technical bulletin management of spent mushroom substrate
TRANSCRIPT
MANAGEMENT OF SPENT
MUSHROOM SUBSTRATE
Technical Bulletin
O.P. Ahlawatand
M.P. Sagar
National Research Centre for Mushroom(Indian Council of Agricultural Research)
Chambaghat, Solan - 173 213 (HP)
Printed: 2007, 1000 Copies
Published by:DirectorNational Research Centre for Mushroom (ICAR)Chambaghat, Solan – 173 213 (HP), INDIAPhone: 01792-230451; Fax: 01792-231207E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]: nrcmushroom.org
N.R.C.M. 2007All rights reserved. No part of this technical bulletin may be reproducedin any form or by any means without prior permission in writingfrom the competent authority.
Designed & Printed at:Yugantar Prakashan Pvt. Ltd.WH-23, Mayapuri Indl. Area, New Delhi-64Ph.: 011-28115949, 28116018
ii
CONTENTS
Page No.
Foreward v
Preface vii
1. Introduction 1
2. Traits of spent mushroom substrate 4
3. Recomposting of SMS 9
4. Recycling of SMS for various purposes 16
a. Horticulture 17
b. Cereal crops 24
c. Mushrooms 26
d. Bioremediation of contaminated soils 33
e. Vermicomposting 37
f. Organic-mineral fertilizer 38
g. Diseases management 38
5. Conclusion 40
6. References 42
iii
FOREWARD
Mushrooms are known for their delicacy and nutritional valuesbut the substrate released after mushroom crop harvest, better knownas ‘Spent Mushroom Substrate’ is also the subject of great importance.The compost/substrate, a blend of agricultural/poultry/industrialwastes and prepared by controlled fermentation process, is first usedfor mushroom cultivation and the spent substrate obtained after cropharvest possesses all essential attributes of an organic manure whichfurther gets enriched during its recomposting by natural weatheringor any other process. The recomposted spent mushroom substratehas been found to be a good growing medium for majority of thevegetables and the field crops, and has shown multifacet utilities inimproving the yield and quality of the crop, and management of thediseases, which is really encouraging for the mushroom industry.The other utilities of spent mushroom substrate, like invermicomposting, bioremediation and as organic-mineral fertilizerare boon to the country’s farming system. I appreciate the efforts andlabour put in by the authors in compiling and editing the bulletinfor its use at farmers’ level. I also would like to encourage the farmersto start using of spent mushroom substrate for integrated farmingand to obtain better revenue out of the agrowaste available at theirdoor step and to make contribution towards a clean environment.
Rajendra Prasad TewariDirectorNational Research Centre for
Dated: Mushroom, Solan – 173 213 (HP)
v
PREFACE
The compost released after the harvest of one full crop of mushroom,beyond which extension of crop becomes unremunerative is calledas the ‘spent mushroom substrate’ (SMS). The spent substrate fromdifferent mushrooms varies in its physical, chemical and biologicalproperties and each one has its own specific utility. The spentsubstrate from button mushroom has been found to be nutritionallyrich with respect to its N:P:K contents, and being having high cationexchange capacity, it has the ability to replace Farm Yard Manure forthe purpose of raising horticultural and cereal crops. Using spentmushroom substrate as feeding material for vermicomposting, plantsdiseases management, preparation of organic-mineral fertilizer andbioremediation of the contaminated soils are the other options ofusing SMS. Presently, farmers in different corners of the country areusing SMS as manure for various field crops but without any supportof the scientific data and because of which they are not getting theoptimum benefits. The unscientific ways of using SMS are alsocreating several problems which include the accumulation of salts insoils and harmful effect on some crop plants. The one of the biggestmushroom units of the country, the ‘Agro-Dutch Ltd.’ at Lalru, Punjabis generating lakhs tons of SMS, which is being widely used forimproving the soil health of the surrounding areas. Though researchfindings within the country and abroad have proved the advantagesof using SMS in different farm activities but no compiled informationis available till date particularly for the use of the farming community.
This bulletin contains information on the major aspects like, traitsof spent mushroom substrate, methods of its recomposting, effectson the underlying soil, recycling for different farm activities (manurefor vegetable/cereal crops, casing material for button mushroom,vermicomposting, organic-mineral fertilizer and plants diseasesmanagement) and bioremediation of the contaminated soils. Thebulletin also deals in aspects of dose of SMS to be used, effect onfruit yield/quality and disease status along with their pictorial
vii
presentations. We hope that the information given in this bulletinwill certainly enlighten the scientific and farming communitiestowards right ways of recomposting and uses of SMS.
The publication of this bulletin has become possible due to theconstant support and critical advice of various colleagues. The supportrendered by them is, indeed, praise worthy. But amongst them thetyping/composing support from Mrs. Shashi Poonam and Mr.Pardeep Gupta is very special. We also got significant contributionfrom Dr S.R. Sharma, who helped us without any hesitation in guidingus for further improvement and editing of the document. Last butnot the least the constant encouragement from Dr. R.P. Tewari,Director, National Research Centre for Mushroom, who reallymotivated us to take up such a time consuming task. We also thankthe Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi for fundingthe Ad-hoc scheme on “Refinement in recycling technologies of spentmushroom substrate for soil amelioration and bioremediation” underwhich majority of the research work was carried out. Once again wethank all those who helped us directly or indirectly in bringing outthis bulletin.
O.P. AhlawatM.P. Sagar
viii
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
CHAPTER - I
Introduction
Plant waste is the basicsubstrate utilized for cultivationof different edible mushrooms.Mushroom growing is an eco-friendly activity as it utilizes thewaste from agriculture,horticulture, poultry, brewery etc.for its cultivation. However, pilingup of “spent mushroomsubstrate” released aftermushroom crop harvesting maycause various environmentalproblems, including ground watercontamination and nuisance(Beyer, 1996).
Compost is considered ‘spentsubstrate’ when one full crop ofmushroom has been taken andfurther extension becomesunremunerative (Wuest and Fahy,1991). Mushroom industry needsto dispose off more than 50 milliontons of used mushroom composteach year called Spent MushroomSubstrate (SMS) (Fox andChorover, 1999). Recently, theterm spent compost or spentmushroom substrate has beenreplaced by a more appropriate
term, “post mushroom substrate”because it is not ‘spent’ and isready to be further attacked by anew set of microorganisms. Thelarge dumped piles of spentmushroom substrate becomeanaerobic and give off offensiveodour. The run-off from such pilescontaminates nearby watersources and pollutes them (Beyer,1996). Under normalcircumstances, the spentmushroom substrate is discardedas waste without consideringenvironmental repercussion (Fig.1). During the recent years,environmental legislations haveforced the mushroom growers to
Fig. 1. Spent mushroom substratedisposed off on road side
1
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
think about more amicable waysof SMS disposal. At the same timethe demand for organic residuesand compost has also increasedseveral folds considering the illeffects of synthetic pesticides andfertilizers. The research workcarried out around the world hasproved that spent mushroomsubstrate possesses the quality ofa good organic manure for raisinghealthy crops of cereals, fruits,vegetables and ornamental plants,in addition to its ability ofreclaiming the contaminated soil.Although farm yard manure ismostly being used for productionof organic food but its pooravailability has restricted theproduction of organic crops at alarge scale. Fortunately, SMS hasmany of the requisite attributesstill left with for its exploitationin place of FYM in raising organic
field crops and environmentmanagement. The empirical datadepicted in Table 1 shows that thecultivation of mushrooms ondifferent substrates increases thecrude protein, crude fibre andcrude ash contents of SMS inaddition to enhancement in in
vitro crude protein digestibility(Zhang et al., 1995).
The SMS has been found tobe a good nutrient source foragriculture mainly because of itsrich nutrient status, high cationexchange capacity (CEC) and slowmineralization rate which retainits quality as an organic matter.Further, SMS contains 45% waterthough bulky, is light in weight(Dann, 1996). Considering thediversified uses of spentmushroom substrate, an urgentneed was felt to compile the all
Table 1. Effect of pilot-scale solid state fermentation on the contents of spentcompost medium.
Media with 35% spent compost of
Pleurotus ostreatus Lentinula edodes
Control Fermented Control Fermented
Crude protein (%DW) 24.1 32.3 28.4 36.7
Crude fibre (%DW) 14.8 10.2 13.3 9.8
Crude ash (%DW) 6.5 9.0 6.5 9.3
In vitro crude protein 64.2 67.8 68.7 70.1digestibility (%DW)
DW - dry weight (Source: Zhang et al., 1995)
2
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
available information pertainingto the traits of SMS, its effect onsurrounding environment anduses particularly for the benefitof farmers. Unless otherwisespecified, post-mushroom
substrate or ‘spent compost’ herewill mean the substrate left aftercultivation of white buttonmushroom (Agaricus bisporus/A.
bitorquis).
3
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
Fig. 2. Variation in selected parameters of SMS of different ageweathered naturally in an unplanned manner
CHAPTER - II
Traits of Spent Mushroom Substrate
Spent mushroom substrate(SMS) normally contains1.9:0.4:2.4%, N-P-K beforeweathering and 1.9:0.6:1.0,N-P-K after weathering for8-16 months. Nitrogen andphosphorus do not leach outduring weathering but potassiumbeing more leachable is lost insignificant amount duringweathering (Fig. 2) (Gupta et al.,2004).
SMS contains much less heavymetals than sewerage sludge,which precludes its classificationas hazardous substance (Wuestand Fahy, 1991). Weatheringcauses a slow decrease in theorganic matter contents (volatilesolids) and leads to differentcharacteristics of weathered SMSbecause of on-going microbialactivity (Beyer, 1999). The SMSobtained from different
4
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
commercial sites reveal that exceptcalcium, boron, copper and zinc,coefficient of variability are lessthan 25% (Devonald, 1987). In alatest study carried out at PennState Mushroom ResearchLaboratory, a little variation in
chemical and physical propertiesof SMS has been ascribed (Foxand Chorover, 1999) incomparison to earlier studycarried out by Wuest and Fahy(1991) (Table 2).
