Lin King-Teh, Schrantz Michael, Sandagdorj Oyungerel, Keng Yen-Fang, Boothe Gregory, Vesper Stephen Joseph
Mycometrics, LLC, Monmouth Junction, NJ 08852, USA.
Front Biosci (Elite Ed). 2011 Jan 1;3(1):108-14. doi: 10.2741/e225.
A school gymnasium was accidentally flooded by the fire-suppression sprinkler system. The surface water was removed immediately and, after 10 days, a professional firm engaged to dry the environment. Twenty five days after the flooding, the school decided to evaluate whether there was any mold growth in the gymnasium. The inspector used two approaches, traditional air samples or a DNA-based analysis of dust samples. Thirty five-minute air samples (for total of 75 L of air each sample) were collected with Air-O-Cell™ (AOC) cassettes and the mold structures (MS) were quantified by microscopy. These samples were compared to two identical outdoor air samples. As an alternative, two dust samples were collected and quantified by mold specific quantitative PCR (MSQPCR). Comparisons of indoor to outdoor mold concentrations in air samples were inconclusive, but applying MSQPCR to the investigation of this water-damaged environment provided a more reliable and useful answer to the extent of mold contamination than did the spore trap analysis.
一所学校的体育馆意外被消防喷淋系统水淹。地表水立即被排走，10天后，一家专业公司受雇对环境进行干燥处理。洪水发生25天后，学校决定评估体育馆内是否有霉菌生长。检查员采用了两种方法，传统的空气样本检测或基于DNA的灰尘样本分析。使用Air-O-Cell™（AOC）盒收集35分钟的空气样本（每个样本共75升空气），并通过显微镜对霉菌结构（MS）进行定量。这些样本与两个相同的室外空气样本进行比较。作为替代方法，收集了两个灰尘样本，并通过霉菌特异性定量PCR（MSQPCR）进行定量。空气样本中室内与室外霉菌浓度的比较尚无定论，但与孢子捕捉分析相比，将MSQPCR应用于对这个水浸环境的调查，能为霉菌污染程度提供更可靠、更有用的答案。
