First, there was heat, then gas, then clouds, then drops. No. Take two. First, there were clouds, then heat, then algae, then people. No. Take three. First, there were fields, then cotton, then candy, then from the fermentation of cotton candy humans were born. 

The same happens when you put together a pedagogue, an architect, an industrial designer, and a storyteller. You miss the point of what happened first. Hierarchy becomes pointless, comfort gets lost in translation, and the automatic process of creating according to your area of expertise represents a threat to your teammate. Many times you imaginary kill each other, other times you enjoy brunch. Either way, patience, curiosity, and commitment are key ingredients for letting these strange fermentations grow.

In that context, Growing Mycelium Made Us Grow has been developed with two goals in mind. The first one was to experiment with the living matter as amateurs of soil, fungi, and science. The second one was to question the lack of accessibility to these types of knowledge, hopefully working as connectors to bridge the gaps among scientific laboratories and regular people.

 

 

Living-Sculpture Patio

Tangibly, we observed the growth and interactions of three types of mycelium (Agaricus bisphorus, Pleurotus eryngii, Pleurotus ostreatus) on different subtracts, (cotton, hemp) experimenting in three contexts: a professional lab, a community lab, and a domestic lab. We translated mycelium’s activity in a controlled environment and it to our faculty’s patio, a semi-public space that was later scaled to the shape of this living-sculpture-patio that is the installation that has been showed in the images. This allowed us to play with the active material and make the hidden mycelium growth (that usually happens underground) more visible.

 

RESEARCH

mycelium

With This Project We Aim To: 

• • • • Tell the story of our intellectual adventures and moody moods during the two months process of growing mycelium and translating it to a speculative spatial structure;
      • Share the sources, protocols, and tools that were useful for us; 
      • Give people the chance to see and touch our outcomes as an invitation for dialogue, play, and exchange.

Every time we see a ‘mushroom’ close to trees, appearing silently above the soil or covering an organic matter in the closest park of our homes, what we are perceiving is the fruit, the visible part. What we don’t see is the root system that allows the fruit to emerge, in the humid and nutrient-rich underground. This root system is called mycelium. Mycelium can feed on different kinds of organic materials digesting first, and ingesting afterward. They colonize most habitats on Earth, preferring dark, moist conditions. The ability of fungi to degrade many large and insoluble molecules is due to its particular mode of nutrition, sequestering the carbon stored in the biomass, and returning the carbon to the atmosphere as it grows(Fairs, 2021). When nutrients become limited in the substrate within which the mycelium lives, it starts to explore the air and space to form reproductive ​​structures, the ones we see in our everyday life.

 

 

 

PROJECT

spatial matrix

From the different instances of the process, we went through in the various types of laboratories and through different scalar, material, procedural, and design tests, as well as changing interpersonal and intergroup moods and relationships, the design of the spatial matrix or internal design emerged from positioning ourselves as enablers of a process that exceeds our prefigurative capacity. Thus, the design had to meet the requirements of being reproducible in the future urban space, as well as replicable in the various multi-scale trials.

The first requirement defined the gripping elements of the matrix, these being the four storm drainage pipes in the courtyard in question, forming vertices on each side of the asymmetrical polygon, while the second requirement defined the systemic character of the matrix and the simplicity of its execution using a repeatable pattern that can be carried out by any individual. This does not mean that it is a simple design, but rather that the complexity is acquired by repetition of the pattern in an asymmetrical spatial structure, which confers the first degree of complexity, added to the second degree of complexity resulting from the growth of the mycelium on the linearity of the fibers. It is from the conjunction of these two degrees of complexity that the project makes sense, by transforming the active matter the linear dimension of the fibers into a superficial and volumetric dimension through the different levels of proximity and interweaving of the matrix generated within the urban space.

 

The resulting matrix can therefore be implemented from a continuous fiber that emerges from the central grid of the courtyard and runs through each vertex of the model in the following pattern, where each step corresponds to a represented level or floor:

• • • • from the grid (0) to the vertex (A)
      • from vertex (A) to the opposite vertex (C) 
      • from vertex (C) to the vertex to its left (D)
      • from the vertex (D) to the opposite vertex (B)

 

 

 

And so it interleaves between the opposite and left vertex until it reaches the vertex (A) again by crossing over from its opposite (C), where the fiber returns to the central grid and starts with another vertex, until the four paths are completed. Once the spatial matrix design was defined, it was performed on two models of the largest approachable scale that fits in the pressure cooker (≈1:100). And so, the laboratory procedure cycle begins again.