Table 2. Characteristics of spent mushroom substrate (SMS) reported in differentstudies
Content Unit Wuest and Fahy, http:/aginto.psu.edu/1991 psa/sgg/mushroom 5.html
Fresh SMS 8-16 months Fresh SMS 16 months(Average) old weathered (Range) old weathered
SMS (Average) SMS (Average)
Sodium, Na % dry wt 0.72 0.22 0.21-0.33 0.06
Potassium, K % dry wt 2.35 1.03 1.93-2.58 0.43
Magnesium, mg % dry wt 0.71 0.91 0.45-0.82 0.88
Calcium, Ca % dry wt 4.93 6.16 3.63-5.15 6.27
Aluminium, Al % dry wt 0.40 0.80 0.17-0.28 0.58
Iron, Fe % dry wt 0.44 0.92 0.18-0.34 0.58
Phosphorus, P % dry wt 0.36 0.55 0.45-0.69 0.84
Ammonia-N, NH4
% dry wt 0.11 0.03 0.06-0.24 0.00
Organic Nitrogen % dry wt 1.83 1.89 1.25-2.15 2.72
Total Nitrogen % dry wt 1.93 1.92 1.42-2.05 2.72
Solids % dry wt 43.39 49.43 33.07-40.26 53.47
Volatile Solids % dry wt 62.78 44.29 52.49-72.42 54.24
pH Standard units 7.28 8.05 5.8-7.7 7.1
Manganese, Mn ppm dry wt 332.92 438.62 NT NT
Copper, Cu ppm dry wt 46.26 61.68 NT NT
Zinc, Zn ppm dry wt 103.88 136.41 NT NT
Lead, Pb ppm dry wt 14.89 18.17 NT NT
Chromium, Cr ppm dry wt 8.53 11.31 NT NT
Mercury, Hg ppm dry wt 0.07 0.19 NT NT
Nickel, Ni ppm dry wt 11.93 15.74 NT NT
Cadmium, Cd ppm dry wt 0.43 0.32 NT NT
N-P-K ratio ppm dry wt 1.9-0.4-2.4 1.9-0.6-1.0 1.8-0.6-2.2 2.7-0.8-0.4
% x 10,000=ppm, NT = not tested
6
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
The SMS obtained fromdifferent sources usually hasconductance in the range of 1.9to 8.3 mmhos cm-1. However, thechloride content in fresh SMSvaries from 1.5 to 7.5 kg t -1
(Gerrits, 1987) and only about294 ppm in a well rotten SMS(Chong and Wickware, 1989).The chloride content in SMS isattributed to level of chickenmanure incorporated duringcomposting (Chong et al., 1991).There are contradictory reportsregarding the pH of fresh andweathered SMS. According toWuest and Fahy (1991), SMS hasan initial pH of around 7.28,which increases duringweathering, while, Devonald(1987) reported pH of the freshSMS in the range of 7.01 and8.04. In contrary to this, Chonget al. (1988) found a decrease inpH from its initial value 7.9 to 7.0on weathering.
The volume of SMS alsodecreases (shrinkage) over thetime. The fresh SMS obtainedfrom various sources varies indensity: 0.198 g cm-3 with a rangeof 0.15 to 0.24 g cm-3 in UK(Devonald, 1987); 0.475g cm-3 inIreland (Maher, 1991) and 0.24to 0.62 g cm-3 in USA (Dvorak et
al., 1991). The composting of
SMS in semi-enclosed drums for6 weeks enhances its bulk densityfrom 0.256 g cm-3 to 0.293 gcm-3 (Lohr et al., 1984).
WEATHERING OF SPENTMUSHROOM SUBSTRATE ANDLEACHATE CHEMISTRY
Spent mushroom substratecontains high amount of saltsand other elements which areharmful to plant growth and needto be leached out to make itusable for agricultural/horticultural activities. In order tomake SMS suitable for its use asmanure, it is exposed to natural
Fig. 3. Electrical conductivity profiles(soil to water = 1:5) of soils as influencedby spent mushroom substrate weathering(Guo et al., 2001)
6
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
Fig 5. Water-soluble organic carbonprofiles of soils as influenced by spentmushroom substrate weathering (Guo et
al., 2001)
climatic conditions like variedtemperature and rainfall, whichis called as weathering of SMS.Weathering makes requiredimprovement in the character-istics of SMS but at the same timeit also releases leachatecontaining nitrates and othernutrients.
During field weatheringprocess, leachate percolates intothe underlying soils. The leachatefrom 24 months old naturally
weathered piles of 3’ and 5’ SMSdepth contains 0.8-11.0 g l-1 ofdissolved organic carbon (Fig. 5);0.1-2.0 g l-1 of dissolved organicnitrogen and organic salts. Thevalues of pH, electricalconductivity and acidneutralizing capacity are 6.6 to9.0, 21 to 66 dsm-1 and 10 to 75mmol l-1, respectively (Fig. 3). Ionicforms of potassium, chlorine andsulphate
are the main inorganic
elements in the leachate.
Fig. 4. Total organic carbon profiles ofsoils as influenced by spent mushroomsubstrate weathering (Guo et al., 2001)
7
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
Organic acids below 1000 Daform the major component ofdissolved organic carbon. In 24months of SMS weathering, the5 feet high pile releases about 2.8kg dissolved organic carbon, 0.7kg dissolved organic nitrogen and13.6 kg of inorganic salts, while3 feet pile releases about 3.0 kgdissolved organic carbon, 1.6 kgdissolved organic nitrogen and26.6 kg of inorganic salts. The 5
feet pile retains more water andexhibits lower net nitrificationcompared with the 3 feet pile. Thetop 3 feet of soil retains 20 to 89%of the leachate solutes and 3 feetpile is more effective for efficientweathering than 5 feet pile (Guoet al., 2001). Aeration duringweathering fastens the process ofweathering by reducing the timefor biological activity within theSMS (Iteinemann et al., 2002).
8
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
CHAPTER - III
Recomposting of SMS
Studies have revealed thatSMS being rich in organic matteradds nutrients to the soils, helpsin neutralizing acidic soils,facilitates plant growth in barrenareas and in some cases, itimproves water quality along withbioremediation of contaminatedsoils/industrial sites. In order toimprove the physico-chemicalcharacteristics of SMS for its useas manure, followingrecomposting methods can beemployed.
1. RECOMPOSTING METHODS
a) Natural
In natural weathering process,the kachcha pit of 53 feet is filled
up to the top with SMS and leftfor natural recomposting processfor next 2 years (Fig. 6).
b) Aerobic
A perforated base is firstprepared in the bottom of akachcha pit of 53 feet with the helpof waste wooden material (Fig. 7).The perforated bottom of the pitis connected perpendicularly with2 inch diameter hollow plasticpipes placed at a distance of 12
feet. Holes of 0.5 inch diameterare also provided in the plasticpipes at a distance of 15 cm eachin a circular fashion. The pit isfilled with SMS up to the brim and
Fig. 6. SMS filled in a pit and left fordecomposition
Fig. 7. Perforated base of the pitconnected with hollow pipes
9
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
left for recomposting for a periodof 2 years (Fig. 8).
c) Anaerobic
In anaerobic process, thekachcha pit of 53 feet is filled withSMS upto the brim and is coveredwith 1 feet thick layer of normalsoil to create anaerobic conditionsand left as such for 2 years.
2. P H Y S I C O - C H E M I C A LPROPERTIES OFRECOMPOSTED SPENTMUSHROOM SUBSTRATE
a) Oyster and paddy strawmushroom spent substrate
The paddy straw mushroomspent substrate has pH in therange of 8.82 to 9.16; while oystermushroom spent substrate haspH between 6.51 to 7.69. Thevalues of electrical conductivity,
Fig. 8. Aerobic method of SMSrecomposting
total dissolved solids and nitrogencontent are lower in paddy strawmushroom spent substrate thanoyster mushroom spentsubstrate. The oyster mushroomSMS contains higher nitrogen(1.82%) as compared to paddystraw mushroom (1.06% to1.46%). The other nutrients likeorganic carbon and phosphate arehigher in paddy straw mushroomspent substrate than in oystermushroom spent substrate.However, contents of potassium,magnesium and calcium are atpar in two types of SMS. Theingredients used and method ofsubstrate preparation employedalways have bearing on theproperties of two types of SMS.
b) Effect of recompostingmethods on physico-chemical properties of oyster,button and paddy strawmushroom SMS
With the increasingrecomposting period, pHdecreases in SMS of allmushrooms, while conductivityincreases in oyster and paddystraw mushroom spent substratesbut not in button mushroomsubstrate. Nitrogen content,porosity, water holding capacity,total dissolved oxygen and
10
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
microbial count increase duringrecomposting by all the methodsin all the mushrooms. Thecontents of phosphorus,potassium, sodium, calcium,carbon, nitrate, total dissolvedsolids, particle density and bulkdensity decrease with the time inSMS of all mushrooms.Recomposting of SMS plays vitalrole in reducing the residue levelof various fungicides, insecticidesand heavy metals. Amongdifferent fungicides, insecticidesand heavy metals, residues ofonly carbendazim (Bavistin) anddeltamethrin (Decis) are detectedin the fresh SMS but not in sixmonths old weathered SMS.
c) Button mushroom SMS
i. Naturally weathered
In SMS samples of differentage, pH ranges between 6.72 in 9months old sample to maximumof 7.50 in 48 months old sample.Conductivity decreases with timeand it varies between lowest of0.24 mS cm-1 in 48 months oldsample and highest of 6.22 mScm-1 in 6 months old sample.Dissolved oxygen level and bulkdensity remain almost same inSMS of different age. Particledensity decreases with time with
lowest of 1.03 g cm-3 in 48 monthsold sample and highest in 12months old sample. Porosity andwater holding capacity varybetween 14.50% to 26.20% and28.00% to 41.00%, respectively indifferent samples withnonsignificant difference amongSMS of different age. Nitrogen,phosphorus, carbon and calciumdecrease continously withincreasing time of weathering.None of the SMS sample containssodium and lead. Nitrate contentalso decreases from 12.80 ppm in6 months old sample to 1.95 ppmin 48 months old sample (Table3).
ii. Button mushroom SMSrecomposted in a pit
The SMS recomposted in a pitof 53 feet shows more variation inits properties than SMS left assuch for open recomposting. Theparameters like pH, electricalconductivity, particle density,porosity and total dissolved solidsdecrease after 30 th day ofrecomposting. Bulk density andwater holding capacity remainconsistant up to 180th day. Thecontents of nitrogen, phosphorusand potassium increase after 30th
day, while carbon, sodium,calcium, chloride and nitrate
11
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
Table
3. Physic
o-c
hem
ical pro
pert
ies o
f butt
on m
ushro
om
SM
S o
f dif
fere
nt
age
S.N
oP
ara
mete
rPro
pert
ies o
f SM
S o
f dif
fere
nt
age (
Mon
ths)
69
12
24
36
48
1.
pH
7.3
06.7
27.2
07.4
56.9
07.5
0
2.
Con
du
cti
vit
y (
mS
cm
-1)
6.2
20.9
52.7
32.9
43.3
40.2
4
3.
Tota
l dis
solv
ed s
olids (
ppm
)2.7
00.4
62
2.0
30.1
41.7
20.1
1
4.
Dis
solv
ed o
xygen
(ppm
)0.6
40.5
40.5
60.6
40.6
30.8
4
5.
Bu
lk d
en
sit
y (
g c
m-3)
0.6
90.7
10.6
20.7
50.7
50.7
3
6.
Part
icle
den
sit
y (
g c
m-1)
1.2
02.0
02.5
01.5
71.2
01.0
3
7.
Poro
sit
y (
%)
25.8
014.5
015.2
015.9
020.8
026.2
0
8.
Wate
r h
old
ing c
apacit
y (
%)
41.0
030.0
028.0
032.0
036.0
038.0
0
9.
Nit
rogen
(%
)2.7
31.9
62.9
01.4
51.7
00.7
0
10.
Ph
osph
oru
s (
%)
0.3
10.2
00.2
00.1
70.1
60.1
0
11.
Pota
ssiu
m (
ppm
)31.4
00.0
011.7
00.0
016.0
00.0
0
12.
Carb
on
(%
)2.5
11.4
61.4
60.8
40.4
50.4
1
13.
Sodiu
m (
ppm
)0.0
00.0
00.0
00.0
00.0
00.0
0
14.
Calc
ium
(ppm
)0.5
60.5
80.4
10.3
40.5
20.2
7
15.
Lead (ppm
)0.0
00.0
00.0
00.0
00.0
00.0
0
16.
Ch
lori
de (
ppm
)46.5
00.8
620.0
01.4
514.1
01.5
4
17.
Nit
rate
(ppm
)12.8
04.3
19.9
02.4
38.9
21.9
5
Gu
pta
et
al.
, 2004
12
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
decrease. During 180 days ofrecomposting, significantchanges occur in EC, totaldissolved solids, bulk density,
porosity, water holding capacityand contents of potassium,carbon, sodium, calcium, chlorideand nitrate (Table 4).
Table 4. Physico-chemical properties of button mushroom SMS recomposted in apit for different durations
Parameter Properties of SMS recomposted for different duration (month)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
pH 8.41 8.03 7.67 7.30 7.27 7.17 7.15
Conductivity 7.50 5.09 4.64 3.44 1.08 0.18 0.14mmho cm-1
Nitrogen (%) 2.71 2.17 1.66 1.47 1.00 0.87 0.83
Phosphorus (%) 1.08 1.10 0.85 0.65 0.32 0.29 0.27
Potassium (ppm) 231.00 103.00 76.20 52.70 17.01 1.97 7.50
Sodium (ppm) 260.00 231.00 124.00 28.00 11.01 2.09 0.27
Carbon (%) 4.90 2.70 2.10 1.07 0.91 0.66 0.61
Calcium (ppm) 543.00 360.00 159.00 73.00 17.00 4.10 3.97
Chloride (ppm) 146.00 65.00 43.50 20.30 1.54 1.20 1.13
Nitrates (ppm) 12.80 6.56 4.19 2.30 2.51 2.10 2.07
Cadmium (ppm) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Lead (ppm) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total dissolved 1910.00 1263.00 613.00 409.00 247.00 93.0 0.81solids (ppm)
Dissolved oxygen 0.83 0.97 1.10 1.57 1.59 1.63 1.63(DO) (ppm)
Bulk density (g cm-3) 0.57 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.24 0.23 0.23
Particle density 2.20 2.00 1.67 1.97 1.97 1.70 1.70(g cm-3)
Porosity (%) 20.00 36.00 44.31 44.01 44.01 42.39 42.39
Moisture (%) 59.0 67.0 67.5 67.5 68.20 69.00 68.10
13
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
3. Button mushroom SMSrecomposted by differentmethods
Initially the pH increases andthen decreases after 30th day inall recomposting methods.Anaerobic recomposting of SMSleads to lower electricalconductivity (0.02 mS cm-1 to 0.49mS cm-1) in comparison to aerobicprocess (1.21 mS cm-1 to 4.62 mScm-1). Total dissolved solids alsodecrease (2740 ppm to 885 ppm)in aerobic SMS, while theseincrease in both anaerobic andnaturally weathered SMS. Theother parameters like bulkdensity, porosity and waterholding capacity increase with thetime in aerobic process, remainconstant in anaerobic processand show minor changes innatural recomposting process.The contents of nitrogen,potassium, carbon, sodium,calcium, chloride and nitratedecrease with the time in allprocesses of recomposting,however, the rate is fastest inanaerobic process followed byaerobic and then natural process.Phosphorus content shows anincrease with the time in aerobic/anaerobic processes, which is anexception in natural recompostingprocess, where it decreases with thetime (Table 5).
d) Microbiological properties
The bacterial population inspent mushroom substrateranges between lowest of 14.33 x10-7 in Volvariella volvacea (paddystraw mushroom) to highest of59.33 x 10-7 in oyster mushroomspent substrate. Spent substratefrom P. florida (oyster mushroom)harbours 5 to 23 fold higherfungal population than otherspent substrates. Among differentfungi, Trichoderma spp. followedby Aspergillus spp. and Mucorspp. dominate in different spentsubstrates. Trichodermadominates in all spent substrates,while Mucor in paddy strawmushroom and Aspergillus inboth paddy straw mushroom andoyster mushroom spentsubstrates.
e) Enzyme activity
Oyster mushroom spentsubstrate exhibits highest activityof exoglucanase, endoglucanaseand xylanase. The spentsubstrate from oyster mushroomalso shows higher activity oflaccase, manganese peroxidaseand arylalcohol oxidase incomparison of SMS of button andpaddy straw mushrooms. Buttonmushroom spent substrate showshigher activity of lignin peroxidaseonly (Ahlawat et al., 2004a).
14
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
Table
5.
Ph
ysic
o-c
hem
ical
pro
pert
ies of
butt
on
m
ush
room
SM
S re
com
poste
d by dif
fere
nt
meth
ods
S.N
o.Para
mete
rPh
ysic
o-c
hem
ical
pro
pert
ies o
f SM
S r
ecom
poste
d b
y d
iffe
ren
t m
eth
ods f
or
dif
fere
nt
dura
tion
(days)
Aero
bic
An
aero
bic
Natu
ral
015
30
45
60
15
30
45
60
15
30
45
60
1.
pH
8.3
08
.56
8.8
18
.13
8.0
08
.77
8.6
18
.12
8.2
27
.17
8.4
37
.88
8.1
9
2.
Con
du
cti
vit
y3
.51
4.6
21
.39
1.2
11
.55
0.0
20
.35
0.4
90
.49
0.3
20
.90
2.2
62
.28
(mS cm
-1)
3.
Tota
l2
74
0.0
01
23
0.0
06
82
.00
74
7.0
08
85
.00
8.8
02
03
.00
22
1.0
02
72
.00
53
.10
43
2.0
01
39
0.0
01
58
0.0
0d
issolv
ed
soli
ds (p
pm
)
4.
Dis
solv
ed
-0.1
80
.02
-0.1
0-0
.19
0.0
00
.00
-0.2
0-0
.09
0.0
0-0
.10
-0.0
9-0
.11
0.0
0oxygen
(p
pm
)
5.
Bulk
den
sit
y0
.22
0.3
00
.39
0.3
30
.35
0.2
50
.31
0.3
30
.38
0.2
80
.19
0.2
20
.22
(g cm
-3)
6.
Part
icle
10
.00
1.3
32
.50
0.9
10
.63
2.0
03
.33
1.4
21
.38
2.5
01
.67
2.0
01
.91
den
sit
y (
g c
m3)
7.
Poro
sit
y (%
)7
.80
52
.60
24
.40
73
.62
73
.62
37
.50
20
.72
47
.18
35
.30
28
.80
48
.50
39
.00
36
.25
8.
Wate
r2
0.0
02
0.0
03
3.3
04
1.1
84
9.0
04
0.0
02
3.0
73
3.3
33
5.2
52
0.0
04
4.4
45
4.5
55
2.6
0h
old
ing
capacit
y (%
)
9.
Nit
rogen
(%
)2
.10
2.1
01
.19
1.8
21
.23
1.7
51
.51
1.5
81
.14
2.0
31
.72
1.7
21
.44
10.
Ph
osph
oru
s0
.57
0.9
70
.94
1.0
51
.11
1.0
51
.30
1.2
41
.25
1.3
71
.20
1.1
41
.14
(%)
11.
Pota
ssiu
m1
38
.00
28
3.0
03
36
.00
41
.40
34
.60
23
6.0
07
2.7
01
8.3
01
9.6
02
56
.00
22
3.0
04
3.8
07
6.8
0(p
pm
)
12.
Carb
on
(%
)5
.43
5.3
45
.84
4.5
00
.60
5.7
05
.83
5.2
21
.50
5.5
25
.57
4.7
40
.60
13.
Sodiu
m4
02
.00
12
0.0
09
1.6
04
.46
0.0
00
.00
20
.40
0.0
00
.00
54
.00
61
.80
0.0
06
.85
(pp
m)
14.
Calc
ium
13
80
.00
19
.90
0.0
02
2.3
08
.12
70
.10
0.0
02
1.1
05
.46
22
.70
23
.80
30
.80
11
.70
(pp
m)
15.
Lead (p
pm
)0
.00
0.0
00
.00
0.0
00
.00
0.0
00
.00
0.0
00
.00
0.0
00
.00
0.0
00
.00
16.
Ch
lori
de
11
5.0
01
11
.00
56
.30
51
.00
21
.80
13
.30
15
.90
31
.00
17
.40
59
.50
30
.20
10
7.0
03
6.1
0(p
pm
)
17.
Nit
rate
(p
pm
)4
.80
13
.60
9.9
04
.92
10
.20
2.2
83
.18
0.4
84
.01
2.6
65
.38
11
.30
30
.80
15
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
CHAPTER - IV
Recycling of SMS
The addition of spentmushroom substrate in nutrientpoor soil improves its health byimproving the texture, waterholding capacity and nutrientstatus (Kaddous and Morgans,1986; Maher, 1991; Beyer, 1996).However, it reduces the soil’sthermal conductance, bulkdensity and water stableaggregates (>0.25 mm). Spentmushroom substrateincorporation in soil leads to anincrease in both pH as well as theorganic carbon content (Kaddousand Morgans, 1986). Theexperiments carried out forstudying the effect of SMS onseveral crops have shown that thedry matter content of plantsincreases with incorporation ofincreasing amount of weatheredor unweathered SMS in soil(Chong et al., 1987). Thephosphorus and potassiumrequirements of the crop plantscan be fully met by incorporating5% of SMS by volume, whilenitrogen requirement by 25% ofSMS by volume (Maher, 1991).
The mixing of spent mushroomsubstrate in soil has shown plantgrowth promoting activity inseveral plant species.
Spent mushroom substratenot only improves soil health butalso helps in the turfestablishment which, however,depends on the rate of SMSapplication in soil (Landschootand McNitt, 1994).
1) FARMERS’ INDIGENOUSKNOWLEDGE ABOUT USESOF SMS
Mushroom growers arerecycling spent mushroomsubstrate naturally and using itin agricultural and horticulturalcrops as manure at their own.They have gained a lot ofexperience in it and are sharingtheir knowledge within a specifiedlocality. The data collected atNRCM, Solan (HP) reveals thatSMS is being used as manure inseveral crops viz. capsicum,tomato, cauliflower, pea, potato,ginger, garlic, wheat, paddy,
16
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
maize and apple (Table 6). Widevariation exists in age of SMSapplied in different crops and itranges between 0 month (fresh)to 3 years old. Similarly, quantityof SMS applied also varies betweena minimum 4.75q ha -1 tomaximum 1000 q ha-1 in fieldcrops and 4-6 kg pl-1 in apple.
Spent compost also improvesthe physical and chemicalstructure of the soil. Mushroomgrowers have the observation thatspent compost considerablyincreases the level of soil fertility,water holding capacity, porosityand texture on applying asmanure.
Both mushroom growers andresearchers have noticed that theapplication of SMS in soilenhances the crop yield andmanages diseases in agriculturaland horticultural crops, inaddition to improvement in soilphysical conditions. On the basisof empirical data and experiencesgained during the process ofverification and refinement of ITKsabout use of SMS as manure incrops; it can be concluded thatSMS should be decomposed foratleast 12 months either bynatural weathering in pits oraerobic/anaerobic recomposting
instead of disposing off in openon road side. Similarly, the dosesof recomposted SMS for variouscrops should be worked out onthe basis of total nutrient (N.P.K.)requirement of the respective cropand the nutrient status of thesoil/SMS. The recomposted SMScan be used singly as basalapplication or in combinationwith inorganic fertilizers.
2) RESEARCHERS’ OUTCOME
a) Horticulture
Spent mushroom substratemakes the soil suitable for raisingvegetables (Kaddous andMorgans, 1986). Suitabletreatments of SMS like rapid saltleaching (Chong et al., 1991) andweathering in open for two to threeyears make SMS more suitablefor either complete or partialsubstitution of growing media forflowers, vegetables, fruits,saplings, ornamental shrubs andother horticultural plants ofeconomic importance (Beyer,1996) (Table 6). The spentmushroom substrate being richin N, P and K, acts as a goodgrowing medium for vegetableslike cucumber, tomato (Fig. 9),broccoli, tulip, cauliflower,peppers, spinach etc., but the
17
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
response of the plants vary atdifferent levels of SMSincorporation. There are variedreports available regarding theeffect of SMS on plant growth andyield of vegetables, but the studycarried out at National ResearchCentre for Mushroom, Solan (HP)for the last 4 years has showndefinite advantage with SMS. Inearlier studies also theincorporation of spent mushroomsubstrate @ 25% and 37.5% withthe growing medium has showngrowth promoting effect onlettuce, marigold and tomato.There is a long list of vegetablesviz; Cucurbita pepo, Capsicum
annuum, spring broccoli, autumnbroccoli, aubergines, sweet corncv. Seneca gold, snapbeans(Phaseolus vulgaris) cv. provinderand Pennisetum glaucum cv.
HGM–100, which show enhancedyield on amendment of the soilwith SMS. However, the agedmushroom compost is preferableover the fresh compost (Lohr andCoffey, 1987). The use of SMS asmanure has also been found toincrease the quality of the producein several crops. In a study, 50tha-1 of SMS incorporation in soilgave the maximum yield of onionbulbs with higher content of P,K, Ca and Mg in the bulbs(Wisniewska and Penkiewicz,1989) and in tomato it improvedthe firmness and ascorbic acidcontent (Dundar et al., 1995).
Besides vegetables,greenhouse and nursery crops,the woody ornamental and foragecrops including, Cotoneaster
dammeri cv Coral Beauty, Deutzia
gracilis, Cornus alba, Argenteo
marginata, Forsythia x intermedia
cv. Lynwood, Juniperus sabina
cv. Blue Danube, J. virginiana cv.Hetzii, Physocarpus opulifolius,
Potentilla fruticosa cv. Red Ace,Ligustrum vulgare, Rosa indica cv.John Franklin, Weigela cv. BristolRuby and W. florida cv. VariegataNana also show good growth indifferent levels (33%, 67% &100%) of SMS mixed with bark(Chong and Rinker, 1994). In
Fig. 9. Tomato crop raised on SMSamended soil
18
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
addition to the above mentionedplant species, spent mushroomsubstrate also increases the totalspear FW and number m-2 inwhite asparagus (Pill et al., 1993),while total height in mountainpersimmon (Diospyros oldhamii)as well as non-astringentpersimmon (D. kaki) cv. Fuyu(Nee et al., 1994). The fresh SMSproperly sized by sieving, leachedof salts and blended withvermiculture acts as an idealgrowth medium for plants andoffers exceptional aeration,porosity, water holding capacityand nitrogen. It acts as aconceivable alternate to peat insoil less mixer (Romaine andHolcomb, 2001). The researchcarried out in this direction atNRCM, Solan has also shown veryencouraging results with respectto effect of SMS on plant growth,fruit yield and quality along withdiseases management (Ahlawat etal., 2004b, 2005a, 2005b, 2006a,2007a, 2007b; Dev Raj et al.,2005). The detailed findings ofwork carried out with differentcrops is presented in the followingtext.
i) TOMATO (Lycopersiconesculentum):
Amendment of aerable landwith 18.5 ton ha-1 of 6-24 months
old naturally weathered SMSfollowed by recommendedpackage of practices leads to farsuperior vegetative growth ofplants and yield of 746q ha-1 (Fig.10) in comparison to tomato yieldof 456.53q ha-1 in FYM mixed soil.Similarly, the mixing of soil with12 months old anaerobicallyrecomposted SMS leads tosuperior tomato yield of 658.89 qha-1 to that of FYM (547.04qha-1).
Fig. 10. Tomato crop raised on SMSamended soil
Mixing of soil withanaerobically recomposted SMSalso enhances the tomato quality(Fig. 11) with respect to superiorfruit weight (59.32 g), ascorbicacid content (33.89 mg g-100 freshweight), dry matter (8.40%), totalsoluble solids (TSS, 5.17 oBrix) &acidity (2.05%).
19
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
Anaerobically recompostedSMS as manure in tomato crop isfound to lower incidences ofblossom end rot, buck eye rot andleaf curl with no effect on fruitborer incidence (Fig. 12).
Fig. 11. Quality fruits on tomato plants
Fig. 12. Fruit borer infestation on tomatocrop
Fig. 14. Capsicum raised on SMS amendedsoil
ii) SHIMLA MIRCH (Capsicumannuum)
Amendment of aerable landwith 25 ton ha-1 of 6-18 monthsold naturally weathered SMS
enhances plant growth (49 cm)and fruit yield (171 q ha-1) (Fig.13) in comparison to farm yardmanure (152.53 q ha-1) and therecommended dose of fertilizers.Similarly, the amendment of
Fig. 13. Effect of SMS on plant growth ofCapsicum
aerable land with 12 months oldaerobically recomposted SMSfollowed by recommendedpackage of practices leads to farsuperior plants growth (51 cm)and fruit yield of 212.27 q ha-1
(Fig. 14).
20
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
Amendment of soil with 12months old naturally weatheredSMS also enhances the fruitquality with respect to fruit length(53.74 mm), fruit width (44.15mm), dry matter (9.40%), totalsoluble solids (4.82 oBrix) &ascorbic acid content (23.70 mgg-100 fresh weight). Similarly theaerobically recomposted SMS alsostimulates the quality of the fruitswith respect to their length (51.08mm), width (43.48 mm), drymatter (9.41%), total solublesolids (4.80 oBrix) & ascorbic acidcontent (25.37 mg g-100 freshweight).
Amendment of soil with 24months old naturally weatheredand aerobically recomposted SMSalso leads to 2-4% lower incidenceof fruit rot, 15-20% lowerincidence of chilli veinal mottlevirus and about 4% lessergrasshopper attack on plants incomparison to recommended doseof fertilizers and FYM.
iii) PEA (Pisum sativum)
Amendment of aerable landwith 12 months old anaerobicallyrecomposted SMS @ 20 ton ha-1
enhances plant height to 110.50cm and pod yield to 120.26qha-1 (Fig. 15) in comparison of pod
yield of 92.40q ha-1 in FYM mixedsoil.
Anaerobically recompostedSMS also improves the quality ofpea (Fig. 16) with respect to itscontents of protein (4.88%),ascorbic acid (11.90mg g-100 offresh weight), dry matter (73.80%)
Fig. 15. Healthy crop of pea on SMSamended soil
Fig. 16. Quality pea pods on plants grownof SMS amended soil
21
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
and total soluble solids (16.9o
Brix).
The mixing of SMS alsoreduces Fusarium wilt andpowdery mildew score incidencesby 3-4 folds both on plants andthe pods.
iv) CAULIFLOWER (Brassicaoleracea L. var. botrytis)
The mixing of 12 months oldanaerobically recomposted SMS@ 25 ton ha-1 along with chemicalfertilizers in nutritionally poor soilbefore transplantation of theseedlings followed byrecommended package ofpractices enhances the vegetativegrowth (Fig. 17) and total yield ofcauliflower (186.56 q ha-1) incomparison to yield obtained fromFYM manured field (119.35 qha-1).
Mixing of 12 months oldanaerobically recomposted SMSalong with chemical fertilizersleads to superior stalk length(5.10 cm), curd length (12.25 cm),curd dia (15.17cm), dry matter(7.84%), ascorbic acid content(57.60mg g-100 fresh weight) andcurd appearance (Fig. 18).
Fig. 17. Cauliflower raised on SMS mixedaerable soil
Fig. 18. Superior quality curd ofcauliflower on SMS amended plot
The extent of incidence of blackrot (Fig. 19) and caterpillar arelowered by 60% and 40%,respectively in anaerobicallyrecomposted SMS manured soilin comparison to FYM mixedplots.
22
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
The mixing of 18 months oldae rob i ca l l y/anae rob i ca l l yrecomposted SMS along withchemical fertilizers not onlystimulates the yield but alsoenhances the quality with respectto rhizome length (10.20cm),breadth (5.15cm), thickness(3.1cm), dry matter (15.83%),total soluble solids (6.0 oBrix),fibre (4.54%) and non-solublesolids (NSS) (9.49%).
Lowest rhizome rotting occursin FYM and anaerobicallyrecomposted SMS, followed byaerobic and natural SMSamendments as compared to therecommended dose of fertilizers.
vi) ONION (Allium cepa L.)
The mixing of 12 months oldanaerobically recomposted SMS +chemical fertilizers @ 25 ton ha-1
v) ZINGER (Zingiber officinale)
The amendment ofnutritionally poor soil with 30-32ton ha -1 of 18 months oldaerobically recomposted SMS +chemical fertilizers enhancesplant growth (Figs. 20a & 20b)and ginger yield upto 144.44q ha-
1 in comparison to 120.9q ha-1 inFYM mixed field.
Fig. 19. Diseased plant from FYM mixedplot
Fig. 20a. Healthy crop of ginger raised onSMS mixed soil
Fig. 20b. Enhanced plant growth in SMSamended plots
23
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
in aerable land stimulates thevegetative growth (38.49 cm) andthe yield of onion bulbs (222.00qha -1) in comparison to FYM(148.00q ha-1) and recommendeddose of fertilizers (206.00q ha-1)(Fig. 21).
recomposted SMS @ 25 ton ha-1
enhances the growth of the plants(Fig. 22) as well as the fruit yield(251.42q ha-1) in comparison toFYM manured plots (236.66 qha-1).
The amendment of soil withanaerobically recomposted SMSalong with chemical fertilizersleads to an enhancement inquality parameters of onion bulbswith respect to length (4.30 cm),diameter (5.55 cm), total solublesolids (12.3 oBrix), dry mat t e r(17.46%), pyruvic acid (0.416) andascorbic acid (29.45) contents incomparison to FYM andrecommended dose of fertilizers.
vii) BRINJAL (Solanummelongena)
The mixing of 12 and 24months old anaerobically
The fruits obtained from SMSmixed plots, FYM andrecommended dose of fertilizers donot vary in quality with respectto their size and weight.
b) Cereal Crops
Studies have been conductedon several crops, out of whichmaize has shown promisingresults in most of the studies. Inone case, SMS incorporation @100, 200 and 400 tons (Freshweight) ac-1 in nutrient poor soillike silty clay loam, shows positiveeffect on the silage and grain yieldof corn crop. The silage
Fig. 21. Onion crop on SMS amended plotsFig. 22. Brinjal crop raised on using SMSas manure
24
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
production in this case increasesby 33% to 68% depending uponthe weather conditions after SMSincorporation. Similarly, thegrain yield is also influenced byweather conditions. None of thestudies has shown any adverseeffect on quality of the groundwater and run off, and the qualityof water matches with water fromthe non fertigated plots (Wuestand Fahy, 1991).
