# From Biodeterioration to Creativity: Bioreceptivity of Spruce Pine 87 Glass Batch by Fungi
## 3 Results
### Chemical Alteration: SEM-EDS and \(\mu\)-Raman
Once again, damages of the reference samples-where two fungal species spores landed during the incubation period-were observed in the alteration of the surface composition for both fungal species (see Figure 4e,f and Table 2). It was not possible to identify the small crystalline structures by Raman spectroscopy, but the consequences of the fungal growth over those surfaces can easily be detected by the increasing C and O contents and the features rich in Cl, S, and Fe that should relate with the excretions of these microorganisms-e.g., exopolymers containing ionic groups and/or elements chelated or exchanged from the glass substrate [31]. This will be discussed further in the next section. A summary of the chemical surface alterations analysed by EDS and \(\upmu\)-Raman is presented in Table 3.  
Additionally, a summary of the observations of the damages caused to the SPB-87 glass by the two fungal genera is presented in Figure 6-a colour scale is used to simplify the observations made on the glass samples. To aid data interpretation, ANOVA statistical analysis was applied to Figure 6 in all columns except references-these do not have a direct comparison due to the fact that these samples were not colonised at the same time as others. Regarding the overall damage degree, the results of the four groups (columns) showed that F \(>\) F\({}_{\mathrm{crit}}\) (and \(p\) < 0.05), which indicates that the mean values of the damages occurred on glass were significantly different, or that at least one mean is different (Appendix B, Table A1). _Aspergillus_ spores presented the lower average value, producing lower damage on glass than the other fungi, since the ANOVA results for the three remaining groups (Appendix B, Table A2) presents a F \(<\) F\({}_{\mathrm{crit}}\) (and a \(p\) value > 0.05)-i.e., lower differences among these groups. However, by the analysis of Tables A1 and A2 in Appendix B, the high variance of the group _Penicillium chrysogenum_ spores may have been responsible for this result, and careful interpretation should follow. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & & \multicolumn{3}{c}{_Penicillium chrysogenum_ (Incubation Environment)} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{_Aspergillus niger_ (Incubation Environment)} \\ \cline{3-8}  & & **with PDA** & **Spores** & **Reference** & **with PDA** & **Spores** & **Reference** \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Raman} & t\({}_{4}\) & – & – & – & – & – & – \\ \cline{2-8}  & t\({}_{6}\) & CaC2O4 \(\cdot\) H2O & CaCO3 & – & CaCO3 & CaC2O4 \(\cdot\) H2O & – \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{EDS} & t\({}_{4}\) & NaCl (?) & CaCO3 & (\(\uparrow\)) Ca, Mg, Cl, Cl, C, O & (\(\uparrow\)) Ca, Mg, Cl, C, O & (\(\downarrow\)) Na & (\(\uparrow\)) Al, O & (\(\uparrow\)) Al, C, O & (\(\downarrow\)) Ca, Cl, K, \\  & & Cl, C, O & Zn, Al, C, O & (\(\downarrow\)) Na & & & (\(\downarrow\)) Na \\ \cline{1-1}  & & (\(\downarrow\)) Na & (\(\downarrow\)) Na & & & & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{LOS} & CaCO3 & (\(\uparrow\)) Ca, Mg, Zn, Cl, C, O & (\(\uparrow\)) Ca, Mg, Cl, O & (\(\uparrow\)) Ca, Mg, Cl, O & (\(\uparrow\)) Ca, Cl, Mg, Cl, O & (\(\uparrow\)) S, Fe, Cl, \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Cl, C, O & (\(\downarrow\)) Na & & C, O & Zn, C, O & C, O \\ \cline{1-1}  & & (\(\downarrow\)) Na & & & C, O & (\(\downarrow\)) Na & (\(\downarrow\)) Na \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Summary of the analysed chemical alterations analysed by [PERSON] and EDS. (\(\uparrow\)) enrichment; (\(\downarrow\)) depletion. Regarding our main question (i) concerning primary versus secondary bioreceptivity, when comparing _Aspergillus niger_ with PDA and spores (Appendix B, Table A3), the results show F > Fcrit and \(p<0.05\), and that the mean values of the damages occurred on glass were significantly different-i.e., secondary bioreceptivity (PDA) produced more damages then primary bioreceptivity (Tween). On the contrary (see Appendix B, Table A4), in the case of PS1, the damage degree is closer between the two different media.