Cargando…

Impacts of indoor surface finishes on bacterial viability

Microbes in indoor environments are constantly being exposed to antimicrobial surface finishes. Many are rendered non‐viable after spending extended periods of time under low‐moisture, low‐nutrient surface conditions, regardless of whether those surfaces have been amended with antimicrobial chemical...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hu, Jinglin, Ben Maamar, Sarah, Glawe, Adam J., Gottel, Neil, Gilbert, Jack A., Hartmann, Erica M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6851865/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30980566
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ina.12558
_version_ 1783469704251179008
author Hu, Jinglin
Ben Maamar, Sarah
Glawe, Adam J.
Gottel, Neil
Gilbert, Jack A.
Hartmann, Erica M.
author_facet Hu, Jinglin
Ben Maamar, Sarah
Glawe, Adam J.
Gottel, Neil
Gilbert, Jack A.
Hartmann, Erica M.
author_sort Hu, Jinglin
collection PubMed
description Microbes in indoor environments are constantly being exposed to antimicrobial surface finishes. Many are rendered non‐viable after spending extended periods of time under low‐moisture, low‐nutrient surface conditions, regardless of whether those surfaces have been amended with antimicrobial chemicals. However, some microorganisms remain viable even after prolonged exposure to these hostile conditions. Work with specific model pathogens makes it difficult to draw general conclusions about how chemical and physical properties of surfaces affect microbes. Here, we explore the survival of a synthetic community of non‐model microorganisms isolated from built environments following exposure to three chemically and physically distinct surface finishes. Our findings demonstrated the differences in bacterial survival associated with three chemically and physically distinct materials. Alkaline clay surfaces select for an alkaliphilic bacterium, Kocuria rosea, whereas acidic mold‐resistant paint favors Bacillus timonensis, a Gram‐negative spore‐forming bacterium that also survives on antimicrobial surfaces after 24 hours of exposure. Additionally, antibiotic‐resistant Pantoea allii did not exhibit prolonged retention on antimicrobial surfaces. Our controlled microcosm experiment integrates measurement of indoor chemistry and microbiology to elucidate the complex biochemical interactions that influence the indoor microbiome.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6851865
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68518652019-11-18 Impacts of indoor surface finishes on bacterial viability Hu, Jinglin Ben Maamar, Sarah Glawe, Adam J. Gottel, Neil Gilbert, Jack A. Hartmann, Erica M. Indoor Air Original Articles Microbes in indoor environments are constantly being exposed to antimicrobial surface finishes. Many are rendered non‐viable after spending extended periods of time under low‐moisture, low‐nutrient surface conditions, regardless of whether those surfaces have been amended with antimicrobial chemicals. However, some microorganisms remain viable even after prolonged exposure to these hostile conditions. Work with specific model pathogens makes it difficult to draw general conclusions about how chemical and physical properties of surfaces affect microbes. Here, we explore the survival of a synthetic community of non‐model microorganisms isolated from built environments following exposure to three chemically and physically distinct surface finishes. Our findings demonstrated the differences in bacterial survival associated with three chemically and physically distinct materials. Alkaline clay surfaces select for an alkaliphilic bacterium, Kocuria rosea, whereas acidic mold‐resistant paint favors Bacillus timonensis, a Gram‐negative spore‐forming bacterium that also survives on antimicrobial surfaces after 24 hours of exposure. Additionally, antibiotic‐resistant Pantoea allii did not exhibit prolonged retention on antimicrobial surfaces. Our controlled microcosm experiment integrates measurement of indoor chemistry and microbiology to elucidate the complex biochemical interactions that influence the indoor microbiome. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-05-13 2019-07 /pmc/articles/PMC6851865/ /pubmed/30980566 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ina.12558 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Indoor Air published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Hu, Jinglin
Ben Maamar, Sarah
Glawe, Adam J.
Gottel, Neil
Gilbert, Jack A.
Hartmann, Erica M.
Impacts of indoor surface finishes on bacterial viability
title Impacts of indoor surface finishes on bacterial viability
title_full Impacts of indoor surface finishes on bacterial viability
title_fullStr Impacts of indoor surface finishes on bacterial viability
title_full_unstemmed Impacts of indoor surface finishes on bacterial viability
title_short Impacts of indoor surface finishes on bacterial viability
title_sort impacts of indoor surface finishes on bacterial viability
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6851865/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30980566
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ina.12558
work_keys_str_mv AT hujinglin impactsofindoorsurfacefinishesonbacterialviability
AT benmaamarsarah impactsofindoorsurfacefinishesonbacterialviability
AT glaweadamj impactsofindoorsurfacefinishesonbacterialviability
AT gottelneil impactsofindoorsurfacefinishesonbacterialviability
AT gilbertjacka impactsofindoorsurfacefinishesonbacterialviability
AT hartmannericam impactsofindoorsurfacefinishesonbacterialviability