This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Reprints and Permissions Copyright Information Books from ASM Press MicrobeWorld Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Zimmerman, N J Articles by Turner, A G Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Zimmerman, N J Articles by Turner, A G Agricola Articles by Zimmerman, N J Articles by Turner, A G

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Appl Environ Microbiol. 1987 January; 53(1): 99-104

Comparison of two biological aerosol sampling methods.

ABSTRACT

Two biological aerosol samplers, the Andersen two-stage microbial impactor and the May three-stage glass impinger, were examined to determine the benefits and effectiveness of the May sampler compared with the Andersen sampler, one of the most widely accepted samplers. Side-by-side samples were collected during simulated wastewater spray irrigation dispersion studies. Escherichia coli colony counts and air concentrations were statistically treated to determine the dependability of the May results with respect to the Andersen results. After data pairs containing potentially overloaded Andersen counts were eliminated, a linear regression of the remaining data was performed. It indicates that although the May sampler reports 82% of the Andersen sampler value, the correlation between the two samplers is good with an r2 value of 0.84. This comparison indicates that although there are differences between the two samplers, they do give comparable results and that when both are used in a sampling program, they tend to complement each other.