Sentetik Kompost Hazırlığında İki Değişik Ham Materyale Beş Değişik Aktivatör Madde İlavesinin Mantar Verim, Kalite ve Erkenciliğe Etkileri

Abstract

Yemeklik mantar üretiminde genellikle taze at gübresi ile hazırlanan kompost kullanılmaktadır. Ülkemiz koşullarında kompost ham materyali olarak istenilen kalite ve kantidede taze at gübresini, yılın her mevsiminde ve he yerde temin etme imkânları sınırlıdır. Bu çalışma ile at gübresi teminindeki güçlükleri ortadan kaldırmak için, at gübresi yerine sentetik kompost hazırlığında kullanılabilecek ham materyaller ve bunlara ilave edilebilecek aktivatör maddeler incelenmiştir. Çalışmada kompost ham materyali olarak buğday samanı ve çeltik sapı, aktivatör madde olarak da tavuk, sığır, koyun gübreleri zeytin pirinası buğday kepeği ele alınmıştır. Denemedeki uygulamalarda 250 kg buğday samanı veya çeltik sapı ham materyal olarak kullanılmış ve buna aktivatör maddelerden bir tanesi 60 kg kuru madde verecek oranda ilave edilmiştir. Denemedeki bütün uygulamalara kompost hazırlama başlangıç materyalinin azot düzeyini kuru madde esasına göre %2 oranına yükseltecek miktarlarda amonyum nitrat ve üre ticari gübreleri (saf N miktarına göre) eşit miktarlarda ilave edilmiştir. 1976 yılında 3 ayrı devrede yürütülen denemelerde en yüksek verim 250 kg, çeltik sapının kuru madde esasına göre 60 kg kuru madde ilave edecek miktarda buğday kepeği ile takviye edilmesiyle elde edilmiştir. Bunu çeltik sapı zeytin pirinası ve buğday samanı, buğday kepeği uygulamaları izlemiştir. İki değişik ham materyale beş değişik aktivatör madde ilavesinin erkenciliğe etkisi incelendiğinde ise 50 günlük hasat periyoduna göre ilk 50 günlük hasat devresinde en yüksek verim her 3 denemede de çeltik sapı + buğday kepeği uygulamasından elde edilmiştir. Bunu buğday samanı + buğday kepeği ve çeltik sapı + zeytin pirinası uygulamaları izlemiştir.

Keywords

• Sentetik Kompost
• Mantar
• Verim ve Kalite

Mushroom Yield, Quality and Earliness as Affected by Five Different Activators Added to Two Different Raw Materials in the Preparation of Synthetic Compost

Abstract

This work was carried out in attempt to find out the preparation formulas of synthetic compost to be used as a substitute for horse manure under conditions familiar to Turkey. The experiments were conducted at the mushroom research facilities of the Yalova Horticultural Research Institute during three different periods of 1976. In studies of two raw materials and five different activators, wheat straw and paddy straw were used as raw material. Five different activators such as chicken manure, steer manure, sheep manure, a byproduct of the olive oil factory, wheat bran are all being easily obtained in our country were tried as activator. In the experiments, 10 kg of molasses and 15 kg gypsum were supplied for 250 kg of raw materials for each treatment. The nitrogen content of starting mixture was brought to 2% by adding of ammonium nitrate and urea in equalized amount as nitrogen value. 80 kg compost was used for each plot of 1 m^ and the strain of Hauser A₁ was spawned at a rate 500 g per m². The compost was cased with a 4 cm layer of peat adjusted to pH 7.5. The randomized block design with 4 replications in the experiments was used. In the experiments performed during three different periods of 1976, the highest yield was obtained with the amount of 60 kg dry matter that can be added as wheat bran for 250 kg paddy straw. This increase obtained in the yield was found to be statistically highly significant (1%) in all three experiments. Other proper treatments besides paddy straw + wheat bran were the combinations of paddy straw olive oil factory byproduct and wheat straw + wheat bran fall into second group according to the least significant difference test which was done at 5% level based on means concerning the yield. On the hand, the yield obtained from combination of each activator with paddy straw is higher than the yield obtained from combination of the same activator with wheat straw. It is determined that paddy straw can be easily used as a basic raw material for the preparation of synthetic compost according to these results based on this investigation. The effects of five different activators added to two raw materials on earliness during the first 30 of 50 day picking period were found highly significant (1%) in all three experiments. In all three experiments the highest yield during 30 days picking was obtained by paddy straw wheat bran, Combinations of wheat straw + wheat bran and paddy straw + olive, oil factory byproduct followed paddy straw wheat bran in yield.

Keywords

• Mushroom
• Synthetic Compost

References

1. Chio, C.M.S. Cheng, H.J.H. Wang, 1972. Quality control of rice straw composting for mushroom cultivation. Mushroom Science 8:343-346.
2. Delmas, J., F. Laborde, 1972. Mushroom growing on substrate made from municipal compost and pine bark compost Mushroom Science 8: 331 341.
3. D’Hardamae, G., 1970. Communication du C.T.E. Numéro 3. Bull. fed nat. Synd. Cult. 9 Champignon, 1970. No: 192 2437-2446.
4. D’Hardamae, G., J.M. Auıiol, R. Duıand, 1972. Utilisations de compost. Urbain et en addition au compost de fumier de cheval dans la culture du champignon de couche. Mushroom Science 8:331-341.
5. Düzgüneş, O., 1963. Bilimsel araştırmalarda istatistik prensipleri ve metotları. Ege Üniversitesi, İzmir, 375s.
6. Genç, E., 1976. Antalya sahil şeridinde toprak altı galeri sistemi ile çeşitli kompost bileşimlerinde kültür mantarı üretim olanaklarının araştırılması (Sonuç Raporu). Antalya Sebzecilik Araştırma Enstitüsü, 14s.
7. Hartwitz, W., 1970. Nuts and nut products. AOAC methods 11. edition. AOAC. P.O. Box 540. Benjamin Franklin Station Washington DC 20044 (439).
8. Işık, S.E., 1976. Mantar Yetiştiriciliği Seminer Notları. Ege Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi, Sebze Yetiştirme ve Islahı Kürsüsü, 24s.

9. Jackson, M.L., 1962. Soil Chemical analysis. Prentice Hall. Inc. New York.
10. Kaçar, B., 1972. Bitki Analizleri. Ankara Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi, 453(155):22-59.
11. Kneebone, L.R., E.G. Mason, 1972 Sugar cane bagasse as a bulk ingredient in mushroom compost. Mushroom Science 8:321-330.
12. McCanne, C., 1970. A synthetic compost for growing mushrooms. M.G.A. Bull. 1970. No:249. 406 415. Agric. Inst. Kinsealy, Dublin 5.
13. McCanne, C., 1974. A manual for Irish Mushroom Growers. Kinsealy Research Centre Dublin, 5:54-59.
14. Rantcheva, T., 1969. Contribution to the problem of the substitutes for horse manure in mushroom growing. Mushroom Science 7:349-354.
15. Rantcheva, T., 972. Compost for mushroom cultivation without using horse manure or any protein containing additives. Mushroom Science 8:593-602.
16. Rempe, H., 1953. Some experiments with sawdust compost. Mushroom Science 2:131-133.
17. Shin, G.C., G.P. Kim, B.L.O.H., D.S. Kim, 1971. Studies on the composition of mushroom compost. Research Reports of the Office of Rural Development, Plant Environment, 1971. Plant Environment Institute, Suwon, S.Korea 14:197-118.
18. Von Minnegerode, F. 1966. Versuche mit künstlichem kompost. Champignon. 5(57):15-17, 20-24.
19. Yoder, J.B., J.W. Sinden, 1953. Synthetic compost in America. Mushroom Science 2:133-139.