You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
© 2017. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Abstract
Low-input grassland biomass from marginal and other slightly more fertile sites can be used for energy production without competing with food or fodder production. The effect of grassland diversity on methane yield has received some attention, but we do not know how community assembly may affect methane yield from grassland biomass. However, methane yields determine the potential economic value of a bioenergy substrate. Hence, a better understanding of how plant community assembly affects methane yield would be important. We measured biomass production and methane yield in the second year of a grassland field experiment which manipulated the order of arrival of different plant functional groups (forbs, grasses or legumes sown first and all sown simultaneously) and sown diversity (9 vs. 21 species). The order of arrival of the plant functional groups significantly determined the relative dominance of each group which in turn mainly explained the variance in aboveground biomass production. Differences in area-specific methane yields were driven by differences in biomass production and which plant functional groups dominated a plot. When grasses were sown first, legumes and grasses codominated a plot and the highest area-specific methane yield was obtained. Overall, the results indicate that altering the order of arrival affected the community functional and species composition (and hence methane yields) much more than sown diversity. Our study shows that a combined use of positive biodiversity effects and guided plant community assembly may be able to optimize methane yields under field conditions. This may allow a guided, sustainable, and lucrative use of grassland biomass for biogas production in the future.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
; Philipp von Gillhaussen 2 ; Weidlich, Emanuela W A 3 ; Sträuber, Heike 1 ; Harms, Hauke 1 ; Temperton, Vicky M 3 1 Department of Environmental Microbiology, UFZ - Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Leipzig, Germany
2 Institute of Bio and Geosciences, Plant Sciences (IBG-2), Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH, Germany; Department Biogeography, University of Bayreuth, Bayreuth, Germany
3 Institute of Bio and Geosciences, Plant Sciences (IBG-2), Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH, Germany; Institute of Ecology, Leuphana University, Lüneburg, Germany





