Occurrences of Endotoxin in Agriculture: History
View Latest Version
Please note this is an old version of this entry, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Contributor:
B. Surya Kumar Chhetry
,
Krishna Narayan Dewangan
,
Dipendra Kumar Mahato
,
Pradeep Kumar

Agricultural operations and the processing sector generate dust laden with endotoxin in the workplace. Endotoxin, a pro-inflammatory agent, has adverse effects on health, especially in the lungs, as exposure to endotoxin reduces lung function capacity. Endotoxin exposure to workers and its harmful impact on the health of agricultural workers needs to be studied in detail for future interventions to reduce exposure to endotoxin.

  • endotoxin
  • lung function
  • gram-negative bacteria

1. Introduction

Agriculture can be related to the generation of enormous amounts of dust, of which organic dust from agricultural activities is the primary source of endotoxin. The endotoxin concentration is a significant concern in agricultural operations and sectors because the exposure value exceeds the recommended threshold value. The occurrence of endotoxin in different animal housing, food processing and other agricultural industries, such as hemp and cotton, are presented in Table 1, Table 2 and Table 3. The location of dust measurements was inside the farms or industries.
There is a variation in the occurrence of endotoxin in agricultural settings. This variation may be due to different sources of dust in agricultural settings. The harvesting of crops (nuts) using a mechanical harvester results in a higher concentration of dust [1][2]. Endotoxin has a significant correlation with the temperature [2][3][4]. The endotoxin concentration increases with an increase in the temperature [2] and relative humidity [3][5][6]. The endotoxin concentration is significantly higher on warmer days than on cold days [7][8]. In poultry and swine buildings, there is an increase in the dust and endotoxin concentration on winter days as ventilation is reduced to conserve heat [9]. The concentration of endotoxin in dust decreases due to the growth of fungi and bacteria in the livestock feed in poultry and swine farms [10]. The animal feeds may contribute to endotoxin contamination, but the major source of endotoxin inside animal houses is animal feces [9][11].
Endotoxin assessments depend on different sampling, extraction and analysis procedures followed [12]. The endotoxin concentration is higher during livestock farming than during crop farming [1]. The endotoxin concentration increases with an increase in the density of animals that are reared (pig) and a reduction in the frequency of cleaning in swine houses [9]. The concentration of endotoxin depends on the duration of exposure [9] and the type of workplace [13].
Table 1. Occurrence of endotoxin in animal housing around the world.
Location of Sampling Country No. of Samples Dust Concentration, mg/m3 Fraction of Dust Analytical Method Endotoxin
Concentration		 Range of Endotoxin Concentration Affected Population Reference
