agronomic assessment of spent substrates for …b a s e biotechnol. agron. soc. environ. 2016 20(3),...

BASE Biotechnol. Agron. Soc. Environ.201620(3),363-374

AgronomicassessmentofspentsubstratesformushroomcultivationRaquelPicornell-Buendía(1),ArturoPardo-Giménez(2),JoséArturodeJuan-Valero(1)(1)EscuelaTécnicaSuperiordeIngenierosAgrónomosdeAlbacete.Castilla–LaManchaUniversity.CampusUniversitarios/n.ES-E02071Albacete(Spain).E-mail:[email protected](2)CentrodeInvestigación,ExperimentaciónyServiciosdelChampiñón(CIES).C/Peñicas,s/n.Apartado63.16220QuintanardelRey.ES-Cuenca(Spain).

ReceivedonAugust7,2015;acceptedonMarch7,2016.

Description of the subject. In thiswork the agronomicviabilityof substratesbasedon spentAgaricusbisporus Imbach(Lange)substrates(SAS)andspentPleurotus ostreatus(Jacq.)P.Kumm.substrates(SPS)isstudied.Objectives.The aimof thiswork is thequalitative agronomic evaluationofSPSandSASand themixtureof thereof indifferentproportions,suchaslignocellulosicsourcesinnewgrowingcyclesofP. ostreatus.Method.Inadditiontothecommercialsubstrateusedasacontrolreference,sixdifferenttreatmentsareconsidered.Inthisexperiment,SPSandSASweremixedindifferentamounts.SASwassubjectedtoaheattreatmentinagrowingroom(“cookout”)andthentoamaturationtreatmentwhichconsistedofacontrolledrecompostingprocessincameras.SPSwassubjectedtoapasteurizingheattreatment(60°C–65°C,8h)andaprogressivetemperaturedecreaseforatleast15htoa“seeding”temperature(25°C).Results.SPS(3,600g)+SAS(2,400g)andSPS(3,000g)+SAS(3,000g)werepreparedsubstratesthatachievedacceptablecrudeproteincontentintheirfruitingbodies.Additionally,weobtainedhigherashcontent,lightness,yellow-blue(y-b)andred-green(r-g)chromaticity,breakingstrength(Bs),andcompressionenergy(Ce)inthesemushrooms.Thesevalueswerehigherthanthemeanvalues,andevenhigherthanthecommercialsubstrate.Conclusions. IncreasedSASparticipationin themixtureof theprocessedsubstrate(andtheconsequentreductionofSPSparticipation) resulted inmushrooms that require higherBs, andCe.These formulation-based composts degraded by thegrowthofP. ostreatus,couldbealow-costsubstratewithselectiveandbalancednutrientsforgrowthanddevelopmentofoystermushrooms.Keywords.Pleurotus ostreatus,agriculturalwastes,ediblefungi,growingmedia.

Évaluation agronomique de substrats de culture épuisés pour la culture de champignonsDescription de l’objet.Dans ce travail, est étudiée la viabilité agronomique de substrats à base de substrats épuisés deAgaricus bisporusImbach(Lange)(SAS)etdesubstratsépuisésdePleurotus ostreatus(Jacq.)P.Kumm.(SPS).Objectifs.Lebutdecetravailest l’évaluationagronomiquequalitativedeSPSetSASet lemélangedeceux-cidansdesproportionsdifférentes,tellesquelessourceslignocellulosiques,dansdenouveauxcyclesdecroissancedeP. ostreatus.Méthode.Enplusdu substrat commercial utilisé comme référence, six traitementsdifférents sont considérés.Dans cetteexpérience,SPSetSASsontmélangésenquantitésdifférentes.SASaétésoumisàuntraitementthermiquedansunechambredecroissanceetensuiteàuntraitementdematurationquiconsisteenunprocessusdecompostagecontrôléenchambre.SPSaétésoumisàuntraitementthermiquedepasteurisation(60°C–65°C,8h)etàunediminutionprogressivedelatempératurependantaumoins15hjusqu’àunetempérature«d’ensemencement»(25°C).Résultats.SPS(3,600g)+SAS(2,400g)andSPS(3,000g)+SAS(3,000g)sontlessubstratsquipermettentd’obtenirunevaleuracceptabledeprotéinedansleursorganesdefructification.Deplus,nousavonsobtenudesvaleursplusélevéesdesdifférentsparamètrespourceschampignons,mêmeplusélevéesquepourlessubstratscommerciaux.Conclusions. Une quantité plus importante de SAS dans le mélange (et la diminution conséquente de SPS) donne deschampignonsquiprésententunerésistanceàlaruptureetuneénergiedecompressionplusélevées.CestypesdecompostsdégradésparlacroissancedeP. ostreatus donnentdessubstratsdefaiblecoutavecdesnutrimentssélectifsetéquilibréspourlacroissanceetledéveloppementdespleurotes.Mots-clés.Pleurotus ostreatus,déchetagricole,champignoncomestible,substratdeculture.

364 Biotechnol. Agron. Soc. Environ. 201620(3),363-374 Picornell-BuendiaR.,Pardo-GiménezA.etal..

1. INTRODUCTION

Thepotentialproductionofediblefungiispromisingin theworldmarket, as thecurrentproduction isnotsufficienttomeetthedemand.Mostproducingcountriesare importers too, since the average consumptionin these countries is very high. Nutritionally, thesespecies(Agaricus bisporus[Lange]Imbach,Pleurotus ostreatus [Jacq.] P. Kumm. and Lentinula edodes[Berkeley], among others) have moderate amountsof high quality proteins, contain all essential aminoacids,andarerichinlysine,leucine,CandBvitamins,minerals,andothertraceelements.Furthermore,theirlipidlevelsandratioofsaturatedtounsaturatedfattyacidsarelow,theycontainrelativelyhighamountsofcarbohydrates,andmostspecieshavehighamountsofnutritionallyvaluablefibers(Changetal.,1997).

Complementary to its nutritional properties,there are various health benefits known in the fieldsof medicine and therapeutics such as, antitumor,antibiotic, antifungal, and anti-inflammatory effects.Additionally, they are hypocholesterolemic, promotea healthy immune system, and have been widelyused to treat cancer andHIV (Brizuela et al., 1998).Approximately, there are 300 species of cultivatedmushrooms,butonly30havebeendomesticatedandjust10arecommerciallygrown.Themost importantcultivated mushroom worldwide is A. bisporus,followedbyP. ostreatusandotherspeciesofthegenusPleurotus;L. edodesisthirdandotherediblefungiaremakingheadwaysinthemarket.

ThereasonforthiscommercialgrowthisbecauseofthecharacteristicsofthespeciesofthegenusPleurotus(Sanchez, 2010). They have excellent organolepticqualities, are easy to grow on a wide variety ofsubstrateswithinawidetemperaturerange,andhaveagreatpotentialinbioremediationprocesses.Moreover,littleinitialcapitalisrequiredtoestablishwarehousesforcultivation.

Unlike white mushrooms (A. bisporus), these donot require a chemically selective substrate becausethey can grow in nutrient media with a C/N ratiobetween30and300(RodriguezBarreal,1987;GarciaRollán,2007).However,theyneedtogrowinaspecificbiological environment with accompanying florato protect and promote growth (Muez et al., 2002).Approximately,13,500tofthisfungusareproducedinCastilla-LaMancha(67%ofthenationaltotal)(Pardoetal.,2009).

Themushroomgrowingsector inSpaingeneratesabout 5.105t of spent compost, while the EU, as awhole, produces more than 3.5.106t (Pardo et al.,2009; Picornell et al., 2010). This lignocellulosicmaterial,calledmushroomspentsubstrate,canbeusedinvariousfieldsofagriculture:animalfeed(Zadrazil,1980b), amendments (Tajbakhsh et al., 2008),

substratesofnurseries,nurseries(Medinaetal.,2009),bioremediation (Faraco et al., 2009), aquaculture,vermicultureandbiofuel(Pathaketal.,2009).

