Conservation Practices in Western Oregon Perennial Grass Seed Systems:I. Impacts of Direct Seeding and Maximal Residue Management on Production

Steiner, J. J.; Griffith, Stephen M.; Mueller‐Warrant, George W.; Whittaker, Gerald; Banowetz, Gary M.; Elliott, L. F.

doi:10.2134/agronj2005.0003

Cited by 19 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the drier year (2000)(2001), fine fescue seed harvest was much earlier with respect to GDD and calendar date. These data substantiate previous findings of Steiner et al (2006). Reproduced from Soil Science Society of America Journal.…”

Section: Crop Developmentsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…Sites were established in 1992 by the USDA-ARS National Forage Seed Production Research Center as part of a longterm integrated agricultural systems study (Gohlke et al, 1999;Steiner et al, 2006). The study contrasted tillage establishment, crop rotation, and residue management practices.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Crop management at the WD site consisted of a fallow (2000)(2001) and first-year (1999-2000), second-year (2000-2001), and third-year (1999)(2000) fine fescue seed crops on soil in continuous 3-yr rotations since 1992. Since our study began after the 1998 to 1999 fallow season, which our first and second production years followed, data presented here for the fallow season were taken in the next time series of the USDA-ARS long-term cropping system research study that began in the fall of 2000 (Gohlke et al, 1999;Steiner et al, 2006). The CT plots were last tilled September 1998 and planted April 1999 and NT plots were last tilled September 1992 and planted April 1999.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Tillage Effects on Nitrogen Dynamics and Grass Seed Crop Production in Western Oregon, USA

Nelson

Griffith

Steiner

2006

Soil Science Soc of Amer J

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding N soil fertility in grass seed crops will lead to improved fertilizer practices and preserve water quality in Willamette Valley, Oregon. This study determined the effects of conventional tillage (CT) and no tillage (NT) on N dynamics and grass seed crop growth and seed yield on moderately well-drained (MWD) and a welldrained (WD) soils either in tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea Schreb.) or fine fescue (F. rubra L.) production. Temporal changes in soil N, N mineralization and immobilization, crop N uptake and biomass accumulation, and microbial biomass C (MBC) were determined. Net N mineralization was determined using the in situ buried bag method and MBC by fumigation extraction. Tillage treatment had no effect on fine fescue and tall fescue seed yield during the 3 yr of production. Soil MBC, under NT, was 20 to 30% higher (P 5 0.05), regardless of soil drainage class or time of year, compared to the CT soil. Soils at the WD site had twice the amount of MBC compared to MWD. Crop N uptake was lowest in the fall and highest when soil N was elevated in the spring. Tillage enhanced annual total net N mineralization at the betterdrained site (WD) resulting in more potential soil NO 3 to be leached the following winter high precipitation months when the crop's demand for N is low. This was especially true for fallow years when an actively growing crop was lacking. Net N mineralization was little affected by tillage in the more poorly drained soil.

show abstract

Section: Crop Developmentsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Tillage Effects on Nitrogen Dynamics and Grass Seed Crop Production in Western Oregon, USA

Nelson

Griffith

Steiner

2006

Soil Science Soc of Amer J

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…All models were developed based on assumptions of existing and near - term cellulosic ethanol production technologies. Tall fescue grass was selected to compare different pretreatment methods for producing cellulosic ethanol, as significant amounts of this straw residue are produced (791,000 metric tons/year) in Pacific Northwest U.S. and its composition is similar to that of proposed dedicated herbaceous energy crops [18,38,39] . Sensitivity analysis was performed by varying the price of raw materials, fermentation efficiencies and efficiency of the electricity conversion to investigate their effect on ethanol price.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of pretreatment and downstream processing technologies on economics and energy in cellulosic ethanol production

Kumar

Murthy

2011

Biotechnol Biofuels

287

204

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundWhile advantages of biofuel have been widely reported, studies also highlight the challenges in large scale production of biofuel. Cost of ethanol and process energy use in cellulosic ethanol plants are dependent on technologies used for conversion of feedstock. Process modeling can aid in identifying techno-economic bottlenecks in a production process. A comprehensive techno-economic analysis was performed for conversion of cellulosic feedstock to ethanol using some of the common pretreatment technologies: dilute acid, dilute alkali, hot water and steam explosion. Detailed process models incorporating feedstock handling, pretreatment, simultaneous saccharification and co-fermentation, ethanol recovery and downstream processing were developed using SuperPro Designer. Tall Fescue (Festuca arundinacea Schreb) was used as a model feedstock.ResultsProjected ethanol yields were 252.62, 255.80, 255.27 and 230.23 L/dry metric ton biomass for conversion process using dilute acid, dilute alkali, hot water and steam explosion pretreatment technologies respectively. Price of feedstock and cellulose enzymes were assumed as $50/metric ton and 0.517/kg broth (10% protein in broth, 600 FPU/g protein) respectively. Capital cost of ethanol plants processing 250,000 metric tons of feedstock/year was $1.92, $1.73, $1.72 and $1.70/L ethanol for process using dilute acid, dilute alkali, hot water and steam explosion pretreatment respectively. Ethanol production cost of $0.83, $0.88, $0.81 and $0.85/L ethanol was estimated for production process using dilute acid, dilute alkali, hot water and steam explosion pretreatment respectively. Water use in the production process using dilute acid, dilute alkali, hot water and steam explosion pretreatment was estimated 5.96, 6.07, 5.84 and 4.36 kg/L ethanol respectively.ConclusionsEthanol price and energy use were highly dependent on process conditions used in the ethanol production plant. Potential for significant ethanol cost reductions exist in increasing pentose fermentation efficiency and reducing biomass and enzyme costs. The results demonstrated the importance of addressing the tradeoffs in capital costs, pretreatment and downstream processing technologies.

show abstract

“…Counts of allowed transitions between general category groups and each row's specific class, both from a specific class the previous year into a general class group and from a general class group the previous year into a specific class 2002a, 2002b, 2005Steiner et al 2006;Mueller-Warrant, Whittaker, and Young III 2008;Griffith et al 2011;Hoag et al 2012;. Strict landuse laws and regulations in Oregon governing both forest management and urban development served as the basis for prohibiting most transitions into new urban development or out of forest.…”

Section: Definition Of Permissible and Forbidden Year-to-year Transitmentioning

confidence: 99%

Detecting and correcting logically inconsistent crop rotations and other land-use sequences

Mueller‐Warrant

Sullivan

Anderson

et al. 2016

International Journal of Remote Sensing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Converting multi-year land-use data into crop rotation history is relatively simple in the absence of classification errors, but severely compromised in their presence. Several classification errors can in theory be detected with a matrix of logically forbidden (or extremely unlikely) year-to-year land-use transitions. We categorized 730 of 3249 potential year-to-year transitions among 57 land-use classes in western Oregon as being logically permissible, with the remaining 77.5% forbidden. Applying these restrictions to eight consecutive years of land-use data revealed that an average of 26.7% of apparent year-to-year transitions among agricultural classes were illogical, in contrast to only 2.5% and 0.6% of urban development and forest transitions. The most useful correction applied to the data involved replacement of original majority-rule values (generated during prior pixel-to object-based data conversion) with second-place classification categories for fields with inconsistent land-uses identified as occurring at the beginning, middle, or ending year of multi-year sequences. This approach reduced year-to-year land-use inconsistency to 20.1% of the agricultural area. A lengthy series of additional iterations involving substitution of either majority-rule or secondplace classification categories (randomized within years and counties) in cases lacking obvious ways to determine which year in pairs of years was in error in the previous iteration stabilized at 17.4% inconsistency by iteration 128. Our corrections improved the measurement of perennial crop stand ages in the complex landscape of the Pacific Northwest and similar approaches should be useful in other complex landscapes.

show abstract

Conservation Practices in Western Oregon Perennial Grass Seed Systems:I. Impacts of Direct Seeding and Maximal Residue Management on Production

Cited by 19 publications

References 28 publications

Tillage Effects on Nitrogen Dynamics and Grass Seed Crop Production in Western Oregon, USA

Tillage Effects on Nitrogen Dynamics and Grass Seed Crop Production in Western Oregon, USA

Impact of pretreatment and downstream processing technologies on economics and energy in cellulosic ethanol production

Detecting and correcting logically inconsistent crop rotations and other land-use sequences

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About