Biological Invasions

, Volume 20, Issue 9, pp 2439–2449 | Cite as

Competitive effects of cultivar and wild switchgrass on other native grasses

  • James O. EckbergEmail author
  • Gregg A. Johnson
  • Laura L. Seefeldt
  • Andrew J. Felton
  • Michael D. Casler
  • Ruth G. Shaw
Original Paper


There is mounting concern that selection and breeding of native grasses for greater biomass production could promote weediness. Yet little is known about the invasion potential or ecological impacts of such selectively bred native grasses. Here we focus on cultivars of native switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) that have undergone selection, breeding, and intraspecific hybridization to improve agronomic traits for biomass production. We evaluated the competitive effects of switchgrass cultivars (EG-2101 and ‘Trailblazer’) and wild switchgrass populations on two native prairie grasses [sideoats grama, Bouteloua curtipendula (Michx.) Torr., and Canada wild rye, Elymus canadensis L.] across a gradient of switchgrass density in a greenhouse. Cultivars produced 48–128% more biomass and reduced sideoats grama biomass by 25–59% more than wild switchgrass. Effects of switchgrass cultivars on Canada wild rye were minimal compared to sideoats grama. Later flowering and larger seed size of cultivars may be contributing to their greater biomass and competitive effects on sideoats grama. These data suggest that breeding switchgrass for enhanced biomass yield may increase competitive effects on some native grasses. Further studies are merited to test the potential for switchgrass biomass cultivars to spread and impact species diversity of restored and remnant native plant communities.


Biofuel Heterospecific Interspecific Invasion Invasiveness 



The authors thank University of Minnesota staff Kevin Betts, Roger Meissner, Rachel Pain, and Pamela Warnke for assistance and support in conducting the experiment; Matt Bickell for GIS support; Ellen Fuge (Minnesota Department of Natural Resources) and Meredith Cornett (The Nature Conservancy) for providing data from the Minnesota County Biological Survey as well as issuing the seed collection permit (2011-37R); and Brad Bolduan, Mark Cleveland, Larissa Mottl, and Russell Smith (Minnesota Department of Natural Resources) and Matt Graeve (The Nature Conservancy) for providing information on the management history of Scientific and Natural Areas. This project was funded by the University of Minnesota Undergraduate Research Opportunities Program (UROP) and the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund.

Supplementary material

10530_2018_1711_MOESM1_ESM.jpg (3.4 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (JPEG 3456 kb)
10530_2018_1711_MOESM2_ESM.jpg (3.1 mb)
Supplementary material 2 (JPEG 3201 kb)


  1. Abay F, Bjørnstad A (2009) Specific adaptation of barley varieties in different locations in Ethiopia. Euphytica 167:181–195. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barichivich J, Briffa KR, Myneni RB et al (2013) Large-scale variations in the vegetation growing season and annual cycle of atmospheric CO2 at high northern latitudes from 1950 to 2011. Glob Chang Biol 19:3167–3183. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Barney JN, DiTomaso JM (2008) Nonnative species and bioenergy: Are we cultivating the next invader? Bioscience 58:64–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berdahl JD, Frank AB, Krupinsky JM et al (2005) Biomass yield, phenology, and survival of diverse switchgrass cultivars and experimental strains in western North Dakota. Agron J 97:549–555. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blade Energy Crops (2009) New varieties 2010—other varieties. In: Progressive Forage. Accessed 21 July 2015
  6. Boe A, Ross JG (1998) Registration of “Sunburst” switchgrass. Crop Sci 38:540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Burson BL, Tischler CR, Ocumpaugh WR (2009) Breeding for reduced post-harvest seed dormancy in switchgrass: registration of TEM-LoDorm switchgrass germplasm. J Plant Regist 3:99–103. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cappuccino N (2004) Allee effect in an invasive alien plant, pale swallow-wort Vincetoxicum rossicum (Asclepiadaceae). Oikos 106:3–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Casler MD (2005) Ecotypic variation among switchgrass populations from the northern USA. Crop Sci 45:388–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Casler MD (2010) Changes in mean and genetic variance during two cycles of within-family selection in switchgrass. BioEnergy Res 3:47–54. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Casler MD (2012) Switchgrass breeding, genetics, and genomics. In: Monti A (ed) Switchgrass: a valuable biomass crop for energy. Springer, Berlin, pp 29–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Casler MD, Boe AR (2003) Cultivar x environment interactions in switchgrass. Crop Sci 43:2226–2233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Casler MD, Vogel KP (2014) Selection for biomass yield in upland, lowland, and hybrid switchgrass. Crop Sci 54:626–636. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Casler MD, Vogel KP, Taliaferro CM et al (2007) Latitudinal and longitudinal adaptation of switchgrass populations. Crop Sci 47:2249–2260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Christensen C (2010) Development of dedicated energy crops to supply the biofuel and biopower industries. In: 7th Annual bioenergy feedstocks symposiumGoogle Scholar
  16. Cottingham KL, Lennon JT, Brown BL (2005) Knowing when to draw the line: designing more informative ecological experiments. Front Ecol Environ 3:145–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Crawley MJ (2007) The R Book. Wiley, West SussexCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Eckberg JO, Casler MD, Johnson GA et al (2015) Switchgrass population and cold-moist stratification mediate germination. Crop Sci 55:2746–2752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ellstrand NC, Schierenbeck KA (2000) Hybridization as a stimulus for the evolution of invasiveness in plants? Proc Natl Acad Sci 97:7043–7050CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Gotelli N, Ellison A (2013) A primer of ecological statistics, 2nd edn. Sinauer Associates, SunderlandGoogle Scholar
  21. Grotkopp E, Rejmanek M (2007) High seedling relative growth rate and specific leaf area are traits of invasive species: phylogenetically independent contrasts of woody angiosperms. Am J Bot 94:526–532CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Gustafson DJ, Gibson DJ, Nickrent DL (2004) Competitive relationships of Andropogon gerardii (Big Bluestem) from remnant and restored native populations and select cultivated varieties. Funct Ecol 18:451–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kemp PR, Williams GJ (1980) A physiological basis for niche separation between Agropyron smithii (C3) and Bouteloua gracilis (C4). Ecology 61:846–858. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kwit C, Stewart CN (2012) Gene flow matters in switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.), a potential widespread biofuel feedstock. Ecol Appl 22:3–7CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Lavergne S, Molofsky J (2007) Increased genetic variation and evolutionary potential drive the success of an invasive grass. Proc Natl Acad Sci 104:3883–3888CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Lemus R, Brummer EC, Moore KJ et al (2002) Biomass yield and quality of 20 switchgrass populations in southern Iowa, USA. Biomass Bioenerg 23:433–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lesica P, Allendorf FW (1999) Ecological genetics and the restoration of plant communities: mix or match? Restor Ecol 7:42–50. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mangla S, Sheley RL, James JJ (2011) Field growth comparisons of invasive alien annual and native perennial grasses in monocultures. J Arid Environ 75:206–210. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Missaoui AM, Fasoula VA, Bouton JH (2005) The effect of low plant density on response to selection for biomass production in switchgrass. Euphytica 142:1–12. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mitchell RB, Vogel KP (2016) Grass invasion into switchgrass managed for biomass energy. Bioenergy Res 9:50–56. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mitchell RB, Schmer MR, Anderson WF et al (2016) Dedicated energy crops and crop residues for bioenergy feedstocks in the central and eastern USA. Bioenergy Res 9:384–398. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Palik DJ, Snow AA, Stottlemyer AL et al (2016) Relative performance of non-local cultivars and local, wild populations of switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) in competition experiments. PLoS ONE. PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Perrin R, Vogel K, Schmer M, Mitchell R (2008) Farm-scale production cost of switchgrass for biomass. BioEnergy Res 1:91–97. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Platenkamp GAJ, Shaw RG (1993) Environmental and genetic maternal effects on seed characters in Nemophila menziesii. Evolution 47:540–555CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Raghu S, Anderson RC, Daehler CC et al (2006) Adding biofuels to the invasive species fire? Science 80(313):1742–14752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rose LW, Das MK, Fuentes RG, Taliaferro CM (2007) Effects of high- vs. low-yield environments on selection for increased biomass yield in switchgrass. Euphytica 156:407–415. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Simberloff D (2008) Invasion biologists and the biofuels boom: cassandras or colleagues? Weed Sci 56:867–872CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Simmonds NW (1991) Selection for local adaptation in a plant breeding programme. Theor Appl Genet 82:363–367CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Smart AJ, Moser LE (1999) Switchgrass seedling development as affected by seed size. Agron J 91:335–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Stanton ML (1984) Seed variation in wild radish: effect of seed size on components of seedling and adult fitness. Ecology 65:1105–1112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service (2011) Fact sheet for release of cave-in-rock switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.)Google Scholar
  42. van Kleunen M, Weber E, Fischer M (2010) A meta-analysis of trait differences between invasive and non-invasive plant species. Ecol Lett 13:235–245. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Vange V, Heuch I, Vandvik V (2004) Do seed mass and family affect germination and juvenile performance in Knautia arvensis? A study using failure-time methods. Acta Oecol 25:169–178. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Vogel KP, Haskins FA, Gorz HJ et al (1991) Registration of “Trailblazer” switchgrass. Crop Sci 31:1388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Vogel KP, Mitchell RB, Casler MD, Sarath G (2014) Registration of “Liberty” switchgrass. J Plant Regist. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Agronomy and Plant GeneticsUniversity of MinnesotaSaint PaulUSA
  2. 2.United States Department of Agriculture- Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Dairy Forage Research CenterMadisonUSA
  3. 3.Department of Ecology, Evolution and BehaviorUniversity of MinnesotaSaint PaulUSA

Personalised recommendations