Performance of 15 Miscanthus genotypes at five sites in Europe.
Open accessAbstract
Miscanthus is a genus of high‐yielding perennial rhizomatous grasses with C 4 photosynthesis. Extensive field trials of Miscanthus spp. biomass production in Europe during the past decade have shown several limitations of the most widely planted clone, M . × giganteus Greef et Deu. A 3‐yr study was conducted at five sites in Europe (Sweden, Denmark, England, Germany, and Portugal) to evaluate adaptation and biomass production potential of four acquisitions of M . × giganteus (No. 1–4) and 11 other genotypes, including M. sacchariflorus (Maxim.) Benth. (No. 5), M. sinensis Andersson (No. 11–15), and hybrids (No. 6–10). At each site, three randomized blocks containing a 5‐ by 5‐m plot of each genotype were established (except in Portugal where there were two blocks) with micropropagated plants at 2 plants m −2 . In Sweden and Denmark, only M. sinensis and its hybrids satisfactorily survived the first winter following planting. Mean annual yields across all sites for all surviving genotypes increased each year from 2 t ha −1 dry matter following the first year of growth to 9 and 18 t ha −1 following the second and third year, respectively. Highest autumn yields at sites in Sweden, Denmark, England, and Germany were 24.7 ( M. sinensis hybrid no. 8), 18.2 ( M. sinensis hybrid no. 10), 18.7 ( M . × giganteus no. 3), and 29.1 t ha −1 ( M . × giganteus no. 4), respectively. In Portugal, where irrigation was used, the top‐yielding genotype produced 40.9 t ha −1 dry matter ( M. sinensis hybrid no. 7). Highest‐yielding genotypes in Sweden and Denmark were among the lowest yielding in Portugal and Germany, demonstrating strong genotype × environment interactions.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Approximately 30% of total annual Miscanthus × giganteus biomass production (leaf litter drop) falls to the ground over winter, and a significant proportion is recycled into soil as organic matter.
“Approximately 30% of the total annual biomass production (leaf litter drop) will fall to the ground over winter (Lewandowski et al., 2000; Clifton-Brown et al., 2001); a significant proportion of this is re-cycled into the soil as organic matter (Hansen et al., 2004; McCalmont et al., 2017).”
From Establishment, Growth, and Yield Potential of the Perennial Grass Miscanthus × Giganteus on Degraded Coal Mine Soils (2017) · cites this paper as Clifton-Brown et al., 2001
The Production for Biomass section says spring harvest yields can be as much as 30% lower than autumn yields because leaves and stem tops die and detach over winter. It does not establish that approximately 30% of total annual M. × giganteus biomass production falls as leaf litter. The soil-organic-matter statement is attached to other citations, not this paper. (LLM, conf=0.85)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 18 · Cited by 360
- Authors
- Clifton‐Brown, J. C., Lewandowski, I., Andersson, B., Basch, G., Christian, D. G., Kjeldsen, J. B., J⊘rgensen, U., Mortensen, J. V., Riche, A. B., Schwarz, K.-U., Tayebi, K., & Teixeira, F.
- Affiliations
- Univ. of Hohenheim, Inst. for Crop Prod. and Grassl. Res. (340) D‐70599 Stuttgart Germany
- University of Hohenheim (DE)
- Svalöf Weibull AB‐S 268 81 Svalöv Sweden
- University of Évora (PT)
- Rothamsted Exp. Stn. Harpenden Hertfordshire AL5 2JQ United Kingdom
- Danish Inst. of Agric. Sci. Dep. of Soil Sci., Res. Cent. Foulum P.O. Box 50 8830 Tjele Denmark
- Venue
- Agronomy Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2001-09
- Volume
- 93
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1013-1019
- ISSN
- 0002-1962 (ISSN-L)
- 1435-0645
- OpenAlex
- W1542610982
- Cited by
- 360
- References
- 18
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 30 · 2014: 30 · 2013: 32 · 2012: 31
- FWCI
- 8.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Agronomy Journal (publishedVersion)
- Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Rothamsted Repository (Rothamsted Repository) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- EU (FAIR3 CT-96-1392)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Bioenergy crop production and management
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Agricultural Productivity and Crop Improvement
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Crop Yield and Soil Fertility
- Keywords
- Miscanthus, Miscanthus × giganteus, Miscanthus sinensis, Miscanthus sacchariflorus, biomass yield, gene-environment interaction, genotype adaptation, perennial grasses, C4 photosynthesis, dry matter production, field trials, irrigation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
