Genotypic diversity effects on biomass production in native perennial bioenergy cropping systems.
The perennial grass species that are being developed as biomass feedstock crops harbor extensive genotypic diversity, but the effects of this diversity on biomass production are not well understood. We investigated the effects of genotypic diversity in switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) and big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii) on perennial biomass cropping systems in two experiments conducted over 2008-2014 at a 5.4-ha fertile field site in northeastern Illinois, USA. We varied levels of switchgrass and big bluestem genotypic diversity using various local and nonlocal cultivars - under low or high species diversity, with or without nitrogen inputs - and quantified establishment, biomass yield, and biomass composition. In one experiment ('agronomic trial'), we compared three switchgrass cultivars in monoculture to a switchgrass cultivar mixture and three different species mixtures, with or without N fertilization. In another experiment ('diversity gradient'), we varied diversity levels in switchgrass and big bluestem (1, 2, 4, or 6 cultivars per plot), with one or two species per plot. In both experiments, cultivar mixtures produced yields equivalent to or greater than the best cultivars. In the agronomic trial, the three switchgrass mixture showed the highest production overall, though not significantly different than best cultivar monoculture. In the diversity gradient, genotypic mixtures had one-third higher biomass production than the average monoculture, and none of the monocultures were significantly higher yielding than the average mixture. Year-to-year variation in yields was lowest in the three-cultivar switchgrass mixtures and Cave-In-Rock (the southern Illinois cultivar) and also reduced in the mixture of switchgrass and big bluestem relative to the species monocultures. The effects of genotypic diversity on biomass composition were modest relative to the differences among species and genotypes. Our findings suggest that local genotypes can be included in biomass cropping systems without compromising yields and that genotypic mixtures could help provide high, stable yields of high-quality biomass feedstocks.
Department of Agronomy Kansas State University Manhattan KS 66506 USA.
Geoffrey P
0000-0002-3067-3359
GP
Morris
Department of Agronomy Kansas State University Manhattan KS 66506 USA.
Zhenbin
Z
Hu
USDA-ARS Dairy Forage Research Center Madison WI 53706 USA.
Paul P
PP
Grabowski
Research School of Biology Australian National University Acton ACT 2601 Australia.
Justin O
JO
Borevitz
Department of Biological Sciences Boise State University Boise ID 83725 USA.
Marie-Anne
MA
de Graaff
Biosciences Division Argonne National Laboratory Argonne IL 60439 USA.
R Michael
RM
Miller
Biosciences Division Argonne National Laboratory Argonne IL 60439 USA.
Julie D
JD
Jastrow
big bluestem; biomass feedstock; cultivars; ecotype; fertilization; low‐input high‐diversity; polymorphism; switchgrass; tallgrass prairie; yield
Appl Biochem Biotechnol. 2008 Jul;150(1):1-14
18427744
Annu Rev Phytopathol. 2002;40:381-410
12147765
Bioinformatics. 2007 Oct 1;23(19):2633-5
17586829
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Jan 15;105(2):464-9
18180449
Science. 2006 Dec 8;314(5805):1598-600
17158327
Genetica. 2011 Jul;139(7):933-48
21786028
Ann Bot. 2007 Nov;100(5):975-89
17766842
Bioinformatics. 2009 Aug 15;25(16):2078-9
19505943
Nature. 2006 Jun 1;441(7093):629-32
16738658
Theor Appl Genet. 2011 Mar;122(4):805-17
21104398
Nature. 2013 Jan 24;493(7433):514-7
23334409
Ecology. 2011 Apr;92(4):915-23
21661554
Bioinformatics. 2009 Jul 15;25(14):1754-60
19451168
Ecol Appl. 2009 Dec;19(8):2202-9
20014588
Proc Biol Sci. 2007 Mar 22;274(1611):871-6
17251113
Mol Ecol. 2014 Aug;23(16):4059-73
24962137
Mol Ecol. 2011 Dec;20(23):4938-52
22060816
Theor Appl Genet. 2012 May;124(7):1325-38
22274765
Mol Ecol. 2014 Dec;23(24):6011-28
25370460
Mol Biol Evol. 2013 Dec;30(12):2725-9
24132122
Bioinformatics. 2011 Aug 1;27(15):2156-8
21653522
PLoS One. 2011 Mar 03;6(3):e16941
21390274
Ecol Appl. 2012 Jan;22(1):3-7
22471071