Assessment of biomass production Partner N° 8 Kompetenzzentrum Wald und Forstwirtschaft Folie 1

Assessment of biomass production

Partner N° 8

Kompetenzzentrum Wald und Forstwirtschaft

Folie 1

Department: Forest Genetics/Tree Breeding


Author: Heino Wolf

2

How to spend our time?

• Reasons for the assessment of biomass

• Material and methods

• Results of the questionnaire

• Results of the literature review

• Summary of results

• Proposal for the discussion on common protocols



Author: Heino Wolf

3

Assessment of biomass production in forestry

• Production of timber traditionally assessed by calculation or estimation of volume in m³

• Volume mainly related to timber usable for paper and wood industry

• With exception of stem, other parts of trees normally not considered

• Relatively sophisticated methods established



Author: Heino Wolf

4

Assessment of biomass production in short rotations

• Assessment or estimation of total biomass produced at the same or different sites mainly in tonnes of absolutely dry weight

• Compared to agriculture, biomass production can not easily be assessed by complete harvest of the growing stock since production time is several years

› Assessment by harvest of parts of the plantation or by spot samples

› Development of suitable, non-destructive methods



Author: Heino Wolf

5

Assessment of biomass production in science and breeding

• Assessment of yield to compare productivity of different sites, management methods a. o. using standardized material

• Assessment of response of species, provenances, progenies, clones to various environmental factors

• Assessment of data for development of non-destructive estimation methods

• Tool for early testing



Author: Heino Wolf

6

Material and methods

• 1st questionnaire Arezzo, Italy

› Survey on activities

• 2nd questionnaire by email

› Confirmation of information given in Arezzo

› Addition of species

› Request for literature esp. with methodological aspects

• Literature review

› Literature and protocols sent by participants

› Literature sources already known



Author: Heino Wolf

7

Results of questionnaires

• 1st questionnaire Arezzo, Italy

› 27 of 28 participants could be asked

› 65 % (N=17/27): No experience with assessment of biomass

› 35 % (N=10/27): Experience with assessment of biomass

• 2nd questionnaire by email

› 23 of 28 participants (82 %) answered until 03.09.2009

› 52 % (N=12/23): Experience with assessment of biomass

› 67 % (N= 8/12): Literature and protocols sent



Author: Heino Wolf

8

Results of questionnaires

• 7 species of interest mentioned

› Poplar: 58 % (N= 7/12)

› Willow: 25 % (N= 3/12)

› Beech, Chest nut, Robinia, Norway spruce, Scots pine: 8 % each (N= 1/12)



Author: Heino Wolf

9

Results of literature review: Species

• 22 publications and protocols included

• 8 species of interest mentioned

› Poplar: 32 % (N= 7/22)

› Willow: 18 % (N= 4/22)

› Beech: 18 % (N= 4/22)

› Scots pine: 9 % (N= 2 /22)

› Chest nut, Robinia, Norway spruce, Silver fir: 5 % each (N= 1/22)

› other species not specified: 5 % each (N= 1/22)



Author: Heino Wolf

10

Results of literature review: Material and sample size

Species Material Sample-Size Sampling Reference

Poplar Clones (1-3a)

5–25 trees/clone Center trees Pontailler et al. 1997

Aspen Full sibs, clones (10a)

6 trees/progeny d1,3 range Liesebach et al. 1999

Poplar Clones (4a; 7a)

5 shoots/clone; 10 shoots/clone

basal area range; randomly

Laureysens et al. 2004a, b


25 trees/clone d1,3 range Roehle et al. 2006

Poplar Clones

(age not specified)

15 trees/clone out of 30 trees

Randomly at each meter

Gautry 2009



Author: Heino Wolf

11



Willow Clones (1a) 6-15 trees/clone; 2-3 trees/plot

Not specified Weih & Nordh 2002

Willow Clones (3-8a/1-5a)

25 trees/clone d1,3 range Roehle et al. 2006

Beech Open polls (2a)

7 seedlings/ treatment

Not specified Madsen 1994


4-8 trees/ provenance

Min., max., average d1,3

Gellrich et al. 2001

Beech Open polls (2-4a)

3 x 15 seedlings/ test site

Randomly Wolf, Riemer 2001

Beech Open polls (54d)


Not specified Löf et al. 2005



Author: Heino Wolf

12



Chest nut

Open polls (1 a)


Complete Pliura & Eriksson 2002

Robinia Open polls (35a?)

Trees, not specified

Not specified Oravec 2008

Norway spruce

Full sibs (4a)

5 seedlings/ progeny

Not specified Parnuta 2008

Scots pine

Open polls (12 a)

3 trees/ provenance

Not specified Oleksyn et al. 1999

Silver fir Open polls (6 a)

10 seedlings/ provenance

Complete Larsen & Mekic 1991

Other species

Not further spec.

15 trees/clone out of 30 trees

Randomly at each meter

Gautry 2009



Author: Heino Wolf

13

Results of literature review: Handling and drying

Species Material Handling Drying Reference


Stem 80°C until constant weight

Pontailler et al. 1997

Aspen Full sibs, clones 10a)

Parts of stem 105°C until cw Liesebach et al. 1999

Poplar Clones (4a; 7a)

Stem, branches; Leaves, bark, wood (stem, branches)

105°C until cw;

60°C; 75°C

Laureysens et al. 2004


Total mass, minced 105°C until cw Roehle et al. 2006

Poplar Clones

(age not specified)

Stem parts, branches >7cm, branches <7cm, leaves

Not specified Gautry 2009



Author: Heino Wolf

14



Willow Clones (1a)

Roots, shoots, cuttings, leaves

70°C, 48h Weih & Nordh 2002

Willow Clones (3-8a/1-5a)

Total mass, minced 105°C until cw Roehle et al. 2006


Roots, stem, branches, leaves, buds

60°C, 72h Madsen 1994


Total mass, minced 105°C until cw Gellrich et al. 2001

Beech Open polls (2-4a)

Roots, stem, leaves 105°C, 16h Wolf, Riemer 2001

Beech Open polls (54d)

Roots, leaves, stem 70°C, 48h Löf et al. 2005



Author: Heino Wolf

15



Chest nut Open polls (1 a)

Roots, stem, leaves

45°C, 48h, then 80°C, 24h

Pliura & Eriksson 2002

Robinia Open polls (35a?)

Not specified Not specified Oravec 2008

Norway spruce

Full sibs (4a)

Roots, stem, branches, needles

104°C, 48h Parnuta 2008

Scots pine

Open polls (12 a)

Stem, branches, needles

Not specified Oleksyn et al. 1999

Scots pine

Open polls (12 a)

Roots > 2mm, roots < 2mm

65°C, 7d Oleksyn et al. 1999



Author: Heino Wolf

16



Silver fir Open polls (6 a)

Roots, needles, top

105°C, 24h Larsen & Mekic 1991

Other species

Trees not futher spec. (age not spec.)

Stem parts >7cm, branches >7cm, dead, alive branches <7cm, leaves

Not specified Gautry 2009



Author: Heino Wolf

17

Results of literature review:Summary

• Genetic background: Clones, full-sibs, open polls

• Material used: Cuttings, seedlings, trees

• Age of material:

› 54d to 35a; 67 % 1 to 10a; 19 % > 10a

• Handling: All parts of plants

• Drying temperatures: 45°C to 105°C

• Drying periods: 16h to one week (7d) or „until constant weight“



Author: Heino Wolf

18

Proposal for common protocol

• Sample size

› Genetic background (clones < full-sibs < open polls)

› Age of material (under 1a > 1 to 10a > over 10a)

• Sampling procedure

› Covering range of e. g. d1,3 or basal area

› Randomly e. g. each third plant

› Should be noted anyway

• Handling procedure

› Fresh weight should also be assessed separately for every compartment investigated



Author: Heino Wolf

19


• Drying temperatures depending on further use:

› If chemical analyses are required: e. g. 45°C (leaves, needles, bark) (look also to the analyses protocol)

› If parts of plants should not be pulverized e. g. fine roots: 60 to 75°C

› If there is no further use: 104°C +- 1K (ISO – guidelines)

• Drying periods: In every case „until constant weight“



Author: Heino Wolf

20


• Documentation step by step

› Genetic background

› Kind of material

› Age of material

› Sampling size and procedure

› Handling of samples

› Drying temperature and reasoning

› Drying period



Author: Heino Wolf

21

Now it is on you!!

Screaming, dancing, shouting???Asking, discussing, developing!!!

Thank you very much

Documents

Assessment of biomass production Partner N° 8 Kompetenzzentrum Wald und Forstwirtschaft Folie 1