Cargando…

Evaluation of Fine and Ultrafine Particles Proportion in Airborne Dust in an Industrial Area

The health impacts of suspended particulate matter (SPM) are significantly associated with size—the smaller the aerosol particles, the stronger the biological effect. Quantitative evaluation of fine and ultrafine particles (FP and UFP) is, therefore, an integral part of ongoing epidemiological studi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Machaczka, Ondrej, Jirik, Vitezslav, Brezinova, Viera, Vrtkova, Adela, Miturova, Hana, Riedlova, Petra, Dalecka, Andrea, Hermanova, Barbara, Slachtova, Hana, Siemiatkowski, Grzegorz, Osrodka, Leszek, Sram, Radim J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8431044/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34501505
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18178915
_version_ 1783750844759408640
author Machaczka, Ondrej
Jirik, Vitezslav
Brezinova, Viera
Vrtkova, Adela
Miturova, Hana
Riedlova, Petra
Dalecka, Andrea
Hermanova, Barbara
Slachtova, Hana
Siemiatkowski, Grzegorz
Osrodka, Leszek
Sram, Radim J.
author_facet Machaczka, Ondrej
Jirik, Vitezslav
Brezinova, Viera
Vrtkova, Adela
Miturova, Hana
Riedlova, Petra
Dalecka, Andrea
Hermanova, Barbara
Slachtova, Hana
Siemiatkowski, Grzegorz
Osrodka, Leszek
Sram, Radim J.
author_sort Machaczka, Ondrej
collection PubMed
description The health impacts of suspended particulate matter (SPM) are significantly associated with size—the smaller the aerosol particles, the stronger the biological effect. Quantitative evaluation of fine and ultrafine particles (FP and UFP) is, therefore, an integral part of ongoing epidemiological studies. The mass concentrations of SPM fractions (especially PM(2.5), PM(1.0), PM(0.25)) were measured in an industrial area using cascade personal samplers and a gravimetric method, and their mass ratio was determined. The results of PM(2.5), PM(1.0) were also compared with the reference measurement at stationary stations. The mean ratios PM(2.5)/SPM, PM(1.0)/SPM, and PM(1.0)/PM(2.5) were 0.76, 0.65, and 0.86, respectively. Surprisingly, a mass dominance of UFP with an aerodynamic diameter <0.25 μm (PM(0.25)) was found with mean ratios of 0.43, 0.57, 0.67 in SPM, PM(2.5) and PM(1.0). The method used showed satisfactory agreement in comparison with reference measurements. The respirable fraction may consist predominantly of UFP. Despite the measures currently being taken to improve air quality, the most biologically efficient UFP can escape and remain in the air. UFP are currently determined primarily as particle number as opposed to the mass concentration used for conventional fractions. This complicates their mutual comparison and determination of individual fraction ratios.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8431044
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84310442021-09-11 Evaluation of Fine and Ultrafine Particles Proportion in Airborne Dust in an Industrial Area Machaczka, Ondrej Jirik, Vitezslav Brezinova, Viera Vrtkova, Adela Miturova, Hana Riedlova, Petra Dalecka, Andrea Hermanova, Barbara Slachtova, Hana Siemiatkowski, Grzegorz Osrodka, Leszek Sram, Radim J. Int J Environ Res Public Health Article The health impacts of suspended particulate matter (SPM) are significantly associated with size—the smaller the aerosol particles, the stronger the biological effect. Quantitative evaluation of fine and ultrafine particles (FP and UFP) is, therefore, an integral part of ongoing epidemiological studies. The mass concentrations of SPM fractions (especially PM(2.5), PM(1.0), PM(0.25)) were measured in an industrial area using cascade personal samplers and a gravimetric method, and their mass ratio was determined. The results of PM(2.5), PM(1.0) were also compared with the reference measurement at stationary stations. The mean ratios PM(2.5)/SPM, PM(1.0)/SPM, and PM(1.0)/PM(2.5) were 0.76, 0.65, and 0.86, respectively. Surprisingly, a mass dominance of UFP with an aerodynamic diameter <0.25 μm (PM(0.25)) was found with mean ratios of 0.43, 0.57, 0.67 in SPM, PM(2.5) and PM(1.0). The method used showed satisfactory agreement in comparison with reference measurements. The respirable fraction may consist predominantly of UFP. Despite the measures currently being taken to improve air quality, the most biologically efficient UFP can escape and remain in the air. UFP are currently determined primarily as particle number as opposed to the mass concentration used for conventional fractions. This complicates their mutual comparison and determination of individual fraction ratios. MDPI 2021-08-25 /pmc/articles/PMC8431044/ /pubmed/34501505 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18178915 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Machaczka, Ondrej
Jirik, Vitezslav
Brezinova, Viera
Vrtkova, Adela
Miturova, Hana
Riedlova, Petra
Dalecka, Andrea
Hermanova, Barbara
Slachtova, Hana
Siemiatkowski, Grzegorz
Osrodka, Leszek
Sram, Radim J.
Evaluation of Fine and Ultrafine Particles Proportion in Airborne Dust in an Industrial Area
title Evaluation of Fine and Ultrafine Particles Proportion in Airborne Dust in an Industrial Area
title_full Evaluation of Fine and Ultrafine Particles Proportion in Airborne Dust in an Industrial Area
title_fullStr Evaluation of Fine and Ultrafine Particles Proportion in Airborne Dust in an Industrial Area
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of Fine and Ultrafine Particles Proportion in Airborne Dust in an Industrial Area
title_short Evaluation of Fine and Ultrafine Particles Proportion in Airborne Dust in an Industrial Area
title_sort evaluation of fine and ultrafine particles proportion in airborne dust in an industrial area
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8431044/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34501505
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18178915
work_keys_str_mv AT machaczkaondrej evaluationoffineandultrafineparticlesproportioninairbornedustinanindustrialarea
AT jirikvitezslav evaluationoffineandultrafineparticlesproportioninairbornedustinanindustrialarea
AT brezinovaviera evaluationoffineandultrafineparticlesproportioninairbornedustinanindustrialarea
AT vrtkovaadela evaluationoffineandultrafineparticlesproportioninairbornedustinanindustrialarea
AT miturovahana evaluationoffineandultrafineparticlesproportioninairbornedustinanindustrialarea
AT riedlovapetra evaluationoffineandultrafineparticlesproportioninairbornedustinanindustrialarea
AT daleckaandrea evaluationoffineandultrafineparticlesproportioninairbornedustinanindustrialarea
AT hermanovabarbara evaluationoffineandultrafineparticlesproportioninairbornedustinanindustrialarea
AT slachtovahana evaluationoffineandultrafineparticlesproportioninairbornedustinanindustrialarea
AT siemiatkowskigrzegorz evaluationoffineandultrafineparticlesproportioninairbornedustinanindustrialarea
AT osrodkaleszek evaluationoffineandultrafineparticlesproportioninairbornedustinanindustrialarea
AT sramradimj evaluationoffineandultrafineparticlesproportioninairbornedustinanindustrialarea