A review of the sampling efficiency of rotating‐arm impactors used in aerobiological studies

Di-Giovanni, F.

doi:10.1080/00173139809362661

Cited by 16 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the present study, the corrected Rotorod data result in values higher than corrected values for the filter cassette, a well characterized standard. This suggests that the higher, calculated collection efficiency for the Rotorod discussed by Di Giovanni (1998) of 85% is probably more correct at least under these conditions than the empirical values reported to date (68-71%; Di-Giovanni, 1998).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 60%

“…Although the Rotorod has been used for determining pollen diversity and to estimate concentrations for over 40 years (Frenz and Lince, 1997), and is recognized to do so in a reproducible manner, further studies were required to confirm the quantitative value of the results obtained (Di-Giovanni, 1998;Coates et al, 2002). We have now demonstrated that the Rotorod measured pollen levels similar to the AOC and filter cassette measurement.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…The failure to correct for varying sampling efficiency can result in large errors in the estimate for atmospheric pollen concentrations (Di-Giovanni, 1998). Because airspeed affects different samplers in different ways (e.g.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All of these conditions assured consistent data. The calculated and empirically determined collection efficiencies of the Rotorod for Ambrosia pollen have been reported as 85% (Frenz, 1999) and 68-71% (Ogden and Raynor, 1967;Di-Giovanni, 1998;Frenz, 1999), respectively. In the present study, the corrected Rotorod data result in values higher than corrected values for the filter cassette, a well characterized standard.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Pollen counts/m 3 were corrected using published particle collection efficiencies for 20 lm particles at the air velocity used (Di-Giovanni, 1998). The values chosen for correction calculations were based on empirical data where available.…”

Section: Data Analysis and Statisticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Comparison of the Rotorod to other air samplers for the determination of Ambrosia artemisiifolia pollen concentrations conducted in the Environmental Exposure Unit

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Environmental Exposure Unit (EEU) is a 924 m 3 facility (Kingston General Hospital, Ontario) in which uniform concentrations of various pollens in HEPA-filtered air at known rates of laminar airflow can be maintained. This facility provided a unique opportunity to compare several air samplers without the environmental variation inherent in outdoor comparisons. The purpose of this study was to conduct a quantitative comparison of pollen measurements using the Rotorod, Burkardä Personal Volumetric Air Sampler, Air-O-Cellä and a 37 mm open-faced filter cassette with a microporous filter in the EEU. Pollen samples were taken during clinical trials being conducted in the Unit. Raw pollen counts/m 3 obtained using the different methods were corrected using published particle collection efficiencies for the particle size ($20 lm) and airflow. Data were analyzed by ANOVA/Tukey HSD. No statistically significant differences were found between pollen concentrations determined by Rotorod, Air-O-Cell and filter cassette. Pollen levels determined by the Burkard were up to 2 times higher than the other sampling methods. Relative standard deviations were similar for the Rotorod, Burkard, and filter cassette and higher for the Air-O-Cell. This study demonstrated that, under our conditions, the Rotorod sampler provides consistent and reliable measurements of ragweed pollen concentrations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 60%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Data Analysis and Statisticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Comparison of the Rotorod to other air samplers for the determination of Ambrosia artemisiifolia pollen concentrations conducted in the Environmental Exposure Unit

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Molecular diagnostics for fungal plant pathogens

McCartney

Foster

Fraaije

et al. 2003

Pest Management Science

333

179

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accurate identification of fungal phytopathogens is essential for virtually all aspects of plant pathology, from fundamental research on the biology of pathogens to the control of the diseases they cause. Although molecular methods, such as polymerase chain reaction (PCR), are routinely used in the diagnosis of human diseases, they are not yet widely used to detect and identify plant pathogens. Here we review some of the diagnostic tools currently used for fungal plant pathogens and describe some novel applications. Technological advances in PCR-based methods, such as real-time PCR, allow fast, accurate detection and quantification of plant pathogens and are now being applied to practical problems. Molecular methods have been used to detect several pathogens simultaneously in wheat, and to study the development of fungicide resistance in wheat pathogens. Information resulting from such work could be used to improve disease control by allowing more rational decisions to be made about the choice and use of fungicides and resistant cultivars. Molecular methods have also been applied to the study of variation in plant pathogen populations, for example detection of different mating types or virulence types. PCR-based methods can provide new tools to monitor the exposure of a crop to pathogen inoculum that are more reliable and faster than conventional methods. This information can be used to improve disease control decision making. The development and application of molecular diagnostic methods in the future is discussed and we expect that new developments will increase the adoption of these new technologies for the diagnosis and study of plant disease.

show abstract