4.6 Article

Seasonal dynamics of airborne fungi in different caves of the Mogao Grottoes, Dunhuang, China

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ibiod.2010.05.005

关键词

Aerobiology; Biodeterioration; Culturable fungi; Mogao Grottoes

资金

  1. National Science Foundation of China [30870438]
  2. Key Scientific Research Base of Conservation for Ancient Mural of State Administration for Cultural Heritage [200701]
  3. China Post doctor Foundation [20080430109]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fungal spores are ubiquitous and can be found in both outdoor and indoor air samples, we investigated the temporal and spatial distributions, compositions, and determinants of ambient airborne fungi in Mogao Grottoes of Dunhuang, China. Culturable fungi in three categories of caves, Open Cave (OC) to visitors, Semi-open Cave (SC), and Closed Cave (CC) and an outdoor area (OD) in Mogao Grottoes monthly from September 2008 to August 2009, using a six-stage Anderson FA-1 sampler. The grand mean of total culturable fungi was 187.45 +/- 37.76 colony-forming units (CFU)/m(3) for all sites considered, and the number was 110.52 +/- 17.40 CFU/m(3), 137.81 +/- 26.67 CFU/m(3), 245.39 +/- 37.20 CFU/m(3), 240.87 +/- 54.91 CFU/m(3) in OC, SC, CC, OD. The most prevalent fungi were Cladosporium spp., non-sporing fungi, Penicillium spp., Alternaria spp. and Aspergillus spp. at all four sampling sites. Airborne fungal numbers and their diversity were generally higher in CC and OD than in OC and SC. Most fungal genus had significant seasonal variations, higher levels were observed in summer and autumn. Pearson correlation analysis showed that the levels of ambient fungi were correlated positively with temperature and visitor numbers, but negatively with relative humidity and rainfall. The results suggested that the visitors have an obvious influence on concentrations and compositions of ambient fungi in Mogao Grottoes providing information to be considered in conservation and management. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据