 

 

After making several models on different scales and testing different types of materials, the ≈1:100 scale models were made with two types of hemp fiber. The first with a coarser fiber that frays, the second with a finer and more resistant fiber. After subjecting the models to the sterilization, feeding, and inoculation process, different results were obtained, which also varied due to adjustments in the procedure. 

The first model, distinguishable by fiber detachment, began to show mycelial growth within a few days of inoculation and could be identified on the hemp fibers. At the same time, another, darker type of fungus could also be distinguished in many parts of the model. The contamination is believed to have occurred in the agar incorporation step, which follows sterilization. However, for research purposes, interesting biological, spatial, and temporal interactions can be observed between the fiber and other materials in the model and the organisms that grew inside.

In the second model, with a thinner and more resistant fiber due to its braiding, sterility conditions were improved by incorporating the agar through syringes, minimizing the risk of contamination by contact with the exterior. However, mycelium was not visible on the model until a few weeks after inoculation, and only in one sector of the fiber. another factor which contributed to moderate growth may be that the model was inoculated while still warm, which may kill the fungus. The model is being monitored, and if no further growth is noticed, more moisture can be added and the model can be re-inoculated.

 

EXHIBITION

active subjects

The exhibition consisted of exposure to all the research and experimental processes that the group, as an interdisciplinary research collective, went through, and the project’s evolution. The setup was a structure made of cardboard and wood. It represented the courtyard of the university to scale. The same model was used for the inoculated samples. The connections between the panels were designed to accommodate the experimental samples. Inside the structure, an interactive sculpture consisting of the same fabric pattern used in the experiments was presented, to be intervened by the visitors playing at exploring the possibilities of expansion and movement of the mycelium as an active material. 

The exhibition was a walk-through. A member of the group guided the visitor through the tour, which was designed to be an open and honest learning journey. The starting point was understanding what mycelium is and knowing our research questions and objectives. After that, going through the group’s learning process and experiences, and then the results we obtained and possible next steps. To finish, the interaction activity was introduced with a warm invitation to dive into it.The content of the panels was distributed in a timeline that showed three lines of content. The first one, with information about our journey as a group in the shape of a lab diary. The second one, with the learning process of growing the mycelium with Vera Meyer’s group in their Lab and in a workshop in Futurium coordinated by Alessandro Volpato. The third line of content was about the experiments we performed, in the Cluster and in our homes, to learn about the techniques, conditions, materials needed, and the results.

When the panels meet at the starting point, participants could interact with the installation inside by placing cotton on top and in between the hemp fibers, imagining how mycelium could grow with the spatial structure. Before leaving, a playbook was handed to inspire participants to continue reflecting on this topic in a ludic way.

 

 

authors:

Barbara Victoria Niveyro // Film Direction // Argentina

Cintia Guerrero // Educational Sciences // Argentina

Javier Deyheralde // Architecture // Argentina

İlkin Taşdelen // Industrial Design // Turkey

 

REFERENCES

Almpani-Lekka, D., Pfeiffer, S., Schmidts, C. et al. (2021). A review on architecture with fungal biomaterials: The desired and the feasible. Fungal Biol Biotechnol, 8, 17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40694-021-00124-5.

Fairs, M. (2021). Mycelium is ‘part of the solution’ to carbon-negative buildings. Dezeen. Retrieved September 16, 2022, from https://www.dezeen.com/2021/06/25/carbon-negative-buildings-mycelium-insulation-fire-proofing/.

Falconer, R. E., Bown, J. L., White N. A., Crawford J. W. (2008). Modelling Interactions in fungi. Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 5(23), 603-615. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2007.1210.

Jones M., Mautner A., Luenco S., Bismarck A. and John S. (2020) Engineered mycelium composite construction materials from fungal biorefineries: A critical review. Materials & Design, 187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2019.108397.

Meyer, V., Basenko, E.Y., Benz, J.P. et al. (2020). Growing a circular economy with fungal biotechnology: a white paper. Fungal Biol Biotechnol 7, 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40694-020-00095-z.

OpenStaxCollege. (2012). Ecology of fungi. HU Pressbooks.  http://pressbooks-dev.oer.hawaii.edu/biology/chapter/ecology-of-fungi/.

Sheldrake, M. (2020). Entangled Life: How fungi make our worlds, change our minds, and shape our futures. Vintage.

Tabellini, G. (2015). Mycelium tectonics: research thesis about mycelia and architecture. http://mycelium-tectonics.com/