Poultry farm Switzerland 36 7.01 (0.42–21.75) Total Dust (PM10) Kinetic-turbidimetric (KT) Limulus assay test 257.58 ng/m3 18.99–1634.8 ng/m3 Farmers [14]
Pig production Denmark 40 3.95 (1.11–13.75) Total Dust (PM10) KT Limulus assay test 58.01 ng/m3 1.30–1101.7 ng/m3 Farmers [14]
Pig production Germany 100 5.00 (<0.09–76.7) Total Dust (PM10) KT Limulus assay test 76.3 ng/m3 0.01–2090.1 ng/m3 Farmers [14]
Floor-housed poultry Canada 181 9.56 Total Dust Chromogenic-end point (CEP) LAL assay test 1106.40 EU/m3 Nil Poultry workers [15]
Cage-housed poultry Canada 122 7.57 Total Dust 1291.47 EU/m3 Nil Poultry workers [15]
Poultry farm Denmark 14 AM: 5.7; GM: 3.5 Inhalable Quantitative kinetic chromogenic (QKC) LAL test AM: 1960 EU/m3; GM: 805 EU/m3 61–7090 EU/m3 - [16]
Pig production Taiwan, Republic of China 95 - Respirable Kinetic Limulus assay test 47 EU/m3 0.02–1643 EU/m3 Worker [9]
Swine farms South Korea 36 0.505 Inhalable LAL Kinetic QCL 812 EU/m3 Nil Workers [17]
Swine farms South Korea 36 0.128 Respirable LAL Kinetic QCL kit 38.6 EU/m3 Nil Workers [17]
Pig farm Italy 18 - PM10 (≤0.49 µm) Endpoint chromogenic LAL 16.261 EU/m3 - - [18]
Pig rearing farmers Denmark 354 AM: 4.9; GM: 3.4 Inhalable Dust QKC LAL test AM: 6200; GM: 1500 EU/m3 13.69–370,000 EU/m3 Pig farm workers [19]
Pig farm Denmark 354 AM: 4.9; GM: 3.4 Inhalable QKC LAL test AM: 6240; GM: 1490 EU/m3 13.69–374,000 EU/m3 Worker [20]
Mixed farms (cattle and pigs) Denmark 8 AM: 2.9; GM: 1.9 Inhalable QKC LAL test AM: 900; GM: 448 EU/m3 13.69–2910 EU/m3 Worker [20]
Cattle farms Denmark 124 AM: 1.6; GM: 1.0 Inhalable QKC LAL test AM: 759; GM: 358 EU/m3 13.69–5890 EU/m3 Worker [20]
Dairy Denmark 124 AM: 1.6; GM: 1.0 Inhalable QKC LAL test AM: 760; GM: 360 EU/m3 13.69–5900 EU/m3 Worker [20]
Dairy farms France 112 AM: 0.42; GM: 0.24 Thoracic Kinetic LAL test AM: 318; GM: 128 EU/m3 2–8672 EU/m3 Dairy farmers [21]
Dairy farms Ireland 38 AM: 1.7; GM: 1.5 Inhalable QKC LAL test AM: 197; GM: 128 EU/m3 26–900 EU/m3 Worker [22]
Cattle feeding section USA 15 AM: 1.272; GM: 0.9148 Inhalable Recombinant Factor C assay AM: 237.9; GM: 163.3 EU/m3 - Worker [23]
Cattle miking section USA 91 AM: 0.9304; GM: 0.7856 Inhalable Recombinant Factor C assay AM: 419.5; GM: 320.2 EU/m3 - Worker [23]
Free stall dairy USA 4 - Inhalable (<100 µm) Kinetic LAL 129.3 EU/m3   - [24]
Dairy farms USA 114 GM: 0.67 Inhalable Recombinant Factor C (rfc) assay GM: 438 EU/m3 0.05–4430 EU/m3 Dairy farm worker [25]
Minks Denmark 7 AM: 1.4; GM: 1.3 Inhalable QKC LAL test AM: 301; GM: 214 EU/m3 93–1050 EU/m3 - [20]
Equine farms USA 58 - Respirable Kinetic chromogenic (KC) LAL test - 1.72–19.0 EU/m3 - [26]
Equine farms USA 58 - Inhalable KC LAL test - 50.2–1024 EU/m3 - [26]
Horse stables The Netherlands 95 AM: 2.4; GM:1.2 Inhalable Quantitative kinetic LAL method Am: 2073; GM: 555 EU/m3 <22.19–48,484 EU/m3 Workers [27]
Livestock farms The Netherlands 211 AM: 0.023; GM: 0.0215 PM10 QKC LAL test 0.657 EU/m3 GM: 0.46–0.66 EU/m3 Outside animal farms [28]
Table 2. Occurrence of endotoxin during different agricultural operations around the world.
Location of Sampling Country No. of Samples Dust Concentration, mg/m3 Fraction of Dust Analytical Method Endotoxin
Concentration		 Range of Endotoxin Concentration Reference
Rice mills Malaysia 79 79 Inhalable Chromogenic Endpoint LAL AM: 0.29 EU/m3 - [29]
Grain, seed and legume production sector The Netherlands 15 GM: 2.5 Inhalable QKC LAL GM: 2700 EU/m3 96–41,200 EU/m3 [12]
Grain, seed and legume processing industries The Netherlands 173 GM: 1.4 Inhalable QKC LAL test GM: 500 EU/m3 2.3–149,060 EU/m3 [12]
Animal processing industries The Netherlands 81 GM: 0.4 Inhalable QKC LAL test GM: 51 EU/m3 2–6230 EU/m3 [12]
Seed processing industry The Netherlands 101 GM: 1.6 Inhalable LAL assay GM: 1800 EU/m3 10–274,000 EU/m3 [30]
Animal production sector (11 companies) The Netherlands 27 GM: 2.4 Inhalable QKC LAL test GM: 1190 EU/m3 62–8120 EU/m3 [12]
Coffee processing factories Tanzania 193 AM: 3.69; GM: 2.50 Total Dust KC LAL test AM: 8200; GM: 3500 EU/m3 42–75,083 EU/m3 [31]
Hog load-out task USA 19 7.14 (2.01–31.06) Inhalable KC LAL assay test 12,150 EU/m3 3497–84,357 EU/m3 [32]
Swine building power washing 13 - Impinger KC LAL assay test 40,353 EU/m3 5401–180,864 EU/m3 [32]
Table 3. Occurrence of endotoxin in other different agricultural industries around the world.
Location of Sampling Country No. of Samples Dust Concentration, mg/m3 Fraction of Dust Analytical Method Endotoxin Concentration Range of Endotoxin Concentration Reference
Textile Mills Shanghai, China 56 1.74 Inhalable KC LAL assay test 2226.83 EU/m3 Nil [33]
Licensed private pesticide applicators USA 204 0.90 Inhalable KC LAL assay test 163 EU/m3 - [34]
Textile sectors Nepal 24 AM: 2.34; GM: 0.81 Inhalable LAL assay AM: 4460; GM: 2160 EU/m3 86–26,300 EU/m3 [35]
Greenhouse Denmark 75 AM: 0.36; GM: 0.25 Inhalable Kinetic LAL Am: 96.9; GM: 44.4 EU/m3 95% CI: 32.4–60.8 [14]
Ornament plant or flower production Spain 37 <0.09 (<0.09–0.88) Total Dust (PM10) KT Limulus assay test 0.36 ng/m3 0.05–12.68 ng/m3 [14]
Cotton mill (threshing of cotton) India 2 25 - LAL gel clot test 0.625 µg/m3 - [36]
Outdoor sickle harvesting of maize in farm India 2 2.5 - LAL gel clot test 0.0625 µg/m3 - [36]
Outdoor sickle harvesting of sorghum in farm India 2 2.5 - LAL gel clot test 0.0625 µg/m3 - [36]
Outdoor sickle harvesting of pearl millet in farm India 2 7.5 - LAL gel clot test 0.625 µg/m3 - [36]
Outdoor threshing of pearl millet India 2 55 - LAL gel clot test 31.25 µg/m3 - [36]
Outdoor threshing of maize India 2 92.5 - LAL gel clot test 31.25 µg/m3 - [36]
Cotton mill (carding and yarning) India 2 2.5 - LAL gel clot test 0.0625 µg/m3 - [36]
Cleaning of Bengal gram in godown India 2 115 - LAL gel clot test 62.5 µg/m3 - [36]
Cleaning of sorghum in godown India 2 70 - LAL gel clot test 6.25 µg/m3 - [36]
Cleaning of wheat in godown India 2 50 - LAL gel clot test 62.5 µg/m3 - [36]
Cleaning of red gram in godown India 2 77.5 - LAL gel clot test 62.5 µg/m3 - [36]
Grinding of grain for flour India 2 150 - LAL gel clot test 1.25 µg/m3 - [36]
Cleaning of rice in godown India 2 257.5 - LAL gel clot test 124.9 µg/m3 - [36]
Horticulture sector (21 companies) The Netherlands 291 GM: 0.6 Inhalable QKC LAL test GM: 170 EU/m3 1.6–191,430 EU/m3 [12]
Gin house India   2.11 - LAL technique 2.77 µg/m3 2.16–3.38 µg/m3 [37]
Grain handling companies Norway 166 GM: 1 Inhalable QKC LAL test GM: 628 11–64,250 [13]
Soil tillage USA 4 - Inhalable Kinetic LAL 34.3 EU/m3 - [24]
Bean threshing USA 4 - Inhalable Kinetic LAL 220.3 EU/m3 - [24]
Hemp processing plant UK - - Inhalable Kinetic QCL test AM: 19,569.4; GM: 14,345 EU/m3 2177–36,962 EU/m3 [38]
Textile and garment factories Ethiopia 95 AM: 1.3; GM: 0.75 Inhalable QKC LAL test AM: 2647; GM: 831 EU/m3 12–30,801 EU/m3 [39]
Wheat harvesting Colorado, USA - GM: 0.83, AM: 1.32 Total dust Quantitative chromogenic modification of LAL GM: 54.24; Mean: 104.6 EU/m3 4.4–744.4 EU/m3 [40]
Sawmill industries Norway 481 GM: 0.09 Thoracic Kinetic LAL assay GM: 3 EU/m3 - [41]
Sawmills Croatia - - Respirable Quantitative chromogenic end-point LAL 336.5 EU/m3 - [42]
AM: arithmetic means; GM: geometric mean.

