Native warm-season grasses: Species, nitrogen fertilization, and harvest date effects on biomass yield and composition

Waramit, Naroon

doi:10.31274/etd-180810-924

Cited by 2 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 231 publications

(148 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Harvest timing and frequency of biomass influence yield and nutrient removal. For biomass production, a single harvest is generally recommended for practicality, economics, stand persistence, and environmental sustainability including fossil fuel use and greenhouse gas emissions, where multiple harvests tend to show little to no yield benefits over a single annual harvest (Lee et al, ; Mitchell, ; Pennington, ; Waramit, ). With regard to harvest timing, postponing harvest until after a killing frost or post‐physiological maturity has also been recommended for perennial grasses used for bioenergy production because it allows time for the plants to senesce or translocate nutrients and water from their aboveground tissues to belowground structures including the crown, rhizomes, and roots (Mitchell, ; Mitchell, Vogel, & Uden, ; Sarath, Baird, & Mitchell, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A large component influencing the economics of feedstock production is yield potential. Yield potential is influenced by a number of factors including crop and cultivar, production environment including climate, weather and soil conditions, and soil fertility and harvest management (Lee & Boe, ; Mulkey, Owens, & Lee, , ; Waramit, ). Many of these factors can be controlled by the farmer through management practices; yet, more research is needed to understand how these factors either individually or combined affect biomass productivity, especially on marginal land.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, waiting to harvest after this point (compared to harvesting at peak biomass production around anthesis/flowering), tends to result in yield losses due to senescence, increased litter fall, and greater lodging. For switchgrass, yield losses ranged from 10% to 20% when harvest was delayed until after a killing frost (Pennington, ; Waramit, ) and greater than 40% when harvest was delayed until the following spring (Pennington, ). In contrast, from a feedstock composition perspective, later harvested biomass tends to have lower concentrations of minerals and protein and higher structural carbohydrates and lignin, resulting in higher quality biomass feedstock (Mitchell, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Impact of warm‐season grass management on feedstock production on marginal farmland in Central Illinois

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The production of dedicated energy crops on marginally productive cropland is projected to play an important role in reaching the US Billion Ton goal. This study aimed to evaluate warm‐season grasses for biomass production potential under different harvest timings (summer [H1], after killing frost [H2], or alternating between two [H3]) and nitrogen (N) fertilizer rates (0, 56, and 112 kg N/ha) on a wet marginal land across multiple production years. Six feedstocks were evaluated including Miscanthus x giganteus, two switchgrass cultivars (Panicum virgatum L.), prairie cordgrass (Spartina pectinata Link), and two polycultures including a mixture of big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii Vitman), indiangrass (Sorghastrum nutans), and sideoats grama (Bouteloua curtipendula [Michx.] Torr.), and a mixture of big bluestem and prairie cordgrass. Across four production years, harvest timing and feedstock type played an important role in biomass production. Miscanthus x giganteus produced the greatest biomass (18.7 Mg/ha), followed by the switchgrass cultivar “Liberty” (14.7 Mg/ha). Harvest in H1 tended to increase yield irrespective of feedstock; the exception being M. x giganteus that had significantly lower biomass when harvested in H1 when compared to H2 and H3. The advantage H1 harvest had over H2 for all feedstocks declined over time, suggesting H2 or H3 would provide greater and more sustainable biomass production for the observed feedstocks. The N application rate played an important role mainly for M. x giganteus where 112 kg N/ha yielded more biomass than no N. Other feedstocks occasionally showed a slight, but statistically insignificant increase in biomass yield with increasing N rate. This study showed the potential of producing feedstocks for bioenergy on wet marginal land; however, more research on tissue and soil nutrient dynamics under different N rates and harvest regimes will be important in understanding stand longevity for feedstocks grown under these conditions.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Impact of warm‐season grass management on feedstock production on marginal farmland in Central Illinois

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Compared with other warmseason grass species at a similar harvest date, this level of IVDMD would be considered low. Waramit (2010) reported IVDMD of late June-harvested switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) and big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii Vitman) to be 55 and 57%, respectively. In general, our P. australis quality results of high CP and low IVDMD are similar to those reported by Silliman et al (2014).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cattle Grazing Effects on Phragmites australis in Nebraska

Volesky

Young

Jenkins

2016

Invasive plant sci. manag.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Phragmites australis (common reed) is one of the most widely distributed flowering plants in North America. The introduced lineage occurs in wetland and riparian areas covering a range of climatic types. In Nebraska, an abundance of livestock could help to reduce P. australis with proper timing and grazing intensities. In 2011, a 3-yr study was initiated to evaluate targeted cattle grazing and herbicide effects and the nutritive value of this species. Treatments included a single application of imazapyr (Habitat®, BASF Corporation, Research Triangle Park, NC) herbicide applied in the first year, grazing, and a control. Grazing was applied for up to five consecutive days in June and August 2011 and 2012 and in June 2013. Stem density, height, and biomass of P. australis were determined before each grazing period and in 2014. Diet samples were collected from rumenally fistulated steers each grazing period. Imazapyr provided 100% control of P. australis; however, re-establishment began 2 yr posttreatment. Grazing significantly reduced pregrazing P. australis biomass in the second and third growing season (P < 0.05). Stem density and height in the grazed treatment was similar to the control through 2012; however, in 2013 and 2014, control stem density was 1.5 times greater and height was 1.4 times that of the grazed treatment. Crude protein content of diet samples was greater in 2011 (16.8%) compared with 2012 (14.3%, P < 0.05). In vitro dry matter digestibility (IVDMD) of diet samples (45.4%) was not affected by year or month (P > 0.05). The relatively low IVDMD suggests that some form of energy supplementation would be needed to create a better nutritional balance. The cumulative effect of grazing does have the potential to reduce P. australis populations, but other methods would have to be used for greater control and site restoration.

show abstract

Native warm-season grasses: Species, nitrogen fertilization, and harvest date effects on biomass yield and composition

Cited by 2 publications

References 231 publications

Impact of warm‐season grass management on feedstock production on marginal farmland in Central Illinois

Impact of warm‐season grass management on feedstock production on marginal farmland in Central Illinois

Cattle Grazing Effects on Phragmites australis in Nebraska

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About