However theseusesdonot take advantageof thehigh volume generated annually, which accumulatesin collection centers located in production areas ofSpain.Furthermorethesespentsubstratesarepotentialcontaminants,aswellas,awasteofenergy.Pleurotus ostreatus has specific enzymes capable of degradingcellulose, lignin,phenolsandpolyphenols to60%oftheoriginalcontentof thespentsubstrates (Picornelletal.,2010).

Currently, cereal straw (wheat inparticular),withincreasing constraints in availability and price, isvirtuallytheonlymaterialusedatanindustrialscalefortheproductionofP. ostreatusinSpain.Thefeasibilityof using highly available alternative materials of alowcostisalineofresearchwithgreattechnologicalinterest for improving productivity and reducingprocessingcosts(Muezetal.,2002;Pardoetal.,2007;Pardoetal.,2009;Picornelletal.,2010).

Accordingtovariousstudies, themostcommonlyprofitableandreadilyavailablespentsubstratewhichgenerateshighqualityfruitingbodies forP. ostreatus(although this fungus can be grown on virtually anylignocellulosic substrate) is the trunk of Quercus humboldtii Bonpland (oak) (Garcia Rollán, 2007).Commerciallyinmostindustrialexploits,2-4cmlong(Sanchez,2010)piecesofwintercerealstraw(wheat,barley,andrye)(Savalgietal.,1994)areusedinthesubstrate container for the production of Pleurotusgenusandothers,suchasPleurotus eryngii(DC.:Fr.)Quel., Pleurotus sajor-caju (Fr.) Singer, Pleurotus pulmonarius substrate (Fr.)Quél., etc.Khanna et al.(1982)refertoricestrawasthebestsubstrateforthecultivationofP. sajor-caju,whilewheatstraw(whichis similar to rice straw) is the best substrate for thecultivationofPleurotusspp.(Bonattietal.,2004).

Biodegradation of these cellulosic residues byPleurotus spp. cultivationdependson theproductionofhemicellulases,cellulases,and ligninasesenzymes(Kurt et al., 2010). These enzymes, and others,turn and degrade long and insoluble components oflignocellulosic materials into soluble components oflowmolecular weight that are taken by intracellularenzymes from fungi for their nutrition.Additionally,enzymes play an important role in the growth anddevelopmentoffungi(Kuforijietal.,2008).

However, lignocellulosic materials are generallylow in protein content with insufficient values ofnitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium (Vijay et al.,2007)formushroomcultivation.Organicsupplementsaremostcommonlyusedinthepreparationofgrowingsubstrates, with wheat and rice bran being the mostpopular(Wangetal.,2001;Peksenetal.,2009;Kurtetal.,2010).

Agronomicassessmentofspentsubstrates 365

Theaimofthisworkistheagronomicassessmentof substrates based on spent A. bisporus (SAS) andspent P. ostreatus (SPS). The use of the remainingspent mushroom substrate after the cultivation ofP. ostreatus in new production cycles would be anagronomicallyviablealternativetousingwheatstraw(WS), which is currently used exclusively as a basematerial.Economically,theuseoftheremainingspentmushroom substrate is beneficial when consideringthehighcostofWS,especiallyindroughtyears.Thiscerealfarmer’sby-productcouldbeintegratedthroughnew formulations andmethodologieswhile loweringproduction costs and reducing the environmentalimpactofunusualwaste.

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.1. Analytical methodology used for the characterization of materials

The characterization of rawmaterials and processedsubstrates was measured according to the followingparameters:moisture (MAPA, 1994), pH (Ansorena,1994),totalnitrogen(Tecator,1987;MAPA,1994),ash

(MAPA,1994),organicmatter(Ansorena,1994),C:Nratio,crudefiber(ANKOM,2008),crudefat(ANKOM,2009),nitrogenfreeextractives(NFE)(Gonzálezetal.,1987),celluloseandneutraldetergent‐soluble (NDS)(ANKOM,2005;ANKOM,2006a;ANKOM,2006b).Furthermore, theexplorationofmites (Krantz,1986)andnematodes(Nombelaetal.,1983)wasconductedinthisexperiment,showingnegativeresultsfortestedsubstrates.

2.2. Preparation of substrates and experimental design

Theonlyagronomicfactorstudiedinthisexperimentisthetypeofbasesubstratewithfourblockreplicates.In accordance with the experimental design, sevendifferenttreatmentsweregeneratedintheprocess,aswell as a reference commercial substrate proper forPleurotusspeciescultivation.Inalltreatments,exceptthe control, 50g.kg-1 CaSO4were added to the basematerial.CaCO3(gypsum)wasalsoaddedinvaryingamounts(Figure 1;Table 1).

SASwassubjectedtoaheattreatmentinagrowingroom(“cookout”)andthentoamaturationtreatmentwhichconsistedofacontrolledrecompostingprocess

CROP CYCLE of Agaricus bisporus (Lange) Imbach

SPENT Agaricus bisporus (Lange) Imbach SUBSTRATE (SAS)

SPENT Pleurotus ostreatus (Jacq.) P.Kumm. SUBSTRATE (SPS)

CROP CYCLE of Pleurotus ostreatus (Jacq.) P.Kumm.

ELABORATION OF BASE SUBSTRATES FOR THE GROWTH OF Pleurotus ostreatus (Jacq.) P.Kumm.

HEAT TREATMENT

MATURATION

ANALYTICALCHARACTERIZATION

AGRICULTURAL EVALUATION IN GROWING ROOMS

DATA PROCESSING AND ANALYSIS

COMMERCIALLY CONTROLLED BASED

SUBSTRATES

MONITORING OF PROCESS

Figure 1.Schematicexperimentapproach—Approche expérimentale schématique.


incameras.SPSwasfromChampymar(QuintanardelRey,Cuenca)whichwasinitiallyobtainedfromfreshwheat straw (maximum one week in empty rooms).Materials were mixed and the moisture content wasadjusted.Thenapasteurizingheattreatment(60°C–65°C,8h)wasperformed.Afterwards,thetemperaturewas decreased to the “seeding” temperature (25°C)over 15h. Finally, supplementation and “seeding”(dose 30g.kg-1 mycelium Fungisem K-15) wereperformed and the samples were bagged in theCenterforResearch,ExperimentationandMushroomServices’(CIES)pilotplant.

All substrates were packed into transparentpolyethylenebagsof29cm indiameterwithheightsranging from 25 to 35cm, according to the type ofsubstrate, totaling approximately 6.5kg of weight.Four holes of 2.2cm in diameter were uniformlydrilledoverthesideofthebags.

2.3. Driving and monitoring of the crop cycle

The total research timewas70days.Theexperimentwas carried out at the CIES, located in the town ofQuintanardelRey(Cuenca,Spain)inanexperimentalgreenhouse controlled for temperature, substratetemperature, relative humidity, and carbon dioxideconcentration,andfollowedtherecommendedrangesfor thevarietyofselectedmyceliumineachstageofdevelopment(CIES,2007).

Acontrolledrecompostingprocesswascarriedoutconsisting of a heat treatment in the growing room.Sinceairheatsfasterthanthesubstrate,theairreachedthe maximum temperature (71°C) in 19h, whereasthe substrate reached this temperature in 22h. Thedurationof thesehigh temperaturesalsodiffers from

one medium to another. The maximum temperatureoftheairandofthesubstratestabilizesfor7and3h,respectively.Aftertheheattreatment,thetemperatureis decreased. The air temperature fell more rapidlythanthesubstratetemperaturecausingthesecondtobeabovethefirst.Finally,thesetemperaturesequilibrateto34–38°Cafter31h.

Duringrecompostingandmaturation,themoisturecontentofthemasswasmaintainedat500g.kg-1withoutleaching.Inthisripeningprocess,theevolutionofthemoisture content in non-intervened composting hadvalues that rangedfrom527g.kg-1 (in thebeginning)and504g.kg-1(attheend).

Substrateincubationlastedapproximately17days(without external ventilation or lighting).During theincubation period, the relative humidity inside thegreenhouserangedbetween90%and95%,while thesubstratetemperaturewasbetween16°Cand23.78ºC.Theroomtemperaturerangedbetween18ºCand22ºCto help control the temperature of the formulations.Afterthis,fruitingwasinducedbyventilation(tokeepCO2levelsregulatedbetween0.28%to0.10%),andthereductionofroomtemperature(21.57°Cto13.63°C),substratetemperature(23.78°Cto14.73°C),humidity(91% to 94.50%), and lighting. These values aresimilartothemicroclimaticconditionsrecommendedby other researchers (Pardo et al., 2005b; GarcíaRollán,2007;Pardoetal.,2007;Gregorietal.,2008;López-Rodríguezet al., 2008;Geaet al., 2009;Kurtetal.,2010).

