Microbiology of cleaning
What is actually alive on a surface, why it persists, and why removing what you can see is not the same as removing what is there.
8 records, listed alphabetically. Every figure on a card is counted from the catalogue rather than written down.
Cellulolytic microorganisms
The fungi and bacteria that digest cotton, linen and paper by converting the fibre itself into sugar. The damage is not staining, it is the material being eaten.
Fungal spores
Already everywhere, water-repellent, and resistant to drying out. Removing them is not the goal, because it is not achievable — denying them moisture is.
Growth beneath a floor covering
A dark, absorbent, slow-drying layer with no airflow. The pile can feel dry to the hand while the padding under it has not dried for weeks.
House dust mites
Not a hygiene failure and not removable by cleaning alone. They live on shed skin in soft furnishings, and humidity governs them more than vacuuming does.
Keratinophilic fungi
The fungi that feed on protein fibres. Wool and silk are less susceptible than cotton — which is not the same as being safe from it.
Kitchen sponge microbiota
The most-studied surface in a domestic kitchen, and the honest finding is narrow: the published methods clean the sponge and are not claimed to eliminate what is in it.
Mould fungi
The organisms behind the marking. Around 1.5 million species, each with its own conditions — and killing them does not end the exposure they created.
Washing machine microbiota
Established communities living on the wet surfaces of a domestic washing machine — which is why the smell returns on a schedule after every treatment.
This section is deliberately narrow and it is deliberately cautious. CleaningHQ describes what organisms are, where they persist and what the evidence says about removing them. It does not tell you that anything is sterile, germ-free or safe, it does not give medical advice, and it does not turn a laboratory result into a promise about a kitchen worktop — a figure measured on a test organism under controlled conditions is a fact about that test, not about your surface. Where the evidence stops, the record says so.