Improving the Ecological Performance of Miscanthus (Miscanthus × giganteus Greef et Deuter) through Intercropping with Woad (Isatis tinctoria L.) and Yellow Melilot (Melilotus officinalis L.)

Cossel, Moritz von; Iqbal, Yasir; Lewandowski, Iris

doi:10.3390/agriculture9090194

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 59 publications

(83 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the later years 2018 and 2019, however, there were no significant differences between REF and MUM [34]. This is in line with a finding from a recent study on intercropping miscanthus and legumes, in which similar effects were reported [47]. However, the potentially higher yielding variant REF was water limited in 2018 due to summer drought [34].…”

Section: Dry Matter Yieldsupporting

confidence: 87%

“…It is expected that there will be a trade-off between the achievement of high MYH of the intercropped plant stand (maize and miscanthus) in MUM in the first year and the achievement of high MYH of miscanthus from the second year onwards. This assumption is based on higher biotic (intercropping competition) and abiotic stress (e.g., drought) in the first year of establishment of miscanthus, which can significantly influence its morphological development and thus its suitability as a biogas substrate in the following years [46,47].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Methane Yield Potential of Miscanthus (Miscanthus × giganteus (Greef et Deuter)) Established under Maize (Zea mays L.)

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study reports on the effects of two rhizome-based establishment procedures ‘miscanthus under maize’ (MUM) and ‘reference’ (REF) on the methane yield per hectare (MYH) of miscanthus in a field trial in southwest Germany. The dry matter yield (DMY) of aboveground biomass was determined each year in autumn over four years (2016–2019). A biogas batch experiment and a fiber analysis were conducted using plant samples from 2016–2018. Overall, MUM outperformed REF due to a high MYH of maize in 2016 (7211 m3N CH4 ha−1). The MYH of miscanthus in MUM was significantly lower compared to REF in 2016 and 2017 due to a lower DMY. Earlier maturation of miscanthus in MUM caused higher ash and lignin contents compared with REF. However, the mean substrate-specific methane yield of miscanthus was similar across the treatments (281.2 and 276.2 lN kg−1 volatile solid−1). Non-significant differences in MYH 2018 (1624 and 1957 m3N CH4 ha−1) and in DMY 2019 (15.6 and 21.7 Mg ha−1) between MUM and REF indicate, that MUM recovered from biotic and abiotic stress during 2016. Consequently, MUM could be a promising approach to close the methane yield gap of miscanthus cultivation in the first year of establishment.

show abstract

Section: Dry Matter Yieldsupporting

confidence: 87%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methane Yield Potential of Miscanthus (Miscanthus × giganteus (Greef et Deuter)) Established under Maize (Zea mays L.)

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(1) crop rotations [76,[125][126][127][128], (2) the intercropping of annual or perennial crops with legumes [86,[129][130][131][132], (3) the establishment of winter-annual species such as camelina (Camelina sativa L. Crantz) or perennial rye under annual crops [133][134][135], and (4) under maize-establishment of perennial energy crops such as miscanthus [115], the cup plant [136], and wild plant mixtures [122] among others [76,108,123].…”

Section: Spatial and Temporal Diversification Of Bcsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prospects of Bioenergy Cropping Systems for A More Social-Ecologically Sound Bioeconomy

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The growing bioeconomy will require a greater supply of biomass in the future for both bioenergy and bio-based products. Today, many bioenergy cropping systems (BCS) are suboptimal due to either social-ecological threats or technical limitations. In addition, the competition for land between bioenergy-crop cultivation, food-crop cultivation, and biodiversity conservation is expected to increase as a result of both continuous world population growth and expected severe climate change effects. This study investigates how BCS can become more social-ecologically sustainable in future. It brings together expert opinions from the fields of agronomy, economics, meteorology, and geography. Potential solutions to the following five main requirements for a more holistically sustainable supply of biomass are summarized: (i) bioenergy-crop cultivation should provide a beneficial social-ecological contribution, such as an increase in both biodiversity and landscape aesthetics, (ii) bioenergy crops should be cultivated on marginal agricultural land so as not to compete with food-crop production, (iii) BCS need to be resilient in the face of projected severe climate change effects, (iv) BCS should foster rural development and support the vast number of small-scale family farmers, managing about 80% of agricultural land and natural resources globally, and (v) bioenergy-crop cultivation must be planned and implemented systematically, using holistic approaches. Further research activities and policy incentives should not only consider the economic potential of bioenergy-crop cultivation, but also aspects of biodiversity, soil fertility, and climate change adaptation specific to site conditions and the given social context. This will help to adapt existing agricultural systems in a changing world and foster the development of a more social-ecologically sustainable bioeconomy.

show abstract

“…Moreover, methods of sowing cup plant under maize were developed . The intercropping of cup plant and maize during the first year of the cup plant establishment also promises to improve environmental performance of maize cultivation through decreased erosion and nutrient leaching …”

Section: Prospective Future Changes At Ephmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…68,131 The intercropping of cup plant and maize during the first year of the cup plant establishment also promises to improve environmental performance of maize cultivation through decreased erosion and nutrient leaching. 69,85,[135][136][137] Influence of the harvest time and ensilaging on properties of the cup plant At the end of the flowering period, which is September in Germany, the cup plant is chopped by a forage harvester with DIRECT DISC system© and transported to the storage location to be ensilaged. 126 Thus, it is harvested the same way and with the same equipment that is used for the maize harvest.…”

Section: Comparison Of Cup Plant and Maize Cultivation Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The replacement of maize (Zea mays L.) by cup plant (Silphium perfoliatum L.) as biogas substrate and its implications for the energy and material flows of a large biogas plant

Cossel

Amarysti

Wilhelm

et al. 2020

Biofuels Bioprod Bioref

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Excessive cultivation of maize (Zea mays L.) as a biogas substrate has fired debate about potential land‐use change effects of bioenergy cropping systems. Cup plant ( Silphium perfoliatum L.) is a perennial biogas crop that provides more environmental services than maize. This study investigated (i) how to replace maize with cup plant as a biogas substrate in a large‐scale biogas plant located in southwest Germany, and (ii) how to optimize the energy and material cycles of such a biogas plant given the new feedstock. The biogas plant produces 1000 m3 biogas per hour with plans for it to be combined with a large dairy farm (1000 dairy units). It was found that the substitution of maize with cup plant as a biogas substrate results in a methane yield reduction of 10% to 20% due to lower biomass yields. However, there exists a strong potential to increase both biomass yields and biogas substrate quality of cup plant by optimizing establishment procedures and better genotypes. Furthermore, cup plant provides food and shelter for open land animals, including birds and insects, and could hence be a suitable alternative to maize for large biogas plants, being more environmentally beneficial. Extracting proteins from cup‐plant biomass could also help replace soy with locally produced protein for feeding cattle. Hydrothermal carbonization is a promising tool for closing nutrient cycles and for extracting phosphate from digestate, but more research is needed before it can be put into practice. © 2020 The Authors. Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining published by Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Improving the Ecological Performance of Miscanthus (Miscanthus × giganteus Greef et Deuter) through Intercropping with Woad (Isatis tinctoria L.) and Yellow Melilot (Melilotus officinalis L.)

Cited by 9 publications

References 59 publications

Methane Yield Potential of Miscanthus (Miscanthus × giganteus (Greef et Deuter)) Established under Maize (Zea mays L.)

Methane Yield Potential of Miscanthus (Miscanthus × giganteus (Greef et Deuter)) Established under Maize (Zea mays L.)

Prospects of Bioenergy Cropping Systems for A More Social-Ecologically Sound Bioeconomy

The replacement of maize (Zea mays L.) by cup plant (Silphium perfoliatum L.) as biogas substrate and its implications for the energy and material flows of a large biogas plant

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About