ArticleBiomimetics (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Mycelium-Based Composites: Surveying Their Acceptance by Professional Architects.
Article in Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of fungal species on thermal conductivity and chemical composition in mycelium-based insulation.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Living Textures and Mycelium Skin Co-Creation: Designing Colour, Pattern, and Performance for Bio-Aesthetic Expression in Mycelium-Bound Composites.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Strength in diversity: unlocking the full potential of engineered living materials with multistrain collaboration.FEMS microbiology reviews · 2025Review
- Harmonizing Nature, Education, Engineering and Creativity: An Interdisciplinary Educational Exploration of Engineered Living Materials, Artistry and Sustainability Using Collaborative Mycelium Brick Construction.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Mycelium-based composites (MBCs) are biomaterials with scientifically proven potential to improve sustainability in construction. Although mycelium-based products are not entirely new, their use in engineering presents challenges due to the inherent properties of this fungal material. This study investigated professional architects' and interior designers' perceptions of MBCs, focusing on familiarity, aesthetic appeal, and willingness to use. The first phase of the survey explored respondents' views on material-related ecological design principles. In the second phase, respondents evaluated ten small architectural objects crafted from MBCs, focusing on form, detail, and visual appeal. The last phase of the survey measured their interest in using mycelium in their design work. The results revealed that MBCs were relatively unknown among the surveyed professionals; only every second respondent knew this material. Despite this, 90% found MBCs visually appealing after seeing the examples. Interestingly, the natural, unprocessed appearance of the material was assessed as less aesthetically pleasing, with thermal treatment improving its perceived value. Architects were more receptive to using MBCs in their professional projects for customers than for personal use. This observation points to a 'double standard': professional architects are more open to using MBCs in projects not intended for their own use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.