Wang, Yang Biswas, Pratim Leavey, Anna Li, Jiayu Wallace, Meghan Burnham, Carey-Ann Cm Boon, Adrianus O'neil, Caroline
Source	Elsevier; Medline; PMC
abstract	Abstract Respiratory viral diseases can be spread when a virus-containing particle (droplet) from one individual is aerosolized and subsequently comes into either direct or indirect contact with another individual. Increasing numbers of studies are examining the occupational risk to healthcare workers due to proximity to patients. Selecting the appropriate air sampling method is a critical factor in assuring the analytical performance characteristics of a clinical study. The objective of this study was to compare the physical collection efficiency and virus collection efficiency of a 5mL compact SKC BioSampler®, a gelatin filter, and a glass fiber filter, in a laboratory setting. The gelatin filter and the glass fiber filter were housed in a home-made filter holder. Submersion (with vortexing and subsequent centrifugation) was used for the gelatin and glass fiber filters. Swabbing method was also tested to retrieve the viruses from the glass fiber filter. Experiments were conducted using the H1N1 influenza A virus A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (IAV-PR8), and viral recovery was determined using culture and commercial real-time-PCR (BioFire and Xpert). An atomizer was used to aerosolize a solution of influenza virus in PBS for measurement, and two Scanning Mobility Particle Sizers were used to determine particle size distributions. The SKC BioSampler demonstrated a U-shaped physical collection efficiency, lowest for particles around 30–50nm, and highest at 10nm and 300–350nm within the size range examined. The physical collection efficiency of the gelatin filter was strongly influenced by air flow and time: a stable collection across all particle sizes was only observed at 2L/min for the 9min sampling time, otherwise, degradation of the filter was observed. The glass fiber filter demonstrated the highest physical collection efficiency (100% for all sizes) of all tested samplers, however, its overall virus recovery efficiency fared the worst (too low to quantify). The highest viral collection efficiencies for the SKC BioSampler and gelatin filter were 5% and 1.5%, respectively. Overall, the SKC BioSampler outperformed the filters. It is important to consider the total concentration of viruses entering the sampler when interpreting the results.
has issue date	2018-01-31(xsd:dateTime)
bibo:doi	10.1016/j.jaerosci.2017.08.007
bibo:pmid	32287370
has license	els-covid
sha1sum (hex)	e06022e85d59209981ff67b7bd0d4bebd2becfa5
schema:url	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaerosci.2017.08.007
resource representing a document's title	Comparing the performance of 3 bioaerosol samplers for influenza virus
has PubMed Central identifier	PMC7125700
has PubMed identifier	32287370
schema:publication	Journal of Aerosol Science
resource representing a document's body	covid:e06022e85d59209981ff67b7bd0d4bebd2becfa5#body_text
is schema:about of	named entity 'viral' named entity 'study' named entity 'droplet' named entity 'studies' named entity 'observed' named entity 'direct' named entity 'physical' named entity 'occupational' named entity 'COMMERCIAL' named entity 'OBSERVED' named entity 'RESULTS' named entity 'DUE TO' named entity 'RISK' named entity 'REAL-TIME' named entity 'STUDY' named entity 'CONTAINING' named entity 'VIRAL' named entity '1.5' named entity 'COMPACT' named entity 'AIR FLOW' named entity 'QUANTIFY' named entity 'ANALYTICAL' named entity '2F8' named entity 'PARTICLE' named entity 'RESPIRATORY' named entity 'STABLE' named entity 'OBJECTIVE' named entity 'EXAMINING' named entity 'EXAMINED' named entity 'EITHER' named entity 'APPROPRIATE' named entity 'HOLDER' covid:arg/e06022e85d59209981ff67b7bd0d4bebd2becfa5 named entity 'CENTRIFUGATION' named entity 'AT 10' named entity 'TO RETRIEVE' named entity 'CONCENTRATION OF' named entity 'STUDIES' named entity 'SAMPLER' named entity 'AEROSOLIZE' named entity 'COMES' named entity 'HIGHEST' named entity 'ACROSS' named entity 'COMPARING' named entity 'INFLUENZA VIRUS' named entity 'PERFORMANCE' named entity 'PERFORMANCE' named entity 'CLINICAL STUDY' named entity 'PBS' named entity 'GELATIN' named entity 'CULTURE' named entity 'EFFICIENCY' named entity 'SELECTING' named entity 'TIME' named entity 'BIOAEROSOL' named entity 'OVERALL' named entity 'INFLUENZA VIRUS' named entity 'CRITICAL FACTOR' named entity 'COLLECTION' named entity 'LOWEST' named entity 'SUBMERSION' named entity 'TESTED' named entity 'ATOMIZER' named entity 'SCANNING' named entity 'RECOVERY' named entity 'TO COMPARE' named entity 'AIR' named entity 'INDIRECT' named entity 'TOTAL' named entity 'PARTICLE SIZE' named entity 'RICO' named entity 'DISTRIBUTIONS' named entity 'PHYSICAL'

Faceted Search & Find service v1.13.91 as of Mar 24 2020

Alternative Linked Data Documents: Sponger | ODE Content Formats:

RDF

ODATA

Microdata

About

OpenLink Virtuoso version 07.20.3229 as of Jul 10 2020, on Linux (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu), Single-Server Edition (94 GB total memory)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2024 OpenLink Software