Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Biomass and Genotype × Environment Interactions of Populus Energy Crops in the Midwestern United States

  • Published:
BioEnergy Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Using Populus feedstocks for biofuels, bioenergy, and bioproducts is becoming economically feasible as global fossil fuel prices increase. Maximizing Populus biomass production across regional landscapes largely depends on understanding genotype × environment interactions, given broad genetic variation at strategic (genomic group) and operational (clone) levels. A regional network of Populus field tests was established in the Midwest USA in 1995, 1997, and 2000 to assess relative productivity of 187 clones grown at Westport, Minnesota (45.7° N, 95.2° W); Waseca, Minnesota (only 2000; 44.1° N, 93.5° W); Arlington, Wisconsin (43.3° N, 89.4° W); and Ames, Iowa (42.0° N, 93.6° W). We evaluated biomass potential throughout plantation development and identified clones with yield substantially greater than commercial controls (Eugenei, NM6). For each site, biomass ranges (Mg ha−1 year−1) of the best six clones were: Westport: 2.3 to 3.9 (5 years), 8.0 to 10.1 (8 years), and 8.9 to 11.3 (10 years); Waseca: 10.4 to 13.4 (7 years); Arlington: 5.1 to 7.1 (3 years), 14.8 to 20.9 (6 years), and 16.1 to 21.1 (8 years); and Ames: 4.3 to 5.3 (4 years), 11.1 to 20.9 (7 years), and 14.3 to 24.5 (9 years). Mean biomass of the best three clones was 1.4 to 2.7 times greater than controls as trees developed at Westport (1995, 1997) and Waseca 2000. Genotype × environment interactions governed biomass production, with clone–mean rank correlations across sites ranging from 0.29 to 0.81. We identified generalist genotypes (e.g. Crandon, NC14105, NM2) with elevated biomass across the region and specialists (e.g. 7300501, 80X01015, and NC14103) with exceptional biomass at specific locations.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

DBH:

diameter at breast height

LSD:

least significant difference

STE:

standard error

References

  1. Ceulemans R, Scarascia-Mugnozza G, Wiard BM, Braatne JH, Hinckley TM, Stettler RF et al (1992) Production physiology and morphology of Populus species and their hybrids grown under short rotation. I. Clonal comparisons of 4-year growth and phenology. Can J For Res 22:1937–1948

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Coleman MD, Isebrands JG, Tolsted DN, Tolbert VR (2004) Comparing soil carbon of short rotation poplar plantations with agricultural crops and woodlots in North Central United States. Environ Manage 33:S299–S308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Coyle DR, Nebeker TE, Hart ER, Mattson WJ (2005) Biology and management of insect pests in North American intensively managed hardwood forest systems. Ann Rev Entomol 50:1–29

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Dickmann DI (2001) An overview of the genus Populus. In: Dickmann DI, Isebrands JG, Eckenwalder JE, Richardson J (eds) Popular culture in North America. Part A, Ch 1. NRC Research, Canada, pp 1–42

    Google Scholar 

  5. Dickmann DI (2006) Silviculture and biology of short-rotation woody crops in temperature regions: then and now. Biomass Bioenergy 30:696–705

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Eckenwalder JE (1984) Natural intersectional hybridization between North American species of Populus (Salicaceae) in sections Aigeiros and Tacamahaca. II. Taxonomy. Can J Bot 62:325–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Eckenwalder JE (1996) Systematics and evolution of Populus. In: Stettler RF, Bradshaw HD Jr, Heilman PE, Hinckley TM (eds) Biology of Populus and its implications for management and conservation. Part I, Ch 1. NRC Research, Canada, pp 7–32

    Google Scholar 

  8. Farmer RE Jr (1993) Latitudinal variation in height and phenology of balsam poplar. Silvae Genet 42:148–153

    Google Scholar 

  9. Farmer RE Jr (1996) The genecology of Populus. In: Stettler RF, Bradshaw HD Jr, Heilman PE, Hinckley TM (eds) Biology of Populus and its implications for management and conservation. Part I, Ch 2. NRC Research, Canada, pp 33–55

    Google Scholar 

  10. Grigal DF, Berguson WE (1998) Soil carbon changes associated with short-rotation systems. Biomass Bioenergy 14:371–377

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Hall RB (2008) Woody bioenergy systems in the United States. Gen Tech Rep NRS-P-31. Newtown Square, PA; USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, p 18

  12. Hansen EA (1981) Root length in young hybrid Populus plantations: its implications for border width of research plots. For Sci 27:808–814

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hansen EA (1992) Mid-rotation yields of biomass plantations in the north central U.S. Res Pap NC-309. St. Paul, MN; USDA Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station, pp 8

  14. Hansen EA (1993) Soil carbon sequestration beneath hybrid poplar plantations in the North Central United States. Biomass Bioenergy 5:431–436

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Hansen EA, Ostry ME, Johnson WD, Tolsted DN, Netzer DA, Berguson WE et al (1994) Field performance of Populus in short-rotation intensive culture plantations in the north-central U.S. Res Pap NC-320. St. Paul, MN; USDA Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station, pp 13

