ReviewIUBMB life2025
Conventional and innovative approaches to black fungi control for stone heritage preservation.
Review in IUBMB life, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adhesive Tape Strips and PVA-Borax Hydrogels as Alternative Cleaning Methods to Remove Fungal Proliferation on Canvas Support of Paintings.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Essential Oils and Cultural Heritage Conservation: Are They Safe, Environmentally Friendly, Sustainable, and Negligibly Toxic?Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Conventional and innovative approaches to black fungi control for stone heritage preservation.IUBMB life · 2025Review
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
Black Meristematic Fungi (BMF) are characterized by a thick melanized cell wall and an isodiametric cellular expansion. BMF represent one of the most damaging groups of microorganisms causing the deterioration of outdoor exposed stone monuments mainly due to the formation of dark spots and patches leading to the darkening of their surface, cracking, and bio-pitting. BMF are among the most stress-resistant organisms on Earth, known for their remarkable ability to withstand solar radiation, desiccation, and extreme temperature fluctuations, which has led to their widespread distribution across the globe. These features make BMF very difficult to remove and restrict, representing a challenge for restorers. Despite the number of scientific works about BMF isolation and ecology, little is known about their response to antimicrobial treatments. Conventional biocides remain the most used treatment for the control of biodeterioration on stone artworks. In recent years, interest in alternative and safer antimicrobial treatments has risen in conservation strategies. The number of scientific works in which their efficacy against BMF is evaluated is, however, still low. The aim of this review is to assess existing studies regarding the response of BMF to both conventional and innovative treatments. This will encompass an in-depth examination of methodologies for the application and evaluation of treatments. Furthermore, we aim to highlight future research directions that will contribute to a more informed selection of effective anti-BMF interventions for stone preservation. We underscore the significance of pioneering, environmentally low-impact solutions.
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.