Dataset Information

Efficiency of different air filter types for pig facilities at laboratory scale.

ABSTRACT: Air filtration has been shown to be efficient in reducing pathogen burden in circulating air. We determined at laboratory scale the retention efficiency of different air filter types either composed of a prefilter (EU class G4) and a secondary fiberglass filter (EU class F9) or consisting of a filter mat (EU class M6 and F8-9). Four filter prototypes were tested for their capability to remove aerosol containing equine arteritis virus (EAV), porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV), bovine enterovirus 1 (BEV), Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae (APP), and Staphylococcus (S.) aureus from air. Depending on the filter prototype and utilisation, the airflow was set at 1,800 m3/h (combination of upstream prefilter and fiberglass filter) or 80 m3/h (filter mat). The pathogens were aerosolized and their concentration was determined in front of and behind the filter by culture or quantitative real-time RT-PCR. Furthermore, survival of the pathogens over time in the filter material was determined. Bacteria were most efficiently filtered with a reduction rate of up to 99.9% depending on the filter used. An approximately 98% reduction was achieved for the viruses tested. Viability or infectivity of APP or PRRSV in the filter material decreased below the detection limit after 4 h and 24 h, respectively, whereas S. aureus was still culturable after 4 weeks. Our results demonstrate that pathogens can efficiently be reduced by air filtration. Consequently, air filtration combined with other strict biosecurity measures markedly reduces the risk of introducing airborne transmitted pathogens to animal facilities. In addition, air filtration might be useful in reducing bioaerosols within a pig barn, hence improving respiratory health of pigs.

SUBMITTER: Wenke C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5640248 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficiency of different air filter types for pig facilities at laboratory scale.

Wenke Cindy C Pospiech Janina J Reutter Tobias T Truyen Uwe U Speck Stephanie S

PloS one 20171013 10

Air filtration has been shown to be efficient in reducing pathogen burden in circulating air. We determined at laboratory scale the retention efficiency of different air filter types either composed of a prefilter (EU class G4) and a secondary fiberglass filter (EU class F9) or consisting of a filter mat (EU class M6 and F8-9). Four filter prototypes were tested for their capability to remove aerosol containing equine arteritis virus (EAV), porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PR ...[more]

PMID: 29028843

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe role of portable high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters for supplemental aerosol mitigation during exercise testing is unknown and might be relevant during COVID-19 pandemic.Research questionWhat is the effect of portable HEPA filtering on aerosol concentration during exercise testing and its efficiency in reducing room clearance time in a clinical exercise testing laboratory?Study design and methodsSubjects were six healthy volunteers aged 20 to 56 years. In the first experiment, exercise was performed in a small tent with controlled airflow with the use of a stationary cycle, portable HEPA filter with fume hood, and particle counter to document aerosol concentration. Subjects performed a four-stage maximal exercise test that lasted 12 min plus 5 min of pretest quiet breathing and 3 min of active recovery. First, they exercised without mitigation then with portable HEPA filter running. In a separate experiment, room aerosol clearance time was measured in a clinical exercise testing laboratory by filling it with artificially generated aerosols and measuring time to 99.9% aerosol clearance with heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) only or HVAC plus portable HEPA filter running.ResultsIn the exercise experiment, particle concentrations reached 1,722 ± 1,484/L vs 96 ± 124/L (P < .04) for all particles (>0.3 μm), 1,339 ± 1,281/L vs 76 ± 104/L (P < .05) for smaller particles (0.3 to 1.0 μm), and 333 ± 209/L vs 17 ± 19/L (P < .01) for larger particles (1.0 to 5.0 μm) at the end of the protocol in a comparison of mitigation vs portable HEPA filter. Use of a portable HEPA filter in a clinical exercise laboratory clearance experiment reduced aerosol clearance time 47% vs HVAC alone.InterpretationThe portable HEPA filter reduced the concentration of aerosols generated during exercise testing by 96% ± 2% for all particle sizes and reduced aerosol room clearance time in clinical exercise testing laboratories. Portable HEPA filters therefore might be useful in clinical exercise testing laboratories to reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission.

Dataset Information

Efficiency of different air filter types for pig facilities at laboratory scale.

Publications

Efficiency of different air filter types for pig facilities at laboratory scale.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets