Exploring Potential U.S. Switchgrass Production for Lignocellulosic Ethanol

Gunderson, Carla A.; Davis, Ethan B.; Jager, Yetta; West, Tristram O.; Perlack, R.D.; Brandt, Craig C.; Wullschleger, Stan D.; Baskaran, Latha; Webb, Erin; Downing, Mark

doi:10.2172/936551

Cited by 40 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 45 publications

(93 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, many herbicides are not currently registered for perennial crops for biomass production [16,63,71]. As a result, weed control during the establishment year can not be solely relied on chemical applications.…”

Section: Weed Control During Establishmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In another study in CRP land of NGP, however, the N rate of 56 kg/ha was optimum for upland switchgrass cultivars [30]. Gunderson et al (2008) [71] summarized the response of biomass yield of upland switchgrass cultivars to N fertilizer rate. They showed that switchgrass yield even decreased as N rate was over 100 kg/ha (Figure 1).…”

Section: Nitrogen (N) Management and N Use Efficiencymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They showed that switchgrass yield even decreased as N rate was over 100 kg/ha (Figure 1). Among the management practices, perennial grass rotating with legume crops or mixture of grass and legumes may reduce N fertilizer inputs and improve their energy balance [71].…”

Section: Nitrogen (N) Management and N Use Efficiencymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In general, biomass yield of switchgrass increased as the amount of seasonal precipitation increased. However, at a given seasonal precipitation level (e.g., 500-600 mm), switchgrass yield ranged from 2 to 25 Mg/ha ( Figure 2) [71], indicating the importance of crop WUE and precipitation use efficiency. Ideally, the figure 2 should be converted to the biomass yield as a function of seasonal evapotranspiration (ET) or transpiration (T), not precipitation because crop yield is more closely related to ET or T. Although most field studies have included precipitation information in NGP, there is no detailed information of crop ET, transpiration and wateruse efficiency (WUE).…”

Section: Water Management and Water Use Efficiency (Wue)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Biomass Production in Northern Great Plains of USA – Agronomic Perspective

Xue¹,

Wang²,

Nyrén³

2013

Biomass Now - Cultivation and Utilization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Weed Control During Establishmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Nitrogen (N) Management and N Use Efficiencymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Nitrogen (N) Management and N Use Efficiencymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Water Management and Water Use Efficiency (Wue)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Biomass Production in Northern Great Plains of USA – Agronomic Perspective

Xue¹,

Wang²,

Nyrén³

2013

Biomass Now - Cultivation and Utilization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Increased attention on the use of NPWSG species including switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.), big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii Vitman), and Indian grass [Sorghastrum nutans (L.) Nash] as bioenergy feedstocks is one of the significant results of programs such as the Herbaceous Energy Crops Research Program launched by the US Department of Energy (Wright, 1994;McLaughlin et al, 2002;McLaughlin and Kszos, 2005). Bioenergy production systems using these species are C negative while producing positive net energy balances due to their high yielding capacity under diverse growing conditions (Gunderson et al, 2008;Mitchell et al, 2016). They even adapt well when grown on marginal landscapes which are not suitable for row crop production, have high water and nutrient use efficiency, and require minimal fertilizer and agrichemical inputs (Tilman et al, 2006;Jose and Bhaskar, 2015;Conway et al, 2017).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Biomass Yield of Warm‐Season Grasses Affected by Nitrogen and Harvest Management

Weerasekara

Kitchen

Jose³

et al. 2018

Agronomy Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Core Ideas Dry matter yields increased with N inputs although efficiency decreased.Applying nitrogen at 67 kg N ha–1 was superior in both yield and efficiency.Delaying the time of harvest until late fall or a killing frost increased yield. Native perennial warm‐season grasses (NPWSG) have drawn interest as bioenergy feedstocks due to their high productivity with minimal amounts of inputs under a wide range of environments. Nitrogen fertility and harvest timing are critical management practices when optimizing biomass yield of NPWSG. Our objective was to quantify the impact of N fertilizer rate and timing in combination with harvest timing and frequency on NPWSG yield. Research was conducted in 2014 and 2015 on four field‐plot locations in Missouri. The experiment was a split‐plot design with three replications where N rate and harvest timing were the main and sub‐plot treatments, respectively. Nitrogen rates were 0, 34, 67, and 101 kg N ha−1 with two application timings, all early spring and split N (early spring and following first harvest). Harvest timing included two single (September and November) and two double harvests (June followed by September or November) per year. Delaying harvest until November increased yield across sites. November harvest and N rates ≥67 kg ha−1 improved NPWSG biomass yields. Although N fertilization improved yield, partial factor productivity (PFP) of applied N did not increase with annual N rates >34 kg ha−1. Fertilization at 67 kg ha−1 yr−1 provides an opportunity to maintain a balance between yield and N efficiency. These results demonstrated that N fertilization and harvest management of NPWSG were not always independent, and therefore these practices should be simultaneously considered. For example, early‐season harvesting suppressed response to N when the second harvest was not delayed until after frost.

show abstract