Ecological Impacts of Miscanthus x giganteus Production

Ecological Impacts of Miscanthus xgiganteus Production

Tom VoigtDepartment of Crop Sciences, University of

Illinois

Friday, December 14, 12

Outline• Miscanthus x giganteus briefly. • M. x giganteus/Switchgrass Side-by-Side Studies.

• Sun Grant/DOE M. x giganteus Nitrogen Fertility Studies.

• EBI Studies• Invasiveness Studies


Miscanthus x giganteus Briefly• Rhizomatous, warm-season perennial.• Sterile triploid 3X (M sinensis [2X] x M.

sacchariflorus [4X]) hybrid propagated asexually.• Photosynthesis occurs at temperatures as low as

54ºF.• Few known commercial pests or diseases• Low input, low maintenance• Appears to require cold weather for senescence.• Has survived -20°F air temperatures in central

Illinois.


M. x giganteus at UIUC


Eastern US/Canada Side-by-Side Trials

Map: www.firstresearch.comFriday, December 14, 12

Eastern US/Canada Side-by-Side Trial Characteristics

SiteLatitude

(N) Longitude (W) Soil

Mean Annual

Temp (°C)Mean Annual Precip. (cm)

IL 40.06 -88.19 silt loam 10.8 104.3KY 38.12 -84.49 silt loams 12.9 116.6LA 30.41 -91.10 silt 19.4 160.2MI 42.39 -85.37 loam 8.9 89.3MS 33.42 -88.79 fine sandy loam 16.8 140.8

NJ 40.46 -74.42loam & sandy loam

complex 11.4 123.9

OK 35.99 -97.04 fine sandy loam 15.2 93.2ON 43.64, -80.41 clay loam 6.3 93.9

SD 44.36 -96.79silty clay loam and silt loam complex 6.2 57.9

6


7

Species: p<0.0192Loca;on: p<0.001

Species × Loca;on: p<0.001

**

**

**

**

**

Yield Over 2010 and 2011 Varied By Location

n/a

2012 Arundale U. of I. Ph.D. Dissertation


Sun Grant/DOE Collaborative Sites

DOE


Sun Grant/DOE Sites

Plot Layout

• 12-10 m x 10 m plots with 100 plants on 1-m spacing.

• 4 reps.• Annual N fertility treatments (0, 60, 120 kg N ha-1) using urea.

• Plants in IL, KY, NE, and NJ planted in 2008 (75% IL replanted in 2009); VA planted in 2010.


Sun Grant/DOE Site Characteristics

SiteLatitude

(N)Longitude

(W) Soil

Mean Annual Temp (°C)

Mean Annual Precip. (cm)

U. of IL 40.06 -88.19

silt loam & silty clay

loam 10.8 104.3

U. of KY 38.12 -84.50 silt loams 12.9 116.6U. of NE 41.17 -96.46 silt loam 9.8 70.4Rutgers U. 40.22 -74.24

sandy loam 11.4 118.8

VA Tech 36.93 -79.39sandy loam 12.8 115.110


Location2009 Yield

(Dry Mg ha-1)2010 Yield

(Dry Mg ha-1)2011 Yield (Dry Mg ha-1)Nebraska 15.6 27.4 31.2

Illinois 3.0 15.6 20.6 Kentucky 17.1 19.0 19.0 New Jersey 16.9 9.7 18.6Virginia - - 9.4

2009 – 2011 Biomass Yields


2010 IL Sustainability Results

• N2O and CO2 greenhouse gas flux

• Nitrate and ammonium leaching• N in harvested biomass


Cumulative CO2 flux during 2009 and 2010Cumulative CO2 flux during 2009 and 2010Cumulative CO2 flux during 2009 and 2010

Year Treatment (kg N ha-1)

Cumulative CO2

Flux (Mg-C ha-1)†2009 0 8.62 ND

60 9.11120 8.62

2010 0 8.90 ND60 9.16

120 8.96† Cumulative fluxes were calculated from measured fluxes corrected for temperature variations using a Q10 = 2.† Cumulative fluxes were calculated from measured fluxes corrected for temperature variations using a Q10 = 2.† Cumulative fluxes were calculated from measured fluxes corrected for temperature variations using a Q10 = 2.

ND, means no difference among treatments within a given year (α = 0.05)ND, means no difference among treatments within a given year (α = 0.05)ND, means no difference among treatments within a given year (α = 0.05)

Sun Grant/DOE - Illinois CO2 Results


DOE - Illinois Yield and Biomass Data

Year Treatment(kg N ha-1)

Yield(Mg ha-1)

Biomass N(kg ha-1)

2009 0 1.1 (0.7)ND

60 4.1 (3.7)

120 4.0 (2.2)

2010 0 14.9 (2.9)ND 44.9 (9.0)**

60 15.8 (1.8) 53.5 (5.3)

120 17.0 (1.4) 66.6 (1.3)

ND, means no difference among treatments within a given year (α = 0.05)ND, means no difference among treatments within a given year (α = 0.05)ND, means no difference among treatments within a given year (α = 0.05)ND, means no difference among treatments within a given year (α = 0.05)

** Treatments are different within a given year (α = 0.01)** Treatments are different within a given year (α = 0.01)** Treatments are different within a given year (α = 0.01)** Treatments are different within a given year (α = 0.01)


IL Sustainability Conclusions

• 2009 biomass yields were low due to replanting previous crop failure; there were no differences in N in harvested biomass, N2O flux, and increased NO3- leaching.

• In 2010, N fertilizer applications did not increase biomass yields, but the 120 kg N ha-1 application did increase the amount of N removed at harvest, increased the N2O flux, and


Sun Grant/DOE

• Winterkill can be an issue during the first winter following planting.

• Dry growing seasons have reduced M. x giganteus yields.

• Through the first four growing seasons, there has not been a significant yield response to N.

• When it is determined that M. x giganteus requires N fertilization, additional research will be required to fine-tune the N rates based on location and environment.


Energy Biosciences Institute

• On-Site and Off-Site Energy Grass Studies

• Novel Woody Plants• SUNY Willows• U.S. Forest Service/Iowa St. U. and

University of Minnesota Poplar Studies• Prairie Forbs


EBI/UI Energy Farm Ecology Plots

Tallgrass prairie

Corn-corn-soybeanrotationMiscanthus x

giganteus

Cave-in-Rock switchgrass


2009 – 2011 EBI Energy Farm Ecology Plot Biomass Yields

Biomass yields(Dry Mg ha-1)Biomass yields(Dry Mg ha-1)Biomass yields(Dry Mg ha-1) Liters ethanol ha-1Liters ethanol ha-1Liters ethanol ha-1

2009 2010 2011 2009 2010 2011M. x giganteus 1.3 11.0 11.9 494 4,180 4,522P. virgatum 2.4 9.4 9.1 912 3,572 3,458Tallgrass Prairie 2.3 6.1 3.4 874 2,318 1,292Maize (grain) 9.5 8.8 3,879 3,621Soybeans (grain) 2.8 94*

*liters of biodiesel


Potential Ecological Impacts of Agricultural Intensification:

Invasiveness of Miscanthus Spp.

T. Voigt, B. Endres, L. Quinn, J. Barney (VA Tech)


Project Objectives

• Identify initial Miscanthus spp. sold in U.S.

• Describe naturalized Miscanthus spp. populations

• Understand Miscanthus spp. seed biology

• Relate naturalized Miscanthus spp. populations to ornamental Miscanthus


Oldest Ornamental Types Offered by

U.S. Nurseries

M. sinensis ‘Variegatus’, ‘Zebrinus’, ‘Gracillimus’, and M. sacchariflorus


Variegated Miscanthus


Zebra GrassFriday, December 14, 12

Maiden GrassFriday, December 14, 12

M. sacchariflorus


Differences between M. sinensis and M. sacchariflorus

• M. sinensis – Miscanthus, Eulalia, Japanese Silver Grass–Clump former; variable height, leaf width, variegation, flowering period, cold hardiness

• M. sacchariflorus – Silver Banner Grass, Amur Silver Grass–Stout rhizomes and running habit forms


Summer 2011

Lauren Quinn and Ryan Dougherty (M.S. student at Va.

Tech.) sampled 21 escapedMiscanthus populations


Transit Areas

Quakertown, PA

Natural/Conservation

AreasHeckscher State Park,

NY


M. sacchariflorusMaine


Plant Size & Phenotype

Heckscher, NY


Invasive Ornamentals?Striping from ornamental origins?

Extremely wide, droopy leaves:

another ornamental trait? Extremely thin, wiry leaves: another ornamental trait?


Summer 2012• Miscanthus sinensis sites visited again in 2012.• In 88% of the populations, there were found

additional M. sinensis within a mile.• While this information cannot elucidate the

source of the original invasion, it provides evidence that our sampled sites do not represent anomalous isolated populations, but instead exist in a landscape matrix that


Where Should Miscanthus x giganteus Optimally Be Grown?


Miscanthus x giganteus Sweet Spot

35Map: www.firstresearch.com


Questions?

Tom Voigt ([email protected])Friday, December 14, 12

37


Documents

Ecological Impacts of Miscanthus x giganteus Production