4.6 Article

A multiproxy approach to evaluate biocidal treatments on biodeteriorated majolica glazed tiles

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 18, 期 12, 页码 4794-4816

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/1462-2920.13380

关键词

-

资金

  1. Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT-MCTES) [SFRH/BD/46038/2008, UID/EAT/00729/2013]
  2. European Commission [PIEF-GA-2012-328689]
  3. Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation [TCP CSD2007-00058]
  4. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [SFRH/BD/46038/2008] Funding Source: FCT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Fishing House located on the grounds of the Marquis of Pombal Palace, Oeiras, Portugal, was built in the 18th century. During this epoch, Portuguese gardens, such as the one surrounding the Fishing House, were commonly ornamented with glazed wall tile claddings. Currently, some of these outdoor tile panels are covered with dark colored biofilms, contributing to undesirable aesthetic changes and eventually inducing chemical and physical damage to the tile surfaces. Phylogenetic analyses revealed that the investigated biofilms are mainly composed of green algae, cyanobacteria and dematiaceous fungi. With the aim of mitigating biodeterioration, four different biocides (TiO2 nanoparticles, Biotin (R) T, Preventol (R) RI 80 and Albilex Biostat (R)) were applied in situ to the glazed wall tiles. Their efficacy was monitored by visual examination, epifluorescence microscopy and DNA-based analysis. Significant changes in the microbial community composition were observed 4 months after treatment with Preventol VR RI 80 and Biotin VR T. Although the original community was inactivated after these treatments, an early stage of re-colonization was detected 6 months after the biocide application. TiO2 nanoparticles showed promising results due to their self-cleaning effect, causing the detachment of the biofilm from the tile surface, which remained clean 6 and even 24 months after biocide application. (C) 2013 Society for Applied Microbiology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd

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