Seasonal variability of endotoxin in ambient fine particulate matter

Endotoxin is a toxic, pro-inflammatory compound that has been detected in indoor air and dust in homes and occupational settings, and also in outdoor air. Data on the outdoor sampling of endotoxin are limited. Currently, little is known about the seasonal variation and influence of temperature on outdoor endotoxin levels. In the present study, we report endotoxin levels in fine fraction particulate matter with a 50% aerodynamic cutoff diameter of 2.5 microm (PM2.5) and describe the seasonal variation of endotoxin in Munich, Germany. In 1999-2000, PM2.5 was collected at forty outdoor monitoring sites across Munich. Approximately four samples were collected at each site for a total of 158 samples. Endotoxin concentrations in the PM2.5 samples were determined using the kinetic chromogenic Limulus Amebocyte Lysate (LAL) assay. The geometric mean endotoxin concentration was 1.07 EU mg PM2.5(-1) (95% C.I.: 0.915-1.251) or 0.015 EU m(-3) of sampled air (95% C.I.: 0.013-0.018). Munich endotoxin levels were significantly related to ambient temperature (p < 0.0001) and percent relative humidity (p < 0.0001). Sampling periods with higher average temperatures yielded higher levels of endotoxin in PM2.5 (r = 0.641), whereas decreases in percent relative humidity were associated with increased endotoxin levels in PM2.5 (r = -0.388). Endotoxin levels were significantly higher during the warmer seasons of spring [means ratio (MR): 2.5-2.7] and summer (MR: 2.1-3.0) than during winter. Although temperature and relative humidity do not explain all of the variability in endotoxin levels, their effects were significant in our data set. Temperature effects and seasonal variation of endotoxin should be considered in future studies of outdoor endotoxin.     

Relationship between different size classes of particulate matter and meteorology in three European cities

Evidence on the correlation between particle mass and (ultrafine) particle number concentrations is limited. Winter- and spring-time measurements of urban background air pollution were performed in Amsterdam (The Netherlands), Erfurt (Germany) and Helsinki (Finland), within the framework of the EU funded ULTRA study. Daily average concentrations of ambient particulate matter with a 50% cut off of 2.5 microm (PM2.5), total particle number concentrations and particle number concentrations in different size classes were collected at fixed monitoring sites. The aim of this paper is to assess differences in particle concentrations in several size classes across cities, the correlation between different particle fractions and to assess the differential impact of meteorological factors on their concentrations. The medians of ultrafine particle number concentrations were similar across the three cities (range 15.1 x 10(3)-18.3 x 10(3) counts cm(-3)). Within the ultrafine particle fraction, the sub fraction (10-30 nm) made a higher contribution to particle number concentrations in Erfurt than in Helsinki and Amsterdam. Larger differences across the cities were found for PM2.5(range 11-17 microg m(-3)). PM2.5 and ultrafine particle concentrations were weakly (Amsterdam, Helsinki) to moderately (Erfurt) correlated. The inconsistent correlation for PM2.5 and ultrafine particle concentrations between the three cities was partly explained by the larger impact of more local sources from the city on ultrafine particle concentrations than on PM2.5, suggesting that the upwind or downwind location of the measuring site in regard to potential particle sources has to be considered. Also, relationship with wind direction and meteorological data differed, suggesting that particle number and particle mass are two separate indicators of airborne particulate matter. Both decreased with increasing wind speed, but ultrafine particle number counts consistently decreased with increasing relative humidity, whereas PM2.5 increased with increasing barometric pressure. Within the ultrafine particle mode, nucleation mode (10-30 nm) and Aitken mode (30-100 nm) had distinctly different relationships with accumulation mode particles and weather conditions. Since the composition of these particle fractions also differs, it is of interest to test in future epidemiological studies whether they have different health effects.     

Do common ravens yell because they want to attract others?

Summary The formation of groups at food bonanzas results from a variety of mechanism, which include recruitment by signalling and information parasitism. Recruitment is distinguished from information parasitism on functional grounds: attraction of a crowd is termed recruitment if the signaler's fitness is enhanced by the attraction of others but termed parasitism if the signaler's fitness is reduced by the attraction of others. We here show, however, that in Common Ravens, Corvus corax, the proximate reasons for giving recruitment signals are probably other than for attracting a crowd. In the forests of the northeastern United States, non-breeding, vagrant ravens commonly aggregate in large numbers at carcasses where they neutralize the defense of territorial adults. We attempted to mimic this situation with a captive flock of juveniles and a pair of resident adults in order to determine the proximate factors triggering yells, vocalizations which attract nearby ravens to large animal carcasses. Our experiments indicate that yells are given primarily by hungry birds. However, yelling is strongly modified by status. Within the vagrant crowd, status is labile. When successive dominants were removed, replacements immediately took their place. Furthermore, when the dominants were re-introduced to the flock they always suffered significant losses of status and ceased yelling. The territorial male has, and constantly maintains, the highest status within (but not necessarily outside) his territory, and here he rarely yells. In sharp contrast, within the vagrant crowd of unmated birds it is the highest-status birds that are the most likely to yell when approaching food. Furthermore, the dominant vagrants (as well as adults) suppress yelling in subordinates. We conclude that ravens yell proximately to advertise their status at food, and that recruitment is only one of several ultimate advantages of the behavior. Offprint request to: B. Heinrich