Re: Sampling re Mycometer and ATP

[Guest guest]

Jeff, others,

I've sent brief comments before on the use of ATP, which I've experience and

have 'studied'. I have not used the Mycometer, however, from B. Baker, I hear it

is basic, gives a generalized quanitification result - something akin to " high,

med, low " . It analyzes an enzyme supposedly present in all parts of the fungi,

mycelia, spores, hyphae, etc. They claim therefore it is more accurate than ATP

at quantifying; i.e., it represents the actual mass of fungi present. I've not

found anything that suggests it is more (or less) precise or accurate than ATP.

One may not really need to quantify (accuracy) as much as identify (precision)

the presence of fungi. I'm not sure it matters.

I do know this: the last time I checked, the ATP meters were around $1200.00,

the Mycometer around $8,000.00, with a much higher per sample cost

(consumables).

If all we are doing is trying to confirm presence of any level of

mold/fungi/bacteria, than ATP might be sufficient. If we are trying to find only

fungi, Mycometer might be sufficient.

There is also mixed information regarding the presence of ATP over time. There

might also be some confounding due to bacteria, but I can't find any literature

discussing the method in detail. Nor any that discusses ATP presence after the

cell dies.

I do know, and will stand by my experience, that ATP is relatively high when

tape lifts indicate fungal contamination (especially growth structures) and the

converse, ATP is low when tape lifts indicate normal spore settling (not

contaminated with growth or debris).

I'm not sure either are more precise than PCR analysis, which we all know has

obvious and clear limititations (limited low number of species being the first

and foremost). (Now Bob throws in a monkey wrench regarding lab variability and

error! ARggghhh. The plot thickens.)

So, do not confuse ATP meters with Mycometer.

For your referencing pleasure, I've copied this from the Mycometer FAQ:

" Does the Mycometer results correlate to CFU? "

" Cultivation methods such as Rodac or Dip slides can be used for quantifying

fungal spores which are typically unicellular (with few exceptions). One cell

one colony. However, mold growth consists of multicellular hyphae and " one cell

one colony " does not apply. As the spores typically only consist of 0-5 % of the

total fungal biomass when having mold growth, cultivation methods are not well

suited for quantifying fungal (mold) biomass. The Mycometer test quantifies mold

by measuring the activity of an enzyme which is present in both spores and

hyphae in roughly the same amount per biomass unit. "

" How does the Mycometer test compare to ATP based technology? "

" The Mycometer does not correlate well with ATP based methods. ATP is present in

all living organisms, in the cells and in excudates and secretions. The enzyme

activity (N-acetylhexosaminidase) that are detected in the Mycometer-test gives

a much more specific measure of fungal presence. As an example: Slide a finger

cross a surface. This will leave high amounts of ATP on the surface while no

N-acetylhexos-aminidase can be measured. "

" How does the Mycometer results correlate to tapelifts? "

" In general Mycometer-test results correlate well with tape lifts. The two

methods aim at measuring fungal biomass meaning both hyphae and spores. "

[Guest guest]

and others,

Thank you and Bob Baker for the discussion of the Mycometer. I agree with

you that depending on what question you are trying to answer, may decide what

test is the most appropriate. However, I would like to clarify a couple of

points regarding the Mycometer technology and the product. First, as you

mentioned , the technology is based on the measurement of enzyme activity that

is specific to fungi or in the case of the Bactiquant test, is specific to

bacteria. Therein lies one difference between ATP and the Mycometer products.

ATP measures all living material ( fungi, bacteria, skin cells, insect parts)

whereas Mycometer measures either the fungal biomass present or the bacterial

biomass present depending on the test assay used. The second point of

clarification is the cost. The Mycometer equipment kit, which will run any of

our assays, is $4500, not $8000. The test assays are more expensive that

typical ATP , and average $20 per test assay. There are a great deal of peer

reviewed technical papers available on the website ( www.mycometer.com) or I

would be happy to address any specific questions offline by phone or by email.

I also have a summary page of the differences between the two technologies that

I can email out.

Respectfully submitted

President

Mycometer, Inc. NA

5002 S. MacDill Ave

Tampa Florida 33611

O:

F:

C:

lrogers@...

www.mycometer.com

>

> Jeff, others,

>

> I've sent brief comments before on the use of ATP, which I've experience and

have 'studied'. I have not used the Mycometer, however, from B. Baker, I hear it

is basic, gives a generalized quanitification result - something akin to " high,

med, low " . It analyzes an enzyme supposedly present in all parts of the fungi,

mycelia, spores, hyphae, etc. They claim therefore it is more accurate than ATP

at quantifying; i.e., it represents the actual mass of fungi present. I've not

found anything that suggests it is more (or less) precise or accurate than ATP.

One may not really need to quantify (accuracy) as much as identify (precision)

the presence of fungi. I'm not sure it matters.

>

> I do know this: the last time I checked, the ATP meters were around $1200.00,

the Mycometer around $8,000.00, with a much higher per sample cost

(consumables).

>

> If all we are doing is trying to confirm presence of any level of

mold/fungi/bacteria, than ATP might be sufficient. If we are trying to find only

fungi, Mycometer might be sufficient.

>

> There is also mixed information regarding the presence of ATP over time. There

might also be some confounding due to bacteria, but I can't find any literature

discussing the method in detail. Nor any that discusses ATP presence after the

cell dies.

>

> I do know, and will stand by my experience, that ATP is relatively high when

tape lifts indicate fungal contamination (especially growth structures) and the

converse, ATP is low when tape lifts indicate normal spore settling (not

contaminated with growth or debris).

