<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">JSBS</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Journal of Sustainable Bioenergy Systems</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2165-400X</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/jsbs.2013.32015</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">JSBS-33605</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Engineering</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Biomass Yield, Chemical Composition and Potential Ethanol Yields of 8 Cultivars of Napiergrass (&lt;i&gt;Pennisetum purpureum&lt;/i&gt; Schumach.) Harvested 3-Monthly in Central Thailand
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>annika</surname><given-names>Rengsirikul</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Yasuyuki</surname><given-names>Ishii</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Kunn</surname><given-names>Kangvansaichol</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Prapa</surname><given-names>Sripichitt</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Vittaya</surname><given-names>Punsuvon</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff4"><sup>4</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Pilanee</surname><given-names>Vaithanomsat</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff5"><sup>5</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Ganda</surname><given-names>Nakamanee</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff6"><sup>6</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Sayan</surname><given-names>Tudsri</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff5"><addr-line>Kasetsart Agricultural and Agro-Industrial Product Improvement Institute, Bangkok, Thailand</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff6"><addr-line>Nakhonratchasima Animal Nutrition Research and Development Center, Nakhonratchasima, Thailand</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff4"><addr-line>Faculty of Science, Kasetsart University, Bangkok, Thailand</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff2"><addr-line>Faculty of Agriculture, University of Miyazaki, Miyazaki, Japan</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff3"><addr-line>PTT Public Company Limited, Ayutthaya, Thailand</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>Faculty of Agriculture, Kasetsart University, Bangkok, Thailand</addr-line></aff><author-notes><corresp id="cor1">* E-mail:<email>agrsat@ku.ac.th(ST)</email>;</corresp></author-notes><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>25</day><month>06</month><year>2013</year></pub-date><volume>03</volume><issue>02</issue><fpage>107</fpage><lpage>112</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>March</day>	<month>20,</month>	<year>2013</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>April</day>	<month>21,</month>	<year>2013</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>May</day>	<month>15,</month>	<year>2013</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
   Eight cultivars of napiergrass (Pennisetum purpureum Schumach.), namely Dwarf, Muaklek, Bana, Taiwan A148, Common, Wruk wona, Tifton and Kampheng San, were grown in central Thailand in 2008-2009 and biomass yield, chemical composition and theoretical ethanol yield were measured. Harvests were made every 3 months. Biomass yield and cell wall compositions differed significantly (P &lt; 0.05) among cultivars. Tifton produced the highest annual biomass yield at 58.3 t/ha followed by Wruk wona (52.1 t/ha), while the lowest yield of 27.1 t/ha<sup> </sup>was in Dwarf. Biomass yield varied with season with highest yields in May and lowest in February during the dry season. Cell wall concentrations were higher in the tall cultivars than in the short ones (Dwarf and Muaklek) (P &lt; 0.05). Theoretical ethanol conversion efficiency ranged from 350 to 460 L/t DM among the cultivars following pretreatment with steam explosion. While a number of cultivars showed significant potential for use as biofuels in central Thailand, Tifton seemed to be the most promising.
    <!--?xml:namespace prefix = o /-->
     
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Bioenergy; Biomass Yield; Cultivar; &lt;i&gt;Pennisetum purpureum&lt;/i&gt;; Season</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>Energy resources in Thailand have been greatly reduced in the last 10 years [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.33605-ref1">1</xref>], and the demand has been satisfied mainly by imported fuels such as natural gas, charcoal and oil. Meanwhile, rapid industrial and commercial growth in recent decades has led to an increasing energy demand in Thailand. Therefore, the increasing world prices for fossil fuels have led to an escalation in the price of Thai products. The development of alternative energy sources should solve this problem. Although vegetable biomass is the biggest supplier of renewable energy in the developing world, it contributes only 4% of the total fuel supply in Thailand [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.33605-ref2">2</xref>]. In the central part of Thailand where soil fertility is higher than in other regions, the genus Pennisetum (including napiergrass) contains the most productive tropical grasses. Even with frequent cutting, this genus outyielded other tropical grasses such as paragrass, guineagrass and ruzigrass [3-5]. Many cultivars from this genus are commonly grown for animal feed, and Common napier, King napier, Bana, Wruk wona, Merkeron and the short type (Mott dwarf) can produce biomass yields exceeding 25 t/ha/yr dry matter (DM) when cut at 30-day intervals [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.33605-ref6">6</xref>]. At Pak Chong in central Thailand, biomass yield reached 75 t/ha/yr when cut at 60-day intervals [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.33605-ref3">3</xref>]. Yields of this magnitude make napiergrass a promising species for methane generation or for co-firing with coal to produce electricity. In Thailand, there is considerable interest in the potential use of napiergrass to produce ethanol. Napier cultivars currently in use were selected for use as animal feeds, with emphasis on high leaf percentage, high N concentration and low fiber levels. Dry matter yield was often sacrificed to obtain high feed quality. In contrast, for bioenergy production, the object is to obtain maximum yield of biomass, with quality suitable for either direct combustion or ethanol conversion [7,8]. Therefore, the objectives of this paper were to quantify the yield and quality of biomass produced in different seasons by a range of napiergrass cultivars when cut at 3-monthly intervals throughout the year and to assess their potential as a source of energy for ethanol and solid biofuel production in central Thailand.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Materials and Methods</title><sec id="s2_1"><title>2.1. Experimental Site</title><p>The experiment was carried out at Suwanvajokkasikit Research Station, Pak Chong, Nakhonratchasima, Thailand situated at 14˚38'N, 101˚18'E and 388 m above sea level in April 2008-May 2009. The soil was sandy clay loam with moderate fertility and pH of 6.5 (in water). Chemical composition of the top 0 - 15 cm of soil was 13 - 14 ppm of available phosphorus (P), 78 - 160 ppm of available potassium (K) and 1.21% - 1.74% of organic matter, using the in-house method based on AOAC [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.33605-ref9">9</xref>] and OMAF [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.33605-ref10">10</xref>] methods were determined by the laboratory of the Department of Agriculture, Thailand. Daily rainfall was recorded at the Pak Chong Meteorological Station.</p></sec><sec id="s2_2"><title>2.2. Experimental Design</title><p>A randomized block design was employed with 8 napiergrass cultivars namely; Bana (BN), Taiwan A148 (TW), Common (CM), Wruk wona (WW), Tifton (TT) and Kampheng San (KS), representing tall types, and Dwarf (DW) and Muaklek (ML), representing short type and four replications.</p></sec><sec id="s2_3"><title>2.3. Experimental Procedure and Plant Measurements</title><p>The area was ploughed and cultivated to produce a firm fine nursery bed before planting on 10 April 2008. Rooted tillers of all cultivars were grown in plastic trays in the nursery for 4 weeks prior to transplanting into the experimental area. The transplanted grasses were grown at 75 &#215; 75 cm spacing. Individual plots consisted of five 6.0 m rows spaced 0.75 m apart, giving 40 plants per plot. An initial basal fertilizer dressing of 15-5-20 (N-P-K, %) at the rate of 160 kg/ha was applied on 10 April 2008. Nitrogen as urea fertilizer was applied after each harvest to provide nitrogen at 375 kg/ha/yr. All plots were cut on 29 May 2008 to commence the observation period and the material discarded. Subsequent harvests were made on 29 August 2008, 29 November 2008, 28 February 2009 and 29 May 2009. In each plot, plant height was measured from an area of 1.50 &#180; 2.25 m (6 plants) at the day of cutting. Tiller density was also determined by counting the plant in an area of 1.5 &#180; 3.0 m in each plot at the same day of cutting. Forage on a central area of 2.25 &#215; 3.00 m (12 plants) in each plot was cut at 15 cm above ground level and fresh weight recorded. A 500 g sub-sample was taken, separated into leaf and stem components, dried at 60˚C for 72 hours and dry weight was recorded. Samples collected in August 2008 and February 2009 were ground to pass a 1 mm screen and analyzed for, carbon (C), hydrogen (H), oxygen (O), nitrogen (N) and sulfur (S) by using an elemental analyzer (CHNS analyzer, LECO, MI, USA). Cellulose, hemicelluloses and lignin concentrations were determined by the detergent method [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.33605-ref11">11</xref>] and heating value by using a bomb calorimeter [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.33605-ref9">9</xref>]. Samples from one replication from the August 2008 harvest were analyzed for glucose content. About 100 g dry matter (DM) of sample was cut to an average length of 2.5 - 3.5 cm, and soaked in 125 mL of water for 10 min. Steam explosion was carried out in a 2.5 litre steam explosion apparatus (Nitto Koatsu Co. Ltd, Japan) under pressure of 14 kg/cm<sup>2</sup> at 200˚C for 5 min. The exploded material was then filtered into solid and liquid components, and kept in sealed plastic bags at 4˚C until glucose analysis. The objective of pretreatment was to remove lignin from cellulose and hemicelluloses prior to glucose analysis. The glucose content was determined by the HPLC system (Shimadzu, Kyoto, Japan) at 80˚C in an Aminex HPX-87P column (Bio-Rad, Sunnyvale, CA, USA), attached with a refractive index detector, with deionized water at a flow rate of 0.6 mL/min. Theoretical ethanol yield was calculated by using the Theoretical Ethanol Yield Calculator software provided by US Department of Energy [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.33605-ref12">12</xref>].</p></sec><sec id="s2_4"><title>2.4. Statistical Analysis</title><p>All data except for glucose content and ethanol yield were tested for significance at P &lt; 0.05 level by the new Duncan’s Multiple Range Test.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Results</title><sec id="s3_1"><title>3.1. Rainfall</title><p><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref> showed a period of low rainfall between November and February and a wet season from March to October with distinct peaks in April-May and September. When the grasses were establishing in April 2008, soil was quite moist owing to moderate rainfall in this month plus 177 mm of irrigation at planting. Sprinkler irrigation</p></sec></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.33605-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">EPPO, “Energy Statistics,” 2010.  
http://www.eppo.go.th/info/index.html</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.33605-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">DEDE, “Renewable Energy Development Plans,” 2010.  
http://61.19.246.165/~energy/redps.php?id=24</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.33605-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">M. Hoshino, “Studies on the Tropical Forage Crop in Thailand,” Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Japan, 1975.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.33605-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">S. Tudsri, S. T. Jorgensen, P. Riddach and A. Pookpakdi, “Effect of Cutting Height and Dry Season Closing Date on Yield and Quality of Five Napier Grass Cultivars in Thailand,” Tropical Grassland, Vol. 36, 2002, pp. 147-148.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.33605-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">T. Tekletsadis, S. Tudsri, S. Juntakool and S. Prasanpanich, “Effect of Dry Season Cutting Management on Subsequent Forage Yield and Quality of Ruzi (Brachiaria ruziziensis) and Dwarf Napier (Pennisetum purpureum) in Thailand,” Kasetsart Journal, Vol. 40, 2004, pp. 159-160.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.33605-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">S. Ketkamalas, “Effect of Variety and Cutting Stage on Yield and Nutritive Value of Napier Silage,” M.Sc. Thesis, Kasetsart University, Bangkok, 2006 (in Thai).</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.33605-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">A. Prochnow, M. Heiermann, M. Plochl, T. Amon and P. J. Hobbs, “Bioenergy from Permanent Grassland—A Review: 2. Combustion,” Bioresource Technology, Vol. 100, No. 21, 2009, pp. 4945-4954. 
doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2009.05.069</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.33605-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">S. N. Naik, V. V. Goud, P. K. Rout and A. K. Dalai, “Production of First and Second Generation Biofuels: A Comprehensive Review,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol. 14, No. 2, 2010, pp. 578-597. 
doi:10.1016/j.rser.2009.10.003</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.33605-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">AOAC, “Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists,” 18th Edition, Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington DC, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.33605-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">OMAF, “Official Methods of Analysis of Fertilizer,” Japan, 1987.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.33605-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">H. K. Goering and P. J. Van Soest, “Forage Fiber Analyses (Apparatus, Reagents, Procedures, and Some Applications),” Agriculture Handbook No. 379, United States Department of Agriculture, 1970.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.33605-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">US Department of Energy, “Theoretical Ethanol Yield Calculation,” 2009.  
http://1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/ethanol_yield_calculator.htm</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.33605-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">L. Khairani, Y. Ishii, S. Idota, R. F. Utamy and A. Nishiwaki, “Variation in Growth Attributes, Dry Matter Yield and Quality among 6 Genotypes of Napier Grass Used for Biomass in Year of Establishment in Southern Kyushu, Japan,” Asian Journal of Agricultural Research, 2012.  
doi:ajar.0000.50058.50058</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.33605-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">J. S. Yuan, K. H. Tiller, H. Al-Ahmad, N. R. Stewart and C. N. Stewart Jr., “Plants to Power: Bioenergy to Fuel the Future,” Trends in Plant Science, Vol. 13, No. 8, 2008, pp. 421-429. doi:10.1016/j.tplants.2008.06.001</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.33605-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">I. Obernberger, T. Brunner and G. Barnthaler, “Chemical Properties of Solid Biofuels—Significance and Impact,” Biomass and Bioenergy, Vol. 30, No. 11, 2006, pp. 973-982. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2006.06.011</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.33605-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">I. Lewandowski and A. Kicherer, “Combustion Quality of Biomass: Practical Relevance and Experiments to Modify the Biomass Quality of Miscanthus giganteus,” European Journal of Agronomy, Vol. 6, No. 3-4, 1997, pp. 163-177. doi:10.1016/S1161-0301(96)02044-8,</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.33605-ref17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">M. Pauly and K. Keegstra, “Cell-Wall Carbohydrates and Their Modification as a Resource for Biofuels,” The Plant Journal, Vol. 54, No. 4, 2008, pp. 559-568.  
doi:10.1111%2fj.1365-313X.2008.03463.x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.33605-ref18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">B. Toussaint, G. Excoffier and M. R. Vignon, “Effect of Steam Explosion Treatment on the Physio-Chemical Characteristics and Enzyme Hydrolysis of Poplar Cell Wall Components,” Animal Feed Science and Technology, Vol. 32, No. 1-3, 1991, pp. 235-242. 
doi:10.1016/0377-8401(91)90028-Q,</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.33605-ref19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">C. Cara, E. Ruiz, M. Ballesteros, P. Manzanares, M. J. Negro and E. Castro, “Production of Fuel Ethanol from Steam-Explosion Pretreated Olive Tree Pruning,” Fuel, Vol. 87, No. 6, 2008, pp. 692-700. 
doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2007.05.008</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.33605-ref20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">L. H. Zhang, D. Li, L. J. Wang, T. P. Wang, L. Zhang, X. D. Chen and Z. H. Mao, “Effect of Steam Explosion on Biodegradation of Lignin in Wheat Straw,” Bioresource Technology, Vol. 99, No. 17, 2008, pp. 8512-8515.  
doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2008.03.028</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.33605-ref21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">A. T. W. M. Hendriks and G. Zeeman, “Pretreatments to Enhance the Digestibility of Lignocellulosic Biomass,” Bioresource Technology, Vol. 100, No. 1, 2009, pp. 10-18. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2008.05.027</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>