Based on the internet search conducted, the number of building mycologists actively performing expert reports in 2019 was determined to be 100. For the assumed confidence interval (α = 0.95), it was calculated that collecting 81 questionnaires from respondents would guarantee a study statistical error of 5%. The study involved 73 respondents, so the statistical error was 6%. All questionnaires were filled out correctly, i.e. there were no logical errors. The results of the questionnaire are presented in Table 3. The table shows the total frequency of fungi occurrence in the inspected objects divided into object categories, in which fungal morphological structures were detected. The fungi were ordered in terms of the total frequency of occurrence in the buildings.
Table 3
Summary frequency of fungi in control sites and locations of fungal morphological structures.
Genera and species name
|
decay
|
frequency[%]
|
locations [%]
|
BU
|
UB
|
OB
|
ST
|
OL
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
Serpula lacrymans (Wulfen) J. Schröt
|
brown
|
36.6
|
32.5
|
34.9
|
23.2
|
0.0
|
9.4
|
Coniophora puteana (Schumach.) P. Karst.
|
brown
|
25.1
|
15.8
|
31.5
|
21.1
|
15.8
|
15.8
|
Fibroporia vaillantii (DC.) Parmasto
|
brown
|
22.8
|
30.0
|
30.0
|
27.5
|
12.5
|
0.0
|
Phlebiopsis gigantea (Fr.) Jülich
|
white
|
13.6
|
12.5
|
21.9
|
31.2
|
21.9
|
12.5
|
Serpula himantioides (Fr.) P. Karst.
|
brown
|
10.9
|
15.8
|
31.6
|
21.1
|
15.8
|
15.7
|
Amyloporia sinuosa (Fr.) Rajchenb., Gorjón & Pildain
|
brown
|
10.8
|
24.3
|
32.4
|
21.6
|
13.5
|
8.1
|
Gloeophyllum sepiarium (Wulfen) P. Karst.
|
brown
|
11.1
|
12.5
|
12.5
|
18.8
|
43.7
|
12.5
|
Neoantrodia serialis (Fr.) Audet
|
brown
|
8.2
|
13.8
|
24.1
|
24.1
|
27.6
|
10.3
|
Tapinella panuoides (Fr.) E.-J. Gilbert
|
brown
|
6.9
|
18.2
|
30.3
|
21.2
|
18.2
|
12.1
|
Schizophyllum commune Fr.
|
white
|
6.0
|
8.3
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
50.0
|
41.6
|
Cylindrobasidium laeve (Pers.) Chamuris
|
white
|
5.9
|
22.6
|
25.8
|
25.8
|
12.9
|
12.9
|
Gloeophyllum trabeum (Pers.) Murrill
|
brown
|
5.3
|
9.5
|
19.0
|
23.8
|
33.3
|
14.3
|
Gloeophyllum abietinum (Bull.) P. Karst.
|
brown
|
4.3
|
18.8
|
18.8
|
18.8
|
25.0
|
18.8
|
Neolentinus lepideus (Fr.) Redhead & Ginns
|
brown
|
4.1
|
11.5
|
11.5
|
19.2
|
42.3
|
15.5
|
Trametes versicolor (L.) Lloyd
|
white
|
3.7
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
7.7
|
61.6
|
30.7
|
Amyloporia xantha (Fr.) Bondartsev & Singer
|
brown
|
3.1
|
22.2
|
33.3
|
16.7
|
16.7
|
11.1
|
Stereum hirsutum (Willd.) Pers.
|
white
|
2.7
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
50.0
|
50.0
|
Daedalea quercina (L.) Pers.
|
brown
|
1.9
|
5.0
|
20.0
|
10.0
|
40.0
|
25.0
|
Asterostroma cervicolor (Berk. & M.A. Curtis) Massee
|
white
|
1.0
|
|
x
|
|
|
|
Hypholoma fasciculare (Huds.) P. Kumm.
|
white
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
x
|
|
Leucogyrophana pinastri (Fr.) Ginns & Weresub
|
brown
|
0.6
|
25.0
|
25.0
|
25.0
|
0.0
|
25.0
|
Coprinus spp.
|
white
|
0.6
|
x
|
x
|
x
|
|
|
Peziza spp. (Ascomycota)
|
-
|
0.6
|
|
x
|
|
|
|
Rhodonia placenta (Fr.) Niemelä, K.H. Larss. & Schigel
|
brown
|
0.6
|
14.3
|
28.6
|
28.6
|
14.3
|
14.3
|
Laetiporus sulphureus (Bull.) Murrill
|
white
|
0.3
|
|
|
x
|
|
|
Fuscoporia contigua (Pers.) G. Cunn.
|
white
|
0.3
|
|
x
|
|
|
|
Pholiota spp.
|
white
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
x
|
|
Pluteus spp.
|
white
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
x
|
|
Donkioporia expansa (Desm.) Kotl. & Pouzar
|
white
|
0.2
|
25.0
|
50.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
25.0
|
Trichaptum fuscoviolaceum (Ehrenb.) Ryvarden
|
white
|
0.2
|
|
x
|
|
|
x
|
Hyphodontia ssp.
|
white
|
0.2
|
|
x
|
|
x
|
|
Armillaria mellea (Vahl.) P. Kumm. s.l.
|
white
|
0.1
|
|
|
x
|
|
|
Chondrostereum purpureum (Pers.) Pouzar
|
white
|
0.1
|
|
x
|
|
x
|
|
Coniophora arida (Fr.) P. Karst.
|
brown
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
x
|
Daedaleopsis confragosa (Bolton) J. Schröt.
|
white
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
x
|
|
Fomitopsis pinicola (Sw.) P. Karst.
|
brown
|
0.1
|
|
x
|
|
|
|
Fuscoporia contigua (Pers.) G. Cunn.
|
brown
|
0.1
|
|
x
|
|
|
|
Heterobasidion annosum (Fr.) Bref s.l.
|
white
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
x
|
Mycena galericulata (Scop.) Gray
|
white
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
x
|
|
Pleurotus spp.
|
white
|
0.1
|
|
x
|
|
|
|
Pseudomerulius aureus (Fr.) Jülich
|
brown
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
x
|
|
Pycnoporus cinnabarinus (Jacq.) P. Karst.
|
white
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
x
|
|
Rhodofomes roseus (Alb. & Schwein.) Kotl. & Pouzar
|
brown
|
0.1
|
|
x
|
|
|
|
Stereum rugosum Pers.
|
white
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
x
|
|
Trametes gibbosa (Pers.) Fr.
|
white
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
x
|
|
Trametes ochracea (Pers.) Gilb. & Ryvarden
|
white
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
x
|
|
Trametes trogii Berk.
|
white
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
x
|
|
Trechispora farinacea (Pers.) Liberta
|
white
|
0.1
|
|
x
|
|
|
|
Volvariella bombycina (Schaeff.) Singer
|
white
|
0.1
|
|
x
|
|
x
|
|
BU -buildings used, UB – unused buildings, OB – other buildings (shed, woodshelter, etc.), ST – structural timber outdoor, OL – other location. |
Respondents reported a total of 48 species and genera of wood-decaying Basidiomycetes, of which 58.3% caused white decay. The highest species diversity of wood-decaying fungi was found on outdoor structures (33 species). The second location in terms of biodiversity was unused residential buildings (30 species). The lowest biodiversity was found in used residential buildings (21 species). Analogically, results concerning "new" species, i.e. not included in the classification of house-rot fungi according to Ważny (2001) were presented. The greatest number of "new" fungal species was found on structures used outdoors (23 species.). In unused residential buildings 20 "new" species were found, and in used residential buildings and farm buildings 11 "new" species each. In their questionnaires, respondents reported 13 "new" species found in other than the above-mentioned locations. Among all the "new" species, white-rot fungi had a significant share.
The frequency of occurrence of each fungal species was determined by calculating the weighted mean of the answers provided by the respondents. The frequency of occurrence of particular species in the expert reports carried out by the respondents, presented in Table 1, is a relative percentage share in the fungal infestation of the buildings, resulting, among others, from the specialization of some of the respondents (e.g. performing expertises mainly in sacral buildings, only in historic buildings, etc.). Therefore, the sum of column 3 does not constitute 100%.
The fungi S. lacrymans, C. puteana were frequently found by the respondents while performing mycological and building expertise of the fungus infested objects (frequency of occurrence ranging from 25.1–50.0%), with S. lacrymas being noted most frequently. Both of the aforementioned species are considered the most important house-rot fungi (Ważny 2001, Krajewski and Witomski 2012, Karyś 2014), and therefore are widely discussed in national book publications on this group of fungi. No "new" species, i.e., not included in the classification of house-rot fungi according to Ważny (2001), were found. Among the species rarely occurrring in the controlled objects (5.1–25.0%), the following species described in the national manuals were observed: F. vaillantii, Ph. gigantea, G. sepiarium, N. serialis, T. panuoides and C. laeve. At the same time, 6 "new" species, not discussed in non-serial publications on house-rot fungi, were recorded in this group, i.e.: S. himantioides, A. sinuosa, G. trabeum and S. commune. Among the fungi rarely found on the controlled sites (≥ 5%), the largest number of "new" fungi was found, i.e. 31 species and genera. The most interesting of this group included the following species: A. cervicolor, A. xantha, D. expansa, L. pinastri, F. contigua, and R. roseus.
Table 1 (columns 4–8) can be used to track which buildings were most frequently infested by each fungal species. In the case of species entered by respondents (fungi outside the list of 21 species included in the questionnaire), Table 1. does not show their percentage occurrence in each category, but only indicates these categories by inserting an "x". The OL (other locations) category, which was completed by respondents, proved to be the most diverse. Respondents mainly entered the following locations: non-sacred historic buildings, churches, structures on forested land, mines, lumber yardsstores, railroad sleepers, and others.
The results of field investigations published in the form of articles generally present a much broader spectrum of wood-decaying fungi in buildings than it is described in monographs. There are relatively few national publications (articles) on the species diversity of house-rot fungi because for over 40 years no data on the occurrence of wood-decaying fungi in buildings were published in Poland. Few publications refer to selected areas of Poland (Ważny and Czajnik 1973, Ważny and Czajnik 1974a,b, Konarski 1974), or focus on a specific category of objects (Ważny and Czajnik 1963a, Ważny et al. 1999, Andres 2011). Only the publication by Ważny and Czajnik (1963b) provides data for the entire country, covering both buildings and outdoor structures. This publication lists 26 fungal species (including 57.1% brown decay fungi and 35.7% white decay fungi). In addition to the species frequently recorded in buildings, rarer species, such as A. sinuosa, A. xantha, G. abietinum and G. trabeum, D. expansa, L. pi-nastri, R. roseus, and others, also appeared in this publication. The total number of observations of brown decay fungi in buildings was 95.4%, while that of white decay fungi was 35.7%. In order to compare the results of the questionnaire with domestic and foreign publications, the results obtained were compared with the total number of fungi observed by the respondents (Table 4).
Table 4. Prevalence of [%] wood-decaying fungi in buildings (acc to the authors mentioned below).
Genera and species name
|
Polanda
|
Germanyb
|
Germanyc
|
Belgiumd
|
Norwaye
|
Polandf
|
1
|
2
|
4
|
6
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
Antrodia spp.
|
-
|
3.6
|
9.4
|
0.7
|
18.4
|
-
|
Amyloporia sinuosa (Fr.) Rajchenb., Gorjón & Pildain
|
9.4
|
1.6
|
1.0
|
-
|
-
|
6.4
|
Amyloporia xantha (Fr.) Bondartsev & Singer
|
0.5
|
1.5
|
2.0
|
0.4
|
-
|
1.6
|
Antrodia gossypium (Speg.) Ryvarden
|
0.2
|
0.1
|
> 0.1
|
> 0.1
|
-
|
-
|
Armillaria mellea (Vahl.) P. Kumm. s.l.
|
0.1
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
0.1
|
Asterostroma spp.
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
4.6
|
-
|
-
|
Asterostroma cervicolor (Berk. & M.A. Curtis) Massee
|
-
|
2.4
|
2.4
|
0.4
|
0.2
|
0.7
|
Asterostroma laxum Bres.
|
-
|
0.1
|
0.2
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Coniophora spp.
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
7.8
|
-
|
-
|
Coniophora arida (Fr.) P. Karst.
|
-
|
0.3
|
0.2
|
0.4
|
-
|
0.2
|
Coniophora puteana (Schumach.) P. Karst.
|
22.5
|
14.6
|
15.5
|
0.7
|
16.3
|
14.1
|
Coprinus spp.
|
-
|
3.1
|
3.5
|
0.7
|
0.1
|
0.4
|
Coriolopsis trogii (Berk.) Domański
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
0.1
|
Cylindrobasidium laeve (Pers.) Chamuris
|
1.6
|
0.3
|
0.2
|
-
|
0.1
|
3.3
|
Daedalea quercina (L.) Pers.
|
0.1
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
0.6
|
Daedaleopsis confragosa (Bolton) J. Schröt.
