Energycane bibliography

Denise Attaway, Gravois, Kenneth, Ensley, Carlen  |  6/3/2014 11:27:36 PM

As the research in to energycane as a biofuel feedstock intensifies, it is important to keep up with the latest research available. This page lists resources that many may find helpful in their quests to learn more about energycane. Please note that this page is constantly updated. Anyone with information to add to the page, can contact Denise Attaway.

Abbasi, T. & Abbasi, S.A. (2010). Bomass energy and the environmental impacts associated with its production and utilization.  Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 14(3), 919-937.
The paper takes stock of the various sources of biomass and the possible ways in which it can be utilized for generating energy. It then examines the environmental impacts, including impact vis a vis greenhouse gas emissions, of different biomass energy generation–utilization options.

Agindotan, B. O., Ahonsi, M. O., Domier, L. L., Gray, M. E., & Bradley, C. A. (2010). Application of sequence-independent amplification (SIA) for the identification of RNA viruses in bioenergy crops. Journal of virological methods, 169(1), 119-128.
Miscanthus × giganteus, energycane, and Panicum virgatum (switchgrass) are three potential biomass crops being evaluated for commercial cellulosic ethanol production. Viral diseases are potentially significant threats to these crops. Therefore, identification of viruses infecting these bioenergy crops is important for quarantine purposes, virus resistance breeding, and production of virus-free planting materials. This is the first report of a Marafivirus infecting switchgrass, and SCMV infecting both energycane and M. × giganteus.

Aita, G.A., Salvi, D.A. & Walker, M.S. (2011). Enzyme hydrolysis and ethanol fermentation of dilute ammonia pretreated energycane. Bioresource Technology 102(6), 4444-4448. DOI:
This study is the first one ever to report on the use of high-fiber sugarcane (a.k.a. energycane) bagasse as feedstock for the production of cellulosic ethanol.

Alexander, A. G. (1982). Second Generation energycane; Concepts, Costs, and Benefits. In Symposium" Fuels and Feedstocks from Tropical Biomass II". UPR Centre for Energy and Environment Research, San Juan, Puerto Rico.

Alexander, A. G. (1983). Costs and Benefits Assessment of Hatillo energycane: Plant and First-conservation Crops 1982-1983. Center for Energy and Environment Research, University of Puerto Rico-US Department of Energy.

Alexander, A. G. (1984). energycane as a multiple-products alternative (No. HNEI-84-S02; CONF-8411159-1). Puerto Rico Univ., Rio Piedras. Agricultural Experiment Station.
Cane sugar planting, as it was formerly known, is in serious and essentially irreversible trouble. Diversification of sugarcane to alternative farm crops is indicated in some instances. Yet, for the most part, the more logical alternative is an internal diversification to a multiple-products biomass commodity. Sometimes termed the energycane approach, its keystones are the management of sugarcane as a quantitative rather than qualitative entity, and the inclusion of certain tropical-grass relatives to assist cane in its year-round supply of biomass to industrial consumers.

Alexander, A.G. (1985). The energycane alternative. Elsevier Science Publishers BV.
Much of this book is based on experience in Puerto Rico where changing economic and political circumstances have produced a crucial need to direct sugarcane management away from a sweetener-oriented enterprise towards the energycane alternative.

Alexander, A. G. (1985). Energy planting vs food planting. The energycane alternative., 415-435.
The chapter reviews the merits and demerits of three discernible viewpoints which have had an impact on the food versus energy issue, particularly relating to tropical sugarcane producing countries.

Alexander, A. G. (1990). High energycane. Cogeneration in the Cane Sugar Industry, 233.
This chapter discusses breeding programs and cultural practices that have been directed towards the goal of an optimum yield of the entire plant, yielding two principal co-products – sugar and fiber.

Ali, A., Bohmert-Tatarev, K., Chinnapen, H., Patterson, N., Peoples, O.P., Snell, K.D., & Tang, J. (2011). Increasing carbon flow for polyhydroxybutyrate production in biomass crops. U.S. Patent Application 13/233,498.
Transgenic plants, transgenic plant material, and transgenic plant cells for the improved synthesis of polyhydroxyalkanoates, preferably poly(3-hydroxybutyrate) (also referred to as PHB), have been developed. In one embodiment, carbon flow is modulated to increase production of PHB. Preferred plants that can be genetically engineered to produce PHB include plants that produce a large amount of lignocellulosic biomass that can be converted into biofuels, such as switchgrass, Miscanthus, Sorghum, sugarcane, millets, Napier grass and other forage and turf grasses. An exemplary plant that can be genetically engineered to produce PHB and produces lignocellulosic biomass is switchgrass, Panicum virgatum L. A preferred cultivar of switchgrass is Alamo. Other suitable cultivars of switchgrass include, but are not limited to, Blackwell, Kanlow, Nebraska 28, Pathfinder, Cave-in-Rock, Shelter and Trailblazer.

Allison, W. (1980, November). Soil and Water Management Concepts for energycane Plantations. In Preprint for the symposium "Fuels And Feedstocks From Tropical Biomass". Caribe Hilton, San Juan, PR.

Álvarez, J., & Helsel, Z. R. (2011). Economic feasibility of biofuel crops in Florida: Energycane on mineral soils.
The purpose of this fact sheet is to explore the economic feasibility of growing "energycane" as a biofuel crop. Energycane is a cross of commercial sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) with Saccharum spontaneam L., but unlike sugarcane, it is higher in fiber and lower in sucrose.

Amponsah, N. Y. (2012). Energy Assessment (EA) of Sustainable Biofuels.

Anderson, W. F., Knoll, J., Lowrance, R., & Strickland, T. (2013). Nutrient and Water Requirements for Elephantgrass Production As a Bio-Fuel Feedstock. In Agronomy Abstracts.

Anderson, W.F., Akin, D.E., Himmelsbach, D.S., Morrison III, W.H., Bransby, D., &
Cobill, R.M. (2005, April). Potential Perennial Biomass Feedstocks for Southern United States. In Meeting Abstract, 50.
The majority of the research on lignocellulosic crop biomass for biofuels has been centered on corn stover and switchgrass(Panicum virgatum L). However, diverse farm practices and subtropical climates of the Southern Coastal Plains of the United States make it more conducive to other biomass feedstocks such as perennial forage and bunch grasses.

Aragon, D., Suhr, M., & Kochergin, V. (2013). Evaluation of energycane and sweet
sorghum as feedstocks for conversion into fuels and chemicals. Sugar Industry/Zuckerindustrie, 138(10), 651-655.

Sweet sorghum and energycane (high-fiber cane) are potential crops for conversion into fuels and chemicals due to their low agricultural input requirements, potentially high fiber content and processing similarities with established sugarcane crops. A conceptual approach to a biorefinery producing fuels and chemicals from sweet sorghum and energycane is proposed.

Arruda, P. (2012). Genetically modified sugarcane for bioenergy generation. Current Opinion in Biotechnology, 23(3), 315-322.
Genetically modified sugarcane with increased yield and pest and disease resistance has already proven its value not only by the increased sugar content but also for the improvement of the crop performance. However, transgene stability is still a challenge since transgene silencing seems to occur in a large proportion of genetically modified sugarcane plants.

Baldwin, B., Anderson, W., Blumenthal, J., Brummer, E. C., Gravois, K., Hale, A. L., & Wilson, L. T. Oct. 2012.. Regional testing of energycane (Saccharum spp) genotypes as a potential bioenergy crop. In Meeting Proceedings (p. 3).
Sugarcane (Saccharum spp.) has been a cash crop in the Deep South since 1795, but the area of production has been limited by its lack of cold hardiness. Energycanes are complex hybrids derived from crosses of domestic sugarcane varieties and S. spontaneum (a cold-hardy relative). They are typically low in sugar, but high in fiber and biomass yield. The objective was to evaluate energycane hybrids for biomass yield.

Beale CV, Bint DA, Long SP. (1996). Leaf photosynthesis in the C4 grass Miscanthus×giganteus, growing in the cool temperate climate of southern England. Journal of Experimental Botany 47, 267–273.

Beale CV, Long SP. (1995). Can perennial C4 grasses attain high  efficiencies of radiant energy conversion in cool climates? Plant, Cell and Environment 18, 641–650.

Benjamin, Y., Garcia-Aparicio, M.P., & Gorgens, J.G. (2014). Impact of cultivar selection and process optimization on ethanol yield from different varieties of sugarcane. Biotechnology for Biofuels, 7(60), 60.
This study evaluated a selection of such "energycane" cultivars for the combined ethanol yields from juice and bagasse, by optimization of dilute acid pretreatment optimization of bagasse for sugar yields. 

Bhattacharya, A., & Knoll, J. (2012). Conventional and molecular breeding for improvement of biofuel crops: past, present and future. Book Chapter, 3-20.

Bischoff, K. P., Gravois, K. A., Reagan, T. E., Hoy, J. W., Kimbeng, C. A., LaBorde, C.M., & Hawkins, G. L. (2008). Registration of ‘L 79-1002’sugarcane. Journal of plant registrations, 2(3), 211-217.
The cross for L 79-1002, a F1 hybrid, was made in 1974 using ‘CP 52-68’ as the female parent and Tainan, a S. spontaneum clone, as the male parent.

Boles, Chelsie, and Jane Frankenberger. (2013). SWAT Model Simulation of Bioenergy Crop Impacts in a Small, Tile-Drained Watershed. Presented at the American Water Resources Association Agricultural Hydrology Conference, St. Louis Missouri, March 25.

Bomgardner, M. M., & Washington, C. (2013). Chasing cheap feedstocks. Chemical & Engineering News, 91(32), 11-15.
On the hot, dry agricultural land of California’s Imperial Valley, 17 new varieties  of an unusual crop are being tested on a 100-acre plot. If the tests are successful, the valley’s bounty of lettuce, cantaloupes, and broccoli may someday be joined by plants that are converted into fuels and chemicals.

Bonnet Jr, J. A., & Samuels, G. (1987). Center for Energy and Environment Research-UPR, Puerto Rico. In Proceedings of the 1986 International Congress on Renewable Energy Sources, Madrid, Spain, 18-23 May 1986 (Vol. 1, p. 14). Editorial CSIC-CSIC Press.

Botha, F. C., & Moore, P. H. Biomass and Bioenergy. (2013). Sugarcane: Physiology,
Biochemistry, and Functional Biology, 521-540.
The basic steps involved in operating a biomass based biorefinery are similar regardless of the feedstock. Biomass first needs transformation, which involves separation or extraction of plant components by grinding, followed by fractionation or cracking by biological or physical–chemical technologies. The key steps in bioconversion of lignocellulose to fuels are size reduction, pretreatment, hydrolysis, and fuel production. Life cycle analysis or assessment (LCA) is an internationally recognized methodology for evaluating the global environmental performance of a product, process, or pathway along its partial or whole life cycle, considering the effects generated from “cradle-to-grave”.

Bransby, D., Allen, D., Gutterson, N., Ikonen, G., Richard Jr, E., & Rooney, W. Developing Sugar Cane as a Dedicated Energy Crop. Book Chapter.

Bransby, D. I., Eaglesham, A., Slack, S. A., & Hardy, R. W. F. (2008). Synchronization of Biofeedstocks and Conversion Technologies: Current Status and Future Prospects. NABC Report, (20), 123-134.
As the biobased industry emerges, synchronization of biofeedstocks and conversion technologies is necessary to maximize economic competitiveness. The objectives of this paper are to: address this issue primarily with respect to conversion technologies for production of bioenergy, highlight important logistical issues, address some needs of cellulosic energy systems, and speculate on future prospects for the industry.

Bransby, D. I., Allen, D. J., Gutterson, N., Ikonen, G., Richard Jr, E., Rooney, W., & van Santen, E. (2010). Engineering advantages, challenges and status of grass energy crops. In Plant biotechnology for sustainable production of energy and co-products (pp. 125-154). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
The focus of this chapter is primarily on grasses as energy feedstocks. In particular, progress in, and future prospects for,genetic improvement of Miscanthus, switchgrass, sugarcane and sorghum are discussed as examples, recognizing that other species could offer similar potential as biomass feedstocks. In addition, possible approaches for integrating grasses into cellulosic biomass supply systems are described.

Brown, K. (2012). The Economic Feasibility of Utilizing energycane in the Cellulosic Production of Ethanol (Doctoral dissertation, Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in The Department of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness by Kayla Brown BS, Louisiana State University).
This research provides some insight on the economic feasibility of producing energycane in Louisiana as a feedstock for cellulosic ethanol production.

Burner, D. M., Tew, T. L., Harvey, J. J., & Belesky, D. P. (2009). Dry matter partitioning  and quality of Miscanthus, Panicum, and Saccharum genotypes in Arkansas, USA. biomass and bioenergy, 33(4), 610-619.
Information about the partitioning and quality of above ground biomass ramifications for crop management and biomass conversion.

Calvin, M. (1985). Renewable resources for fuel and materials. University Press, Cambridge, UK.

Carvalho-Netto, O.V., Bressiani, J.A., Soriano, H.L., Fiori, C.S., Santos, J.M., Barbosa, G.V.S., Xavier, M.A., Landell, M.G.A., & Pereira, G.A.G. (2014). The potential of the energy cane as the main biomass crop for the cellulosic industry. Chemical and Biological Technologies in Agriculture, 1(20),
The last century was the scene of an extraordinary social and economic development of mankind. This development had the fossil energy as one of its pillars. It is imperative that we change the pillars of energy from fossil to renewables that will be more sustainable and less aggressive to the environment. One of the sources of this new energy platform, probably the
best, is biomass. Fibrous plants bring several advantages and fit well within the requirements deemed important to be elected as producers of biomass.

Chan, D. (2012). Identifying the WRKY Transcription Factor Gene in energycane.
Rising energy costs has motivated a growing need for substitute sources of energy, of which biofuels exist as renewable alternative fuel source. Sugarcane, Saccharum spp., with its high photosynthetic efficiency and capabilities in biomass production, holds the great potential as an ideal crop for lignocellulosic biofuel production.

Chaubey, I. (2013). Bioenergy, landscape changes and ecosystem response: opportunities for sustainable watershed management. Keynote Address given at the 47th Annual Convention of Indian Society of Agricultural Engineers (ISAE) and International Symposium on Bioenergy. Hyderabad, India. January 28-30, 203.

Chaubey, I., R. Cibin, Y. Her, and B. Gramig. (2012). Optimizing selection and landscape placement of energy crops. Annual Conference of the American Water resources Association. Jacksonville, FL.

Chen, X.K., Liu, J.Y., Wu, C.W., Zhao, J., & Zhao, P.F. (2009). Breeding of the New Sugarcane Variety Yunzhe 94-375. Sugar Crops of China, 2, 002.

Chong, B. F., & O'Shea, M. G. (2012). Developing sugarcane lignocellulosic biorefineries: opportunities and challenges. Biofuels,
3(3), 307-319.
The production of first-generation ethanol as a biofuel to reduce oil inputs has been successful on a large scale using sugarcane juice and/or molasses (Brazil) and corn (USA). The advent of second-generation biofuels is impending as lignocellulosic processing technology improves and costs decrease.

Chong, B. F., & O'Shea, M. G. (2013). Advancing energycane Cell Wall Digestibility Screening by Near-Infrared Spectroscopy. Applied spectroscopy, 67(10), 1160-1164.
Breeding energy cane for cellulosic biofuel production involves manipulating various traits. An important trait to optimize is cell wall degradability as defined by enzymatic hydrolysis.

Chu, T. L. (1982). Development of Second-and Third-Generation energycane Varieties. In Symposium Proceedings: Fuels and Feedstocks from Tropical Biomass U_. Rio Piedras: CEER-UPR Biomass Division. Caribe Hilton Hotel, San Juan, PR (1982).

Cibin, R., I. Chaubey, and B. Engel. (2012). Optimum selection and placement of energy crops at watershed scale: a multi-objective optimization framework for sustainable bioenergy production. Paper no. 121337030, Annual Conference of the ASABE, Dallas, TX.

Clifton-Brown JC, Lewandowski I. (2000). Overwintering problems of
newly established Miscanthus plantations can be overcome by identifying
genotypes with improved rhizome cold tolerance. New Phytologist 148,

Clifton-Brown J, Robson P, Davey C, et al. (2013). Breeding Miscanthus
for bioenergy. In: Saha MC, Bhandari HS, Bouton JH, eds. Bioenergy
feedstocks: breeding and genetics. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 67–81.

Cobill, R. M. (2007). Development of energycanes for an expanding biofuels industry. Sugar Journal, 70(6), 6.
The rising cost of oil has caused a significant increase in interest in the utilization of renewable resources for biofuels production. In his 2007 State of the Union address, President Bush announced the goal to reduce gasoline usage by increasing the utilization of renewable and alternative fuels, such as ethanol, to 35 billion gallons by 2017. To meet this goal alternative feedstocks for the production of ethanol will have to be identified. Several grasses are under consideration in the U.S. to support a developing cellulosic ethanol industry because of their abilities to produce the large quantities of plant fiber needed to support the continuous operation of these facilities. Among these are: switchgrass (Panicum virgatum), miscanthus (Miscanthus x giganteus), elephantgrass (Pennisetum purpureum) and high-fiber sugarcane (Saccharum complex). The obvious advantage to using the high biomass-yielding grasses as dedicated bioenergy crops is that they will require shorter distances for transport and have less of an impact on food prices. In April 2007, scientists at the USDA’s Agricultural Research Services Sugarcane Research Lab along with scientists from the LSU AgCenter's Agricultural Experiment Station (LSUAC) and the American Sugar Cane League of the U.S.A., Inc, jointly released three “high-fiber” sugarcane varieties (L 79-1002, HoCP 91-552, and Ho 00-961) as candidate feedstocks for the U.S. biofuels industry (a.k.a. energy canes). Breeding efforts and agronomic studies are underway at the SRL to develop even higher biomass-yielding sugar cane varieties that possess greater levels of cold tolerance that would also allow for a longer harvest season.

Conrad, A., McLaughlin, W., Rister, M.E., Lacewell, R.D., Falconer, L.L., Blumenthal, J.M., & McCorkle, D. A. (2011). Economic Analysis of Cellulosic Feedstock for Bioenergy in the Texas Rio Grande Valley. In 2011 Annual Meeting, February 5-8, 2011, Corpus Christi, Texas (No. 98810). Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
The purpose of this research was to minimize biofuels feedstocks’ entire logistics cost across all components to deliver the required amount of feedstock needed for a 30-million gallon per year conversion facility, including machinery and equipment, land, water, labor, and operating costs in South Texas.

Corcodel, L., Roussel, C., & Decloux, M. (2011). Energy content: a new approach to cane evaluation. International Sugar Journal, 113(1355), 782.
PowerPoint presentation

Coyle, W. T. (2010). Next-generation biofuels: Near-term challenges and implications for agriculture. DIANE Publishing.
With a long-term goal of 16 billion gallons for cellulosic biofuel use by 2022, expansion of next-generation fuels will have to be rapid. An alternative is the production of green gasoline and green diesel, biobased fuels equal to fossil fuels that could be used in unlimited volumes with existing vehicles and in the existing fuel distribution system. The  focus of this report is on the outlook for production of next-generation biofuels, key near-term challenges for the sector, and the implications for feedstock supply from U.S. agriculture.

Coyle, W. T. (2013). USDA Economic Research Service-Next-Generation Biofuels: Near-Term Challenges and Implications for Agriculture.
The Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007 mandates a tripling in U.S. biofuel use to 36 billion gallons by 2022. Achieving this goal will depend on rapid expansion in next-generation biofuels, primarily from cellulose.  Advanced conversion technologies will be used to create next-generation biofuels from widely available, largely nonfood biomass, including wood waste; crop residues; dedicated energy crops such as switchgrass, energy cane, and biomass sorghum; municipal solid waste; and algae. While some next-generation processes that yield bio-butanol or petroleum-equivalent fuels will use corn and other first-generation feedstocks, overall next-generation biofuels likely will have less direct impact on food crops than first-generation biofuels.