2.4. Evaluation of parameters

For the evaluation of quality parameters, freshmushroomsofuniformsizeandmaturitywereusedandselectedonthemostoptimaldayoftheharvestperiod.Thesurfacecoloroffruitingbodieswasmeasuredbyreflection using a Minolta brand colorimeter, modelCR-300,previouslycalibratedwithacalibrationplateCR-A43 (L = 96.12, r-g = -0.11, y-b = +2.66) andilluminantD65.Toevaluatethemechanicalpropertiesofmushrooms,intermsoffirmness,ananalyzer(TA-XTPlusofStableMicroSystems)wasused.Totakethismeasurementthefruitingbodieswerecutintosmallpieces(~4cm2)andwereintroducedintothe5-bladedKramer Shear Cell (KS5), arranged in two adjacentuniformlayersandtestedataconstantspeedof2mm.s-1;thus breaking strength (Bs)was obtained, defined asthemaximumforcerequiredtotearthefruitingbodies(expressed inN). Protein content in the carpophoreswas calculated by multiplying the total nitrogencontentbyaconversionfactorof4.38(Delmas,1989).TotalnitrogencontentwasdeterminedbytheKjeldahlmethod(TECATOR,1987;MAPA,1994).Ashcontentwasdeterminedbyadirectcalcinationofthesamplesat540°C(MAPA,1994).

Table 1. Formulations tested (g per bag) in theexperiment — Formulations testées (g par sac) dans l’expérience.Treatment SPS SAS GYPSUMT1 6,000 0 300T2 5,400 600 300T3 4,800 1,200 300T4 4,200 1,800 300T5 3,600 2,400 300T6 3,000 3,000 300T7 Commerciallycontrolledbased

substrates(6.5kgperbag)T:treatment—traitement;SPS:spentPleurotus ostreatus(Jacq.)P.Kumm.substrate—substrat épuisé de Pleurotusostreatus (Jacq.) P. Kumm. ;SAS:spentAgaricus bisporus(Lange)Imbach.substrate—substrat épuisé de Agaricusbisporus(Lange) Imbach.


Dependingonthelevelofspawnruntimeofthesubstratebythemyceliumandtestedcontaminations,a parameter was established designated as thegermination index (GI), on a scale from 0 (noinvasion)to5(fullinvasion).

Theearlinesswasestablishedasthetimeindayssincethe“seeding”ofthesubstratetothefirstflushharvested(weighingthedailyrelativeproductionofthesubstrate).Aflushcorrespondstoeachproductioncyclethatisrepeatedrhythmicallyduringtheharvest.

2.5. Statistical analysis

To carry out the statistical analysis, two softwarepackages were used: Statgraphics® Plus version5.1 (Statistical Graphics Corp., 2001) and SPSS®(SPSS, 2004). Descriptive statistical techniques,principal component analysis, variance analysisand correlation and regression methods were usedto evaluate the data. Differences were consideredsignificantforp <0.05.

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

3.1. Analytical characterization of the base materials used and the formulations

The chemical characteristic results of the differentsource materials, formulations, and commerciallycontrolled based substrates are shown in table 2.GrowthandnutritionalvalueofgenusPleurotusspp.mushroomsdependmainlyon the typeofsubstrateandgrowingconditions (Curvettoetal.,2002),butalsoonthetreatmentsappliedtomadesubstratesandthegrowingmycelium(Pardoet al.,2005a).Theseconsiderationsarealsovalid forotheredible fungi,forexample,L. edodes(“shiitake”)(Philippoussisetal.,2002;Ozceliketal.,2007).

The final values obtained after the SASrecomposingprocesswereadjustedto theoptimumrange considered for this process (Lohr et al.,1984;Szmidt,1994;Raymondetal.,1997).Higherconcentrations of P, K, Ca, and Mg in the coverlayer (Raymond et al., 1997) and a higher ashcontent(whichcontributesgreatlytothecoverlayerof mineral soil) (Stewart et al., 1977; Lohr et al.,1984)wereobserved,whencomparedtothecontrolsubstrate.

In this experiment, the chemical characteriza-tionwas studiedusing twodifferentbasematerialsin the made substrates. Increasing doses of SASincreasethepHfrom5.88to8.07andtheashcontentfrom27.66%to50.88%. Incontrast, this treatmentdecreasesmoisturecontentfrom75.60%to72.50%,organicmatter from 72.34% to 49.12%, C/N from Ta

ble

2.Physicochem

icalcharacterizationofso

urcematerialsandsu

bstratesu

sed—C

arac

téri

satio

n ph

ysic

o-ch

imiq

ue d

es m

atiè

res b

rute

s et d

es su

bstr

ats u

tilis

és.

pHM

oist

ure

Tota

l nitr

ogen

Prot

ein

Ash

cont

ent

Org

anic

mat

ter

C/N

rat

ioC

rude

fibe

rC

rude

fat

NFE

Cel

lulo

seN

DS

Base

materials

SPS

5.51

776.00

6.10

38.10

158.30

841.70

80.00

298.40

3.50

501.70

310.40

308.10

SAS

7.78

504.00

13.40

83.80

646.00

354.00

15.30

161.00

3.20

106.10

90.50

62.70

Substrates

T15.88

756.00

6.00

37.50

276.60

723.40

69.90

289.10

3.00

393.80

293.40

213.10

T26.96

742.00

7.40

46.30

384.30

615.70

48.30

271.60

3.40

294.50

215.10

176.30

T37.51

740.00

7.10

44.40

388.90

611.10

49.90

243.00

3.90

319.80

209.10

144.90

T47.94

719.00

7.60

47.50

474.10

525.90

40.10

239.60

4.20

234.60

188.40

125.50

T57.85

755.00

7.20

45.00

419.90

580.10

46.70

238.30

2.70

294.10

185.20

131.30

T68.07

725.00

8.60

53.80

508.80

491.20

33.10

231.00

2.50

204.00

153.30

111.80

T78.15

672.00

9.60

60.00

143.00

857.00

51.80

418.70

5.10

373.20

375.80

124.00

Average

7.48

729.00

7.64

47.80

370.80

629.20

48.50

275.90

3.54

302.00

231.47

146.70

CV(%

)10.88

3.98

15.11

15.10

33.60

19.80

23.50

24.00

26.02

22.65

33.25

24.43

T:treatment—

trai

tem

ent:see

tabl

e 1—voirt

able

au 1;C

V:coefficientofvariation—c

oeffi

cien

t de

vari

atio

n;NFE

:nitrogenfreeextracts—

ext

raits

d’a

zote

libr

e;NDS:neutral

detergent-soluble—

dét

erge

nt n

eutre

solu

ble;Resultsexpresseding. kg-

1 drymatter,exceptpH,m

oisture(freshmatter)andC/Nratio—

les r

ésul

tats

sont

exp

rim

és e

n g.

kg-1 d

e m

atiè

re

sèch

e, à

l’ex

cept

ion

du p

H, d

e l’h

umid

ité (m

atiè

re fr

aich

e) e

t du

rapp

ort C

/N.


69.90 to33.10,crudefiber from28.91%to23.10%,NFEfrom39.38%to20.40%,cellulosefrom29.34%to15.33%andNDSdecreasesfrom21.31%to11.18%.

3.2. Production qualitative parameters. Descriptive statistics and ANOVA

Intable 3,descriptivestatisticsofcrudeproteinandash contents, as well as brightness values (L), red-green (r-g) and yellow-blue (y-b) chromaticity, Bs,andCeintheharvestedmushroomsareshown.

Ofthesixtreatmentswithdifferentspentsubstratemixtures, T1 consisting of 6,000g of SPS, showeddifficulties in germination, mycelial development,andgrowtharrest,sawahighdegreeofcontaminationbyGliocladiumspp.(whichcanbeassociatedtothelowpHofthesubstrate,Table 2),anddidnotproduceP. ostreatuscultivation.

Overall,proteinsarethemostcriticalcomponentsthatcontributetothenutritionalvalueofafood,andfungiareagoodsourceofthem(Crisanetal.,1978).

Most of the interest in the nutritional value ofmushrooms is related to thenutritional quantity andqualityofproteins(Manning,1985).Themushroom’sprotein content values achieved in this experimentrangedbetween15.48%(T2)and20.70%(commercialsubstrate,T7)(Table 3)arelowerthanthoseobtainedby Rodríguez Barreal (1987) (31%) and Benavidesetal.(2009)(34.09%).

Manysupplementssuchascottonseedpowderandrice bran (rich in nitrogen) are ideal for increasingyields and quality of the mushrooms (Jandaik,

1989). Organic supplements such as soybean meal,alfalfa, and cotton seed powder andmeal, not onlyincrease yields, but also the mushrooms proteincontent (Zadrazil, 1980a; Zadrazil, 1980b). Foreroetal.(2008)arguethatthereisapositivecorrelationbetweenthenitrogenandproteincontentsofthefungisubstrate,duetotheimportanceofthemacroelementas anutrient for thegrowthanddevelopmentof thefungus.

The protein content values obtained in thisexperiment were lower than those obtained withP. ostreatusandP. sajor-cajubyBasaketal.(1996),Wangetal.(2001)andMandeeletal.(2005)(between17.80%and23.30%).Aswellasthoseobtainedusingpepper residues as substrates (between 15.60% and28.60%)(Foreroetal.,2008).

Higher values in P. ostreatus were obtained byPardo et al. (2005a) in terms of protein contentdepending on the substrate type, treatment, andmyceliumused(from14.04%to17.75%).Pardoetal.(2007),alsousingP. ostreatus,gotsimilarvaluesofthose in this experiment in terms of protein contentdepending on the different types of substrate andtreatment used (from 19.07% to 23.98%). Pardoetal.(2008),workingwithP. ostreatus,gotdifferentmushroomprotein content values, depending on thetypeofsubstrate,substratetreatment,andtheweightofthebagused(from14%to26.30%).

Likewise, higher values than this experiment(between T2= 15.48% and T6= 18.79%) wereobtained by Bermudez et al. (2007) on Pleurotusspp. inblendsofcoffeepulp+cedarchipswith the

Table 3.PhysicochemicalcharacterizationofPleurotusfruitingbodiesgrownonthedifferentformulations—Caractérisation physico-chimique des fructifications de Pleurotus cultivées sur les différents substrats.Substrate Crude protein

(g.100g-1)Ash content(g.100g-1)

Color Bs (N) Ce (mJ)L r-g y-b

T2 15.48b 5.84c 72.89 1.46b 11.72a,b 314.54a,b 1.308.87b

T3 16.14b 6.37b 74.20 2.12a,b 9.66b 310.50a,b 1.350.50b

T4 15.73b 6.89a 72.41 2.53a,b 11.99a,b 303.14b 1.351.97b

T5 17.22a,b 7.24a 73.38 2.96a 14.21a 319.71a,b 1.429.01a,b

T6 18.79a,b 7.46a 74.22 2.67a,b 14.70a 350.96a 1.649.30a

T7 20.70a 6.67a,b 70.90 2.09a,b 11.94a,b 279.43b 1.294.96b

Average 17.34 6.74 73.00 2.31 12.37 313.05 1.397.43FisherF 6.41 7.15 0.99 2.85 4.30 5.57 5.40SL 0.001*** 0.001*** 0.45ns 0.05* 0.01** 0.003** 0.003**T:treatment—traitement:seetable 1—voirtableau 1;L:brightness—luminosité;r-g:red-greencolorcomponents—composants de couleur rouge-vert;y-b:yellow-bluecolorcomponents—composantsdecouleurjaune-bleu;Bs:breakingstrength—résistance à la rupture;Ce:compressionenergy—énergie de compression;SL,F:significancelevel,Fisher—niveau de signification Fisher;ns:nosignificantdifference—aucune différence significative,p-value>0.05;*:p-value<0.05;**:p-value<0.01;***:p-value<0.001;foreachcolumn,valuesfollowedbydifferentlettersaresignificantlydifferentfromeachother—dans chaque colonne, les valeurs suivies de lettres différentes sont significativement différentes les unes des autres(p=0.05,Tukey-HSD).


strainsCCEBI3021andCCEBI3027:27%and34%,respectively;substratesoncoffeepulp:30%and38%,respectively; and substrates based on cedar chips:21% and 22%, respectively. Fonseca et al. (2009)alsoachievedhighervalues inproteincontentusingassubstrates,amixtureofricebran(40%),ricestraw(35%)andJuncus effususL.(25%)inthegrowingofP. ostreatus(30.52%).

Similarvaluesforproteincontenttothoseobtainedin this experiment were achieved byOyetayo et al.(2004) working with P. sajor-caju, comparing theproteincontentofmushroomsgrowninsubstratesofgrated cobs (17.49%) and without supplementation(14.94%) and, similar values in P. eryngii, Manziet al. (2004) (22.20%), and Hassan et al. (2010):sawdust (22.17%), soybean straw (24.08%), sugarcanebagasse(21.33%)andricestraw(22.75%).

Theashcontentofthemushroomsobtainedinthisexperiment ranged between 5.84% (T2) and 7.46%(T6)(Table 3).ThesevaluesaresimilartothosegivenonaveragebyRodriguezBarreal(1987)(7.50%)andBenavides et al. (2009) (5.55%). Other researchers,suchBasaketal. (1996),Manzietal. (1999),Wangetal.(2001)andShashirekhaetal.(2002)expandedthe range of these contents between 6.70% and15.40%.Baena(2005),workingwithgreenmangueybagasseinmushroomsofP. ostreatus,gotashcontentvalues rangingbetween3.77%and8.73%.Siwulskietal.(2009),alsoworkingwithP. ostreatus,butwithaldersawdustsubstratessupplementedwithleavesoftwodifferentspeciesofGinkgo bilobaL.,concludedthat the addition ofG. biloba leaves does not affecttheashcontentoffruitingbodies.

Pardo et al. (2005a), on research carried out inCastillaLaManchawithP. ostreatusobtainedsimilarashcontentvaluesinmushroomstothisexperiment,depending on the type of substrate, treatment, andmyceliumused (from6.83%to7.70%). In thesamerangeofP. ostreatus ash content values,Pardo, in alaterwork(Pardoetal.,2007),achieveddifferentashvaluesinthecarpophores(from6%to7.14%).

Inanotherstudy,alsowithP. ostreatus, thesameresearchers (Pardo et al., 2008) obtained differentvalues for ash content depending on the type ofsubstrate, treatment, and weight of the bag used(from 5.80% to 7.50%). These authors found nosignificantdifferencesbetweenthedrymattercontentandashof fruitingbodiesobtainedfromthevariouscombinations, although theynoticeda lowerproteincontentinthemostproductivemixtures.

Similarly, slightly higher values of ash contentthanthoseobtainedinthisexperimentwereachievedby Forero et al. (2008). Growing P. ostreatus onwastechili, they reachedvaluesbetween8.81%and9.84%,justifyingthesefiguresbythehighashcontentof supplied based substrates. Similar values were

obtainedbyFonsecaetal.(2009),usingamixtureofrice straw (35%), Juncus effusus L. (25%) and ricebran(40%),achievinganashcontentvalueof6.38%bygrowingP. ostreatus.

InotherPleurotusspecies,suchasP. eryngii,Manzietal.(1999)usingsubstratesbasedonwheatstraw+beet(15%),reachedashcontentvaluesbetween6.90%and10.50%.Manzietal.(2004)achievedinthesamespecies,anashcontentof1.20%(basedonthefreshproduct with 86.60% moisture).Also, in P. eryngii,Hassan et al. (2010) obtained different ash contentvalues with various substrates: sawdust (6.94%),soybean straw (7.66%), sugar canebagasse (6.54%)and rice straw (8.02%). In P. sajor-caju, Oyetayoetal.(2004)reachedashcontentvaluesof10.51%inmushroomswhencultivatedwithsubstratesofgratedears,whichdecaysto7.41%withoutsupplementation.

Inother typesof fungi, for instance,Ganoderma lucidum (Curt.: Fr.) P. Karst, the moisture, protein,and ash contents are very different from the valuesof the same parameters inPleurotus spp. Peksen etal. (2009), working with this fungus and differentcombinationsof sawdust substrates (wheatbran andteawaste)obtainedlowervaluesinthesethreequalityparametersthanthoseobtainedinthisexperimentandcollectedbytheliteratureforP. ostreatus.

In general, according to color and texture,mushrooms produced in the substrates of thisexperimentshowsimilarfeaturesachievedbyUrbanoet al. (2002), Rodriguez Valencia et al. (2005) andForeroetal.(2008).Fortheconsumer,thecolorandtexture of the mushrooms are paramount (Matseret al., 2000).Unacceptable changes in these factorscanproducealossofconsumeracceptability.

Inregardstocolor,thecommercialsubstrate(T7)hadthesmallestvalues in lightness(L)(70.90).ThebrightestsubstrateswereachievedwithT3(74.20)andT6(74.22)withT4(72.41)andT2(72.89)followingclose behind (Table 3). The substrates with thehighestvalue in the red-greencomponent (r-g)werethose that reduced theamountofSPSand increasedthe SAS until balanced. The highest values of red-greencomponent(r-g)wereachievedwithT4(2.53)andT5(2.96)whileT7(2.09)andT2(1.46)werethelowest. Similarly, these considerations are valid foryellow-blue component (y-b).The highest values ofyellow-bluecomponent(y-b)wereachievedwithT4(11.99)andT6(14.70)whileT2(11.72)andT3(9.66)werethelowest(Table 3).

Texture(hardness,cohesiveness,springiness,andchewiness)wascontrolledinPleurotusspp.cultivatedonricestraw(Kotwaliwaleetal.,2007).Accordingtotheseauthors,theincreaseinhardnessandchewiness,and the decrease in cohesion and elasticity in thesemushroomscanbeattributedtothelossofmoistureinthemushroombodies.


3.3. Correlation matrix and “step by step” regression models

T1 (6,000g SPS) showed difficulties in germinationand a high degree of contamination byGliocladiumspp.Duetothesereasons,T1wasnotconsideredinthestatisticalanalysisofthisexperiment.

Table 4 presents the correlation matrix betweenproductionparametersandphysicochemicalpropertiesofthesubstratespreparedinthisexperiment.Cellulosecontentofprocessedsubstratescorrelatessignificantlywith protein and ash contents and Ce. Also, theash content and the red-green component (r-g) arepositivelycorrelatedwiththepHofthemixtures.

Table 5 presents the correlation matrix betweenproductionandqualitativeparameters,GI,theearliness,and quantitative production parameters. Higher GIvalues correspondedwith adecrease in all harvestedmushrooms qualitative parameters. Additionally,statistically significant negative correlations wereobserved with dry matter, protein content, Bs andCe. In contrast, the days from inoculation until theappearance of the first primordia are positivelycorrelatedwith all quality parameters, although onlysignificantlywiththeunitweight,ashcontentandtheyellow-bluecomponent (y-b)ofmushrooms.Finally,BEisnegativelycorrelatedwithallqualityparameters,although, only significantlywith the ash content andtheyellow-bluecomponent(y-b)ofmushrooms.

Correlatingwithotherqualityparameters,ahigherdry matter content in mushrooms corresponds withhigherprotein,Bs,andCevalues(Table 6).

Table 7presentsthe“stepbystep”regressionmodelsforqualitativeproductionparametersdependingonthephysicochemicalpropertiesofthesubstratesmade,GI,earliness,andproductioncharacteristicsofquantitativeparameters.Themodelthatbestexplainsthevariabilityofthemushroom’sproteincontentisonethatincludestheGI(R2=93.30%),although,withincreasingGI,thiscontent is reduced.Also,celluloseandhemicellulosecontents, and the yellow-blue component (y-b) ofthe mushrooms provide good models to explain thevariabilityofthisqualitativeparameter.

The best model explaining the variability of ashcontentincludethepHofprocessedsubstrates(positivecoefficient) and crude fat (negative coefficient) asindependentvariables(R2=99.00%).

MathematicalmodelsfortheCEvariabilityincludetheGI(negativecoefficient;R2=97.60%),thecellulosecontentofmadesubstrates(negativecoefficient;R2=84.20%) and dry matter (positive coefficient, R2=95.50%).

Ash and cellulose contents of the preparatedsubstratesaretwoindependentvariablesthatexplain,suitably, the variability of the red-green component(r-g) (positive coefficients), while the quantity of Ta

ble

4.CorrelationmatrixbetweenthecharacteristicsofP

leur

otusfruitingbodiesandphysicochem

icalcharacteristicsofthesubstrates—

Mat

rice

de

corr

élat

ion

entre

le

s car

acté

rist

ique

s des

fruc

tifica

tions

de Pleurotus e

t les

car

acté

rist

ique

s phy

sico

-chi

miq

ues d

es su

bstr

ats.

Cru

de p

rote

in(g. 100g

-1)

Ash

con

tent(g. 100g

-1)

Bs(N

)C

e (mJ)

Lr-

gy-

bpH

0.670(0.216)

0.951**(0.013)

0.400(0.504)

0.678(0.208)

0.205(0.741)

0.921*(0.026)

0.565(0.321)

Nitrogen

T(g.kg

-1DM)

0.735(0.157)

0.559(0.327)

0.831(0.082)

0.860(0.061)

0.277(0.652)

0.264(0.668)

0.628(0.257)

C/Nratio

-0.693(0.195)

-0.714(0.176)

-0.686(0.201)

-0.816(0.092)

-0.115(0.853)

-0.478(0.416)

-0.660(0.225)

Crudefiber(g.kg

-1DM)

-0.692(0.195)

-0.907*(0.034)

-0.404(0.500)

-0.670(0.216)

-0.422(0.479)

-0.899*(0.038)

-0.427(0.473)

Crudefat(g.kg

-1DM)

-0.827(0.084)

-0.544(0.343)

-0.845(0.072)

-0.752(0.142)

-0.472(0.423)

-0.401(0.504)

-0.834(0.079)

NFE

(g. kg-

1 DM)

-0.570(0.316)

-0.640(0.245)

-0.580(0.305)

-0.712(0.177)

0.051(0.935)

-0.411(0.491)

-0.627(0.258)

Cellulose(g. kg-

1 DM)

-0.900*(0.037)

-0.916*(0.029)

-0.794(0.109)

-0.939*(0.018)

-0.334(0.583)

-0.737(0.155)

-0.815(0.093)

NDS(g. kg-

1 DM)

-0.727(0.164)

-0.946**(0.015)

-0.483(0.410)

-0.744(0.149)

-0.294(0.632)

-0.884*(0.046)

-0.560(0.326)

BS:breakingstrength—

rési

stan

ce à

la ru

ptur

e;C

E:compressionenergy—é

nerg

ie d

e co

mpr

essi

on;L

:brightness—

lum

inos

ité;r-g:red-greencolorcom

ponents—

com

posa

nts

de c

oule

ur ro

uge-

vert;y-b:yellow-bluecolorcom

ponents—

com

posa

nts d

e co

uleu

r jau

ne-b

leu;Nitrogen

T:totalnitrogen—

azo

te to

tal;NFE

:nitrogenfreeextracts—

ext

raits

d’

azot

e lib

re;N

DS:neutraldetergent-soluble—

dét

erge

nt n

eutre

solu

ble;DM:drymatter—

mat

ière

sèch

e;resultsinparenthesesindicatestatisticalsignificance—le

s rés

ulta

ts e

ntre

pa

rent

hèse

s ind

ique

nt la

sign

ifica

tion

stat

istiq

ue;no*—

pas

de

*: p>0.05:nosignificant—

non

sign

ifica

tif;*:0.01<p≤0.05:significantat95%

—si

gnifi

catif

à 9

5 %;**:0.001<p≤

0.01:significantat99%

—si

gnifi

catif

à 9

9 %.


mushrooms produced and BE(negative coefficients) explainthe yellow-blue component (y-b)(Table 7).

4. CONCLUSIONS

According to the results obtainedfor the combinations tested, SPS(3,600g)+SAS(2,400g)andSPS(3,000g) + SAS (3,000g) wereprepared substrates that achievedacceptable crude protein contentin fruiting bodies. With these sub-strates,higherashcontent,lightness,yellow-blue (y-b) and red-green(r-g)chromaticity,breakingstrength(Bs) and compression energy (Ce)were obtained. These values werehigher than the mean values andeven higher than the commercialsubstrate. Increased SAS participa-tioninthemixtureoftheprocessedsubstrate(andtheconsequentreduc-tionofSPSparticipation)resultedinmushrooms that require higher BsandCeforthecultivationoffruitingbodies.

Consequently, these formulationbased composts degraded by thegrowth of P. ostreatus could be alow-costsubstratewithselectiveandbalanced nutrients for growth anddevelopment of oyster mushrooms.This material could be integratedthrough new formulations andmethodologies while loweringproduction costs and reducing theenvironmental impact of unusualwaste.

Bibliography

ANKOM,2005.Method for determining acid detergent lignin in beakers.ANKOM Technology method AK 8/05.Macedon,NY,USA:ANKOMTechnology.

ANKOM, 2006a. Neutral detergent fiber in feeds. Filter bag technique. ANKOM Technology method 6. Macedon, NY, USA: ANKOMTechnology.

ANKOM,2006b.Aciddetergentfiberinfeeds.Filterbagtechnique.ANKOMTa

ble 5

.CorrelationmatrixbetweenthecharacteristicsofP

leur

otusfruitingbodiesandgerminationindex,earliness,andquantitativeparam

eters—

Mat

rice

de c

orré

latio

n en

tre le

s car

acté

rist

ique

s des

fruc

tifica

tions

de Pleurotuse

t le

taux

de

germ

inat

ion,

la p

réco

cité

et l

es p

aram

ètre

s qua

ntita

tifs.

Cru

de p

rote

in

(g. 100g

-1)

Ash

con

tent

(g. 100g

-1)

Bs (N

)C

e (mJ)

Lr-

gy-

b

GerminationIndex

-0.974**(0.005)

-0.751(0.143)

-0.971**(0.006)

-0.991***(0.001)

-0.567(0.319)

-0.520(0.369)

-0.797(0.107)

1rs Flush“Seeding”

0.778(0.122)

0.901*(0.037)

0.652(0.233)

0.791(0.111)

0.044(0.945)

0.778(0.121)

0.944*(0.016)

Total“Seeding”

0.775(0.124)

0.440(0.458)

0.931*(0.021)

0.832(0.081)

0.337(0.579)

0.154(0.805)

0.769(0.129)

Totalquantityofm

ushrooms

-0.718(0.172)

-0.845(0.072)

-0.606(0.279)

-0.719(0.171)

0.044(0.944)

-0.738(0.154)

-0.972**(0.006)

BE

-0.828(0.083)

-0.903*(0.036)

-0.719(0.171)

-0.844(0.072)

-0.123(0.843)

-0.758(0.137)

-0.944*(0.016)

Bs,CE,L,r-g,y-b;no*,*,**:see

tabl

e 4—v

oirt

able

au 4;B

E:biologicalefficiency(kg.100kg

-1ofdrysu

bstrate)—

effi

caci

té b

iolo

giqu

e (k

g.10

0 kg

-1 d

e su

bstr

at se

c).

Tabl

e 6.Correlationmatrixbetweenproductionparameters—

Mat

rice

de

corr

élat

ion

entre

les p

aram

ètre

s qua

litat

ifs.

Cru

de p

rote

in(g. 100g

-1)

Cru

de p

rote

in(g. 100g

-1)

1.000

Ash

con

tent

g. 100g

-1)

Ash

con

tent(g. 100g

-1)

0.818(0.091)

1.000

Bs(N

)Bs(N

)0.926(0.024)

0.577(0.308)

1.000

Ce(mJ)

Ce (mJ)

0.977**(0.004)

0.794(0.109)

0.944*(0.016)

1.000

LL

0.655(0.230)

0.282(0.646)

0.633(0.252)

0.589(0.296)

1.000

r-g

r-g

0.641(0.243)

0.946**(0.015)

0.320(0.600)

0.572(0.314)

0.184(0.767)

1.000

y-b

y-b

0.768(0.130)

0.765(0.131)

0.712(0.177)

0.752(0.143)

0.062(0.921)

0.632(0.253)

1.000

Bs,CE,L,r-g,y-b,*,**:see

tabl

e 4—v

oirt

able

au 4.


Technology Method 5. Macedon, NY, USA:ANKOMTechnology.

ANKOM,2008.Crude fiber analysis in feeds by filter bag technique. AOCS Approved Procedure Ba 6a-05, ANKOM Technology Method 7.Macedon,NY,USA:ANKOMTechnology.

ANKOM, 2009. Rapid determination of oil/fat utilizing high temperature solvent extraction. ANKOM Technology method 2, AOCS Official Procedure Am 5-04.Macedon,NY,USA:ANKOMTechnology.

AnsorenaJ., 1994. Sustratos. Propiedades y Caracterización. Madrid, España: Ed. Mundi-Prensa,S.A.

BaenaA., 2005. Aprovechamiento del bagazo del manguey verde (Agave salmiana) de la agroindustria del mezcal en San Luís Potosí para la producción del Hongo ostra (Pleurotusostreatus).Trabajodegrado(MaestroenCienciasAplicadas): Instituto Potosino de InvestigaciónCientífica y Tecnologíca, A.C., San Luís Potosí(México).

BasakM.K. et al., 1996. Recycling jute waste forediblemushroomproduction.Ind. Crops Prod.,5,173-176.

BenavidesJ.S.&HerreraJ.C.,2009.Reconocimiento de las características del género Pleurotus spp. y sus aplicaciones. Manizales, Colombia: ColegioSeminario Redentorista San Clemente MariaHofbauer.

BermúdezR.C., García OduardoN. & MourlotA.,2007.Fermentaciónsólidapara laproduccióndePleurotus sp. sobre mezclas de pulpa de café yvirutadecedro.Tecnol. Quím.,27,55-62.

BonattiM.,KarnoppP.,SoaresH.M.&FurlanS.A.,2004. Evaluation of Pleurotus ostreatus andPleurotus sajor-caju nutricional characteristicswhencultivatedindifferentlignocellulosicwastes.Food Chem.,88,425-428.

BrizuelaM.A., GarcíaL., PérezL. & MansurM.,1998.Basidiomicetos:nuevafuentedemetabolitossecundarios.Rev. Iberoam. Micol.,15,69-74.

ChangS.T.&MilesP., 1997.Biología de las Setas. Fundamentos Básicos y Acontecimientos Actuales.HongKong,China:WorldScientific.

CIES, 2007. Relación de variedades comercialesde setas Pleurotus y otros hongos exóticos. In:DiputaciónProvincialdeCuenca,ed.El Champiñón en Castilla – La Mancha.Boletíninformativo25.Quintanar del Rey, Cuenca, España: Centro deInvestigación, Experimentación y Servicios delChampiñón.

CrisanE.V. & SandsA., 1978. Nutrition value. In:ChangS.T.&HayesW.A., eds.The biology and cultivation of edible mushrooms.NewYork,NY,USA:AcademicPress,137-168.Ta

ble

7.M

odelso

btainedbyregressing“stepbystep”—

Mod

èles

obt

enus

par

la ré

gres

sion

« st

ep b

y st

ep ».

Expl

aine

d va

riab

leIn

depe

nden

t var

iabl

eEq

uatio

nR

2 cor

rect

edSE

Ashcontent

PCC+QPP+CPP

Ashcontent=-10.822**+2.138**·pH-0.299**·C

Fa+0.016**·NDS

100.00**

0.00165

Bs

PCC+QPP

PCC+QPP+CPP

PCC(-C

Fi)+

QPP+CPP(-DM)

Bs=

717.976***-67.707***·GI-10.076***·pH

+0.107**·Nºm

ushrooms

Bs=

-125.618***+36.914***·D

M+0.261***·B

s+0.135**·P2

Bs=

718.725***-71.941***·GI-9.143**·Ashcontent+0.030**·NFE

100.00***

100.00***

100.00***

0.01386

0.01269

0.03363

Ce

PCC+QPP+CPP

CE=3.409.055***–414.818***·G

I97.60***

20.93752

r-gPC

C+QPP,Q

PP+CPP

r-g=-10.242**+1.460***·Ashcontent+0.017**·cellulose+0.000*·C

E100.00***

0.00116

y-b

PCC+QPP+CPP

y-b=16.548***-0.108**·Nºm

ushrooms

92.50**

0.55873

R2 :determinationcoefficient—

coe

ffici

ent d

e dé

term

inat

ion(%

);SE

:standarderroroftheestimate—

err

eur s

tand

ard

de l’

estim

atio

n;PCC:physico-chemicalcharacteristicso

fsubstrate—

car

acté

rist

ique

s phy

sico

-chi

miq

ues d

u su

bstr

at;pH(aq.1:5,w

/w),totalnitrogen—

azo

te to

tal(g.kg

-1,odm

),ash—

cen

dres(g. kg-

1 ,odm),C/Nratio,crudefiber—

rapp

ort

C/N

fibr

es b

rute

s(C

Fi;g. kg-

1 ,odm),crudefat—

mat

ière

s gra

ssesb

rute

s(C

Fa;g. kg-

1 ,odm),nitrogenfreeextracts—

ext

raits

d’a

zote

libr

e(NFE

;g. kg-

1 ,odm),cellulose(g. kg-

1 ,odm),

neutral-detergentso

luble—

dét

erge

nt n

eutre

solu

ble(NDS;g. kg-

1 ,odm),odm:ondrymatter—

sur m

atiè

re sè

che;QPP:indexgermination,earlinessandquantitativeproduction

parameters—

inde

x de

ger

min

atio

n, p

réco

cité

et p

aram

ètre

s de

prod

uctio

n qu

antit

atifs;G

I:germinationindex—

indi

ce d

e ge

rmin

atio

n;P2:daysfrominoculationtotheformation

ofthefirstprim

ordia—

jour

s de

l’ino

cula

tion

à la

form

atio

n de

la p

rem

ière

pri

mor

dia;P4:daysfrominoculationtotheonsetofharvest—

jour

s de

l’ino

cula

tion

à l’a

ppar

ition

de

la

réco

lte;nºm

ushrooms:quantityofm

ushrooms—

qua

ntité

de

cham

pign

ons;BE:biologicalefficiency(kg.100kg

-1ofdrysu

bstrate)—

effi

caci

té b

iolo

giqu

e (k

g.10

0 kg

-1 d

e su

bstr

at se

c);

CPP:qualitativeproductionparameters—

par

amèt

res d

e pr

oduc

tion

qual

itativ

es;g:averageunitw

eightofuncutmushrooms—

uni

té d

e po

ids m

oyen

de

cham

pign

ons n

on c

oupé

s; DM:

drymatter—

mat

ière

sèch

e(g. 100g

-1) ;crudeprotein—

pro

téin

e br

ute(g. 100g

-1);ashcontents—

tene

ur e

n ce

ndre

s(g.100g-

1 );Bs,CE,r-g

,y-b:seeta

ble

4—v

oirt

able

au 4;

**:0.001<

p**≤0.01:significantat99%

— si

gnifi

catif

à 9

9 %;***:p≤0.001:significantat99.9%

— si

gnifi

catif

à 9

9,9

%;regressionsincludeonlythosewhosecoefficients

accompanyingtheindependentvariablesaresignificant,providedthatthesignificanceofthemodelissignificant—

les r

égre

ssio

ns c

ompr

enne

nt se

ulem

ent c

elle

s don

t les

coe

ffici

ents

ac

com

pagn

ant l

es v

aria

bles

indé

pend

ante

s son

t sig

nific

ativ

es, à

con

ditio

n qu

e la

sign

ifica

tion

du m

odèl

e so

it si

gnifi

cativ

e.


CurvettoN.R.,FiglasD.,DevalisR.&DelmastroS.,2002.GrowthandproductivityofdifferentPleurotus ostreatus strains on sunflower seed hulls supplemented withN-NH4

+and/orMn(II).Bioresour.Technol.,84,171-176.DelmasJ., 1989.Les champignons et leur culture. Paris:

Flammarion-LaMaisonRustique.FaracoV.etal.,2009.Bio-remediationofcoloredindustrial

wastewaters by the white-rot fungi Phanerochaete chrysosporium and Pleurotus ostreatus and theirenzymes.Biodegradation,20,209-220.

FonsecaG.G. et al., 2009. Protein enrichment anddigestibility of soft rush (Juncus effusus) and riceresiduesusingediblemushroomsPleurotus ostreatusandPleurotus sajor-caju.World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol.,25,449-456.

ForeroC.L.,HoyosO.L.&BazanteW.E.,2008.Evaluaciónderesiduosdeají(Capsicumspp.)comosustratoenlaproducción de setas comestibles (Pleurotus ostreatus).Fac. Cienc. Agropecu.,6,42-53.

García RollánM., 2007.Cultivo de setas y trufas. 5th ed.Madrid:Mundi–Prensa,S.A.

GeaF.J., Martínez-CarrascoA. & NavarroM.J., 2009.Efectodelasuplementacióndelsustratosobrelacosechadesetas.Hortic. Int.,67,32-40.

GonzálezJ.,AlviraP.&GonzálezG., 1987. La cascarillade arroz en la alimentación animal. II. Composiciónquímico-bromatológica. Rev. Agroquím. Tecnol. Aliment.,27,139-149.

GregoriA.etal.,2008.TheuseofspentbrewerygrainsforPleurotus ostreatuscultivationandenzymeproduction.New Biotechnol.,25,157-161.

HassanF.R.H.,MedanyG.M.&AbouHusseinS.D.,2010.Cultivation on the king oyster mushroom (Pleurotus eryngii)inEgypt.Aust. J. Basic Appl. Sci.,4,99-105.

JandaikC.L., 1989. Response of Pleurotus sajor-caju tosupplementation prior to and after pasteurisation ofstraw.Indian Phytopathol.,42,284-285.

KhannaP.&GarchaH.S.,1982.Utilizationofpaddystrawfor cultivationofPleurotus species.Mushroom Newsl. Trop.,2,5-9.

KotwaliwaleN., BakaneP. & VermaA., 2007. Changesin textural and optical properties of oyster mushroomduringhotairdrying.J. Food Eng.,78,1207-1211.

KrantzG.W.,1986.A manual of acarology.2nded.Corvallis,OR,USA:OregonStateUniversityBookStores,Inc.

KuforijiO.O. & FasidiI.O., 2008. Enzyme activities ofPleurotus tuber-regium (Fries) Singer, cultivated onselected agricultural wastes. Bioresour. Technol., 99,4275-4278.

KurtS. & BuyukalacaS., 2010. Yield performancesand changes in enzyme activities of Pleurotus spp.(P. ostreatus and P. sajor-caju) cultivated on differentagriculturalwastes.Bioresour. Technol.,101,3164-3169.

LohrV.L., WangS.H. & WoltJ.D., 1984. Physical andchemical characteristics of fresh and aged spentmushroomcompost.HortScience,19,681-683.

López-RodríguezC., Hernández-CorredorR., Suárez-FrancoC. & BorreroM., 2008. Evaluación delcrecimientoyproduccióndePleurotus ostreatus sobrediferentesresiduosagroindustrialesdelDepartamentodeCundinamarca.Univ. Scientiarum,13,128-137.

MandeelQ.A., Al-LaithA.A. & MohamedS.A., 2005.Cultivation of oyster mushrooms (Pleurotus spp.) onvarious lignocellulosic wastes. World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol.,21,601-607.

ManningK.,1985.Foodvalueandchemicalcomposition.In: FleggP.B., SpencerD.M. &WoodD.A., eds. The biology and technology of the cultivated mushrooms.Chichester,UK:JohnWiley&SonsLtd.,211-230.

