4.5 Article

Biological activities of respirable dust from Eastern Canadian peat moss factories

Journal

TOXICOLOGY IN VITRO
Volume 24, Issue 4, Pages 1273-1278

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.tiv.2010.03.019

Keywords

Aerobiology; Dust; Biological contaminants; Peat moss factories; Agricultural setting

Categories

Funding

  1. Institut de Recherche Robert-Sauve en Sante et en Securite du Travail du Quebec (IRSST)
  2. CIHR/IRSST
  3. Chaire de pneumologie de la Fondation
  4. Fond de la Recherche en Sante du Quebec (FRSQ)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Bacteria, moulds, endotoxin and quartz from respirable dust of agricultural and industrial buildings are typically incriminated for the respiratory health decline of exposed workers despite that dust being an undefined mixture and quantification methods of aerosolized bacteria, moulds or endotoxin not being standardized yet. We developed an in vitro alveolar epithelial cell system in which biological activities of peat moss factories' dust might be correlated to bacteria, mould, endotoxin and quartz concentrations of the analyzed samples. Following exposure, interleukin-8 protein secretion, necrosis and apoptosis of the exposed A549 cells were monitored respectively with ELISA on cell supernatants, trypan blue exclusion and DNA fragmentation detection by flow cytometry. Respirable dust was collected with liquid impingers and respirable quartz with 10 mm Dorr-Oliver cyclones. We quantified mesophilic bacteria, mesophilic moulds and endotoxins from liquid impinger samples. No correlation was observed between biological activities of dust and bacteria, mould, endotoxin or quartz concentrations under our experimental conditions. Our speculation is that simple measurements, such as dust concentrations, may not be adequate indicators of the human respiratory health hazard for a given environment. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available