4.5 Article

Performance of 15 Miscanthus genotypes at five sites in Europe

Journal

AGRONOMY JOURNAL
Volume 93, Issue 5, Pages 1013-1019

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.2134/agronj2001.9351013x

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Miscanthus is a genus of high-yielding perennial rhizomatous grasses with C-4 photosynthesis. Extensive field trials of Miscanthus spp. biomass production in Europe during the past decade have shown several limitations of the most widely planted clone, M. x giganteus Greef et Deu. A 3-yr study was conducted at five sites in Europe (Sweden, Denmark, England, Germany, and Portugal) to evaluate adaptation and biomass production potential of four acquisitions of M. x giganteus (No. 1-4) and 11 other genotypes, including,11. sacchariflorus (Maxim.) Benth. (No. 5), AL sinensis Andersson (No. 11-15), and hybrids (No. 6-10). At each site, three randomized blocks containing a 5- by 5-m plot of each genotype were established (except in Portugal where there were two blocks) with micropropagated plants at 2 plants m(-2). In Sweden and Denmark, only M. shiensis and its hybrids satisfactorily survived the first winter following planting. Mean annual yields across all sites for all surviving genotypes increased each year from 2 t ha(-1) dry matter following the first year of growth to 9 and 18 t ha(-1) following the second and third year, respectively. Highest autumn yields at sites in Sweden, Denmark, England, and Germany were 24.7 (M. shiensis hybrid no. 8), 18.2 (AL sinensis hybrid no. 10), 18.7 (M. x giganteus no. 3), and 29.1 t ha(-1) (M. x giganteus no. 4), respectively. In Portugal, where irrigation was used, the top-yielding genotype produced 40.9 t ha(-1) dry matter (M. sinensis hybrid no. 7). Highest-yielding genotypes in Sweden and Denmark were among the lowest yielding in Portugal and Germany, demonstrating strong genotype x environment interactions.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available