174 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23460818)
21. The abbreviated impactor measurement (AIM) concept: part 1--Influence of particle bounce and re-entrainment-evaluation with a "dry" pressurized metered dose inhaler (pMDI)-based formulation.
Mitchell JP; Nagel MW; Avvakoumova V; MacKay H; Ali R
AAPS PharmSciTech; 2009; 10(1):243-51. PubMed ID: 19280348
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Comprehensive performance evaluation of six bioaerosol samplers based on an aerosol wind tunnel.
Guo J; Lv M; Liu Z; Qin T; Qiu H; Zhang L; Lu J; Hu L; Yang W; Zhou D
Environ Int; 2024 Jan; 183():108402. PubMed ID: 38150804
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Sampling atmospheric carbonaceous aerosols using a particle trap impactor/denuder sampler.
Mader BT; Flagan RC; Seinfeld JH
Environ Sci Technol; 2001 Dec; 35(24):4857-67. PubMed ID: 11775162
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Bioaerosol Sampler Choice Should Consider Efficiency and Ability of Samplers To Cover Microbial Diversity.
Mbareche H; Veillette M; Bilodeau GJ; Duchaine C
Appl Environ Microbiol; 2018 Dec; 84(23):. PubMed ID: 30217848
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Fast monitoring of indoor bioaerosol concentrations with ATP bioluminescence assay using an electrostatic rod-type sampler.
Park JW; Park CW; Lee SH; Hwang J
PLoS One; 2015; 10(5):e0125251. PubMed ID: 25950929
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Bioaerosol and surface sampling for the surveillance of influenza A virus in swine.
Prost K; Kloeze H; Mukhi S; Bozek K; Poljak Z; Mubareka S
Transbound Emerg Dis; 2019 May; 66(3):1210-1217. PubMed ID: 30715792
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Comparison of field performance of the Andersen N6 single stage and the SAS sampler for airborne fungal propagules.
Bellin P; Schillinger J
Indoor Air; 2001 Mar; 11(1):65-8. PubMed ID: 11235232
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. The influence of sampling duration on recovery of culturable fungi using the Andersen N6 and RCS bioaerosol samplers.
Saldanha R; Manno M; Saleh M; Ewaze JO; Scott JA
Indoor Air; 2008 Dec; 18(6):464-72. PubMed ID: 18761682
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Evaluation of a high-volume portable bioaerosol sampler in laboratory and field environments.
An HR; Mainelis G; Yao M
Indoor Air; 2004 Dec; 14(6):385-93. PubMed ID: 15500631
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Field testing of a personal size-selective bioaerosol sampler.
Kenny LC; Bowry A; Crook B; Stancliffe JD
Ann Occup Hyg; 1999 Aug; 43(6):393-404. PubMed ID: 10518465
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Relative precision of inhaler aerodynamic particle size distribution (APSD) metrics by full resolution and abbreviated andersen cascade impactors (ACIs): part 2--investigation of bias in extra-fine mass fraction with AIM-HRT impactor.
Mitchell JP; Nagel MW; Doyle CC; Ali RS; Avvakoumova VI; Christopher JD; Quiroz J; Strickland H; Tougas T; Lyapustina S
AAPS PharmSciTech; 2010 Sep; 11(3):1115-8. PubMed ID: 20623212
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. The impact of high background particle concentration on the spatiotemporal distribution of Serratia marcescens bioaerosol.
Liu Z; Li H; Chu J; Huang Z; Xiao X; Wang Y; He J
J Hazard Mater; 2023 Sep; 458():131863. PubMed ID: 37354722
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Field Performance of a Novel Passive Bioaerosol Sampler using Polarized Ferroelectric Polymer Films.
Therkorn J; Thomas N; Scheinbeim J; Mainelis G
Aerosol Sci Technol; 2017; 51(7):787-800. PubMed ID: 30774180
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Evaluation of Air Samplers for Recovery of Artificially Generated Aerosols of Pure Cultures in a Controlled Environment.
Kang YJ; Frank JF
J Food Prot; 1989 Aug; 52(8):560-563. PubMed ID: 31003329
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. The adaptation of existing personal inhalable aerosol samplers for bioaerosol sampling.
Kenny LC; Stancliffe JD; Crook B; Stagg S; Griffiths WD; Stewart IW; Futter SJ
Am Ind Hyg Assoc J; 1998 Dec; 59(12):831-41. PubMed ID: 9866164
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Study on the Collection Efficiency of Bioaerosol Nanoparticles by Andersen-Type Impactors.
Tian Y; Wu Y; Zhang G; Chen H; Wu D; Liu J; Li Y; Shen S; Feng D; Pan Y; Li J
J Biomed Nanotechnol; 2022 Feb; 18(2):319-326. PubMed ID: 35484751
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Performance characteristics of PM10 samplers under calm air conditions.
Lai CY; Chen CC
J Air Waste Manag Assoc; 2000 Apr; 50(4):578-87. PubMed ID: 10786010
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Composition and Distribution Analysis of Bioaerosols Under Different Environmental Conditions.
Wang Z; Li J; Qian L; Liu L; Qian J; Lu B; Guo Z
J Vis Exp; 2019 Jan; (143):. PubMed ID: 30663694
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. [Bacterial and fungal aerosols in the work environment of cleaners].
Gołofit-Szymczak M; Górny RL; Ławniczek-Wałczyk A; Cyprowski M; Stobnicka A
Med Pr; 2015; 66(6):779-91. PubMed ID: 26674165
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Factors affecting microbiological colony count accuracy for bioaerosol sampling and analysis.
Chang CW; Grinshpun SA; Willeke K; Macher JM; Donnelly J; Clark S; Juozaitis A
Am Ind Hyg Assoc J; 1995 Oct; 56(10):979-86. PubMed ID: 7572615
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
