4.6 Article

Optimizing the amount of pig manure in the vermicomposting of spent mushroom (Lentinula) substrate

期刊

PEERJ
卷 8, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PEERJ INC
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.10584

关键词

Spent mushroom substrate (SMS); Pig manure addition; Vermicomposting; Optimizing

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41701300]
  2. Scientific Research Foundation of Liaoning Province [201601338]
  3. Basic Research Project of Colleges and Universities in Liaoning Province [LJ2017QL015]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. The mushroom industry produces a large amount of spent mushroom substrate (SMS), which requires a large geographical footprint and causes pollution. Methods. We sought to optimize the C:N ratio of the initial feedstock used in vermicomposting of SMS by adding pig manure additions. We applied five treatments to the initial feedstock (S0, S1, S2, S3, and S4) with different C:N ratio of approximately 35, 30, 25, 20, and 15, respectively. Results. Our results showed that lignin and cellulose in SMS were degraded after 56 days vermicomposting, especially in S2 (77.05% and 45.29%, respectively) and S3 (65.05% and 48.37%, respectively) treatments. We observed the degradation of the fibrous structure in SMS using pig manure treatments after vermicomposting by microscope and scanning electron microscope. Cellulase and polyphenol oxidase (PPO) were enhanced in pig manure treatments during vermicomposting, especially in the S2 and S3 treatments. The biomass of earthworms in the S2 treatments was at its highest level among all treatments at 28 to 56 days. The high level of PPO activity in the S2 treatment may protect cellulase and earthworms against the aromatic toxicity that is a byproduct of lignin degradation, particularly at 28 to 56 days of vermicomposting. Conclusively, it indicated that the C/N ratio of 25 in the S2 treatment was the optimal for SMS vermicomposting with the addition of pig manure. Our results provide a positive application for the recycling of both SMS and pig manure.

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

4.6
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