Research article

Modeling and optimization of the oyster mushroom growth using artificial neural network: Economic and environmental impacts


  • The main aim of the study is to investigate the growth of oyster mushrooms in two substrates, namely straw and wheat straw. In the following, the study moves towards modeling and optimization of the production yield by considering the energy consumption, water consumption, total income and environmental impacts as the dependent variables. Accordingly, life cycle assessment (LCA) platform was developed for achieving the environmental impacts of the studied scenarios. The next step developed an ANN-based model for the prediction of dependent variables. Finally, optimization was performed using response surface methodology (RSM) by fitting quadratic equations for generating the required factors. According to the results, the optimum condition for the production of OM from waste paper can be found in the paper portion range of 20% and the wheat straw range of 80% with a production yield of about 4.5 kg and a higher net income of 16.54 $ in the presence of the lower energy and water consumption by about 361.5 kWh and 29.53 kg, respectively. The optimum condition delivers lower environmental impacts on Human Health, Ecosystem Quality, Climate change, and Resources by about 5.64 DALY, 8.18 PDF*m2*yr, 89.77 g CO2 eq and 1707.05 kJ, respectively. It can be concluded that, sustainable production of OM can be achieved in line with the policy used to produce alternative food source from waste management techniques.

    Citation: Tarahom Mesri Gundoshmian, Sina Ardabili, Mako Csaba, Amir Mosavi. Modeling and optimization of the oyster mushroom growth using artificial neural network: Economic and environmental impacts[J]. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(10): 9749-9768. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022453

    Related Papers:

    [1] Eduardo González-Olivares, Claudio Arancibia-Ibarra, Alejandro Rojas-Palma, Betsabé González-Yañez . Bifurcations and multistability on the May-Holling-Tanner predation model considering alternative food for the predators. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(5): 4274-4298. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019213
    [2] Huanyi Liu, Hengguo Yu, Chuanjun Dai, Zengling Ma, Qi Wang, Min Zhao . Dynamical analysis of an aquatic amensalism model with non-selective harvesting and Allee effect. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2021, 18(6): 8857-8882. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2021437
    [3] Pei Yu, Xiangyu Wang . Analysis on recurrence behavior in oscillating networks of biologically relevant organic reactions. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(5): 5263-5286. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019263
    [4] Wenjie Yang, Qianqian Zheng, Jianwei Shen, Linan Guan . Bifurcation and pattern dynamics in the nutrient-plankton network. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(12): 21337-21358. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023944
    [5] Urszula Ledzewicz, Behrooz Amini, Heinz Schättler . Dynamics and control of a mathematical model for metronomic chemotherapy. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2015, 12(6): 1257-1275. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2015.12.1257
    [6] V. Volpert, B. Xu, A. Tchechmedjiev, S. Harispe, A. Aksenov, Q. Mesnildrey, A. Beuter . Characterization of spatiotemporal dynamics in EEG data during picture naming with optical flow patterns. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(6): 11429-11463. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023507
    [7] Meiqiao Wang, Wuquan Li . Distributed adaptive control for nonlinear multi-agent systems with nonlinear parametric uncertainties. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(7): 12908-12922. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023576
    [8] Rongjie Yu, Hengguo Yu, Chuanjun Dai, Zengling Ma, Qi Wang, Min Zhao . Bifurcation analysis of Leslie-Gower predator-prey system with harvesting and fear effect. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(10): 18267-18300. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023812
    [9] Wisdom S. Avusuglo, Kenzu Abdella, Wenying Feng . Stability analysis on an economic epidemiological model with vaccination. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2017, 14(4): 975-999. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2017051
    [10] Kelum Gajamannage, Erik M. Bollt . Detecting phase transitions in collective behavior using manifold's curvature. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2017, 14(2): 437-453. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2017027
  • The main aim of the study is to investigate the growth of oyster mushrooms in two substrates, namely straw and wheat straw. In the following, the study moves towards modeling and optimization of the production yield by considering the energy consumption, water consumption, total income and environmental impacts as the dependent variables. Accordingly, life cycle assessment (LCA) platform was developed for achieving the environmental impacts of the studied scenarios. The next step developed an ANN-based model for the prediction of dependent variables. Finally, optimization was performed using response surface methodology (RSM) by fitting quadratic equations for generating the required factors. According to the results, the optimum condition for the production of OM from waste paper can be found in the paper portion range of 20% and the wheat straw range of 80% with a production yield of about 4.5 kg and a higher net income of 16.54 $ in the presence of the lower energy and water consumption by about 361.5 kWh and 29.53 kg, respectively. The optimum condition delivers lower environmental impacts on Human Health, Ecosystem Quality, Climate change, and Resources by about 5.64 DALY, 8.18 PDF*m2*yr, 89.77 g CO2 eq and 1707.05 kJ, respectively. It can be concluded that, sustainable production of OM can be achieved in line with the policy used to produce alternative food source from waste management techniques.



