TY - JOUR
T1 - Propagation method affects Miscanthus×giganteus developmental morphology
AU - Boersma, Nicholas N.
AU - Heaton, Emily A.
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was supported by the Iowa State University Dept. of Agronomy and the National Science Foundation (Grant Number EPS-1101284 ). We thank Speedling Inc. and Caveny Farm for generously providing plant material. We also thank George Patrick and Heaton lab undergraduate members for their assistance in planting and collecting morphological data throughout this experiment, Karl Pazdernik for statistical consulting, and Danielle Wilson, Catherine Bonin and Elke Brandes for critical evaluations of preliminary manuscript drafts.
PY - 2014/6
Y1 - 2014/6
N2 - The Illinois clone of Miscanthus×. giganteus has many traits of an ideal biomass crop, including sterility, which significantly limits invasive potential. However, this sterility necessitates vegetative propagation, a time and labor intensive process that currently challenges the crop's adoption. Traditionally propagated by rhizome segments, M.×. giganteus can also reproduce by stems like its relative, sugarcane. Previous work indicates, however, that non-traditional propagation of M.×. giganteus can affect developmental morphology of resultant plants in the field. We investigated the effect of stem propagation on developmental morphology (part I, this paper), and survival and yield (part II), of field-grown M.×. giganteus (Illinois clone) plants at three sites in Iowa, USA during the second and third year of growth. Although stem propagation affected morphology compared to traditional rhizome propagation, the differences were less pronounced than reported for hormone-aided micropropagation. Observed differences (and similarities) between stem and rhizome propagated plants were consistent between different growing environments and years, despite extreme weather. Rhizome propagated plants had larger basal circumferences (146.2. cm vs. 134.7. cm on average, P= 0.0107), but stem propagated plants had more stems per plant (38 vs. 33 on average, P= 0.0492) suggesting that these two propagation techniques result in plants with different growth strategies but may achieve similar yields. Though small, these differences persisted consistently throughout the duration of this experiment, suggesting morphological differences may be maintained over time in mature stands of M.×. giganteus.
AB - The Illinois clone of Miscanthus×. giganteus has many traits of an ideal biomass crop, including sterility, which significantly limits invasive potential. However, this sterility necessitates vegetative propagation, a time and labor intensive process that currently challenges the crop's adoption. Traditionally propagated by rhizome segments, M.×. giganteus can also reproduce by stems like its relative, sugarcane. Previous work indicates, however, that non-traditional propagation of M.×. giganteus can affect developmental morphology of resultant plants in the field. We investigated the effect of stem propagation on developmental morphology (part I, this paper), and survival and yield (part II), of field-grown M.×. giganteus (Illinois clone) plants at three sites in Iowa, USA during the second and third year of growth. Although stem propagation affected morphology compared to traditional rhizome propagation, the differences were less pronounced than reported for hormone-aided micropropagation. Observed differences (and similarities) between stem and rhizome propagated plants were consistent between different growing environments and years, despite extreme weather. Rhizome propagated plants had larger basal circumferences (146.2. cm vs. 134.7. cm on average, P= 0.0107), but stem propagated plants had more stems per plant (38 vs. 33 on average, P= 0.0492) suggesting that these two propagation techniques result in plants with different growth strategies but may achieve similar yields. Though small, these differences persisted consistently throughout the duration of this experiment, suggesting morphological differences may be maintained over time in mature stands of M.×. giganteus.
KW - Bioenergy crop
KW - Establishment
KW - Growth
KW - Ontogeny
KW - Rhizome
KW - Stem
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84906725084&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84906725084&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.indcrop.2014.01.059
DO - 10.1016/j.indcrop.2014.01.059
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84906725084
SN - 0926-6690
VL - 57
SP - 59
EP - 68
JO - Industrial Crops and Products
JF - Industrial Crops and Products
ER -