Industrial production of Pleurotus spp. mycelium for biomaterials: techno-economic assessment of a solid-state fermentation plant for biotextiles

Camilo Alejandro Pineda-Soto¹, Marvin Ricaurte¹

¹School of Chemical Sciences and Engineering, Yachay Tech University, Hacienda San José s/n y Proyecto Yachay, Urcuquí 100119, Ecuador

Author of correspondence. email: camilo.pineda@yachaytech.edu.ec

Abstract

Mycelium-based materials have emerged as promising bio-fabricated resources for packaging, construction and biotextiles due to their low density, biodegradability and ability to valorise lignocellulosic residues. However, there is still limited quantitative evidence regarding the technical and economic feasibility of industrial Pleurotus spp. mycelium production under realistic operating conditions. This study presents a detailed techno-economic assessment of a solid-state fermentation (SSF) process designed to obtain 12,000 m²·yr⁻¹ of structured Pleurotus spp. mycelium sheets as feedstock for the biotextile industry. The process was modelled in SuperPro Designer, including upstream preparation of mineral solutions and lignocellulosic substrate, steam sterilisation, inoculation, controlled aerobic fermentation in a tray-type reactor, and downstream cooling, demoulding, packaging and storage. Mass and energy balances were combined with equipment sizing to estimate capital expenditure (CAPEX) and operating expenditure (OPEX).  The overall fixed capital investment was US$ 498,069, with a total capital demand, including working capital, of US$ 585,585. Annual operating costs at full capacity (12,000 m²·yr⁻¹) reached US$ 87,516, dominated by auxiliary facilities and maintenance. For a selling price of US$ 30 per m² of mycelium sheet, the projected revenues were US$ 360,000·yr⁻¹. The discounted cash-flow analysis (10-year project horizon, 11.3% discount rate) yielded a net present value (NPV) of US$ 820,865, an internal rate of return (IRR) of 24.1% and a benefit–cost ratio of 1.75, confirming economic feasibility under the base scenario. Sensitivity analysis revealed strong dependence on product selling price and energy costs. An environmental scoring matrix classified the project as Category II (neutral impact), mainly due to the use of agricultural residues, recycling of process water and low emissions associated with the SSF configuration. The results demonstrate that industrial production of Pleurotus spp. mycelium for biomaterial applications is technically feasible and financially attractive in regions with access to low-cost lignocellulosic residues and moderate energy prices.The study offers a quantitative framework that connects process engineering, environmental performance, and economic feasibility, facilitating decision-making for the implementation of mycelium-based biotextile value chains.

Keywords: Pleurotus spp., mycelium-based composites, solid-state fermentation, techno-economic assessment, biotextiles, circular bioeconomy

Introduction

Mycelium-based composites have garnered significant interest as biodegradable, low-density, and sustainable substitutes for petroleum-derived foams, plastics, and engineered wood products (Jones et al., 2020; Yang et al., 2021; Elsacker et al., 2023).    These materials use the filamentous network of fungal hyphae to bind lignocellulosic particles together into strong biocomposites. This enables the upcycling of agricultural waste using low-energy bio-fabrication.     Applications encompass packaging, insulation, furniture, biotextiles resembling leather, and structural components in lightweight construction (Aiduang et al., 2024; Alaneme et al., 2023; Holt et al., 2024; Lingam et al., 2023).

 Pleurotus spp. (oyster mushrooms) are notably appealing in this context due to their fast development, effective colonization of various lignocellulosic substrates, and capacity to develop thick, mechanically resilient mycelial networks (Aiduang et al., 2024; Camilleri et al., 2025).  Recent studies have delineated the mechanical, physical, and thermal properties of mycelium-based composites derived from various fungal species and agricultural residues, affirming the appropriateness of Pleurotus-based materials for insulation and low-to-medium load-bearing applications (Aiduang et al., 2024; Yang et al., 2021; Ghazvinian et al., 2022).

Nevertheless, most of this material focuses on laboratory-scale experiments or prototype production, without significant quantitative data on industrial process design and techno-economic performance. Evaluations of techno-economics and environmental impact have been documented for analogous bio-based systems, including mycelium composites for construction and chitin nanofibrils derived from fungi, emphasizing the significance of energy consumption, plant scale, and substrate logistics in assessing competitiveness (Osman, 2023; Choi et al., 2023; Muñoz et al., 2023; Akromah et al., 2024).

