Paradox
©
Fisana

Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

tap water dunk vs. compost tea dunk


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 mydarling

mydarling

    (actual mycologist)

  • Expired Member
  • 4,025 posts

Posted 06 December 2008 - 09:07 PM

i ran a little experiment with PESA to determine the difference between tap water dunking and compost tea dunking on substrate blocks from 17-quart tubs, with the assumption that more nutrients injected during the compost dunk would result in larger fruits. both dunks were 10-11 hrs long. the only difference between the tub composition is that tub #2 had substrate a bit thicker (by an inch or less).

the compost tea was made according to the method in this post: http://mycotopia.net...html#post621978

the first flushes from both tubs were very similar in terms of fruit size.

http://mycotopia.net...=1&d=1228615002

Second flush:
tub #1 given 11 hr tap water dunk.
tub #2 given 10 hr compost tea dunk.
big difference in fruit size!

http://mycotopia.net...=1&d=1228615401

IMO the compost made a big difference in helping produce larger fruits. the only other difference between the tubs was amount of fanning they got during second flush (tub #2 was fanned much less often), but i'm not sure whether this is significant enough to make such a big difference. like i mentioned above, tub #2 was slightly thicker, but the tubs had the same size fruits until the dunk happened.

just thought i'd share. ;)

Attached Thumbnails

  • tub 1 vs tub 2, first flush.jpg
  • tub 1 vs tub 2, second flush.jpg


#2 mydarling

mydarling

    (actual mycologist)

  • Expired Member
  • 4,025 posts

Posted 06 December 2008 - 09:38 PM

some people think that this result may have been because of less fanning = less evaporation = more moisture available for fruiting.

what do you think?

#3 wildburr

wildburr

    Wildest of Burrs

  • Honorary Former Staff
  • 4,657 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 06 December 2008 - 09:53 PM

But fruits need Fresh air to really grow. Less fanning would leave more CO2 in the FC. I think your experiment worked, you definitely got larger fruits with less care in the FAE part.

#4 oakchild

oakchild

    Mycotopiate

  • Expired Member
  • 378 posts

Posted 06 December 2008 - 10:04 PM

Hello mydarling, (Did you choose that name for this purpose :lol:)

This sounds like an interesting question to investigate, and I am happy that you are curious enough to investigate it. Your test however was definitely not conclusive. The big problem was the lack of separation of variables.

(Repeated in Bold font for emphasis)

The scientific method requires that you test only 1 variable at a time.

I suggest you repeat the experiment, but this time, with the exception of the dunking medium, the test runs should be identical in EVERY way.
  • Substrates should be the same thickness (1" difference can matter).
  • They should be fanned the same amount (Moister content and FAE definitely matter).
  • The length of the dunk should likewise be identical (not #1 11hrs and #2 10hrs).
  • Make sure they get the same lighting and the same temperature. (You didn't mention these parameters in your original test.)
  • You need to be working from identical genetics as well. This necessarily means you use a clone of the same age to inoculate both your substrates. (You also didn't mention if you were using an isolate or multispore in your original test.)
  • You should measure performance by dry weight not perceived size. (If one produces larger shrooms but it was only larger due to higher water content, then there was no benefit.)
In addition to testing the per flush performance, you could also test to see if the compost tea dunks between flushes lets the substrate continue to perform well on later flushes (4,5,6,7 maybe).

If you are still motivated to answer this question definitely document it here from the beginning so we can watch the progress. I am sure people will be very interested in your results (I know I am looking forward to it).

If you have any questions or want advice on something don't hesitate to ask me. :thumbup:

Blessings,
Oakchild

8-)
  • Cornfield likes this

#5 mydarling

mydarling

    (actual mycologist)

  • Expired Member
  • 4,025 posts

Posted 06 December 2008 - 10:20 PM

Hello mydarling, (Did you choose that name for this purpose :lol:)

This sounds like an interesting question to investigate, and I am happy that you are curious enough to investigate it. Your test however was definitely not conclusive. The big problem was the lack of separation of variables.

(Repeated in Bold font for emphasis)

The scientific method requires that you test only 1 variable at a time.

I suggest you repeat the experiment, but this time, with the exception of the dunking medium, the test runs should be identical in EVERY way.

  • Substrates should be the same thickness (1" difference can matter).
  • They should be fanned the same amount (Moister content and FAE definitely matter).
  • The length of the dunk should likewise be identical (not #1 11hrs and #2 10hrs).
  • Make sure they get the same lighting and the same temperature. (You didn't mention these parameters in your original test.)
  • You need to be working from identical genetics as well. This necessarily means you use a clone of the same age to inoculate both your substrates. (You also didn't mention if you were using an isolate or multispore in your original test.)
  • You should measure performance by dry weight not perceived size. (If one produces larger shrooms but it was only larger due to higher water content, then there was no benefit.)
In addition to testing the per flush performance, you could also test to see if the compost tea dunks between flushes lets the substrate continue to perform well on later flushes (4,5,6,7 maybe).

If you are still motivated to answer this question definitely document it here from the beginning so we can watch the progress. I am sure people will be very interested in your results (I know I am looking forward to it).

