Niemeier R Todd, Sivasubramani Satheesh K, Reponen Tiina, Grinshpun Sergey A
Department of Environmental Health, Center for Health-Related Aerosol Studies, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio 45267-0056, USA.
J Occup Environ Hyg. 2006 May;3(5):262-73. doi: 10.1080/15459620600637333.
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.
为了更好地理解室内环境中不同真菌采样方法之间的关系,我们使用了四种方法对13处有可见霉菌的房屋中的霉菌污染进行量化。棉签、真菌孢子源强度测试仪(FSSST)和空气样本(共52个样本)均采用显微镜计数(总孢子数)和基于培养的计数(CFU计数)技术进行分析。沉降灰尘样本仅分析可培养真菌,因为显微镜计数受掩盖效应限制。使用相关性分析检查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),均观察到棉签和FSSST样本获得的数据之间存在显著关系。未观察到空气样本与FSSST样本之间或空气样本与沉降灰尘样本之间的关系。还计算了每种采样方法的孢子可培养百分比,发现所有三种方法的该百分比差异很大(棉签:0.03%至63%,FSSST:0.1%至>100%,空气:0.7%至79%)。这些发现证实,仅依靠一种采样或计数方法来表征室内霉菌来源可能无法准确估计微环境中的真菌污染。此外,FSSST采样似乎是现场霉菌来源的有效测量方法,可提供潜在霉菌孢子释放到室内空气中的上限估计。然而,由于本研究的样本量较小,需要进一步研究以更好地理解本研究中观察到的关系。