    Consider the following 2×2 block saddle point problems

    A(xy)(ABTB0)(xy)=(fg), (1.1)

    where ARn,n is symmetric positive definite, BRm,n,mn. It appears in many different applications of scientific computing, such as constrained optimization [49], the finite element method for solving the Navier-Stokes equation [29,30,31], and constrained least squares problems and generalized least squares problems [1,38,44,45] and so on; see [9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,19,20,35,39,40] and references therein.

    In recent years, there has been a surge of interest in the saddle point problem of the form (1), and a large number of stationary iterative methods have been proposed. For example, Santos et al. [38] studied preconditioned iterative methods for solving the singular augmented system with A=I. Yuan et al. [44,45] proposed several variants of SOR method and preconditioned conjugate gradient methods for solving general augmented system (1) arising from generalized least squares problems where A can be symmetric and positive semidefinite and B can be rank deficient. The SOR-like method requires less arithmetic work per iteration step than other methods but it requires choosing an optimal iteration parameter in order to achieve a comparable rate of convergence. Golub et al. [32] presented SOR-like algorithms for solving linear systems (1). Darvishi et al. [28] studied SSOR method for solving the augmented systems. Bai et al. [2,3,23,49] presented GSOR method, parameterized Uzawa (PU) and the inexact parameterized Uzawa (PIU) methods for solving linear systems (1). Zhang and Lu [46] showed the generalized symmetric SOR method for augmented systems. Peng and Li [37] studied the unsymmetric block overrelaxation-type methods for saddle point. Bai and Golub [4,5,6,7,8,33,40] presented splitting iteration methods such as Hermitian and skew-Hermitian splitting (HSS) iteration scheme and its preconditioned variants, Krylov subspace methods such as preconditioned conjugate gradient (PCG), preconditioned MINRES (PMINRES) and restrictively preconditioned conjugate gradient (RPCG) iteration schemes, and preconditioning techniques related to Krylov subspace methods such as HSS, block-diagonal, block-triangular and constraint preconditioners and so on. Bai and Wang's 2009 LAA paper [40] and Chen and Jiang's 2008 AMC paper [23] studied some general approaches about the relaxed splitting iteration methods. Wu, Huang and Zhao [42] presented modified SSOR (MSSOR) method for augmented systems. Cao, Du and Niu [19] introduced a shift-splitting preconditioner and a local shift-splitting preconditioner for saddle point problems (1). Moreover, the authors studied some properties of the local shift-splitting preconditioned matrix and numerical experiments of a model stokes problem are presented to show the effectiveness of the proposed preconditioners. Recently, Chen and Ma [22] presented a generalized shift-splitting preconditioner for saddle point problems with symmetric positive definite (1, 1)-block and gave theoretical analysis and numerical experiments.

    For large, sparse or structure matrices, iterative methods are an attractive option. In particular, Krylov subspace methods apply techniques that involve orthogonal projections onto subspaces of the form

    K(A,b)span{b,Ab,A2b,...,An1b,...}.

    The conjugate gradient method (CG), minimum residual method (MINRES) and generalized minimal residual method (GMRES) are common Krylov subspace methods. The CG method is used for symmetric, positive definite matrices, MINRES for symmetric and possibly indefinite matrices and GMRES for unsymmetric matrices [39].

    In this paper, based on generalized shift-splitting preconditioners presented by Chen and Ma [22], I establish a parameterized shift-splitting preconditioner for saddle point problems with symmetric positive definite (1, 1)-block. Furthermore, the preconditioner is based on a parameterized shift-splitting of the saddle point matrix, resulting in an unconditional convergent fixed-point iteration, which has the intersection with the generalized shift-splitting preconditioner. However, the relaxed parameters of the parameterized shift-splitting methods are not optimal and only lie in the convergence region of the method.

    Recently, for the coefficient matrix of the augmented system (1.1), Chen and Ma [22] made the following splitting

    A=12(αI+ABTBβI)12(αIABTBβI), (2.1)

    where α>0,β>0 are two constant numbers and I is the identity matrix (with appropriate dimension). Based on the iteration methods studied in [19,22], a parameterized shift-splitting of the saddle point matrix A can be constructed as follows:

    A=12(αI+A(1αβ)BTBβI)12(αIA(1+αβ)BTBβI), (2.2)

    where α>0,β>0 are two constant numbers and I is the identity matrix (with appropriate dimension). By this special splitting, the following parameterized shift-splitting method can be defined for solving the saddle point problem (1.1):

    Parameterized shift-splitting (PSS) method: Given initial vectors u0Rm+n, and two relaxed parameters α>0 and β>0. For k=0,1,2,... until the iteration sequence {uk} converges, compute

    12(αI+A(1αβ)BTBβI)uk+1=12(αIA(1+αβ)BTBβI)uk+(fg), (2.3)

    where α>0,β>0 are two constant numbers. It is easy to see that the iteration matrix of the Parameterized shift-splitting iteration is

    Γ=(αI+A(1αβ)BTBβI)1(αIA(1+αβ)BTBβI). (2.4)

    If we use a Krylov subspace method such as GMRES (Generalized Minimal Residual) method or its restarted variant to approximate the solution of this system of linear equations, then

    TPSS=12(αI+A(1αβ)BTBβI), (2.5)

    can be served as a preconditioner. We call the preconditioner PPSS the parameterized shift-splitting preconditioner for the nonsymmetric saddle point matrix A.

    In every iteration of the parameterized shift-splitting iteration (2.5) or the preconditioned Krylov subspace method, we need solve a residual equation

    (αI+A(1+αβ)BTBβI)z=r (2.6)

    needs to be solved for a given vector r at each step. Since the matrix PPSS has the following matrix factorization

    TPSS=12(I1αββBT0I)(A+αI+1αββBTB00βI)(I01βBI). (2.7)

    Let r=[rT1,rT2]T and z=[zT1,zT2]T, where r1,z1Rn and r2,z2Rm. Then by (8), it can resuly in

    (z1z2)=(I01αββI)(A+αI+1αββBTB00βI)(I1βBT0I)(r1r2). (2.8)

    Hence, analogous to Algorithm 2.1 in [19], we can derive the following algorithmic version of the generalized shift-splitting iteration method.

    Algorithm 2.1. For a given vector r=[rT1,rT2]T, the vector z=[zT1,zT2]T can be computed by (9) from the following steps:

    Step 1: t1=r11αββBTr2;

    Step 2: Solve (A+αI+1αββBTB)z1=t1;

    Step 3: z2=1β(Bz1+r2).

    Now, we turn to study the convergence of the parameterized shift-splitting iteration for solving symmetric saddle point problems. It is well known that the iteration method (2.5) is convergent for every initial guess if and only if ρ(Γ)<1, where ρ(Γ) denotes the spectral radius of Γ). Let λ be an eigenvalue of Γ) and [x,y] be the corresponding eigenvector. Then we have

    (αIA(1+αβ)BTBβI)(xy)=λ(αI+A(1αβ)BTBβI)(xy), (2.9)

    or equivalently,

    (λ1)αx+(λ+1)Ax+(1+αβ+λλαβ)BTy=0,(λ+1)Bx+(1λ)βy=0. (2.10)

    To get the convergence of the parameterized shift-splitting iteration, we first give some lemmas.

    Lemma 2.1. Let A be a symmetric positive definite matrix, and B has full row rank. Let Γ be defined as in (5) with α>0 and β>0. If λ be an eigenvalue of Γ, then λ±1.

    Proof. Let [x,y] be the corresponding eigenvector of λ. if λ=1, then from (11) we have

    (ABTB0)(xy)=0. (2.11)

    It is easy to get that the coefficient matrix of (2.11) is nonsingular. Hence x=0 and y=0. which contradicts the assumption that [x,y] is an eigenvector of the iteration matrix Γ. So λ1.

    Now, we prove that λ1. If λ=1, then from (2.10) we can obtain

    2αx+2αβBTy=0,and2βy=0. (2.12)

    Since α>0,β>0, from (2.12) we get x=0 and y=0, which also contradict the assumption that [x,y] is an eigenvector of the iteration matrix Γ. So λ1. This completes the proof.

    Lemma 2.2. Assume A be a symmetric positive definite matrix, and B has full row rank. Let λ be an eigenvalue of Γ(with α>0 and β>0) and [x,y] be the corresponding eigenvector with xCn and yCm. Then x0. Moreover, if y=0, then |λ|<1.

    Proof. If x=0, then from (11) we have (1+αβ+λλαβ)BTy=0. By Lemma 2.1 we know that λ1 and α>0,β>0. Thus we have BTy=0. Because BT has full column rank, we get y=0, which contradicts with the assumption that [x,y] is an eigenvector. Thus x0. From Lemma 2.2 [21], we easy know |λ|≤∥(αI+A)1(αIA)2.

    Theorem 2.3. Assume ARn×n be a symmetric positive definite matrix, and BRm×n has full row rank, and let α,β be two positive constants. Let ρ(Γ) denote the spectral radius of the parameterized shift-splitting iteration matrix. Then it holds that

    ρ(Γ)<1,α>0,β>0, (2.13)

    i.e., the parameterized shift-splitting iteration converges to the unique solution of the saddle point problem (1.1).

    Proof. Let λ be an eigenvalue of Γ and [x,y] be the corresponding eigenvector with xCn and yCm. By Lemma 2.1 we obtain λ1. Then we can obtain from (2.10) that

    y=λ+1β(λ1)Bx. (2.14)

    Substituting (2.14) into the first equation of (2.10), we get

    (λ1)αx+(λ+1)Ax+(1+αβ+λλαβ)(λ+1)β(λ1)BTBx=0. (2.15)

    By Lemma 2.2, we obtain that x0. Multiplying β(λ1) as well as xxx on both sides of Eq. (2.15), we have

    αβ(λ1)2+β(λ21)xAxxx+(1+αβ+λλαβ)(λ+1)xBTBxxx=0. (2.16)

    Let

    a=xAxxx,b=xBTBxxx. (2.17)

    Because A is a symmetric positive definite matrix and B has full row rank, we get a>0 and b0. Substituting (2.17) into (2.16), we know that λ satisfies the following real quadratic equation

    λ2+2b2αβαβ+βa+b+αβbλ+αββa+b+αβbαβ+βa+b+αβb=0. (2.18)

    Then from Lemma 2.2, we know that a sufficient and necessary condition for the roots of the real quadratic equation (2.18) to satisfy |λ|<1 is

    |αββa+b+αβbαβ+βa+b+αβb|<1, (2.19)

    and

    |2b2αβαβ+βa+b+αβb|<1+αββa+b+αβbαβ+βa+b+αβb. (2.20)

    It is easy to find that (2.19) and (2.20) hold for all α>0 and β>0 when a>0 and b>0. Also, if b=0, there is a x0 such that Bx=0. Then by Lemma 2.1, from (2.10) we have y=0. Hence, by Lemma 2.2 we have |λ|<1. Thus ρ(Γ)<1. Then, we get (2.13), e.e., the parameterized shift-splitting iteration converges to the unique solution of the saddle point problem (1.1).

    Remark 2.1. When α=0, The parameterized shift-splitting preconditioner reduces to the local shift-splitting preconditioner. Moreover, the parameterized shift-splitting preconditioner in this paper and the generalized shift-splitting preconditioner in [21] are two different preconditioning modes. Moreover, they have an intersection.

    Remark 2.2 From Theorem 2.3, we know that the parameterized shift-splitting iteration method is uncondit0inally convergent.

