跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.222.104.206) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/05/29 23:49
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:林雅晴
研究生(外文):Lin, Ya-chin
論文名稱:衝擊器之生物氣膠採樣效率
論文名稱(外文):Sampling efficiency of impactor for bioaerosol
指導教授:李芝珊李芝珊引用關係---
指導教授(外文):Li Chih-shan
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺灣大學
系所名稱:環境衛生研究所
學門:醫藥衛生學門
學類:公共衛生學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:1998
畢業學年度:86
語文別:中文
論文頁數:2
中文關鍵詞:生物氣膠衝擊器採樣效率
外文關鍵詞:bioaerosolimpactorsampling efficiency
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:12
  • 點閱點閱:571
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:3
生物氣膠與人類健康的重要性與日俱增,因此量測工具的準確性也須要被評估。本研究
選擇三種攜帶式生物氣膠採樣器:Andersen Microbial Particle Sizing Sampler(AMS)
、Burkard Portable Air Sampler-for Agar Plate(Burkard)及Microbiological Air Sa
mpler(MAS-100),利用不同菌種及不同的採樣時間來評估採樣器的表現。本研究分別評估
採樣器之物理性收集效率及生物性收集效率。物理性收集效率方面,由PSL、大氣中的微
粒以及實驗用菌種作為測試氣膠,結果發現與各採樣器之理論截取粒徑相同,且其收集效
率曲線陡峭(sharp);而以不同菌種測試其物理性收集率則發現Burkard及MAS-100收集青
黴菌之效率最低,只有約十分之一,不同菌種間收集率最低的都是Burkard,這個結果與
物理性的截取粒徑大致相符。而生物性收集效率方面,本研究以CS值及校正存活率後之CS
r值來評估不同採樣器對不同菌種所得到的結果,發現AMS除了對大腸桿菌之採樣效率較低
之外,對其他菌種的採集效率穩定,其CSr值為0.1-0.6,而Burkard及MAS-100對細菌之收
集效率不佳,尤其是對大腸菌之收集效率比AMS低約100倍,但對真菌之收集效率較高,CS
r值分別為1-2及0.1-0.3,且不因菌種而有不同。其中Burkard採樣真菌之效率比AMS好,
而MAS-100對真菌的收集效率為AMS之40-80%。物理性的收集效率不能解釋採樣器表現的不
同,因此生物性的因子值得進一步的研究,以瞭解影響採樣器效率的原因。不同菌種長時
間採樣的結果也有差異。大腸桿菌、枯草桿菌及青黴菌長時間採樣後濃度顯著下降,而酵
母菌則否。細菌與真菌的差異可能與培養基的特性有關,而青黴菌在長時間衝擊後因包埋
作用使得存活率降低可能是造成濃度下降的因素。造成長時間採得濃度下降的原因仍有待
進一步的研究確認。在大氣環境採樣的樣本在長時間運送後可能使其所得濃度產生變化。
本研究以單一菌種(大腸桿菌及枯草桿菌)來評估衝擊瓶及濾紙在不同時間及不同保存溫度
下的影響。結果發現衝擊瓶中的大腸桿菌無論是置於25C或是4C的溫度,其濃度只有在第
一個小時內沒有顯著的變化,之後大約維持在原濃度的二分之一左右,採樣完8小時左右
,置於25C環境的樣本,其濃度開始急遽增加。而對枯草桿菌的樣本來說,採樣完後至8小
時左右,無論是25C或是4C的樣本都沒有變化,8小時左右置於25C環境下的枯草桿菌樣本
濃度開始急遽上升。利用果膠濾紙採集大腸桿菌時,在採樣完後第一個小時其樣本濃度就
下降至原來的50%以下,4小時後已沒有大腸桿菌存活;而枯草桿菌則可維持72小時,其濃
度仍然沒有變化。至於薄膜濾紙,則大腸桿菌的樣本濃度下降更快速,採樣完後5分鐘,
其濃度已下降至原來的30-40%以下,至30分鐘左右,已完全無活的大腸桿菌存在;而枯草
桿菌的情形則與果膠濾紙相同,能夠維持濃度穩定達72小時之久。結論是採集大腸桿菌無
論何種採樣器均需儘快完成樣本處理。而枯草桿菌則以濾紙保存較佳,若以衝擊瓶保存,
則需將樣本置於4C的環境中。可以知道不同採樣器的保存效率與菌種有關。
Bioaerosol samplers are important tools for monitoring bioaerosol concentration
in different environments. The factors influent collection efficiency of
bioaerosol samplers were evaluated. Three portable bioaerosol samplers were
chosen for study: Andersen Microbial Particle Sizing Sampler(AMS), Burkard
Portable Air Sampler-for Agar Plate(Burkard) and Microbiological Air Sampler
(MAS-100). This study also used 5 species microorganism and different sampling
time to evaluate the factors influence the performance of bioaerosol samplers.
This study evaluated both physical and biological collection efficiency of
impactors. By the physical aspects, and PSL aerosol, the particulate of the
ambient and the test species were as test target. The results foung that the
dp50 each test showed was similar to the theoretical measurement, and the
collection efficiency curve was sharp. Using test species as test aerosol found
that Burkard got the lowest collection rate at whole species used. In the view
of biological aspects, CS and CSr value were used as an indicator. AMS got the
highest CS value for bacteria and Burkard for fungi. After correction of
survival, AMS got almost even CSr value for species except E. coli. Burkard and
MAS-100 only got even value for fungi. Because physical factors
couldn''t explain
the result especially for fungi, biological factors affect the efficiency of
impactor needs further evaluation.
The concentration of E. coli, B. subtilis and P. citrinum decreased after long
time sampling. The explanation was because of different media and specie
characteristic.
This study evaluated the storage effect of different bioaerosol samplers by
using pure species of bacteria. impinger, unclepore and gelatine filter were
commonly used in high concentration environment. Delay of processing would made
the concentration change. We used different storage time and temperature to
evaluated the storage effect.
Storaging in impinger at 4C made the concentration of E. coli decrease but not
seem for B. subtilis. Storaging in impinger at 25C made concentration of both
species increased. It might be because of the nutrient part of the collection
liquid of impinger. For filter at both 4C and 25C, the concentration of E. coli
decreased soon but it seems no change for B. subtilis.
The conclusion is for E. coli sampling, the sample processing must be done as
soon as possible, and filter is a good method for sampling B. subtilis, an
endospore type bioaerosol.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
無相關期刊