Covid-19 Research

Research Article

OCLC Number/Unique Identifier: 9124573402

Faster Evaluation of Contaminated Surfaces for Mould Inspections by Tape Sampling

Environmental Sciences    Start Submission

Judith Meider* and Constanze Messal

Volume2-Issue6
Dates: Received: 2021-06-05 | Accepted: 2021-06-23 | Published: 2021-06-24
Pages: 516-522

Abstract

Taking a tape-lift sample is one of the main practices used by indoor environmental quality investigators for detecting whether mould structures (for example, spores and hyphae) have either settled onto or colonized the surface. Despite the popularity of the method, there can be significant inconsistency in how tape lifts are collected and evaluated.

The common ASTM standard D7910-14: Practice for the Collection of Fungal Material from Surfaces by Tape Lift, describes the correct way to collect a tape-lift sample. Using ASTM D7658-17: Standard Test Method for Direct Microscopy of Fungal Structures from Tape, semi-quantitative results in percentage of infested area in a scale from 0 up to 5 are available only.

In case histories or for mould removal control, the total cell count is needed. This cannot be realized by the ASTM method. Therefore, an innovative method is asked to combine the quickness of taping and the precision of total cell count. Our research team developed two methods to quickly and fully quantify the tape samples. Regarding the assessment criteria, the user can decide to operate with the 3-LINE method to achieve the highest precision or use the faster 3-STEP method for even better results. Therefore, an innovative method is asked to combine the quickness of taping and the precision of total cell count. The aim of the work is to develop two strategies to quickly and comprehensive quantify the tape samples.

FullText HTML FullText PDF DOI: 10.37871/jbres1268


Certificate of Publication




Copyright

© 2021 Meider J, et al. Distributed under Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0

How to cite this article

Meider J, Messal C. Faster Evaluation of Contaminated Surfaces for Mould Inspections by Tape Sampling. J Biomed Res Environ Sci. 2021 June 24; 2(6): 516-522. doi: 10.37871/jbres1268, Article ID: jbres1268


Subject area(s)

References


  1. Jones CL. Mould in building disputes. J Bacteriol Mycol Open Access. 2018;264-272.
  2. WTA leaflet E-4-12 Edition. 03.2020/D. Ziele und Kontrolle von Schimmelpilzschadensanierungen in Innenräumen.
  3. ASTM D7658-17: Standard Test Method for Direct Microscopy of Fungal Structures from Tape. ASTM 2017. https://bit.ly/3gL7wNP
  4. Messal C. Semi-quantitative microscopic evaluation of material samples; Schützen & Erhalten. 2018.
  5. Messal C, Münzenberg U, Steringer M. To preserve our cultural treasures. B+B Bauen im Bestand. 2019.
  6. Leitfaden zur Vorbeugung, Erfassung und Sanierung von Schimmelbefall in Gebäuden: 2017, Umweltbundesamt Dessau-Roßlau. https://bit.ly/2TUzFcu
  7. Messal C. Quantifizierende Mikroskopie von Oberflächenkontaktproben; Schützen & Erhalten. 2019.
  8. ASTM standard D7910-14: Practice for the Collection of Fungal Material from Surfaces by Tape Lift. ASTM 2014. https://bit.ly/3d3JR94
  9. Meider J, Wagner A, Eickner S, Messal C. Happy Taping for Dummies - Microscopy of Surface Contact Samples - how comparable and meaningful are these samples at all? Deutscher Schimmelpilztag. Neuss. 2020.


Comments


Swift, Reliable, and studious. We aim to cherish the world by publishing precise knowledge.

  • asd
  • Brown University Library
  • University of Glasgow Library
  • University of Pennsylvania, Penn Library
  • University of Amsterdam Library
  • The University of British Columbia Library
  • UC Berkeley’s Library
  • MIT Libraries
  • Kings College London University
  • University of Texas Libraries
  • UNSW Sidney Library
  • The University of Hong Kong Libraries
  • UC Santa Barbara Library
  • University of Toronto Libraries
  • University of Oxford Library
  • Australian National University
  • ScienceOpen
  • UIC Library
  • KAUST University Library
  • Cardiff University Library
  • Ball State University Library
  • Duke University Library
  • Rutgers University Library
  • Air University Library
  • UNT University of North Texas
  • Washington Research Library Consortium
  • Penn State University Library
  • Georgetown Library
  • Princeton University Library
  • Science Gate
  • Internet Archive
  • WashingTon State University Library
  • Dimensions
  • Zenodo
  • OpenAire
  • Index Copernicus International
  • icmje
  •  International Scientific Indexing (ISI)
  • Sherpa Romeo
  • ResearchGate
  • Universidad De Lima
  • WorldCat
  • JCU Discovery
  • McGill
  • National University of Singepore Libraries
  • SearchIT
  • Scilit
  • SemantiScholar
  • Base Search
  • VU
  • KB
  • Publons
  • oaji
  • Harvard University
  • sjsu-library
  • UWLSearch
  • Florida Institute of Technology
  • CrossRef
  • LUBsearch
  • Universitat de Paris
  • Technical University of Denmark
  • ResearchBIB
  • Google Scholar
  • Microsoft Academic Search