|
Stipe-n Cap


Registered: 08/04/12
Posts: 7,623
Loc: Canada
|
Re: Top Layer/Pseudo-casing by p9 [Re: Nimpo]
#27439480 - 08/23/21 12:08 PM (2 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
|
mushboy
modboy



Registered: 04/24/05
Posts: 32,268
Loc: where?
|
Re: Top Layer/Pseudo-casing by p9 [Re: Stipe-n Cap]
#27439510 - 08/23/21 12:39 PM (2 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
i thought i posted in this thread.. anyway..

i compress my top layer rather firmly. the sub too. i push the coir down into every nook of the tote making sure its snug.

spawning more ape soon ill toss up some pics for the thread. ive done fluffy loose subs and i get sidepins out the ass. i dont notice any difference in colonizing times. only thing i notice is no side pins and surprisingly no blobs or 'blueberries' unlike my last adventures with ape.
|
kidcharlemagne
Stranger


Registered: 11/14/13
Posts: 261
Last seen: 1 year, 4 months
|
Re: Top Layer/Pseudo-casing by p9 [Re: Stipe-n Cap]
#27439563 - 08/23/21 01:11 PM (2 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Thanks for the write-up. Do you have any data or, if not, any sense, of how yield and time to full colonization are affected by the addition of extra quarts of sub? I'm guessing the time to colonization isn't affected much given the exponential growth of the mycelium, but I'd love to get some sense from someone who's actually tested it, or at least observes with a more scientific eye. Thanks.
|
Stipe-n Cap


Registered: 08/04/12
Posts: 7,623
Loc: Canada
|
|
It doesn't really make much of a difference. My full sized monos are 30 days from spawn to harvest with PE, which is pretty standard.
@mushboy
Looking forward to some pics.
Loose subs always give me side pins and blobs.
|
karri0n
Mind Traveller



Registered: 08/29/20
Posts: 698
Last seen: 15 days, 1 hour
|
Re: Top Layer/Pseudo-casing by p9 [Re: Stipe-n Cap]
#27439597 - 08/23/21 01:39 PM (2 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Holy fuck that's a lot of sub.
I ran an APE greenhouse tray with 1:2.5 spawn/coir and one of those was a full quart of coir as a top layer.
I am pretty sure it was you who told me to just run a thick top layer of coir instead of a peat casing. It worked, and I got no blobs.

I really wish I had read this thread first, because with 2.5 I was worried that my ratio was gonna be too low. I see I was wrong. This ratio would have been better for two reasons:
1. If I had used this ratio it would have gone perfectly to the top and I could have cut it down in 2 seconds flat to harvest by sliding a knife across the tray.
2. These dicks were thirsty. Really, really fucking thirsty. I physically couldn't mist them enough because the sub would flood, and they still wanted more.
Edit:
Got a link to the autoclave experiment as mentioned in the video?
--------------------
Panaeolus Bisporus
Edited by karri0n (08/23/21 01:41 PM)
|
Stipe-n Cap


Registered: 08/04/12
Posts: 7,623
Loc: Canada
|
Re: Top Layer/Pseudo-casing by p9 [Re: karri0n]
#27439600 - 08/23/21 01:43 PM (2 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Yeah man, it's in my signature. The bacterial endospore experiment.
And dicks love all the water they can get.
|
kidcharlemagne
Stranger


Registered: 11/14/13
Posts: 261
Last seen: 1 year, 4 months
|
Re: Top Layer/Pseudo-casing by p9 [Re: Stipe-n Cap]
#27439692 - 08/23/21 02:58 PM (2 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
p9hu7 said: It doesn't really make much of a difference. My full sized monos are 30 days from spawn to harvest with PE, which is pretty standard.
@mushboy
Looking forward to some pics.
Loose subs always give me side pins and blobs.
And how about the yield?
|
Stipe-n Cap


Registered: 08/04/12
Posts: 7,623
Loc: Canada
|
|
My last harvest was just over 7 dry ounces first flush, no room on the substrate for following flushes. If I hadn't had to unexpectedly shut down and pack up, I was well on my way to 8+ dry ounces first flush.
With other varieties (mostly TOC)I was pulling between 5 and 6 dry ounces first flush, with room to improve. All tubs were one and done.
I would be seriously disappointed to get less than 112 dry grams first flush, this only happened once or twice while hunting for clones.
|
kidcharlemagne
Stranger


Registered: 11/14/13
Posts: 261
Last seen: 1 year, 4 months
|
Re: Top Layer/Pseudo-casing by p9 [Re: Stipe-n Cap]
#27439873 - 08/23/21 05:07 PM (2 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
p9hu7 said: My last harvest was just over 7 dry ounces first flush, no room on the substrate for following flushes. If I hadn't had to unexpectedly shut down and pack up, I was well on my way to 8+ dry ounces first flush.
With other varieties (mostly TOC)I was pulling between 5 and 6 dry ounces first flush, with room to improve. All tubs were one and done.
I would be seriously disappointed to get less than 112 dry grams first flush, this only happened once or twice while hunting for clones.
But to keep things equivalent, how is that yield relative to when you use higher spawn/sub ratios?
|
Stipe-n Cap


Registered: 08/04/12
Posts: 7,623
Loc: Canada
|
|
Higher spawn ratios don't get you more mushrooms, they (cubes) require very little supplementation and FAE when compared to edibles. I have found no benefit in going past 5 quarts of spawn and I think that most seasoned growers will agree.
The correct way to think about it is how does it compare to substrates with less water and the answer is more water=bigger denser mushrooms.
Now there are obvious genetic considerations, that's why I have mentioned that as with any recipe one must select for efficient cultures.
Quote:
p9hu7 said: There's zero correlation, so no.
The best spawn ratio for your culture depends upon how much water it can efficiently convert to fruits with the minimum necessary grain/food source.
You could use this recipe with an inefficient clone and get shitty results, but that's the same with any recipe or rstio that you choose to mention.
Pick cultures based upon 4 criteria:
1. Efficient transportation of h20 into fruits;
2. Efficient utilization of substrate surface area;
3. Solid stipes;
4. Potency.
These are all genetic traits that can be selected for when choosing clones. Choose clones that readily cluster, have dense solid stipes, contain a significant amount of water, and pin evenly across the entire surface of the substrate.
People have clones that check some of these boxes but not all, it's a shame to see an even canopy of hollow stipes. Pretty to look at but that's about it.
|
Smartattack
C'mon man



Registered: 12/21/18
Posts: 3,775
Loc: A thought
|
Re: Top Layer/Pseudo-casing by p9 [Re: Stipe-n Cap]
#27439980 - 08/23/21 06:37 PM (2 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I agree and use this way as well. I didn't do it initially for science however, just out of hate for conventional casing ideas and having to keep yet another material around. Coir is cheap (ish) and abundant. Why use another different thing, efficiency is key to being productive. Especially long term.
-------------------- * Smarts videos * Planet of the APES   I'm a fungal white supremacist.
|
Stipe-n Cap


Registered: 08/04/12
Posts: 7,623
Loc: Canada
|
Re: Top Layer/Pseudo-casing by p9 [Re: Smartattack]
#27439986 - 08/23/21 06:44 PM (2 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I was a proponent of peat based casings for a while, I had tried thick top layers before but they never worked for me because I never did compress them, it hadn't crossed my mind, I always heard that compression was bad.
After having way too many tubs on hand to process that many casings I knew that I had to make this top layer thing work in my favor.
Compression and leveling is key, I'd really like to understand the mechanism that prevents blobs though, like wtf is even wrong with you PE you mutant fuck
|
karri0n
Mind Traveller



Registered: 08/29/20
Posts: 698
Last seen: 15 days, 1 hour
|
Re: Top Layer/Pseudo-casing by p9 [Re: Stipe-n Cap]
#27439992 - 08/23/21 06:46 PM (2 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I really think the blobs are looking for more water.
--------------------
Panaeolus Bisporus
|
Smartattack
C'mon man



Registered: 12/21/18
Posts: 3,775
Loc: A thought
|
Re: Top Layer/Pseudo-casing by p9 [Re: karri0n]
#27439998 - 08/23/21 06:50 PM (2 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I think blobs are actually PEs default state and we are actually forcing it into mutation when we actually get them to resemble normal mushrooms lol.
-------------------- * Smarts videos * Planet of the APES   I'm a fungal white supremacist.
|
fahtster
Now With 33%More Faht



Registered: 06/17/06
Posts: 9,267
|
Re: Top Layer/Pseudo-casing by p9 [Re: Smartattack]
#27440027 - 08/23/21 07:11 PM (2 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Resting blob state. I’m stepping in what yur throwing down, hegrow
|
kidcharlemagne
Stranger


