Physical degradation of wheat straw by the in-vessel and windrow methods of mushroom compost production
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mushroom compost manufacturers in Ireland are moving away from the traditional outdoor phase I windrow method, favouring in-vessel production. Composters and growers have reported better quality compost with faster spawn run and higher yields produced by this process. In the present study, physical examination of samples highlighted differences when comparing the windrow and in-vessel methods of compost production. Observations using scanning electron microscopy suggest that the cuticle of wheat straw from in-vessel production is damaged during phase I, peeling away from the surface in fragments, and exposing the epidermis. Changes in silicon levels on the straw surface acted as a marker for cuticle damage when comparing both composting systems. Cuticle damage may be important during composting and afterwards, as substrate colonisation is faster, and consequently spawn run is shorter. The phase I compost microbial community is altered by the in-vessel technique, producing a predominantly thermophilic bacterial flora in contrast to the mesophilic and thermophilic bacteria and fungi found in windrow phase I compost. These differences may be significant in mushroom compost production.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".