Citation

Seto Y, Kanamori-Kataoka M, Tsuge K, Ohsawa I, Maruko H, Sekiguchi H, Sano Y, Yamashiro S, Matsushita K, Sekiguchi H, Itoi T, Iura K. Toxin Rev. 2007; 26(3): 299-312.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2007, Informa - Taylor and Francis Group)

DOI

10.1080/15569540701506756

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

We evaluated commercially available, portable, on-site equipment for chemical warfare agent detection (a gas detection tube, ion mobility spectrometer, surface acoustic wavelength detector, flame photometric detector, photoionization detector, Fourier-transformed infrared spectrometer and a gas chromatograph-mass spectrometer) using authentic, vaporized chemical-warfare agents from the standpoint of their qualitative detection characteristics, detection limits, response times, frequency of false alarms and residubility on the devices. False alarms and the strong adsorption of agents by the devices are typical drawbacks of such equipment. As a screening method for biological warfare agents, on-site methods using flow cytometry, bioluminescence assay, and lateral flow immunoassay were developed.