# Mdpj _sciences_
## 4 Comparative Analysis of Experimental and Simulation Approaches
### Laboratory Tests
#### 4.2.3 Environmental Factors Influencing Purification  
[PERSON] et al. [21] examined the potential for captured particles to re-enter the environment due to natural phenomena like wind or rain. Tests in an environmental chamber with a rain simulator, fan, and air flow meter quantified PM levels on leaf surfaces using ESEM/ImageJ 1.46r analysis, showing significant particle removal by rain on both adaxial and abaxial surfaces. Figure 8: Sealed fumigation chamber. Factors such as irrigation and lighting conditions also significantly impact purification performance. [PERSON] et al. [58] tested a biofilter in a transparent panel box with potted plants, a fluorescent lamp, fans (for introducing contaminated air and releasing cleaned air), a water circulation system, a control panel, and an air quality analyzer. They found that removal efficiency was higher under continuous light in any drought condition, as lack of water caused stomata closure, and leaf wax increased pollutant removal. [PERSON] et al. [26] experimented with the importance of airflow and pressure through the module using tools like a thermo-anemometer to measure air velocity and temperature and digital pressure sensors. A water-saturated substrate allowed high air passage, aiding pollutant absorption. [PERSON] et al. [29] assessed the contribution of airflow turbulence in a test chamber with pollutant injection points, a central fan for even particle distribution, integrated green system fans, entry and exit sampling instruments, a door, and fluorescent lighting. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [23] studied the effects of lighting conditions on plants in a laboratory room with a green wall, an HVAC system, CO\({}_{2}\) inlet tubes, a gas exchange device, temperature and humidity sensors, and LED lighting. CO\({}_{2}\) reduction increased with higher light intensities and decreased when lights were off, supporting findings by [PERSON] et al. [45]. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [57] found that CO\({}_{2}\) concentrations increased under low light, while VOC removal continued, albeit less efficiently. [PERSON] et al. [28] identified suitable cultivars for active green walls, highlighting those capable of removing CO\({}_{2}\) under low light conditions and noting that substrate ventilation slightly increased removal rates. [PERSON] et al. [33] tested VOC removal efficiency in a laboratory room with an integrated ventilation and lighting system, exposing four plant types to methyl ethyl ketone (MEK) from a VOC source connected to the lab. Inlet and outlet air samples were compared to determine green system effectiveness. [PERSON] et al. [27] evaluated a biofiltration system's efficacy in removing MEK in a test chamber using incense cones containing the compound. Several studies compared plant species to identify the best for pollutant absorption. [PERSON] et al. [53] analyzed species in a living wall exposed to traffic pollution in a metro station, examining particle distribution on leaves and using ESEM/Image] for PM quantification. [PERSON] et al. [20] assessed evergreen and deciduous plants of various sizes and micromorphologies in a living wall to reduce PM from city traffic, sampling leaves randomly, and quantifying PM following the same approach. [PERSON] et al. [60] compared PM distribution on a homogeneous surface (plants of two cultivars of the same height) to a heterogeneous one (plants of varying heights) in a living wall, finding that morphological diversity positively impacted PM removal. [PERSON] et al. [54] collected tree and soil samples from a moderately trafficked site, conducting laboratory tests to analyze PM and TE accumulation on leaves, studying wax content through chemical analysis, and dissolving wax in chloroform before using the Image Analysis System from Skye Instruments Ltd., along with the Skye-Leaf software. [PERSON] et al.