Carbon and nitrogen environmental trade-offs of winter rye cellulosic biomass in the Chesapeake Watershed

Ramcharan, Amanda; Richard, Tom L.

doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2017.05.017

Cited by 10 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Harvesting WCR biomass will not affect the potential of this crop to mitigate nitrate-N loss as well. By employing biophysical model cycles, Ramcharan and Richard (2017) reported that including WCR in the cornsoybean (Glycine Max L.) rotation in the U.S. mid-Atlantic region significantly reduced nitrate-N leaching over a winter fallow control (77% on average), even when the WCR was fertilized, and regardless of whether its biomass was harvested as cellulosic feedstock.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Profitability of dual‐purpose rye cover crop as influenced by harvesting date

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Harvesting annual winter cereal rye (Secale cereale L.) (WCR) as an emergency forage could offset cover crop establishment costs, facilitate WCR adoption, and still provide multiple ecosystem benefits. A five site-year trial was conducted in Colorado (CO) and Illinois (IL) to evaluate the effect of harvest date on WCR forage yield, quality, and its economic performance. From March to April, WCR dry matter (DM) yield increased exponentially in CO and linearly in IL. The DM yield at Julian day (DOY) 112-116 in CO was 6.9, 5.0, and 5.2 Mg ha -1 in 2018, 2019, and 2020, respectively, compared with 4.7 and 2.7 Mg ha -1 in IL in 2019 and 2020, respectively. Delayed harvesting increased acid detergent fiber and neutral detergent fiber concentrations and decreased crude, total digestible nutrients, and relative feed quality. Yield-quality trade-off showed that forage yield increased rapidly but forage quality declined after DOY 105-108. Economic analysis, including cost of nutrient removal and 10% cash crop (corn [Zea mays L.]) yield penalty following WCR production revealed harvesting WCR biomass as forage was economically feasible in four out of five site-years at hay price over $132 Mg -1 . Eliminating corn yield penalty indicated profitability in four site-years at hay price of ≥$110 Mg -1 and removing nutrient removal costs made all site-years profitable at hay price of ≥$110 Mg -1 . It was concluded that harvesting WCR biomass can be a profitable and effective strategy for sustainable intensification that can offer environmental stewardship and economic benefit. INTRODUCTIONWinter cereals have shown to be excellent cover crops in various agroclimatic conditions (Kaspar & Bakkar, 2015).

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Profitability of dual‐purpose rye cover crop as influenced by harvesting date

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Root Zone Water Quality Model (RZWQM) has been used to investigate crop yield and nitrate leaching in China (Sun et al, 2018), where the model validation was described in a previous study (Sun et al, 2016). The model has been thoroughly tested in Iowa for numerous subsurface drained corn–soybean systems (Thorp et al, 2007, 2008; Malone et al, 2010, 2014b; Fang et al, 2012), including several with winter rye as a cover crop (Li et al, 2008; Qi et al, 2011; Malone et al, 2014a; Gillette et al, 2018).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Shao et al (2015) showed that fertilizing and harvesting winter rye can increase feedstock supplies and producer revenue compared with unfertilized rye, but N losses to subsurface drainage and net energy potential of the system were not investigated. Studies have addressed various combinations of potential producer revenue, N loss to the environment, and net energy potential of agricultural systems that include harvested winter rye (e.g., Rotz et al, 2002;Igos et al, 2016;Ramcharan and Richard, 2017). But studies are needed that simultaneously address potential producer revenue, N loss to subsurface drainage, and net energy potential of corn-soybean systems in the US Midwest that include harvested and fertilized double-cropped winter rye.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Harvesting Fertilized Rye Cover Crop: Simulated Revenue, Net Energy, and Drainage Nitrogen Loss

Malone

Obrycki

Karlen

et al. 2018

Agricultural & Env Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Harvesting fertilized rye (Secale cereale L.) cover crop has been suggested as a method to increase producer revenue and biofuel feedstock production, but drainage N loss impacts are currently unknown. Using the tested Root Zone Water Quality Model (RZWQM) across several N rates, spring application of 120 kg N ha -1 prior to winter rye harvest reduced drainage N loss by 54% compared with no cover crop and by 18% compared with planted rye that was neither fertilized nor harvested. Estimates of producer revenue and net energy were also positive, with 8.3 Mg ha -1 of harvested rye biomass. If confirmed by field studies, these results suggest that double-cropping fertilized rye is a promising strategy to increase producer revenue, increase net energy production, and reduce drainage N loss. Core Ideas• Fertilizing winter rye increased estimated revenue and harvestable biomass.• Fertilizing winter rye increased net energy production.• Harvesting fertilized winter rye reduced simulated drainage N loss.• Rye revenue in response to fertilizer rate plateaued at approximately 120 kg N ha −1 .• Field studies are needed to evaluate fertilized/ harvested rye cover crop.Abbreviations: CC, cover crop; CCH, unfertilized harvested cover crop; CCH_L_x, late harvest of fertilized cover crop; DM, dry matter; NCC, no cover crop.

show abstract

“…In some places, the potential for BDR is relatively small. For example, in the UK, the amount of biomethane that we estimate could be produced is about 3.2 Bm, 3 or about 3% of the UK's current natural gas consumption, due to the limited potential for application of double cropping in the UK. The limitations arise because we assume that the land area in the UK currently used for arable cropping has low potential to implement the BDR sequential cropping systems advocated due to a relatively short primary growing season compared to the longer growing season and greater degree days available in continental Europe.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…About half the atmospheric carbon taken up by double crops is partitioned below ground to the roots, so that, even with harvesting the aboveground biomass, these double crops can increase soil carbon accumulation. 3,4 The vast majority of that aboveground biomass carbon would normally decompose to atmospheric CO 2 within a year, and less than 10% would become soil organic matter. 5,6 In contrast, in a digester, about 70% of the carbon goes to biogas and 30% is transformed into more stable carbon in the digestate residue.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The potential for expanding sustainable biogas production and some possible impacts in specific countries

Dale

Bozzetto²,

Couturier

et al. 2020

Biofuels Bioprod Bioref

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Current food production practices tend to damage and deplete soil, diminish biodiversity, and degrade water supplies. For agriculture to become environmentally sustainable and simultaneously increase food output for a growing world population, fundamental changes in agricultural production systems are required. Renewable energy can reduce greenhouse gases (GHGs) but we also need simple, low-cost approaches to remove atmospheric carbon and sequester it in stable forms. Recycling of digestate from the anaerobic digestion of agricultural and waste materials to soils can sequester atmospheric carbon and provide many other economic, social and environmental benefits. Biogasdoneright™ (BDR) is a set of practices that link biogas production with sustainable agriculture. The BDR approach to sustainable agriculture is being implemented on a large scale in Italy. In this paper, we examine the potential impact of implementing BDR in selected other countries. The biomethane potential in these countries, estimated conservatively, varies from about 10-30% of their current annual natural gas consumption. Biomethane from sequential (double) crops provides by far the greatest fraction of the biomethane potential. Double cropping also drives many of the environmental and economic benefits of BDR systems. Depending on where and how widely it is implemented, the production of biogas in BDR systems could have very significant national-level impacts. For example, sufficient biomethane could

show abstract

Carbon and nitrogen environmental trade-offs of winter rye cellulosic biomass in the Chesapeake Watershed

Cited by 10 publications

References 26 publications

Profitability of dual‐purpose rye cover crop as influenced by harvesting date

Profitability of dual‐purpose rye cover crop as influenced by harvesting date

Harvesting Fertilized Rye Cover Crop: Simulated Revenue, Net Energy, and Drainage Nitrogen Loss

The potential for expanding sustainable biogas production and some possible impacts in specific countries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About