Registered: 11/14/13
Posts: 261
Last seen: 1 year, 4 months
|
Re: Top Layer/Pseudo-casing by p9 [Re: Stipe-n Cap]
#27440162 - 08/23/21 09:29 PM (2 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
p9hu7 said: Higher spawn ratios don't get you more mushrooms, they (cubes) require very little supplementation and FAE when compared to edibles. I have found no benefit in going past 5 quarts of spawn and I think that most seasoned growers will agree.
The correct way to think about it is how does it compare to substrates with less water and the answer is more water=bigger denser mushrooms.
Now there are obvious genetic considerations, that's why I have mentioned that as with any recipe one must select for efficient cultures.
Quote:
p9hu7 said: There's zero correlation, so no.
The best spawn ratio for your culture depends upon how much water it can efficiently convert to fruits with the minimum necessary grain/food source.
You could use this recipe with an inefficient clone and get shitty results, but that's the same with any recipe or rstio that you choose to mention.
Pick cultures based upon 4 criteria:
1. Efficient transportation of h20 into fruits;
2. Efficient utilization of substrate surface area;
3. Solid stipes;
4. Potency.
These are all genetic traits that can be selected for when choosing clones. Choose clones that readily cluster, have dense solid stipes, contain a significant amount of water, and pin evenly across the entire surface of the substrate.
People have clones that check some of these boxes but not all, it's a shame to see an even canopy of hollow stipes. Pretty to look at but that's about it.
OK but bigger, denser mushrooms translates to increased yields. I'm asking how much additional yield you get with 6 qts sub vs, say, a standard 3 or so in a shoebox.
|
Stipe-n Cap


Registered: 08/04/12
Posts: 7,623
Loc: Canada
|
|
You do not get bigger denser mushrooms by adding more and more spawn, don't use 6 quarts of spawn, use 4 or 5.
My answer is probably no difference, and it may actually harm your overall yield.
The dry matter that is left over after desication doesn't require a great deal of supplementation to form, the grain itself is the supplementation. I would not experience an increase in BE by boosting my spawn from 4 quarts to 6, or from 6 to 10; there are diminishing returns as the spawn ratio increases.
When you consider the ingredients by weight your spawn jar is roughly ~4 lb (~1814gr) whereas the water is 5000gr.
Mushrooms are 90-92% by weight, the more water available to the organism the more water to be potentially found in the fruit.
What I'm trying to make clear is that more spawn doesn't mean more mushrooms necessarily. When spawning a mono with 4 quarts you will have a greater overall harvest weight than a shoebox spawned with a single quart of spawn but this is primarily due to the increased availability of water and not so much the additional spawn, though it does play a part, it doesn't play as significant of a role as water.
You can find pics posted by RR somewhere on the forum demonstrating this with a picture of a massive fruit growing from a very small bit of substrate with very minimal supplementation. This fruit was grown tall and dense by providing ample water through floating or hand watering, I can't remember which.
I would wager that we could even get away with using even less spawn than that.
Edited by Stipe-n Cap (08/23/21 09:51 PM)
|
Atomsplit



Registered: 01/16/21
Posts: 1,505
Loc: SAB
|
Re: Top Layer/Pseudo-casing by p9 [Re: Stipe-n Cap] 1
#27440197 - 08/23/21 10:08 PM (2 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I'm trying this on imperfect gt spawn just to see what happens. Thanks p9 and everyone chiming in. Great info here.
Once I get better I'll get to work on Apes courtesy of Smart
--------------------
.
|
Stipe-n Cap


Registered: 08/04/12
Posts: 7,623
Loc: Canada
|
Re: Top Layer/Pseudo-casing by p9 [Re: Atomsplit] 1
#27440199 - 08/23/21 10:09 PM (2 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
If you're using questionable spawn the additional water will cause you problems. Dryer substrate is preferable for potentially bacterial spawn.
|
kidcharlemagne
Stranger


Registered: 11/14/13
Posts: 261
Last seen: 1 year, 4 months
|
Re: Top Layer/Pseudo-casing by p9 [Re: Stipe-n Cap]
#27440559 - 08/24/21 07:51 AM (2 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
p9hu7 said: You do not get bigger denser mushrooms by adding more and more spawn, don't use 6 quarts of spawn, use 4 or 5.
My answer is probably no difference, and it may actually harm your overall yield.
The dry matter that is left over after desication doesn't require a great deal of supplementation to form, the grain itself is the supplementation. I would not experience an increase in BE by boosting my spawn from 4 quarts to 6, or from 6 to 10; there are diminishing returns as the spawn ratio increases.
When you consider the ingredients by weight your spawn jar is roughly ~4 lb (~1814gr) whereas the water is 5000gr.
Mushrooms are 90-92% by weight, the more water available to the organism the more water to be potentially found in the fruit.
What I'm trying to make clear is that more spawn doesn't mean more mushrooms necessarily. When spawning a mono with 4 quarts you will have a greater overall harvest weight than a shoebox spawned with a single quart of spawn but this is primarily due to the increased availability of water and not so much the additional spawn, though it does play a part, it doesn't play as significant of a role as water.
You can find pics posted by RR somewhere on the forum demonstrating this with a picture of a massive fruit growing from a very small bit of substrate with very minimal supplementation. This fruit was grown tall and dense by providing ample water through floating or hand watering, I can't remember which.
I would wager that we could even get away with using even less spawn than that.
So just to be clear, the reason you're using that much sub is just because you prefer bigger fruits, even to the possible detriment of yield?
|
|