Effect of Drought Stress on Yield and Quality of Maize/Sunflower and Maize/Sorghum Intercrops for Biogas Production

Abstract

AbstractIntercropping represents an alternative to maize (Zea mays L.) monoculture to provide substrate for agricultural biogas production. Maize was intercropped with either sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) or forage sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench] to determine the effect of seasonal water supply on yield and quality of the above‐ground biomass as a fermentation substrate. The two intercrop partners were grown in alternating double rows at plant available soil water levels of 60–80 %, 40–50 % and 15–30 % under a foil tunnel during the years 2006 and 2007 at Braunschweig, Germany. Although the intercrop dry matter yields in each year increased with increasing soil moisture, the partner crops responded quite differently. While maize produced significantly greater biomass under high rather than low water supply in each year, forage sorghum exhibited a significant yield response only in 2006, and sunflower in none of the 2 years. Despite greatly different soil moisture contents, the contribution of sorghum to the intercrop dry matter yield was similar, averaging 43 % in 2006 and 40 % in 2007. Under conditions of moderate and no drought stress, sunflower had a dry matter yield proportion of roughly one‐third in both years. In the severe drought treatment, however, sunflower contributed 37 % in 2006 and 54 % in 2007 to the total intercrop dry matter yield. The comparatively good performance of sunflower under conditions of low water supply is attributable to a fast early growth, which allows this crop to exploit the residual winter soil moisture. While the calculated methane‐producing potential of the maize/sorghum intercrop was not affected by the level of water supply, the maize/sunflower intercrop in 2006 had a higher theoretically attainable specific methane yield under low and medium than under high water supply. Nevertheless, the effect of water regime on substrate composition within the intercrops was small in comparison with the large differences between the intercrops.