slide1 l.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Sorghum Feedstock Performance Tests: Coordinator: W.L . Rooney Texas A&M University Collaborators: Scott Staggen PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Sorghum Feedstock Performance Tests: Coordinator: W.L . Rooney Texas A&M University Collaborators: Scott Staggen

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 24

Sorghum Feedstock Performance Tests: Coordinator: W.L . Rooney Texas A&M University Collaborators: Scott Staggen - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 263 Views
  • Uploaded on

Sorghum Feedstock Performance Tests: Coordinator: W.L . Rooney Texas A&M University Collaborators: Scott Staggenborg, Kansas State University Ken Moore, Iowa State University Todd Pfieffer /Michael Barrett, University of Kentucky Bissondat Macoon, Mississippi State University

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Sorghum Feedstock Performance Tests: Coordinator: W.L . Rooney Texas A&M University Collaborators: Scott Staggen' - ailis


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
slide1

Sorghum Feedstock Performance Tests:

Coordinator: W.L. Rooney Texas A&M University

Collaborators:

Scott Staggenborg, Kansas State University

Ken Moore, Iowa State University

Todd Pfieffer/Michael Barrett, University of Kentucky

Bissondat Macoon, Mississippi State University

Ron Heiniger, North Carolina State University

Gary Odvody, Texas Agrilife Research

Jim Heilman, Texas A&M University

Jeff Pedersen, USDA-ARS

objectives
Objectives
  • Establish yield parameters for different types of sorghums
  • Establish quality parameters for different sorghums across environments
  • Sustainability Analysis
sorghum experimental design
Sorghum Experimental Design
  • Medium experimental units (0.05 to 0.10 ha)
  • 3 to 4 replications
  • Nitrogen as recommended for forage sorghum production
  • Rainfed, no supplemental irrigation
  • Harvest
    • Single, end of season Harvest (2008)
    • Multiple, optimized to Type (2009)
  • 6 Genotypes (varies in year)
  • Harvest
    • Biomass Yield (Fresh, Dry),
    • Height
    • Maturity
    • Composition
sorghum hybrid selection 2008
Sorghum Hybrid Selection - 2008

Sweet Sorghum Variety

M81-E

Grain Sorghum (check)

No energy sorghum hybrids available in 2008

  • Forage Sorghum Hybrids
    • Graze-All, Graze-n-Bale
    • PS and PI
  • Silage Sorghum Hybrids
    • 22053 and Sugar-T
    • PS and PI, BMR and bmr
2008 results
2008 Results
  • Harvestable Yield in 6/7 locations
    • Iowa – not planted due to wet spring
      • Planting Dates - mid March to early June
      • Harvest Date - late September to late November
  • Yields
    • Dry Weights
      • 9 Mg/ha (grain check) to 26.2 Mg/ha (PS Forage Hybrid)
  • Composition
    • Biomass composition samples collected in most locations
sorghum hybrid selection 2009
Sorghum Hybrid Selection - 2009

Sweet Sorghum Variety

M81-E

Energy Sorghum

TAM08001

  • Forage Sorghum Hybrids
    • Graze-All (PI)
    • Graze-n-Bale (PS)
  • Silage Sorghum Hybrids
    • 22053, PS bmr
    • Sugar-T, PI
2009 results
2009 Results
  • Harvestable Yield in 6/7 locations
    • CC, Texas – not planted due to extreme drought
  • Yields – generally very good
  • Composition
    • Biomass composition samples collected in most locations (2008 and 2009)
    • NIR Scans completed in CS
    • Sorghum composition model co-developed by NREL and TAMU to estimate fiber composition.
yield data and interpretation
Yield Data and Interpretation
  • Multiple Cut Hybrids provide greater window of harvest, more cost/harvest
  • Single Cut Hybrids provide total yield in single harvest reduce cost/harvest
  • Yield of top MC, SC in year is similar
  • Adaptation:
  • Photoperiod Sensitive
    • Higher Yielding
    • Less susceptible to drought
composition
Composition
  • Sample Collected
  • Composition will be estimated
  • NIR Calibration Curve
    • Collaborative with NREL, NSP
    • Standardization is critical
    • Estimate on all over years for GxE study
sustainability
Sustainability
  • Sustainability analysis initiated in College Station in 2009
    • Soil Carbon
    • Nitrogen Requirements
  • Initial collections in 2009, no information available as of now.
2010 plans
2010 Plans
  • Continue testing, further refining of hybrid variety selections.
  • Compile three year averages
    • Location
    • Hybrids
  • Additional Emphasis
    • Composition Analysis
    • Nutrient Analysis
    • Economic Analysis
  • Additional Locations