| Literature DB >> 22017920 |
Miia Pitkäranta1, Teija Meklin, Anne Hyvärinen, Aino Nevalainen, Lars Paulin, Petri Auvinen, Ulla Lignell, Helena Rintala.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Indoor microbial contamination due to excess moisture is an important contributor to human illness in both residential and occupational settings. However, the census of microorganisms in the indoor environment is limited by the use of selective, culture-based detection techniques. By using clone library sequencing of full-length internal transcribed spacer region combined with quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) for 69 fungal species or assay groups and cultivation, we have been able to generate a more comprehensive description of the total indoor mycoflora. Using this suite of methods, we assessed the impact of moisture damage on the fungal community composition of settled dust and building material samples (n = 8 and 16, correspondingly). Water-damaged buildings (n = 2) were examined pre- and post- remediation, and compared with undamaged reference buildings (n = 2).Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2011 PMID: 22017920 PMCID: PMC3206440 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2180-11-235
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Microbiol ISSN: 1471-2180 Impact factor: 3.605
Fungal diversity and concentrations in house dust samples
| Samplea | nucITS clone library analysisb | Culture | qPCRc | Ergd | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | %C | total cfu | ERMI value | μg/g | |||||||
| In1a | 225 | 98 | 45 | 220 | 4.06 | 0.027 | 9.6·104 | 12 | 1.4·107 | 4.0 | 2.6 |
| In1b | 100 | 62 | 44 | 142 | 3.94 | 0.014 | 5.7·103 | 6 | 4.4 ·105 | -0.7 | 0.4 |
| Re1a | 207 | 45 | 44 | 103 | 2.22 | 0.31 | 2.5·106 | 9 | 1.3 ·107 | -5.2 | 5.5 |
| Re1b | 26 | 21 | 31 | 67 | 2.97 | 0.018 | 1.4·102 | 9 | 4.0·105 | 1.0 | 0.2 |
| In2a | 100 | 37 | 48 | 77 | 2.73 | 0.148 | 1.7·106 | 17 | 1.2·107 | 4.4 | 1.1 |
| In2b | 119 | 42 | 25 | 167 | 2.68 | 0.186 | 1.1·106 | 22 | 2.6·106 | 4.3 | 1.1 |
| Re2a | 167 | 48 | 52 | 93 | 2.95 | 0.108 | 1.4·105 | 10 | 3.2·107 | -1.3 | 1.9 |
| Re2b | 137 | 75 | 25 | 298 | 3.88 | 0.030 | 2.7·105 | 24 | 4.1·106 | 4.6 | 2.6 |
| Combined data | 1081 | 305 | 45 | 675 | 4.63 | 0.028 | 33 | ||||
a) Sample name abbreviations: In: index building, Re: reference building, 1: Location-1, 2: Location-2, a: pre-remediation sample, b: post-remediation sample.
b) Abbreviations: N: number of clones; Sobs: number of observed OTUs; %C: percentage coverage (ACE); SACE: total no. of OTUs according to ACE richness estimator; H': Shannon diversity index; D: Simpson diversity index.
c) Abbreviations: SqPCR: number of qPCR assays giving positive results; total CE: sum of cell equivalent counts for 69 common indoor fungi, ERMI: Environmental Relative Moldiness Index.
d) Concentration of ergosterol.
Figure 1Relative abundances of clones affiliated to fungal classes in the studied dust and building material samples. Sample name abbreviations: In: index building Re: reference building, 1: Location-1, 2: Location-2, a: pre-remediation sample, b: post-remediation sample; Dust comb: combined data from settled dust samples; BM-1: building material pool from Index-1 building. Construction of clone library from the Index-2 building material pool failed.
