The construction of the clone library from Index-2 building material DNA failed due to a low-quality amplification product. A total of 45 fungal phylotypes were identified, of which 39 were represented by cultured isolates, 11 by clones and 5 by both cultures and clones. Detailed information of the phylotypes and their isolation sources is given in Additional file 3, Table S2. The fungi detected

see more from building materials via cloning and sequencing of isolates were mainly filamentous species. The Index-1 building yielded solely filamentous species, most of which were xerophilic soil fungi (e.g. Aspergillus conicus, Eurotium sp., Penicillium citreonigrum, P. corylophilum and Wallemia sp.), whereas species favouring high water activity were identified from the Index-2 building (e.g.

Phoma sp., Trichoderma citrinoviride, T. atroviride, and EVP4593 manufacturer yeasts like Cryptococcus spp., Sporidiobolus salmonicolor https://www.selleckchem.com/products/dorsomorphin-2hcl.html and Rhodotorula mucilaginosa). Several morphologically unidentifiable (sterile) colonies were readily identified to species level by nucITS sequence analysis, including Hormonema dematioides, Phoma herbarum, Pithomyces (Leptosphaerulina) chartarum and Rhinocladiella atrovirens. All colonies provisionally identified as Aureobasidium-like were found to represent other taxa by nucITS-sequencing (see Additional file 3, Table S2 for details). Comparison of molecular methods and culture The fungi most abundant and prevalent by cultivation (Additional file 4, Tables S3_S4) and qPCR (Additional file 4, Tables S3_S4) methods in dust samples were largely overlapping with those observed to be abundant by clone library analysis, yet their relative abundances in PR-171 cost individual samples did not correlate well between methods. Cladosporium,

Aureobasidium, Penicillium, Sphaeropsidales, yeasts and unidentifiable (sterile) isolates, i.e. the dominant taxa based on clone analysis (Table 2), accounted for 89-100% of total colony forming units (CFUs) in all but one sample. A total of 13 genera were detected by cultivation, while 33 qPCR assays representing 13 genera gave a positive result from one or more samples (Additional file 4, Tables S3_S4). Of the 13 genera detected by cultivation, nine were also detected by qPCR, three were not targeted, and one (Alternaria) gave a negative result but was found to be represented by species (A. citri and A. arborescens) other than the one targeted by the assay (A. alternata). The analytical sensitivity of qPCR was clearly superior to the clone library analysis: In 92% of cases when a qPCR-detectable phylotype occurred in a clone library, it was correctly detected by qPCR from the same sample. At the same time, only 40% of positive qPCR detections were repeated by clone library analysis (Table 3).