Table 2. Dry matter yield 

du

Exceptionally High Yields and Soil Carbon Sequestratio

for Giant Reed in Alabama

Ping Huang, David Bransby, and Susan Sladden;

Giant Reed (Arundo donax L.) has been extensively

evaluated as a dedicated cellulosic energy crop insouthern Europe, with very favorable results. Efforts tocommercialize it are being stepped up in Italy, Greece,France, Spain and Portugal. However, the informationon its potential for soil carbon sequestration and yieldresponse to harvest frequency is lacking. Therefore, theaim of our research was to determine yield response ofGiant Reed to harvest frequency and its potential forsoil carbon sequestration.

Above-ground biomass yield of Giant Reed showed nopositive responses to broiler litter treatments afterestablished (Table 1). However, there was significantdifference in above-ground biomass yield as well asrhizome yield among different harvest frequency treatments(Table 2). Carbon and N contents varied significantlyamong leaf, stem and rhizome components of Giant Reed(Figure 1). In addition, average above-ground dry matteryield of Giant Reed was higher than that of ‘Alamo’switchgrass over the same 8-year period (Figure 2).

1) Annual above-g

biennial harvesharvest will like

2) Giant Reed seq

year period, ameasured in an

3) Average above

over an 8-year switchgrass ov

Data from a replicated small-plot experiment with GiantReed planted during the spring of 1999 in south centralAlabama were analyzed. Plots were fertilized withammonium nitrate at a rate of 112 kg N ha-1 in 2000.

broiler litter was applied during 2001 and 2003 at a rateof 112 kg N ha-1. Four harvest frequency treatments

(summer every year, winter every second year, winterevery year, and summer & winter every year) wereapplied during 2006 and 2009. Plots were harvested toobtain dry biomass yield data for different treatments.Rhizome yield was collected in 2009. Above-groundbiomass yield data and rhizome data were analyzedusing the GLIMMIX procedure of SAS and the GLMprocedure of SAS, respectively.

Table 1. Annual above-ground dry matter yield of Giant Reed under broiler 

litter treatments during 2001 and 2003

Introduction

Harvest frequency : summer every year (left) VS winter every second year (right)

Alamo

Acknowledgmen

We express our appBreeding Unit at thExtension Center fo

Procedure

Results

Conclusions

Department of Agronomy and Soils, Auburn University

Oct. 16th, 2009

Nov. 2nd, 2009

Oct. 16th, 2009

Oct. 16th, 2009

Broiler litter treatments 

(Kg N ha-1)

Above-ground dry matter yield (Mg ha-1)

Year

2001 2002 2003

0 29.08±5.35 a 32.03±9.56 a 32.82±5.30 a

112 30.03±9.20 a 26.55±7.53 a 23.61±3.87 b

ab means within the same column with different superscripts differ significantly (P<0.05)

Harvest frequency

Summer every year 

Winter every second year 

Winter every year 

Summer & winter every year 

abc means within the same col

Harvest frequency : winter every second year (left) VS winter every year (right)

Nov. 2nd, 2009

Harvest frequency : winter every year (left) VS summer &winter every year (right)

Rhizome distribution of Giant Reed in the 0-30 cm topsoil

Giant Reed rhizomes sampled from one square yard 

winter every year

b

a

b

b

c

a

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3638404244464850

Rhizome Leaf Stem

Nitrogen Content Carbon Content

Carbon content (%)

Nitrogen content (%)

Parts of Giant Reed

Figure 1. Carbon and nitrogen contents in different parts 

of Giant Reed in November 2009

05

1015202530354045505560

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2009

Switchgrass Giant Reed

Above-ground dry matter yield (Mg ha-1)

Year

24.50

34.01

Figure 2. Annual above-ground biomass yield of Giant Reed 

and ‘Alamo’ switchgrass during the same period