>

> I'm not sure either are more precise than PCR analysis, which we all know has

obvious and clear limititations (limited low number of species being the first

and foremost). (Now Bob throws in a monkey wrench regarding lab variability and

error! ARggghhh. The plot thickens.)

>

> So, do not confuse ATP meters with Mycometer.

>

> For your referencing pleasure, I've copied this from the Mycometer FAQ:

>

> " Does the Mycometer results correlate to CFU? "

> " Cultivation methods such as Rodac or Dip slides can be used for quantifying

fungal spores which are typically unicellular (with few exceptions). One cell

one colony. However, mold growth consists of multicellular hyphae and " one cell

one colony " does not apply. As the spores typically only consist of 0-5 % of the

total fungal biomass when having mold growth, cultivation methods are not well

suited for quantifying fungal (mold) biomass. The Mycometer test quantifies mold

by measuring the activity of an enzyme which is present in both spores and

hyphae in roughly the same amount per biomass unit. "

>

> " How does the Mycometer test compare to ATP based technology? "

> " The Mycometer does not correlate well with ATP based methods. ATP is present

in all living organisms, in the cells and in excudates and secretions. The

enzyme activity (N-acetylhexosaminidase) that are detected in the Mycometer-test

gives a much more specific measure of fungal presence. As an example: Slide a

finger cross a surface. This will leave high amounts of ATP on the surface while

no N-acetylhexos-aminidase can be measured. "

>

> " How does the Mycometer results correlate to tapelifts? "

> " In general Mycometer-test results correlate well with tape lifts. The two

methods aim at measuring fungal biomass meaning both hyphae and spores. "

>

[Guest guest]

Group:

I have extensively used both the Mycometer and an ATP luminometer. Being a

microbiologist, I also have taken and analyzed tape samples from the locations

on multiple projects.

The Mycometer is very good for mold and great for consultants or contractors.

Its very useful both for investigation, but moreso for post-testing.

The ATP luminometer is not reliable or specific enough for

investigative/consulting for water damage. However, I would suggest that

contractors use it as a cheap way for their techs to judge - in general - how

clean they are getting surfaces.

But, consultants should not consider using it for post-testing unless you are

dealing with sewage loss. There are too many times where the ATP levels are

high, but the surfaces have been adequately cleaned (verified by tape samples).

Alternatively, there are times when a descent amount of loose fungal debris is

still present but way past being viable and you get a low ATP number.

Again, I have verified this with a microscope in the field and am very

comfortable with my position.

Cassidy Kuchenbecker, MS

Environmental Initiatives

> >

> > Jeff, others,

> >

> > I've sent brief comments before on the use of ATP, which I've experience and

have 'studied'. I have not used the Mycometer, however, from B. Baker, I hear it

is basic, gives a generalized quanitification result - something akin to " high,

med, low " . It analyzes an enzyme supposedly present in all parts of the fungi,

mycelia, spores, hyphae, etc. They claim therefore it is more accurate than ATP

at quantifying; i.e., it represents the actual mass of fungi present. I've not

found anything that suggests it is more (or less) precise or accurate than ATP.

One may not really need to quantify (accuracy) as much as identify (precision)

the presence of fungi. I'm not sure it matters.

> >

> > I do know this: the last time I checked, the ATP meters were around

$1200.00, the Mycometer around $8,000.00, with a much higher per sample cost

(consumables).

> >

> > If all we are doing is trying to confirm presence of any level of

mold/fungi/bacteria, than ATP might be sufficient. If we are trying to find only

fungi, Mycometer might be sufficient.

> >

> > There is also mixed information regarding the presence of ATP over time.

There might also be some confounding due to bacteria, but I can't find any

literature discussing the method in detail. Nor any that discusses ATP presence

after the cell dies.

> >

> > I do know, and will stand by my experience, that ATP is relatively high when

tape lifts indicate fungal contamination (especially growth structures) and the

converse, ATP is low when tape lifts indicate normal spore settling (not

contaminated with growth or debris).

> >

> > I'm not sure either are more precise than PCR analysis, which we all know

has obvious and clear limititations (limited low number of species being the

first and foremost). (Now Bob throws in a monkey wrench regarding lab

variability and error! ARggghhh. The plot thickens.)

> >

> > So, do not confuse ATP meters with Mycometer.

> >

> > For your referencing pleasure, I've copied this from the Mycometer FAQ:

> >

> > " Does the Mycometer results correlate to CFU? "

> > " Cultivation methods such as Rodac or Dip slides can be used for quantifying

fungal spores which are typically unicellular (with few exceptions). One cell

one colony. However, mold growth consists of multicellular hyphae and " one cell

one colony " does not apply. As the spores typically only consist of 0-5 % of the

total fungal biomass when having mold growth, cultivation methods are not well

suited for quantifying fungal (mold) biomass. The Mycometer test quantifies mold

by measuring the activity of an enzyme which is present in both spores and

hyphae in roughly the same amount per biomass unit. "

> >

> > " How does the Mycometer test compare to ATP based technology? "

> > " The Mycometer does not correlate well with ATP based methods. ATP is

present in all living organisms, in the cells and in excudates and secretions.

The enzyme activity (N-acetylhexosaminidase) that are detected in the

Mycometer-test gives a much more specific measure of fungal presence. As an

example: Slide a finger cross a surface. This will leave high amounts of ATP on

the surface while no N-acetylhexos-aminidase can be measured. "

> >

> > " How does the Mycometer results correlate to tapelifts? "

> > " In general Mycometer-test results correlate well with tape lifts. The two

methods aim at measuring fungal biomass meaning both hyphae and spores. "

> >

>