首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>other >Assessment of Fungal Contamination in Moldy Homes: Comparison of Different Methods
【2h】

Assessment of Fungal Contamination in Moldy Homes: Comparison of Different Methods

机译:发霉的房屋中真菌污染的评估:不同方法的比较

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

In an effort to better understand the relationship between different fungal sampling methods in the indoor environment, four methods were used to quantify mold contamination in 13 homes with visible mold. Swab, fungal spore source strength tester (FSSST), and air samples (total of 52 samples) were analyzed using both the microscopic (total spore count) and culture-based (CFU count) enumeration techniques. Settled dust samples were analyzed for culturable fungi only, as the microscopic enumeration was restricted by the masking effect. The relationships between the data obtained with the different sampling methods were examined using correlation analysis. Significant relationships were observed between the data obtained from swab and FSSST samples both by the total counting (r = 0.822, p <0.05) and by the CFU counting (r = 0.935, p <0.01). No relationships were observed between air and FSSST samples or air and settled dust samples. Percentage culturability of spores for each sampling method was also calculated and found to vary greatly for all three methods (swab: 0.03% to 63%, FSSST: 0.1% to >100%, air: 0.7% to 79%). These findings confirm that reliance on one sampling or enumeration method for characterization of an indoor mold source might not provide an accurate estimate of fungal contamination of a microenvironment. Furthermore, FSSST sampling appears to be an effective measurement of a mold source in the field, providing an upper bound estimate of potential mold spore release into the indoor air. Because of the small sample size of this study, however, further research is needed to better understand the observed relationships in this study.
机译:为了更好地了解室内环境中不同真菌采样方法之间的关系,使用了四种方法对13个可见霉菌家庭的霉菌污染进行了量化。使用显微镜(总孢子计数)和基于培养物(CFU计数)的计数技术分析了拭子,真菌孢子源强度测试仪(FSSST)和空气样品(总共52个样品)。仅对沉降的粉尘样品中的可培养真菌进行了分析,因为微观枚举受到掩盖效应的限制。使用相关分析检查了使用不同采样方法获得的数据之间的关系。通过总计数(r = 0.822,p <0.05)和CFU计数(r = 0.935,p <0.01),从拭子和FSSST样品获得的数据之间观察到显着的关系。空气和FSSST样品或空气和沉降的粉尘样品之间未发现任何关系。还计算了每种采样方法的孢子可培养百分比,发现这三种方法的孢子的可培养性差异很大(拭子:0.03%至63%,FSSST:0.1%至> 100%,空气:0.7%至79%)。这些发现证实,依靠一种取样或计数方法来表征室内霉菌来源可能无法提供对微环境真菌污染的准确估计。此外,FSSST采样似乎是现场霉菌来源的有效测量方法,提供了潜在霉菌孢子释放到室内空气中的上限估计。由于本研究的样本量较小,因此需要进一步研究以更好地了解本研究中观察到的关系。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号