The amount of protein instover and grains increases withSMS incorporation in the fieldand in study carried out by Wuestet al., (1995), the grain as well asstover were found to containsignificantly higher level ofnitrogen. The incorporation ofSMS along with peat stimulatesthe growth of diazotrophs in thefield (Gronborg, 1990). Further,annual incorporation of SMS upto90 kg m-2 area has not been foundto degrade the quality of surfacewater, and the run-off has beenfound to contain very low amountof ammonia-N, biological oxygendemand (BOD) and chloride. Thestudy carried out with wheat(Triticum aestivum) at NationalResearch Centre for Mushroom,Solan (HP) has also shownencouraging results.
i) WHEAT (Triticum aestivum)
Field application of 12 monthsold anaerobically recompostedSMS + basal dose of chemicalfertilizers (Urea, DAP and Murateof Potash) enhances vegetativegrowth of plants (86.60cm) andyield (49.80q ha-1) of wheat (Fig.23) in comparison (35.20q ha-1)to FYM mixed plots.
Amendment of soil with 12months old anaerobicallyrecomposted SMS + chemicalfertilizers stimulates the earquality with respect to length (cm),no of grains ear-1, test weight ofgrains (gm) and grain: straw ratioin comparison to control and FYMmixed treatments.
Fig. 23. Wheat crop raised using differentSMS treatments
25
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
c) Mushrooms
Production of second crop ofmushroom from the spentsubstrate can prove more efficientutilization of the substrateingredients and can alsoameliorate the problem of solidwaste disposal in the mushroomindustry (Fahy and Wuest, 1984).Re-spawning of Agaricus spentcompost together with theaddition of spawn mate (delayed- release nutrient) and Bonapartepeat (adsorbent material) can givegood yield of second Agaricus
crop.
The shiitake spent mushroomsubstrate supplemented with 10%wheat bran and 10% millet canbe utilized for Pleurotus sajor-caju
cultivation, after air -drying,grinding, supplementation,pasteurization and spawning ofspent substrate. In one casehigher yield of P.sajor-caju (79%Biological Efficiency) was obtainedby supplementing the spentshiitake basal medium with 12%soybean and 1.0% CaCO
3 (Royse,
1993).
Another use of SMS inmushroom cultivation is as casingmaterial for button mushroom.The use of aerobically fermented
spent mushroom substrate ascasing material gives mushroomyield at par with peat basedcasing material with anadditional advantage of lessbacterial blotch (Pseudomonas
tolaasii) infection on fruitingbodies than those from peat-basedcasing material (Szmidt, 1994;Ahlawat and Vijay, 2004). Thecasing prepared from SMS, EDTAand peat has also been foundmost productive (Sharma et al.,1999).
Casing of button mushroombags with one year old aerobicallyrecomposted SMS supports about2-3 days early crop of buttonmushroom (Fig. 24) along withmushroom yield at par with coirpith and superior than 2 year oldFYM with non-significantdifferences in fruiting body
Fig. 24. Button mushroom crop using SMSbased casing
26
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
Table
6.
Respon
se o
f dif
fere
nt
pla
nt
specie
s t
ow
ard
s d
iffe
ren
t doses a
nd a
ge o
f SM
S
Cro
pA
ge o
f SM
SQ
uan
tity
Impact
Sourc
e o
f in
form
ati
on
(q h
a-1)
Yie
ldQ
uali
tyD
iseases/
insect-
pests
Capsic
um
6-1
2 m
on
ths
100-1
50
Incre
ased
NR
Norm
al
Mu
sh
room
gro
wers
6 m
on
ths m
ixed
125
Incre
ased
Norm
al
wit
h F
YM
24-3
6 m
on
ths
25-3
7.5
Incre
ased
Decre
ased
24 m
on
ths
250
Incre
ased
NR
Tom
ato
0-6
mon
ths
100 -125
Incre
ased
NR
No d
iseases
Mu
sh
room
gro
wers
6 m
on
ths m
ixed
125
Incre
ased
Norm
al
wit
h F
YM
2-6
mon
ths
12.5
Incre
ased
NR
24 m
on
ths
250
Incre
ased
NR
24-3
6 m
on
ths
25-3
7.5
Incre
ased
Decre
ased
Cau
lifl
ow
er
6 m
on
ths m
ixed
125
Incre
ased
NR
Norm
al
Mu
sh
room
gro
wers
wit
h F
YM
6-1
2 m
on
ths
100-1
25
Incre
ased
Decre
ased
24-3
6 m
on
ths
25-3
7.5
Incre
ased
NR
Gin
ger
2-6
mon
ths
25
Incre
ased
NR
Decre
ased
Mu
sh
room
gro
wers
6 m
on
ths
100-1
25
Incre
ased
Incre
ased
12 m
on
ths
250
Incre
ased
Incre
ased
18 m
on
ths
37.5
-50
Incre
ased
Decre
ased
Garl
ic1 m
on
th312.5
Incre
ased
NR
Incre
ased
Mu
sh
room
gro
wers
6 m
on
ths
100-1
25
Incre
ased
Incre
ased
12 m
on
ths
62.5
-75
Incre
ased
Norm
al
Wh
eat
2-3
mon
ths
87.5
Incre
ased
NR
NR
Mu
sh
room
gro
wers
1-6
mon
ths
125-1
50
Incre
ased
Decre
ased
6 m
on
ths
25 -
37.5
Incre
ased
Decre
ased
4 m
on
ths
12.5
Incre
ased
Decre
ased
7-8
mon
ths
4.7
5-1
2.5
Incre
ased
Decre
ased
12 m
on
ths
250
Incre
ased
NR
27
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
Cro
pA
ge o
f SM
SQ
uan
tity
Impact
Sourc
e o
f in
form
ati
on
(q h
a-1)
Yie
ldQ
uali
tyD
iseases/
insect-
pests
12 m
on
ths
12.5
-37.5
Incre
ased
Decre
ased
12 m
on
ths
11.2
5In
cre
ased
Decre
ased
Maiz
e0-6
mon
ths
50-1
50
Incre
ased
NR
No d
iseases
Mu
sh
room
gro
wers
2-6
mon
ths
4.3
75
Incre
ased
Decre
ased
6 M
on
ths
25-3
7.5
Incre
ased
Decre
ased
12 m
on
ths
11.2
5In
cre
ased
Decre
ased
12 m
on
ths
62.5
-75
Incre
ased
Norm
al
24-3
6 m
on
ths
25-3
7.5
Incre
ased
Decre
ased
3-1
5 m
on
ths
10
Incre
ased
NR
12 m
on
ths
250
Incre
ased
NR
Paddy
Fre
sh
62.5
Incre
ased
NR
Decre
ased
Mu
sh
room
gro
wers
1 m
on
th62.5
Incre
ased
Incre
ased
12 m
on
ths
12.5
-37.5
Incre
ased
Decre
ased
1-2
mon
ths
125
Incre
ased
Decre
ased
Pota
to0-6
mon
ths
18.7
5In
cre
ased
NR
NR
Mu
sh
room
gro
wers
6 m
on
ths
100-1
25
Incre
ased
Decre
ased
4 m
on
ths
12.5
Incre
ased
Decre
ased
12 m
on
ths
250
Incre
ased
Decre
ased
24 m
on
ths
100
Incre
ased
Norm
al
Pea
0-6
mon
ths
100
Incre
ased
NR
No d
iseases
Mu
sh
room
gro
wers
6 m
on
ths
100-1
25
Incre
ased
Decre
ased
12 m
on
ths
62.5
-75
Incre
ased
Norm
al
12 m
on
ths
93.7
5N
orm
al
Norm
al
12 m
on
ths
250
Incre
ased
NR
Apple
1 m
on
th5-6
kg p
l-1
Norm
al
Norm
al
Mu
sh
room
gro
wers
5 m
on
ths
4 k
g p
l-1
Incre
ased
Norm
al
8-1
2 m
on
ths
4-6
kg p
l-1
Incre
ased
Decre
ased
Cu
cu
mber,
Vari
ed a
ge
Vari
ed d
ose
En
han
ced
NR
NR
Beyer,
1996
Tom
ato
,
28
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
Cro
pA
ge o
f SM
SQ
uan
tity
Impact
Sourc
e o
f in
form
ati
on
(q h
a-1)
Yie
ldQ
uali
tyD
iseases/
insect-
pests
Bro
ccoli,
Tu
lip,
Cau
liflow
er,
Pepper,
Spin
ach
Lett
uce,
Mari
-A
ged m
ush
room
25-3
7.5
% o
fE
nh
an
ced
NR
NR
Loh
r an
d C
off
ey,
1987
gold
, Tom
ato
com
post
the g
row
ing
mediu
m
Cu
cu
rbit
a pepo,
Vari
ed a
ge
Vari
ed d
ose
En
han
ced
NR
NR
Mayn
ard
, 1994; S
teff
en
Ca
psic
um
an
nu
um
,et
al.,
1994;
Rh
oads
Spri
ng b
roccoli,
an
d
Ols
on
, 1995
Au
tum
n b
roccoli,
Au
berg
ines, S
weet
corn
, S
napbean
s,
Pen
nis
etu
m g
lau
cu
m
On
ion
Aged S
MS
500
NR
Hig
her
NR
Wis
nie
wska a
nd
con
ten
tPen
kie
wic
z, 1
989
of
P,
K,
Ca
an
d M
g
Tom
ato
Bu
tton
NR
NR
Impro
ved
Restr
icte
dD
un
dar
et
al., 1995;
mu
sh
room
firm
ness
root
kn
ot
Verm
a, 1986
SM
San
din
festa
tion
ascorb
ic a
cid
Woody
NR
33, 67, 100%
Su
peri
or
NR
NR
Ch
on
g a
nd R
inker,
1994
orn
am
en
tal
mix
ed w
ith
gro
wth
an
d fora
ge c
rops
bark
Wh
ite
NR
NR
NR
Tota
l spear
NR
Pill
et
al., 1993
aspara
gu
sFW
an
dn
um
ber
m-2
29
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
Cro
pA
ge o
f SM
SQ
uan
tity
Impact
Sourc
e o
f in
form
ati
on
(q h
a-1)
Yie
ldQ
uali
tyD
iseases/
insect-
pests
Mou
nta
inN
RN
RTota
l h
eig
ht
NR
NR
Nee e
t a
l., 1994
pers
imm
on
,N
on
-astr
igen
tpers
imm
on
Apple
Spra
yin
g w
ith
Weekly
an
dN
RN
RC
on
trols
Yoh
ale
m e
t a
l., 1994
aqu
eou
s e
xtr
act
biw
eekly
apple
scab
of
SM
S
Tom
ato
6-2
4 m
on
ths
185
En
han
ced
Su
peri
or
Lesser
NR
CM
, S
ola
nn
atu
rally w
eath
ere
dpla
nt
gro
wth
qu
ali
tydis
eases a
nd
an
d 1
2 m
on
ths
an
d f
ruit
yie
ldin
sect-
pests
an
aero
bic
ally
infe
sta
tion
recom
poste
d
Sh
imla
mir
ch
6-1
8 m
on
ths
250
En
han
ced
Su
peri
or
2-2
0%
low
er
NR
CM
, S
ola
n(C
apsic
um
)n
atu
rally w
eath
ere
dpla
nt
gro
wth
qu
ali
tydis
eases a
nd
an
d 1
2 m
on
ths
an
d f
ruit
yie
ldin
sect-
pests
aero
bic
ally
infe
sta
tion
recom
poste
d
Pea
12 m
on
ths
200
En
han
ced
Su
peri
or
3-4
fold
sN
RC
M,
Sola
nan
aero
bic
ally
pla
nt
gro
wth
qu
ali
tylo
wer
dis
eases
recom
poste
dan
d p
od y
ield
incid
en
ce
Cau
