School of Geography and the Environment, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3QY, UK; Departamento de Edafoloxía e Química Agrícola, Facultade de Farmacia, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, 15782 Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Laboratório HERCULES, Universidade de Évora, Largo Marquês de Marialva 8, Évora 7000-676, Portugal; IRNAS-CSIC, Av. Reina Mercedes 10, 41012 Sevilla, Spain.
Sci Total Environ. 2021 May 20;770:145314. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.145314. Epub 2021 Jan 21.
2020 marks 25 years since Olivier Guillitte defined the term 'bioreceptivity', to describe the ability of a building material to be colonised by living organisms. Although Guillitte noted in his 1995 paper that several issues required further investigation, to the best of our knowledge the bioreceptivity concept has not been restated, reviewed, reanalysed or updated since then. The present paper provides an opinionated exposition of the status and utility of the bioreceptivity concept for built heritage science and conservation in the light of current knowledge, aimed to stimulate further discussion. A bibliometric analysis highlights the key dimensions of the past 25 years of published research, showing that the term bioreceptivity has been widely used in the field of built cultural heritage. In our reanalysis of the concept, special attention is devoted to the six types of bioreceptivity (primary, secondary, tertiary, intrinsic, extrinsic and semi-extrinsic) articulated by Guillitte in 1995. We propose that field-based studies of bioreceptivity are urgently needed, and that the intrinsic, extrinsic and semi-extrinsic types of bioreceptivity should be dropped, and a new category (quaternary bioreceptivity) added. Additionally, we propose that bioreceptivity in submerged and subsoil environments should also be considered. Bioreceptivity remains an important concept for managing both new build and built heritage, as it provides the key to understanding the drivers and patterns of biological colonisation of building materials.
2020 年标志着奥利维尔·吉莱特 (Olivier Guillitte) 定义“生物可接受性”一词 25 周年，该术语用于描述建筑材料被生物定植的能力。尽管吉莱特在他 1995 年的论文中指出，还有几个问题需要进一步研究，但据我们所知，自那时以来，生物可接受性概念尚未被重新表述、审查、重新分析或更新。本文根据当前知识，对生物可接受性概念在建筑遗产科学和保护中的地位和效用进行了有见地的阐述，旨在激发进一步的讨论。文献计量分析突出了过去 25 年发表研究的关键维度，表明生物可接受性一词已在建筑文化遗产领域得到广泛应用。在我们对该概念的重新分析中，特别关注了吉莱特 1995 年提出的六种生物可接受性类型（主要、次要、三级、内在、外在和半外在）。我们提出，迫切需要进行基于现场的生物可接受性研究，应摒弃内在、外在和半外在的生物可接受性类型，并增加一个新类别（四级生物可接受性）。此外，我们还建议考虑水下和土壤环境中的生物可接受性。生物可接受性仍然是管理新建建筑和建筑遗产的重要概念，因为它提供了理解建筑材料生物定植驱动因素和模式的关键。
