Context or problemBioenergy sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench) is a promising crop for contributing to the United States bioenergy supply. However, the varying limitations of the marginal lands targeted for its cultivation present a management challenge. ObjectiveThis two-year study aimed to investigate how the limitations associated with marginal cropland impact the effects of nitrogen fertilization on the yield of bioenergy sorghum and the uptake of 11 macro- (N, P, K, Ca, Mg, and S) and micronutrients (Fe, Mn, Zn, Cu, and B). MethodsThe study contrasted prime cropland in central Illinois (Urbana) with three marginal cropland sites in southern (Ewing) and central Illinois (Fairbury and Pesotum). These marginal cropland sites are characterized by varying limitations, including low soil fertility (P and K limitations), leaching and erosion, and flooding, respectively. Four nitrogen rates (0, 56, 112, and 168 kg N ha−1) were tested under eight environments. ResultsThe average yields and ranges of sorghum biomass were 20.2 (17.0–23.2) Mg ha−1 in Urbana, 18.1 (13.1–19.8) Mg ha−1 in Ewing, 13.8 (9.0–17.3) Mg ha−1 in Fairbury, and 23.3 (14.6–33.0) Mg ha−1 in Pesotum. Optimal N rates were 56 N in Pesotum and 112 N in Urbana, Ewing, and Fairbury. Tissue macronutrient contents in Urbana were generally higher than in the marginal croplands, while micronutrient contents did not show discernible trends. Increasing N rate generally correlated with the macronutrient removal except in Ewing. ConclusionComparable sorghum biomass yields were observed between prime and marginal croplands (averaging 18.3 Mg ha−1), but optimal N rates varied between 56 N and 112 N. This suggests that yield gaps can be narrowed by applying the optimal N rates for the respective locations. However, increased removals of macronutrients, especially P and K, with increasing yields indicate the need to revise fertilizer recommendations, particularly for soils deficient in these nutrients. Implications or significanceOur study suggests that while sorghum production on marginal cropland is feasible, N management needs to be adapted to the unique limitations associated with various types of marginal cropland.