lifl
ow
er
12 m
on
ths
250
En
han
ced
Su
peri
or
40-6
0%
low
er
NR
CM
, S
ola
nan
aero
bic
ally
pla
nt
gro
wth
qu
ali
tydis
eases a
nd
recom
poste
d S
MS
an
d c
urd
yie
ldin
sect-
pests
+ c
hem
ical
fert
iliz
ers
infe
sta
tion
Zin
ger
18 m
on
ths
300-3
20
En
han
ced
Su
peri
or
Lesser
rott
ing
NR
CM
, S
ola
naero
bic
ally
pla
nt
gro
wth
qu
ali
tyof
rhiz
om
ere
com
poste
d S
MS
an
d r
hiz
om
e+ c
hem
ical
fert
iliz
ers
yie
ld
30
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
Cro
pA
ge o
f SM
SQ
uan
tity
Impact
Sourc
e o
f in
form
ati
on
(q h
a-1)
Yie
ldQ
uali
tyD
iseases/
insect-
pests
On
ion
12 m
on
ths
250
En
han
ced
Su
peri
or
NR
NR
CM
, S
ola
nan
aero
bic
ally
pla
nt
gro
wth
qu
ali
tyre
com
poste
d S
MS
an
d b
ulb
yie
ld+ c
hem
ical
fert
iliz
ers
Bri
nja
l12-2
4 m
on
ths
250
En
han
ced
Su
peri
or
NR
NR
CM
, S
ola
nan
aero
bic
ally
pla
nt
gro
wth
qu
alt
iyre
com
poste
d S
MS
an
d f
ruit
yie
ld
Wh
eat
12 m
on
ths
300 q
+E
nh
an
ced
Su
peri
or
NR
NR
CM
, S
ola
nan
aero
bic
ally
ch
em
ical
pla
nt
gro
wth
qu
alt
iyre
com
poste
dfe
rtiliz
ers
an
d g
rain
yie
ldS
MS
+ c
hem
ical
(N,
P,
K @
fert
iliz
ers
80 k
g, 60 k
g,
50 k
g h
a-1)
Maiz
eFre
sh
1000-4
000
En
han
ced
Su
peri
or
NR
Wu
est
an
d F
ah
y,
1991
silage a
nd
pro
tein
gra
in
yie
ldcon
ten
t in
silage a
nd
gra
ins
Wh
ite b
utt
on
Bu
tton
Fu
llG
ood s
econ
dN
RN
RF
ah
y a
nd W
uest,
1984
mu
sh
room
mu
sh
room
SM
Scro
p+ s
paw
n m
ate
an
d b
on
apart
e p
eat
Oyste
r m
ush
room
Sh
iita
ke
Fu
llG
ood y
ield
NR
NR
Royse, 1993
mu
sh
room
waste
+ 1
0%
wh
eat
bra
n+ 1
0%
mille
t
31
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
Cro
pA
ge o
f SM
SQ
uan
tity
Impact
Sourc
e o
f in
form
ati
on
(q h
a-1)
Yie
ldQ
uali
tyD
iseases/
insect-
pests
Oyste
rS
hii
take
Fu
ll79%
BE
NR
NR
Royse, 1993
mu
sh
room
mu
sh
room
waste
+ 1
2%
soyabean
+1%
CaC
O3
Bu
tton
Aero
bic
ally
As c
asin
gM
ush
room
NR
Low
er
bacte
rial
Szm
idt,
1994
mu
sh
room
ferm
en
ted S
MS
yie
ld a
t par
blo
tch
in
fecti
on
wit
h p
eat
Bu
tton
SM
S +
ED
TA
As c
asin
gS
uperi
or
NR
Low
er
bacte
rial
Sh
arm
a e
t a
l., 1999
mu
sh
room
+ p
eat
mu
sh
room
blo
tch
in
fecti
on
yie
ld
Bu
tton
Aero
bic
ally
As c
asin
gE
arl
y a
nd
NR
Low
er
dry
bu
bble
NR
CM
, S
ola
nm
ush
room
ferm
en
ted S
MS
mu
sh
room
infe
cti
on
yie
ld a
t par
wit
h c
oir
pit
h
32
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
weight. The SMS based casingalso lowers dry bubble diseaseincidence in comparison to coirpith.
d) Bioremediation ofcontaminated soil
The uncontrolled release ofindustrial wastes in the open andpoor availability of pre-treatmentfacilities contribute towards theincreased level of contaminants inthe soil. The degradation of thesecontaminants mainly dependsupon the physical and chemicalconditions of the soil and thenature of microorganisms thrivein the soil. In addition to being arich nutrient source for variousfield crops, spent mushroomsubstrate originated fromdifferent edible mushroomspossesses unique physico-chemical and biologicalproperties, which make SMS anideal bioremediative agent forvarious environmental protectionactivities. SMS adsorbs theorganic and inorganic pollutantsand harbours diverse category ofmicrobes, which have thecapability of biological break downof the organic xenobioticcompounds. The microbes,especially actinomycetes(Streptomyces sp. and
Thermomonospora sp.) present inspent mushroom substrate alsohave strong pollutantscatabolizing capabilities whichresult in decreased level ofpollutants in contaminated soilafter incubation with SMS(Ahlawat et al., 2007c) (Table 7).
In laboratory experiments, themixing of pentachlorophenol(PCP) contaminated sterile soilwith aliquotes of spent sawdustcultures of shiitake mushroom,supplemented with nutrientsolution of glucose, thiamine andmineral salt result indisappearance of about 44.4-60.5% of pentachlorophenol in21 days of incubation. (Okekeet al., 1993). However, duringthe same incubation period,Buswell (1995) reported 50%break down of PCP on mixing ofspent shiitake substrate withsterile PCP contaminated soil. Theaddition of spent oystermushroom substrate incontaminated soil also results in50% to 87% reduction in 3-ringcompounds in first 12 weeks ofaddition and these furtherincrease to 87% to 99% on re-inoculation of SMS followed byfurther incubation for 3 weeks.The effect on 4-ring compound isless and it ranges between 34 to
33
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
43%, which again increases to51% to 59% on re-inoculation ofSMS after 12 weeks of firstaddition (Leopold, 2002). Thespent mushroom substrate alsohas the decontaminationpotential for land sites used fordisposal of hazardous wastes(Buswell, 1994). Similar studiesbut with diverse category ofchemicals were conducted byFermor et al. (2000) and reporteda significant potential of phase IIcompost in remediation of landscontaminated with xenobioticpollutants like chlorophenols(PCP), polycyclic aromatichydrocarbons (PAHS) andaromatic monomers. The crudeand partially purified extract fromSMS also degrade variety of dyesand it has found uses as ableaching and deinking aide (Fig.25) during recycling of paper
waste (Hanson, 2002; Ahlawat et
al., 2006b).
The second category ofchemical contaminants affectingthe soil are the man madefungicides, herbicides andinsecticides, which are being inuse for protecting the crops fromdifferent categories of pathogens,competitors and pests. Fivepercent, W/W spent mushroomcompost incorporation in soilhaving 5 ppm alachlorconcentration, increases thealachlor disappearance andprotects garden pea cv. Taichungfrom root injury. It has also beenobserved that SMS stimulates themicrobial population (108-109)and maintains it for 28 days. Thestimulated microbial populationof Aspergillus sp., Penicillium sp.,Trichoderma sp., Aeromonas sp.and Bacillus sp., has been foundto degrade alachlor within 7 daysof incubation under in vitro
conditions (Huang et al., 1995,1996).
Use of spent mushroomsubstrate also stabilizes theabandoned mine sites, pipelineconstruction sites andcommercial/industrial sites. Themixing of SMS in soil degradesdifferent pesticides at varied rates
Fig. 25. Laboratory study for dyesdecolourization by using enzyme extractfrom SMS
34
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
with the involvement of physicalstructure of SMS and microbes itharbours.
i) Bioremediation of pesticides:
The mixing of spentmushroom substrate @ 10, 20 &30%, w/w in soil, results in fasterdegradation of Decis, Malathion,Bavistin and Mancozeb incomparison to soil without anyamendment of SMS. Mixing ofsoil @ 30% gives best results andthe effect is at par in 20% SMSamendment treatment (Fig. 26).
degradation occurs at much fasterrate and it reaches to undetectablelimit after 5 months of SMSapplication. In case of fungicidesalso (Carbendazim andMancozeb), maximumdegradation occurs on 30% SMSmixing. The residue level ofcarbendazim reduces to 6% of itsinitial concentration after 6months of SMS mixing in soil.Twenty percent SMS mixing givesresults at par with 30% SMStreatment. The degradation ofMancozeb occurs at a faster ratein 20% SMS treatment. In control,degradation of different pesticidesoccurs at slower rate and is farless as compared to SMSincorporated soil.
During the study, thelignolytic enzymes have beenfound to play major role inpesticides bioremediation. Amongdifferent microflora of SMS,Trichoderma sp., Aspergillus sp.,Mucor sp. and B-I bacterial isolatepossess higher pesticidesbiodegradation potential under invitro conditions. Thebioremediation of pesticides insterilized SMS occurs at a veryslow rate as compared to pure ormixed inoculum of different fungior bacteria (Gupta et al., 2006a;Ahlawat et al., 2007c)
Fig. 26. Experiment on pesticidesbiodegradation by using SMS
The concentration ofinsecticides (Malathion andDeltamethrin) reduces to just halfof its initial concentration justafter one month of SMS mixingand to negligible level after sixmonths of SMS mixing. However,in Decis (deltamethrin), the
35
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
Table
7.
