2011
DOI: 10.1128/aem.02037-10
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Recovery of Bacillus Spore Contaminants from Rough Surfaces: a Challenge to Space Mission Cleanliness Control

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

2
36
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(39 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
(56 reference statements)
2
36
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The degree to which particulate matter will adhere to a surface will depend on the hydrophobicity of the surface, with greater hydrophobicity resulting in greater adhesion (Bower et al, 1996). Some quite marked differences in efficiencies of removal have been recorded even between spores of different species of the same genus (Probst et al, 2011) which must partly reflect differences in spore hydrophilicity. In addition, the manner in which organisms are deposited at the surface will also influence the efficiency with which they can be removed as Probst et al (2011) showed when comparing aerosolised and drop-deposited spores.…”
Section: Sampling From Surfacesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The degree to which particulate matter will adhere to a surface will depend on the hydrophobicity of the surface, with greater hydrophobicity resulting in greater adhesion (Bower et al, 1996). Some quite marked differences in efficiencies of removal have been recorded even between spores of different species of the same genus (Probst et al, 2011) which must partly reflect differences in spore hydrophilicity. In addition, the manner in which organisms are deposited at the surface will also influence the efficiency with which they can be removed as Probst et al (2011) showed when comparing aerosolised and drop-deposited spores.…”
Section: Sampling From Surfacesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some quite marked differences in efficiencies of removal have been recorded even between spores of different species of the same genus (Probst et al, 2011) which must partly reflect differences in spore hydrophilicity. In addition, the manner in which organisms are deposited at the surface will also influence the efficiency with which they can be removed as Probst et al (2011) showed when comparing aerosolised and drop-deposited spores. Pickup efficiency is also affected by the concentration of organisms actually present at the surface, with the efficiency actually decreasing with increasing bacterial concentration (Montville and Schaffner, 2003).…”
Section: Sampling From Surfacesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In the present study, foam, nylon, and polyester swabs registered relatively low RE (23 to 50%) compared with cotton swabs (57 to 71%), and the RE recorded with the chosen cotton swabs (Tulips) was notably higher than what is generally attained by employing synthetic swabs for B. anthracis spore surveillance (2)(3)(4)(5). The RE of cotton swabs appeared to be linked to the quick water-absorbing capacity, leading to the identification of H-index as a major criterion for selecting efficient cotton swabs.…”
Section: MLmentioning
confidence: 68%
“…In addition, little information has appeared to be available from developing parts of the world with regard to effective spore surveillance, the input of which would become valuable in the event of an unprecedented public health hazard arising from the dreaded B. anthracis. Although different compositions of swabs, such as cotton, foam, polyester, rayon, sponge, and blends, are available commercially, none has been found to be universally acceptable (1,(3)(4)(5)(6). Cotton swabs are easily available worldwide and have registered higher RE than synthetic swabs in some studies (6).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%