A new circular economy approach for integrated production of tomatoes and mushrooms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spent mushroom Substrate is the by-product generated at the end of the mushroom growing cycle. It can be used in agriculture for different purposes, including seedling production, soil conditioning or application as an organic fertilizer. Tomato is one of the world́s most important crops, requiring considerable care, in terms of both nutrition and disease control. The objective of this study was to investigate the viability of spent mushroom substrate as a nutrient source for tomato seedlings and develop an integrated tomato and mushroom co-production system. For seedling production, different compositions were evaluated with spent mushroom substrate from Pleurotus ostreatus or substrate colonized with Agaricus bisporus. The parameters evaluated comprised germination rate, seedling quality and physicochemical analysis. A tomato and mushroom integrated production system was developed using a 40-liter pot divided into upper (spent mushroom substrate and soil), middle (spent mushroom substrate from P. ostreatus) and lower (gravel) layers. For seedlings production, plants treated with the substrate colonized with A. bisporus presented a superior root length (10.1 cm) and aerial part length (6.6 cm). Co-production of tomato and mushrooms was also shown to be viable. In this co-cultivation system between tomato and mushroom, the treatment with the substrate colonized with A. bisporus differed from others, with this treatment presenting high yields of tomato (2.35 kg/plant pot) and mushrooms (1.33 kg/plant pot) within the same bucket. With this co-production system, the tomato production time was reduced by 60 days and prolonged continuous mushroom production by 120 days. These findings show a sustainable approach to manage different agroindustrial residues, encouraging the use of these residues for olericulture and fungiculture 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".