2. Occurrence of Endotoxin in Animal Housing

Any structure that houses livestock is certain to produce dust. Dust can be generated from feed, excreta, feathers, fur etc. The occurrence of endotoxin in animal housing around the world is presented in Table 1. The animals and workers are exposed to different levels of dust in animal housing. The floor-housed poultry rearing system in Canada has the highest level of total dust (9.56 mg/m3) [15]. The cage-housed poultry system has lower dust concentrations due to the fact that the poultry is kept in the layer system and the poultry cannot perform dust bathing on the floor, which reduces the dust. The endotoxin concentration was found to be lower in the floor-housed poultry rearing system than in the cage system. In a floor-housed poultry rearing system, the excreta are collected in the floor and the moisture is absorbed by the bedding material, which is not the case with the cage-house poultry rearing system. The inhalable dust concentration in poultry farms of Denmark has a dust concentration of 5.7 mg/m3, which is above the permissible exposure limit [16]. In the case of the swine/pig farms, the dust generated was found to be in the range of 0.128 [17] to 5.0 mg/m3 [14] and the geometric mean of endotoxin concentration varies from 16.261 [18] to 1500 EU/m3 [19] The reason for higher endotoxin levels is due to concentrated animal feeds.
In dairy farms, the dust and endotoxin concentrations were measured at the milking section and feeding sections and in free stall dairy farms. The geometric mean of the dust concentration varies from 0.2 [21] to 1.7 mg/m3 [22], and the endotoxin concentration varies from 128 [23] to 448 EU/m3 [16]. The lowest concentration of dust was observed in a mink farm (7 mg/m3) [20], and the highest concentration of dust was reported in horse stables of the Netherlands (95 mg/m3) [27], and the endotoxin concentration was 214 [20] to 555 EU/m3 [27]. The endotoxin and dust concentrations were higher in pig farms than in cattle and poultry farms due to the higher density of animals and use of concentrated feeds in pig farms. Environmental factors, such as temperature, relative humidity and wind velocity, affect the levels of airborne endotoxins at the farms [2][13][28]. Endotoxin exposure is higher for persons living in rural regions with intense livestock production [43].

3. Occurrence of Endotoxin in Food Processing Industries

In food processing industries, water is used while processing the food. Endotoxin varies with the pre-processing methods used in food processing plants. Dry pre-processed methods (sun dried cherries of coffee) result in higher concentrations of endotoxin than wet pre-processed food processing methods by using water to depulp coffee cherries [31]. The occurrence of endotoxin in food processing industries around the world is presented in Table 2. The presence of water helps to reduce dust and endotoxin exposure to the workers, as the dust gets absorbed in the water [12]. Yang, 2013, reported that the total suspended dust increases on colder days [10].

