scholarly journals Impact of Growing Environment on Anthracnose Severity of Switchgrass Cultivars and Clones

Plant Disease ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 100 (10) ◽  
pp. 2034-2042
Author(s):  
Lindsey Hoffman ◽  
Laura M. Chaves ◽  
Eric N. Weibel ◽  
Hilary S. Mayton ◽  
Stacy A. Bonos

Anthracnose (caused by Colletotrichum navitas) has the potential to significantly reduce biomass yield of switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.); however, limited information is available on the impact of growing environment on tolerance of switchgrass to anthracnose. Therefore, the major objectives of this study were to (i) examine genotype–environment (G × E) effects on anthracnose severity in populations of switchgrass cultivars and individual genotypes and (ii) determine clonal repeatability estimates and stability analysis of anthracnose tolerance on individual switchgrass genotypes. Two experiments were conducted at one prime and two marginal soil locations in New Jersey. In all, 14 switchgrass cultivars were established from seed in 2008 for experiment 1 and 50 replicated switchgrass clones were planted in 2009 for experiment 2 at all three locations. Anthracnose was rated visually in 2010 for experiment 1 and in 2010 and 2011 for experiment 2. Significant G × E interactions were detected for both experiments (P ≤ 0.05) and anthracnose severity varied by location and cultivar. Clonal repeatability estimates for disease tolerance among clones was 0.78 on a clonal basis and 0.32 on a single-plant basis. Lowland ecotypes exhibited less disease overall than upland ecotypes. Results from this study indicate that selection for improved tolerance to anthracnose should be conducted after evaluation across several environments over multiple years.

2019 ◽  
Vol 125 ◽  
pp. 105-113 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kittikun Songsomboon ◽  
Ryan Crawford ◽  
Jamie Crawford ◽  
Julie Hansen ◽  
Jaime Cummings ◽  
...  

Agronomy ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (7) ◽  
pp. 923
Author(s):  
Efthymia Alexopoulou ◽  
Federica Zanetti ◽  
Eleni G. Papazoglou ◽  
Konstantinos Iordanoglou ◽  
Andrea Monti

Switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) has been identified in the USA as an ideal biomass crop, in relation to its wide environmental suitability, mainly linked to the availability of both upland and lowland ecotypes, allowing the possibility of growing this species in most of the North American region. Switchgrass is conventionally grown for forage, but more recently, it has been considered as a model biofuel crop. Early European studies on switchgrass as a bioenergy crop started in the late 1990s, when a multi-location field trial was established in Greece (Aliartos) and Italy (Ozzano) to compare the productivity of 13 switchgrass genotypes, including upland (Carthage, Blackwell, Caddo, CIR, Forestburg, SU 94-1, Summer) and lowland (Alamo, Kanlow, Pangburn, SL 93-2, SL 93-3, SL94-1) genotypes. The scope was to identify the most suitable ecotype within each environment and, possibly, the best performing variety. The trials lasted 17 years (1998–2014) in Greece and 13 years (1998–2010) in Italy. While in Italy the trial was rainfed and unfertilized, in Greece, where the soil was marginal, drip irrigation was always applied, and the plots were fertilized regularly. The biomass yields in Greece, as averages across the 17 years, were similar for the lowland and upland varieties (11.5 vs. 11.1 Mg ha−1, respectively), while in Italy, as averages across the 13 years, the differences were relevant: 15.4 vs. 11.3 Mg ha−1 for lowland and upland, respectively. Alamo (lowland) was the most productive variety, both in Greece and Italy, with average annual yields of 12.7 and 16.6 Mg ha−1, respectively; CIR in Greece (10.1 Mg ha−1) and Forestburg in Italy (9.1 Mg ha−1) (both upland) were the least productive genotypes. The present results demonstrate the good suitability of switchgrass as biomass crop for the Mediterranean climate. Despite the very marginal soil (i.e., very shallow and with a sandy texture) in the Greek trial, the application of regular fertilization and irrigation produced biomass yields above 11 Mg ha−1 (grand mean) in the present 17-year-long study.


Crop Science ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 50 (6) ◽  
pp. 2355-2363 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. S. Bhandari ◽  
M. C. Saha ◽  
P. N. Mascia ◽  
V. A. Fasoula ◽  
J. H. Bouton

2014 ◽  
Vol 168 ◽  
pp. 148-155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qingzhen Jiang ◽  
Stephen L. Webb ◽  
Charles R. Yesudas ◽  
Hem S. Bhandari ◽  
Brindha Narasimhamoorthy ◽  
...  

1992 ◽  
Vol 72 (3) ◽  
pp. 809-818 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. E. Bidlack ◽  
D. R. Buxton

Cell-wall (CW) components greatly influence digestibility of forages as they mature. There is only limited information on the timing of rates of deposition of CW components. This investigation examined differences in CW and CW component deposition in greenhouse-grown alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.), birds-foot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus L.), red clover (Trifolium pratense L.), orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata L.), smooth bromegrass (Bromus inermis Leyss.), and switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.). Plant material was sampled from the basal 10 cm of forage after harvesting at 3–5 cm above the soil level. Samples analyzed included sheaths from orchardgrass, sheaths and stems from bromegrass and switch-grass, and stems from all legumes. After establishment and herbage removal, samples were collected biweekly between 2 and 10 wk of regrowth. Results indicated that, except for orchardgrass, maximum rates of CW and CW component deposition usually occurred earlier in legumes compared with those of grasses. Maximum CW deposition for all species occurred within 1–3 d of maximum dry weight deposition. Among CW components in grasses and legumes, maximum deposition of hemicellulose occurred first, followed by that of cellulose (1–6 d later), and then lignin (up to 14 d after maximum hemicellulose deposition). Maximum cellulose deposition in all species occurred at the same time as maximum CW deposition.Key words: Cell wall, deposition, cellulose, hemicellulose, lignin, forage


Crop Science ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 51 (4) ◽  
pp. 1525-1533 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. S. Bhandari ◽  
M. C. Saha ◽  
V. A. Fasoula ◽  
J. H. Bouton

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document