Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
A new personal portable sampler of biologic particles (Partrap FA52, Coppa, Biella, Italy) was used for pollen sampling in comparison with Hirst's (Burkard) fixed device. The aerobiologic samplings were carried out simultaneously outdoors with the two devices coupled on the same axis, during the daytime of 10 dry, nonconsecutive spring days. The total amount and the percentages of the pollens most often trapped by the two collectors were compared by Student's t-test for paired samples. The Partrap FA52 showed a highly significant efficacy, quite comparable to that of the Burkard device, in pollen trapping for both the total number (P < 0.0001) and the percentages of Parietaria (P < 0.0001), pine (P < 0.002), and grass (P < 0.0001) pollens. Therefore, Partrap FA52 proved to be highly effective in obtaining quantitative and qualitative aerobiologic samples in comparison with the commonly used fixed samplers.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1398-9995.1997.tb02426.x | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!