Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Switchgrass Response to Cutting Frequency and Biosolids Amendment: Biomass Yield, Feedstock Quality, and Theoretical Ethanol Yield

  • Published:
BioEnergy Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Biofuel crops have relatively low economic value, and potential to grow them with low-cost inputs is essential for economic viability. Use of biosolids as a fertility source has not been explored at the field scale for switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.), a potential bioenergy crop. This study tested harvest management and biosolids rate effects on switchgrass production, quality, and theoretical ethanol yield in Virginia, USA. Switchgrass (cv. “Cave-in-Rock”) was annually cut once (winter) or twice (summer and winter) for 2 years. Biosolids were applied once at 0, 77, and 154 kg N ha−1 in May 2011; urea was applied once at 146 kg N ha−1 for comparison. Feedstock yield and quality parameters (neutral and acid detergent fibers, cellulose, hemicellulose, lignin, and ash) were measured and used to compute theoretical ethanol potential (TEP) and theoretical ethanol yield (TEY). Cutting twice per season produced greater biomass yields than cutting once (6.6 vs 5.4 Mg ha−1) in 2011 but not in 2012. Cutting once per season produced feedstock with greater TEP (513 vs 433 L Mg−1) and TEY (2,980 vs 2,680 L ha−1) in both years. Biosolids and urea increased biomass yields by 11 % (0.6 Mg ha−1) and TEY by 13 % (352 L Mg−1), but both decreased TEP by 1 % (7.1 L Mg−1 biomass). Cutting once per season is advantageous in producing more TEY given comparable biomass yield and superior feedstock quality. Biosolids were a suitable alternate N source and could boost biomass and biofuel production while reducing input costs in switchgrass-based bioenergy systems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Allison GG, Morris C, Lister SJ, Barraclough T, Yates N, Shield I, Donnison IS (2012) Effect of nitrogen fertilizer application on cell wall composition in switchgrass and reed canary grass. Biomass Bioenergy 40:19–26

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Lemus R, Brummer EC, Burras CL, Moore KJKJ, Barker MFMF, Molstad NENE, Charles Brummer E, Lee Burras C (2008) Effects of nitrogen fertilization on biomass yield and quality in large fields of established switchgrass in southern Iowa, USA. Biomass Bioenergy 32:1187–1194. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2008.02.016

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Parrish DJ, Fike JH (2005) The biology and agronomy of switchgrass for biofuels. Crit Rev Plant Sci 24:423–459

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Lee DK, Owens VN, Doolittle JJ (2007) Switchgrass and soil carbon sequestration response to ammonium nitrate, manure, and harvest frequency on conservation reserve program land. Agron J 99:462–468

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Fike JH, Parrish DJ, Alwang J, Cundiff JS (2007) Challenges for deploying dedicated, large-scale, bioenergy systems in the USA. Perspect Agric Vet Sci Nutr Nat Resour 2:1–28

    Google Scholar 

  6. Fike JH, Parrish DJ, Wolf DD, Balasko JA, Green JT, Rasnake M, Reynolds JH (2006) Switchgrass production for the upper southeastern USA: influence of cultivar and cutting frequency on biomass yields. Biomass Bioenergy 30:207–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Fike JH, Parrish DJ, Wolf DD, Balasko JA, Green JT, Rasnake M, Reynolds JH (2006) Long-term yield potential of switchgrass-for-biofuel systems. Biomass Bioenergy 30:198–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Haile-Mariam S, Collins HP, Higgins SS (2008) Greenhouse gas fluxes from an irrigated sweet corn (Zea mays L.)-potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) rotation. J Enoviron Qual 37:759–771

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Sanderson MA, Reed RL, McLaughlin SB et al (1996) Switchgrass as a sustainable bioenergy crop. Bioresour Technol 56:83–93

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Goff BM, Moore KJ, Fales SL, Heaton EA (2010) Double-cropping sorghum for biomass. Agron J 102:1586–1592

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Liu X-JA, Fike JH, Galbraith JM, Fike WB, Parrish DJ, Evanylo GK, Strahm BD (2013) Effects of harvest frequency and biosolids application on switchgrass yield, feedstock quality, and theoretical ethanol yield. GCB Bioenergy. doi:10.1111/gcbb.12124

    Google Scholar 

  13. 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

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Waramit N, Moore KJ, Heggenstaller AH (2011) Composition of native warm-season grasses for bioenergy production in response to nitrogen fertilization rate and harvest date. Agron J 103:655–662

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Ashworth AJ (2010) Biomass production and nutrient removal of switchgrass as a bioenergy feedstock. University of Arkansas pp. 81

  16. Adler PR, Sanderson MA, Boateng AA, Weimer PJ, Jung HJG (2006) Biomass yield and biofuel quality of switchgrass harvested in fall or spring. Agron J 98:1518–1525

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Guretzky JA, Biermacher JT, Cook BJ, Kering MK, Mosali J (2011) Switchgrass for forage and bioenergy: harvest and nitrogen rate effects on biomass yields and nutrient composition. Plant Soil 339:69–81

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Trocsanyi ZK, Fieldsend AF, Wolf DD (2009) Yield and canopy characteristics of switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) as influenced by cutting management. Biomass Bioenergy 33:442–448

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Gunderson C, Davis E, Jager H, West T, Perlack R, Brandt C, Wullschleger S, Wilkerson E, Downing M (2007) Exploring potential US switchgrass production for lignocellulosic ethanol. Tech Manuscr ORNL/TM-2007/183 Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennesse

  20. Haque M, Epplin FM, Taliaferro CM (2009) Nitrogen and harvest frequency effect on yield and cost for four perennial grasses. Agron J 101:1463–1469

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Lee DK, Aberle E, Chen C, Egenolf J, Harmoney K, Kakani G, Kallenbach RL, Castro JC (2013) Nitrogen and harvest management of Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) grassland for sustainable biomass feedstock production. GCB Bioenergy 5:6–15. doi:10.1111/j.1757-1707.2012.01177.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. McLaughlin SB, Kszos LA (2005) Development of switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) as a bioenergy feedstockin the United States. Biomass Bioenergy 28:515–535

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Murphy F, Devlin G, McDonnell K (2013) Miscanthus production and processing in Ireland: an analysis of energy requirements and environmental impacts. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 23:412–420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Mulkey VR, Owens VN, Lee DK (2008) Management of warm-season grass mixtures for biomass production in South Dakota USA. Bioresour Technol 99:609–617

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Cogger CG, Bary AI, Myhre EA, Fortuna A-M (2013) Biosolids applications to tall fescue have long-term influence on soil nitrogen, carbon, and phosphorus. J Environ Qual 42:516–522. doi:10.2134/jeq2012.0269

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Hargreaves JC, Adl MS, Warman PR (2008) A review of the use of composted municipal solid waste in agriculture. Agric Ecosyst Environ 123:1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Ojeda G, Alcañiz JM, Ortiz O (2003) Runoff and losses by erosion in soils amended with sewage sludge. L Degrad Dev 14:563–573

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Guo M, Song W, Kazda R (2012) Fertilizer value of lime-stabilized biosolids as a soil amendment. Agron J 104:1679–1686

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Sigua GC, Adjei MB, Rechcigl JE (2005) Cumulative and residual effects of repeated sewage sludge applications: forage productivity and soil quality implications in South Florida, USA. Environ Sci Pollut Res 12:80–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Evanylo GK, Abaye AO, Dundas C, Zipper CE, Lemus R, Sukkariyah B, Rockett J (2005) Herbaceous vegetation productivity, persistence, and metals uptake on a biosolids-amended mine soil. J Environ Qual 34:1811–1819

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Castillo MS, Sollenberger LE, Vendramini JMB, Woodard KR, O’Connor GA, Newman YC, Silveira ML, Sartain JB (2010) Municipal biosolids as an alternative nutrient source for bioenergy crops: I. Elephantgrass biomass production and soil responses. Agron J 102:1308–1313

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Jin VL, Johnson M-VV, Haney RL, Arnold JG (2011) Potential carbon and nitrogen mineralization in soils from a perennial forage production system amended with class B biosolids. Agric Ecosyst Environ 141:461–465

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Hartman JC, Nippert JB, Orozco RA, Springer CJ (2011) Potential ecological impacts of switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) biofuel cultivation in the Central Great Plains, USA. Biomass Bioenergy 35:3415–3421

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Vazquez-Rowe I, Rege S, Marvuglia A, Thenie J, Haurie A, Benetto E (2013) Application of three independent consequential LCA approaches to the agricultural sector in Luxembourg. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:1593–1604

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Wright CK, Wimberly MC (2013) Recent land use change in the Western Corn Belt threatens grasslands and wetlands. PNAS 110:4134–4139

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Hoagland KC, Ruark MD, Renz MJ, Jackson RD (2013) Agricultural management of switchgrass for fuel quality and thermal energy yield on highly erodible land in the driftless area of Southwest Wisconsin. Bioenergy Res 6:1012–1021

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Bow JR, Muir JP (2010) Dynamics of feeding Cynodon Dactylon cv. “Tifton” hay of varying maturities to wether goats. Small Rumin Res 93:198–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Coble CG (1989) Harvesting strategies for high yielding biomass crops. Energy Biomass Wastes XII:361–377

    Google Scholar 

  40. Lötjönen T (2008) Harvest losses and bale density in reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea L.) spring-harvest. Asp Appl Biol 90:263–268

    Google Scholar 

  41. Hodgson EM, Fahmi R, Yates N, Barraclough T, Allison G, Bridgwater AV, Donnison IS (2010) Miscanthus as a feedstock for fast-pyrolysis: does agronomic treatment affect quality? Bioresour Technol 101:6185–6191

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Fahmi R, Bridgwater AV, Donnison I, Yates N, Jones JM (2008) The effect of lignin and inorganic species in biomass on pyrolysis oil yields, quality and stability. Fuel 87:1230–1240. doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2007.07.026

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Pepper IL, Zerzghi H (2008) Sustainability of land application of class B biosolids. J Environ Qual 37:58–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Zerzghi H, Gerba CP, Brooks JP, Pepper IL (2009) Long-term effects of land application of class B biosolids on the soil microbial populations, pathogens, and activity. J Environ Qual 39:402–408. doi:10.2134/jeq2009.0307

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Reynolds JH, Walker CL, Kirchner MJ (2000) Nitrogen removal in switchgrass biomass under two harvest systems. Biomass Bioenergy 19:281–286

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Owens VN, Viands DR, Mayton HS, Fike JH, Farris R, Heaton E, Bransby DI, Hong CO (2013) Nitrogen use in switchgrass grown for bioenergy across the USA. Biomass Bioenergy 58:286–293. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2013.07.016

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. VADCR (2005) Virginia nutrient management standards and criteria. Richmond, VA. 1–117.

  48. Dien BS, Jung H-JG, Vogel KP, Casler MD, Lamb JFS, Iten L, Mitchell RB, Sarath G (2006) Chemical composition and response to dilute-acid pretreatment and enzymatic saccharification of alfalfa, reed canary grass, and switchgrass. Biomass Bioenergy 30:880–891

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Lemus R, Brummer EC, Moore KJ, Molstad NE, Burras CL, Barker MF (2002) Biomass yield and quality of 20 switchgrass populations in southern Iowa, USA. Biomass Bioenergy 23:433–442

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Monono EM, Nyren PE, Berti MT, Pryor SW (2013) Variability in biomass yield, chemical composition, and ethanol potential of individual and mixed herbaceous biomass species grown in North Dakota. Ind Crop Prod 41:331–339. doi:10.1016/j.indcrop.2012.04.051

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Vogel KP, Dien BS, Jung HG, Casler MD, Masterson SD, Mitchell RB (2011) Quantifying actual and theoretical ethanol yields for switchgrass strains using NIRS analyses. Bioenergy Res 4:96–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Fu C, Mielenz JR, Xiao X et al (2011) Genetic manipulation of lignin reduces recalcitrance and improves ethanol production from switchgrass. PNAS 108:3803–3808

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Sarath G, Dien B, Saathoff AJ, Vogel KP, Mitchell RB, Chen H (2011) Ethanol yields and cell wall properties in divergently bred switchgrass genotypes. Bioresour Technol 102:9579–9585

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank James Mahan for providing a field site and conducting all field operations, Chris Fields-Johnson and Tianyu Lei for assistance with sample collection, and Steve Nagle for assistance with sample analysis. Funding for this research was provided in part by the DC Water (formerly the District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biological Sciences and Center for Ecosystem Science and Society, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ, 86011, USA

    Xiao-Jun Allen Liu

  2. Department of Crop and Soil Environmental Sciences, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, 24061, USA

    John H. Fike, John M. Galbraith & Wonae B. Fike

Authors
  1. Xiao-Jun Allen Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John H. Fike
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. John M. Galbraith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Wonae B. Fike
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xiao-Jun Allen Liu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Liu, XJ.A., Fike, J.H., Galbraith, J.M. et al. Switchgrass Response to Cutting Frequency and Biosolids Amendment: Biomass Yield, Feedstock Quality, and Theoretical Ethanol Yield. Bioenerg. Res. 7, 1191–1200 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-014-9454-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-014-9454-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation