Bioaerosol Exposure and Risk Assessment

A special issue of Atmosphere (ISSN 2073-4433). This special issue belongs to the section "Air Quality and Human Health".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (30 April 2020) | Viewed by 42901

Special Issue Editor


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Public Health and Pediatrics, University of the Study of Turin, 10126 Torino, Italy
Interests: air pollution; fine particulate matter; bioaerosol; human health; genotoxicity; exposomics; public health genomics; adaptive genomics; microbiota

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Recent studies have demonstrated new effects of aerosol inhalation on human health. In addition to the spread of infective diseases, a variety of more common health effects, that are not infectious in nature, has been reported. The complex interactions between an inhaled mixture and the respiratory microbiome have to be investigated to determine the resulting beneficial and potentially harmful effects.

Aerosols include biological particles and other types of material that can be inhaled. How quantitatively and qualitatively to analyse aerosols in indoor and outdoor environments is not well understood yet. In particular, research is required for:

  • The evaluation of the interactions between aerosol components and both the natural environment and humans;
  • Designing a comprehensive approach considering additive, synergic or other effects on human health ;
  • The study of specific microenvironment aerosol exposure for a correct risk assessment;
  • The determination of aerosol contribution to exposomic research models and its influence on the adaptive genome, including epigenetic mechanisms and lung microbiota modulation.

We have to understand how and to what extent aerosol mixtures affect human respiratory health.

This Special Issue seeks research papers on the interaction between aerosol inhalation and human health, focusing on thorough risk assessment analyses. We encourage the submission of interdisciplinary works discussing new tools in aerosol risk assessment.

Professor Deborah Traversi
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Atmosphere is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • air pollution
  • aerosol
  • bioaerosol
  • risk assessment
  • respiratory human health
  • exposure models
  • air microbiota

Published Papers (8 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review

17 pages, 1968 KiB  
Article
Potential Respiratory Deposition and Species Composition of Airborne Culturable, Viable, and Non-Viable Fungi during Occupancy in a Pig Farm
by John Kerr White, Jeppe Lund Nielsen and Anne Mette Madsen
Atmosphere 2020, 11(6), 639; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos11060639 - 16 Jun 2020
Cited by 11 | Viewed by 2850
Abstract
Fungal species composition and site of deposition within the airways affects whether diseases develop and where they may arise. The aim of this study is to obtain knowledge regarding the potential deposition of airborne culturable, viable, and non-viable fungi in the airways of [...] Read more.
Fungal species composition and site of deposition within the airways affects whether diseases develop and where they may arise. The aim of this study is to obtain knowledge regarding the potential deposition of airborne culturable, viable, and non-viable fungi in the airways of pig farm workers, and how this composition changes over multiple sampling days. Airborne fungi were sampled using impactors and subsequently analyzed using amplicon sequencing and matrix assisted laser desorption ionization time of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) fingerprinting. The geometric mean aerodynamic diameter (Dg) of airborne particles with culturable airborne fungi were not affected by sampling days and ranged in size between 3.7 and 4.6 µm. Amplicon sequencing of the internal transcribed spacer region of the rRNA gene operon, in combination with DNA interchelating agents, revealed a large presence of non-viable fungi, but several pathogenic and toxic fungal species were detected in the viable portion. The diversity was found to be significantly associated with the sampling day but did not change significantly over multiple sampling rounds during the same day. The non-viable fraction contained genera typically associated with the pig gastrointestinal tract, such as Kazachstania and Vishniacozyma. In conclusion, the Dg of culturable fungi was between 3.7 and 4.6 µm, and the Dg of the viable and total fungi was 1.5 and 2.1 µm, respectively. The species composition changed over the multiple sampling days. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Bioaerosol Exposure and Risk Assessment)
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

16 pages, 1339 KiB  
Article
Comparison of Two Models to Estimate Deposition of Fungi and Bacteria in the Human Respiratory Tract
by Jessica A. Sagona, Lynn E. Secondo and Gediminas Mainelis
Atmosphere 2020, 11(6), 561; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos11060561 - 28 May 2020
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 2709
Abstract
Understanding the deposition of bioaerosols in the respiratory system may help determine the risk of disease; however, measuring deposition fraction in-situ is difficult. Computational models provide estimates of particle deposition fraction for given breathing and particle parameters; however, these models traditionally have not [...] Read more.
Understanding the deposition of bioaerosols in the respiratory system may help determine the risk of disease; however, measuring deposition fraction in-situ is difficult. Computational models provide estimates of particle deposition fraction for given breathing and particle parameters; however, these models traditionally have not focused on bioaerosols. We calculated deposition fractions in an average-sized adult with a new bioaerosol-specific lung deposition model, BAIL, and with two multiple-path models for three different breathing scenarios: “default” (subject sitting upright and breathing nasally), “light exercise”, and “mouth breathing”. Within each scenario, breathing parameters and bioaerosol characteristics were kept the same across all three models. BAIL generally calculated a higher deposition fraction in the extrathoracic (ET) region and a lower deposition fraction in the alveolar region than the multiple-path models. Deposition fractions in the tracheobronchial region were similar among the three models; total deposition fraction patterns tended to be driven by the ET deposition fraction, with BAIL resulting in higher deposition in some scenarios. The difference between deposition fractions calculated by BAIL and other models depended on particle size, with BAIL generally indicating lower total deposition for bacteria-sized bioaerosols. We conclude that BAIL predicts somewhat lower deposition and, potentially, reduced risk of illness from smaller bioaerosols that cause illness due to deposition in the alveolar region. On the other hand, it suggests higher deposition in the ET region, especially for light exercise and mouth-breathing scenarios. Additional comparisons between the models for other breathing scenarios, people’s age, and different bioaerosol particles will help improve our understanding of bioaerosol deposition. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Bioaerosol Exposure and Risk Assessment)
Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 740 KiB  
Article
Bioaerosol in Composting Facilities: A Survey on Full-Scale Plants in Italy
by Elisa Anedda and Deborah Traversi
Atmosphere 2020, 11(4), 398; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos11040398 - 16 Apr 2020
Cited by 5 | Viewed by 2430
Abstract
Bioaerosols lead to human health diseases and composting plants are one of the main sources among human activities. In this study, a survey was conducted on such plants to evaluate bioaerosol risk management. A questionnaire was used to collect information on plant location, [...] Read more.
Bioaerosols lead to human health diseases and composting plants are one of the main sources among human activities. In this study, a survey was conducted on such plants to evaluate bioaerosol risk management. A questionnaire was used to collect information on plant location, process types, collective and personal protective equipment, bioaerosol and particulate matter monitoring data, and occupational surveillance. We examined the data produced by 11 plants located in Italy. Self-control bioaerosol monitoring showed a global contamination index mean of 9908 CFU/m3 underlining a higher concentration (a) in plants with only aerobic process (CPs) with respect to plants that also combined anaerobic treatment of the waste (ADCPs) (p < 0.05) and (b) in facilities with biocells with respect to windrows (p < 0.01). Workers are generally more exposed when working without vehicles. Some areas such as pre-treatment and screening are more prone to higher bioaerosol concentrations, requiring more efficient collective protective equipment. Particulate matter monitoring showed concentration in line with occupational exposure limits for inhalable dust (1862 ± 1729 µg/m3) and breathable dust (276 ± 126 µg/m3), however, organic particle exposure risk assessment has to be carefully reviewed. Improvements in the training program, process design, and health surveillance are desirable as major preventive tools. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Bioaerosol Exposure and Risk Assessment)
Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 817 KiB  
Article
Bioburden Assessment by Passive Methods on a Clinical Pathology Service in One Central Hospital from Lisbon: What Can it Tell Us Regarding Patients and Staff Exposure?
by Carla Viegas, Magdalena Twarużek, Raquel Lourenço, Marta Dias, Beatriz Almeida, Liliana Aranha Caetano, Elisabete Carolino, Anita Quintal Gomes, Robert Kosicki, Ewelina Soszczyńska and Susana Viegas
Atmosphere 2020, 11(4), 351; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos11040351 - 03 Apr 2020
Cited by 14 | Viewed by 4176
Abstract
The assessment and control of microbial contamination in health care facilities is presently a mandatory and vital part of strategies to prevent and control hospital-acquired infections. This study aims to assess the bioburden with two passive sampling methods (30 ventilations grids swabs and [...] Read more.
The assessment and control of microbial contamination in health care facilities is presently a mandatory and vital part of strategies to prevent and control hospital-acquired infections. This study aims to assess the bioburden with two passive sampling methods (30 ventilations grids swabs and 16 electrostatic dust collectors (EDCs)) at Clinical Pathology Services. The fungal burden was characterized through molecular tools, antifungal resistance, and the mycotoxins and cytotoxicity profile. Total bacteria presented the highest prevalence in both matrixes, whereas Gram-bacteria presented the lowest. Swabs presented a higher prevalence (27.6%) for fungal burden. Chrysonilia sitophila presented the highest prevalence in swabs, whereas for EDCs, C. sitophila and Mucor sp. were the most prevalent. Concerning Aspergillus genera on swabs, section Flavi was the one with the highest prevalence (58.02%), whereas, for EDCs, section Versicolores was the only section observed (100%). Aspergillus section Fumigati was detected in 10 swabs and 7 EDC samples and Aspergillus section Versicolores was detected in one EDC sample. Fungal growth on azole-supplemented media was observed in eight EDC samples. No mycotoxins were detected in any of the samples. A low cytotoxic effect was observed in two sites upon incubation of collected samples with A549 and SK cells and in two other sites upon incubation of collected samples with SK cells only. A medium cytotoxic effect was observed with one EDC sample upon incubation with A549 cells. This study reinforces the need of determination of the azole resistance profile for fungal species and allowed a preliminary risk characterization regarding the cytotoxicity. An intervention including the use of a ultraviolet with wavelength between 200 nm and 280 nm (UVC)—emitting device and an increased maintenance and cleaning of the central heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems should be ensured to promote the reduction of microbial contamination. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Bioaerosol Exposure and Risk Assessment)
Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 1775 KiB  
Article
The Relationship Between Air Pollution and All-Cause Mortality in Singapore
by Andrew Fu Wah Ho, Huili Zheng, Kang Hao Cheong, Wee Liang En, Pin Pin Pek, Xinxing Zhao, Geoffrey G. Morgan, Arul Earnest, Benjamin Yong Qiang Tan, Yih Yng Ng, Ling Li Foo and Marcus Eng Hock Ong
Atmosphere 2020, 11(1), 9; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos11010009 - 20 Dec 2019
Cited by 16 | Viewed by 8456
Abstract
Ambient air pollution is a risk factor for both acute and chronic diseases and poses serious health threats to the world population. We aim to study the relationship between air pollution and all-cause mortality in the context of a city-state exposed to the [...] Read more.
Ambient air pollution is a risk factor for both acute and chronic diseases and poses serious health threats to the world population. We aim to study the relationship between air pollution and all-cause mortality in the context of a city-state exposed to the Southeast Asian haze problem. The primary exposure was ambient air pollution, as measured by the Pollutants Standards Index (PSI). The outcome of interest was all-cause mortality from 2010–2015. A time-stratified case-crossover design was performed. A conditional Poisson regression model, including environmental variables such as PSI, temperature, wind speed, and rainfall, was fitted to the daily count of deaths to estimate the incidence rate ratio (IRR) of mortality per unit increase in PSI, accounting for overdispersion and autocorrelation. To account for intermediate exposure effects (maximum lag of 10 days), a distributed lag non-linear model was used. There were 105,504 deaths during the study period. Increment in PSI was significantly associated with an increased risk of mortality. The adjusted IRR of mortality per the 10-unit increase in PSI was 1.01 (95%CI = 1.00–1.01). The lag effect was stronger when PSI was in the unhealthy range compared to the good and moderate ranges. At lag = 7 days, PSI appeared to have an adverse effect on mortality, although the effect was not significant. These findings provide evidence on the general health hazard of exposure to air pollution and can potentially guide public health policies in the region. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Bioaerosol Exposure and Risk Assessment)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Research

25 pages, 1158 KiB  
Review
Workplace Biological Risk Assessment: Review of Existing and Description of a Comprehensive Approach
by Sarah Burzoni, Philippe Duquenne, Gautier Mater and Luc Ferrari
Atmosphere 2020, 11(7), 741; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos11070741 - 13 Jul 2020
Cited by 10 | Viewed by 8234
Abstract
Biological risks potentially affect workers in multiple occupational sectors through their exposure to pathogenic agents. These risks must be carefully assessed to prevent adverse health effects. This article identifies and critically analyzes approaches that manage the qualitative evaluation of biological risk (EvBR) as [...] Read more.
Biological risks potentially affect workers in multiple occupational sectors through their exposure to pathogenic agents. These risks must be carefully assessed to prevent adverse health effects. This article identifies and critically analyzes approaches that manage the qualitative evaluation of biological risk (EvBR) as part of occupational health and safety prevention, for which no standard method yet exists. Bibliographic and computing references were searched to identify qualitative EvBR approaches, which were then analyzed based on defined criteria, such as the risks studied and the type of assessment. Approaches proposing the most representative types of assessment were analyzed. EvBR approaches in an occupational setting were identified in 32 sources. “Workstation analysis” combined with “assessment by risk level” were the most common approaches. The predominant risk descriptors (RDs) were defined in a characterized and quantifiable way, and a variety of hazard levels and exposure indices were created. Overall, the risk was determined by summing or multiplying the hazard level and exposure indicators. The results confirmed that no methodological consensus currently exists regarding the EvBR and no approach has yet been described that integrates all the parameters to allow for a full assessment of biological risk. Based on the detailed analysis of the existing data, the present paper proposes a general approach. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Bioaerosol Exposure and Risk Assessment)
Show Figures