    In this section, I present one example to illustrate the effectiveness of the parameter shift-splitting preconditioner for GMRES(m) method and MINRES to solve the linear systems (1) in the sense of iteration step (denoted as "It"), elapsed CPU time in seconds (denoted as "CPU"), and relative residual error (denoted as "RES"). All numerical examples are carried out in Matlab 7.0. In our experiments, all runs with respect to both GSS method and PSS method are started from initial vector ((x(0))T,(y(0))T)T=0, and terminated if the current iteration satisfy RES<106.

    Example 3.1. [18] Consider the linear system of equations (1) with

    T=IV+VIandW=10(IVC+VCI)+9(e1eTl+eleT1)I,

    where V=tridiag(1,2,1)Rl×l,VC=Ve1eTleleT1Rl×l and e1 and el are the first and last unit vectors in Rl, respectively. Here T and K correspond to the five-point centered difference matrices approximating the negative Laplacian operator with homogeneous Dirichlet boundary conditions and periodic boundary conditions, respectively, on a uniform mesh in the unit square [0,1]×[0,1] with the mesh-size h=1l+1.

    In Figures 1 ~ 4, I report the eigenvalue distribution for the generalized shift-splitting preconditioned matrix T1GSSA and the parameter shift-splitting preconditioned matrix for different parameter, respectively. In Tables 1 ~ 4, we report iteration counts, relative residual and cpu time about preconditioned matrices T1GSSA and T1PSSA with l=16 and l=24 when choosing different parameters. Figures 1 ~ 4 and Tables 1 ~ 4 show that the GSS preconditioner and PSS preconditioner have the same eigenvalue distribution and the convergence when choosing different parameters.

    Figure 1.  The eigenvalue distribution for the parameter shift-splitting preconditioned matrix T1PSSA when α=0.001,β=0.002(the first), α=0.003,β=0.001 (the second), α=0.005,β=0.006(the third), α=0.007,β=0.004(the fourth) and α=0.009,β=0.008 (the fifth), respectively. Here, l=16.
    Figure 2.  The eigenvalue distribution for the generalized shift-splitting preconditioned matrix T1GSSA when α=0.001,β=0.002(the first), α=0.003,β=0.001 (the second), α=0.005,β=0.006(the third), α=0.007,β=0.004(the fourth) and α=0.009,β=0.008 (the fifth), respectively. Here, l=16.
    Figure 3.  The eigenvalue distribution for the parameter shift-splitting preconditioned matrix T1PSSA when α=0.001,β=0.002(the first), α=0.003,β=0.001 (the second), α=0.005,β=0.006(the third), α=0.007,β=0.004(the fourth) and α=0.009,β=0.008 (the fifth), respectively. Here, l=24.
    Figure 4.  The eigenvalue distribution for the generalized shift-splitting preconditioned matrix T1GSSA when α=0.001,β=0.002(the first), α=0.003,β=0.001 (the second), α=0.005,β=0.006(the third), α=0.007,β=0.004(the fourth) and α=0.009,β=0.008 (the fifth), respectively. Here, l=24.
    Table 1.  Iteration counts, relative residual and CPU time about preconditioned matrices T1GSSA and T1PSSA when choosing different parameters. Here, p=16.
    T1PSSA α β ItBiCGSTAB ResBiCGSTAB CPU(s)
    0.001 0.002 2 6.5007×107 0.147
    0.003 0.001 1 8.0657×107 0.074
    0.005 0.006 5.5 6.5785×107 0.367
    0.007 0.004 4 5.9859×107 0.262
    0.009 0.008 2 6.4956×107 0.142
    T1GSSA α β ItBiCGSTAB ResBiCGSTAB CPU(s)
    0.001 0.002 2 6.5008×107 0.146
    0.003 0.001 1 8.0664×107 0.072
    0.005 0.006 5.5 4.6159×107 0.329
    0.007 0.004 4 6.1723×107 0.268
    0.009 0.008 2 6.4961×107 0.151