If you have any questions or want advice on something don't hesitate to ask me. :thumbup:

Blessings,
Oakchild

8-)


hey oakchild,
thanks for the thoughtful response! much appreciated!

i am quite familiar with the scientific method, being a molecular biologist by education and having worked in research labs for a long time. i was just in fact discussing with my trusty parter in crime (:reb:) that it's hard to know for sure which factor lead to the better flush. that being said, this was not a perfect experiment by any means, which is why i mentioned the confounding variables (fae, thickness). i just thought the results were noteworthy and encouraging, as the first flushes produced much more similar fruits.

thickness differed because i fucked up the first tub by pasteurizing too little substrate. wanted the next tub to have more substrate to work with. i was not at the time thinking of using the tubs for experimentation with dunking, so i didn't realize this would be a variable later.

fae could not be controlled as i had to leave for thanksgiving and the tub was left unattended for 4 days. stoopid thanksgiving :horse: both tubs were exposed to equal amounts of "air circulation" from the fan in the room, but the actual act of taking lid off and fanning was different.

lighting and temperature were indeed the same for both tubs.

source was different spores. the jars were inoculated with spore solution from syringes made with the same print, but of course each jar got different spores from the print and a thus different mix of genes.

when i have the time, spaces, and resources to repeat this experiment, i will definitely be more thorough in keeping conditions the same.

ps. no, i didn't chose the name mydarling for that purpose, but it is funny now.... :p hehehe. can call me md if ya like, that's what most people do. :)

#6 Skatterman420

Skatterman420

    Former Member

  • Banned Member
  • 589 posts

Posted 06 December 2008 - 10:28 PM

I just started doing this after I heard about your experiments.
I also see a difference using a tea. I've tried with Earth Juice tea, and Straw tea. I like it :dance:


I'll have to make a grow log using this method after I take some before and after shots.

#7 oakchild

oakchild

    Mycotopiate

  • Expired Member
  • 378 posts

Posted 06 December 2008 - 11:18 PM

hey oakchild,
thanks for the thoughtful response! much appreciated!


No problem. Just doing my part to help.

i am quite familiar with the scientific method, being a molecular biologist by education and having worked in research labs for a long time. i was just in fact discussing with my trusty parter in crime (:reb:) that it's hard to know for sure which factor lead to the better flush. that being said, this was not a perfect experiment by any means, which is why i mentioned the confounding variables (fae, thickness). i just thought the results were noteworthy and encouraging, as the first flushes produced much more similar fruits.

thickness differed because i fucked up the first tub by pasteurizing too little substrate. wanted the next tub to have more substrate to work with. i was not at the time thinking of using the tubs for experimentation with dunking, so i didn't realize this would be a variable later.


Oh, I see.

fae could not be controlled as i had to leave for thanksgiving and the tub was left unattended for 4 days. stoopid thanksgiving :horse: both tubs were exposed to equal amounts of "air circulation" from the fan in the room, but the actual act of taking lid off and fanning was different.


If you do this as an actual experiment in the future, I would put some air stones in there powered by an aquarium pump on a timer instead of fanning. This will allow FAE to be precisely controlled.

lighting and temperature were indeed the same for both tubs.

source was different spores. the jars were inoculated with spore solution from syringes made with the same print, but of course each jar got different spores from the print and a thus different mix of genes.


Okay. That would be the biggest factor contributing to the uncertainty in the results. Isolates are definitely necessary for this type of test. I have seen multispore (even from the same print) inoculated substrates perform very different under the same conditions.

when i have the time, spaces, and resources to repeat this experiment, i will definitely be more thorough in keeping conditions the same.


Look forward to seeing it. If you have no objections I might give it a go if I can eek out the spare time.

ps. no, i didn't chose the name mydarling for that purpose, but it is funny now.... :p hehehe. can call me md if ya like, that's what most people do. :)


What was the dry weight of the fruits from your test cases?

Blessings,
Oakchild

8-)

#8 mydarling

mydarling

    (actual mycologist)

  • Expired Member
  • 4,025 posts

Posted 07 December 2008 - 12:07 AM

oakchild i would not mind at all if you did work on this experiment. the more the merrier! i'd like to see if it actually makes a difference, and the more the results can be repeated, the stronger the case for compost.

as for isolation, i'm just a little noob and not embarking on cloning and such yet. if i can just isolate inner stem tissue to inoculate some grain and use the resulting myc to g2g other jars, then i might try that for cloning. but agar and lc are a little out of my league at the moment. :space:

both little tubs ended up giving out about 17g dry. although i do have to say that the compost dunked tub only fruited from the sides (for unknown reasons) while the other fruited all around, and that if it had fruited all over the top, it would have made a heavier flush than the other tub based on the size of the fruits. then again, maybe it put all its effort into making fewer large shrooms, whereas the tap water dunked one made lots of little ones.

well, it appears my experiment was not much of a good experiment. hah. oh well. i'll update this if i have any more reliable information in the future.....

#9 oakchild

oakchild

    Mycotopiate

  • Expired Member
  • 378 posts

Posted 07 December 2008 - 12:46 AM

as for isolation, i'm just a little noob and not embarking on cloning and such yet. if i can just isolate inner stem tissue to inoculate some grain and use the resulting myc to g2g other jars, then i might try that for cloning. but agar and lc are a little out of my league at the moment. :space:


Isolation is easy. Just find a nice fruit off of a grow and use the 9er tek.

Also, LC is really easy too. All you need is a PC and silicon injection port lids.

G2G is just about as difficult as Agar. Especially when you use H2O2 in the agar (Do a search on H2O2 agar).

If you are doing bulk grows then these other teks are not out of your league, give them a try! They are very useful tools.

Blessings,
Oakchild

8-)

#10 sagiboy

sagiboy

    -= Eat Em ALL =-

  • Expired Member
  • 917 posts

Posted 07 December 2008 - 01:38 AM

:cool: thread...




Like Mycotopia? Become a member today!