4. Occurrence of Endotoxin in Other Industries

Byssinosis is commonly developed in workers who are exposed to cotton dust [33]. In rice mills, dust can be generated due to abrasion of the paddy. The occurrence of endotoxin in other agricultural industries around the world is presented in Table 3. During the post-harvest handling of cereal/fruit crops, dust is generated due to the breaking of plant materials. The workers are exposed to this contaminant and are exposed to dust, which can reduce the forced vital capacity of the workers [44][45][46][47][48][49][50]. Many researchers have collected data on inhalable, thoracic and total dust, but very few researchers have sampled the respirable fraction of dust samples [9][17][26][42]. The respirable dust fraction can penetrate beyond the terminal bronchioles of the lungs [44][51]. Respirable dust laden with endotoxin can cause serious health issues for the workers.

This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/appliedchem3010002

References

  1. Nieuwenhuijsen, M.J.; Noderer, K.S.; Schenker, M.B.; Vallyathan, V.; Olenchock, S. Personal Exposure to Dust, Endotoxin and Crystalline Silica in California Agriculture. Ann. Occup. Hyg. 1999, 43, 35–42.
  2. Carty, C.L.; Gehring, U.; Cyrys, J.; Bischof, W.; Heinrich, J. Seasonal Variability of Endotoxin in Ambient Fine Particulate Matter. J. Environ. Monit. 2003, 5, 953–958.
  3. Allen, J.; Bartlett, K.; Graham, M.; Jackson, P. Ambient Concentrations of Airborne Endotoxin in Two Cities in the Interior of British Columbia, Canada. J. Environ. Monit. 2011, 13, 631–640.
  4. Rolph, C.A.; Gwyther, C.L.; Tyrrel, S.F.; Nasir, Z.A.; Drew, G.H.; Jackson, S.K.; Khera, S.; Hayes, E.T.; Williams, B.; Bennett, A.; et al. Sources of Airborne Endotoxins in Ambient Air and Exposure of Nearby Communities–A Review. Atmosphere 2018, 9, 375.
  5. Vučemilo, M.; Matković, K.; Vinković, B.; Macan, J.; Varnai, V.M.; Prester, L.; Granić, K.; Orct, T. Effect of Microclimate on the Airborne Dust and Endotoxin Concentration in a Broiler House. Czech J. Anim. Sci. 2008, 53, 83–89.
  6. Salonen, H.; Duchaine, C.; Létourneau, V.; Mazaheri, M.; Laitinen, S.; Clifford, S.; Mikkola, R.; Lappalainen, S.; Reijula, K.; Morawska, L. Endotoxin Levels and Contribution Factors of Endotoxins in Resident, School, and Office Environments—A Review. Atmos. Environ. 2016, 142, 360–369.
  7. Morgenstern, V.; Carty, C.L.; Gehring, U.; Cyrys, J.; Bischof, W.; Heinrich, J. Lack of Spatial Variation of Endotoxin in Ambient Particulate Matter across a German Metropolitan Area. Atmos. Environ. 2005, 39, 6931–6941.
  8. Morgenstern, V.; Bischof, W.; Koch, A.; Heinrich, J. Measurements of Endotoxin on Ambient Loaded PM Filters after Long-Term Storage. Sci. Total Environ. 2006, 370, 574–579.
  9. Chang, C.W.; Chung, H.; Huang, C.F.; Su, H.J.J. Exposure Assessment to Airborne Endotoxin, Dust, Ammonia, Hydrogen Sulfide and Carbon Dioxide in Open Style Swine Houses. Ann. Occup. Hyg. 2001, 45, 457–465.
  10. Yang, X.; Wang, X.; Zhang, Y.; Lee, J.; Su, J.; Gates, R.S. Monitoring Total Endotoxin and (1→3)-β-d-Glucan at the Air Exhaust of Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations. J. Air Waste Manag. Assoc. 2013, 63, 1190–1198.
  11. Thedell, T.D.; Mull, J.C.; Olenchock, S.A. A Brief Report of Gram-negative Bacterial Endotoxin Levels in Airborne and Settled Dusts in Animal Confinement Buildings. Am. J. Ind. Med. 1980, 1, 3–7.
  12. Spaan, S.; Wouters, I.M.; Oosting, I.; Doekes, G.; Heederik, D. Exposure to Inhalable Dust and Endotoxins in Agricultural Industries. J. Environ. Monit. 2006, 8, 63–72.
  13. Halstensen, A.S.; Heldal, K.K.; Wouters, I.M.; Skogstad, M.; Ellingsen, D.A.G.G.; Eduard, W. Exposure to Grain Dust and Microbial Components in the Norwegian Grain and Compound Feed Industry. Ann. Occup. Hyg. 2013, 57, 1105–1114.
  14. Radon, K.; Danuser, B.; Iversen, M.; Monso, E.; Weber, C.; Hartung, J.; Donham, K.; Palmgren, U.; Nowak, D. Air Contaminants in Different European Farming Environments. Ann. Agric. Environ. Med. 2002, 9, 41–48.
  15. Kirychuk, S.P.; Dosman, J.A.; Reynolds, S.J.; Willson, P.; Senthilselvan, A.; Feddes, J.J.R.; Classen, H.L.; Guenter, W. Total Dust and Endotoxin in Poultry Operations: Comparison between Cage and Floor Housing and Respiratory Effects in Workers. J. Occup. Environ. Med. 2006, 48, 741–748.
  16. Basinas, I.; Schlünssen, V.; Heederik, D.; Sigsgaard, T.; Smit, L.A.M.; Samadi, S.; Omland, Ø.; Hjort, C.; Madsen, A.M.; Skov, S.; et al. Sensitisation to Common Allergens and Respiratory Symptoms in Endotoxin Exposed Workers: A Pooled Analysis. Occup. Environ. Med. 2012, 69, 99–106.
  17. Shin, S.J.; Song, E.S.; Kim, J.W.; Lee, J.H.; Gautam, R.; Kim, H.J.; Kim, Y.G.; Cho, A.R.; Yang, S.J.; Acharya, M.; et al. Major Environmental Characteristics of Swine Husbandry That Affect Exposure to Dust and Airborne Endotoxins. J. Toxicol. Environ. Health Part A Curr. Issues 2019, 82, 233–243.
  18. Traversi, D.; Alessandria, L.; Schilirò, T.; Gilli, G. Size-Fractionated PM10 Monitoring in Relation to the Contribution of Endotoxins in Different Polluted Areas. Atmos. Environ. 2011, 45, 3515–3521.
  19. Basinas, I.; Schlünssen, V.; Takai, H.; Heederik, D.; Omland, Ø.; Wouters, I.M.; Sigsgaard, T.; Kromhout, H. Exposure to Inhalable Dust and Endotoxin among Danish Pig Farmers Affected by Work Tasks and Stable Characteristics. Ann. Occup. Hyg. 2013, 57, 1005–1019.
  20. Basinas, I.; Sigsgaard, T.; Heederik, D.; Takai, H.; Omland, Ø.; Andersen, N.T.; Wouters, I.M.; Bønløkke, J.H.; Kromhout, H.; Schlünssen, V. Exposure to Inhalable Dust and Endotoxin among Danish Livestock Farmers: Results from the SUS Cohort Study. J. Environ. Monit. 2012, 14, 604–614.
  21. Pfister, H.; Madec, L.; Le Cann, P.; Costet, N.; Chouvet, M.; Jouneau, S.; Vernhet, L. Factors Determining the Exposure of Dairy Farmers to Thoracic Organic Dust. Environ. Res. 2018, 165, 286–293.
  22. Basinas, I.; Cronin, G.; Hogan, V.; Sigsgaard, T.; Hayes, J.; Coggins, A.M. Exposure to Inhalable Dust, Endotoxin, and Total Volatile Organic Carbons on Dairy Farms Using Manual and Automated Feeding Systems. Ann. Work Expo. Health 2017, 61, 344–355.
  23. Garcia, J.; Bennett, D.H.; Tancredi, D.; Schenker, M.B.; Mitchell, D.; Reynolds, S.J.; Mitloehner, F.M. Occupational Exposure to Particulate Matter and Endotoxin for California Dairy Workers. Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health 2013, 216, 56–62.
  24. Dungan, R.S.; Leytem, A.B.; Bjorneberg, D.L. Concentrations of Airborne Endotoxin and Microorganisms at a 10,000-Cow Open-Freestall Dairy. J. Anim. Sci. 2011, 89, 3300–3309.