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Table 2.  Iteration counts, relative residual and CPU time about preconditioned matrices T1GSSA and T1PSSA when choosing different parameters. Here, p=16.
    T1PSSA α β ItGMRES ResGMRES CPU(s)
    0.001 0.002 9(1) 1.8872×108 0.394
    0.003 0.001 8(1) 3.4887×107 0.359
    0.005 0.006 13(1) 3.2668×107 0.499
    0.007 0.004 11(1) 4.7948×107 0.432
    0.009 0.008 13(1) 8.5534×107 0.530
    T1GSSA α β ItGMRES ResGMRES CPU(s)
    0.001 0.002 9(1) 1.8871×108 0.402
    0.003 0.001 8(1) 3.4834×107 0.358
    0.005 0.006 13(1) 3.2640×107 0.510
    0.007 0.004 11(1) 4.7939×107 0.432
    0.009 0.008 13(1) 8.5183×107 0.493

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Table 3.  Iteration counts, relative residual and CPU time about preconditioned matrices T1GSSA and T1PSSA when choosing different parameters. Here, p=24.
    T1PSSA α β ItBiCGSTAB ResBiCGSTAB CPU(s)
    0.001 0.002 2.5 9.8445×107 1.557
    0.003 0.001 1 8.6139×107 0.583
    0.005 0.006 5.5 7.2770×107 3.166
    0.007 0.004 4 9.6488×107 2.366
    0.009 0.008 17 9.2708×107 10.313
    T1GSSA α β ItBiCGSTAB ResBiCGSTAB CPU(s)
    0.001 0.002 2.5 9.8383×107 1.551
    0.003 0.001 1 8.6147×107 0.580
    0.005 0.006 5.5 6.9932×107 3.382
    0.007 0.004 4 9.4912×107 2.391
    0.009 0.008 20.5 9.0799×107 12.469

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Table 4.  Iteration counts, relative residual and CPU time about preconditioned matrices T1GSSA and T1PSSA when choosing different parameters. Here, p=24.
    T1PSSA α β ItGMRES ResGMRES CPU(s)
    0.001 0.002 16(1) 7.7884×108 5.527
    0.003 0.001 13(1) 7.5976×107 4.262
    0.005 0.006 20(1) 6.4167×107 6.343
    0.007 0.004 16(1) 8.7812×107 5.338
    0.009 0.008 21(1) 6.5959×107 6.970
    T1GSSA α β ItGMRES ResGMRES CPU(s)
    0.001 0.002 16(1) 7.7882×108 5.500
    0.003 0.001 13(1) 7.5943×107 4.400
    0.005 0.006 20(1) 6.4171×107 6.298
    0.007 0.004 16(1) 8.7812×107 5.288
    0.009 0.008 21(1) 6.6135×107 6.897

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    In this paper, the author presents a parameterized shift-splitting preconditioner for saddle point problems with symmetric positive definite (1,1)block. Theoretical analysis shows that PSS method is an unconditional convergent fixed-point iteration. Furthermore, numerical example indicates that the GSS preconditioner and PSS preconditioner have the same eigenvalue distribution and the convergence when choosing different parameters.

    This research of this author is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (11226337, 11501525), Excellent Youth Foundation of Science & Technology Innovation of Henan Province (184100510001, 184100510004), Science & Technology Innovation Talents in Universities of Henan Province(16HASTIT040, 17HASTIT012), Aeronautical Science Foundation of China (2016ZG55019, 2017ZD55014), Project of Youth Backbone Teachers of Colleges and Universities of Henan Province (2015GGJS-003, 2015GGJS-179), Advanced Technological Research Project of Henan Province (182102110129), Henan Province Postdoctoral Science Foundation (2013031), Research on Innovation Ability Evaluation Index System and Evaluation Model (142400411268). The work of Chaoqian Li is supported partly by the Applied Basic Research Programs of Science and Technology Department of Yunnan Province [2018FB001], Outstanding Youth Cultivation Project for Yunnan Province [2018YDJQ021] and Program for Excellent Young Talents in Yunnan University. The work of Yaotang Li is supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (11861077).

    All authors confirm that there is no conflict of interest in this paper.