Dal-Bianco, M., Carneiro, M. S., Hotta, C. T., Chapola, R. G., Hoffmann, H. P., Garcia, A. A. F., & Souza, G. M. (2012). Sugarcane improvement: how far can we go?. Current opinion in biotechnology, 23(2), 265-270.
Sugarcane is an important crop for food and energy production. Among the main traits that make it a unique crop, we note its capacity to accumulate high levels of sucrose in its stems and its characteristic high yield, making it the highest tonnage crop among cultivated plants. This review outlines some of the most pressing aspects of a biotechnological route for sugarcane improvement including technological data available and the use of marker-assisted breeding, genome sequencing, transgenics, and gene discovery for traits of interest.

Darby, P., & Salassi, M. (2009). A Comparison of Pricing Strategies for Cellulosic Ethanol Processors: A Simulation Approach.
This study links six different pricing strategies with production cost information to determine from the producers perspective which pricing strategy would be preferred. For the purposes of this study potential profit margins for the biofuel processing firm are not investigated due to the lack of reliable information.

Darby, P., Mark, T.B., & Salassi, M. (2009). Energycane usage for cellulosic ethanol: estimation of feedstock costs.

Darby, P., & Salassi, M. (2010). What does the introduction of energy crops mean for the crop mix and cellulosic ethanol plant location in Louisiana?
This study focuses on the Louisiana Sugarcane Belt as farmers in this region are looking for additional crops to add into their portfolio due to stagnate sugar prices and rising input prices.

Darby, P. M., Mark, T. B., & Salassi, M. E. (2010). Breaking into the Cellulosic Ethanol Market: Capacity and Storage Strategies. In 2010 Annual Meeting, February 6-9, 2010, Orlando, Florida (No. 56542). Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
There are two basic ways in which the development of a cellulosic ethanol industry might take place. First, processors could build the plant and assume that the feedstock needed to operate the facility will come. Second, processors could contract for the production of energy crops and then build the plant. However, both of these approaches present a first mover problem that must be resolved for the industry to develop. One possible solution to this is to locate a cellulosic ethanol plant in a location that already has one or more feedstocks or by-products that are viewed as waste products.

Darby, P. M., & Mark, T. B. (2012). Determining the Optimal Location for Collocating a Louisiana Sugar Mill and a New Cellulosic Ethanol Plant. In 2012 Annual Meeting, February 4-7, 2012, Birmingham, Alabama (No. 119787). Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
This research specifically examines the relative viability of collocating a cellulosic ethanol plant with some of Louisiana's eleven sugar mills. Using a GIS-based transportation model, each mill is examined for feedstock availability and transportation costs. Capital sharing advantages are the same for each of the sugar mills, so the feedstock availability and transportation costs are where the mills can potentially be differentiated, in addition to the calculated value of the actual collocated plant.

Davis, H. B., Stuart, W. L., & Bhim, P. Considerations for the development of an Integrated Production System from sugar cane.
The shift in market conditions for sugar, strongly suggests that industries that are dependent solely on raw sugar sales, could experience severe difficulties in sustaining viability in the long term. Caribbean sugar industries, which are among the oldest in the world, have long been dependent on the safety net provided by preferential markets for their existence. Integrated production of sugar with cogeneration and ethanol could offer a viable solution to a sustainable sugar cane industry in countries with low petroleum resources.

Davis, S.C., Anderson-Teixeira, K.J., & DeLucia, E.H. Life-cycle Analysis and the Ecology of Biofuels. Trends in Plant Science, 14(3), 140-146.

de Siqueira Ferreira, S., Nishiyama, M. Y., Paterson, A. H., & Souza, G. M. (2013). Biofuel and energy crops: high-yield Saccharinae take center stage in the post-genomics era. Genome biology, 14(6), 210.

Digman, M. F. (2009). Grasses and legumes for cellulosic bioenergy. Grassland: Quietness and strength for a new American agriculture. ASA, CSSA, and SSSA, Madison, WI.(This volume.), 205-219.

Dobson, I., & Dumenil, J. C. (2010). Process, Plant, and Butanol From Lignocellulosic Feedstock. US 20110076732 A1 U.S. Patent Application 12/816,001.
This invention relates to a process, a plant, and butanol made of or derived from lignocellulosic feedstock. The process includes the step of depolymerizing lignocellulosic material to form pentose and a remainder. The process also includes the step of converting the pentose to butanol material and using the remainder for generation of power or further downstream conversion.

Dowling, C. D., Burson, B. L., Foster, J. L., Tarpley, L., & Jessup, R. W. (2013). Confirmation of Pearl Millet-Napiergrass Hybrids Using EST-Derived Simple Sequence Repeat (SSR) Markers. American Journal of Plant Sciences, 4(5).

Dumenil, J. C. (2008). Process, Plant And Biofuel From Lignocellulosic Feedstock. U.S. Patent Application 12/336,983.

Duval, B.D., Anderson-Teixeira, K.J., Davis, S.C., Keogh, C., Long, S.P., Parton, W.J. & DeLucia, E.H. (2013). Predicting Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Soil Carbon from Changing Pasture to an Energy Crop.
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0072019
Bioenergy related land use change would likely alter biogeochemical cycles and global greenhouse gas budgets. Energycane (Saccharum officinarum L.) is a sugarcane variety and an emerging biofuel feedstock for cellulosic bio-ethanol production. It has potential for high yields and can be grown on marginal land, which minimizes competition with grain and vegetable production.

Duval, B., Davis, S. C., Parton, W. J., Long, S. P., & DeLucia, E. H. (2011, December). The Greenhouse Gas Flux and Carbon Budget of Land Use Conversion from Pasture to energycane Production. AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts. 1, 03.

Duval, B. D., Davis, S. C., Anderson-Teixeira, K. J., Keogh, C., Parton, W. J., Long, S.P., & DeLucia, E. H. Conversion of pasture to energycane For Bioenergy is predicted to alter greenhouse gas Exchange and soil carbon.

Economics, C., & Needs, B. E. (1987). energycane as a Possible Solution to Sugar. Alternative Energy Sources VII: Bioconversion, 4, 169.

Ehrenberg, R. (2009). The biofuel future: Scientists seek ways to make green energy pay off. Science News, 176(3), 24-29.
New liquid fuels promise more than just carbon correctness. They offer a renewable, home-grown energy source, reducing the need for foreign oil. They present ways to heal an agricultural landscape hobbled by intensive fertilizer use. Biofuels could even help clean waterways, reduce air pollution, enhance wildlife habitats and increase biodiversity.

Elliott, D. (2011). Welcome to Task 34.
The overall objective of Task 34 is to improve the rate of implementation and success of fast pyrolysis for fuels and chemicals by contributing to the resolution of critical technical areas and disseminating relevant information particularly to industry and policy makers.

Erickson, J. E., Soikaew, A., Sollenberger, L. E., & Bennett, J. M. (2012). Water Use
and Water-Use Efficiency of Three Perennial Bioenergy Grass Crops in Florida. Agriculture, 2(4), 325-338.

Fageria, N. K., Moreira, A., Moraes, L. A. C., Hale, A. L., Viator, R. P., & Singh, B. P.
(2013). Sugarcane and energycane. Biofuel crops: production, physiology and genetics, 151-171.

Fang, J., & Gao, B. (2010, December). Optimization of Biofuel and Biochar Production
from the Slow Pyrolysis of Biomass. In AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts (Vol. 1, p. 0469).

Fang-yin, P.A.N., Fu-ye, Liu., Wen-long, Wu, Jun-xian, Yang, Yong-sheng,
Chen, & Hai-hua, Deng. (2008). Studies on the planting density and the rates of fertilization for the new sugar-energycane variety YT96-86 [J]. Guangdong Agricultural Sciences, 7, 007.

Fedenko, J.R., Erickson, J.E., Woodard, K.R., Sollenberger, L.E., Vendramini, J.M., Gilbert, R.., & Peter, G.F. (2013). Biomass Production and Composition of Perennial Grasses Grown for Bioenergy in a Subtropical Climate Across Florida, USA. BioEnergy Research, 6(3), 1082-1093.

Femeena, P V., Sudheer, K. P., Cibin R, Chaubey, I., Her, Y. (2013). Spatial optimization of cropping pattern in an agricultural watershed for food and biofuel production with minimum downstream pollution. American Geophysical Union Meeting of the Americas, Cancun, Mexico.

Feng, Q., I. Chaubey, R. Cibin, and Y. Her. (2012). Biomass yield and hydrologic/water quality impacts from switchgrass and Miscanthus on marginal land.
Paper no. 121337201, Annual Conference of the ASABE, Dallas, TX.

Ferreira, S. S. (2014). Designing the Energy-Cane: Prospecting Genes and
Regulatory Networks in Ancestor and Hybrid Sugarcane Genotypes Using WGS, RNA-Seq and Oligoarrays. In Plant and Animal Genome XXII Conference. Plant and Animal Genome.

Fidler, M. Land Use Trade-offs between Fuel, Food and Ecosystem Services in Florida.

Flavell, R., Cruz, C. D. B., Christie, M., Allen, J., Keller, M., Gilna, P., & Kell, D. B. (2011). Moving forward with biofuels. Nature (London), 474(7352), S26-S30.

Fouad, W. M., Xiong, Y., Steeves, C., Oraby, H., Sandhu, S., Gallo, M., & Altpeter, F. (2009, March). Stable Genetic Transformation of energycane. In InVitro Cellular & Developmental Biology-Animal (Vol. 45, pp. S74-S74). 233 Spring St., New York, NY 10013 USA: Springer.

Friesen, P.C., Pexioto, M.M., Busch, F.A., Johnson, D.C., & Sage, R.F. (2014). Chilling and frost tolerance in Miscanthus and Saccharum genotypes bred for cool temperate climates. (2014). Journal of Experimental Botany.  doi: 10.1093/jxb/eru105
Miscanthus hybrids are leading candidates for bioenergy feedstocks in mid to high latitudes of North America and Eurasia, due to high productivity associated with the C4 photosynthetic pathway and their tolerance of cooler conditions. However, as C4 plants, they may lack tolerance of chilling conditions (0–10 °C) and frost, particularly when compared with candidate C3 crops at high latitudes.

Fu, Z., & Holtzapple, M. T. (2010). Fermentation of sugarcane bagasse and chicken
manure to calcium carboxylates under thermophilic conditions. Applied biochemistry and biotechnology, 162(2), 561-578.

Fumasi, R. J., Richardson, J. W., & Outlaw, J. L. (2008, February). The Economics Of
Growing And Delivering Cellulosic Feedstocks In The Beaumont, Texas Area. In Annual Meeting of Southern Agricultural Economics Association.

Fu-ye, L.I.U., Hai-hua, D.E.N.G., Jun-xian, Y.A.N.G., Wen-long, W.U., Fang-yin, P.A.N., Jian-tao, W.U.,& Yong-sheng, C.H.E.N. (2011). Breeding of New Sugar-energycane Variety YT96-86 and Analysis on Its Characteristics. Seed, 6, 029.

Garcia, P. A. F., & Salassi, M. (2009). Production of Biomass in the Louisiana Sugarcane Belt: What could it mean for the sugar industry?

Gordon, V.S., Comstock, J., Sandhu, H.S., Gilbert, R., El-Hout, N., & Arundale, R., (2015). Development of New Energy Cane Cultivars in Florida. Plant & Animal Genome XXIII, Jan. 10-14, 2015, San Diego, CA, poster session.
Though originating from the sugarcane (Sacharrum spp.) family, energy cane breeding strategies have diverged from the tradition goal of increasing sugars to maintaining a focus on selecting high biomass hybrids. These hybrids are derived from wide crosses between commercial sugarcane cultivars and S. spontaneum, a subspecies within the Saccharum family, which is characterized by high stalk counts and fiber content, excellent ratooning ability, and tolerances to abiotic and biotic pressures.

Gottfried, R. R. (1987). Can Energycane Stem the Tide?. Social and Economic Studies, 177-202.
This paper examines whether energycane technology can enable the Puerto Rican government to decrease its large losses from the sugar industry.

Govindaraj, P., & Natarajan, U. S. (2012). SBIEC 11001 (IC0594462; INGR12016), a Sugarcane (Erianthus X Saccharum sp Hybrid) Germplasm with High Biomass Potential. Indian Journal of Plant Genetic Resources, 25(3).

Grantz, D. A., Molinar, R., & Vu, H. B. (2006). Sugarcane Recovery from the Severe Freeze of 2006-2007 Suggests Potential as a BioEnergy Crop for California. California Agriculture.Govindaraj, P., & Suganya, A. (2012). SBIEC 11002 (IC0594463; INGR12017), a Sugarcane (Saccharum sp) Germplasm with a Dual Purpose energycane. Indian Journal of Plant Genetic Resources, 25(3).

Grantz, D. A., & Vu, H. B. (2009). O3 Sensitivity in a Potential C4 Bioenergy Crop: Sugarcane in California. Crop science, 49(2), 643-650.

Gravois, K., Grisham, M., & Viator, R. (2013). Exploiting sugarcane for energy. Sugar Journal, 75(8), 8-12.

Green, A., Wagner, J., Green, B., Van Ravenswaay, H., Clauson, D., Schwartz, J., & Gaffney, S. (1989). Co-combustion of waste, biomass and natural gas. Biomass, 20(3), 249-262.

Grisham, M. P., Hale, A. L., & Johnson, R. M. (2012, October). Disease concerns in energycane. In Meeting Proceedings.

Grohmann, K. (1991). Pretreatment Research Overview.
This report summarizes the research progress and accomplishments of the US Department of Energy (DOE) Ethanol from Biomass Program, field managed by the Solar Energy Research Institute, during FY 1990. The report includes an overview of the entire program and summaries of individual research projects. For further details, contact Norman Hinman at the SERI Program Office.

Guo, J.W., Zhang, Y.B., & Liu, S.C. (2010). Influence of Three Kinds of Mine Tailings on Growth of Adaptability in energycane [J]. Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 5, 013.
Pot experiments were conducted using three kinds of mine tailings Cu,Pb/Zn and Sn were mixed with soil from paddy by 7:3,8:2,9:1 for each tailing as energycane growing medium,The result indicated that most of the medium positively affected on cane yield except for the treatment of Cu3,Sn2,Cu1 and Sn1 indicated the most positive effect on cane yield.Most of the treatment have positive effect on root yield except for Pb1.Various ratio of mine tailings negetively affected quality index such as sucrose content,fibre content,apparent purity and reducing sugar while the difference was not significant compared with check.The ratio of mine tailings to paddy soil when 8:2 for Cu,or 9:1for Sn,Pb/Zn are suitable.This result could be of good reference for growing engery cane in field with mine tailings.

Gupta, M. N., & Raghava, S. (2007). Relevance of chemistry to white biotechnology. Chemistry Central Journal, 1(1), 1-3.
White biotechnology is a fast emerging area that concerns itself with the use of biotechnological approaches in the production of bulk and fine chemicals, biofuels, and agricultural products. It is a truly multidisciplinary area and further progress depends critically on the role of chemists. This article outlines the emerging contours of white biotechnology and encourages chemists to take up some of the challenges that this area has thrown up.

Gutterson, N. (2008). Plant Biotechnology and Cellulosic Ethanol Production. In Mendel Biotechnology, Presentation at the Farm Foundation Conference on the Second Decade of Crop Biotechnology, Westin City Center, Washington DC January (pp. 16-17).
Powerpoint presentation about optimizing feedstocks and using entire plant biomass to produce large amounts of readily convertible biomass at high enough yields to minimize any adverse impact on the global environment without affecting CO2 levels, land degradation, loss of biodiversity, etc.

Haffner, F. B., Mitchell, V. D., Arundale, R. A., & Bauer, S. (2013). Compositional analysis of Miscanthus giganteus by near infrared spectroscopy. Cellulose, 20(4), 1629-1637.
Fourier transform near infrared spectroscopy was applied to ball-milled and dried whole plant Miscanthus × giganteus samples in combination with partial least square regression analysis for prediction of main constituents of the biomass.

Halbleib, M. D., Daly, C., & Hannaway, D. B. (2013). Nationwide Crop Suitability Modeling of Biomass Feedstocks. 
A major objective of the Sun Grant GIS component is to gain an understanding of the spatial distribution of current and potential biofuel/bio-energy feedstock resources across the country. The Sun Grant Western Region GIS Center (PRISM Climate Group) at Oregon State University has developed, and is applying, an environmental modeling approach (PRISM-EM) for making current and potential national feedstock production maps.

Hale, A., Veremis, J., Tew, T., Burner, D., Legendre, B., & Dunckelman, P. (2009, July). 50 years of sugarcane germplasm enhancement-roadblocks, hurdles, and success. In International Society of Sugar Cane Technologists Proceedings.
In 1959, a sugarcane germplasm enhancement program was initiated in Houma Louisiana, USA. This program was intended to develop parental material with an expanded genetic base for the commercial breeding program. What has come to be known as the “basic breeding program” is a long-term undertaking which utilizes a modified backcross breeding scheme. As a result of these basic breeding efforts, LCP 85-384 was released in 1993 by Louisiana State University, USDA-ARS Sugarcane Research Unit, and the American Sugarcane League. This variety increased Louisiana yields of sugar per hectare by 25%. Continued efforts are underway with new and novel genetic combinations being achieved each year.

Hale, A. L., Viator, R. P., & Veremis, J. C. (2013). Identification of freeze tolerant Saccharum spontaneum accessions through a pot-based study for use in sugarcane germplasm enhancement for adaptation to temperate climates. Biomass and Bioenergy.

Hamilton, P. G., Radtke, C. W., & Kreitman, K. M. (2013). U.S. Patent Application 13/895,882.

Haspeslagh, L. (2010). Aquatic phototrophs for the production of fuels and green chemicals. Lipids, 20(40), 3.

Heissner, R. (2010). Jennings Demonstration PLant (No. DE-FC36-08GO18119). Verenium Biofuels Corporation.

Helsel, Z. R., & Álvarez, J. (2012). Economic Potential of Switchgrass as a Biofuel Crop in Florida.

Helsel, Z. R., Alvarez, J., & Brumfield, R. Economic feasibility of biofuels crops in Florida and New Jersey.

Her Y, Cibin R, and Chaubey I. (2013). Simple parallel computing strategies for parameter calibration and spatial optimization - ASABE Annual International Meeting (Jul 22 - 24), Kansas City, Missouri.

Hodnett, G. L., Hale, A. L., Packer, D. J., Stelly, D. M., Da Silva, J., & Rooney, W. L. (2010). Elimination of a Reproductive
Barrier Facilitates Intergeneric Hybridization. Crop Science, 50(4), 1188-1195.

Hunsigi, G. (1993). Fibre and energycane. In Production of Sugarcane 1(23), 167-190. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Jackson, P. (2012). Energycane. Bioenergy Feedstocks: Breeding and Genetics, 117- 149.

James, B. T. (2010). Marker development and genetic diversity in saccharum and miscanthus (Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois).

James, B. T., Chen, C., Rudolph, A., Swaminathan, K., Murray, J. E., Na, J. K., & Ming, R. (2012). Development of microsatellite markers in autopolyploid sugarcane and comparative analysis of conserved microsatellites in sorghum and sugarcane. Molecular Breeding, 30(2), 661-669.

Jawetz, P., & Samuels, G. (1985). Issues related to introduction of energy-cane to Latin-America. In International conference on Biomass. 3 (pp. 1126-1130).

Jennewein, S., Gilbert, R., Wright, A., Glaz, B., Rowland, D., Bennett, J., & Schnell, R.
(2012, October). Physiological and Morphological Effects of High Water Tables on Early Growth of Giant Reed (Arundo donax), Elephant Grass (Pennisetum purpureum), Energycane and Sugarcane (Saccharum spp.), American Society of Agronomy Abstracts, 97-122.

Jessup, R. W. (2009). Development and status of dedicated energy crops in the United States. In Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology-Plant, 45(3), 282-290.

Jessup, R. W. (2013). Seeded-Yet-Sterile’Perennial Biofuel Feedstocks. Adv Crop Sci Tech 1: e102. doi: 10.4172/2329-8863.10 00e102 Page 2 of 2 Volume 1• Issue 2• 1000e102 Adv Crop Sci Tech ISSN: 2329-8863 ACST, an open access journal 4.

Jia-yong, H. U. A. N. G. (2010). Analysis of New Sugar and energycane Varieties Based on Grey Relational Method. Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 33, 039.

JiaWen, G., YueBin, Z., & ShaoChun, L. (2010). Influence of three kinds of mine tailings on growth of adaptability in energycane. Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 23(5), 1443-1446.

Jinbao, L., Lilian, H., & Fusheng, L. (2007). Analysis of Advantage and Outlook on Sugarcane as Energy-crop [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 12, 092.

Johnson, T., Johnson, B., Scott-Kerr, C., & Kiviaho, J. (2009). Bioethanol-status report on bioethanol production from wood and other lignocellulosic feedstocks. In 63rd Appita Annual Conference and Exhibition, Melbourne 19-22 April 2009 (p. 3). Appita Inc.
Lignocellulosic biomass is seen as an attractive feedstock for future supplies of renewable fuels, reducing the dependence on imported petroleum. However, there are technical and economic impediments to the development of commercial processes that utilise biomass feedstocks for the production of liquid fuels such as ethanol. Significant investment into research, pilot and demonstration plants is on-going to develop commercially viable processes utilising the biochemical and thermochemical conversion technologies for ethanol. This paper reviews the current status of commercial lignocellulosic ethanol production and identifies global production facilities.

Jonker, G. J. (2013). Outlook for the co-production of electricity and ethanol in Brazil using different biomass feedstocks. In Symposium Biorefinery for Food, Fuel and Materials 2013. 

Popp, J., Lakner, Z., Harangi-Rakos, M. & Fari, M. (2014). The effect of bioenergy expansion: Food, energy, and environment. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 32, 559-578.
The increasing prices and environmental impacts of fossil fuels have made the production of biofuels to reach unprecedented volumes over the last 15 years. Given the increasing land requirement for biofuel production, the assessment of the impacts that extensive biofuel production may cause to food supply and to the environment has considerable importance. This article presents [1] risks to food and energy security [2] estimates of bioenergy potential with regard to biofuel production, and [3] the challenges of the environmental impact.

Richard, E. P. and Anderson, W. F. (2014) Sugarcane, Energy Cane and Napier Grass, in Cellulosic Energy Cropping Systems (ed D. L. Karlen), John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Chichester, UK. doi: 10.1002/9781118676332.ch6
The 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act mandates that 16 billion of the targeted 36 billion gallons of biofuels must be derived from cellulosic sources. Sugarcane grown solely for the production of energy is commonly referred to as energy cane. This chapter discusses the production of sugar/energy cane as a dedicated bioenergy feedstock with an emphasis to areas where sugarcane may not be traditionally grown. Much of the information presented in the chapter is based on research conducted on the production of sugarcane for sugar. Napier grass resembles sugar or energy cane in stature and in methods of propagation. It is considered a viable feedstock for bioenergy due to the perennial nature and yields similar to energy cane in Florida and Georgia. The chapter discusses phylogeny, growth, yield, and chemical composition, establishment, fertilization, disease, insect, and weed control, harvest management and genetic improvement for cane and Napier grass.

Keeler, B. L., Krohn, B. J., Nickerson, T. A., & Hill, J. D. (2013). US Federal Agency Models Offer Different Visions for Achieving Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS2) Biofuel Volumes. Environmental science & technology, 47(18), 10095-10101.

Khan, N. A., Bedre, R., Parco, A., Bernaola, L., Hale, A., Kimbeng, C., & Baisakh, N. (2013). Identification of cold-responsive genes in energycane for their use in genetic diversity analysis and future functional marker development. Plant Science, 211, 122-131.
Breeding for cold tolerance in sugarcane will allow its cultivation as a dedicated biomass crop in cold environments. Development of functional markers to facilitate marker-assisted breeding requires identification of cold stress tolerance genes.

Khanal, S. K., & Lamsal, B. P. (2010). Bioenergy and biofuels production: some perspectives. Bioenergy and biofuel from biowastes and biomass. ASCE, New York, 1-22.

Kim, J., Realff, M. J., Lee, J. H., Whittaker, C., & Furtner, L. (2011). Design of biomass processing network for biofuel production using an MILP model. Biomass and bioenergy, 35(2), 853-871.

Kim, M., & Day, D. F. (2010, April). Composition of multiple feedstocks suitable for extended ethanol production at Louisiana sugar mills. In The 32nd Symposium on Biotechnology for Fuels and Chemicals.

Kim, M., & Day, D. F. (2013). Enhancement of the Enzymatic Digestibility and Ethanol Production from Sugarcane Bagasse by Moderate Temperature-Dilute Ammonia Treatment. Applied biochemistry and biotechnology, 171(5), 1108-1117.

Kirkpatrick, J. (2014). Construction and analysis of the miscanthus genespace.

Knoll, J., Anderson, W., Strickland, T., & Hubbard, B. (2010, April). Field performance of potential biomass feedstocks under no inputs in South Georgia. In The 32nd Symposium on Biotechnology for Fuels and Chemicals.
Warm-season perennial grasses have the greatest potential for biomass production in the Southeast. The larger root systems of perennial crops should be able to adapt to lower inputs of water and fertilizer, and should also contribute to soil carbon sequestration. This study was initiated in fall 2005 at Tifton, GA, to assess the performance of perennial grasses under rainfed conditions with no fertilizer inputs. The test consisted of four replications in a randomized complete block design, and included the following entries: two energycanes (Saccharum sp.) US 01-012 and L 79-1002; two Napiergrasses (Pennisetum purpureum Schum.) ‘Merkeron’ and N51; two switchgrasses (Panicum virgatum L.) GA-001 and GA-993; three giant reeds (Arundo donax L.) ADS, ADE, and ADF; and Erianthus arundinaceum.

Knoll, J., Anderson, W., Richard, E.P., Doran-Peterson, J.,  Baldwin, B., Hale, A.L., & Viator, R.P. (2013) Harvest date effects on biomass yield and quality of new energycane (Saccharum hybrids) genotypes in the Southeast USA. Biomass and Bioenergy. 56, 147-156. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2013.04.018
Energycane (Saccharum hyb.) is a perennial bioenergy crop derived from sugarcane, but with higher fiber, greater biomass yields, and better cold tolerance than typical sugarcane. Two commercial sugarcanes, two high-sugar (Type I) energycanes, and five high-fiber (Type II) energycanes were planted at Tifton, GA, USA in a randomized complete block design with four replications. Beginning in October, 2008 (plant-cane crop year) five monthly samples were taken to assess the effects of delaying harvest on biomass composition and quality for ethanol production. The monthly harvests were repeated in the winter of 2010–2011 (second-ratoon crop year). Delaying harvest into the winter months resulted in minimal reductions in biomass moisture and N mass fractions, while K mass fraction decreased significantly. 

Knoll, J., Anderson, W., Strickland, T., & Hubbard, R. (2010, October). Biomass production of perennial grasses with no inputs in South Georgia. In Meeting Abstract.

Knoll, J. E., & Anderson, W. F. (2012). Vegetative propagation of napiergrass and energycane for biomass production in the southeastern United States. Agronomy Journal, 104(2), 518-522.

Knoll, J. E., Anderson, W. F., Strickland, T. C., Hubbard, R. K., & Malik, R. (2012). Low-input production of biomass from perennial grasses in the coastal plain of Georgia, USA. Bioenergy Research, 5(1), 206-214.
Warm-season perennial grasses are a promising source of biomass for energy production in Southeast USA, and low-input production is desirable. With only residual fertility in the soil and no irrigation, this test compared biomass yields of eight grasses under low-input production: L 79–1002 energycane (Saccharum hyb.), Merkeron and N51 napiergrass (Pennisetum purpureum Schum.), three clones of giant reed (Arundo donax L.), and two switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) lines. For the first 2 years napiergrass maintained dry matter (DM) yields over 25 Mg DM ha-1 year-1, and energycane yielded over 20 Mg DM ha-1year-1 for 3 years.

Knoll, J.E., Anderson, W.F., Richard Jr, E.P., Doran-Peterson, J., Baldwin, B., Hale,
A.L., & Viator, R.P. (2013). Harvest date effects on biomass quality and ethanol yield of new energycane (Saccharum hyb.) genotypes in the Southeast USA. Biomass and Bioenergy, 56, 147-156.

Knoll, J., Anderson, W., Doran-Peterson, J., Burgess, N., & Richard Jr, E. Biomass yield
and quality of new energycane (Saccharum hybrids) genotypes for cellulosic ethanol production in the southeast. In Meeting Abstract.

Khoodaruth, A., & Elahee, M.K. (2013). Use of higher fibre cane for increasing cogenerated electricity: Policy implications for Mauritius. Utilities Policy, 26, 67-75.

Leal, M.R. L.V. (2007). The potential of sugarcane as an energy source. In XXVI Congress, International Society of Sugar Cane Technologists, ICC, Durban, South Africa, 29 July-2 August, 2007. (pp. 23-34). International Society Sugar Cane Technologists (ISSCT).

Leal, M.R.L., Walter, A.S., & Seabra, J.E. (2013). Sugarcane as an energy source. Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery, 3(1), 17-26.

Lee, D. K., Parrish, A. S., & Voigt, T. B. (2014). Switchgrass and Giant Miscanthus Agronomy. In Engineering and Science of Biomass Feedstock Production and Provision (pp. 37-59). Springer New York.

Legendre, B. L., & Burner, D. M. (1995). Biomass production of sugarcane cultivars and early-generation hybrids. Biomass and Bioenergy, 8(2), 55-61.

Lehtomäki, A. (2006). Biogas production from energy crops and crop residues. University of Jyväskylä.

Lemus, R. (2013). Nutrient Management in Biofuel Crop Production. Biofuel Crop Sustainability, 301-324.

León, R. G., Gilber, R. A., Korndorfer, P. H., & Comstock, J. C. (2012). Selection Criteria and Performance of Energycane Clones (Saccharum spp.× S. spontaneum) for
Biomass Production Under Tropical and Sub-tropical Conditions. Ceiba, 51(1), 11-16.
The urgent need to reduce our reliance on oil and at the same time reduce carbon emissions, has triggered the search for alternative energy sources such as biofuels. New technologies have made possible the conversion of cellulose and hemicellulose into sugars that can be fermented to produce ethanol. The information available until now suggests that the behavior of energycane germplasm varies importantly between tropical and sub-tropical conditions. Therefore, selection and breeding programs must be carefully developed accounting for the unique responses that this germplasm could show under these two different climatic conditions.

Li, M. M., & Yu, S. J. (2007). Present Status & the Prospect of Fuel Ethanol Production by Sugarcane. Liquor Making Science and Technology, 6(156), 111.

Li, Q. W., Qi, R., & Zhang, Y. P. (2004). Prospect of fuel ethanol production from energycane. Sugarcane and Canesugar, 5, 29-33.
Ling, L. Y., Driemeier, C., & Cesar, R. M. (2012, October). Data-oriented research for bioresource utilization: A case study to investigate water uptake in cellulose using Principal Components. In E-Science (e-Science), 2012 IEEE 8th International Conference on (pp. 1-7). IEEE.

Liyakathali, N. A. M. (2014). Ultrasonic Pretreatment of energycane Bagasse for Biofuel Production (Doctoral dissertation, Anna University).

Lopes, F.J.F. & de Carli Poelkin, V.G. (2014). Advances in methods to improve the sugarcane crop as 'Energycane' for Biorefinery: An Appraisal. Biofuels in Brazil, 03 April 2014, 125-150. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-05020-1_7
Plant biomass is a source of renewable energy and biomolecules amenable to feed environmentally sustainable biorefineries. Chemistry, biotechnology, and process engineering advances will make biorefineries feasible in technical and cost aspects. 
In this chapter, we discuss some principles underlying biorefination and bottlenecks under the crop physiology aspects—including Saccharum. Correlations between biomass yield and properties with environmental factors are revisited.

Lun-wang, W. A. N. G. (2008). Analysis of Cultivation Benefit and Varietal Characters Performance of Multipurpose Sugarcane Variety B9 [J]. Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 30, 046.

Madakadze, I. C., Stewart, K., Peterson, P. R., Coulman, B. E., & Smith, D. L. (1999). Switchgrass biomass and chemical composition for biofuel in eastern Canada.

Malik, R., & Anderson, W. F. (2008, May). Elephantgrass as a Cellulosic Feedstock for the Southeast. In The 30th Symposium on Biotechnology for Fuels and Chemicals. (poster)

Mark, T. B., Detre, J. D., & Salassi, M. (2011). Advanced Biofuel Production in Louisiana Sugar Mills: an Application of Real Options Analysis.

Mark, T. B., Detre, J. D., Darby, P. M., & Salassi, M. E. (2014). energycane usage for cellulosic ethanol: estimation of feedstock costs and comparison to corn ethanol. International Journal of Agricultural Management, 3(2), 89-98.

Mathanker, S. K., Hansen, A. C., Grift, T. E., & Ting, K. C. Sensing Miscanthus Stem Bending Force and Swathed Biomass Volume to Predict Yield.

Matsuoka, S., Ferro, J., & Arruda, P. (2011). The Brazilian experience of sugarcane ethanol industry. In Biofuels (pp. 157-172). Springer New York.

Matsuoka, S., Kennedy, A.J., dos Santos, E.G.D., Tomazela, A.L., & Rubio, L.C.S. (2014) Energy Cane: Its Concept, Development, Characteristics and Prospects. Advances in Botany, 2014, DOI: 10.1155/2014/597275.
Unlike conventional sugar cane (Saccharum spp.) energy cane is a cane selected to have more fiber than sucrose in its composition. This is obtained simply by altering the genetic contribution of the ancestral species of sugarcane using traditional breeding methods. The resulting key feature is a significant increase in biomass yield. This happens because accumulating sugar is not physiologically a simple process and results in penalty in the side of fiber and yield. This review paper describes the initial conception of fuel cane in Puerto Rico in the second half of 1970s, the present resurgence of interest in it, how to breed energy cane, and the main characteristics that make it one of the most favorable dedicated bioenergy crops. The present status of breeding for energy cane in the world is also reviewed. Its potential contribution to the renewable energy market is discussed briefly.

McCutchen, B. F., Avant Jr, R. V., Baltensperger, D., Eaglesham, A., Slack, S. A., & Hardy, R. W. F. (2008). High-tonnage dedicated energy crops: the potential of sorghum and energycane. NABC Report, (20), 119-122.

Miao, Z., Grift, T. E., Hansen, A. C., & Ting, K. C. (2011). Energy requirement for comminution of biomass in relation to particle physical properties. Industrial crops and products, 33(2), 504-513.

Miao, Z., Shastri, Y., Grift, T. E., Hansen, A. C., & Ting, K. C. (2012). Lignocellulosic biomass feedstock transportation alternatives, logistics, equipment configurations, and modeling. Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining, 6(3), 351-362.

Mislevy, P., Adjei, M. B., Prine, G. M., & Martin, F. G. (1992). Energycane response to harvest management. In Proceedings-Soil and Crop Science Society of Florida (Vol. 51, pp. 79-84).

Mislevy, P., Adjei, M. B., Martin, F. G., & Miller, J. D. (1993). Response of US 72-1153 energycane to harvest management. In Proceedings-Soil and Crop Science Society of Florida (Vol. 52, pp. 27-32).

Mislevy, P., Adjei, M. B., Martin, F. G., & Prine, G. M. (1993). Influence of maturity on quality and agronomic characteristics of energycane. XVII Int. Grassl. Congr, 581-583.

Mislevy, P., Martin, F.G., Adjei, M.B., & Miller, J.D. (1995). Agronomic characteristics of US 72-1153 energycane for biomass. Biomass and Bioenergy, 9(6), 449-457.

Mislevy, P., Martin, F. G., Adjei, M. B., & Miller, J. D. (1997). Harvest management effects on quantity and quality of Erianthus plant morphological components. Biomass and Bioenergy, 13(1), 51-58.

Misook, K., Day, D. (2011). Composition of sugarcane, energycane, and sweet sorghum suitable for ethanol production at Louisiana sugar mills. J Ind Microbiology Biotechnology 38, 803-807. DOI: 10.1007/s10295-010-0812-8.

Mitchell, V. D., Taylor, C. M., & Bauer, S. (2013). Comprehensive Analysis of Monomeric Phenolics in Dilute Acid Plant Hydrolysates. BioEnergy Research, 1 16.

Mohanraj, K., & Nair, N. V. (2014). Biomass potential of novel interspecific hybrids involving improved clones of Saccharum. Industrial Crops and Products, 53, 128-132.

Monge, J.J., Ribera, L.A., Jifon, J.L., & Silva, J.A. (2013). Economics of Lignocellulosic Ethanol Production From energycane. In 2013 Annual Meeting, February 2-5, 2013, Orlando, Florida (No. 142773). Southern Agricultural Economics Association.

Moser, L. E., Burson, B. L., & Sollenberger, L. E. Alternative Uses of Warm-Season Forage Grasses.

Muth Jr, D. (2012). A paper submitted to Applied Energy D. Muth, Jr., KM Bryden, and RG Nelson 3. An investigation of sustainable agricultural residue availability for energy applications, 85.

Muth Jr, D. J., Bryden, K. M., & Nelson, R. G. (2013). Sustainable agricultural residue removal for bioenergy: A spatially comprehensive US national assessment. Applied Energy, 102, 403-417.

Na, C.I., Sollenberger, L.E., Erickson, J.E., Woodard, K.R., Vendramini, J.M.B., & Silveira, M.L. (2014). Management of perennial warm-season bioenergy grasses. I. Biomass Harvested, Nutrient Removal, and Persistence Responses of Elephantgrass and Energycane to Harvest Frequency and Timing. Bioenergy Research.  doi.
Harvest management practices affect productivity and persistence of grasses grown for bioenergy, but data are limited that describe their effects on the tall-growing grasses adapted to the USA Gulf Coast region. The objective was to determine harvest frequency and timing effects on biomass yield, nutrient removal, and persistence of three perennial bioenergy grasses in the southeastern USA.

Overend, R. P. (1996). Production of Electricity from Biomass Crops-US Perspective. National Renewable Energy Laboratory.

Overend, R. P., Kinoshita, C. M., & Jr, M. J. A. (1996). Bioenergy in transition. Journal of Energy Engineering, 122(3), 78-92.

Overman, A. R., & Woodard, K. R. (2006). Simulation of biomass partitioning and
production in elephantgrass. Communications in soil science and plant analysis, 37(13-14), 1999-2010.

Owens, V., Gutterson, N., Richard, E., & Barney, J. Herbaceous Perennials: Placement, Benefits and Incorporation Challenges in Diversified Landscapes.

Painter, C. (2009). CSIRO Sugar Research. Australian Sugarcane, 13(5/6), 54.

Pakarinen, O., Lehtomäki, A., Rissanen, S., & Rintala, J. (2008). Storing energy crops for methane production: effects of solids content and biological additive. Bioresource technology, 99(15), 7074-7082.

Pan, Y.B. (2012). Biotechnology: Impact on sugarcane agriculture and industry. Sugar Tech, 14(1), 1-2.

Payne, J. H. (1990). Cogeneration in the cane sugar industry. Elsevier.

Paterson, A. H., Moore, P. H., & Tew, T. L. (2013). The gene pool of Saccharum species and their improvement. In Genomics of  the Saccharinae (pp. 43-71). Springer New York.

Pinheiro, C., Simões, N., Costa, M., Toureiro, A., Ribeiro, I.C., Lourenço, M.E., & Chaves, M.M. (2012). Leaf temperature and photosynthetic performance in chickpea.

Preston, T. R. (1983). The use of sugar cane and by-products for livestock. In Chemistry and world food supplies: the new frontiers, Chemrawn II: invited papers presented at the International Conference on Chemistry and World Food Supplies, Manila, Philippines, 6-10 December 1982 (p. 221). Int. Rice Res. Inst..

Prine, G. M., & Woodard, K. R. (1993). Herbaceous energy crops in humid lower South USA. In Proc. First Biomass Conference of the Americas: Energy, Environment, Agriculture and Industry. Held at Burlington, Vermont from August (Vol. 30, pp. 278-279).

Prine, G. M., Stricker, J. A., & McConnell, W. V. (1997, August). Opportunities for bioenergy development in lower south USA. In Proc. 3rd Biomass Conference of the America: Making a Business from Biomass in Energy, Environment, Chemicals, Fibers and Materials (pp. 1-227).

Prine, G., Anderson, D. L., Shibles, D. B., & Riddle, T. C. (2003). Energy from crops: production and management of biomass/energy crops on phosphatic clay in central Florida. University of Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, EDIS.

Qiu, Z. (2012). The Use of Ionic Liquid for the Pretreatment of energycane Bagasse (Doctoral dissertation, Louisiana State University).

Qiu, Z., Aita, G.M. & Walker, M.S. (2012). Effect of ionic liquid pretreatment on the chemical composition, structure and enzymatic hydrolysis of energycane bagasse. Bioresource Technology, 117, 251-256.

Qiu, Z., & Aita, G. M. (2013). Pretreatment of energycane bagasse with recycled ionic liquid for enzymatic hydrolysis. Bioresource technology, 129, 532-537.

Qiu, Z., Aita, G. M., & Mahalaxmi, S. (2013). Optimization by response surface methodology of processing conditions for the ionic liquid pretreatment of energycane bagasse. Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology.

Rahmani, M., Hodges, A. W., & Stricker, J. A. (1996, September). Potential producers and their attitudes toward adoption of biomass crops in Central Florida. In Proceedings of the 7th National Bioenergy Conference (pp. 822-829).

Rainbolt, C., & Gilbert, R. (2010). Production of Biofuel Crops in Florida: Sugarcane/Energycane.

Rajeswari, S., Krishnamurthi, M., Anand, S. P., & Kumar, S. T. (2009). Performance of somaclones developed from intergeneric hybrids of sugarcane. Sugar Tech, 11(3), 258-261.

Rausch, K., Singh, V., & Tumbleson, M. (2010). Conversion Technologies for Biofuels.

Reagan, G., AgCenter, L.S.U., Beuzelin, J., Wilson, B., VanWeelden, M., Wilson, T., & Hardy, T. (2011). Beaumont Site Visit: Mexican Rice Borer and Sugarcane Borer Sugarcane and Rice Research.

Reagan, T.E., Wilson, B.E., Beuzelin, J.M., VanWeelden, M.T., White, W.H., Way, M.O., & Wilson, L.T. (2012). New Developments in Mexican Rice Borer IPM Research. Journal of the American Society of Sugar Cane Technologists, 32.

Richardson, J. (2009). High-Biomass Energy Crops for US Energy Security (Doctoral dissertation, Texas A&M University).

Robert, M.C., & Tew, T. (2008, October). Integration of energycane VarietyDevelopment into Basic and Commercial Sugarcane Variety Programs. In The 2008 Joint Annual Meeting.

Romero, R. A., Stromberg, B., & Locke, A. (2011). Study of the Effect of Different Solids Load on the Optimum pH during Enzymatic Hydrolysis of Steam Exploded Corn Stover. Journal of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, 5(10), 880-889.

Rukavina, H., Dufrene, E., Hale, A., & Tew, T. (2010, June). Evaluation of new energycane varieties for Louisiana. In American Society of Sugar Cane Technologists 30, 55)

Rushing, B. M., Horton, D. M., Baldwin, B. M., & Richard Jr, E. Evaluation of Energycane for Biomass Production in Starkville, MS. In Association for the Advancement of Industrial Crops Conference.

Saha, M.C., Bhandhari, H.S., & Bouton, J.H., (2013). Bioenergy Feedstocks: Breeding and Genetics.,Wiley.
Bioenergy and biofuels are generated from a wide variety of feedstock. Fuels have been converted from a wide range of sources from vegetable oils to grains and sugarcane. Second generation biofuels are being developed around dedicated, non-food energy crops, such as switchgrass and Miscanthus, with an eye toward bioenergy sustainability. Bioenergy Feedstocks: Breeding and Genetics looks at advances in our understanding of the genetics and breeding practices across this diverse range of crops and provides readers with a valuable tool to improve cultivars and increase energy crop yields.

Salassi, M. (2010). The Economics of Processing Ethanol at Sugarmills: A Simulation Approach.

Salassi, M.E., Brown, K., Hilbun, B.M., Deliberto, M.A., Gravois, K.A., Mark, T.B., & Falconer, L.L. (2013). Farm-Scale Cost of Producing Perennial energycane as a Biofuel Feedstock. BioEnergy Research, 1-11.

Salassi, M. E., Brown, K. L., Deliberto, M. A., & Gravois, K. A. (2013). Costs of producing energycane as a biofuel feedstock in Louisiana. Louisiana Agriculture, 56(1), 27-28.

Salassi, M. E., Brown, K. L., Deliberto, M. A., & Gravois, K. A. (2014). Farm-Scale cost of producing perennial energycane as a biofuel feedstock. Bioenergy Research, 7, 609-619. DOI: 10.1009/s12155-013-9390-8
This study explored the crop establishment and whole farm production costs of growing energycane as a biofuel feedstock in the southeastern United States.

Samaha, D. (2013). Combined Biological and Chemical Pretreatment Methods for Lignocellulosic Ethanol Production from energycane.

Samuels, G., & Jawetz, P. (1984, November). Policy issues in the transfer of energycane to the Caribbean. In Southeast Industrial Biomass Energy Exposition, Tech. Sessions, Atlanta. GA. NOT (Vol. 28, p. 29).

Sanderson, M. A., Brink, G. E., Higgins, K. F., & Naugle, D. E. (2004). Alternative uses of warm-season forage grasses. Warm-season (C4) grasses, (warmseasonc4gra), 389-416.

Santchurn, D., Ramdoyal, K., Badaloo, M. G. H., & Labuschagne, M. (2012). From sugar industry to cane industry: investigations on multivariate data analysis techniques in the identification of different high biomass sugarcane varieties. Euphytica, 185(3), 543-558.

Santchurn, D., Ramdoyal, K., Badaloo, M. G. H., & Labuschagne, M. (2013). From sugar industry to cane industry: Evaluation and simultaneous selection of different types of high biomass canes. Biomass and Bioenergy, 61, 82-92.
The objectives of this study were to characterise and identify different types of high biomass genotypes obtainable from early generation hybrid populations.

Schank, S. C., Chynoweth, D. P., Turick, C. E., & Mendoza, P. E. (1993). Napiergrass genotypes and plant parts for biomass energy. Biomass and Bioenergy, 4(1), 1 7.

Segrest, S. A., Rockwood, D. L., Stricker, J. A., Green, A. E. S., Smith, W. H., & Carter,
D. R. (1998). Biomass Cofiring with Coal at Lakeland, Florida, Utilities. Proceedings of BioEnergy 98: Expanding BioEnergy Partnerships, 4-8.

Sharma S, Chaubey, I., Cibin R. (2013). Impact of Bioenergy Crops Expansion on Water Quality in Agricultural Regions of Indiana - ASABE Annual International Meeting (Jul 22 - 24), Kansas City, Missouri, USA.

Shastri, Y. N., Hansen, A. C., Rodríguez, L. F., & Ting, K. C. (2012). Impact of probability of working day on planning and operation of biomass feedstock production systems. Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining, 6(3), 281-291.

Shastri, Y., & Ting, K. C. (2014). Biomass Feedstock Production and Provision: Overview, Current Status, and Challenges. In Engineering and Science of Biomass Feedstock Production and Provision (pp. 1-15). Springer New York.

Shields, S. A. (2010). Evaluation of energycane for Lignocellulosic Ethanol Production (Doctoral dissertation, Nicholls State University).

Shields, S. & Boopathy, R. (2011). Ethanol production from lignocellulosic biomass of energycane. International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation 65, 142-146.
The release of many new sugarcane varieties by the United States Department of Agriculture to be used as energy crops is a promising feedstock alternative. Energy cane produces large amounts of biomass that can be easily transported, and production does not compete with food supply and prices because energy cane can be grown on marginal land instead of land for food crops.

Singh, B. P. (2013). Biofuel crops: production, physiology and genetics. CABI.

Sizuo Matsuoka, Anthony J. Kennedy, Eder Gustavo D. dos Santos, André L. Tomazela, and Luis Claudio S. Rubio. (2014). Energy Cane: Its Concept, Development, Characteristics, and Prospects,” Advances in Botany. doi:10.1155/2014/597275
Unlike conventional sugar cane (Saccharum spp.) energy cane is a cane selected to have more fiber than sucrose in its composition. This is obtained simply by altering the genetic contribution of the ancestral species of sugarcane using traditional breeding methods. The resulting key feature is a significant increase in biomass yield.

Smith, R.L., Schweder, M.E., Chowdhury, M.K.U., Seib, J.C., & Schank, S.C. (1993). Development and application of RFLP and rapd dna markers in genetic improvement of Pennisetum for biomass and forage production. Biomass and Bioenergy, 5(1), 51-62.

Snidera, J.L., Dasb, P.K., & Rapera, R.L. Mid-South Regional Roadmap.

Somerville, C., Youngs, H., Taylor, C., Davis, S.C., & Long, S.P. (2010). Feedstocks for lignocellulosic biofuels. Science(Washington), 329(5993), 790-792.

Stefaniak, T. R., Dahlberg, J. A., Bean, B. W., Dighe, N., Wolfrum, E. J., & Rooney, W. L. (2012). Variation in biomass composition components among forage, biomass, sorghum-sudangrass, and sweet sorghum types. Crop Science, 52(4).

Stricker, J.A., & Smith, W.H. (2004). Economic Development Through Biomass Systems Integration in Central Florida: Final Report; May 5, 1995 (No. NREL/SR-510-35432). National Renewable Energy Lab., Golden, CO (US).

Suhardi, V., Prasai, B., Samaha, D., & Boopathy, R. (2013). Evaluation of pretreatment methods for lignocellulosic ethanol production from energycane variety L 79-1002. International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation, 85, 683-687.

Suhardi, V.S. H., Prasai, B., Samaha, D., & Boopathy, R. (2013). Combined biological and chemical pretreatment method for lignocellulosic ethanol production from energycane. Renewable Bioresources, 1(1), 1.

Suman, A., Ali, K., Arro, J., Parco, A.S., Kimbeng, C.A., & Baisakh, N. (2012). Molecular diversity among members of the Saccharum complex assessed using TRAP markers based on lignin-related genes. BioEnergy Research, 5(1), 197 205.

Takahashi, W., & Takamizo, T. (2012). Molecular breeding of grasses by transgenic approaches for biofuel production.

Tew, T., & Cobill, R. (2007, November). Challenges and Opportunities Associated with Simultaneous energycane and Sugarcane Genetic Improvement--Results of a Survey of International Sugarcane Breeders. In Agronomy Society of America, Crop Science Society of America, Soil Science Society of America Meeting.

Tew, T. L., & Cobill, R. M. (2008). Genetic improvement of sugarcane (Saccharum spp.) as an energy crop. In Genetic improvement of bioenergy crops (pp. 273-294). Springer New York.

Tew, T., Hale, A., Lingle, S., & Cobill, R. (2008, October). Improving Sugarcane as a Bioenergy Crop in the US. In Agronomy Abstracts (Vol. 653, No. 4).

Tew, T., Hale, A., Pan, Y., & Richard, E. (2009, August). energycane breeding and selection in Louisiana—a progress report. In Nineth Sugarcane Breeding and Germplasm Workshop. International Society of Sugarcane Technologists (ISSCT), Cairns.

Thomas, V.M., Choi, D.G., Luo, D., Okwo, A., & Wang, J.H. (2009). Relation of biofuel to bioelectricity and agriculture: Food security, fuel security, and reducing greenhouse emissions. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 87(9), 1140-1146.

Todd, J. R. (2013, January). Phenotypic evaluation of the World Collection of Sugarcane and Related Grasses. In Plant and Animal Genome XXI Conference. Plant and Animal Genome.

Triana, O., Abril, A., & Wong, A. (2008). Energy varieties of sugar cane as a novel source of fibre for the cellulose and paper industry. Appita Journal: Journal of the Technical Association of the Australian and New Zealand Pulp and Paper Industry, 61(5), 402.

Tullos Anderson, J. (2010). Economic Value of Cellulosic Ethanol: Analysis of Advanced Biofuels from energycane in South Florida.

Turhollow, A. (1994). The economics of energy crop production. Biomass and Bioenergy, 6(3), 229-241.

Varela, M., Lechón, Y., & Saez, R. (1999). Environmental and socioeconomic aspects in the strategic analysis of a biomass power plant integration. Biomass and Bioenergy, 17(5), 405-413.

Várhegyi, G., Szabó, P., & Antal Jr, M.J. (1994). Kinetics of the thermal decomposition
of cellulose under the experimental conditions of thermal analysis. Theoretical extrapolations to high heating rates. Biomass and Bioenergy, 7(1), 69-74.

Viator, R.P. Energycane crop establishment and flood tolerance in a temperate climate. In Meeting Abstract.

Viator, R., White, P., & Richard Jr, E. (2010). Sustainable production of energycane for bio-energy in the Southeastern US. Book Chapter, 1058, 147-161.

Viator, R. P., White Jr, P. M., Hale, A. J., & Waguespack, H. L. (2012). Screening for tolerance to periodic flooding for cane grown for sucrose and bioenergy. Biomass and Bioenergy, 44, 56-63.

Viator, R. P., & Richard Jr, E. P. (2012). Sugar and energycane date of planting effects on cane, sucrose, and fiber yields. Biomass and Bioenergy, 40, 82-85.
Production practices may change depending if sugar cane is grown primarily for sucrose (sugar cane) or as a biofuels feedstock (energy cane). Research was conducted to determine if planting date affects yields of both sugar and energy canes. Three sugar cane varieties and one energy cane variety were compared at the planting dates of August 1, September 1, and October 1. Averaged across both sugar and energy cane varieties in plant-cane, the August planting date produced more cane, sucrose, and dry biomass than the September and October plantings.

Viator, S. & Schudmak, C. (2015). Sugarcane by-product and alternate usage panel. 
Presentation during 2015 Louisiana Agricultural Technology and Management Conference, Marksville, LA.

Waclawovsky, A. J., Sato, P. M., Lembke, C. G., Moore, P. H., & Souza, G. M. (2010). Sugarcane for bioenergy production: an assessment of yield and regulation of sucrose content. Plant biotechnology journal, 8(3), 263-276.

Wang, B., Feng, H., Wang, X., Zhou, B., & De Frias, J. A. (2012). Deconstructing lignocellulosic biomass with a two-step methodU.S. Patent No. 8,173,406. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Way, M. O. (2013). Beaumont Site Visit: Management of Stalk Borers Attacking Sugarcane, Energycane, Sorghum, and Rice.

Wedin, W. F., & Fales, S. L. Grasses and Legumes for Cellulosic Bioenergy.

Wei, C. B., Liu, S. H., Sun, G. M., & Zang, X. P. (2008). Primary research on drip fertigation on sugarcane. Guangdong Agricultural Sciences, 7, 60-61.

Wenyan, C., & Shuijin, W. (2006). Sugarcane for Energy-A New Highlight of Sugarcane and Sugar Industry Development. Sugarcane and Canesugar, 3, 004.

White Jr, P. M., Viator, R. P., Richard Jr, E. P., & Grisham, M. P. (2012, October). Green-cane harvest of sugarcane effects on biomass and energy yields and nutrient removal. In Meeting Proceedings.

White, P., Viator, R., Webber, C., & Aita, G. Energycane Harvest Date Effects On Biomass, Sugar, and Fiber Yields. In ASA-CSSA-SSSA Annual Meeting Abstracts.

William, J., Duval, B. D., DeLucia, E., Davis, S. C., Hartman, M., DelGrosso, S., & Khanna, M. Use of low productivity land to grow biofuel crops in the US.

Windig, W., Heckler, C. E., Agblevor, F. A., & Evans, R. J. (1992). Self-modeling mixture analysis of categorized pyrolysis mass spectral data with the SIMPLISMA approach. Chemometrics and intelligent laboratory systems, 14(1), 195-207.

Woodward, K. R. (1990). Biomass yield and silage characteristics of elephantgrass (Pennisetum purpureum Schum.) as affected by harvest frequency and enotype. Dissertation Abstracts International. B, Sciences and Engineering, 51(3).

Woodard, K.R., Prine, G.M., Bates, D.B. & Chynoweth, D.P. (1991). Preserving elephantgrass and energycane biomass as silage for energy. Bioresource Technology 36(3), 253-259.

Woodard, K.R., Prine, G.M. & Bachrein, S. (1992). Solar energy recovery by elephantgrass, energycane, and elephantmill canopies. Crop Science, 33, 824-830. DOI: 10.2135/cropsci1993.0011183X003300040039x

Woodard, K.R., & Prine, G.M. (1993). Dry matter accumulation of elephantgrass, energycane, and elephantmillet in a subtropical climate. Crop Science, 33(4), 818-824.

Woodard, K.R., & Prine, G.M. (1993). Regional performance of tall tropical bunchgrasses in the southeastern USA. Biomass and Bioenergy, 5(1), 3-21.

Wright, L.L., Cushman, J.H., & Martin, S.A. (1993). Biomass resource potential using energy crops (No. CONF-930304--32). Oak Ridge National Lab., TN (United States).

Wright, L. L., Cushman, J. H., & Martin, S. A. (1995). The biomass resource potential of energy crops. Alternative fuels and the environment.

Wright, L., & Turhollow, A. (2010). Switchgrass selection as a “model” bioenergy crop: a history of the process. Biomass and Bioenergy, 34(6), 851-868.

Xue, Q., Wang, G., & Nyren, P. E. (2013). Biomass Production in Northern Great Plains of USA–Agronomic Perspective.

Yahya, A., & Marley, S. J. (1994). Physical and chemical characterization of methyl soyoil and methyl tallow esters as CI engine fuels. Biomass and Bioenergy, 6(4), 321-328.

Yang, Y., Wilson, L. T., Lv, J., & Wang, J. (2013). Development of a Process-based Herbaceous Bioenergy Crop Model.
The objectives of this study are: 1) Determine the phenotypic traits that govern bioenergy crop growth and development; 2) Develop an individual-based herbaceous bioenergy crop model that captures the temporal and spatial dynamics of crop growth and development; 3) Conduct comprehensive analysis on the genotype (G) × environment (E) × management (M) interactions to identify site-/genotype-specific management practices for optimal biomass production.

Yejun, H. A. N., Dodd, D., Nair, S., Mackie, R. I., & Cann, I. K. (2013). U.S. Patent No. 8,357,518. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Zeitsch, K. J. (2000). The chemistry and technology of furfural and its many by-products (Vol. 13). Elsevier.
Striking a healthy balance between theory and practice, the book leads the reader from reaction mechanisms and kinetics to the technology of making furfural by various old and new processes, using conventional raw materials or sulfite waste liquor. Detailed discussions of means of increasing the yield are of great chemical and technological interest as well as of immense economic importance.

Zhou, H., Deng, Z., Luo, J., & Zhang, M. (2004). Analysis on combining ability for the energy sugarcane breeding. Acta Agriculturae Universitatis Jiangxiensis, 27(2), 214-220.

Zhou, H., & Zhang, M. Q. (2006). The Molecular Marker Analysis for the Energycane Breeding [J]. Sugar Crops of China, 4, 001.

Zhu, J.L., Deng, Z.H., Xu, L.N., & Chen, R.K. (2011). Evaluation of New Sugarcane Lines in Ratooning for Energy and Sugar. Sugar Crops of China, 1, 006.

Ziyun, C. (2003). Development and Application of Sugarcane for Energy [J]. Sugarcane and Canesugar, 2, 007.

Rate This Article:

Have a question or comment about the information on this page?

Innovate . Educate . Improve Lives

The LSU AgCenter and the LSU College of Agriculture