2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.03.026
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Bioreceptivity of building stones: A review

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

2
117
0
5

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 215 publications
(124 citation statements)
references
References 108 publications
2
117
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…SSA is directly related to porosity and inversely related to pore size (Benavente et al, 2007;Benavente, 2011) and therefore, provides pore structure information related to decay mechanisms. Thus, high SSA values imply a high susceptibility to salt weathering (Benavente et al, 2007), capillary stress (Benavante et al, 2008), high capacity to water condensation and retention within porous materials, and consequently, high bioreceptivity (Sanchez-Moral et al, 2005;Miller et al 2012). In addition, the presence of a water film might decrease the free surface energy of the material, decreasing its strength.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…SSA is directly related to porosity and inversely related to pore size (Benavente et al, 2007;Benavente, 2011) and therefore, provides pore structure information related to decay mechanisms. Thus, high SSA values imply a high susceptibility to salt weathering (Benavente et al, 2007), capillary stress (Benavante et al, 2008), high capacity to water condensation and retention within porous materials, and consequently, high bioreceptivity (Sanchez-Moral et al, 2005;Miller et al 2012). In addition, the presence of a water film might decrease the free surface energy of the material, decreasing its strength.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is well known that rocks, either in natural geological settings or as part of monuments, are common habitats for a wide range of microorganisms (Scheerer et al, 2009;Miller et al, 2012). The colonization of lithic substrates by microbial communities is influenced by the properties of the substrate, such as porosity, surface roughness and mineralogical composition -bioreceptivity-(see review in Miller et al, 2012), in addition to climate and microclimatic conditions (Guillitte, 1995;Ortega-Morales et al, 1999;Gaylarde and Gaylarde, 2005;Barberousse et al, 2006).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There may be additive biodeteriorative effect of the other microorganisms like cyanobacteria and etc., but we didn't searched its. Similar researches demonstrated that cyanobacteria is a component of stone deteriotation [4][5][6][7][8]21,24,25].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 65%
“…The stone is susceptible to colonization by several microorganisms such as bacteria, fungi, algae, cyanobacteria and more complex organisms such as lichens and mosses responsible for a series of mechanical and chemical processes that cause the biodeterioration of the stone. The relative effects of each of these organisms vary according to the topoclimatic environmental conditions, the stone type, its state of preservation and its position on the monument [6][7][8]. On the other hand, pore size, distribution and specific surface area together with the capillarity of a stone control the mechanical degradation caused by water, salts, and bacteria.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation