|
Some of these posts are very old and might contain outdated information. You may wish to search for newer posts instead.
|
Leviticus969



Registered: 07/01/12
Posts: 939
|
Re: CALLING ALL PAST AND CURRENT CULTIVATORS: Data needed for quantative study! [Re: Mycologist217]
#21613266 - 04/29/15 01:06 PM (9 years, 21 days ago) |
|
|
Why was he banned? If the cops wanna learn about growing some bomb ass shrooms then teach them god damn...
|
blackdust


Registered: 02/28/09
Posts: 8,327
|
Re: CALLING ALL PAST AND CURRENT CULTIVATORS: Data needed for quantative study! [Re: Mycologist217]
#21613270 - 04/29/15 01:08 PM (9 years, 21 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mycologist217 said: Haha should I feel silly for being interested in the op?
No. Statistics is actually really cool. Neat tools such as variance, standard deviation, t & z distributions, etc. 
edit: i found the SPSS software from IBM! This seems like a new fun toy. lol
Edited by blackdust (04/29/15 01:16 PM)
|
FriedEgg



Registered: 09/22/14
Posts: 2,537
Loc: Taiwan
|
Re: CALLING ALL PAST AND CURRENT CULTIVATORS: Data needed for quantative study! [Re: blackdust]
#21614052 - 04/29/15 04:56 PM (9 years, 21 days ago) |
|
|
was OP really banned? he was actually a nice guy .
RIP ETHNOBOTANICALORACLE APRIL 2015 YOU WILL BE MISSED #bannedaccountsmatter
-------------------- (Yes, the egg is real)
How to post pics
|
silverstem
Caps & Stems


Registered: 10/12/13
Posts: 900
Loc: jordan
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
|
Re: CALLING ALL PAST AND CURRENT CULTIVATORS: Data needed for quantative study! [Re: FriedEgg]
#21614129 - 04/29/15 05:12 PM (9 years, 21 days ago) |
|
|
I use water and wbs and coir.. And spores and agar and totes and jars and a PC and a syringe and a fork and tyvek and rtv... I contributed . Now go enter the information I gave you.
--------------------
Shroomery needs a gun forum!!!!!!!!! CAN WE HAVE ONE?????
|
EthnobotanicOracle
Stranger

Registered: 04/16/15
Posts: 42
Last seen: 9 years, 5 days
|
Re: CALLING ALL PAST AND CURRENT CULTIVATORS: Data needed for quantative study! [Re: FriedEgg]
#21623062 - 05/01/15 06:09 PM (9 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
FriedEgg said: was OP really banned? he was actually a nice guy .
RIP ETHNOBOTANICALORACLE APRIL 2015 YOU WILL BE MISSED #bannedaccountsmatter
Thank you, I was banned for false reasons, and am back now. All the hate on this thread is hilarious. Some people really hate to see others succeed.
|
Pastywhyte
Say hello to my little friend



Registered: 09/15/12
Posts: 37,867
Loc: Canada
|
Re: CALLING ALL PAST AND CURRENT CULTIVATORS: Data needed for quantative study! [Re: EthnobotanicOracle]
#21623094 - 05/01/15 06:16 PM (9 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
EthnobotanicOracle said:
Quote:
FriedEgg said: was OP really banned? he was actually a nice guy .
RIP ETHNOBOTANICALORACLE APRIL 2015 YOU WILL BE MISSED #bannedaccountsmatter
Thank you, I was banned for false reasons, and am back now. All the hate on this thread is hilarious. Some people really hate to see others succeed.
I love seeing people succeed, that's why I have 13K posts in mush cult. I don't hate you or anyone for that matter. I just think what your planning to do is an utter waste of time. Good luck!
|
newrook
Sucks at bulk


Registered: 03/20/15
Posts: 657
Last seen: 6 months, 21 days
|
Re: CALLING ALL PAST AND CURRENT CULTIVATORS: Data needed for quantative study! [Re: EthnobotanicOracle]
#21623161 - 05/01/15 06:40 PM (9 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
EthnobotanicOracle said:
Quote:
FriedEgg said: was OP really banned? he was actually a nice guy .
RIP ETHNOBOTANICALORACLE APRIL 2015 YOU WILL BE MISSED #bannedaccountsmatter
Thank you, I was banned for false reasons, and am back now. All the hate on this thread is hilarious. Some people really hate to see others succeed.
How did you succeed again?
--------------------
  THROW AWAY YOUR SGFC
|
bodhisatta 
Smurf real estate agent


Registered: 04/30/13
Posts: 61,891
Loc: Milky way
|
Re: CALLING ALL PAST AND CURRENT CULTIVATORS: Data needed for quantative study! [Re: Pastywhyte]
#21623162 - 05/01/15 06:41 PM (9 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
Yep we post for no pay and deal with people who can't help themselves just because we're shroomy people. Some ppl need to eat more shrooms to lose their ego that easily is bruised
|
Pastywhyte
Say hello to my little friend



Registered: 09/15/12
Posts: 37,867
Loc: Canada
|
Re: CALLING ALL PAST AND CURRENT CULTIVATORS: Data needed for quantative study! [Re: Pastywhyte]
#21623217 - 05/01/15 07:01 PM (9 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
bodhisatta said: Yep we post for no pay and deal with people who can't help themselves just because we're shroomy people. Some ppl need to eat more shrooms to lose their ego that easily is bruised
I agree. That why this was my initial advice 
Quote:
Pastywhyte said: Everytime I see a thread like this the first thing I think is "OP has never grown a mushroom."
OP go and grow some mushrooms 
|
Al Bundy
No Ma'am



Registered: 05/01/15
Posts: 178
Loc: Chicago
Last seen: 3 years, 23 days
|
Re: CALLING ALL PAST AND CURRENT CULTIVATORS: Data needed for quantative study! [Re: Pastywhyte]
#21623609 - 05/01/15 08:39 PM (9 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
OP grow some mushrooms and collect your OWN data
|
blojo02184
Big Red



Registered: 05/15/13
Posts: 3,527
Loc: Maine
Last seen: 3 months, 4 days
|
Re: CALLING ALL PAST AND CURRENT CULTIVATORS: Data needed for quantative study! [Re: Al Bundy]
#21623698 - 05/01/15 08:58 PM (9 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
Yeah, I'm pretty interested in what your going to try and say null and what the hypothesis is.
I feel like you won't get the volume of data that you seek. It would need to be a coordinated effort with close group interaction.
Statistics are fun tools, if used properly. I could easily skew a statistic to make it seem one sided.
|
EthnobotanicOracle
Stranger

Registered: 04/16/15
Posts: 42
Last seen: 9 years, 5 days
|
Re: CALLING ALL PAST AND CURRENT CULTIVATORS: Data needed for quantative study! [Re: blojo02184]
#21623780 - 05/01/15 09:17 PM (9 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Al Bundy said: OP grow some mushrooms and collect your OWN data 
I plan to, however as people have stated, individual methods, and successes and failures vary drastically, that is why I want to compare data from as many people as possible. If I do 8 monotubs on wbs properly, but run 8 tubs on horse poo with some major flaws then comparing this data wont be relevant to compare, and I may not recognize the flaw in my procedure, leading me to draw false conclusions. However If I have data from 25+ people, each individual having multiple data points for multiple methods of growth, then the results will even out a bit.
As many have pointed out, this is not a controlled study, there are far too many variables, and differences in individual's techniques will skew the data, however with a large enough sample size I feel that much of this could be equalized. It wont be hard scientific proof of anything, it is not a "proper" study, but it's the best we can do with what we have ( unless a few users who grow on a quite large scale wont to collaborate on a proper study. ) and it could still be a great resource. I'm not terribly concerned about lies, the fact that all data will be collected and presented anonymously removes the "dick showing contest" aspect of this project. other than a sole attempt to troll me individually, or to sabotage the project, I can't really see a motive for many people to submit false data. I also imagine any severely flawed false data would be easily recognized and removed.
From this point on I will be ignoring the trolls. My desire to constantly address naysayers is a serious character flaw on my part. If you have nothing to contribute please refrain from posting.Quote:
blojo02184 said: Yeah, I'm pretty interested in what your going to try and say null and what the hypothesis is.
I feel like you won't get the volume of data that you seek. It would need to be a coordinated effort with close group interaction.
Statistics are fun tools, if used properly. I could easily skew a statistic to make it seem one sided.
I don't have much of a hypothesis at this point, I'm treating this sort of like a pilot study, collect data, observe trends, create hypotheses for further study.
I fear for the volume of data as well, that is the main reason I've been trying to fend off the haters. People are easily influenced when confronted with the hive-mind. I may expand this project to other forums, and if necessary attempt to gather data from old grow logs. Hopefully a few others get excited about the project and decide to help out ;]
Everyone is responding as if my intention is to hoard this data for myself and then spit out results with minimal to no backing. I'd like for this to be a community project, I will be posting all data, as well as any trends I find and how I got to that point, on here.
I welcome all of you to come up with your own hypotheses, as well as any important variables that may help, and once I have data compiled I'm very interested to see what others make of it. Negative hypotheses are fine, but explain why in a way that doesn't involve ad hominem arguments.
|
Pastywhyte
Say hello to my little friend



Registered: 09/15/12
Posts: 37,867
Loc: Canada
|
Re: CALLING ALL PAST AND CURRENT CULTIVATORS: Data needed for quantative study! [Re: blojo02184]
#21623793 - 05/01/15 09:22 PM (9 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
That's another real issue. Most new people for instance start with cakes as they're forgiving. But they usually don't know how to make the most of them at first. So in addition to the cakes usually being ms, the are usually not getting the most out of them anyway. This leads to the belief that cakes suck. Random data collected in the manner suggested in the OP could definitely result in a conclusion that cakes produce poorly. Yet cakes put out some of the highest BE of any substrate.
There is no hive mind. Most people grow in the manner that works best for their lifestyle, budget and needs. The only way anyone can determine what that is would be to dive in and try things.
Grow the mushrooms man. Don't overthink it, just pick a tek, get yer feet wet and dive in. Then grow all the mushies
|
EthnobotanicOracle
Stranger

Registered: 04/16/15
Posts: 42
Last seen: 9 years, 5 days
|
Re: CALLING ALL PAST AND CURRENT CULTIVATORS: Data needed for quantative study! [Re: Pastywhyte]
#21624233 - 05/01/15 11:31 PM (9 years, 18 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Pastywhyte said: That's another real issue. Most new people for instance start with cakes as they're forgiving. But they usually don't know how to make the most of them at first. So in addition to the cakes usually being ms, the are usually not getting the most out of them anyway. This leads to the belief that cakes suck. Random data collected in the manner suggested in the OP could definitely result in a conclusion that cakes produce poorly. Yet cakes put out some of the highest BE of any substrate.
There is no hive mind. Most people grow in the manner that works best for their lifestyle, budget and needs. The only way anyone can determine what that is would be to dive in and try things.
Grow the mushrooms man. Don't overthink it, just pick a tek, get yer feet wet and dive in. Then grow all the mushies 
If you looked at the variables being studied, this is the reason Im collecting data on spawn, substrate, method, and whether you started with MS, Limited genetics, or an Isolated strain. Methods can be analyzed based on multiple factors, and then that can be used to compare to other methods in a way that measures efficiency in multiple ways (Total yeld, colonization time fruiting time, average yeild per flush, Yield of first flush, number of flushes [though a lot of data will likely have to be excluded for flushes] as well as yield per x amount of substrate)
My main concern with pf tek vs pretty much everything else is that as you said, it is generally their first time growing, and there are a whole other number of problems that could have arisen, making PF tek look worse than it is, I'm considering including a column for amount of growing experience, but I feel that could be seen as a possible anonymity compromise.
This isn't necessarily intended for my own grows, I'll probably have quite a few of my own entries in the data table by the time enough has been collected. It may influence my work a ways down the line, once Ive thoroughly analyzed it and gotten feedback from others.
|
Mycologist217
Frank's Disciple



Registered: 02/13/13
Posts: 2,425
Loc: Man of the Moon
Last seen: 1 day, 3 hours
|
Re: CALLING ALL PAST AND CURRENT CULTIVATORS: Data needed for quantative study! [Re: EthnobotanicOracle]
#21624334 - 05/01/15 11:58 PM (9 years, 18 days ago) |
|
|
What about the degrees of freedom, hypothesis and null hypothesis or were you pulling our legs with this science stuff?
-------------------- My LC Manual (With custom LC lid Tek) ~~ Required Mycology Supplies ~~ Agar Work Videos ~~ L G M AMU Q&A-NO SYMPATHY FOR THE DEVIL! KEEP THAT IN MIND! BUY THE TICKET: TAKE THE RIDE Check out my Retail Gourmet Mushroom Farm! Mycologist217 is a fictitious entity that uses images supplied by Google to mask his/her inability to develop normal social habits.
|
The shroomy 1
Luminous beings surround me




Registered: 03/27/07
Posts: 5,543
Loc: The Aether
Last seen: 8 months, 21 days
|
Re: CALLING ALL PAST AND CURRENT CULTIVATORS: Data needed for quantative study! [Re: Pastywhyte]
#21627139 - 05/02/15 06:48 PM (9 years, 18 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Pastywhyte said:

I have read enough papers to know that controlled variables are key to drawing any kind of conclusions. Otherwise its just a mess of meaningless data. What you propose will simply be a pile of anecdotes and nothing more. I don't care if everyone uses the same ratios or temps. Genetics will be the undoing of this project.
I seem to have touched a nerve with my post. Your insinuation that I don't share my methods or results and that i horde my methods to lord over others is disingenuous at best. I have shared much of what i do with everone. Its all in the search engine for anyone to find and read.
There are two types of people who post here. Those who grow mushrooms and those who don't. If anyone wishes to find themselves in the first group the info is all here.
Edit; there are also tons of posts and threads where people measure quantitative data rrelevant to new and established methods. It sounds to me like someone needs to UTFSE. That is all.
... you are my HERO!
--------------------
AMU Q&A thread.
|
Pastywhyte
Say hello to my little friend



Registered: 09/15/12
Posts: 37,867
Loc: Canada
|
Re: CALLING ALL PAST AND CURRENT CULTIVATORS: Data needed for quantative study! [Re: The shroomy 1]
#21627281 - 05/02/15 07:22 PM (9 years, 18 days ago) |
|
|
No shroomy, you sir are an inspiration to us all. A most fitting name for a great guy
|
RyeJar
StrangerDanger


Registered: 04/16/15
Posts: 523
Last seen: 1 year, 1 month
|
Re: CALLING ALL PAST AND CURRENT CULTIVATORS: Data needed for quantative study! [Re: cronicr]
#21627631 - 05/02/15 08:46 PM (9 years, 18 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
cronicr said:
wtf is this, get the fuck out of here
Quote:
cronicr said: what exactly are you bringing to the table here other then an attitude
|
EthnobotanicOracle
Stranger

Registered: 04/16/15
Posts: 42
Last seen: 9 years, 5 days
|
Re: CALLING ALL PAST AND CURRENT CULTIVATORS: Data needed for quantative study! [Re: Mycologist217]
#21632275 - 05/03/15 10:11 PM (9 years, 16 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mycologist217 said: What about the degrees of freedom, hypothesis and null hypothesis or were you pulling our legs with this science stuff?
As i've already stated, a hypothesis is rather irrelevant at this point. however, if you insist I propose one, a broad hypothesis like "I believe the data will show that a number of variables in cultivation techniques will have a direct effect on yield." will have to do.
Null hypothesis " The data will show that as studied, variables observed in cultivation methods have no correlation with yield."
Yield refers to all/any yield statistic (total yield, yield of first flush, average yield per flush.)
As far as degrees of freedom, that is very dependent on the type and amount of data I obtain. This whole thing is a current work in progress, and (assuming I get any feedback other than hate, and people attempting to test my comprehension of statistics.) I may add or remove variables.
A lack of controlled variables is the main issue, and trust me, If I had a lab, in a country where it was legal, and had any source of funding at all, I would be running properly controlled studies en masse. That's not possible at the current time though.
By collecting a large enough sample size some of the variables can be analyzed as controls (again it's all anecdotal user reported, but its as close as we can get.) I'm sure some variables would have large groups with the same input. For example, for Psilocybe cubensis, Monotub, WBS, 1/4 spawn to sub, Im sure many people would have the same, or very similar temps for colonization and fruit, so to analyze data with temp also as a control you just need to remove the data that is outside your accepted temp ranges. Say there are 60 rows of data that meet all those criteria, then you can use those 60 to compare and average time to first flush, time to colonize and first flush yield. That data could also be compared based on whether it was an MS, LG, or Isolation.
Ideally with enough data, each method (bulk, invitro, PF cakes, etc.) would have a few groups large enough to be significant with their own sets of "semi-controls" representing the more popular teks practiced by people. by analyzing each group, they can be compared for efficiency (again multiple types of efficiency, this is not one-size fits all) and averaged individually or as a whole to compare to groups from other methods.
Im not a statistician, and my knowledge of more advanced statistics is rather rudimentary, if anyone believes they can do a better job than me on any aspect of this project I welcome them to be a part of the team. As a community we can achieve so much more than an individual.
|
Pastywhyte
Say hello to my little friend



Registered: 09/15/12
Posts: 37,867
Loc: Canada
|
Re: CALLING ALL PAST AND CURRENT CULTIVATORS: Data needed for quantative study! [Re: EthnobotanicOracle]
#21632628 - 05/03/15 11:30 PM (9 years, 16 days ago) |
|
|
Dude just do a grow
|
|