Direct Analysis of Low-Volatile Molecular Marker Extract from Airborne Particulate Matter Using Sensitivity Correction Method

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Satoshi Irei
Keyword(s):  
Particulate Matter ◽  
Molecular Marker ◽  
Airborne Particulate Matter ◽  
Direct Analysis ◽  
Correction Method ◽  
Airborne Particulate

scholarly journals Direct Analysis of Low-Volatile Molecular Marker Extract from Airborne Particulate Matter Using Sensitivity Correction Method

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Satoshi Irei
Keyword(s):  
Particulate Matter ◽  
Molecular Marker ◽  
Airborne Particulate Matter ◽  
Direct Analysis ◽  
Correction Method ◽  
Standard Reference Materials ◽  
Gas Chromatography Mass Spectrometry ◽  
Source Analysis ◽  
Airborne Particulate ◽  
Molecular Marker Analysis

Molecular marker analysis of environmental samples often requires time consuming preseparation steps. Here, analysis of low-volatile nonpolar molecular markers (5-6 ring polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons or PAHs, hopanoids, andn-alkanes) without the preseparation procedure is presented. Analysis of artificial sample extracts was directly conducted by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS). After every sample injection, a standard mixture was also analyzed to make a correction on the variation of instrumental sensitivity caused by the unfavorable matrix contained in the extract. The method was further validated for the PAHs using the NIST standard reference materials (SRMs) and then applied to airborne particulate matter samples. Tests with the SRMs showed that overall our methodology was validated with the uncertainty of ~30%. The measurement results of airborne particulate matter (PM) filter samples showed a strong correlation between the PAHs, implying the contributions from the same emission source. Analysis of size-segregated PM filter samples showed that their size distributions were found to be in the PM smaller than 0.4 μm aerodynamic diameter. The observations were consistent with our expectation of their possible sources. Thus, the method was found to be useful for molecular marker studies.

scholarly journals The Impact of Bushfire Smoke on Cattle—A Review

Animals ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 848
Author(s):  
Benjamin Eid ◽  
David Beggs ◽  
Peter Mansell
Keyword(s):  
Particulate Matter ◽  
Prolonged Exposure ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Airborne Particulate Matter ◽  
Mortality Rates ◽  
Airborne Particulate ◽  
Primary Mechanism ◽  
Background Mortality ◽  
Fire Front ◽  
The Impact

In 2019–2020, a particularly bad bushfire season in Australia resulted in cattle being exposed to prolonged periods of smoke haze and reduced air quality. Bushfire smoke contains many harmful pollutants, and impacts on regions far from the fire front, with smoke haze persisting for weeks. Particulate matter (PM) is one of the major components of bushfire smoke known to have a negative impact on human health. However, little has been reported about the potential effects that bushfire smoke has on cattle exposed to smoke haze for extended periods. We explored the current literature to investigate evidence for likely effects on cattle from prolonged exposure to smoke generated from bushfires in Australia. We conducted a search for papers related to the impacts of smoke on cattle. Initial searching returned no relevant articles through either CAB Direct or PubMed databases, whilst Google Scholar provided a small number of results. The search was then expanded to look at two sub-questions: the type of pollution that is found in bushfire smoke, and the reported effects of both humans and cattle being exposed to these types of pollutants. The primary mechanism for damage due to bushfire smoke is due to small airborne particulate matter (PM). Although evidence demonstrates that PM from bushfire smoke has a measurable impact on both human mortality and cardiorespiratory morbidities, there is little evidence regarding the impact of chronic bushfire smoke exposure in cattle. We hypothesize that cattle are not severely affected by chronic exposure to smoke haze, as evidenced by the lack of reports. This may be because cattle do not tend to suffer from the co-morbidities that, in the human population, seem to be made worse by smoke and pollution. Further, small changes to background mortality rates or transient morbidity may also go unreported.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document