  25. Davidson, M.E.; Schaeffer, J.; Clark, M.L.; Magzamen, S.; Brooks, E.J.; Keefe, T.J.; Bradford, M.; Roman-Muniz, N.; Mehaffy, J.; Dooley, G.; et al. Personal Exposure of Dairy Workers to Dust, Endotoxin, Muramic Acid, Ergosterol, and Ammonia on Large-Scale Dairies in the High Plains Western United States. J. Occup. Environ. Hyg. 2018, 15, 182–193.
  26. Hwang, J.; Golla, V.; Metwali, N.; Thorne, P.S. Inhalable and Respirable Particulate and Endotoxin Exposures in Kentucky Equine Farms. J. Agromedicine 2020, 25, 179–189.
  27. Samadi, S.; Wouters, I.M.; Houben, R.; Jamshidifard, A.R.; Van Eerdenburg, F.; Heederik, D.J.J. Exposure to Inhalable Dust, Endotoxins, β(1→3)-Glucans, and Airborne Microorganisms in Horse Stables. Ann. Occup. Hyg. 2009, 53, 595–603.
  28. De Rooij, M.M.T.; Heederik, D.J.J.; Borlée, F.; Hoek, G.; Wouters, I.M. Spatial and Temporal Variation in Endotoxin and PM10 Concentrations in Ambient Air in a Livestock Dense Area. Environ. Res. 2017, 153, 161–170.
  29. Shakri, S.F.M.; Anua, S.M.; Safuan, S.; Mohamad Asri, A.A. Endotoxin Exposure and Lung Function among Rice Millers in Malaysia. J. Health Transl. Med. 2020, 23, 31–40.
  30. Smit, L.A.M.; Wouters, I.M.; Hobo, M.M.; Eduard, W.; Doekes, G.; Heederik, D. Agricultural Seed Dust as a Potential Cause of Organic Dust Toxic Syndrome. Occup. Environ. Med. 2006, 63, 59–67.
  31. Sakwari, G.; Mamuya, S.H.D.; Bråtveit, M.; Larsson, L.; Pehrson, C.; Moen, B.E. Personal Exposure to Dust and Endotoxin in Robusta and Arabica Coffee Processing Factories in Tanzania. Ann. Occup. Hyg. 2013, 57, 173–183.
  32. O’Shaughnessy, P.; Peters, T.; Donham, K.; Taylor, C.; Altmaier, R.; Kelly, K. Assessment of Swine Worker Exposures to Dust and Endotoxin during Hog Load-out and Power Washing. Ann. Occup. Hyg. 2012, 56, 843–851.
  33. Pranav, P.K.; Biswas, M. Mechanical Intervention for Reducing Dust Concentration in Traditional Rice Mills. Ind. Health 2016, 54, 315–323.
  34. Sauvé, J.F.; Locke, S.J.; Josse, P.R.; Stapleton, E.M.; Metwali, N.; Altmaier, R.W.; Andreotti, G.; Thorne, P.S.; Hofmann, J.N.; Beane Freeman, L.E.; et al. Characterization of Inhalable Endotoxin, Glucan, and Dust Exposures in Iowa Farmers. Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health 2020, 228, 113525.
  35. Paudyal, P.; Semple, S.; Niven, R.; Tavernier, G.; Ayres, J.G. Exposure to Dust and Endotoxin in Textile Processing Workers. Ann. Occup. Hyg. 2011, 55, 403–409.
  36. Krysińska-Traczyk, E.; Pande, B.N.; Skórska, C.; Sitkowska, J.; Prazmo, Z.; Cholewa, G.; Dutkiewicz, J. Exposure of Indian Agricultural Workers to Airborne Microorganisms, Dust and Endotoxin during Handling of Various Plant Products. Ann. Agric. Environ. Med. 2005, 12, 269–275.
  37. Doctor, P.B.; Bhagia, L.J.; Derasari, A.Y.; Vyas, J.B.; Amin, R.J.; Ghosh, S.K. A Preliminary Study on Gram-Negative Bacteria (GNB) and Their Endotoxins in a Gin House in India. J. Occup. Environ. Hyg. 2006, 3, 707–712.
