Hydrological responses of land use change from cotton (Gossypium hirsutum
L.) to cellulosic bioenergy crops in the Southern High Plains of Texas, USA
YONG CHEN a,b, SRINIVASULU ALE a,*, NITHYA RAJAN b, CRISTINE L.S. MORGAN b,
JONGYOON PARK a
a
Texas A&M AgriLife Research (Texas A&M University System), Vernon, TX, USA
b
Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA.
Supporting Information
Table S1 Simulated management practices for cellulosic bioenergy crops in SWAT
No.
Operations
Description
Irrigated switchgrass and big bluestem (Yimam et al., 2014)
1
Fertilizer Application Parameters (May 1)
FERT_ID
Fertilizer ID
FRT_KG
Amount of fertilizer applied to HRU
2
Begin Growing Season Parameters ( Planting on May 15)
3
Auto-irrigation Parameters (Start date: May 15; End date: November 15)
WSTRS_ID
Water stress identifier
IRR_SCA
Irrigation source
AUTO_WSTRS
Water stress threshold
IRR_EFF
Irrigation efficiency
4
Harvest (only) Parameters (Harvest on November 15)
Dryland switchgrass and big bluestem (Yimam et al., 2014)
1
Fertilizer Application Parameters (May 1)
FERT_ID
Fertilizer ID
FRT_KG
Amount of fertilizer applied to HRU
2
Begin Growing Season Parameters (Planting on May 15)
3
Harvest (only) Parameters (Harvest on November 15)
Irrigated Miscanthus (Lewandowski and Schmidt, 2006; Danalatos et al., 2007)
1
Fertilizer Application Parameters (May 1)
FERT_ID
Fertilizer ID
FRT_KG
Amount of fertilizer applied to HRU
2
Begin Growing Season Parameters ( Planting on May 15)
3
Auto-irrigation Parameters (Start date: May 15; End date: November 15)
WSTRS_ID
Water stress identifier
IRR_SCA
Irrigation source
AUTO_WSTRS
Water stress threshold
IRR_EFF
Irrigation efficiency
4
Harvest (only) Parameters (Harvest on November 15)
Dryland Miscanthus (Lewandowski and Schmidt, 2006; Danalatos et al., 2007)
1
Fertilizer Application Parameters (May 1)
FERT_ID
Fertilizer ID
FRT_KG
Amount of fertilizer applied to HRU
2
Begin Growing Season Parameters (Planting on May 15)
3
Harvest (only) Parameters (Harvest on November 15)
Irrigated biomass sorghum (Yimam et al., 2014; Hao et al., 2014)
1
Fertilizer Application Parameters (May 15)
FERT_ID
Fertilizer ID
FRT_KG
Amount of fertilizer applied to HRU
2
Begin Growing Season Parameters ( Planting on Jun 1)
3
Auto-irrigation Parameters (Start date: Jun 1; End date: October 31)
WSTRS_ID
Water stress identifier
IRR_SCA
Irrigation source
AUTO_WSTRS
Water stress threshold
IRR_EFF
Irrigation efficiency
4
Harvest and Kill Parameters (Kill on October 31)
Dryland biomass sorghum (Yimam et al., 2014; Hao et al., 2014)
1
Fertilizer Application Parameters (May 15)
FERT_ID
Fertilizer ID
FRT_KG
Amount of fertilizer applied to HRU
2
Begin Growing Season Parameters (Planting on Jun 1)
3
Harvest and Kill Parameters (Kill on October 31)
Input data
Urea
270 (kg ha-1)
Default
Plant Water Demand
Shallow Aquifer
0.9
0.80#
Default
Urea
180 (kg ha-1)
Default
Default
Urea
320 (kg ha-1)
Default
Plant Water Demand
Shallow Aquifer
0.9
0.80
Default
Urea
214 (kg ha-1)
Default
Default
Urea
360 (kg ha-1)
Default
Plant Water Demand
Shallow Aquifer
0.9
0.80#
Default
Urea
240 (kg ha-1)
Default
Default
Table S2 Crop growth parameters for all the selected cellulosic bioenergy crops
Parameter
Acronym
Unit
Alamo
Miscanthus ×
switchgrass#
giganteus*
-1
Biomass/energy ratio BIO_E
[(kg ha )/(MJ
41
47
m-2)]
Harvest index
HVSTI
[(kg ha-1)/(kg
1
0.9
ha-1)]
Harvest efficiency
HARVEFF
NA
0.70
0.75ξ
Heat units to maturity - 1800‡
1800‡
℃-day
Maximum leaf area
BLAI
m2/m2
11
6
index
Fraction of growing
FRGRW1
NA
0.1
0.1
season coinciding
with
LAIMX1
First point fraction of LAIMX1
NA
0.1
0.2
BLAI for optimum
growth curve
Max. canopy height
CHTMX
m
3.5
2.5
Max root depth
RDMX
m
3
2.2
Fraction of growing
FRGRW2
NA
0.45
0.2
season coinciding
with
LAIMX2
Second point fraction LAIMX2
NA
0.85
0.95
of
BLAI for optimum
growth curve
Fraction of growing
DLAI
NA
1.1
0.7
season when leaf area
starts declining
Optimal temperature
T_OPT
°C
25
25
Min temperature
T_BASE
°C
8
12
Fraction of nitrogen
CNYLD
(Kg N)/(Kg
0.0035
0.016
in harvested biomass
yield)
Fraction of
CPYLD
(Kg P)/(Kg
0.0003
0.0022
phosphorus in
yield)
harvested biomass
Fraction of nitrogen
BN1
(Kg N)/(Kg
0.01
0.035
in plant at emergence
biomass)
Fraction of nitrogen
BN2
(Kg N)/(Kg
0.0065
0.015
in plant at 0.5
biomass)
maturity
Fraction of nitrogen
BN3
(Kg N)/(Kg
0.0057
0.0038
in plant at maturity
biomass)
Fraction of
BP1
(Kg P)/(Kg
0.0016
0.0014
phosphorus in plant
biomass)
at emergence
Fraction of
BP2
(Kg P)/(Kg
0.0012
0.001
phosphorus in plant
biomass)
at 0.5 maturity
Fraction of
BP3
(Kg P)/(Kg
0.0009
0.0007
phosphorus in plant
biomass)
at maturity
Lower limit of
WSYF
[(kg ha-1)/(kg
1
0.9
harvest index
ha-1)]
Big bluestem#
14
Biomass
sorghum#
33.5
0.9
0.9
0.75ξ
1800‡
3
-1295‡
4
0.05
0.15
0.1
0.05
1
2
0.25
1.5
2
0.5
0.7
0.95
0.35
0.64
25
12
0.016
30
11
0.0199
0.0022
0.0032
0.02
0.044
0.012
0.0164
0.005
0.0128
0.0014
0.006
0.001
0.0022
0.0007
0.0018
0.9
0.9
Min crop factor for
water erosion
Max stomatal
conductance
Vapor pressure
deficit
GSI fraction
corresponding to the
second point on the
stomatal conductance
curve
Rate of decline in
RUE due to increase
in vapor pressure
deficit
Biomass-energy ratio
corresponding to the
2nd point on the
radiation use
efficiency curve
Minimum LAI for
plant during dormant
period
Light extinction
coefficient
Root fraction at
emergence
Root fraction at
maturity
SCS runoff curve
numbers
USLE_C
NA
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.2
GSI
m/s
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
VPDFR
kPa
4
4
4
4
FRGMAX
NA
0.75
0.75
0.75
0.75
WAVP
NA
8.5
8.5
10
8.5
BIOEHI
NA
54 (existing
Alamo
switchgrass
value)**
54
39
36
ALAI_MIN
m2/m2
0
0
0
0
EXT_COEF
NA
0.55
0.33
0.36
0.65
RFR1C
NA
0.87
0.4
0.4
0.4
RFR2C
NA
0.18
0.2
0.2
0.2
A, B, C, D
NA
31, 59, 72, 79
31, 59, 72, 79 31, 59, 72, 79
67, 77, 83, 87
(existing
Alamo
switchgrass
value)**
* Crop parameters obtained from Trybula et al. (2014) field study
#
The default values in the SWAT 2012 crop database or management files
**We used the existing Alamo switchgrass parameters for Miscanthus × giganteus
ξ We used the harvest efficiency value of Shawnee switchgrass obtained from Trybula et al. (2014) field study for
the Alamo switchgrass and big bluestem
‡ Heat units to maturity for Miscanthus × giganteus, Alamo switchgrass, big bluestem, and biomass sorghum were
estimated using the SWAT-PHU program (http://swat.tamu.edu/software/potential-heat-unit-program/)
Fig. S1 Comparison of observed and simulated monthly streamflow at Gauge I during the model
a) calibration and b) validation periods.
Fig. S2 Comparison of observed and simulated monthly streamflow at Gauge II during the
model a) calibration and b) validation periods.
References
Danalatos NG, Archontoulis SV, Mitsios I (2007) Potential growth and biomass productivity of
Miscanthus×giganteus as affected by plant density and N-fertilization in central Greece.
Biomass and Bioenergy, 31, 145-152.
Hao BZ, Xue QW, Bean BW, Rooney WL, Becker JD (2014) Biomass production, water and
nitrogen use efficiency in photoperiod-sensitive sorghum in the Texas High Plains. Biomass
and Bioenergy, 62, 108-116.
Lewandowski I, Schmidt U (2006) Nitrogen, energy and land use efficiencies of miscanthus,
reed canary grass and triticale as determined by the boundary line approach. Biomass and
Bioenergy, 112, 335-346.
Trybula EM, Cibin R, Burks JL, Chaubey I, Brouder SM, Volenec JJ (2014) Perennial
rhizomatous grasses as bioenergy feedstock in SWAT: parameter development and model
improvement. Global Change Biology Bioenergy, doi: 10.1111/gcbb.12210
Yimam YT, Ochsner TE, Kakani VG, Warren JG (2014) Soil moisture dynamics and
evapotranspiration under annual and perennial bioenergy crops. Soil Science Society of
America Journal, 78, 1584-1592.