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
0.1
|
Donkioporia expansa (Desm.) Kotl. & Pouzar
|
0.1
|
10.0
|
8.8
|
15.5
|
-
|
0.1
|
Fibroporia vaillantii (DC.) Parmasto
|
1.9
|
3.1
|
1.4
|
-
|
-
|
13.8
|
Fomitopsis pinicola (Sw.) P. Karst.
|
0.1
|
0.1
|
-
|
-
|
> 0.1
|
0.1
|
Fuscoporia contigua (Pers.) G. Cunn.
|
-
|
1.1
|
0.9
|
2.8
|
-
|
0.1
|
Gloeophyllum spp.
|
-
|
2.0
|
0.8
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Gloeophyllum abietinum (Bull.) P. Karst.
|
-
|
1.5
|
1.6
|
-
|
-
|
1.9
|
Gloeophyllum sepiarium (Wulfen) P. Karst.
|
1.6
|
1.6
|
1.0
|
-
|
2.9
|
4.4
|
Gloeophyllum trabeum (Pers.) Murrill
|
-
|
0.7
|
1.0
|
0.4
|
-
|
2.1
|
Heterobasidion annosum (Fr.) Bref s.l.
|
0.1
|
0.1
|
0.1
|
-
|
-
|
0.1
|
Hypholoma fasciculare (Huds.) P. Kumm.
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
0.1
|
Hyphodontia ssp.
|
-
|
|
|
> 0,1
|
-
|
0.1
|
Hyphodontia alutaria (Burt) J. Erikss.
|
-
|
0.1
|
> 0.1
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Hyphodontia breviseta (P. Karst.) J. Erikss.
|
-
|
0.1
|
> 0.1
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Hyphodontia floccosa (Bourdot & Galzin) J. Erikss.
|
-
|
0.1
|
> 0.1
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Hyphodontia nespori (Bres.) J. Erikss. & Hjortstam
|
-
|
0.1
|
> 0.1
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Laetiporus sulphureus (Bull.) Murrill
|
0.1
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
0.2
|
Leucogyrophana spp.
|
-
|
0.3
|
0.4
|
0.4
|
0.2
|
-
|
Leucogyrophana mollusca (Fr.) Pouzar
|
-
|
0.4
|
0.1
|
-
|
2.0
|
-
|
Leucogyrophana pinastri (Fr.) Ginns & Weresub
|
0.4
|
1.1
|
2.3
|
-
|
> 0.1
|
0.4
|
Mycena galericulata (Scop.) Gray
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
0.1
|
Neoantrodia serialis (Fr.) Audet
|
1.1
|
0.3
|
0.2
|
-
|
-
|
4.2
|
Neolentinus lepideus (Fr.) Redhead & Ginns
|
1.5
|
0.5
|
0.5
|
-
|
0.1
|
1.3
|
Peziza spp. (Ascomycota)
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
6.0
|
-
|
0.3
|
Phlebiopsis gigantea (Fr.) Jülich
|
1.5
|
-
|
0.1
|
-
|
0.1
|
7.8
|
Pleurotus sp.
|
-
|
0.3
|
0.2
|
0.4
|
-
|
0.1
|
Rhodofomes roseus (Alb. & Schwein.) Kotl. & Pouzar
|
0.1
|
|
0.3
|
0.3
|
0.1
|
0.1
|
Rhodonia placenta (Fr.) Niemelä, K.H. Larss. &Schigel
|
-
|
1.7
|
0.6
|
-
|
0.1
|
0.3
|
Schizophyllum commune Fr.
|
0.3
|
0.1
|
-
|
0.4
|
-
|
0.6
|
Serpula himantioides (Fr.) P. Karst.
|
1.0
|
2.0
|
2.6
|
-
|
0.5
|
5.3
|
Serpula lacrymans (Wulfen) J. Schröt
|
52.3
|
25.3
|
24.0
|
41.9
|
16.0
|
24.8
|
Stereum hirsutum (Willd.) Pers.
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
0.1
|
Stereum rugosum Pers.
|
-
|
0.1
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
0.1
|
Tapinella panuoides (Fr.) E.-J. Gilbert
|
2.7
|
2.9
|
2.6
|
0.7
|
0.8
|
3.6
|
Trametes hirsuta (Wulfen) Pilát
|
-
|
0.3
|
0.2
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Trametes ochracea (Pers.) Gilb. & Ryvarden
|
-
|
0.1
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
0.1
|
Trametes versicolor (L.) Lloyd
|
0.1
|
0.1
|
0.1
|
0.4
|
-
|
0.3
|
Trechispora farinacea (Pers.) Liberta
|
-
|
1.1
|
0.4
|
0.7
|
-
|
0.1
|
Trechispora invisitata (H.J. Jacks.) Liberta
|
-
|
0.1
|
> 0.1
|
> 0.1
|
-
|
-
|
Trechispora mollusca (Pers.) Liberta
|
-
|
0.4
|
0.2
|
> 0.1
|
-
|
-
|
Trechispora spp.
