Kenaf productivity and morphology, when grown in Iowa and in Kentucky

Abstract Kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.), mostly produced in China and India, is grown to a limited extent in the U.S., although this natural fiber can be a promising alternative to synthetic fibers for reinforcing plastic or other composite materials, or fuel purposes. Producing kenaf in the Midwestern U.S. could provide a local source of this fiber for use in a number of manufactured products and potentially for use as a biofuel feedstock. The objectives of this study were to: 1) compare the productivity and the morphology of kenaf cultivars ‘Tainung 2’ and ‘Whitten’ when grown in Iowa and Kentucky and harvested after the first killing frost; 2) assess kenaf growth over the growing season; and 3) determine management (variety and seed density) effects on kenaf productivity and morphology. In 2014 and 2015, varieties ‘Tainung 2’ and ‘Whitten’ were grown at 185,300 and 370,700 seed/ha in Iowa and in Kentucky. Stem and leaf biomass, plant population, core:bast ratio, stem height and diameter, leaf area index (LAI), and nitrogen concentration were measured during 6 in-season harvests and at the final harvest. Results showed that, ‘Tainung 2’ and ‘Whitten’ grown in Kentucky in 2014 yielded 24 and 19 Mg/ha, respectively, whereas both cultivars reached a final yield of 8 Mg/ha in Iowa. However, in 2015, final yields were similar for both locations (12.6 Mg/ha on average). It was found that variety and seed density treatment effects were starting to be observed during the growing season, and that, when grown in Iowa, kenaf response to treatments was less variable over time than in Kentucky. With respect to fiber production, growing ‘Tainung 2’ in Kentucky produced plants with 16% more core fiber than in Iowa, but using that same variety in Iowa would result in higher bast production. Therefore, a producer in Kentucky could influence kenaf productivity by changing management practices and variety. Overall, kenaf production is very feasible in Kentucky and Iowa, but Kentucky has greater yield potential.

[1]  B. Kansal,et al.  Agriculture and environment. , 1996 .

[2]  Mitul Dilip Zaveri.  Absorbency Characteristics of Kenaf Core Particles , 2004 .

[3]  B. Baldwin,et al.  Registration of ‘Whitten’ Kenaf , 2006 .

[4]  M. Castellano,et al.  A long‐term nitrogen fertilizer gradient has little effect on soil organic matter in a high‐intensity maize production system , 2014, Global change biology.

[5]  Fernando E. Miguez,et al.  Nonlinear Regression Models and Applications in Agricultural Research , 2015 .

[6]  Khalina Abdan,et al.  KENAF FIBRES AS REINFORCEMENT FOR POLYMERIC COMPOSITES: A REVIEW , 2009 .

[7]  S. Shi,et al.  Vacuum-assisted resin infusion (VARI) and hot pressing for CaCO3 nanoparticle treated kenaf fiber reinforced composites , 2015 .

[8]  S. Shi,et al.  Property enhancement of kenaf fiber composites by means of vacuum-assisted resin transfer molding (VARTM) , 2015 .

[9]  E. Alexopoulou,et al.  Cultivation of kenaf in north-east Greece Part II - Effect of variety and nitrogen on growth and dry yield , 2007 .

[10]  S. Shi,et al.  Increasing inorganic nanoparticle impregnation efficiency by external pressure for natural fibers , 2015 .

[11]  S. Archontoulis,et al.  Growth and biomass productivity of kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus, L.) under different agricultural inputs and management practices in central Greece , 2010 .

[12]  Kwang Ho Kim,et al.  Variety Trial and Pyrolysis Potential of Kenaf Grown in Midwest United States , 2017, BioEnergy Research.

[13]  Gilles Lemaire,et al.  Decline in Percentage N of C3 and C4 Crops with Increasing Plant Mass , 1990 .

[14]  Highly Functional Bioplastics (PLA compounds) Used for Electronic Products , 2007, Polytronic 2007 - 6th International Conference on Polymers and Adhesives in Microelectronics and Photonics.

[15]  F. Metzger,et al.  Feeding Habits of the Adult Japanese Beetle. , 1940 .

[16]  Jan Vos,et al.  A flexible sigmoid function of determinate growth. , 2003, Annals of botany.

[17]  S. Shi,et al.  High pressure-assisted magnesium carbonate impregnated natural fiber-reinforced composites , 2016 .

[18]  Ann M. Johanns,et al.  Increasing Cropping System Diversity Balances Productivity, Profitability and Environmental Health , 2012, PloS one.

[19]  Mohammad Jawaid,et al.  Potential of bioenergy production from industrial kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) based on Malaysian perspective , 2015 .

[20]  E. H. Toole,et al.  Preservation of Hemp and Kenaf Seed , 1959 .

[21]  B. Lu,et al.  Identification and genetic relationships of kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) germplasm revealed by AFLP analysis , 2004, Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution.

[22]  A. Dobermann,et al.  Agroecosystems, Nitrogen-use Efficiency, and Nitrogen Management , 2002, Ambio.

[23]  C. Webber,et al.  Effect of location and cultivar on kenaf yield components , 1992 .

[24]  Michael Duffy,et al.  Crop Rotation Effects on Soil Quality at Three Northern Corn/Soybean Locations , 2006 .

[25]  M. Berti,et al.  Row Spacing Affects Biomass Yield and Composition of Kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) as a Lignocellulosic Feedstock for Bioenergy , 2013 .

[26]  C. Webber.  Yield components of five kenaf cultivars , 1993 .

[27]  W. Weibull.  A Statistical Distribution Function of Wide Applicability , 1951 .

[28]  S. Shi,et al.  Natural fiber composites with EMI shielding function fabricated using VARTM and Cu film magnetron sputtering , 2016 .

[29]  E. Alexopoulou,et al.  Growth and yields of kenaf varieties in central Greece , 2000 .

[30]  Tristan R. Brown,et al.  Biorenewable Resources: Engineering New Products from Agriculture , 2003 .

[31]  S. Cosentino,et al.  Yield, water use and radiation use efficiencies of kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) under reduced water and nitrogen soil availability in a semi-arid Mediterranean area , 2013 .

[32]  Sibel Irmak,et al.  Biofuel production by liquefaction of kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) biomass. , 2014, Bioresource technology.