2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic: Built Environment Considerations To Reduce Transmission.

With the rapid spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) that results in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), corporate entities, federal, state, county, and city governments, universities, school districts, places of worship, prisons, health care facilities, assisted living organizations, daycares, homeowners, and other building owners and occupants have an opportunity to reduce the potential for transmission through built environment (BE)-mediated pathways. Over the last decade, substantial research into the presence, abundance, diversity, function, and transmission of microbes in the BE has taken place and revealed common pathogen exchange pathways and mechanisms. In this paper, we synthesize this microbiology of the BE research and the known information about SARS-CoV-2 to provide actionable and achievable guidance to BE decision makers, building operators, and all indoor occupants attempting to minimize infectious disease transmission through environmentally mediated pathways. We believe this information is useful to corporate and public administrators and individuals responsible for building operations and environmental services in their decision-making process about the degree and duration of social-distancing measures during viral epidemics and pandemics

Correction for Dietz et al., "2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic: Built Environment Considerations To Reduce Transmission".

Volume 5, no. 2, e00245-20, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1128/mSystems.00245-20. After original publication of this article, the following changes were made. Page 5, first paragraph, line 18: HEPA filters are rated to remove at least 99.97% of particles down to 0.3 μm (51). Most residential and commercial buildings utilize MERV-5 to MERV-11, and in critical health care settings, MERV-12 or higher and HEPA filters are used. MERV-13 filters have the potential to remove microbes and other particles ranging from 0.3 to 10.0 μm. Most viruses, including CoVs, range from 0.004 to 1.0 μm, limiting the effectiveness of these filtration techniques against pathogens such as SARS-CoV-2 (52). Furthermore, no filter system is perfect. Recently,.... was changed to HEPA filters are rated to remove at least 99.97% of particles at 0.3 μm in size, representing the most penetrating particle size (51). Most residential and commercial buildings utilize MERV-5 to MERV-11, and in critical health care settings, MERV-13 or higher and HEPA filters are used. MERV-13 filters have the potential to remove microbes and other particles ranging from 0.3 to 10.0 μm. Most viruses, including CoVs, range from 0.004 to 1.0 μm (52). However, viruses are rarely observed as individual particles, but instead are expelled from the body already combined with water, proteins, salts, and other components as large droplets and aerosols. Thus far, SARS-CoV-2 has been observed in aerosolized particles in a spectrum of sizes including 0.25 to 0.5 μm (96), necessitating high efficiency filtration techniques to reduce the transmission potential of pathogens such as SARS-CoV-2. However,.... Page 6, third paragraph, second sentence: Even though viral particles are too small to be contained by even the best HEPA and MERV filters, ventilation precautions can be taken to ensure the minimization of SARS-CoV-2 spread. was changed to Viruses are frequently found associated with larger particles (e.g., complexes with water, proteins, salts, etc.) in a range of sizes. Even though some of these particles have been identified in sizes that could potentially penetrate high efficiency filters, ventilation and filtration remain important in reducing the transmission potential of SARS-CoV-2. Page 10, Acknowledgments, first sentence: “We thank Jason Stenson and Cassandra Moseley for comments on the manuscript” was changed to “We thank Jason Stenson, Richard Corsi, Cassandra Moseley, and Linsey Marr for comments on the manuscript

Differing effects of four building materials on viable bacterial communities and VOCs

16 pagesIndoor environmental quality is a paramount concern among architects. Exposure to VOCs and microorganisms impacts occupant health, yet the role of materials on these exposures remains poorly understood. In this study, we placed four material types in individual microcosms to test whether material type influences bacterial community structure and VOC emission. We used culture-independent methods to characterize bacterial communities and TD-GC-MS to measure VOC emission. We found that viable bacterial communities had different patterns of abundance, diversity, and composition, in comparison with total (viable plus dead cells) bacterial communities. Examining viable bacteria only, Earth had the highest abundance and diversity, unique community composition, and overall negative VOC emission. Timber had the lowest bacterial abundance, composition similar to Gypsum and Concrete, and the highest VOC emission rate. Our research provides further evidence that architects’ decisions about building materials can influence chemical and microbial exposures indoors

Twenty Important Research Questions in Microbial Exposure and Social Equity

Social and political policy, human activities, and environmental change affect the ways in which microbial communities assemble and interact with people. These factors determine how different social groups are exposed to beneficial and/ or harmful microorganisms, meaning microbial exposure has an important socioecological justice context. Therefore, greater consideration of microbial exposure and social equity in research, planning, and policy is imperative. Here, we identify 20 research questions considered fundamentally important to promoting equitable exposure to beneficial microorganisms, along with safeguarding resilient societies and ecosystems. The 20 research questions we identified span seven broad themes, including the following: (i) sociocultural interactions; (ii) Indigenous community health and well-being; (iii) humans, urban ecosystems, and environmental processes; (iv) human psychology and mental health; (v) microbiomes and infectious diseases; (vi) human health and food security; and (vii) microbiome-related planning, policy, and outreach. Our goal was to summarize this growing field and to stimulate impactful research avenues while providing focus for funders and policymakers