4.8 Article

Composition variability of spent mushroom compost in Ireland

期刊

BIORESOURCE TECHNOLOGY
卷 99, 期 2, 页码 411-418

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2006.12.012

关键词

spent mushroom compost; composition; variability

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Spent mushroom compost (SMC) has proven to be an attractive material for improving soil structure in tilled soils and increasing dry matter production in grassland soils, owing to its high organic matter content and availability of essential plant nutrients. Because of this, it is important to identify the variability in composition of SMC in order to evaluate its merit as a fertilizer/soil conditioner. For this reason, a study was carried out involving the analysis of SMC samples obtained from five mushroom growers using compost from each of the 13 mushroom composting yards currently operating in both Northern Ireland (5 yd) and the Republic of Ireland (8 yd). The selected parameters measured include dry matter, organic matter, total N, P and K, C/N ratio; plant-available P and K, pH, EC, total Ca, Mg, Na, Cu, Zn, Fe, Mn, Cd, Cr, Ni, Pb; and cellulose, hemicellulose and lignin constituents. Yield of mushroom data were also collected from the selected growers. There were significant differences (P < 0.05) within two compost production yards for some parameters, therefore, for the most part, the uniformity of SMC within each yard is relatively consistent. However, significant differences (P < 0.05) were evident when comparing SMC obtained from growers supplied with compost from Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland independently, particularly among total and available phosphorus and potassium values. The results obtained show that, while SMC has fertilizer merit, its variability of composition must be taken into aclcount when assessing this value. The variability of composition is also of particular interest in the context of recent emphasis on plant nutrient management in agriculture. (c) 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据