  16. Heilman PE (1999) Planted forests: poplars. New For 17:89–93

    Google Scholar 

  17. Heilman PE, Stettler RF (1985) Genetic variation and productivity of Populus trichocarpa and its hybrids. II. Biomass production in a 4-year plantation. Can J For Res 15:384–388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Heilman PE, Ekuan G, Fogle DB (1994) Above- and below-ground biomass and fine roots of 4-year-old hybrids of Populus trichocarpa × Populus deltoides and parental species in short-rotation culture. Can J For Res 24:1186–1192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Hill J, Nelson E, Tilman D, Polasky S, Tiffany D (2006) Environmental, economic, and energetic costs and benefits of biodiesel and ethanol biofuels. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 103:11206–11210

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Isebrands JG, Karnosky DF (2001) Environmental benefits of poplar culture. In: Dickmann DI, Isebrands JG, Eckenwalder JE, Richardson J (eds) Poplar culture in North America. Part A, Ch 6. NRC Research, Canada, pp 207–218

    Google Scholar 

  21. Isebrands JG, Ceulemans R, Wiard B (1988) Genetic variation in photosynthetic traits among Populus clones in relation to yield. Plant Physiol Biochem 26:427–437

    Google Scholar 

  22. Johnson JMF, Coleman MD, Gesch R, Jaradat A, Mitchell R, Reicosky D et al (2007) Biomass-bioenergy crops in the United States: a changing paradigm. Amer J Plant Sci Biotechnol 1:1–28

    Google Scholar 

  23. Keoleian GA, Volk TA (2005) Renewable energy from willow biomass crops: life cycle energy, environmental and economic performance. Crit Rev Plant Sci 24:385–406

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Mahama AA, Zalesny RS Jr, Hall RB (2007) Breeding success and range of incompatibility among Populus hybrids in sections Aigeiros Duby and Tacamahaca Spach. In: Abstracts of the 2007 annual meeting of the Poplar Council of Canada: poplar culture: a collaborative effort from clone to mill, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada, 16–21 September, 2007

  25. Maisenhelder LC (1970) Eastern cottonwood selections outgrow hybrids on southern sites. J For 68:300–301

    Google Scholar 

  26. Mathews RW (2001) Modelling of energy and carbon budgets of wood fuel coppice systems. Biomass Bioenergy 21:1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. McCamant T, Black RA (2000) Cold hardiness in coastal, montane, and inland populations of Populus trichocarpa. Can J For Res 30:91–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. McMahon BG, Berguson WE, Buchman DJ, Levar TE, Maly CC, O’Brien TC (2008) A Minnesota-based Populus breeding and hybrid poplar development program. Gen Tech Rep NRS-P-31. Newtown Square, PA; USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, pp 34

  29. Mohn CA, Randall WK (1973) Interaction of cottonwood clones with site and planting year. Can J For Res 3:329–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Netzer DA, Tolsted D, Ostry ME, Isebrands JG, Riemenschneider DE, Ward KT (2002) Growth, yield, and disease resistance of 7- to 12-year-old poplar clones in the north central United States. Gen Tech Rep NC-229. St. Paul, MN; USDA Forest Service, North Central Research Station, pp 31

  31. Newcombe G, Ostry M, Hubbes M, Périnet P, Mottet M (2001) Poplar diseases. In: Dickmann DI, Isebrands JG, Eckenwalder JE, Richardson J (eds) Poplar culture in North America. Part A, Ch 8. NRC Research, Canada, pp 249–276

    Google Scholar 

  32. Orlovic S, Guzina V, Krstic B, Merkulov L (1998) Genetic variability in anatomical, physiological and growth characteristics of hybrid poplar (Populus × euramericana Dode (Guinier)) and eastern cottonwood (Populus deltoides Bartr.) clones. Silvae Genet 47:183–190

    Google Scholar 

  33. Rajora OP, Zsuffa L (1990) Allozyme divergence and evolutionary relationships among Populus deltoides, P. nigra, and P. maximowiczii. Genome 33:44–49

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Riemenschneider DE, Berguson WE, Dickmann DI, Hall RB, Isebrands JG, Mohn CA et al (2001) Poplar breeding and testing strategies in the north-central US: demonstration of potential yield and consideration of future research needs. For Chron 77:245–253

    Google Scholar 

  35. SAS Institute, Inc (2004) SAS/STAT™ User’s guide. Version 9. Cary, North Carolina, SAS Institute, Inc

  36. Scarascia-Mugnozza GE, Ceulemans R, Heilman PE, Isebrands JG, Stettler RF, Hinckley TM (1997) Production physiology and morphology of Populus species and their hybrids grown under short rotation. II. Biomass components and harvest index of hybrid and parental species clones. Can J For Res 27:285–294

    Google Scholar 

  37. Scarascia-Mugnozza GE, Hinckley TM, Stettler RF, Heilman PE, Isebrands JG (1999) Production physiology and morphology of Populus species and their hybrids grown under short rotation. III. Seasonal carbon allocation patterns from branches. Can J For Res 29:1419–1432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Schreiner EJ (1971) Genetics of eastern cottonwood. Res Pap WO-11. Durham, NH; USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, pp 19

  39. Schultz RC, Isenhart TM, Simpkins WW, Colletti JP (2004) Riparian forest buffers in agroecosystems—lessons learned from the Bear Creek Watershed, central Iowa, USA. Agroforestry 61:35–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Sims REH, Rogner HH, Gregory K (2003) Carbon emission and mitigation cost comparisons between fossil fuel, nuclear and renewable energy resources for electricity generation. Energy Policy 31:1315–1326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Sims REH, Hastings A, Schlamadinger B, Taylor G, Smith P (2006) Energy crops: current status and future prospects. Glob Chang Biol 12:2054–2076

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Stettler RF, Zsuffa L, Wu R (1996) The role of hybridization in the genetic manipulation of Populus. In: Stettler RF, Bradshaw HD Jr, Heilman PE, Hinckley TM (eds) Biology of Populus and its implications for management and conservation. Part I, Ch 4. NRC Research, Canada, pp 87–112

    Google Scholar 

  43. Stout AB, Schreiner EJ (1933) Results of a project in hybridizing poplars. J Heredity 24:216–229

    Google Scholar 

  44. Tufekcioglu A, Raich JW, Isenhart TM, Schultz RC (1999) Fine root dynamics, coarse root biomass, root distribution, and soil respiration in a multispecies riparian buffer in Central Iowa, USA. Agrofor Syst 44:163–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Weber JC, Stettler RF, Heilman PE (1985) Genetic variation and productivity of Populus trichocarpa and its hybrids. I. Morphology and phenology of 50 native clones. Can J For Res 15:376–383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Zalesny JA, Zalesny RS Jr (2009) Chloride and sodium uptake potential over an entire rotation of Populus irrigated with landfill leachate. Int J Phytoremed 11:496–508

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Zalesny JA, Zalesny RS Jr, Wiese AH, Sexton B, Hall RB (2008) Sodium and chloride accumulation in leaf, woody, and root tissue of Populus after irrigation with landfill leachate. Environ Pollut 155:72–80

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Zalesny RS Jr, Bauer EO (2007) Selecting and utilizing Populus and Salix for landfill covers: implications for leachate irrigation. Int J Phytoremed 9:497–511

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Zalesny RS Jr, Zalesny JA (2009b) Selecting Populus with different adventitious root types for environmental benefits, fiber, and energy. In: Niemi K, Scagel C (eds) Adventitious root formation in forest trees and woody horticultural crops—from genes to applications. Ch 18. Research Signpost, Kerala, India, pp 359–384

  50. Zalesny RS Jr, Riemenschneider DE, Hall RB (2005) Early rooting of dormant hardwood cuttings of Populus: analysis of quantitative genetics and genotype × environment interactions. Can J For Res 35:918–929

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Zalesny RS Jr, Hall RB, Bauer EO, Riemenschneider DE (2005) Soil temperature and precipitation affect the rooting ability of dormant hardwood cuttings of Populus. Silvae Genet 54:47–58

    Google Scholar 

  52. Zavitkovski J (1981) Small plots with unplanted plot border can distort data in biomass production studies. Can J For Res 11:9–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Zsuffa L, Lin D, Payne P (1999) One-way crossing barriers in some interspecific crosses of Aigeiros and Tacamahaca poplars. For Chron 75:833–836

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

R.S. Zalesny Jr. presented the results of this study during the Breeding and Genetics Session of the Short Rotation Crops International Conference: Biofuels, Bioenergy, and Bioproducts from Sustainable Agricultural and Forest Crops; August 19–21, 2008; Bloomington, Minnesota, USA. We thank Donald Dickmann, Judson Isebrands, Carl Mohn, Donald Riemenschneider, and Gerald Tuskan for insightful and productive collaborations during previous studies relating to the Midwest network of Populus field tests. We appreciate review of earlier versions of the manuscript from Edmund Bauer, David Coyle, Eric Gustafson, Raymond Miller, Thomas Schmidt, and Georg von Wühlisch.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Northern Research Station, Institute for Applied Ecosystem Studies, U.S. Forest Service, 5985 Highway K, Rhinelander, WI, 54501, USA

    Ronald S. Zalesny Jr. & Jill A. Zalesny

  2. Department of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, Iowa State University, 339 Science II, Ames, IA, 50011, USA

    Richard B. Hall

  3. Natural Resources Research Institute, University of Minnesota, 5013 Mill Trunk Highway, Duluth, MN, 55811, USA

    Bernard G. McMahon & William E. Berguson

  4. Department of Plant Pathology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1630 Linden Drive, Madison, WI, 53706, USA

    Glen R. Stanosz

Authors
  1. Ronald S. Zalesny Jr.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Richard B. Hall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jill A. Zalesny
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Bernard G. McMahon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. William E. Berguson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Glen R. Stanosz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ronald S. Zalesny Jr..

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zalesny, R.S., Hall, R.B., Zalesny, J.A. et al. Biomass and Genotype × Environment Interactions of Populus Energy Crops in the Midwestern United States. Bioenerg. Res. 2, 106–122 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-009-9039-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-009-9039-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation