4.6 Article

Overwintering problems of newly established Miscanthus plantations can be overcome by identifying genotypes with improved rhizome cold tolerance

期刊

NEW PHYTOLOGIST
卷 148, 期 2, 页码 287-294

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1046/j.1469-8137.2000.00764.x

关键词

Miscanthus x giganteus; Miscanthus sinensis; Miscanthus sacchariflorus; cold tolerance; rhizome; overwintering; perennial grass; biomass

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Miscanthus, a perennial rhizomatous C-4 grass, is a potential biomass crop in Europe, mainly because of its high yield potential and low demand for inputs. However, until recently only a single clone, M. x giganteus, was available for the extensive field trials performed across Europe and this showed poor overwintering in the first year after planting at some locations in Northern Europe. Therefore, field trials with five Miscanthus genotypes, including two acquisitions of Miscanthus x giganteus, one of M. sacchariflorus and two hybrids of M. sinensis were planted in early summer 1997 at four sites, in Sweden, Denmark, England and Germany. The field trials showed that better overwintering of newly established plants at a site was not apparently connected with size or early senescence. An artificial freezing test with rhizomes removed from the field in January 1998 showed that the lethal temperature at which 50% were killed (LT50) for M. x giganteus and M. sacchariflorus genotypes was -3.4 degreesC. However, LT50 in one of the M. sinensis hybrid genotypes tested was -6.5 degreesC and this genotype had the highest survival rates in the field in Sweden and Denmark. Although the carbohydrate content of rhizomes, osmotic potential of cell sap and mineral composition were not found to explain differences in frost tolerance adequately, moisture contents correlated with frost hardiness (LT50) in most cases. The results obtained form a basis for identifying suitable Miscanthus genotypes for biomass production in the differing climatic regions of Europe.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据