Production Characteristics of Miscanthus (Mischantus × Giganteus Greef et Deu) under Agroecological Conditions of Serbia †
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
3. Results and Discussion
4. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Burner, D.M.; Ashworth, A.; Pote, D.; Kiniry, J.; Belesky, D.; Houx, J.; Carver, P.; Fritschi, F. Dual-use bioenergy-livestock feed potential of giant miscanthus, giant reed, and miscane. Agric. Sci. 2017, 8, 97–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Đurić, N.; Kresović, B.; Glamočlija, Đ. Sistemi Konvencionalne i Organske Proizvodnje Ratarskih Useva; Monografija, Izdavač, PKB Agroekonomik: Beograd, Serbia, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Đurić, N.; Glamočlija, Đ. Introduction of mischantus in agricultural production in Serbia and the potential for using biomass for obtaining alternative fuels. In Thematic Proceedings: Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development in Terms of the Republic of Serbia Strategic Goals Realization within the Danube region: Support Programs for the Improvement of Agricultural and Rural Development, Belgrade, Serbia, 14–15 December 2017; Institute of Agricultural Economics: Belgrade, Serbia, 2018; pp. 453–470. [Google Scholar]
- Đurić, N.; Popović, V.; Tabaković, M.; Jovović, Z.; Čurović, M.; Mladenović-Glamočlija, M.; Rakoščanin, N.; Glamočlija, Đ. Morfološke i Produktivne Osobine Miskantusa u Promenljivom Vodnom Režimu; Zbornik Naučnih Radova Instituta PKB Agroekonomik: Beograd, Serbia, 2019; Volume 25, br. 1–2; pp. 89–98. [Google Scholar]
- Živanović, L.; Ikanović, J.; Popović, V.; Simić, D.; Kolarić, L.; Maklenović, V.; Bojović, R.; Stevanović, P. Effect of Planting Density and Supplemental Nitrogen Nutrition on the Productivity of Miscanthus. Rom. Agric. Res. 2014, 31, 291–298. [Google Scholar]
- Maksimović, J.S. Uticaj Gustine Sadnje na Zakorovljenost Zasada i Prinos Biomase Miskantusa (Miscanthus x Giganteus Greef et Deu.); Doktorska Disertacija, Poljoprivredni Fakultet: Zemun, Serbia, 2016; p. 126. [Google Scholar]
- Mladenović-Glamočlija, M.; Popović, V.; Janković, S.; Glamočlija, Đ.; Čurović, M.; Radović, M.; Đokić, M. Nutrition effect to productivity of bioenergy crop Miscanthus x giganteus in different environments. Agric. For. 2020, 66, 67–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Janković, S.; Glamočlija, Đ.; Prodanović, S. Energetski Usevi. Monografija; Institut za Primenu Nauke u Poljoprivredi: Beograd, Serbia, 2017; p. 255. [Google Scholar]
- Hastings, A.; Clifton-Brown, J.; Wattenbach, M.; Stampfl, P.; Paul Mitchell, C.; Smith, P. Potential of Miscanthus grasses to provide energy and hence reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2008, 28, 465–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Styles, D.; Jones, M.B. Energy crops in Ireland: Quantifying the potential life-cycle greenhouse gas reductions of energy-crop electricity. Biomass Bioenergy 2007, 31, 759–772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fowler, P.A.; McLauchlin, A.R.; Hall, L.M. The Potential Industrial Uses of Forage Grasses Including Miscanthus; Bio-Composites Centre, University of Wales: Bangor, UK, 2003; p. 40. [Google Scholar]
Months | Years | Average | Optimum | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | |||
January | 49.0 | 46.0 | 23.0 | 39.0 | 22.0 | 55 | - |
February | 49.0 | 41.0 | 20.0 | 47.0 | 34.0 | 51.0 | - |
March | 97.0 | 79.0 | 29.0 | 58.0 | 12.0 | 54.0 | 50.0 |
April | 25.0 | 35.0 | 66.0 | 35.0 | 77.0 | 52.0 | 55.0 |
May | 88.0 | 76.0 | 116.0 | 81.0 | 142.0 | 80.0 | 85.0 |
June | 20.0 | 98.0 | 37.0 | 85.0 | 89.0 | 82.0 | 90.0 |
July | 5.0 | 35.0 | 16.0 | 97.0 | 43.0 | 65.0 | 100.0 |
August | 69.0 | 12.0 | 30.0 | 77.0 | 40.0 | 56.0 | 80.0 |
September | 86.0 | 45.0 | 61.0 | 53.0 | 28.0 | 54.0 | 55.0 |
October | 68.0 | 58.0 | 57.0 | 37.0 | 14.0 | 54.0 | 35.0 |
November | 51.0 | 50.0 | 52.0 | 49.0 | 54.0 | 52.0 | - |
December | 14.0 | 63.0 | 37.0 | 65.0 | 55.0 | 45.0 | - |
III-IX | 390.0 | 380.0 | 355.0 | 486.0 | 431.0 | 443.0 | 515.0 |
I-XII | 621.0 | 632.0 | 544.0 | 723.0 | 610.0 | 700.0 |
Months | Years | Average | Optimum | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | |||
January | 3.0 | 1.0 | −5.0 | 3.0 | 2.0 | 1.6 | - |
February | 3.0 | 7.0 | 3.0 | 2.0 | 6.0 | 2.1 | - |
March | 7.0 | 8.0 | 10.0 | 5.0 | 11.0 | 6.9 | 10 |
April | 12.0 | 13.0 | 12.0 | 17.0 | 14.0 | 13.0 | 15.0 |
May | 19.0 | 18.0 | 18.0 | 20.0 | 16.0 | 18.3 | 18.0 |
June | 23.0 | 22.0 | 23.0 | 21.0 | 24.0 | 22.4 | 19.0 |
July | 28.0 | 23.0 | 25.0 | 22.0 | 24.0 | 24.0 | 21.0 |
August | 26.0 | 23.0 | 25.0 | 24.0 | 26.0 | 23.5 | 21.0 |
September | 21.0 | 19.0 | 18.0 | 18.0 | 20.0 | 18.5 | 18.0 |
October | 11.0 | 14.0 | 13.0 | 14.0 | 16.0 | 11.2 | 10.0 |
November | 7.0 | 8.0 | 7.0 | 8.0 | 12.0 | 7.1 | - |
December | 3.0 | 3.0 | 4.0 | 3.0 | 6.0 | 2.4 | - |
IV-IX | 19.4 | 17.5 | 18.0 | 17.6 | 19.3 | 17.2 | 16.5 |
I-XII | 13.6 | 13.3 | 12.8 | 12.9 | 14.8 | 13.1 |
Depth | pH (H2O) | pH (nKCl) | Humus (%) | N (%) | P2O5 (mg 100 g−1) | K2O (mg 100 g−1) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0–30 cm | 7.9 | 7.1 | 3.66 | 0.253 | 17.4 | 21.6 |
30–60 cm | 8.2 | 7.3 | 3.41 | 0.219 | 15.1 | 19.4 |
Average | 8.1 | 7.2 | 3.54 | 0.236 | 16.3 | 20.5 |
Year/Variant | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | Average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Control | 222 | 295 | 235 | 328 | 357 | 287.4 |
N, 30 kg ha−1 | 227 | 318 | 242 | 356 | 361 | 300.9 |
Average | 224.5 | 306.5 | 238.5 | 342.0 | 359.0 | 294.1 |
LSD *, years | 5% | 74.474 | 1% | 129.668 | ||
LSD *, N30 | 5% | 15.26 | 1% | 26.57 |
Year/Variant | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | Average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Control | 20.425 | 25.320 | 18.025 | 30.655 | 33.373 | 25.560 |
N, 30 kg ha−1 | 21.470 | 25.550 | 17.980 | 32.210 | 34.525 | 26.347 |
Average | 20.948 | 25.435 | 18.003 | 31.433 | 33.949 | 25.953 |
LSD, years | 5% | 6.9855 | 1% | 11.9522 | ||
LSD, N30 | 5% | 756.47 | 1% | 1.31701 |
Year/Variant | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | Average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Control | 31.95 | 32.13 | 32.21 | 32.09 | 32.14 | 32.11 |
N, 30 kg ha−1 | 32.01 | 32.20 | 32.19 | 32.01 | 32.16 | 32.12 |
Average | 31.98 | 32.17 | 32.20 | 32.05 | 32.15 | 32.11 |
LSD, years | 5% | 0.253 | 1% | 0.431 | ||
LSD, N30 | 0.091 | 0.156 |
Factors | Stalk Height | Dry Stalk Yield | Cellulose Content |
---|---|---|---|
Year (A) | 738.3 ** | 6541.8 ** | 1.378 ns |
Fertilization (B) | 42.56 ** | 105.43 ** | 0.012 ns |
A × B | 7.13 ** | 17.92 ** | 0.153 ns |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Đurić, N.; Poštić, D.; Rajičić, V.; Branković, G.; Cvijanović, G.; Đorđević, R.; Savić, S. Production Characteristics of Miscanthus (Mischantus × Giganteus Greef et Deu) under Agroecological Conditions of Serbia. Chem. Proc. 2022, 10, 82. https://doi.org/10.3390/IOCAG2022-12287
Đurić N, Poštić D, Rajičić V, Branković G, Cvijanović G, Đorđević R, Savić S. Production Characteristics of Miscanthus (Mischantus × Giganteus Greef et Deu) under Agroecological Conditions of Serbia. Chemistry Proceedings. 2022; 10(1):82. https://doi.org/10.3390/IOCAG2022-12287
Chicago/Turabian StyleĐurić, Nenad, Dobrivoj Poštić, Vera Rajičić, Gordana Branković, Gorica Cvijanović, Radiša Đorđević, and Slađana Savić. 2022. "Production Characteristics of Miscanthus (Mischantus × Giganteus Greef et Deu) under Agroecological Conditions of Serbia" Chemistry Proceedings 10, no. 1: 82. https://doi.org/10.3390/IOCAG2022-12287
APA StyleĐurić, N., Poštić, D., Rajičić, V., Branković, G., Cvijanović, G., Đorđević, R., & Savić, S. (2022). Production Characteristics of Miscanthus (Mischantus × Giganteus Greef et Deu) under Agroecological Conditions of Serbia. Chemistry Proceedings, 10(1), 82. https://doi.org/10.3390/IOCAG2022-12287