Abstract
Switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) may have value as forage and a bioenergy feedstock. Our objective was to evaluate how harvest system and N fertilizer rates affected biomass yield and nutrient composition of young stands of switchgrass (cv. Alamo) in the southern Great Plains, USA. Nitrogen fertilization increased biomass yields from 10.4, 10.8, and 12.2 Mg ha−1 at 0 kg N ha−1 to 13.7, 14.6, and 21.0 Mg ha−1 at 225 kg N ha−1 when harvested after seed set (October), after frost (December), and twice per year after boot stage (July) and frost, respectively. Nutrient concentrations and removal were generally twice as great when biomass was harvested twice versus once per year. Precipitation strongly affected biomass yields across the two years of these experiments. When late-summer precipitation is available to support regrowth in this environment, harvesting switchgrass twice per year will result in greater biomass yields. Harvesting twice per year, however, will increase fertilization requirements and reduce feedstock biomass quality. Switchgrass harvested during mid-summer after boot stage was of poor forage quality. To have value as a dual-purpose forage and bioenergy feedstock, switchgrass would need to be utilized during spring to early summer while in a vegetative stage.
Similar content being viewed by others
Abbreviations
- ADF:
-
Acid detergent fiber
- CRP:
-
Conservation Reserve Program
- IVDMD:
-
In vitro dry matter digestibility
- NIRS:
-
Near infrared reflectance spectroscopy
- NDF:
-
Neutral detergent fiber
References
Adler PR, Sanderson MA, Boateng AA, Weimer PJ, Jung HG (2006) Biomass yield and biofuel quality of switchgrass harvested in fall or spring. Agron J 98:1518–1525
Ball DM, Collins M, Lacefield GD, Martin NP, Mertens DA, Olson KE, Putnam DH, Undersander DJ, Wolf MW (2001) Understanding forage quality. American Farm Bureau Federation Publication 1-01, Park Ridge, Illinois
Biomass Research and Development Board (2008) National Biofuels Action Plan. Biomass Research and Development Board. http://www.brdisolutions.com/default.aspx. Accessed 30 Oct 2009
Bransby DI, Samson R, Parrish DJ, Fike JH (2008) Harvest and conversion systems for producing energy from switchgrass: logistic and economic considerations. Forage and Grazinglands. doi:10.1094/FG-2008-0722-01-RV
Burns JC, Mochrie RD, Timothy DH (1984) Steer performance from two perennial Pennisetum species, switchgrass, and a fescue-‘Coastal’ bermudagrass system. Agron J 76:795–800
Cassida KA, Muir JP, Hussey MA, Read JC, Venuto BC, Ocumpaugh WR (2005) Biomass yield and stand characteristics of switchgrass in south central U.S. environments. Crop Sci 45:673–681
CAST (2007) Convergence of agriculture and energy: II. Producing cellulosic biomass for biofuels. CAST Commentary QTA2007-2. Council for Agricultural Science and Technology, Ames, Iowa
Farrell AE, Plevin RJ, Turner BT, Jones AD, O’Hare M, Kammen DM (2006) Ethanol can contribute to energy and environmental goals. Sci 311:506–508
Fike JH, Parrish DJ, Wolf DD, Balasko JA, Green JT Jr, Rasnake M, Reynolds JH (2006a) Long term yield potential of switchgrass-for-biofuel systems. Biomass Bioenergy 30:198–206
Fike JH, Parrish DJ, Wolf DD, Balasko JA, Green JT Jr, Rasnake M, Reynolds JH (2006b) Switchgrass production for the upper southeastern USA: influence of cultivar and cutting frequency on biomass yields. Biomass Bioenergy 30:207–213
Fixen PE (2007) Potential biofuels influence on nutrient use and removal in the U.S. Better Crops 91:12–14
Fixen PE, Grove JH (1990) Testing soils for phosphorus. In: Westerman RL (ed) Soil testing and plant analysis, 3rd edn. ASA-CSSA-SSSA, Madison, pp 141–180
Haby VA, Russelle MP, Skogley EO (1990) Testing soils for potassium, calcium, and magnesium. In: Westerman RL (ed) Soil testing and plant analysis, 3rd edn. ASA-CSSA-SSSA, Madison, pp 181–228
Hsu FH, Nelson CJ, Matches AG (1985) Temperature effects on seedling development of perennial warm-season forage grasses. Crop Sci 25:249–255
Kinery JR, Schmer MR, Vogel KP, Mitchell RB (2008) Switchgrass biomass simulation at diverse sites in the northern Great Plains of the U.S. Bioenergy Res 1:259–264
Lemus R, Brummer EC, Burras CL, Moore KJ, Barker MF, Molstad NE (2008a) Effects of nitrogen fertilization on biomass yield and quality in large fields of established switchgrass in southern Iowa, USA. Biomass Bioenergy 32:1187–1194
Lemus R, Parrish DJ, Abaye O (2008b) Nitrogen-use dynamics in switchgrass grown for biomass. Bioenergy Res 1:153–162
Lierop WV (1990) Soil pH and lime requirement determination. In: Westerman RL (ed) Soil testing and plant analysis, 3rd edn. ASA-CSSA-SSSA, Madison, pp 73–126
Ma Z, Wood CW, Bransby DI (2001) Impact of row spacing, nitrogen rate, and time on carbon partitioning of switchgrass. Biomass Bioenergy 20:413–419
Madakadze IC, Stewart K, Peterson PR, Coulman BE, Smith DL (1999) Switchgrass biomass and chemical composition for biofuel in eastern Canada. Agron J 91:696–701
McLaughlin SB, Kszos LA (2005) Development of switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) as a bioenergy feedstock in the United States. Biomass Bioenergy 28:515–535
Muir JP, Sanderson MA, Ocumpaugh WR, Jones RM, Reed RL (2001) Biomass production of ‘Alamo’ switchgrass in response to nitrogen, phosphorus, and row spacing. Agron J 93:896–901
Mulkey VR, Owens VN, Lee DK (2006) Management of switchgrass-dominated Conservation Reserve Program lands for biomass production in South Dakota. Crop Sci 46:712–720
Nelson DW, Sommers LE (1982) Total carbon, organic carbon and organic matter. In: Page AL (ed) Methods of soil analysis. Part 2-chemical and microbiological properties, 2nd edn. ASA-CSSA-SSSA, Madison
Oklahoma Climatological Survey (2009) http://climate.mesonet.org/county_climate/Products/Choose_By_County_Page.html. Accessed 30 Oct 2009
Parrish DJ, Fike JH, Bransby DI, Samson R (2008) Establishing and managing switchgrass as an energy crop. Forage and Grazinglands. doi:10.1094/FG-2008-0220-01-RV
Reynolds JH, Walker CL, Kirchner MJ (2000) Nitrogen removal in switchgrass biomass under two harvest systems. Biomass Bioenergy 19:281–286
Sanderson MA, Read JC, Reed RL (1999) Harvest management of switchgrass for biomass feedstock and forage production. Agron J 91:5–10
Sanderson MA, Martin NP, Adler P (2007) Biomass, energy, and industrial uses of forages. In: Barnes RF et al (eds) Forages. The science of grassland agriculture, vol II, 6th edn. Blackwell, Ames, pp 635–647
Schmer MR, Vogel KP, Mitchell RB, Perrin RK (2008) Net energy of cellulosic ethanol from switchgrass. Proc Nat Acad Sci 105:464–469
Shenk JS, Westerhaus MO (1994) The application of near infrared reflectance spectroscopy (NIRS) to forage analysis. In: Fahey GC (ed) Forage quality, evaluation, and utilization. ASA-CSSA-SSSA, Madison, pp 406–449
USDA-NASS (2008) Agricultural statistics 2008. United States Government Printing Office, Washington D.C. http://www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/Ag_Statistics/2008/2008.pdf. Accessed 30 Oct 2009
Varvel GE, Vogel KP, Mitchell RB, Follett RF, Kimble JM (2008) Comparison of corn and switchgrass on marginal soils for bioenergy. Biomass Bioenergy 32:18–21
Vogel KP, Brejda JJ, Walters DT, Buxton DR (2002) Switchgrass biomass production in the Midwest USA: harvest and nitrogen management. Agron J 94:413–420
Acknowledgements
We thank Ceres, Inc. for their support of this research. Critical reviews of research procedures and results were provided by Cory Christenson, Jeff Gwyn, Bud Wylie, Joe Bouton, Steve Rhines, Twain Butler, and John Blanton. The Samuel Roberts Noble Foundation personnel contributing to the successful completion of this research included Shawn Norton, Tabby Campbell, Julie Barrick, Derrick Warren, Kevin Lynch, and Roger Hartwell.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Responsible Editor: Johan Six.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Guretzky, J.A., Biermacher, J.T., Cook, B.J. et al. Switchgrass for forage and bioenergy: harvest and nitrogen rate effects on biomass yields and nutrient composition. Plant Soil 339, 69–81 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-010-0376-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-010-0376-4