Nonetheless, there exists a deficiency of research specifically concentrating on Pleurotus-derived biomaterials for biotextile applications, wherein sheet-like structures, surface quality, and dimensional accuracy are critical (Mayne et al., 2023; Wan et al., 2020).  This study seeks to perform a thorough techno-economic assessment of an industrial solid-state fermentation (SSF) method for generating structured Pleurotus spp. mycelium designed as feedstock for biotextiles and various biomaterials.Building upon experimental knowledge and previous systematic reviews on mycelium materials, the work integrates process simulation, mass and energy balances, equipment sizing, capital and operating cost estimation, financial indicators and environmental scoring.

Materials and Methods

2.1. Process concept and plant capacity

The process targets the production of 1,000 m² of mycelium sheet per month, equivalent to 12,000 m²·yr⁻¹, operating one 8-h shift for 250 days per year. The product is a structurally coherent mycelium–substrate composite obtained by SSF of Pleurotus spp. on a lignocellulosic substrate and cast into tray-shaped moulds to generate sheet-like materials suitable for subsequent biotextile processing (pressing, cutting, lamination).

The main process stages are:

• Reception and weighing of agar–malt extract powder and mineral salts.
• Preparation and mixing of aqueous nutrient medium.
• Steam sterilisation in an autoclave (121 °C, 15 min).
• Cooling of the sterilised medium and filling of sterile trays.
• Inoculation with pure Pleurotus spp. spawn.
• Incubation/fermentation in a tray-type SSF reactor (FES bioreactor) under controlled temperature, humidity and aeration.
• Unloading, trimming, packaging and labelling of mycelium sheets.

2.2. Process simulation

The process flowsheet was constructed in SuperPro Designer using unit operations for solid handling, mixing, sterilisation, tray drying/fermentation and packaging. The configuration follows the block diagram and detailed flowsheet developed in the master’s thesis, including three interconnected subsystems: (i) substrate and nutrient preparation, (ii) process air conditioning and (iii) fermentation and post-treatment.

Mass balances were based on a representative batch where 61 kg of agar-malt extract medium (AEM) are dissolved in 1,152 kg of water, sterilised and distributed into 152,866 Petri-equivalent units or trays per year, corresponding to the 12,000 m² production target. One kilogram of pure Pleurotus spp. inoculum is considered sufficient to inoculate each production batch. Utilities (steam, electricity, cooling water and compressed air) were modelled using SuperPro’s built-in utility units.

2.3. Equipment sizing and cost estimation

Equipment was sized automatically by SuperPro based on throughput, residence times and operating conditions, then cross-checked with vendor data for stainless-steel mixing tanks, horizontal autoclaves and industrial tray incubators. The key equipment items are:

• Stainless-steel mixing tank (100 L, AISI 304, motorised agitator)
• Horizontal steam autoclave (approx. 150 °C design temperature, 4.9 bar, stainless steel 304L)
• FES tray-type bioreactor/incubator with electric heating, humidification and forced air circulation
• Refrigerated storage and packaging line (including filling and labelling units)

Purchase costs for equipment and office/laboratory items were taken from updated vendor quotations and literature benchmarks, resulting in a total equipment cost of US$ 128,700. Installation, piping, electrical systems, buildings, services and contingencies were estimated using standard percentage factors for bioprocess plants (Peters et al., 2003) and refined using the detailed breakdown shown in Table 2.

2.4. Operating cost estimation

Operating costs (OPEX) were divided into:

Variable costs: raw materials (substrate, nutrients), utilities (steam, electricity, water), direct labour, maintenance and repair, operating supplies, laboratory analysis, catalysts/solvents and licensing/royalty fees.

Fixed costs: depreciation, property taxes, insurance and rent.

General expenses: administrative overheads, distribution and sales, and R&D expenses.

Annual costs were calculated at full capacity (12,000 m²·yr⁻¹) and scaled linearly for ramp-up years (50% and 80% utilisation in years 1 and 2). Depreciation was computed using straight-line over 10 years. Interest and loan amortisation assumed 100% debt financing for the fixed capital with typical long-term industrial interest rates.

2.5. Financial analysis

A discounted cash-flow model was built in Excel to compute:

• Net present value (NPV)
• Internal rate of return (IRR)
• Benefit–cost (B/C) ratio
• Break-even point (BEP)
• The main assumptions were:
• Project lifetime: 10 years
• Discount rate: 11.3%
• Corporate income tax: according to national regulations (implicit in provided cash-flow)
• Product selling price: US$ 30 per m² of mycelium sheet
• Residual value: 10% of fixed capital investment at year 10

The base-case was complemented with sensitivity analysis on product selling price (±10–30%) and OPEX (±10%), following common practice in biomass-based techno-economic assessments (Osman, 2023; Jiang et al., 2016, Tang et al., 2016).

2.6. Environmental impact scoring

A semi-quantitative environmental assessment was carried out using a scoring matrix that considers air emissions, wastewater quality and management of solid wastes, along with occupational health and safety measures. Each item is scored according to national guidelines, yielding a total impact score and category (I to IV, from beneficial to highly adverse). The matrix employed herein categorized the mycelium plant as Category II (environmentally neutral) with a score of 34 points, mostly influenced by the presence of organic matter and colorants in process water, however alleviated by recycling and minimal air emissions.

 This method, although less comprehensive than a complete life-cycle evaluation, aligns with current LCA research demonstrating that energy use in autoclaves, incubators, and ovens predominates the environmental impact of mycelium production (Stoffel et al., 2019; Akromah et al., 2024; Motamedi et al., 2025).

3. Results

3.1. Process description and block flow diagram

The industrial process starts with reception and weighing of agar–malt extract and mineral salts, which are dissolved in process water in a 100-L stainless-steel mixing tank under agitation. The nutrient solution is then pumped to a horizontal autoclave and sterilised at 121 °C and 15 psi for 15 min, ensuring elimination of contaminant microorganisms.Subsequent to sterilization, the medium is chilled to around 25 °C and aseptically put into sterile trays or molds, where it is inoculated with a pure culture of Pleurotus spp.

The inoculated trays are loaded into a tray-type FES bioreactor that maintains temperature, humidity and aeration at optimal levels for micellar growth during a 7-day fermentation period. Upon completion, the solid mycelium–substrate composite is removed, visually inspected, and sent to a refrigerated chamber for stabilisation, followed by packaging in labelled boxes. Figure 1 schematically summarises the main stages.

Figure 1. Block flow diagram of the industrial solid-state fermentation process for mycelium sheet production, including raw-material reception, medium preparation, sterilisation, tray filling, inoculation, incubation, cooling and packaging.

3.2. Mass balance

The plant is designed to operate at a capacity of 1,000 m² of mycelium per month (12,000 m²·yr⁻¹). The simplified annual mass balance is summarised in Table 1.

Table 1. Simplified annual mass balance for mycelium sheet production (12,000 m²·yr⁻¹).

These values are conservative estimates that match the SuperPro simulation. They also show that solid-state fermentation systems use water and nutrients very efficiently (Yang et al., 2021; Aiduang et al., 2024).

3.3. Equipment and fixed capital investment

Key process equipment, including preparation, fermentation and packaging units, is summarised in Table 2.

Table 2. Main equipment and machinery for the mycelium production plant.

Based on this equipment list and associated installation factors, the investment components are summarised in Table 3.

Table 3. Summary of investment costs (CAPEX).

The ratio of indirect to direct investment (about 0.47) is normal for small bioprocess facilities. It shows the extra costs that come with specialized utilities and sanitary installations.

3.4. Operating costs

Annual operating costs at full capacity are detailed in Table 4.

Table 4. Annual operating costs at full capacity (12,000 m²·yr⁻¹).

Auxiliary facilities (energy and utilities), direct labor, and maintenance collectively represent approximately 45% of operational expenditures, highlighting the necessity of energy-efficient equipment and thorough preventive maintenance programs for ongoing competitiveness (Osman, 2023; Akromah et al., 2024).

3.5. Revenues and cash flow

At a selling price of US$ 30 per m², the plant revenues increase from US$ 180,000 in year 1 (50% capacity) to US$ 288,000 in year 2 (80% capacity) and stabilise at US$ 360,000·yr⁻¹ from year 3 onwards. Additional cash inflows at year 10 include the recovery of working capital (US$ 87,516) and the residual value of infrastructure (US$ 49,806.9).

Total annual expenses (including financial costs) stabilise around US$ 83,140.6 from year 6 onwards, after completion of long-term loan amortisation. The resulting cash-flow profile yields cumulative non-discounted net cash of approximately US$ 711,796 by year 10.