  38. Fishwick, D.; Allan, L.J.; Wright, A.; Curran, A.D. Assessment of Exposure to Organic Dust in a Hemp Processing Plant. Ann. Occup. Hyg. 2001, 45, 577–583.
  39. Tefera, Y.; Schlünssen, V.; Kumie, A.; Deressa, W.; Moen, B.E.; Bråtveit, M. Personal Inhalable Dust and Endotoxin Exposure among Workers in an Integrated Textile Factory. Arch. Environ. Occup. Health 2020, 75, 415–421.
  40. Viet, S.M.; Buchan, R.; Stallones, L. Acute Respiratory Effects and Endotoxin Exposure During Wheat Harvest in Northeastern Colorado. Appl. Occup. Environ. Hyg. 2001, 16, 685–697.
  41. Straumfors, A.; Olsen, R.; Daae, H.L.; Afanou, A.; McLean, D.; Corbin, M.; Mannetje, A.; Ulvestad, B.; Bakke, B.; Johnsen, H.L.; et al. Exposure to Wood Dust, Microbial Components, and Terpenes in the Norwegian Sawmill Industry. Ann. Work Expo. Health 2018, 62, 674–688.
  42. Pipinić, I.S.; Varnai, V.M.; Lučić, R.B.; Čavlović, A.; Prester, L.; Orct, T.; MacAn, J. Endotoxin Exposure Assessment in Wood-Processing Industry: Airborne versus Settled Dust Levels. Arh. Hig. Rada Toksikol. 2010, 61, 161–166.
  43. Liebers, V.; Raulf-Heimsoth, M.; Brüning, T. Health Effects Due to Endotoxin Inhalation (Review). Arch. Toxicol. 2008, 82, 203–210.
  44. Srinivasulu, M.; Begum, S.A. Assessment of Pulmonary Function Tests Among Rice Mill Workers. Int. J. Adv. Res. 2020, 8, 733–737.
  45. Musa, A.I.; Orelaja, O.A. Ergonomic Consideration of the Effect of Flour Dust on Peak Expiratory Flow Rate of Bakers in Abeokuta, Ogun State. Trans. VŠB Tech. Univ. Ostrava Saf. Eng. Ser. 2017, 12, 19–24.
  46. Mohammadien, H.A.; Hussein, M.T.; El-Sokkary, R.T. Effects of Exposure to Flour Dust on Respiratory Symptoms and Pulmonary Function of Mill Workers. Egypt. J. Chest Dis. Tuberc. 2013, 62, 745–753.
  47. Wickramage, S.P.; Rajaratne, A.A.J.; Udupihille, M. Are Rice Millers an At-Risk Group for Lung Disease?—An Occupational Health Concern in Rural Sri Lanka. Indian J. Physiol. Pharmacol. 2017, 61, 340–347.
  48. Habybabady, R.H.; Nasibi Sis, H.; Paridokht, F.; Ramrudinasab, F.; Behmadi, A.; Khosravi, B.; Mohammadi, M. Effects of Dust Exposure on the Respiratory Health Symptoms and Pulmonary Functions of Street Sweepers. Malays. J. Med. Sci. 2018, 25, 76–84.
  49. Sundaram, P.; Shankar, M.S.V.; Aswathappa, J.; Kutty, K. Evaluation of Pulmonary Function in Rice Mill Workers. Indian J. Physiol. Pharmacol. 2019, 63, 192–197.
  50. Suryadi, I.; Matin, H.H.A.; Suhardono, S.; Rinawati, S.; Rachmawati, S.; Kusumaningrum, L. Correlation with Dust Exposure Rice Milling Worker’s Lung Function Capacity in Sub-District Kerjo. In Proceedings of the IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, Jakarta, Indonesia, 9 January 2021; Volume 623, p. 012033.
  51. Ateş, I. Occupational Mineral Dust Induced Toxicity and Cytokines. Turk. J. Pharm. Sci. 2011, 8, 81–90.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
This entry is offline, you can click here to edit this entry!
ScholarVision Creations
Feedback