Comparison of Methods to Identify and Monitor Mold Damages in Buildings
Molds thrive in indoor environments, challenging the stability of building materials and occupants’ health. Diverse sampling and analytical techniques can be applied in the microbiology of buildings, with specific benefits and drawbacks. We evaluated the use of two methods, the microscopy of visible...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2022-09-01
|
| Series: | Applied Sciences |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/12/18/9372 |
| _version_ | 1797491399231275008 |
|---|---|
| author | Pedro Maria Martin-Sanchez Maria Nunez Eva Lena Fjeld Estensmo Inger Skrede Håvard Kauserud |
| author_facet | Pedro Maria Martin-Sanchez Maria Nunez Eva Lena Fjeld Estensmo Inger Skrede Håvard Kauserud |
| author_sort | Pedro Maria Martin-Sanchez |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Molds thrive in indoor environments, challenging the stability of building materials and occupants’ health. Diverse sampling and analytical techniques can be applied in the microbiology of buildings, with specific benefits and drawbacks. We evaluated the use of two methods, the microscopy of visible mold growth (hereinafter “mold” samples) (tape lifts) and the DNA metabarcoding of mold and dust samples (swabs), for mapping mold-damage indicator fungi in residential buildings in Oslo. Overall, both methods provided consistent results for the mold samples, where nearly 80% of the microscopy-identified taxa were confirmed by DNA analyses. <i>Aspergillus</i> was the most abundant genus colonizing all materials, while some taxa were associated with certain substrates: <i>Acremonium</i> with gypsum board, <i>Chaetomium</i> with chipboard, <i>Stachybotrys</i> with gypsum board and wood, and <i>Trichoderma</i> with wood. Based on the DNA data, the community composition was clearly different between the mold and the dust, with a much higher alpha diversity in the dust. Most genera identified in the mold were also detected with a low abundance in the dust from the same apartments. Their spatial distribution indicated some local spread from the mold growth to other areas, but there was no clear correlation between the relative abundances and the distance to the damages. To study mold damages, different microbiological analyses (microscopy, cultivation, DNA, and chemistry) should be combined with a thorough inspection of buildings. The interpretation of such datasets requires the collaboration of skilled mycologists and building consultants. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-10T00:46:55Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-45995ff585f34848a76140e77b65c686 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2076-3417 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-10T00:46:55Z |
| publishDate | 2022-09-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Applied Sciences |
| spelling | doaj.art-45995ff585f34848a76140e77b65c6862023-11-23T14:57:32ZengMDPI AGApplied Sciences2076-34172022-09-011218937210.3390/app12189372Comparison of Methods to Identify and Monitor Mold Damages in BuildingsPedro Maria Martin-Sanchez0Maria Nunez1Eva Lena Fjeld Estensmo2Inger Skrede3Håvard Kauserud4Department of Biosciences, University of Oslo, P.O. Box 1066 Blindern, 0316 Oslo, NorwayMycoteam AS, P.O. Box 5 Blindern, 0313 Oslo, NorwayDepartment of Biosciences, University of Oslo, P.O. Box 1066 Blindern, 0316 Oslo, NorwayDepartment of Biosciences, University of Oslo, P.O. Box 1066 Blindern, 0316 Oslo, NorwayDepartment of Biosciences, University of Oslo, P.O. Box 1066 Blindern, 0316 Oslo, NorwayMolds thrive in indoor environments, challenging the stability of building materials and occupants’ health. Diverse sampling and analytical techniques can be applied in the microbiology of buildings, with specific benefits and drawbacks. We evaluated the use of two methods, the microscopy of visible mold growth (hereinafter “mold” samples) (tape lifts) and the DNA metabarcoding of mold and dust samples (swabs), for mapping mold-damage indicator fungi in residential buildings in Oslo. Overall, both methods provided consistent results for the mold samples, where nearly 80% of the microscopy-identified taxa were confirmed by DNA analyses. <i>Aspergillus</i> was the most abundant genus colonizing all materials, while some taxa were associated with certain substrates: <i>Acremonium</i> with gypsum board, <i>Chaetomium</i> with chipboard, <i>Stachybotrys</i> with gypsum board and wood, and <i>Trichoderma</i> with wood. Based on the DNA data, the community composition was clearly different between the mold and the dust, with a much higher alpha diversity in the dust. Most genera identified in the mold were also detected with a low abundance in the dust from the same apartments. Their spatial distribution indicated some local spread from the mold growth to other areas, but there was no clear correlation between the relative abundances and the distance to the damages. To study mold damages, different microbiological analyses (microscopy, cultivation, DNA, and chemistry) should be combined with a thorough inspection of buildings. The interpretation of such datasets requires the collaboration of skilled mycologists and building consultants.https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/12/18/9372indoor microbiological qualityindoor moldsbuilt environment moldsdust samplingITS DNA metabarcodinghigh-throughput sequencing |
| spellingShingle | Pedro Maria Martin-Sanchez Maria Nunez Eva Lena Fjeld Estensmo Inger Skrede Håvard Kauserud Comparison of Methods to Identify and Monitor Mold Damages in Buildings Applied Sciences indoor microbiological quality indoor molds built environment molds dust sampling ITS DNA metabarcoding high-throughput sequencing |
| title | Comparison of Methods to Identify and Monitor Mold Damages in Buildings |
| title_full | Comparison of Methods to Identify and Monitor Mold Damages in Buildings |
| title_fullStr | Comparison of Methods to Identify and Monitor Mold Damages in Buildings |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Methods to Identify and Monitor Mold Damages in Buildings |
| title_short | Comparison of Methods to Identify and Monitor Mold Damages in Buildings |
| title_sort | comparison of methods to identify and monitor mold damages in buildings |
| topic | indoor microbiological quality indoor molds built environment molds dust sampling ITS DNA metabarcoding high-throughput sequencing |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/12/18/9372 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT pedromariamartinsanchez comparisonofmethodstoidentifyandmonitormolddamagesinbuildings AT marianunez comparisonofmethodstoidentifyandmonitormolddamagesinbuildings AT evalenafjeldestensmo comparisonofmethodstoidentifyandmonitormolddamagesinbuildings AT ingerskrede comparisonofmethodstoidentifyandmonitormolddamagesinbuildings AT havardkauserud comparisonofmethodstoidentifyandmonitormolddamagesinbuildings |