Climate mitigation potential and soil microbial response of cyanobacteria‐fertilized bioenergy crops in a cool semi‐arid cropland

Bioenergy carbon capture and storage (BECCS) systems can serve as decarbonization pathways for climate mitigation. Perennial grasses are a promising second‐generation lignocellulosic bioenergy feedstock for BECCS expansion, but optimizing their sustainability, productivity, and climate mitigation po...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inGlobal change biology. Bioenergy Vol. 14; no. 12; pp. 1303 - 1320
Main Authors Gay, Justin D., Goemann, Hannah M., Currey, Bryce, Stoy, Paul C., Christiansen, Jesper Riis, Miller, Perry R., Poulter, Benjamin, Peyton, Brent M., Brookshire, E. N. Jack
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Oxford John Wiley & Sons, Inc 01.12.2022
Wiley
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Bioenergy carbon capture and storage (BECCS) systems can serve as decarbonization pathways for climate mitigation. Perennial grasses are a promising second‐generation lignocellulosic bioenergy feedstock for BECCS expansion, but optimizing their sustainability, productivity, and climate mitigation potential requires an evaluation of how nitrogen (N) fertilizer strategies interact with greenhouse gas (GHG) and soil organic carbon (SOC) dynamics. Furthermore, crop and fertilizer choice can affect the soil microbiome which is critical to soil organic matter turnover, nutrient cycling, and sustaining crop productivity but these feedbacks are poorly understood due to the paucity of data from certain agroecosystems. Here, we examine the climate mitigation potential and soil microbiome response to establishing two functionally different perennial grasses, switchgrass (Panicum virgatum, C4) and tall wheatgrass (Thinopyrum ponticum, C3), in a cool semi‐arid agroecosystem under two fertilizer applications, a novel cyanobacterial biofertilizer (CBF) and urea. We find that in contrast to the C4 grass, the C3 grass achieved 98% greater productivity and had a higher N use efficiency when fertilized. For both crops, the CBF produced the same biomass enhancement as urea. Non‐CO2 GHG fluxes across all treatments were low and we observed a 3‐year net loss of SOC under the C4 crop and a net gain under the C3 crop at a 0–30 cm soil depth regardless of fertilization. Finally, we detected crop‐specific changes in the soil microbiome, including an increased relative abundance of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi under the C3, and potentially pathogenic fungi in the C4 grass. Taken together, these findings highlight the potential of CBF‐fertilized C3 crops as a second‐generation bioenergy feedstock in semi‐arid regions as a part of a climate mitigation strategy. Cyanobacteria biofertilizers are a promising sustainable alternative to synthetic nitrogen fertilizers and a potential component in climate mitigation strategies. Here, we compare the growth and environmental response of two perennial grass bioenergy candidates to a cyanobacteria biofertilizer and urea in a semi‐arid cropland. Cyanobacteria application matched urea biomass production for a cool‐season (C3) grass while the warm‐season grass (C4) had marginal growth responses to any treatment. Regardless of fertilization, soil organic carbon increased under the C3 but not the C4 grass, all treatments had low non‐CO2 greenhouse gas emissions, and crop‐specific changes were detected in the soil microbiome after three years.
ISSN:1757-1693
1757-1707
DOI:10.1111/gcbb.13001