|
-
|
1.2
|
1.4
|
0.45
|
-
|
-
|
Trichaptum abietinum (Pers. ex J.F. Gmel.) Ryvarden
|
-
|
0.1
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Trichaptum fuscoviolaceum (Ehrenb.) Ryvarden
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
0.1
|
Volvariella bombycine (Schaeff.) Singer
|
-
|
0.1
|
> 0.1
|
0,2
|
-
|
0.1
|
References: aWażny and Czajnik 1963b, bSchmidt 2007, cSchmidt and Hunckfield 2011, dFraiture 2008, eAlfredsen et al. 2005, fsurvey research 2019–2020. |
The questionnaire results generally correspond to the outcome of studies on indoor fungi conducted in Europe after 2000. Studies conducted in Germany have shown a high biodiversity of indoor wood-decaying fungi. Shmidt (2007) reported a list of 74 species and genera of fungi (including 40.5% brown-rot and 59.5% white-rot fungi), and Schmidt and Huckfeldt (2011) included a list of 117 species and genera of fungi (including 38.9% brown-rot and 61.1% white-rot fungi) responsible for wood decay in buildings. In the publication of Schmidt and Huckfeldt (2011), the total number of observations of brown-rot fungi in buildings was 74.5% and white-rot fungi was 24.8%. Buildings in Germany were most frequently infested by S. lacrymans (24-25.3%) and C. puteana (14.6-15.3%). Analogous frequency of both species was shown by a questionnaire conducted by the authors of this study. The third most frequent fungus infesting wood in buildings in Germany was D. expansa (8.8-10.%), which is very rarely recorded in Poland. On the other hand, in Germany, fungi were present at much lower levels: F. vaillantii (1.4-3.1%), A. sinuosa (1.0-1.6%) and N. serialis (0.3-1.1%).
An equally high biodiversity in infested buildings in Belgium was found by Fraiture (2008). The author listed 101 species and genera of fungi (including 36.8% brown-rot fungi and 63.2% white-rot fungi). Also in France, a low percentage of buildings was found infected by fungi of the genus Antrodia sp., while the incidence of S. lacrymans was 41.9%. The cumulative incidence of brown-rot fungi in buildings was 73.5%, while the incidence of white-rot fungi was 21.2%.
A study by Alfredsen et al. (2005) conducted in Norway showed a much lower biodiversity of house-rot fungi. The paper gives a list of 31 species and genera of Basidiocota fungi (including 65.6% brown-rot and 34.4% white-rot fungi) infesting wood in buildings. The total number of observations of brown-rot fungi in buildings was 74.9%, and white-rot fungi was 24.5%. The most frequent Basidiomycetes causing wood damage in Norwegian buildings were fungi of the genus Antrodia (23.7%), and species of C. puteana (21.1%) and S. lacrymans (20.7%). The proportion of species presented here was related to the number of observations of Basidomycota and not to the total number of fungi, as it was done in the cited article. It should be noted that in the publication discussed here the fungi of the genus Antrodiasp. include: A. xanta, A. sinuosa, N. serialis and F. vaillantii, because according to the systematics of that time these species belonged to one genus (Antrodia). In Poland, the frequency of wood infestation in buildings by S. lacrymans and fungi of the genus Antrodia (according to systematics adopted in the article above) was higher than in Norway, whereas the incidence of C. puteana in fungus infested buildings was slightly lower.
Gabriel and Švec (2017) in their review paper presented, among others, the frequency of occurrence of the main fungal species in historical buildings of Romania (castles, palaces, citadels, churches of allfaiths, etc.). The buildings were infected, among others, by S. lacrymans (32%) and C. puteana (60%), A. vaillantii (21%), D. expansa (21%). The survey conducted showed lower percentage occurrence of fungi in buildings in Poland and lower fungal diversity. It should be noted, however, that the Romanian research concerns historical buildings, which does not necessarily correspond to the general fungal infestation of residential buildings, etc.
Vampala (2008) in a publication on wood-decaying fungi in buildings in the Czech Republic presented a list of selected 40 species of fungi belonging to the Basidiomycetes (including 42.1% brown-rot fungi and 57.9% white-rot fungi). Unfortunately, the frequency of their occurrence in decayed buildings was not given in the paper. The diversity of indoor wood-decaying fungi in the Czech Republic is slightly lower than in Poland.