The percentage frequencies of the most abundant fungal genera in the dust clone libraries.
| Genus | Location 1 | Location 2 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| In1a | In1b | Re1a | Re1b | In2a | In2b | Re2a | Re2b | |
| | 0.9% | 1.0% | ND | ND | 49.0% | 46.2% | 3.0% | 4.4% |
| | 8.4% | 10.0% | 64.7% | ND | 5.0% | 8.4% | 1.2% | 5.8% |
| | 5.3% | 3.0% | 2.4% | 7.7% | 3.0% | 0.8% | 3.0% | 15.3% |
| | 1.8% | ND | 2.9% | 15.4% | 2.0% | 0.8% | 0.6% | 0.7% |
| | 1.3% | 6.0% | 1.4% | ND | ND | 3.4% | 1.8% | 0.7% |
| | 4.4% | 4.0% | 2.9% | ND | 2.0% | ND | ND | ND |
| | 1.8% | ND | ND | ND | 4.0% | 0.8% | 0.6% | 4.4% |
| | ND | ND | 1.0% | ND | ND | ND | ND | 9.5% |
| | 1.3% | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | 7.8% | 0.7% |
| | ND | ND | ND | 3.8% | ND | ND | ND | ND |
| | 2.7% | ND | ND | ND | 1.0% | ND | ND | ND |
| | 4.0% | 12.0% | 5.3% | 3.8% | 6.0% | 5.9% | 4.8% | 12.4% |
| | 3.1% | 12.0% | ND | 19.2% | 1.0% | 1.7% | 5.4% | 7.3% |
| | ND | 1.0% | ND | ND | ND | ND | 43.1% | 1.5% |
| | 1.3% | 2.0% | ND | ND | ND | ND | 0.6% | 3.6% |
| | ND | 1.0% | 1.0% | ND | ND | 1.7% | 3.6% | ND |
| | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | 0.8% | 4.8% | 0.7% |
| | 0.4% | 1.0% | ND | 3.8% | ND | ND | ND | 0.7% |
| | 11.1% | ND | ND | ND | 2.0% | ND | ND | ND |
| | ND | ND | ND | 7.7% | ND | ND | ND | ND |
| | ND | ND | ND | 3.8% | 3.0% | ND | ND | ND |
| | 4.0% | 2.0% | ND | ND | 1.0% | ND | ND | ND |
| | ND | 6.0% | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND |
| 48.0% | 39.0% | 18.4% | 34.6% | 21.0% | 29.4% | 19.8% | 32.1% | |
The frequencies of clones affiliated with the 23 most abundant genera are shown individually. The abundant genera accounted altogether for 52-81.6% of the clones in individual libraries.
ND: not detected
Qualitative comparison of qPCR and clone library sequencing for detecting fungal species in dust samples
| Result | No. of cases |
|---|---|
| Positive detection of a taxon in a sample by both qPCR and clone library sequencing | 35 |
| Negative result by both methods | 443 |
| Detection by qPCR only (clone library non-detect) | 74 |
| Detection by clone library sequencing only (qPCR non-detect) | 4 |
Figure 2UniFrac PCoA of dust sample nucITS library clone frequencies. The first and second principal coordinates (P1 and P2) are shown. The first axis correlates with building (P1, red circles, 23% of variation). Apart from reference sample Re1a, the second axis correlates with building conditions (P2, blue circles, 16% of variation). The circles were drawn manually.
Figure 3Phylogenetic representation of indoor dust fungal communities inferred from nucITS clone library data. Percentage frequency representation of clusters in individual dust samples are given as a heat map table, also showing cluster numbers (#), class and main genera included. A statistically significantly increased occurrence of a cluster in a sample is shown underlined (UniFrac analysis). Class abbreviations: Eur: Eurotiomycetes; Dot: Dothideomycetes; Leo: Leotiomycetes; Lec: Lecanoromycetes; Sor: Sordariomycetes; Tap: Taphrinomycetes; Sac: Saccharomycetes; Tre: Tremellomycetes; Mic: Microbotryomycetes; Aga: Agaricomycetes; BaIs: Basidiomycetes incertae sedis; Puc: Pucciniomycetes; Wal: Wallemiomycetes; Zyg: Zygomycetes incertae sedis. For detailed cluster contents and OTU annotations, see Additional file 2 Table S1.
Figure 4Pair-wise comparison of fungal species richness in water-damaged and reference buildings pre- to post-remediation. Phylotype diversities (Sn) were calculated from clone library data separately for each sample and for each fungal class. The diversity ratio between the index and reference buildings (Sn(In):Sn(Re)) was calculated for each building pair pre- and post-remediation. The results for the two locations are shown separately. The species richness of Agaricomycetes, Eurotiomycetes and Dothideomycetes was higher in the index buildings in relation to reference buildings' pre-remediation, but decreased post-remediation.