Addit
ion
al
advan
tages o
f usin
g S
MS i
n d
iffe
ren
t ty
pes o
f soil
s
Type o
f soil
/w
aste
Type o
f SM
SA
dvan
tage
Sourc
e o
f in
form
ati
on
Ara
ble
soil
Bu
tton
mu
sh
room
SM
SE
nh
an
ced f
ert
ilit
y l
evel, w
ate
r h
old
ing
Mu
sh
room
gro
wers
capacit
y,
poro
sit
y a
nd s
oil t
extu
re
Nu
trie
nt
poor
soil
Bu
tton
mu
sh
room
SM
SE
nh
an
ced t
extu
re,
wate
r h
old
ing
Kaddou
s n
ad M
org
an
s,
capacit
y a
nd n
utr
ien
t sta
tus
1886; M
ah
er,
1991;
Beyer,
1996
Nu
trie
nt
poor
soil
Bu
tton
mu
sh
room
SM
SE
nh
an
ced p
H a
nd o
rgan
ic c
arb
on
,K
addou
s n
ad M
org
an
s,
wh
ile r
edu
ced t
herm
al con
du
cta
nce a
nd
1886
bu
lk d
en
sit
y
Pen
tach
loro
ph
en
ol
Sh
iita
ke s
pen
t su
bstr
ate
44.4
-60%
bre
akdow
n o
f PC
PO
keke e
t a
l., 1993)
con
tam
inate
d s
oils
Pen
tach
loro
ph
en
ol
Sh
iita
ke s
pen
t su
bstr
ate
50%
bre
akdow
n o
f PC
PB
usw
ell, 1995
con
tam
inate
d s
oils
Th
ree a
nd 4
-rin
gO
yste
r m
ush
room
spen
t50-8
7%
redu
cti
on
in
3-r
ing a
nd
Leopold
, 2002
com
pou
nds
su
bstr
ate
34-4
3%
redu
cti
on
in
4 r
ing
con
tam
inate
d s
oils
com
pou
nds
Lan
d s
ites u
sed f
or
Bu
tton
mu
sh
room
SM
SR
edu
cti
on
in
ch
loro
ph
en
ols
, poly
cyclic
Bu
sw
ell, 1994; F
erm
or
haza
rdou
s w
aste
saro
mati
c h
ydro
carb
on
s a
nd a
rom
ati
cet a
l., 2000
dis
posal
mon
om
ers
Min
e,
pip
eB
utt
on
mu
sh
room
SM
SS
tabiliz
ati
on
of
the s
ites
Bu
sw
ell, 1994
con
str
ucti
on
,com
merc
ial an
din
du
str
ial
sit
es
Ala
ch
lor
Bu
tton
mu
sh
room
SM
SIn
cre
ased d
isappeara
nce o
f ala
ch
lor
Hu
an
g e
t a
l., 1995
con
tam
inate
d s
oil
Fu
ngic
ides,
Bu
tton
mu
sh
room
SM
SIn
cre
ased d
egra
dati
on
of
the p
esti
cid
es
NR
CM
, S
ola
npesti
cid
es a
nd h
eavy
@ 2
0%
w/w
an
d h
eavy m
eta
lsm
eta
ls c
on
tam
inate
dsoils
Paper
waste
Extr
act
from
SM
SD
ein
kin
g o
f paper
waste
Han
son
, 2002
36
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
ii) Bioremediation of heavymetals
The mixing of spentmushroom substrate @ 10, 20 &30%, w/w, results in fasterdegradation of lead and cadmiumin soil in comparison to soilwithout any amendment of SMS.It has been recorded that metalsdecrease at sharpest rate in 30%SMS, w/w, mixed soil. The levelof cadmium & lead reduces toundetectable limit after sixmonths of SMS mixing in soilunder in situ conditions. However,the decrease in levels of theseheavy metals in control plotoccurs at a very slow rate, whereno SMS is mixed. The sharpdecrease in level of heavy metalsin SMS mixed soil occurs becauseof the isolated biomass of SMSwhich works as an ion exchanger.
The microflora thrive on SMShas been found to be responsiblefor faster heavy metalsbioremedation in SMS mixedsoils. In sterilized SMS, initiallythe metal level decreases quite fastbut become gradual after the zeroday of analysis (Gupta et al.,2006b).
e) Vermicomposting
Decomposition of SMS takesminimum of six months and
quality manure from SMS canonly be prepared by long termdecomposition. The duration ofSMS decomposition can beshortened to few weeks byvermicomposting of SMS. Farmyard manure is the most preferredfood material for worms, butrecent studies conducted atNational Research Centre forMushroom, Solan have shownthat spent substrate from paddystraw, oyster and buttonmushrooms are also suitable forvermicomposting. Fresh as well as15-20 days old rotten spentmushroom substrate from whitebutton, oyster, milky and paddystraw mushrooms is anacceptable material for the wormsto multiply and to convert it intomanure for field crops. The SMScan be used as a vermicompostingmedium either alone or in
Fig. 27. Vermicomposting by using SMSas feeding material
37
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
different combinations either withFYM, agricultural or vegetablefarming wastes depending upontheir availability. Effectivevermicomposting can be followedby following the standard protocolas adopted for FYM, agriculturaland domestic wastes (Fig. 27). Thetime for vermicomposting withSMS varies between 2 to 2.5months.
f) Spent mushroom substrateas organic fertilizer
Spent mushroom substrate isstill nutrient-rich and containsabout 80% of the total nitrogenin bound form with highmolecular weight fractions oflignin and humic substances(Grabbe, 1982). Nitrogen releasefrom the SMS is very low;therefore, plant nutrition isinsufficient, which can, however,be achieved by the addition ofsome easily available form ofnitrogen source. On the otherhand phosphorus, potassium,micro-nutrients and the growthsubstances in SMS are present insufficient quantity and in theavailable form. Availability ofnutrients from SMS can beenhanced by preparing anorganic-mineral fertilizer from thespent mushroom substrate. The
absorption capacity of stable‘humus’ available in SMS helpsin retention of nitrogen in the topsoil (Grabbe, 1978). Conversionof SMS into an organic-mineralfertilizer is an alternative way ofusing spent mushroom compostfor soil amelioration and to makeit a balanced source of nutritionfor plant growth. The organicmineral fertilizers prepared withthree different formulae, having2, 7 and 10% nitrogen and eachsupplemented with 2% phosphate(P
2O
5) and 2% of potassium (K
2O)
have the potential of a balancedorganic fertilizer for spinach andgive yields of spinach equal to thestandard fertilization. In addition,the organic mineral fertilizer alsoimproves the quality and drymatter of spinach as compared tomineral fertilizer treatment(Sochtig and Grabbe, 1995).Preparation of the organic mineralfertilizer from the SMS has alsobeen patented in USA (Robinson,1988).
g) Spent mushroom substratefor disease management
Due to the unique chemicalconstitution and the microflorapresent in SMS, its applicationcan be more diversified than whatis normally predicted. The
38
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
actinomycetes, bacteria andfungi inhabiting the compost, notonly play role in its furtherdecomposition but also exertantagonism to the normalpathogens surviving andmultiplying in the soil ecosystem.The amendment of soil with spentmushroom substrate restricts theroot knot infestation of tomatoplants caused by Meloidogyne
incognita. It shows higherefficacy than the application ofcarbofuran (2kg ai ha-1), acommon nematicide used tocombat the above organism(Verma, 1986). Under in vitro
conditions, the anaerobicallyfermented aqueous extract of theSMS inhibits the conidialgermination of Venturia
inaequalis, the causal agent ofapple scab. The extract alsoinhibits the conidial germinationof Cochliobolus carborum andSphaeropsis sapinea (Diplodia
pinea) causing diseases on maizeand red pine (Pinus resinosa),respectively. The aqueous extractobtained after 5 to 9 days ofincubation in the ratio of 2:1 to4:1 (water: SMS) maintains itsefficacy for about 4 months on
storage at -200C, 40C and roomtemperature. The biologicalanalysis of SMS extract showsthat it contains a Pseudomonas
and a Bacillus. SMS obtainedfrom different growers harboursdifferent mycoflora and showsdifferences in its effect oninhibition of conidial germinationand disease suppression. Theinhibitory properties of SMSremain unaffected even afterautoclaving and filter sterilization(Yohalem et al., 1994) of aqueousextract. Weekly or bi-weeklyapplication of spreader/stickeramended SMS extract, startingfrom green tip to petal fall of appletree reduces the scab-affectedleaf area. It maintains higherpopulation of bacteria even after1 month of the final spray whichis the reason of less scab affectedleaf area in SMS sprayedtreatment (Yohalem et al., 1996).The field application of SMS alongwith a soil fumigant ‘Basamid’results in suppression of thefungus Cylindrocladium
scoparium, an ubiquitouspathogen of varied plant hoststhroughout the world (Hunter et
al., 1997).
39
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
CHAPTER - V
Conclusion
SMS has the potential ofsolving several agriculture relatedproblems. However, it requiressome early treatments likedesalting/prolonged leaching andrecomposting for addedadvantages. The conductivity ofSMS, which is taken as a criteriaof high salt concentration can betested before using SMS forraising crops. However, the ionswhich contribute to highconductivity in recompostedSMS are highly water solubleand their leaching is possible.SMS is also not part of the list ofwastes which are required to fulfillthe legal hygienic conditions inrespect of load of heavy metals and
phosphate. The model way ofagrowastes utilization in Israel(Table 8), can be adopted forrecycling of SMS without leavingany residue in the end.
The exploitation of spentmushroom substrate for themanagement of environment,agriculture and production ofrecyclable energy requires strictwatch on its physical, chemicaland microbiological properties.Yes, its diversified uses inagriculture, environment andrecycling energy (Fig. 28) forcesus to change its name from spentmushroom substrate to “usedmushroom substrate”.
Table 8: Recycling mushroom substrates and wastes
Recycling Course Product Waste
Cultivation of cotton Fibres Plant residue cotton straw
Cultivation of oyster mushroom on Oyster mushrooms Spent substrate (SMS)straw
SMS used as cattle feed Meat and milk Manure
Manure fermented to produce biogas Methane energy Residue (“Cabutz”)
Cabutz used as casing soil for Champignons SMSchampignons
SMS composted for organic farming Organic food crops No further waste
(Levanon and Danai, 1997)
40
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
Fig
. 28.
Recycli
ng o
f spen
t m
ush
room
substr
ate
41
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
References
1. Ahlawat OP, Ahlawat Kusum,Indurani C, Vijay B and DharBL (2004a). Chemicalcomposition and enzymaticactivity of spent paddy strawand oyster mushroomsubstrates. MushroomScience XVI : 553-559.
2. Ahlawat OP, Dev Raj, SagarMP, Gupta Pardeep and VijayB (2006a). Effect ofrecomposted spentmushroom substrate on yieldand quality of cauliflower(Brassica oleracea L. var.botrytis). Mushroom Research15(2): 149-152.
3. Ahlawat OP, Dev Raj, SagarMP, Gupta Pardeep and VijayB (2007a). Effect ofrecomposted buttonmushroom spent substrateon growth, yield and qualityof Ginger (Zingiber officinale).Indian Journal of Mushrooms(accepted).
4. Ahlawat OP, Gupta Pardeep,Dev Raj and Vijay B (2006b).Dye decolorization potentialof spent substrates from
Agaricus bisporus andPleurotus sp.- a laboratorystudy. Mushroom Research15(1): 75-82
5. Ahlawat OP, Indurani C andSagar MP (2005a). Spentmushroom substrate-properties and recycling forbeneficial purposes. In:Frontiers in Mushroom
Biotechnology (R.D. Rai, R.C.Upadhyay and S.R. Sharma,Eds.). Pp. 314-334. NationalResearch Centre forMushroom (HP), India.
6. Ahlawat OP, Sagar MP, DevRaj, Indurani C, GuptaPardeep and Vijay B (2005b).Effect of spent mushroomsubstrate of different age andrecomposted by differentmethods on growth, yield andquality of Capsicum annuum.Indian J. Horticulture(communicated).
7. Ahlawat OP, Sagar MP, DevRaj, Gupta Pardeep and VijayB (2007b). Effect ofrecomposted buttonmushroom spent substrate
42
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
on growth and yieldattributes of Wheat (Triticum
aestivum L.). MushroomResearch (accepted).
8. Ahlawat OP, Gupta Pradeep,Kumar Satish and SharmaDK (2007c). Evaluation ofbioremedation potential ofbutton mushroom spentsubstrate against selectedinsecticides from soil system.Current Science(communicated).