3.6. Financial indicators

Using a discount rate of 11.3% and the cash-flow described above, the key financial indicators are:

• Net present value (NPV): US$ 820,864.7
• Internal rate of return (IRR): 24.07%
• Benefit–cost (B/C) ratio: 1.7462

The economic break-even point, calculated as BEP=CV/[1+(CF/Sales)], stabilises at approximately US$ 44,383 from year 3 onwards.The data demonstrate robust economic performance, with the IRR markedly exceeding the discount rate and the B/C ratio considerably surpassing 1, aligning with prior favorable bio-based material initiatives (Osman, 2023; Muñoz et al., 2023).

3.7. Sensitivity analysis

Sensitivity analysis (Table 5) shows that the project is particularly sensitive to changes in product revenues. A 10% reduction in revenue diminishes the NPV to US$ 633,478 and the IRR to 20.0%, but a 30% reduction still results in a positive NPV of US$ 258,704, but the IRR approaches the discount rate of 11.1%. Conversely, a 10% increase in mycelium price significantly improves profitability (NPV = US$ 1,008,252; IRR = 27.9%).

Table 5. Sensitivity of financial indicators to changes in revenues and product price.

The high elasticity of NPV and IRR with respect to revenues underlines the importance of market development for mycelium-based biomaterials and the need for long-term purchase agreements with biotextile manufacturers.

3.8. Environmental performance

The environmental impact matrix (Table 6) assigns scores to air emissions, wastewater quality, solid-waste management and occupational safety. The project obtains a total score of 34, corresponding to Category II (environmentally neutral).

Table 6. Environmental impact scoring for the mycelium production plant.

The moderate score is linked mainly to the presence of organic matter and colourants in process water; however, the impact is mitigated by effluent recycling and composting of solid residues, which are compatible with circular bioeconomy strategies. LCA studies on mycelium composites confirm that energy use in sterilisation and incubation is the main contributor to environmental impacts, so strategies such as heat integration, renewable electricity and improved insulation can further reduce the footprint (Akromah et al., 2024; Motamedi et al., 2025).

Discussion

4.1. Comparison with previous mycelium studies

The simulated process and economic indicators demonstrate significant alignment with contemporary literature regarding mycelium-based materials.  SSF on lignocellulosic substrates is recognized as an efficient technique for generating mycelium composites with mechanical properties comparable to lightweight polymer foams (Jones et al., 2020; Elsacker et al., 2023; Aiduang et al., 2024).

  This study used a tray-based SSF reactor and specific operating conditions (7-day fermentation, regulated temperature and humidity, and forced aeration) that align with previous research and contemporary design approaches for mycelium scaffolds (Yang et al., 2021; Santulli, 2022).

 Experimental research and techno-economic assessments of mycelium composites in construction indicate that competitiveness is influenced by plant scale, substrate logistics, and energy costs (Osman, 2023).

  This case study broadens this viewpoint to biotextile applications, illustrating that, despite a limited capacity of 12,000 m²·yr⁻¹, the facility can attain an IRR surpassing 24% under plausible selling prices.

4.2. Technical bottlenecks and process optimisation

From a process-engineering standpoint, the SuperPro simulation highlights the fermentation stage as the main bottleneck, since it dictates residence time, reactor volume and energy consumption. Similar conclusions have been reported in other mycelium studies, where growth kinetics and oxygen transfer limit scale-up (Ghazvinian et al., 2022; Chan et al., 2021).

Key operational sensitivities identified in this work include:

• Substrate moisture content: small deviations significantly affect colonisation rate and final material cohesion, in agreement with reports on water activity and mycelium growth (Yang et al., 2021; Aiduang et al., 2024).

• Temperature and humidification of process air: crucial for maintaining reactor thermal stability and avoiding overheating caused by metabolic heat.
• Homogeneity of inoculation: required to prevent under-colonised zones that weaken mechanical properties of the resulting sheets.

Process optimisation should therefore prioritise improved heat and mass transfer within the tray reactor (e.g., optimised tray geometry, airflow distribution and intermittent mixing) and advanced control strategies for temperature and humidity.

4.3. Economic relevance and risk profile

The favorable NPV and elevated IRR suggest that cultivating Pleurotus mycelium may be a lucrative enterprise under appropriate conditions.   The sensitivity analysis indicates that the risk level is moderate to high, mostly due to fluctuations in energy prices and market demand.

The IRR is almost the same as the discount rate when sales drop by 30%.  Even though it is still positive, this means that long-term profits may not be as stable as they used to be.  These results align with comprehensive assessments of bio-based materials, suggesting that market advancement and policy support (e.g., green public procurement, eco-labels) are essential to alleviate the high initial capital expenses compared to traditional materials (Alaneme et al., 2023; Le Ferrand, 2024).

  4.4. Effects on sustainability and the circular economy

This study investigates the transformation of agricultural byproducts and nutrient solutions into a biodegradable material, potentially applicable in biotextiles, packaging, and insulation.   In line with previous studies on mycelium bio-composites and their energy-efficient properties (Yang et al., 2021; Motamedi et al., 2025), the results support the utilization of mycelium as a fundamental material in circular bioeconomy projects.

By using local lignocellulosic waste and recycling process water and solid leftovers, the facility cuts down on the need to throw away waste and the greenhouse gas emissions that come with it.   Also, small-scale fisheries are labor-intensive and not very high-tech, which helps create jobs in rural areas and regional value chains. This is especially important for countries with strong agricultural sectors.

Conclusions

This study established and analyzed a detailed flowsheet for the industrial cultivation of Pleurotus spp.   Mycelium sheets generated through solid-state fermentation are designed for use in the biomaterials and biotextiles industries.  Employing SuperPro Designer for modeling, mass and energy balances, equipment sizing, and thorough cost analysis, the following conclusions can be drawn:

• The proposed SSF process, comprising sterilized nutritional medium, tray inoculation, and regulated incubation within a FES reactor, is technically feasible and compatible with existing industrial equipment.The regulation of substrate moisture, temperature, humidity, and aeration is crucial for ensuring homogeneous colonization and preserving the structural integrity of the biomaterial.
• The economic viability is evidenced by a total capital requirement of around US$ 585,585 and an annual operating expenditure of US$ 87,516 at full capacity, resulting in favorable financial metrics (NPV = US$ 820,865; IRR = 24.1%; B/C = 1.75) at a selling price of US$ 30 per m².
• Profitability is very sensitive to fluctuations in product selling prices, revenue instability, and energy expenses.A 30% decrease in revenue still yields a positive NPV but reduces the IRR to around the discount rate, highlighting the need for robust market strategies and long-term contracts.
• The environmental grading matrix classifies the project as Category II (neutral impact), consistent with LCA studies that reveal the principal environmental burden of mycelium composites arises from energy consumption during sterilization and incubation.Strategies such as renewable energy integration, heat recovery, and water recycling might further alleviate impacts.
• Strategic potential: Pleurotus mycelium should be regarded not merely as a replacement for certain synthetic materials, but as a foundational material facilitating decentralized, residue-based production systems that incorporate bioeconomy, circularity, and regional development.

5.1. Future work

Based on the outcomes of this techno-economic assessment, the following lines of research and development are recommended:

• Comprehensive mechanical and functional characterisation of the produced mycelium sheets (compression, flexure, tensile strength, thermal conductivity, water absorption) for comparison with existing biotextiles and polymer foams (Elsacker et al., 2023; Aiduang et al., 2024).
• Creation of hybrid biomaterials that integrate mycelium with natural fibers, biopolymers, or mineral fillers to expand application possibilities and enhance durability.
• Execution of life-cycle assessment (LCA) to measure carbon footprint, water footprint, and cumulative energy consumption, based on recent LCA research on mycelium composites (Akromah et al., 2024).
• PMC
• Examination of regulatory instruments and commercial models (e.g., green procurement, eco-labels, take-back schemes) that can facilitate the market adoption of mycelium-based biotextiles.

Declaration of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content of the paper.

References

1. Aiduang, W. (2024). Improving the physical and mechanical properties of mycelium-based green composites using paper waste. Polymers, 16, 262. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym16020262
2. Akromah, S., Åkesson, D., Fröling, M., & West, H. (2024). Potential environmental impact of mycelium composites on African communities. Sustainability, 16(10), 4382. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-62561-7
3. Alaneme, K. K., Anaele, J. U., Oke, T. M., Kareem, S. A., Adediran, M., Ajibuwa, O. A., & Anabaranze, Y. O. (2023). Mycelium-based composites: A review of their bio-fabrication procedures, material properties and potential for green building and construction applications. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 83, 234–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2023.10.012
4. Camilleri, E., et al. (2025). Mycelium-based composites: An updated comprehensive review. Construction and Building Materials, 412, 134222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2025.134222
5. Chan, X. Y., et al. (2021). Mechanical properties of dense mycelium-bound composites subjected to tropical weathering. Scientific Reports, 11, 22345. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-01598-4
6. Choi, Y. J., Eom, H., Yang, S. H., Nandre, R., Kim, S., Kim, M., Oh, Y. L., Nakazawa, T., Honda, Y., & Ro, H. S. (2023). Heterokaryosis, the main obstacle in the generation of PPO1-edited Agaricus bisporus by CRISPR/Cas9 system. Scientia Horticulturae, 318, 112095. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCIENTA.2023.112095
7. Elsacker, E., Vandelook, S., & Peeters, E. (2023). Recent technological innovations in mycelium materials as leather substitutes: A patent review. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, 11, 1204861. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2023.1204861
8. Ghazvinian, A., et al. (2022). Mycelium-based composite graded materials. Molecules, 7(2), 48. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomimetics7020048
9. Holt, R. R., Munafo, J. P., Salmen, J., Keen, C. L., Mistry, B. S., Whiteley, J. M., & Schmitz, H. H. (2024). Mycelium: A nutrient-dense food to help address world hunger, promote health, and support a regenerative food system. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 72(5), 2697–2707. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.3c03307
10. Jones, M., Mautner, A., Luenco, S., Bismarck, A., & John, S. (2020). Engineered mycelium composite construction materials from fungal biorefineries: A critical review. Materials Design, 187, 108397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2019.108397
11. Le Ferrand, H., et al. (2024). Critical review of mycelium-bound product development to overcome barriers to commercialization. Journal of Cleaner Production, 454, 140152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.141859
12. Lingam, D., Narayan, S., Mamun, K., & Chara, D. (2023). Engineered mycelium-based composite materials: Comprehensive study of various properties and applications. Construction and Building Materials, 391, 131841. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.131841
13. Mayne, R., Roberts, N., Phillips, N., Weerasekera, R., & Adamatzky, A. (2023). Propagation of electrical signals by fungi. Biosystems, 229, 104933. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystems.2023.104933
14. Motamedi, S., et al. (2025). A review of mycelium bio-composites as energy-efficient and sustainable building materials. Energies, 18(16), 4225. https://doi.org/10.3390/en18164225
15. Muñoz, J. C., et al. (2023). Techno-economic assessment of chitin nanofibrils isolated from fungi. ACS Sustainable Resource Management, 1(1), 75–88. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.3c00102
16. Osman, E. Y. (2023). Economic assessment of mycelia-based composite in the built environment (Doctoral dissertation, Kansas State University).
17. Stoffel, F., Santana, W. de O., Gregolon, J. G. N., Kist, T. B. L., Fontana, R. C., & Camassola, M. (2019). Production of edible mycoprotein using agroindustrial wastes: Influence on nutritional, chemical and biological properties. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies, 58, 102227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2019.102227
18. Tang, J., Etacheri, V., & Pol, V. G. (2016). Wild fungus derived carbon fibers and hybrids as anode for lithium-ion batteries. ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering, 4(5), 2624–2631. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.6b00114
19. Wan Mahari, W. A., Peng, W., Nam, W. L., Yang, H., Lee, X. Y., Lee, Y. K., Liew, R. K., Ma, N. L., Mohammad, A., Sonne, C., Van Le, Q., Show, P. L., Chen, W. H., & Lam, S. S. (2020). A review on valorization of oyster mushroom and waste generated in the mushroom cultivation industry. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 400, 123156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.123156
20. Yang, L., Park, D., & Qin, Z. (2021). Material function of mycelium-based biocomposite: A review. Frontiers in Materials, 8, 737377. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmats.2021.737377

| Received: [September 28, 2025] | Accepted: [November 22, 2025] | Published: [diciember 12, 2025]|

Citation: Pineda-Soto, C. A., & Ricaurte, M. (2025). Industrial production of Pleurotus spp. mycelium for biomaterials: techno-economic assessment of a solid-state fermentation plant for biotextiles. Bionatura 10 (2). DOI: 10.70373/RB/2025.10.02.12.

Peer review information: Bionatura thanks the anonymous reviewers for their contribution to the peer review of this work using https://reviewerlocator.webofscience.com/

All articles published by Bionatura Journal are freely and permanently accessible online immediately after publication, without subscription charges or registration barriers.

Publisher’s Note: Bionatura stays neutral concerning jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Copyright: © 2025 by the authors. Submitted for possible open access publication under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)