Figure 1

21 pages, 613 KiB  
Review
Covid-19 Airborne Transmission and Its Prevention: Waiting for Evidence or Applying the Precautionary Principle?
by Annalaura Carducci, Ileana Federigi and Marco Verani
Atmosphere 2020, 11(7), 710; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos11070710 - 03 Jul 2020
Cited by 25 | Viewed by 8319
Abstract
Besides the predominant ways of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 (namely, contacts and large droplets) the airborne one is increasingly taken into consideration as a result of latest research findings. Nevertheless, this possibility has been already suggested by previous studies on other coronaviruses including SARS-CoV [...] Read more.
Besides the predominant ways of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 (namely, contacts and large droplets) the airborne one is increasingly taken into consideration as a result of latest research findings. Nevertheless, this possibility has been already suggested by previous studies on other coronaviruses including SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV. To describe the state of the art of coronaviruses and airborne transmission, a systematic review was carried out using the PRISMA methodology. Overall, 64 papers were selected and classified into three main groups: laboratory experiments (12 papers), air monitoring (22) and epidemiological and airflow model studies (30). The airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is suggested by the studies of the three groups, but none has yet obtained complete evidence. The sampling and detection methods have not been validated, therefore monitoring results are affected by a possible underestimation. Then, epidemiological investigations only hypothesize the airborne transmission as a possible explanation for some illness cases, but without estimating its attributable risk. Nevertheless, while waiting for more evidence, it is urgent to base advice on preventive measures, such as the use of masks, safe distancing and air ventilation, on the precautionary principle. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Bioaerosol Exposure and Risk Assessment)
Show Figures

Figure 1

19 pages, 727 KiB  
Review
Methods for Bioaerosol Characterization: Limits and Perspectives for Human Health Risk Assessment in Organic Waste Treatment
by Elena Franchitti, Erica Pascale, Elisabetta Fea, Elisa Anedda and Deborah Traversi
Atmosphere 2020, 11(5), 452; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos11050452 - 30 Apr 2020
Cited by 30 | Viewed by 4750
Abstract
Bioaerosol characterization represents a major challenge for the risk assessment and management of exposed people. One of the most important bioaerosol sources is the organic waste collection and treatment. This work analyzed and discussed the literature with the purpose of investigating the main [...] Read more.
Bioaerosol characterization represents a major challenge for the risk assessment and management of exposed people. One of the most important bioaerosol sources is the organic waste collection and treatment. This work analyzed and discussed the literature with the purpose of investigating the main techniques used nowadays for bioaerosol monitoring during organic waste treatment. The discussion includes an overview on the most efficient sampling, DNA extraction, and analysis methods, including both the cultural and the bio-molecular approach. Generally, an exhaustive biological risk assessment is not applied due to the organic waste heterogeneity, treatment complexity, and unknown aerosolized emission rate. However, the application of bio-molecular methods allows a better bioaerosol characterization, and it is desirable to be associated with standardized cultural methods. Risk assessment for organic waste workers generally includes the evaluation of the potential exposition to pathogens and opportunistic pathogens or to other microorganisms as biomarkers. In most cases, Saccharopolyspora rectivirgula, Legionella spp., Aspergillus spp., and Mycobacterium spp. are included. Future perspectives are focused on identifying common composting biomarkers, on investigating the causality process between chronic bioaerosol exposure and disease onset, and finally, on defining common exposure limits. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Bioaerosol Exposure and Risk Assessment)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop