Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T11:08:45.388Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Investigations into the environment and nutrition of the cultivated mushroom (Psalliota campestris): II. The effect of calcium and phosphate on growth and productivity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

N. H. Pizer  and
A. J. Thompson
N. H. Pizer
Affiliation:
Research Department, South-Eastern Agriculture College, Wye, Kent
A. J. Thompson
Affiliation:
Research Department, South-Eastern Agriculture College, Wye, Kent
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In a previous paper (Pizer, 1937) it has been shown that the physical state of composted horse manure is of great importance as regards the growth of the mushroom mycelium. A granular condition obtained by flocculating the manure with small amounts of calcium—0·5 part of calcium per 100 parts of dry compost, wt./wt. —is most suitable for rapid, vigorous growth, while a dispersed greasy condition arising through a shortage of calcium is very unfavourable and may prevent growth entirely. In both flocculated and dispersed composts, mycelial growth is made more vigorous by small additions of a soluble phosphate, equivalent to 0·031 g. phosphorus per 100 g. of dry compost. Further experiments dealing with the practical application of these results are described in the present paper. The calcium compounds used were commercial flake calcium chloride (26),1 ground gypsum (24), superphosphate of lime (21) and hydrated lime (53), the latter being used in error for ground carbonate of lime (38). All these materials, except hydrated lime, were found to be satisfactory in laboratory trials for promoting mycelial growth, but the best results were given by the first three. The materials differ greatly in composition and properties, in ease of application and reactivity, and probably in their influence on the metabolism and productivity of the mushroom, and it was the main object of the experiments to discover the most suitable one for the grower to use.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 28 , Issue 4 , October 1938 , pp. 604 - 617
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1938

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Beach, W. S. (1937). Bull. Pa agric. Exp. Sta. no. 351, p. 32.Google Scholar
Burgevin, H. (1937). Private communication.Google Scholar
Demolon, A., Burgevin, H. & Marcel, M. (1935). Le Fumier Artificiel et ses Applications, p. 49. Paris.Google Scholar
Hébert, A. & Heim, F. (1909). Note Préliminaire. Ann. Sci. Agron., Paris, Sér. 3, 2, 1–12.Google Scholar
Hébert, A. & Hem, F. (1911). Ann. Sci. agron., Paris, Sér. 3, 2, 337–47.Google Scholar
Lambert, E. B. (1932). Circ. U.S. Dep. Agric. No. 251.Google Scholar
Lambert, E. B. (1934). J. agric. Res. 48, 971–80.Google Scholar
Pizer, N. H. (1936). Gdnrs' Chron. 100, 112.Google Scholar
Pizer, N. H. (1937). Gdnrs' Chron. 101, 174.Google Scholar
Pizer, N. H. (1937). J. agric. Sci. 27, 349–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Styer, J. F. (1928). Amer. J. Bot. 15, 246–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Styer, J. F. (1930). Amer. J. Bot. 17, 983–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waksman, S. A. & Nissen, W. (1932). Amer. J. Bot. 19, 514–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar