1989
DOI: 10.1016/0144-4565(89)90059-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Biomass production from selected herbaceous species in the southeastern USA

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
7
0
2

Year Published

1991
1991
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
1
7
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…On aquic soils (Palamas), recovery fraction ranges from 15% to 20% depending on growing year and irrigation treatment. Such a recovery fraction range is reported in literature (Bransby et al, 1989;Sladden et al, 1994) for switchgrass cultivations with fertilization of 75-180 kg N ha -1 . Contrary, in dry soils (Velestino), the recovery fraction remained at low levels (4-6%) pointing the useless effort of adding any nitrogen in switchgrass growing in such soils. )…”
Section: Base Uptakesupporting
confidence: 54%
“…On aquic soils (Palamas), recovery fraction ranges from 15% to 20% depending on growing year and irrigation treatment. Such a recovery fraction range is reported in literature (Bransby et al, 1989;Sladden et al, 1994) for switchgrass cultivations with fertilization of 75-180 kg N ha -1 . Contrary, in dry soils (Velestino), the recovery fraction remained at low levels (4-6%) pointing the useless effort of adding any nitrogen in switchgrass growing in such soils. )…”
Section: Base Uptakesupporting
confidence: 54%
“…Matching the N application level with N removal has obvious agronomic, economic, and environmental value. Bransby et al [12] fertilized switchgrass with 100 kg ha À1 of N annually four years in the Southeastern USA, and an average of 87 kg ha À1 of N was removed in biomass from the field during the last three. Stout and Jung [13] reported fertilizer N recovery of about 31% and 23% following switchgrass fertilization at 90 and 180 kg ha À1 y À1 in Pennsylvania USA.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It naturally possesses various traits that make it desirable as a lignocellulosic feedstock, including high yield potential, tolerance to water and nutrient limitations, low establishment costs, mitigation of soil erosion, adaptation to marginal land sites, and a high net energy gain [1][2][3]. While switchgrass is considered a front-running feedstock for bioenergy, the complexity of the cell wall and recalcitrance attributable to compounds such as lignin currently renders the utilization of switchgrass for ethanol production at an economic disadvantage [4].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%