The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Site-Specific Management of Miscanthus Genotypes for Combustion and Anaerobic Digestion: A Comparison of Energy Yields
Open accessAbstract
grass miscanthus is currently mainly cultivated for energy generation via combustion. In recent years, anaerobic digestion has been identified as a promising alternative utilization pathway. Anaerobic digestion produces a higher-value intermediate (biogas), which can be upgraded to biomethane, stored in the existing natural gas infrastructure and further utilized as a transport fuel or in combined heat and power plants. However, the upgrading of the solid biomass into gaseous fuel leads to conversion-related energy losses, the level of which depends on the cultivation parameters genotype, location, and harvest date. Thus, site-specific crop management needs to be adapted to the intended utilization pathway. The objectives of this paper are to quantify (i) the impact of genotype, location and harvest date on energy yields of anaerobic digestion and combustion and (ii) the conversion losses of upgrading solid biomass into biogas. For this purpose, five miscanthus genotypes (OPM 3, 6, 9, 11, 14), three cultivation locations (Adana, Moscow, Stuttgart), and up to six harvest dates (August-March) were assessed. Anaerobic digestion yielded, on average, 35% less energy than combustion. Genotype, location, and harvest date all had significant impacts on the energy yield. For both, this is determined by dry matter yield and ash content and additionally by substrate-specific methane yield for anaerobic digestion and moisture content for combustion. Averaged over all locations and genotypes, an early harvest in August led to 25% and a late harvest to 45% conversion losses. However, each utilization option has its own optimal harvest date, determined by biomass yield, biomass quality, and cutting tolerance. By applying an autumn green harvest for anaerobic digestion and a delayed harvest for combustion, the conversion-related energy loss was reduced to an average of 18%. This clearly shows that the delayed harvest required to maintain biomass quality for combustion is accompanied by high energy losses through yield reduction over winter. The pre-winter harvest applied in the biogas utilization pathway avoids these yield losses and largely compensates for the conversion-related energy losses of anaerobic digestion.
Overview
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
Verification
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?
The methane hectare yield for the Adana site was 4,676, for the Moscow site 4,194, and for the Stuttgart site 6,495 m3 CH4 yr−1 ha−1.
“The methane hectare yield [m3 CH4 yr−1 ha−1] for the Adana site was 4,676, for the Moscow site 4,194, and for the Stuttgart site 6,495 (Kiesel et al., 2017).”
From Novel Miscanthus Germplasm-Based Value Chains: A Life Cycle Assessment (2017) · cites this paper as Kiesel et al., 2017
The Materials and methods > Laboratory analysis passage explains how methane yield per hectare was calculated, and the Field trial passage identifies Adana, Moscow, and Stuttgart as study sites (page numbers unavailable). The retrieved passages do not report the claimed values of 4,676, 4,194, and 6,495 m³ CH₄ yr⁻¹ ha⁻¹, so the numerical part of the citation remains unsupported by our copy. (LLM, conf=0.72)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredMiscanthus biomass can be used as a biogas substrate when harvested green in September to October.
“When harvested green in the period September to October, it can be used as a biogas substrate (Whittaker et al., 2016; Kiesel and Lewandowski, 2017).”
From Novel Miscanthus Germplasm-Based Value Chains: A Life Cycle Assessment (2017) · cites this paper as Kiesel and Lewandowski, 2017
The methane yield was measured as described in Kiesel and Lewandowski (2017).
“The methane yield was measured as described in Kiesel and Lewandowski (2017).”
From Novel Miscanthus Germplasm-Based Value Chains: A Life Cycle Assessment (2017) · cites this paper as Kiesel and Lewandowski (2017)
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Lewandowski, I., & Schmidt, U. (2006) · Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment · doi:10.1016/j.agee.2005.08.003 · Cited by 310
Self-citationNutrient requirements of Miscanthus x giganteus: Conclusions from a review of published studies
Cadoux, S., Riche, A. B., Yates, N. E., & Machet, J.-M. (2012) · Biomass and Bioenergy · doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2011.01.015 · Cited by 225
Clifton‐Brown, J., Hastings, A., Mos, M., McCalmont, J. P., Ashman, C., Awty‐Carroll, D., Cerazy, J., Chiang, Y., Cosentino, S., Cracroft‐Eley, W., et al. (2017) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12357 · Cited by 192
Self-citationOptimizing GHG emission and energy-saving performance of miscanthus-based value chains
Meyer, F., Wagner, M., & Lewandowski, I. (2017) · Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery · doi:10.1007/s13399-016-0219-5 · Cited by 23
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 30
- Angelidaki, 2009, Defining the biomethane potential (BMP) of solid organic wastes and energy crops: a proposed protocol for batch assays, Water Sci. Technol., 59, 927, 10.2166/wst.2009.040 · DOI
- Christian, 2008, Growth, yield and mineral content of Miscanthus × giganteus grown as a biofuel for 14 successive harvests, Ind. Crops Prod., 28, 320, 10.1016/j.indcrop.2008.02.009 · DOI · Paper page
- Clifton-Brown, 2002, Comparative responses to water stress in stay-green, rapid- and slow senescing genotypes of the biomass crop, Miscanthus, New Phytol., 154, 335, 10.1046/j.1469-8137.2002.00381.x · DOI
- Clifton-Brown, 2015, History of the development of Miscanthus as a bioenergy crop: from small beginnings to potential realisation, Biol. Environ. Proc. R. Ir. Acad., 115B, 1, 10.3318/bioe.2015.05 · DOI · Paper page
- den Camp, 1988, Effects of lignin on the anaerobic degradation of (ligno) cellulosic wastes by rumen microorganisms, Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol., 29, 408, 10.1007/BF00265827 · DOI
- Felten, 2013, Energy balances and greenhouse gas-mitigation potentials of bioenergy cropping systems (Miscanthus, rapeseed, and maize) based on farming conditions in Western Germany, Renewable Energy, 55, 160, 10.1016/j.renene.2012.12.004 · DOI
- Fonteyne, 2016, Chilling tolerance and early vigour-related characteristics evaluated in two Miscanthus genotypes, Photosynthetica, 54, 295, 10.1007/s11099-016-0193-y · DOI
- Frydendal-Nielsen, 2016, The effect of harvest time, dry matter content and mechanical pretreatments on anaerobic digestion and enzymatic hydrolysis of miscanthus, Bioresour. Technol., 218, 1008, 10.1016/j.biortech.2016.07.046 · DOI
- Greef, 1997, Genetic diversity of European Miscanthus species revealed by AFLP fingerprinting, Genet. Resour. Crop. Evol., 44, 185, 10.1023/A:1008693214629 · DOI
- Iqbal, 2014, Inter-annual variation in biomass combustion quality traits over five years in fifteen Miscanthus genotypes in south Germany, Fuel Process. Technol., 121, 47, 10.1016/j.fuproc.2014.01.003 · DOI · Paper page
- Jensen, 2016, Towards Miscanthus combustion quality improvement: the role of flowering and senescence, GCB Bioenergy, 10.1111/gcbb.12391 · DOI
- Kiesel, 2017, Miscanthus as biogas substrate – Cutting tolerance and potential for anaerobic digestion, GCB Bioenergy, 9, 153, 10.1111/gcbb.12330 · DOI
- Kołodziej, 2016, Miscanthus × giganteus as a biomass feedstock grown on municipal sewage sludge, Ind. Crops Prod., 81, 72, 10.1016/j.indcrop.2015.11.052 · DOI
- Le Gall, 2015, Cell wall metabolism in response to abiotic stress, Plants, 4, 112, 10.3390/plants4010112 · DOI
- Lewandowski, 2003, Environment and harvest time affects the combustion qualities of genotypes, Agron. J., 95, 1274, 10.2134/agronj2003.1274 · DOI
- Lewandowski, 2016, Progress on optimizing miscanthus biomass production for the European bioeconomy: results of the EU FP7 project OPTIMISC, Front. Plant Sci., 7, 1620, 10.3389/fpls.2016.01620 · DOI · Paper page
- Mayer, 2014, Assessment of energy crops alternative to maize for biogas production in the greater region, Bioresour. Technol., 166, 358, 10.1016/j.biortech.2014.05.054 · DOI
- McCalmont, 2017, Environmental costs and benefits of growing Miscanthus for bioenergy in the UK, GCB Bioenergy, 9, 489, 10.1111/gcbb.12294 · DOI · Paper page
- Menardo, 2013, Biogas production from steam-exploded Miscanthus and utilization of biogas energy and CO2 in greenhouses, Bioenergy Res., 6, 620, 10.1007/s12155-012-9280-5 · DOI
- Naumann, 1976/2012, Die chemische Untersuchung von Futtermitteln
- Patinvoh, 2017, Innovative pretreatment strategies for biogas production, Bioresour. Technol., 224, 13, 10.1016/j.biortech.2016.11.083 · DOI
- Purdy, 2015, Seasonal carbohydrate dynamics and climatic regulation of senescence in the perennial grass, Miscanthus, Bioenergy Res., 8, 28, 10.1007/s12155-014-9500-2 · DOI
- Robson, 2012, Phenotypic variation in senescence in Miscanthus: towards optimising biomass quality and quantity, Bioenergy Res., 5, 95, 10.1007/s12155-011-9118-6 · DOI
- Strullu, 2011, Biomass production and nitrogen accumulation and remobilisation by Miscanthus×giganteus as influenced by nitrogen stocks in belowground organs, Field Crops Res., 121, 381, 10.1016/j.fcr.2011.01.005 · DOI
- Styles, 2015, Consequential life cycle assessment of biogas, biofuel and biomass energy options within an arable crop rotation, GCB Bioenergy, 7, 1305, 10.1111/gcbb.12246 · DOI
- van der Weijde, 2013, The potential of C4 grasses for cellulosic biofuel production, Front. Plant Sci., 4, 107, 10.3389/fpls.2013.00107 · DOI
- van der Weijde, 2017a, Impact of drought stress on growth and quality of Miscanthus for biofuel production, GCB Bioenergy, 9, 770, 10.1111/gcbb.12382 · DOI
- van der Weijde, 2017b, Evaluation of Miscanthus sinensis biomass quality as feedstock for conversion into different bioenergy products, GCB Bioenergy, 9, 176, 10.1111/gcbb.12355 · DOI · Paper page
- Wahid, 2015, Methane production potential from Miscanthus sp: Effect of harvesting time, genotypes and plant fractions, Biosyst. Eng., 133, 71, 10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2015.03.005 · DOI
- Whittaker, 2016, How well does Miscanthus ensile for use in an anaerobic digestion plant?, Biomass Bioenergy, 88, 24, 10.1016/j.biombioe.2016.03.018 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Marginal Agricultural Land Low-Input Systems for Biomass Production
Von Cossel, M., Lewandowski, I., Elbersen, B., Staritsky, I., Van Eupen, M., Iqbal, Y., Mantel, S., Scordia, D., Testa, G., Cosentino, S. L., et al. (2019) · Energies · doi:10.3390/en12163123 · Cited by 186
Self-citationWinkler, B., Mangold, A., von Cossel, M., Clifton-Brown, J., Pogrzeba, M., Lewandowski, I., Iqbal, Y., & Kiesel, A. (2020) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2020.110053 · Cited by 94
Self-citationNovel Miscanthus Germplasm-Based Value Chains: A Life Cycle Assessment
Wagner, M., Kiesel, A., Hastings, A., Iqbal, Y., & Lewandowski, I. (2017) · Frontiers in Plant Science · doi:10.3389/fpls.2017.00990 · Cited by 36
“The methane hectare yield [m3 CH4 yr−1 ha−1] for the Adana site was 4,676, for the Moscow site 4,194, and for the Stuttgart site 6,495 (Kiesel et al., 2017).”
BackgroundSelf-citationBioenergy crop production on reclaimed mine land in the North Appalachian region, USA
Ussiri, D. A. N., Guzman, J. G., Lal, R., & Somireddy, U. (2019) · Biomass and Bioenergy · doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2019.04.024 · Cited by 13
Metadata
- Authors
- Kiesel, A., Nunn, C., Iqbal, Y., Van der Weijde, T., Wagner, M., Özgüven, M., Tarakanov, I., Kalinina, O., Trindade, L. M., Clifton-Brown, J., & Lewandowski, I.
- Affiliations
- University of Hohenheim (DE)
- Aberystwyth University (GB)
- Wageningen University & Research (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Kiesel, Andreas
- Venue
- Frontiers in Plant Science
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2017-03-17
- Volume
- 8
- Pages
- 347-347
- ISSN
- 1664-462X (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC5355453
- OpenAlex
- W2597384685
- Cited by
- 43
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 3
- FWCI
- 12.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Frontiers in Plant Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Seventh Framework Programme (289159)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Bioenergy crop production and management
- Physical Sciences › Energy › Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment › Anaerobic Digestion and Biogas Production
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Biofuel production and bioconversion
- Keywords
- Miscanthus, genotype effects, harvest time, site-specific crop management, anaerobic digestion, combustion, energy yield, conversion loss, biogas upgrading, dry matter yield, ash content, moisture content, autumn harvest, biomass quality
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
