Texas, USA 2010 - International Herbage Seed Group
Texas, USA 2010 - International Herbage Seed Group Texas, USA 2010 - International Herbage Seed Group
Table 2. Straw availability at plant site locations optimized for straw source year and nominalplant capacity and evaluated against 2005, 2006, 2007, and 3-year average straw density rasters.† Same data source used in defining plant site location series and measuring straw availability.Data source used to define plantsite location seriesYearNominal plantcapacityData source used inmeasuring strawavailabilityMeanStraw availability at defined plant site locationsStandarddeviationCVRatio of standarddeviation to sitelocation data source(10 6 kg y -1 ) (Raster year) (10 6 kg y -1 ) (%)2005 † 1 2005 † 1.13 0.29 26.13 1.002005 1 2006 1.01 0.77 76.94 2.632006 1 2005 1.26 0.87 69.33 3.042006 † 1 2006 † 1.13 0.29 25.51 1.002007 1 2005 1.38 1.60 115.87 5.652007 1 2006 1.23 1.17 94.55 4.122007 † 1 2007 † 1.11 0.28 25.53 1.002007 1 3-y avg. † 1.24 0.88 71.12 3.123-y avg. 1 2005 1.21 0.54 44.66 2.093-y avg. 1 2006 1.08 0.44 40.61 1.703-y avg. 1 2007 0.97 0.58 59.67 2.243-y avg. † 1 3-y avg. † 1.09 0.26 23.77 1.00Mean 1 1.16 0.59 50.00 2.112005 † 10 2005 † 10.81 2.64 24.41 1.002005 10 2006 9.60 4.45 46.34 1.692006 10 2005 10.97 4.58 41.80 2.712006 † 10 2006 † 9.82 1.69 17.22 1.002007 10 2005 11.75 9.03 76.85 11.612007 10 2006 10.51 6.37 60.56 8.192007 † 10 2007 † 9.45 0.78 8.23 1.002007 10 3-y avg. 10.57 4.96 46.97 6.393-y avg. 10 2005 10.60 3.18 29.97 3.643-y avg. 10 2006 9.49 2.30 24.20 2.633-y avg. 10 2007 8.52 3.44 40.33 3.943-y avg. † 10 3-y avg. † 9.54 0.87 9.14 1.00Mean 10 10.09 3.33 32.31 3.042005 † 100 2005 † 117.75 30.53 25.93 1.002005 100 2006 104.63 34.02 32.51 1.112006 100 2005 126.67 48.30 38.13 1.532006 † 100 2006 † 113.29 31.65 27.94 1.002007 100 2005 122.90 55.86 45.45 5.782007 100 2006 109.96 36.74 33.41 3.802007 † 100 2007 † 98.81 9.66 9.78 1.002007 100 3-y avg. 110.55 31.03 28.07 3.213-y avg. 100 2005 108.91 23.19 21.30 2.233-y avg. 100 2006 97.59 16.01 16.41 1.543-y avg. 100 2007 87.65 22.50 25.67 2.173-y avg. † 100 3-y avg. † 98.04 10.38 10.59 1.00Mean 100 110.33 30.48 27.08 1.8147
Figure 1. Optimized locations for 10 million kg y -1 capacity bioenergy plants based on 3-yr average straw availability. Symbols indicate quantilesof range required to supply straw, with asterisks, stars, crosses, triangles, and circles denoting 2 to 4, 4 to 6, 6 to 7, 7 to 12, and 12 to 600 kmmiles. County boundaries are outlined.48
- Page 7 and 8: International Herbage Seed Conferen
- Page 9 and 10: 16:15 - 16:30 Reliability of salini
- Page 11 and 12: Hotel expense is covered for night
- Page 13 and 14: 40,000 were slaves (McDonald, 2007)
- Page 15 and 16: Fig. 1. Texas AgriLife Research and
- Page 17 and 18: $7 billion for cattle, $3 billion f
- Page 19 and 20: principle and encourages both AgriL
- Page 21 and 22: eceived by growers, the above perce
- Page 23 and 24: seed conditioning plants are locate
- Page 25 and 26: Table 4.Hectares of open-field burn
- Page 27 and 28: system, a seed crop is produced fro
- Page 29 and 30: Fig. 1. Land resource areas of Texa
- Page 31 and 32: y land owners. Seed yields are low
- Page 33 and 34: The influence of planting density o
- Page 35 and 36: Simple correlation and regression a
- Page 37 and 38: Variation in seed shattering in a g
- Page 39 and 40: Seed retention (SR) was calculated
- Page 41 and 42: mm160120Precipitation8040020Km h -1
- Page 43 and 44: Young, B. A. (1986). A Source of Re
- Page 45 and 46: Several methods are commonly used f
- Page 47 and 48: Table 3. Effect of the length of ha
- Page 49 and 50: Alfalfa seed production in semi-hum
- Page 51 and 52: Rather near the meteorological stat
- Page 53 and 54: ReferencesBolaños-Aguilar E.D., Hu
- Page 55 and 56: ased bioenergy conversion plants wa
- Page 57: Table 1. Average distances required
- Page 61 and 62: Perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne
- Page 63 and 64: Relative Seed Yieldsingle composite
- Page 65 and 66: Flowers, M.D.; Hart, J.M.; Young II
- Page 67 and 68: Thus, similar to tissue tests, remo
- Page 69 and 70: Conclusion:Perhaps our most importa
- Page 71 and 72: Modelling critical NDVI curves in p
- Page 73 and 74: The five spectral reflectance measu
- Page 75 and 76: Harvest loss in ryegrass seed crops
- Page 77 and 78: Larger than expected harvest losses
- Page 79 and 80: Rolston, P.; Trethewey, J.; McCloy,
- Page 81 and 82: Optical sensors have the potential
- Page 83 and 84: Figure 2. Seed yield response to ap
- Page 85 and 86: Flowers, M. D., Hart, J.M., Young I
- Page 87 and 88: In 2010, France has launched the fo
- Page 89 and 90: Yield (% maximum)ConclusionThe resu
- Page 91 and 92: Plant N uptakeN unavailableSoil nit
- Page 93 and 94: Stresses associated with germinatio
- Page 95 and 96: correspond to electrical conductivi
- Page 97 and 98: applied later in the fall was more
- Page 99 and 100: Figure 2. Establishment of five ove
- Page 101 and 102: The seed vigour testing was perform
- Page 103 and 104: Table 1. Germination index (GI) for
- Page 105 and 106: Reliability of salinity screening L
- Page 107 and 108: AcknowledgmentThis research was sup
Table 2. Straw availability at plant site locations optimized for straw source year and nominalplant capacity and evaluated against 2005, 2006, 2007, and 3-year average straw density rasters.† Same data source used in defining plant site location series and measuring straw availability.Data source used to define plantsite location seriesYearNominal plantcapacityData source used inmeasuring strawavailabilityMeanStraw availability at defined plant site locationsStandarddeviationCVRatio of standarddeviation to sitelocation data source(10 6 kg y -1 ) (Raster year) (10 6 kg y -1 ) (%)2005 † 1 2005 † 1.13 0.29 26.13 1.002005 1 2006 1.01 0.77 76.94 2.632006 1 2005 1.26 0.87 69.33 3.042006 † 1 2006 † 1.13 0.29 25.51 1.002007 1 2005 1.38 1.60 115.87 5.652007 1 2006 1.23 1.17 94.55 4.122007 † 1 2007 † 1.11 0.28 25.53 1.002007 1 3-y avg. † 1.24 0.88 71.12 3.123-y avg. 1 2005 1.21 0.54 44.66 2.093-y avg. 1 2006 1.08 0.44 40.61 1.703-y avg. 1 2007 0.97 0.58 59.67 2.243-y avg. † 1 3-y avg. † 1.09 0.26 23.77 1.00Mean 1 1.16 0.59 50.00 2.112005 † 10 2005 † 10.81 2.64 24.41 1.002005 10 2006 9.60 4.45 46.34 1.692006 10 2005 10.97 4.58 41.80 2.712006 † 10 2006 † 9.82 1.69 17.22 1.002007 10 2005 11.75 9.03 76.85 11.612007 10 2006 10.51 6.37 60.56 8.192007 † 10 2007 † 9.45 0.78 8.23 1.002007 10 3-y avg. 10.57 4.96 46.97 6.393-y avg. 10 2005 10.60 3.18 29.97 3.643-y avg. 10 2006 9.49 2.30 24.20 2.633-y avg. 10 2007 8.52 3.44 40.33 3.943-y avg. † 10 3-y avg. † 9.54 0.87 9.14 1.00Mean 10 10.09 3.33 32.31 3.042005 † 100 2005 † 117.75 30.53 25.93 1.002005 100 2006 104.63 34.02 32.51 1.112006 100 2005 126.67 48.30 38.13 1.532006 † 100 2006 † 113.29 31.65 27.94 1.002007 100 2005 122.90 55.86 45.45 5.782007 100 2006 109.96 36.74 33.41 3.802007 † 100 2007 † 98.81 9.66 9.78 1.002007 100 3-y avg. 110.55 31.03 28.07 3.213-y avg. 100 2005 108.91 23.19 21.30 2.233-y avg. 100 2006 97.59 16.01 16.41 1.543-y avg. 100 2007 87.65 22.50 25.67 2.173-y avg. † 100 3-y avg. † 98.04 10.38 10.59 1.00Mean 100 110.33 30.48 27.08 1.8147
Change language