ManziP. et al., 1999. Nutrients in edible mushrooms: aninterspeciescomparativestudy.J. Food Chem.,65,477-482.

ManziP., MarconiS.,AguzziA. & PizzoferratoL., 2004.Commercialmushrooms: nutritional quality and effectofcooking.Food Chem.,84,201-206.

MAPA, 1994. Métodos Oficiales de Análisis. Tomo III.Madrid: Servicio de Publicaciones del Ministerio deAgricultura,PescayAlimentación.

MatserA.M.,KnottE.R.,TeunissenP.G.M.&BartelsP.V.,2000.Effectsofhighisostaticpressureonmushrooms.J. Food Eng.,45,11-16.

MedinaE. et al., 2009. Spent mushroom substrates ascomponent of growing media for germination andgrowthofhorticulturalplants.Bioresour. Technol.,100,4227-4232.

MuezM.A.&PardoJ.,2002.Lapreparacióndelsustrato.In:SánchezJ.E.&RoyseD.,eds.La biología y el cultivo de Pleurotus spp.Limusa,México:Ecosur,157-186.

NombelaG.&BelloA.,1983.Modificacionesalmétododeextraccióndenematodosfitoparásitosporcentrifugaciónenazúcar.Bol. Serv. Plagas,9,183-189.

OyetayoF.L. & AkindahunsiA.A., 2004. Nutrientdistribution in wild and cultivated edible mushroom,Pleurotus sajo-caju. Food Agric. Environ., 2, 166-168.

OzcelikE.&PeksenA.,2007.Hazelnuthuskasasubstratefor the cultivation of shiitake mushroom (Lentinula edodes).Bioresour. Technol.,98,2652-2658.

PardoA., PeronaM.A. & PardoJ., 2005a. Evaluaciónde nuevos materiales en la elaboración de sustratosespecíficosparaelcultivodePleurotus ostreatus(Jacq.exFr.)Kummer.Cuad. Fitopatol.,85,77-83.

PardoA., PeronaM.A. & PardoJ., 2005b. Utilización deraspóndeuvaenlaelaboracióndesustratosespecíficospara el cultivo de Pleurotus ostreatus (Jacq. ex Fr.)Kummer.ITEA,101,59-69.

PardoA.,PeronaM.A.&PardoJ.,2007.Nuevosmaterialesytratamientosenlaelaboracióndesustratosparacultivode Pleurotus ostreatus (Jacq. ex Fr.) Kummer. Cuad. Fitopatol.,91,7-13.

PardoA., Perona M.A. & PardoJ., 2008. Evaluaciónde nuevos materiales en la elaboración de sustratos


específicosparacultivodePleurotus ostreatus(Jacq.exFr.)Kummer.Cuad. Fitopatol.,85,77-84.

PardoA.,PardoJ.E.,PicornellM.R.&deJuanJ.A.,2009.SuplementacióndesustratosdegradadosporelcultivodePleurotus ostreatus(Jacq.)P.Kumm.In:Resumen de las Actas del VI Congreso Ibérico de Ciencias Hortícolas, 25-29 Mayo 2009, Palacio de Congresos y Auditorio, La Rioja, España,670-674.

PathakH.etal.,2009.GlobalwarmingmitigationpotentialofbiogasplantsinIndia.Environ.Monit. Assess.,157,407-418.

PeksenA.&YakupogluG.,2009.Teawasteasasupplementfor the cultivation of Ganoderma lucidum. World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol.,25,611-618.

PhilippoussisA.,DiamantopoulouP.&ZervakisG., 2002.Monitoring of mycelium growth and fructification ofLentinula edodesonseverallignocellulosicresidues.In:SánchezJ.E., HuertaG.&MontielE., eds.Mushroom biology and mushroom products.Cuernavaca,México:UAEM,279-287.

PicornellM.R.,deJuanJ.A.&PardoA.,2010.Reutilización de sustratos postcultivo de hongos comestibles en el cultivo de Pleurotus ostreatus (Jacq.) P. Kumm.PhD thesis: Escuela Técnica Superior de IngenierosAgrónomosdeAlbacete,UniversidaddeCastilla –LaMancha(España).

RaymondD.A., VaroneyR.P. & ChongC., 1997.Characteristics of composts derived from waxedcorrugatedcardboard.Compost Sci. Util.,5,60-70.

RodríguezBarrealJ.A.,1987.El Pleurotusostreatus, hongo comestible: su cultivo sobre sustratos lignocelulósicos.Madrid: Ed. Fundación Conde del Valle de Salazar,EscuelaTécnicaSuperiordeIngenierosdeMontes.

Rodríguez ValenciaN. & JaramilloC., 2005. Cultivo de hongos comestibles del género Pleurotus sobre residuos agrícolas de la zona cafetera. Chinchiná, Caldas,Colombia:Cenicafé.

SánchezC., 2010. Cultivation of Pleurotus ostreatus andother ediblemushrooms.Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol.,85,1321-1337.

SavalgiV.&SavalgV.,1994.Evaluationofsubstratesandsupplements for threePleurotus spp. Indian J. Mycol. Plant Pathol.,24,190-191.

ShashirekhaM.N., RajarathnamS. & BanoZ., 2002.Enhancementofbioconversionefficiencyandchemistryof the mushroom, Pleurotus sajor-caju (Berk andBr.) Sacc. produced on spent rice straw substrate,supplementedwithoilseedcakes.J. Agric. Food Chem.,76,27-31.

SiwulskiM., Czerwinska-NowakA. & KorszunS., 2009.Effectofadditionofmaidenhairtreeleavestosubstrate

on yielding and chemical composition of Pleurotus ostreatus (Fr.) Kumm. carpophores. Veg. Crops Res. Bull.,71,103-109.

SPSS,2004.SPSS® 13.0 Brief Guide.Chicago,ILL,USA:SPSS.

StatisticalGraphicsCorporation,2001.Statgraphics Plus® 5.1 for Windows. Herndon, VA, USA: StatisticalGraphicsCorporation.

StewartB.A.&MeekB.D.,1977.Solublesaltconsiderationswith waste application. In: Soils for management of organic wastes and water wastes.Madison,WI,USA:SoilScienceSocietyofAmerica,217-232.

SzmidtR.A.K., 1994. Recycling of spent mushroomsubstrates by aerobic composting to produce novelhorticulturalsubstrates.Compost Sci. Util.,2,63-72.

TajbakhshJ. et al., 2008. Trend of physico-chemicalpropertieschangeinrecyclingspentmushroomcompostthrough vermicomposting by epigeic earthwormsEisenia foetidaandE. andrei.J. Agric. Technol.,4,185-198.

TECATOR, 1987. Determination of Kjeldahl nitrogen content with the Kjeltec auto 1030 analyzer. TecatorapplicationNote30/87.Hönagäs,Sweden:Tecator.

UrbanoB.O.Z.&AstaizaP., 2002.Determinación de una metodología para la utilización de residuos agrícolas (cascarilla de café, pasto de corte, espárrago, cainas de frijol y arveja) generados en el Municipio de Popayán y evaluación del efecto de los sustratos en la producción de setas (Pleurotusostreatus).TrabajodeGrado(IngenieroAgroindustrial): Facultad de Ciencias Agropecuarias,Departamento de Agroindustria, Universidad DelCauca–Unicauca(Colombia).

VijayM., ShyamP., AbrarS. & MirzaB., 2007.Bioconversionoflowqualitylignocellulosicagriculturalwaste into edible protein byPleurotus sajor-caju (Fr.)Singer.J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci.,8,745-751.

WangD., SakodaA. & SuzukiM., 2001. Biologicalefficiency and nutritional value ofPleurotus ostreatuscultivatedonspentbeergrain.Bioresour. Technol.,78,293-300.

ZadrazilF., 1980a. Influence of ammonium nitrate andorganicsupplementsontheyieldofPleurotussajor-caju(Fr.)Sing.Eur. J. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol.,9,31-35.

ZadrazilF., 1980b. Conversion of different plant wastesinto feed by basidiomycetes. Eur. J. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol.,9,243-248.

(71ref.)

agronomic assessment of spent substrates for …b a s e biotechnol. agron. soc. environ. 2016 20(3),...

Documents