9. Ahlawat OP, Sharma Vibhuti,Indurani C and Vijay B(2004b). Physico-chemicalchanges in button mushroomspent substrate recompostedby different methods. In:International Workshop on
“Recent T rends in
Environmental Science” from24-26 th April, 2004 atNational EnvironmentalScience Academy, New Delhi.
10. Ahlawat OP and Vijay B(2004). Effect of casingmaterial fermented withthermophilic fungi on yield ofAgaricus bisporus. Indian J.Microbiol 44(1): 31-35.
11. Beyer M (1996). The impactof the mushroom Industry onthe environment. MushroomNews 44(11): 6-13.
12. Beyer DM (1999). Spentmushroom substrate factsheet. http:/mushrooms p a w n . c a s . p s u . e d u /spent.htm.
13. Bisaria R, Madan M andMukhopadhyay SN (1983).Production of biogas fromresidues from mushroomcultivation. BiotechnologyLetters 5(12): 811-812.
14. Buswell JA (1994). Potentialof spent mushroom substratefor bioremediation purposes.Compost - Science andUtilization 2(3): 31-36.
15. Buswell JA (1995). Potentialof spent mushroom substratefor bioremediation purposes.Mushroom News 43(5): 28-34.
16. Chong C, Cline RA, RinkerDL (1987). Spent mushroomcompost and papermillsludge as soil amendmentsfor containerized nurserycrops. Combined Proceedings- International PlantPropagators Society 37: 347-353.
17. Chong et al (1988). Proc.Ontario Hort. Crops Conf.,Mushroom Session 8 P.
18. Chong C and Wickware M(1989). Hort Rev 7(6): 10, 11,13.
43
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
19. Chong C, Cline RA andRinker DL (1991). Rapidleaching of salts - key tosuccessful plant growth inspent mushroom compostpotting mixes. MushroomNews 39(10): 12-13.
20. Chong C, Rinker DL andCline RA (1991). Acomparison of five spentmushroom composts forcontainer culture ofornamental shrubs. MushSci XIII : 637-644.
21. Chong C and Rinker DL(1994). Use of spentmushroom substrate forgrowing containerized woodyornamentals: an overview.Compost - Science andUtilization 2(3): 45-53.
22. Dann MS (1996). The manyuses of spent mushroomsubstrate. Mushroom News44 (8): 24-27.
23. Devonald VG (1987). Spentmushroom compost, apossible growing mediumingredient. In: Compost:Production, Quality and Use.Els., April. Sci. London. 785-791.
24. Dev Raj, Indurani C, SagarMP, Gupta Pardeep, AhlawatOP and Vijay B (2007). Effect
of spent mushroom substraterecomposted by differentmethods and of different ageon vegetative growth, yieldand quality of tomato (L.
esculentum).). The Indian
Journal of Agricultural
Sciences (communicated).
25. Dundar O, Paksoy M andAbak K (1995). Qualitychanges during cold storageof tomato fruits grown indifferent substrates. In: FirstInternational Symposiumon Solanacea for freshmarket, from 28-31 March,1995, Malaya, Spain.
26. Fahy HK and Wuest PJ(1984). Best practices forenvironmental protection inthe mushroom farmcompany. Chester CountyPlanning Commission WestChester, PA, p. 65.
27. Femor T, Wastls N,Duncombe T, Brooke R,McCarthy A, Semple K andReid B (2000).Bioremediation: Use ofcomposts and compostingtechnologies. Mushroom Sci.XV(II): 833-839.
28. Fox R and Chorover J (1999).Seeking a cash crop in spentsubstrate. http:/
44
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
aginfo.psu.edu/psa/sgg/mushrooms.html.
29. Gerrits JPG (1987).Compost for mushroomproduction and itssubsequent use for soilimprovement. In M.deBertoldi, MP Ferranti, PLHermite and F Zucconi(eds.). Els. April. Sci.London. pp. 431-439.
30. Grabbe K (1978). Verfahrenzur Herstellung eines Dungemittels. BRD - Patent Nr.2831583.
31. Guo M, Chorover J, RosarioR and Fox RH (2001).Leachate chemistry of field-weathered spent mushroomsubstrate. J Environ Quality106(8): 208-209.
32. Guo M, Chorover J and FoxRH (2001). Effects of spentmushroom substrateweathering on the chemistryof underlying soils. J EnvironQuality 30: 2127-2134.
33. Grabbe K (1982). Prinzipiendes mikrobiellenStoffumsatzes bie derAufbereitung Flussiger andfester Reststoffe und ihreBedeutung fur dieSubstratherstellung im
C h a m p i g n o n a n b a uWissenschaft and Umwelt 4:210-218.
34. Gronborg H (1990). Trials atthe advisory centre. GartnerTidende. 106(8): 208-209.
35. Gupta Pardeep, Indurani C,Ahlawat OP, Vijay B andMediratta V (2004). Physico-chemical properties of spentmushroom substrates ofAgaricus bisporus.Mushroom Research 13(2):84-94.
36. Gupta Pardeep, Ahlawat OP,Kumar Satish, Sharma DKand Dev Raj (2006a). Studieson bioremediation ofpesticides using spentmushroom substrate. In:XIXth Annual Conference ofNational EnvironmentalScience Academy on SolidWaste Management on 16th– 18th October, 2006 atPunjab University,Chandigarh.
37. Gupta Pardeep, Ahlawat OP,Kumar Satish, Sharma DKand Dev Raj (2006b).Bioremediation of heavymetals through spentmushroom substrate. In:XIXth Annual Conference ofNational Environmental
45
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
Science Academy on SolidWaste Management on 16th– 18th October, 2006 atPunjab University,Chandigarh
38. Huang JW, Hu CK and ShihSD (1996). The role of soilmicroorganisms in alleviationof root injury of garden peaseedlings by alachlor withspent golden mushroomcompost. Plant PathologyBulletin 5(3): 137-145.
39. Huang JW, Hu CK, TzengDDS and Ng KH (1995).Effect of soil amended withspent golden mushroomcompost on alleviatingphytotoxicity of alachlor toseeling of garden pea. Pl.Pathology Bulletin 4(2): 76-82.
40. Hunter BB, Hall T, LysonsMT and Bell TK (1997). Fieldapplication of sewage andspent mushroom composts inconjuction with basamid, afumigant to control the rootpathogen, Cylindrocladiumscoparium nursry soil.www.epa.gov/docs/ozone/mbr/aire/1997/045 hunter.
41. Iteinemann P and Robert(2002). Processing ofmushroom substrate.Mushroom News 50(5): 3-13.
42. Kaddous FGA and MorgansAS (1986). Spentmushroom compost and deeplitre fowl manure as a soilameliorant for vegetables. InProc. of Surface SoilManagement Rotorua, NewZealand, pp. 138-147.
43. Landschoot P and McNitt A(1994). Improving turf withcompost. Biocycle 35(10): 54-57.
44. Leopald D (2002). Use ofedible and medicinal oystermushroom (Pleurotus
ostrearus (Jacq:Fr) kumm.7spent compost in remediationof chemically polluted soils.International J MedicinalMushrooms 4(3):
45. Levanon D and Danai O(1997). Recyclingagricultural residuals inIsreal. Biocycle 38(6): 56-57.
46. Lohr VI, Brien RGO andCoffey DL (1984). Spentmushroom compost in soilless media and its effects onthe yield and quality oftransplants. J. Amer. Soc.Hort. Sci. 109(5): 693-697.
47. Lohr VI, Wang SH and WoltJD (1984). Physical andchemical characteristics offresh and aged spent
46
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
mushroom compost. HortScience 19(5): 681-683.
48. Lohr VI and Coffey DL (1987).Growth responses ofseedlings to varying rates offresh and aged spentmushroom compost. HortScience 22(5): 913-915.
49. Maher MJ (1991). Spentmushroom compost (SMC)as a nutrient source in peatbased potting substrate.Mushroom Science XIII (PartII): 645-650.
50. Nee CC, Chou WY and ChenS (1994). Study on compostof winter mushroom - areused medium forpersimmon potting. JAgriculture and Forestry43(4): 39-44.
51. Okeke BC, Smith JE,Paterson A and Watson -Craik IA (1993). Aerobicmetabolism ofpentachlorophenol by spentsawdust culture of “shiitake”mushroom (Lentinus edodes)in soil. Biotech. Let. 15:1077-1080.
52. Pill WG, Evans TA andGarrison SA (1993). Forcingwhite button asparagus invarious subs under cool and
warm regimes. Hort. Science28(10): 996-998.
53. Robinson EC (1988).Fertilizer and Method. United- States - Patent, U.S. 4, 743,287.
54. Romaine P and Holcomb E(2001). Spent mushroomsubstrate a novalmultifunctional constituentof a potting medium forplants. Mushroom News49(11): 4-6.
55. Royse D J (1993). Recyclingof spent shiitake substrate forproduction of the oystermushroom (Pleurotus sajor-
caju). Mushroom News 41 (2):14-18.
56. Rupert DR (1995). Use ofspent mushroom substrate instabilizing disturbed andcommercial sites. CompostScience and Utilization 3(1):80-83.
57. Sagar MP, Ahlawat OP, DevRaj, Vijay B and C Indurani(2007). Identification,documentation, verificationand refinement of indigenoustechnical knowledge aboutuse of spent mushroomsubstrate. Indian JTraditional Knowledge(communicated).
47
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)
58. Sharma HSS, Furlan A andLyons G (1999). Comparativeassessment of chelated SMSas casing material forproduction of Agaricus
bisporus. AppliedMicrobiology andBiotechnology 52(3): 366-372.
59. Sochtig H and Grabbe K(1995). The production andutilization of organic-mineralfertilizer from spentmushroom compost.Mushroom Science XIV (PartII): 907-915.
60. Szmidt RAK (1994).Recycling of spent mushroomsubstrates by aerobiccomposting to produce novelhorticultural substrates.Compost Science andUtilization 2(3): 63-72.
61. Verma RR (1986). Efficacy oforganic amendmentsagainst Meloidogyne
incognita infesting tomatoIndia J Nematology 16(1):105-106.
62. Wisniewska GH andPankiewicz T (1989).Evaluation of the suitabilityof spent mushroom substratefor tulip cultivation. Prace -Instytute - Sadownictwa-i-
Kwiaciarstwa- w.-Skierniewicach. Seria-B,-Rosliny -Ozdobne, 14: 7 -14.
63. Wuest PJ and Fahy HK(1991). Spent mushroomcompost traits and uses.Mushroom News 39 (12): 9-15.
64. Wuest PJ, Fahy HK andFahy J (1995). Use of spentmushroom substrate (SMS)for corn (maize) productionand its effect on surfacewater quality. CompostScience and Utilization. 3(1):46-54.
65. Yohalem DS, Harris RF andAndrews JH (1994). Aqueousextracts of spent mushroomsubstrate for foliar diseasecontrol. Compost Scienceand Utilization 2(4): 67-74.
66. Yohalem DS, Nordheim EVand Andrews JH (1996). Theeffect of water extracts ofspent mushroom compost onapple scab in the field.Phytopathology 86(9): 914-922.
67. Zang CK, Gong F and Li DS(1995). A note on theutilization of spentmushroom composts inAnimal feeds. BioresourceTechnology 52: 89-91.
48
Management of Spent Mushroom Substrate (SMS)