Not everything is blue or red or as they usually say, black or white.
If light increases your yield or not depends on three things
- On the mushroom species, you are growing
- The strain you chose
- The phase the mushroom is in
In this article, I will talk about what kind of light works for which mushroom species, especially for the following ones
- Lentunila edodes
- Pleurotus ostreatus
- Pleurotus erygnii
- Hypsizygus Marmoreus
I do this by grouping the findings together according to the mushroom phase for each of the mushroom species[1].
- Spore germination
- Mycelium running
- Primordia Formation
- Fruiting Body Development
Let’s get started.
Effect of light on Pleurotus ostreatus
Effect of light on the spore germination of Pleurotus ostreatus.
In a relatively recent study[2], the author investigated the influence of different color lights on the spore germination on various mushroom species. One of them was Pleurotus ostreatus.
The researcher found that illumination with red light only increased the percentage of total spore germination of Pleurotus ostreatus (Fig. 1).
Figure 1: Spore photosensitivity of Pleurotus ostreatus[3]
As figure 1 indicates. Blue and green light suppresses the germination of Pleurotus ostreatus.
Effect of light on the mycelium growth of Pleurotus ostreatus.
Again, blue light suppresses the growth of mycelium of Pleurotus ostreatus (Fig. 2).
In this research, the mycelium was illuminated with 6 to 105 μmol/m2*s (PPFD) for 7 days in a row (Fig. 2 from top to bottom).
As shown in this figure. The higher the intensity, the higher the suppression of the growth of Pleurotus ostreatus. Which means there is a dose sensitivity.
Figure 2: Suppression effect of blue light stimulation on the growth of Oyster mushroom mycelia[4]
The impact of the irradiation dose was investigated by another study done in 2019. The researcher illuminated the mycelium with a blue, red, and green light for different durations and measured the radius of the mycelium colonies.
As figure 3 shows the highest growth of Pleurotus ostreatus was achieved with the green light (10 s).
Figure 3: Influence of laser irradiation on the average rate of radial growth of Pleurotus ostreatus mycelium[5]
The same figure also indicates that there is actually no suppression of the blue light, as mentioned in the previous study. How could that be possible?
We find the answer in the respective dose of the studies.
In the first study, they illuminated the mycelium with 6 to 105 μmol/m²*s (PPFD).
The dose in the second study was between 0 and 102.5 mJ/cm².
As 1 μmol/m2*s is 1.2 x 10-1 J/m²*s[6], and we know the duration of the second test, we can convert those numbers.
For example, with 51.5 mJ/cm² and 10 s, we will get 6.1 μ mol/m²*s. Which is the just starting point of the first study. Even if we go to the maximum time (20 s), we will only end up with 12.2 μmol/m²*s, which is the second data point of the first test. Which shows only a small suppression.
Effect of light on the development of the fruiting body of Pleurotus ostreatus.
In the next study[7], the authors illuminated the fruiting bodies with fluorescent lamps for different durations (6, 10, 14 hours) and different intensity (100, 300, 500, 700 lx).
It could be shown that the longer the illumination (here 14 hours) and or higher the intensity (here 700 lx), the higher the yield of Pleurotus eryngii (Fig. 4 and Fig 5.).
Figure 4: Yield of Pleurotus ostreatus in relation to the period of lighting[8]
Figure 5: Yield of Pleurotus ostreatus and Pleurotus pulmonarius in relation to the intensity of lighting[9]
In the last study, the author[10] used different color lighting to illuminate Pleurotus ostreatus and investigated the impact on the yield (Fig. 6).
It could be shown that illumination with red and blue increased the weight of Pleurotus ostreatus by 35 % in comparison with the control (no light) and 12 % in comparison with an incandescent lamp.
Figure 6: Effect of LED light on the weight of fresh fruiting bodies of Pleurotus ostreatus[11]
The effect of light on the appearance of the pinheads can be seen in the following video. In it I talk about the use of different light sources to influence the growth of fruiting bodies of Pleurotus ostreatus.
Effect of light on Pleurotus eryngii
Effect of light on the development of the fruiting body of Pleurotus eryngii
The same author of the last study also investigated the impact of LED light on the growth of Pleurotus eryngii. It was found that blue light suppresses to some extent, the growth of Pleurotus eryngii (Fig. 7).
Figure 7: Effect of LED light on the weight of fresh fruiting bodies of Pleurotus eryngii[12]
To the same conclusion came the next author (Fig. 8). He used several different LED lights and analyzed the quality characteristics of Pleurotus eryngii.
The best result (+13 %) was achieved with a red light (650 nm) while not losing the overall quality of the mushroom itself.
The light intensity was between 64.9 and 108 μmol/m²s.
Figure 8: Impact of different LED lights on the fresh weight of fruiting bodies of Pleurotus eryngii[13]
Here is a video in which I talk about the influence of light on the physicochemical and sensory qualities of Pleurotus eryngii, known as the king oyster mushroom.
Effect of light on Lentunila edodes
Effect of light on the spore germination of Lentunila edodes
The same author who investigated the impact of different LED lights on the spore germination of Pleurotus ostreatus also tested the setting for Lentinula edodes.
As shown in figure 9, the best results could be achieved with a blue and red light at a dose of 230 mJ/cm².
Again, the use of green light suppresses the germination process of Lentunila edodes.
Figure 9: Spore photosensitivity of Lentunila edodes[14]
Effect of light on the mycelium growth of Lentunila edodes
The author of the next study used different LED lights to increase the biomass of Lentinula edodes mycelium.
It could be found that green light illuminated for only 1 min/day could increase the dry biomass of Lentinula edodes by around 50 % in comparison to the control (Fig. 10).
Figure 10: Dry biomass of Lentunila edodes mycelia grown under exposure to different LED light sources at 0.35 W/m² and 1 min/d exposure[15]
Effect of light on the development of the fruiting body of Lentunila edodes
The next study investigated not only different light sources but also the impact if the mushrooms were grown of low calcium medium and high calcium medium.
The study found that on low-calcium medium, only red-light lead to the development of fruiting bodies of Lentinula edodes (Fig. 11).
Figure 11: Effect of LED light on the development of Lentunila edodes on low-calcium medium (36 ppm)[16]
On the high-calcium, red-light was not sufficient, and blue light was needed in order to develop fruiting bodies of Lentinula edodes (Fig. 12).
Figure 12: Effect of LED light on the development of Lentunila edodes on high-calcium medium (A: 168 ppm + 8 ml/L bark extract, 138 ppm, 138 ppm + 8 ml/L bark extract)[17]
Effect of light on Hypsizygus Marmoreus
Effect of light on the development of the fruiting body of Hypsizygus marmoreus
The following study investigated the effect of LED lights on the development of the fruit body in Hypsizygus marmoreus.
The authors found that with blue or green light, they could increase the yield per bottle of Hypsizygus marmoreus (Fig. 13) while keeping the commercial yield higher but at the cost of the color (L*value: not shown).
Figure 13: Effect of LED lights on the development of fruit body in Hypsizygus marmoreus (yield)[18]
The next study investigated the light intensity on the yield of Hypsizygus marmoreus and found that the higher the light intensity, the higher the yield of Hypsizygus marmoreus (Fig. 14).
Figure 14: Effect of light intensity using blue LED on developing process in Hypsizygus marmoreus[19]
But at a certain point, the increase of the light intensity does not lead to a higher yield.
How can I measure PPFD?
If you want to measure the PPFD of your light, then you need a PAR/PPFD meter that can measure the photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD). The PPFD gives us the number of photons in micromol per sq. meter and second.
One of them Meters that you can use is the Apogee MQ 500. A hand-held meter, attached via a cable, which gives you enough flexibility.
Figure 15: Apogee MQ 50
It is easy to use. You place the sensor (Fig. 15: blue) under your lighting and turn the reader on. Then move the sensor over the area.
If you do that you will get something similar to figure 16. For example, you can measure at a distance of 12 feet (m) and using a 2 x 2 ft grid or even 4 x 4 ft grid depending on the area you want to illuminate.
Doing so gives you a better understanding of the distribution of the light.
Figure 16: Example of a PAR Meter Map
Effect of light on different mushroom species (summary)
I hope, in my article, I could show to you that not everything is blue or red, but the perfect light for your mushroom depends on the fungus itself and the phase it is in.
In the table below, I summarized all the data I found during my research.
You will find additional information not only about the mentioned mushrooms in my article but also about different mushrooms as well.
| Mushroom species | Mushroom phase | Treatment | Result | Literature |
| Lentunila edodes | Mycelium | Dark, Red (645), Green (515), Blue (465) Exposure time: 0, 1, 5, 30, 60 min/day Light intensity: 0.44, 0.88, 1.77, 3.10, 6.66 W/m² | Green > Blue > Red > Dark Dry weight at 0.35 W/m² + 50% with green light Green light 1 min/day | Glukhova 2011 |
| Lentinula tigrinus | Mycelium | Red, Green, Blue, Fluorescent, Dark | Highest growth: blue light No difference on the density | Damaso 2018 |
| Pleurotus ostreatus | Mycelium | Red, Green, Blue, control 5, 10, 15, 20 s | Best growth: 10 s green light | Reshetnyk 2019 |
| Pleurotus ostreatus | Mycelium | Blue light 120 hours illumination with 6 to 105 μmol/m²s | Suppression of the growth phase 15 genes upregulated 13 genes downregulated | Nakano 2010 |
| Agaricus bisporus | Spore germination | Red (632.8), Green (514.5), Blue (488) 45, 230, 650 mJ/cm² | Red light best result Green suppresses Blue suppresses for some species No difference between continuous and intermittent illumination | Poyedinok 2015 |
| Flammulina velutipe | Spore germination | Red (632.8), Green (514.5), Blue (488) 45, 230, 650 mJ/cm² | Red light best result Green suppresses Blue suppresses for some species No difference between continuous and intermittent illumination | Poyedinok 2015 |
| Ganoderma lucidium | Spore germination | Red (632.8), Green (514.5), Blue (488) 45, 230, 650 mJ/cm² | Red light best result Green suppresses Blue suppresses for some species No difference between continuous and intermittent illumination | Poyedinok 2015 |
| Ganoderma aplanatum | Spore germination | Red (632.8), Green (514.5), Blue (488) 45, 230, 650 mJ/cm² | Red light best result Green suppresses Blue suppresses for some species No difference between continuous and intermittent illumination | Poyedinok 2015 |
| Hericium erinaceus | Spore germination | Red (632.8), Green (514.5), Blue (488) 45, 230, 650 mJ/cm² | Red light best result Green suppresses Blue suppresses for some species No difference between continuous and intermittent illumination | Poyedinok 2015 |
| Lentinula edodes | Spore germination | Red (632.8), Green (514.5), Blue (488) 45, 230, 650 mJ/cm² | Red light best result Green suppresses Blue suppresses for some species No difference between continuous and intermittent illumination | Poyedinok 2015 |
| Pleurotus ostreatus | Spore germination | Red (632.8), Green (514.5), Blue (488) 45, 230, 650 mJ/cm² | Red light best result Green suppresses Blue suppresses for some species No difference between continuous and intermittent illumination | Poyedinok 2015 |
| Hypsizyjus Marmoreus | Primordia | Blue (450), 3.47 μmol/m²s (30 lx) 1, 10, 30 lx Continuous illumination | The lower the intensity the higher the number of primordia | Namba 2002 |
| Pleurotus ostreatus | Fruiting Body | Blue (440), Red (660 or 720), or Blue + Red | Highest yield Blue + Red | Jo 2011 |
| Pleurotus ostreatus | Fruiting body | Blue Green Red Yellow | Blue light increases the length of the stipe and the diameter of the pileus Red light suppresses | PSlusarczyk 2015 |
| Pleurotus ostreatus (PX, K22, B80) | Fruiting body | 6, 10, 14 hours; 100, 300, 500, 700 lx | The longer, the higher the yield The higher the intensity, the higher the yield | Siwulski 2012 |
| Pleurotus pulmonarius (P20) | Fruiting body | 6, 10, 14 hours; 100, 300, 500, 700 lx | The longer, the higher the yield The higher the intensity, the higher the yield | Siwulski 2012 |
| Pleurotus eryngii | Fruiting Body | Blue (440), Red (660 or 720), or Blue + Red, or Green (525) | Highest yield Red | Jo 2011 |
| Pleurotus eryngii | Fruiting Body | Blue (450), Red (650), Green (525), UV (365) with 64.9 to 108 μmol/m²s | Red: Highest yield Highest L*value High overall value | Kim 2012b |
| Hypsizyjus Marmoreus | Fruiting Body | Blue (450), 3.47 μmol/m²s (30 lx) 30, 60, 120 lx Continuous illumination for 12 days | The higher the intensity the higher the yield | Namba 2002 |
| Hypsizygus Marmoreus | Fruiting body | Red, Green, Blue < 150 lx | Green light: rapid formation of the pileus Dark or Red: slow formation Blue: no formation Blue light increases the ergosterol level by 100 % | Jang 2013 |
| Lentinula edodes ATCC48085 | Fruiting Body | 9/15 (on/off) Different light sources | Low Ca-medium Red light: Highest #of primordia Highest #of fruiting bodies High Ca-medium Red: not sufficient Blue: required | Leatham 1987 |
| Lentinus sajor-caju | Fruiting Body | 8/16 (on/off) Blue, Green, Red, White (RGB) | Highest yield: Blue light | Huang 2017 |
Now I want to hear from you:
What fact presented in this article surprised you the most?
Are you excited to experiment with light in the future?
Let me know by leaving a quick comment.
Literature
Glukhova 2011
Damaso 2018
Reshetnyk 2019
https://www.lmaleidykla.lt/ojs/index.php/biologija/article/view/4118
Nakano 2010
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/cab3/82f48bd1beecf343c05dc3373dde480e83e8.pdf
Poyedinok 2015
Namba 2002
https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/apmsb/10/3/10_KJ00007318152/_article
Jo 2011
PSlusarczyk 2015
http://slowacki.kielce.eu/IB/PSlusarczyk.pdf
Siwulski 2012
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/196d/c596c1e4e7d2123daeae1307d5f1fb5599a2.pdf
Kim 2012b
Jang 2013
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3627973/
Leatham 1987
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0007153687801808
Huang 2017
Wetzel 2000
https://books.google.de/books?id=XzjC8nNoSmQC&printsec=frontcover&hl=de#v=onepage&q&f=false
[1] If data are available
[2] Poyedinok 2015
[3] Own figure based on Poyedinok 2005
[4] Nakano 2010
[5] Reshetnyk 2019
[6] Wetzel 2000
[7] Siwulski 2012
[8] Own figure based on Siwulski 2012
[9] Own figure based on Siwulski 2012
[10] Jo 2011
[11] Own figure based on Jo 2011
[12] Own figure based on Jo 2011
[13] Own figure based on Kim 2012b
[14] Own figure based on Poyedinok 2005
[15] Glukhova 2014
[16] Own figure based on Leatham 1987
[17] Own figure based on Leatham 1987
[18] Own figure based on Jang 2013
[19] Own figure based on Namba 2002
This is an amazing resource, thank you!
I will say, I looked through the PSlusarczyk (2015) article and saw that they actually said the stipe length could be confounded because of high CO2. Seems like they only allowed very limited fresh air exchange, and I wonder if the blue light is really the issue here.
Thanks, man! My pleasure.
love your work. you have given so much value in this space. your videos and website are amazing. please done stop!
Hi Groumet Grower, great to hear that you like the content. Don’t worry; my content list is growing faster than mushrooms.