Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

Mushrooms, Mycology and Psychedelics > Mushroom Cultivation
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Mushroom-Hut Substrate Mix   MagicBag.co Certified Organic All-In-One Grow Bags   North Spore Bulk Substrate, Injection Grain Bag

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1
Some of these posts are very old and might contain outdated information. You may wish to search for newer posts instead.
HPoo-2-HMC
    #7190729 -

Hpoo 2 Hpoo transfers are said to be unproductive. But I have never noticed any significant difference in yield.

When I have done invitro I have spawned one 1lb bag of Hpoo to three other 1lb bags, and then those three 1lb bags to nine 1lb bags. So after all is said and done I have nine 1lb bags all spawned from one original 1lb bag. I spawn grain to the original bag.

I will refer to the original bag as 1st generation. The three bags spawned from that I refer to as 2nd generation. The nine bags spawned from the 2nd generation are referred to as, you guessed it, 3rd generation.

For my experiment I put 1st, 2nd, and 3rd generation bags side by side to fruit, about 10 of each. I did not see any significant differences in yield.

So although that was a lot of buildup for an incredibly simple question it did have a purpose. It seems when asking about super spawning (usually hpoo 2 hpoo) a lot of the responses are people telling you that it is a bad idea because it hurts yield. I personally find super spawning easy and efficient. If you have a problem with it please keep your comments to yourself in this thread as this threads purpose isn't intended to promote super spawning or turn people onto it. Enough of that, onto my question.

Could you spawn hpoo to high mountain compost, or would this create problems that are not related to super spawning in general? In other words, would there be any negative differences between hpoo-2-hpoo and hpoo-2-HMC?

Hope that makes sense.

Later guys, thanks.

-CT

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: HPoo-2-HMC [Re: ChristianTaylor5]
    #7193866 -

Anyone?

-CT

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: HPoo-2-HMC [Re: ChristianTaylor5]
    #7193912 -

I heard that it doesnt effect yield i heard that it leaves you open more to contamination.at least that is what rr stated i have never done it so cant really voice an opinion.


--------------------
"Anything i say is fictional"
  what you should look for in manure

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: HPoo-2-HMC [Re: xaxphaanes]
    #7205728 -

I have heard it can result in many negative effects but have never had any problems myself.

I really would like to know if spawning hpoo 2 High Mountain Compost is essentially the same as good old hpoo 2 hpoo.

Could someone please shed some light non this.

Later,

-CT

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: HPoo-2-HMC [Re: ChristianTaylor5]
    #7205878 -

Essentially yes it will be the same as poo to poo. I don't really understand why you want to do it that way though??? Are you spawning Hpoo that has flushed and has depleted nutrients??? Or is this simply fully colonized hpoo that will be used as a spawn?

Either way, if I was you, having some awesome High Mountain Compost, that I know isn't cheap. I would use Rye as my spawn. Thats just me. I don't really understand why you would want to take a perfectly colonized substrate that could be fruiting doing its thing, then making the mycelium work harder to colonize new nutrients. It just seem illogical. I've never tried this my self though, but as I said it just goes against logic to me.


--------------------
ToiletDuk said:
For the record, I would show you my butthole but you would fall down and worship it as a God and you would give up everything to roam the land converting the heathens by fire and sword. Millions would die. No, no the cost is too great. I cannot.


Edited by TrippinTeddy (07/21/07 12:30 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: HPoo-2-HMC [Re: ChristianTaylor5]
    #7206230 -

It has nothing to do with yield. Of course your yields will be fine.

You're just inoculating a fresh substrate with a ratio of "spawn" that's the same as if you were using fully colonized grain. With only pasteurized material. Far greater chance for something to go bad and as TT says, I wouldn't waste commercially produced spawn on something that may work for you 25% of the time, perhaps more.

Use sterilized grains.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: HPoo-2-HMC [Re: CaptainLinger]
    #7206797 -

In the 4 runs I did I had a 100% success rate with no drop in yield. Even with 3rd generation mycelium. I explained the experiment and the results in my original post. I was just curious if there were any possible negative outcomes from hpoo 2 hmc that wouldn't exsist in a hpoo 2 hpoo.

Captain: Although I am positive you have far more experience than I do I dont know where you get statistics like that when I have only experienced 100% success rate (running about 30-50 invitro bags at one time with about 1 lb of hpoo in each bag, read my original post explaining the experiment I conducted)

Thanks for claering up the hpoo 2 hmc issue for me guys.

Later

-CT

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: HPoo-2-HMC [Re: ChristianTaylor5]
    #7206857 -

Not a statistic. My experience with such contaminant-laden transfers.

You'll get along fine, until you don't *shrug* You're new, your house probably has a very low contaminant load. I used to do grain-to-grains in open air.

We do grain spawn for a reason. It's not as if everyone involved in this hobby didn't notice that there's mycelium in tubs, too.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: HPoo-2-HMC [Re: ChristianTaylor5]
    #7206864 -

...it will likely continue to work until you take one fully colonized substrate, and wreck 30-50 with a nonsterile substrate. Then you probably won't do it anymore :smile:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: HPoo-2-HMC [Re: CaptainLinger]
    #7212318 -

Fair enough captain.

-CT

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: HPoo-2-HMC [Re: ChristianTaylor5]
    #17399314 -

wait what

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1

Shop: Mushroom-Hut Substrate Mix   MagicBag.co Certified Organic All-In-One Grow Bags   North Spore Bulk Substrate, Injection Grain Bag

Mushrooms, Mycology and Psychedelics > Mushroom Cultivation
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* bluethumb's compost experiment (beginners read) cheesyincident 2,161 6 03/06/02 11:30 AM
by cookiewhore
* high mountain compost experience pfshroomer 2,012 1 05/10/04 10:42 AM
by buckeye
* Casing Compost? Anonymous 688 1 08/16/02 05:27 AM
by psilocybinjunkie
* High Mountain Compost? Yield? with or without straw? mitemouse 1,127 1 12/17/03 09:25 AM
by forevrgrounded98
* Commercial Mushroom Compost Ainasko 6,064 10 06/06/03 08:14 PM
by spiritshaper
* compost Anonymous 1,871 17 03/23/04 02:31 PM
by mitemouse
* Compost & Penis Envy? MrDobolina 4,670 10 11/05/03 04:46 PM
by MrDobolina
* Spawning to HMC with PF cakes TripTasic 579 5 03/21/09 01:20 PM
by TripTasic

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Shroomism, george castanza, RogerRabbit, veggie, mushboy, fahtster, the_chosen_one, LogicaL Chaos, 13shrooms, hamloaf, cronicr, Stipe-n Cap, Pastywhyte, bodhisatta, Tormato, Land Trout, A.k.a
1,235 topic views. 17 members, 421 guests and 183 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.027 seconds spending 0.009 seconds on 16 queries.