Monitoring the effects of different conservation treatments on paper-infecting fungi

Fungi are among the most degradative organisms inducing biodeterioration of paper-based items of cultural heritage. Appropriate conservation measures and restoration treatments to deal with fungal infections include mechanical, chemical, and biological methods, which entail effects on the paper itself and health hazards for humans. Three different conservation treatments, namely freeze-drying, gamma rays, and ethylene oxide fumigation, were compared and monitored to assess their short- (one month, T1) and long-term (one year, T2) effectiveness to inhibit fungal growth. After the inoculation with fungi possessing cellulose hydrolysis ability - Chaetomium globosum, Trichoderma viride, and Cladosporium cladosporioides - as single strains or as a mixture, different quality paper samples were treated and screened for fungal viability by culture-dependent and -independent techniques.Results derived from both strategies were contradictory. Both gamma irradiation and EtO fumigation showed full efficacy as disinfecting agents when evaluated with cultivation techniques. However, when using molecular analyses, the application of gamma rays showed a short-term reduction in DNA recovery and DNA fragmentation; the latter phenomenon was also observed in a minor degree in samples treated with freeze-drying. When RNA was used as an indicator of long-term fungal viability, differences in the RNA recovery from samples treated with freeze-drying or gamma rays could be observed in samples inoculated with the mixed culture. Only the treatment with ethylene oxide proved negative for both DNA and RNA recovery. Therefore, DNA fragmentation after an ethylene oxide treatment can hamper future paleogenetic and archaeological molecular studies on the objects.

► Freeze-drying, gamma rays and ethylene oxide fumigation: evaluation of effectiveness to inhibit fungal growth. ► Screening with DGGE for the short- and long-term recovery from infected paper of fungal DNA and RNA. ► Freeze-drying: no efficacy as disinfecting agent, no effect on DNA recovery either after short- or long-term monitoring. ► Gamma rays: full efficacy as disinfecting agent, short-term reduction of DNA recovery and DNA fragmentation. ► Ethylene oxide: full efficacy as disinfecting agent. DNA fragmentation: negative for both DNA and RNA recovery.