The study of Irbe et al. (2012) focused mainly on biodeterioration of external wooden elements of buildings in Latvia. A total of 46 species and genera of Basidiomycetes fungi were found on wooden buildings in the open-air museum (including 31.8% brown-rot fungi and 68.2 white-rot fungi). A total of 19 Basidiomycetes genera and species were found on wooden religious buildings (including 26.3% brown-rot fungi and 73.7% white-rot fungi). The most common genera were Antrodia, Gloeophyllum, Athelia, Hyphoderma, Hyphodontia, Phanerochaete, Postia, and Botryobasidium. It should be noted that according to the systematics adopted in the discussed publication, fungi from the genus Antrodia sp. include A. sinuosa and A. xanta. The percentage share of particular fungi species was not given in the paper. The diversity of wood-decaying fungi in buildings in Latvia is slightly lower than in Poland.
Haas et al. (2018) reported 40 species from 74 different genera of indoor wood-decaying fungi (including 46.8% brown-rot fungi and 53.2% white-rot fungi) in the federal state of Styria (Austria). The total number of observations of indoor brown-rot fungi was 87.8%, and of white-rot fungi - 6.6%. The highest number of damages in buildings was caused by Serpula spp. (61.5%), including S. lacrymans 61.2% and S. himantioides (0.2%). The incidence of fungi of the genus Antrodia spp. (according to systematics used in the publication) caused 10.7%, including: A. sinuosa (0.2%), A. xantha (1.1), F. vaillantii (0.8%), N. serialis (0.5%). Fungi of the genus Gloeophyllum caused damage in 8.2% of buildings, including G. abietinum (1.2%), G. sepiarium (2.8%), and G. trabeum (0.9%). The prevalence of fungi of the genus Coniophora was 3.9%, including C. marmorata (2.5%) and C. puteana (0.2%). Donkioporia expansa was responsible for 1.1% of wood damage in buildings. The authors of the publication believe that the high percentage of infestation of buildings by S. lacrymans may have its genesis in the large destruction of buildings in this part of Austria during World War II. In Poland, the incidence of S. lacrymans in buildings is lower than in Styria (more than 2×), whereas the occurrence of the "indor polypores group'' (A. sinuosa, A. xantha F. vaillantii and N. serialis) is higher (almost 3×). The incidence of D. expansa in affected buildings in Poland is significantly lower (10×).
In the countries of southern Europe with subtropical climates, indoor white-rot fungi are much more frequent than in moderate climate countries. Irbe et al. (2008) on the basis of studies conducted in Macedonian cultural heritage (37 monasteries and churches, and one fortress) presented a list of 26 species of wood-decaying Basidiomycetes fungi, of which 21 species (80.8%) caused white rot. The most common fungus found was Lyomyces crustosus, causing white rot. The prevalence of white rot in buildings was 81.3%. S. lacrymans was not found during the inspection of historic buildings; moreover, this fungus was never found in Macedonia. Among the brown-rot fungi, the most abundant was the genus Antrodia spp. (including A. sinuosa, according to systematics adopted in the article) – 6.2%.
Confronting the results of the questionnaire with national publications (Ważny and Czajnik 1963b), one can state that the species abundance of Basidiomycetes fungi destroying wood in buildings has increased significantly. In the publication from the 1960s, a list of 26 species was provided, whereas the respondents of the survey provided a total of 48 types of fungi (43 species and 5 fungi recognized to genus). In addition to the increase in diversity, it can be concluded that the proportions of species causing brown and white wood rot have changed. In the sixties of the twentieth century in Polish buildings the fungi causing brown rot prevailed (95.4%), whereas the results of the survey indicate a decrease in wood damage in buildings caused by these fungi (83.4%). These changes are more evident when we analyze the list of fungi species (without taking into account their frequency of occurrence in buildings). In the list of species presented by Ważny and Czajnik (1963b), 57.1% of fungi found in buildings cause brown rot of wood, whereas the results of the survey indicate that currently brown-rot fungi are only 39.1%. An increasing trend in the number of white-rot species in buildings is observed across Europe (Shmidt 2011).
In Poland there are also changes within the brown-rot fungi. Analyzing the occurrence of individual species we can state that the occurrence of S. lacrymans and C. puteana has decreased twice, while the share of "indoor polypores group" in infested buildings has increased twice. Such a trend is not observed in other European countries.