2 replies to this topic

[YoshiTrainer]

This is one of those areas where I may not be as precise as I should be, usually erring on the 'more is better' side. Really though, what difference does it make, so long as there is a minimum depth? For example, I believe the recommended sub depth for panaeolus is 1.5-2", other than wasting sub, would it matter if it were 4" deep? More nutrients, moisture, etc, how could that be bad? The same could be said for casings. It seems the smaller the mush, the thinner the sub and casing?

Do these sound about right? (Sub/casing)
Pans, Mexicana: 1.5-2"/ 1/4"
Cubes: 3"/ 1/2-1.5"
Semperviva: 2-3"?/ 1/2"?
Any other exotics: 2-3"?/ 1/4-1"?

[Severian]

So can't answer your question as precisely as you like and I'm a big late to the party but! I can point you in the direction of an answer-

Was skimming through stamets and Chilton's 1983 copy of the mushroom cultivator today, and In it they discuss commercial (agaricus? Don't remember) growers aiming to get the highest biological efficiency out of a substrate by trying to cram as much nutrition/moisture into a sub as possible without pushing it over into contam inviting limits

Iirc, there is an equation connection weight of sub divided by surface area- I think they were using per square foot - aiming for 5 lbs of substrate dry weight per square foot-

I might have some numbers wrong there - I wasn't looking for that info exactly- like I said- but 90% sure if you it was in chapters 7 or 8. If you don't have a copy and want that info specific ley me know and I'll look it up for you.

Not cubensis specific but I imagine the same principle applies- deeper subs have more nutrition and moisture, thus more capacity for fruiting

[Severian]

Though also past a point would likely generate too much heat to be bueno
...