No abstract

Improving production in short rotation coppice (SRC) plantations requires, among other elements, a proper understanding of clonal performance. Genotypic stability over a range of environments is a factor of concern for breeding and recommendation purposes. Most common stability measures can be embedded in a mixed-model framework accounting for interaction and heterocedasticity in genotype-by-environment tables. Data from nine hybrid poplars of different taxonomic background were tested in four Mediterranean sites under three agronomic practices (control, herbicide application, and supplementary fertilization) for total biomass (TB), stem biomass (SB), and branch biomass (BB) at the end of the first rotation. Stability models (stability variance, Finlay-Wilkinson and Eberhart-Russell) were compared, also allowing for the definition of groups of genotypes with distinct taxonomic backgrounds and a priori different variabilities. Results showed that genotype-by-environment (GE) interactions were associated with factors inherent to evaluation sites rather than to the agronomic practices tested. Depending on biomass fraction, regression models provided appropriate stability measures. Highly reactive clones to improving environmental conditions (e.g., 'AF2') tended to show the largest mean TB. However, this was not always the case, as clone 'Monviso' showed both intermediate reactivity (i.e., stable sensu Eberhart-Russell) and enhanced overall performance. The taxonomic group was relevant for explaining stability patterns for SB. The stability assessment for BB indicated different patterns in biomass allocation. Present findings point to the feasibility of either exploiting specific adaptation (in which case hybrid type may play a relevant role) or searching for broadly adapted, stable material exhibiting good performance in Mediterranean conditions.

Fruit and vegetable wastes (FVW) are some of the most abundant agro‐industrial wastes. This residual biomass can be used to obtain biofuels such as bioethanol, biomethane, biohydrogen, and biobutanol. Additionally, FVW can also be employed as a raw material for recovering bioactive compounds (antioxidants, enzymes, or antibiotics) and to produce organic acids of industrial interest (citric acid, lactic acid, acetic acid). However, the use of these wastes as a substrate to obtain the mentioned value‐added products usually requires several steps, including different pre‐treatments, microbial biotransformation, and separation and purification processes. The aim of this work is to provide an overview of the different products that can be obtained from FVW, as well as the technologies that can be employed in the revalorization procedures.

No abstract

No abstract