葡萄枝屑栽培毛木耳配方筛选试验

【目的】以葡萄枝屑为主料,筛选出适合毛木耳栽培的培养基配方,为葡萄种植业废弃物资源化利用及开拓食用菌栽培原料应用范围提供科学依据。【方法】以不同比例的葡萄枝屑为主要原料,甘蔗渣、米糠等为辅料配制成3个培养基配方,以常规配方为对照,通过袋栽方式栽培毛木耳,比较不同葡萄枝屑添加比例对毛木耳菌丝生长和生物学效率的影响。【结果】不同葡萄枝屑添加比例培养基对毛木耳菌丝生长及生物学效率的影响不同,其中毛木耳平均产量以配方1(葡萄枝粉72%、甘蔗渣18%、米糠7%、石灰2%、石膏1%)最高,生物学效率达60.9%,其次为配方2(葡萄枝粉54%、甘蔗渣36%、米糠7%、石灰2%、石膏1%),生物学效率为53....

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in南方农业学报 Vol. 42; no. 8; pp. 961 - 963
Main Author 黄卓忠 陈丽新 韦仕岩 覃晓娟
Format Journal Article
LanguageChinese
Published 广西农业科学 院微生物研究所,南宁,530007 2011
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN2095-1191
DOI10.3969/j.issn.2095-1191.2011.08.033

Cover

More Information
Summary:【目的】以葡萄枝屑为主料,筛选出适合毛木耳栽培的培养基配方,为葡萄种植业废弃物资源化利用及开拓食用菌栽培原料应用范围提供科学依据。【方法】以不同比例的葡萄枝屑为主要原料,甘蔗渣、米糠等为辅料配制成3个培养基配方,以常规配方为对照,通过袋栽方式栽培毛木耳,比较不同葡萄枝屑添加比例对毛木耳菌丝生长和生物学效率的影响。【结果】不同葡萄枝屑添加比例培养基对毛木耳菌丝生长及生物学效率的影响不同,其中毛木耳平均产量以配方1(葡萄枝粉72%、甘蔗渣18%、米糠7%、石灰2%、石膏1%)最高,生物学效率达60.9%,其次为配方2(葡萄枝粉54%、甘蔗渣36%、米糠7%、石灰2%、石膏1%),生物学效率为53.3%,且菌丝生长旺盛、前端整齐、洁白浓密、粗壮有力。【结论】经主辅料合理搭配,以葡萄枝屑作为主料栽培毛木耳完全可行。生产中毛木耳栽培的培养基配方以葡萄枝粉54%~72%、甘蔗渣18%~36%、米糠7%、石灰2%、石膏1%较好,毛木耳菌丝长势旺、洁白、粗壮,生物转化率较高。
Bibliography:45-1381/S
sawdust of grape branches; Auricularia polytricha; formula screening; hypha growth; biological efficiency
[Objective]The sawdust of grape branches was used in optimizing the culture formula for cultivating Auricularia polytricha in order to recycle the grape industry wastes and to provide more raw materials for cultivating edible fungi.[Method]Three different proportions of sawdust of grape branches, bagasse and rice bran were mixed together to prepare culture medium for growing A. polytricha. The regular formula without the sawdust of grape branches was taken as the control. The effects of these three treatments on the hypha growth and biological efficiency of A. polytricha was studied using package cultivation technique. [Result]The hypha growth and biological efficiency of A. polytricha differed in different treatments. The formula containing 72, 18, 7, 2 and 1% sawdust of grape branches, bagasse, rice bran, lime and gypsum, respectively, was found to be the best one (biological efficiency of 60.9%
ISSN:2095-1191
DOI:10.3969/j.issn.2095-1191.2011.08.033