Residual biomass potential of commercial and pre-commercial sugarcane cultivars

Landell, Marcos Guimarães de Andrade; Scarpari, Maximiliano Salles; Xavier, Mauro Alexandre; Anjos, Ivan Antônio dos; Baptista, Antonio Sampaio; Aguiar, Cláudio Lima de; Silva, Daniel Nunes da; Bidoia, M. A. P.; Brancalião, Sandro Roberto; Bressiani, José Antônio; Campos, Marcelo; Miguel, Paulo Eduardo Martins; Silva, Thiago Nogueira da; Silva, Victor Hugo Pavelqueires da; Anjos, Luciana Oliveira Souza; Ogata, Bruna Harumi

doi:10.1590/s0103-90162013000500003

Cited by 41 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…On average, sugarcane straw presents N, P, and K nutrient concentrations ranging from 4.4 to 5.4, 0.1 to 0.7, and 2.8 to 10.8 g kg −1 , respectively (Oliveira et al ., , ; Fortes et al ., ; Trivelin et al ., ; Andreotti et al ., ). With regard to lignocellulosic composition, straw contains about 19.0–34.4% lignin, 29–44% cellulose, 27–31% hemicelluloses, in addition to 2.4–7.9% ash (Barros et al ., ; Costa et al ., ; Landell et al ., ; Oliveira et al ., ; Moutta et al ., ; Santos et al ., ; Szczerbowski et al ., ). Since the widespread adoption of mechanized harvesting in sugarcane fields, straw has generally been maintained on the soil surface, which has significantly altered crop management.…”

Section: Assessment Of Sugarcane Straw and Potential Use In Industrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Agronomic and environmental implications of sugarcane straw removal: a major review

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Large‐scale bioenergy demand has triggered new approaches to straw management in Brazilian sugarcane fields. With the progressive shift from a burned to a nonburned harvest system, most of the straw presently retained on the soil surface has become economically viable feedstock for bioenergy production. The trade‐offs between the need to preserve soil quality and produce more bioenergy have been the subject of intense discussion. This study presents a synthesis of available information on the magnitude of the main impacts of straw removal from sugarcane fields for bioenergy production and therefore represents an easily available resource to guide management decisions on the recommended amount of straw to be maintained on the field to take advantage of the agronomic, environmental, and industrial benefits. Crop residues remaining on sugarcane fields provide numerous ecosystem services including nutrient recycling, soil biodiversity, water storage, carbon accumulation, control of soil erosion, and weed infestation. Furthermore, several studies reported higher sugarcane production under straw retention on the field, while few suggest that straw may jeopardize biomass production in cold regions and under some specific soil conditions. Pest control is among the parameters favored by straw removal, while N2O emissions are increased only if straw is associated with the application of N fertilizer and vinasse. An appropriate recommendation, which is clearly site specific, should be based on a minimum mass of straw on the field to provide those benefits. Overall, this review indicates that most of the agronomic and environmental benefits are achieved when at least 7 Mg ha−1 of dry straw is maintained on the soil surface. However, modeling efforts are of paramount importance to assess the magnitude and rates of straw removal considering the several indicators involved in this complex equation, so that an accurate straw recovery rate could be provided to producers and industry toward greater sustainability.

show abstract

Section: Assessment Of Sugarcane Straw and Potential Use In Industrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Agronomic and environmental implications of sugarcane straw removal: a major review

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The amount of straw produced depends on factors such as sugarcane variety and edaphoclimatic conditions (Leal et al, 2013). On average, the straw represents 9 to 19 % of the sugarcane dry weight (Landell et al, 2013), varying from 7.4 to 24.3 Mg ha -1 (average 14 Mg ha -1 ) in Brazil (Paes and Oliveira, 2005). Sugarcane straw has great potential for heat production, electricity and cellulosic ethanol .…”

Section: Impacts Of Bioenergy Crop Residues On Soil Properties I) Cromentioning

confidence: 99%

Crop residue harvest for bioenergy production and its implications on soil functioning and plant growth: A review

Cherubin

Oliveira

Feigl

et al. 2018

Sci. agric. (Piracicaba, Braz.)

198

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT:The use of crop residues as a bioenergy feedstock is considered a potential strategy to mitigate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. However, indiscriminate harvesting of crop residues can induce deleterious effects on soil functioning, plant growth and other ecosystem services. Here, we have summarized the information available in the literature to identify and discuss the main trade-offs and synergisms involved in crop residue management for bioenergy production. The data consistently showed that crop residue harvest and the consequent lower input of organic matter into the soil led to C storage depletions over time, reducing cycling, supply and availability of soil nutrients, directly affecting the soil biota. Although the biota regulates key functions in the soil, crop residue can also cause proliferation of some important agricultural pests. In addition, crop residues act as physical barriers that protect the soil against raindrop impact and temperature variations. Therefore, intensive crop residue harvest can cause soil structure degradation, leading to soil compaction and increased risks of erosion. With regard to GHG emissions, there is no consensus about the potential impact of management of crop residue harvest. In general, residue harvest decreases CO 2 and N 2 O emissions from the decomposition process, but it has no significant effect on CH 4 emissions. Plant growth responses to soil and microclimate changes due to crop residue harvest are site and crop specific. Adoption of the best management practices can mitigate the adverse impacts of crop residue harvest. Longterm experiments within strategic production regions are essential to understand and monitor the impact of integrated agricultural systems and propose customized solutions for sustainable crop residue management in each region or landscape. Furthermore, private and public investments/cooperations are necessary for a better understanding of the potential environmental, economic and social implications of crop residue use for bioenergy production.

show abstract

“…Simulations performed by Robertson and Thorburn [93] using data from Australia determined that organic [23,41,95] and positive [36,96] effects on yield. In colder regions, trash reduces shoot sprouting from ratoon crops [97], which may account for some of the observed negative results. One option for avoiding decreasing yields in such regions is to remove trash mulch from crop rows but maintain it between rows, as demonstrated by Campos et al [23].…”

Section: Influence Of Trash Blanket On Nitrogen Fertilizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nitrogen Use Efficiency for Sugarcane-Biofuel Production: What Is Next?

Otto

Castro

Mariano³

et al. 2016

Bioenerg. Res.

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Land area devoted to sugarcane (Saccharum spp.) production in Brazil has increased from 2 million to 10 million ha over the past four decades. Studies have shown that, from an environmental perspective, the transformation of nitrogen (N) fertilizers into N 2 O gases can offset the advantages gained by replacing fossil fuels with biofuels. Our objectives here were to review recent developments in N management for sugarcane-biofuel production and assess estimates of N use efficiency (NUE) and N losses based on future scenarios, as well as for life-cycle assessments of bioenergy production. Approximately 60 % of N-based fertilizer applied to sugarcane fields in Brazil is recovered by plants and soils, whereas N losses to leaching and N 2 O emissions can average 5.6 and 1.84 % of the total applied N, respectively. Maintenance of trash, rotation with N-fixing legume species, and optimization of byproducts usage have potential for reducing the N requirements of sugarcane cultivation in Brazil. Moreover, the development of sugarcane genotypes with higher NUEs, along with management systems that consider soil capacity of mineralization, is required for improving the NUE of sugarcane. Strategies to maintain N as NH 4 + in sugarcane-cropped soils also have the potential to reduce N losses and enhance NUE. The development of secondgeneration biofuels is important for increasing biofuel production while simultaneously maintaining N rates and improving NUE, and sugarcane systems in Brazil show potential for sustainable biofuel production with low N rates and limited N 2 O losses. Reducing N rates in sugarcane fields is thus necessary for improving sugarcane-based biofuel production and reducing its environmental impacts.

show abstract

Residual biomass potential of commercial and pre-commercial sugarcane cultivars

Cited by 41 publications

References 5 publications

Agronomic and environmental implications of sugarcane straw removal: a major review

Agronomic and environmental implications of sugarcane straw removal: a major review

Crop residue harvest for bioenergy production and its implications on soil functioning and plant growth: A review

Nitrogen Use Efficiency for Sugarcane-Biofuel Production: What Is Next?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About