Comparison of the Results of Studies of Air Pollution Fungi Using the SAS Super 100, MAS 100, and Air IDEAL

Cecylia Łukaszuk, Elżbieta Krajewska-Kułak, Andrzej Guzowski, Wojciech Kułak and Bogumiła Kraszyńska
Additional contact information
Cecylia Łukaszuk: Department of Integrated Medical Care, Medical University of Bialystok, 15-274 Białystok, Poland
Elżbieta Krajewska-Kułak: Department of Integrated Medical Care, Medical University of Bialystok, 15-274 Białystok, Poland
Andrzej Guzowski: Department of Integrated Medical Care, Medical University of Bialystok, 15-274 Białystok, Poland
Wojciech Kułak: Department of Pediatric Rehabilitation, Medical University of Białystok, 15-274 Białystok, Poland
Bogumiła Kraszyńska: Department of Integrated Medical Care, Medical University of Bialystok, 15-274 Białystok, Poland

IJERPH, 2017, vol. 14, issue 7, 1-7

Abstract: Although several air sampling devices for identifying and enumerating airborne microorganisms are commercially available, each poses some limitations. The aim of this study was to evaluate air pollution fungi using three such samplers: SAS Super 100, Microbiological Air Sampler (MAS) 100, and Air IDEAL. Mycological air was taken from the cellars of a 17th-century church in Siemiatycze, Poland, and the nearby outdoor environment. With samplers placed 1.5 m above the floor, microbial flora in air samples collected inside and outside the cellar were detected. The number of colony-forming units (CFU) of fungi obtained with the three samplers from the cellars and outdoor environment differed; the most CFU were obtained with the Air IDEAL and the least with the SAS Super 100. Significant differences emerged in CFUs collected from air samples with the MAS 100 and SAS Super 100, on the one hand, and the SAS Super 100 and Air IDEAL, on the other. Otherwise, results among the samplers were different. More Cladosporium species were collected with the MAS 100 sampler, whereas more Fusarium and Aspergillus species were collected with the Air IDEAL sampler. Significant differences among CFU/m 3 values among the tested sites depended on the sampler used.

Keywords: air samplers; air; air pollution; cellar; fungi (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2017
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/14/7/815/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/14/7/815/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:14:y:2017:i:7:p:815-:d:105287

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().