    [1] J. Worrall, C. S. Yang, Shiitake and oyster mushroom production on apple pomace and sawdust, HortScience, 27 (1992), 1131-1133. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI.27.10.1131 doi: 10.21273/HORTSCI.27.10.1131
    [2] J. Ashraf, M. A. Ali, W. Ahmad, C. M. Ayyub, J. Shafi, Effect of different substrate supplements on oyster mushroom (Pleurotus spp.) production, Food Sci. Technol., 1 (2013), 44-51. https://doi.org/10.13189/fst.2013.010302 doi: 10.13189/fst.2013.010302
    [3] R. Zhang, X. Li, J. Fadel, Oyster mushroom cultivation with rice and wheat straw, Bioresour. Technol., 82 (2002), 277-284. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-8524(01)00188-2 doi: 10.1016/S0960-8524(01)00188-2
    [4] M. N. Uddin, S. Yesmin, M. A. Khan, M. Tania, M. Moonmoon, S. Ahmed, Production of oyster mushrooms in different seasonal conditions of Bangladesh, Bioresour. Technol., 3 (2011), 161. https://doi.org/10.3329/jsr.v3i1.6130 doi: 10.3329/jsr.v3i1.6130
    [5] J. Kumla, N. Suwannarach, A. Jaiyasen, B. Bussaban, S. Lumyong, Development of an edible wild strain of Thai oyster mushroom for economic mushroom production, Chiang Mai J. Sci., 40 (2013), 161-172.
    [6] G. V. Thomas, S. R. Prabhu, M. Z. Reeny, B. M. Bopaiah, Evaluation of lignocellulosic biomass from coconut palm as substrate for cultivation of Pleurotus sajor-caju (Fr.) Singer, World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol., 14 (1998), 879-882. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008881124903 doi: 10.1023/A:1008881124903
    [7] M. Obodai, J. Cleland-Okine, K. A. Vowotor, Comparative study on the growth and yield of Pleurotus ostreatus mushroom on different lignocellulosic by-products, J. Ind. Microbiol. Biotechnol., 30 (2003), 146-149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10295-002-0021-1 doi: 10.1007/s10295-002-0021-1
    [8] A. Keneni, G. Kebede, Cultivation of Oyster Mushroom (Pleurotus ostreatus) on substratum composed of waste paper and cotton seed wastes, Adv. J. Agric. Res., 2 (2014), 114-122.
    [9] I. O. Fasidi, Studies on Volvariella esculenta (Mass) Singer: cultivation on agricultural wastes and proximate composition of stored mushrooms, Food Chem., 55 (1996), 161-163. https://doi.org/10.1016/0308-8146(95)00082-8 doi: 10.1016/0308-8146(95)00082-8
    [10] Q. A. Mandeel, A. A. Al-Laith, S. A. Mohamed, Cultivation of oyster mushrooms (Pleurotus spp.) on various lignocellulosic wastes, World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol., 21 (2005), 601-607. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11274-004-3494-4 doi: 10.1007/s11274-004-3494-4
    [11] R. Cohen, L. Persky, Y. Hadar, Biotechnological applications and potential of wood-degrading mushrooms of the genus Pleurotus, Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol., 58 (2002), 582-594. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-002-0930-y doi: 10.1007/s00253-002-0930-y
    [12] Y. Zhang, W. Geng, Y. Shen, Y. Wang, Y. Dai, Edible mushroom cultivation for food security and rural development in China: bio-innovation, technological dissemination and marketing, Sustainability, 6 (2014), 2961-2973. https://doi.org/10.3390/su6052961 doi: 10.3390/su6052961
    [13] P. Khanna, H. Garcha, Pleurotus mushroom—A source of food protein, Mushroom News Lett. Trop., 4 (1984), 9-14.
    [14] T. Hussain, Growing mushroom: a new horizon in agriculture, Mushroom J., 21 (2001), 23-26.
    [15] M. Kadiri, Effect of additives on mycelial growth and fructification of Pleurotus squarrosulus (Polyporales: Polyporaceae), Rev. Biol. Trop., (1994), 49-52.
    [16] E. Baysal, H. Peker, M. K. Yalinkiliç, A. Temiz, Cultivation of oyster mushroom on waste paper with some added supplementary materials, Bioresour. Technol., 89 (2003), 95-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-8524(03)00028-2 doi: 10.1016/S0960-8524(03)00028-2
    [17] G. Finnveden, M. Z. Hauschild, T. Ekvall, J. Guinée, R. Heijungs, S. Hellweg, et al., Recent developments in life cycle assessment, J. Environ. Manage., 91 (2009), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.06.018 doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.06.018
    [18] J. B. Guinee, R. Heijungs, G. Huppes, A. Zamagni, P. Masoni, R. Buonamici, et al., Life cycle assessment: past, present, and future, Environ. Sci. Technol., 45 (2011), 90-96. https://doi.org/10.1021/es101316v doi: 10.1021/es101316v
    [19] M. Trojanová, A. Hošovský, Comparison of different neural networks models for identification of manipulator arm driven by fluidic muscles, Acta Polytech. Hung., 15 (2018), 7-28.
    [20] S. Nosratabadi, S. Ardabili, Z. Lakner, C. Mako, A. Mosavi, Prediction of food production using machine learning algorithms of multilayer perceptron and ANFIS, Agriculture, 11 (2021), 408. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11050408 doi: 10.3390/agriculture11050408
    [21] F. Ecer, S. Ardabili, S. Band, A. Mosavi, Training multilayer perceptron with genetic algorithms and particle swarm optimization for modeling stock price index prediction, Entropy, 22 (2020), 1239. https://doi.org/10.3390/e22111239 doi: 10.3390/e22111239
    [22] N. A. Amenaghawon, S. E. Ogbeide, C. O. Okieimen, Application of statistical experimental design for the optimisation of dilute sulphuric acid hydrolysis of cassava Bagasse, Acta Polytech. Hung., 11 (2014), 239-250.
    [23] P. Usubharatana, H. Phungrassami, Life cycle assessment of the straw mushroom production, Appl. Ecol. Environ. Res., 14 (2016), 189-200. https://doi.org/10.15666/aeer/1401_189200 doi: 10.15666/aeer/1401_189200
    [24] F. Leiva, J. Saenz-Díez, E. Martínez, E. Jiménez, J. Blanco, Environmental impact of Agaricus bisporus cultivation process, Eur. J. Agron., 71 (2015), 141-148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2015.09.013 doi: 10.1016/j.eja.2015.09.013
    [25] B. Robinson, K. Winans, A. Kendall, J. Dlott, A life cycle assessment of Agaricus bisporus mushroom production in the USA, Int. J. Life Cycle Assess., 24 (2019), 456-467. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-018-1456-6 doi: 10.1007/s11367-018-1456-6
    [26] M. G. A. Gunady, W. Biswas, V. A. Solah, A. P. James, Evaluating the global warming potential of the fresh produce supply chain for strawberries, romaine/cos lettuces (Lactuca sativa), and button mushrooms (Agaricus bisporus) in Western Australia using life cycle assessment (LCA), J. Cleaner Prod., 28 (2012), 81-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.12.031 doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.12.031
    [27] C. O. Bamigboye, J. K. Oloke, M. Burton, J. F. Dames, A. Lateef, Optimization of the process for producing biomass and exopolysaccharide from the king tuber oyster mushroom, Pleurotus tuber-regium (Agaricomycetes), for biotechnological applications, Int. J. Med. Mushrooms, 21 (2019), 311-322. https://doi.org/10.1615/IntJMedMushrooms.2019030357 doi: 10.1615/IntJMedMushrooms.2019030357
    [28] F. R. Vieira, M. C. N. de Andrade, Optimization of substrate preparation for oyster mushroom (Pleurotus ostreatus) cultivation by studying different raw materials and substrate preparation conditions (composting: phases Ⅰ and Ⅱ), World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol., 32 (2016), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11274-016-2152-y doi: 10.1007/s11274-015-1971-6
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Bo Wu, Xing-Bao Gao, A modified parameterized shift-splitting preconditioner for saddle point problems, 2021, 40, 2238-3603, 10.1007/s40314-020-01383-5
    2. Shengzhong Song, Zhengda Huang, A two-parameter shift-splitting preconditioner for saddle point problems, 2022, 124, 08981221, 7, 10.1016/j.camwa.2022.08.018
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2022 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(3711) PDF downloads(271) Cited by(5)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog