MushroomFarming.inA joint educational initiative by
ICAR–DMRSolanCrop-specific reading path · Auricularia species
State the species rather than assuming A. cornea and all other wood ears share the same disease evidence.
Keep the original cultivation guide open →Brown pigmentation and changes during drying can be normal. Colour alone does not diagnose brown rot.
Evidence boundary: Scar and brown-rot studies are host- and country-specific; the library preserves these limits.
These links are a differential list, not a claim that your crop has all these diseases. Each entry states whether it is an established host report, a regional study or a generic process/safety risk.
Pests & vectors
Adults are a monitoring clue. Larvae feeding in substrate, pins or mushrooms cause the direct crop damage.
Production-system risk across crops; most detailed guidance cited concerns commercial Agaricus.
Signs, checks & response →Pests & vectors
Phorids must be distinguished from sciarids because monitoring and biological-control choices are not interchangeable.
Strong commercial Agaricus context; other crops require identification of the actual fly.
Signs, checks & response →Pests & vectors
Some mites damage crops or carry contaminants; others feed on mould or other small organisms. Their presence may point to an underlying contamination problem.
A small moving speck is not enough to identify a harmful mite.
Signs, checks & response →Pests & vectors
Crop decline in wet substrate may justify examination for nematodes, but the presence of nematodes alone does not establish the cause.
Nematode function depends on identity; not all are harmful to mushrooms.
Signs, checks & response →Pests & vectors
Jumping specks and surface grazing require identification and evidence of damage. Not every organism found near a crop is its primary problem.
A broad pest differential, especially where substrate contacts soil or wet organic residues.
Signs, checks & response →Pests & vectors
Missing tissue is not necessarily disease. Feeding, physical damage and contamination by animals require different responses.
Outdoor/log cultivation and entry into protected farms; exact risks vary with location.
Signs, checks & response →Pests & vectors
Identification can prevent the removal of useful organisms. Biological control still needs the correct pest, product, conditions and local legal status.
A decision guide, not an instruction to release an unapproved organism.
Signs, checks & response →Environmental disorders
Interpret shape against the intended crop. Air exchange, carbon dioxide, light and crowding interact; a single photograph cannot choose a ventilation setpoint.
Species and strain matter: a shape desired in enoki or king oyster may be undesirable in another crop.
Signs, checks & response →Environmental disorders
Room humidity does not tell the whole water story. A crop can have wet caps in one rack zone and drying injury in another.
All production systems, with different crop-specific tolerances.
Signs, checks & response →Environmental disorders
A room-air reading can miss a hot substrate core. Equally, a cold chain suitable for button mushrooms must not be assumed suitable for paddy straw.
Substrate, crop and storage temperatures must be interpreted separately for each species.
Signs, checks & response →Environmental disorders
Poorly colonised substrate can be a process failure before a competitor arrives. Treating the visible late mould may miss the original cause.
Ammonia/conditioning is especially relevant to button compost. Bag substrates use different preparation systems.
Signs, checks & response →Environmental disorders
Unexpected forms or lesions after cleaning, spraying or nearby fuel use need an exposure history as well as a disease differential.
Rosecomb is classically described in Agaricus; broader crop filters cover exposure investigation, not identical symptoms.
Signs, checks & response →Environmental disorders
Counting days is not the same as checking readiness. Poor fruiting can follow immature substrate, an unsuitable transition, culture quality or infection.
Species-specific induction and fruiting systems, including cased and uncased crops.
Signs, checks & response →Viruses & culture health
Separate three questions: was the spawn viable, was the substrate suitable, and was the inoculation/handling process sound?
Applies from grain spawn to compost, straw and supplemented wood substrates.
Signs, checks & response →Food & worker safety
Separate when damage started from when someone noticed it. That distinction prevents a storage problem being mislabelled as a growing-room disease.
Harvest, packing, transport and storage; a crop can deteriorate after leaving a healthy room.
Signs, checks & response →Food & worker safety
A healthy-looking mushroom is not proof of food safety. A crop-disease photo guide cannot detect Listeria, Salmonella or unacceptable residues.
All edible-mushroom food chains; enoki outbreak evidence is a specific example, not a claim about every crop.
Signs, checks & response →Food & worker safety
Removing a mouldy crop must not create a dust cloud. The work method and source control are central to protecting people.
Substrate preparation, harvesting, waste handling and cleaning can create different exposures.
Signs, checks & response →Fungal diseases
This is primarily a disease pattern in the growing substrate/mycelium, not simply a mark on a harvested wood-ear fruit body.
Published Auricularia research from China; check the actual species and strain being grown.
Signs, checks & response →Fungal diseases
A reported Trichoderma-associated rot needs to be separated from natural wood-ear pigmentation, drying and general spoilage.
Confirmed in a particular A. cornea production study; not every brown Auricularia is diseased.
Signs, checks & response →Competitor moulds
Rapidly spreading orange growth is an operational contamination problem. A history of food use for selected Neurospora strains does not make an unknown colony safe.
Generic substrate-contamination differential; not a confirmed disease report for every crop listed.
Signs, checks & response →Competitor moulds
Green, blue-green or dark growth is not automatically Trichoderma. Neither harmlessness nor toxin production can be established from its colour.
Raw-material, spawn, substrate and storage contamination differential across production systems.
Signs, checks & response →Competitor moulds
Upright fuzzy growth with tiny dark heads is an observation to record, not a reliable species identification.
Generic contamination differential, not a proven host disease on all crops.
Signs, checks & response →Competitor moulds
Slime moulds belong outside the true fungi. They can cover production surfaces or fruit bodies, but interpretation requires more than appearance.
Reported on several cultivated mushrooms and substrates; presence does not automatically mean parasitic disease.
Signs, checks & response →Scientific Reports · 2019
Used for: Revised identity of the slippery-scar pathogen; earlier reports used S. lignicola.
Limit: Taxonomy has changed. A scar requires laboratory examination, not identification by colour.
Frontiers in Microbiology · 2023
Used for: Auricularia cornea brown rot and confirmed pathogen in the study.
Limit: Do not extend one host’s diagnosis to all wood-ear species. CC BY; experimental and natural panels must be distinguished.
Frontiers in Plant Science · 2024
Used for: Records across shiitake, Auricularia, Hericium, maitake and other crops.
Limit: Review. These organisms are not true fungi; their presence is not automatically proof of parasitism.