You are
here

Inside This Issue

• Hybrid willows provide renewable energy for greenhouse growers in Petrolia
• Poplar genomics to poplar production: Bridging the gap between science and industry
• Herbicide Working Group - What's new?
• Farewell from Sandra Williams
• In Memoriam: Bob Gambles
• Lontrel 360 (Clopyralid), a newly registered herbicide for poplar growers

Version française

Newsletter in PDF format (2.09 MB)
Version française (2.24 MB)

Hybrid willows provide renewable energy for greenhouse growers in Petrolia

Cheryl Hendrickson
LandSaga Biogeographical, New Hamburg, Ontario
Phone: 519 662-9754
E-mail: hendrickson@landsaga.com
www.landsaga.com

History was made again in Petrolia, the birthplace of the world’s oil industry, as the first high biomass hybrid willows were planted to heat greenhouse ranges, promising independence for one grower from the fuel that made this area famous.

With yields of over 90 GJ/acre/yr, at $6-8/GJ at today’s prices, the wood to energy crop can provide a level of independence from fossil fuel use, not to mention lower costs overall. Like other greenhouse growers in search of heating alternatives in the face of rising energy prices, Jack and Christine Graydanus of Enniskillen Pepper Company installed a biomass burner system which currently uses oat hull pellets to heat their 6 acre greenhouse range. The Company installed test plots this spring of fast growing hybrid willows as a fuel source in a nearby field which will determine the production rate per acre, and provide a chipped product for experimentation in the existing burner system. The wood has a high btu content (over 18 GJ per ton), and dries fairly quickly compared to denser hardwoods.

The system of growing high biomass hybrid willows that can be repeatedly harvested in three year rotations over a 25 year period is known as short rotation intensive coppice (SRIC). While new to Ontario, SRIC is widely practiced in Sweden, where hybrid willow is planted for energy and for the treatment of municipal solid waste, which is applied as a fertilizer. Over 40,000 acres are currently in production in Sweden, which has well developed growing and harvesting technologies.

Hybrid willows are specially bred for high biomass production. Currently, LandSaga Biogeographical in New Hamburg, ON, is the only commercial supply of hybrid willows in Canada. Last year LandSaga supplied the Canadian Forest Service with hybrid willows for renewable energy demonstration plantings across the prairie provinces.

Hybrid willows are typically planted in mid April and May, using 25 cm long “cuttings” which are sections of tree stem up to 2 cm in diameter. Planted with only 2 buds above ground in formal rows on disked land, cuttings take advantage of early moisture and develop roots and shoots instantly. Some varieties can expect to see 2 meters of growth in one year. Once established, the plantation can be harvested repeatedly, with 1-3m of regrowth in one season after harvest.

All first year growth is removed after the first fall to encourage the willows to produce multiple stems in place of the one. The first harvest for biomass fuel will occur in 2008 and every three years after for the next 25 years or longer. Once the plantation is established, there are no major operating expenses other than harvesting. Weed management in the first two seasons is critical, but otherwise, no other inputs are necessary. However, willows will show increased growth with nutrient enhancement, and experiments are now being set up to determine the extent of growth enhancement with poultry manure topdressing.

According to the 2001 Census, Canada has 1836 ha of greenhouses, 50 percent of which are located in Ontario and increasing yearly. Heating all of the greenhouses in Ontario with willow biomass alone could replace dependence on over 37 million GJ of fossil fuel energy per year. Biomass plantations also have value in providing carbon credits for achieving Kyoto protocol for greenhouse gas emittors, as the root systems are permanent carbon sinks. Although some farmers are reluctant to plant trees in a field, the high value of the crop for heating purposes starts to make it very attractive.

Poplar genomics to poplar production: Bridging the gap between science and industry

Barb Thomas and Jim Richardson
Poplar Council of Canada

Canada has a tremendous poplar natural resource. Recent forest inventories estimate the scale of this resource at 4 billion m3 on more than 160 million ha, of which about 28 million ha are stands with the genus Populus as the predominant species. Aspen is the most widely dispersed tree species in North America and is the cornerstone of many pulp and oriented-strandboard mills in Canada. Yet, the forest industry in Canada is facing an economic crisis and many mills are closing. At the same time, the complete genome sequence of black cottonwood, one of our most important Populus species, has been assembled by an international consortium, including Canadian scientists supported by Genome Canada. Black cottonwood is only the third plant species in the world to achieve this status. Sequencing of the poplar genome has opened a wealth of opportunities to understand and improve poplars. However, considerable resources will be required to pursue these possibilities and new and continuing financial, academic, and industrial collaborations across traditional partnership boundaries will need to be forged.

In particular there is a need to bring together the two seemingly-disparate groups represented by the forest industry and the genomics research community. With the help of government, an alignment of resources with the separate and shared research needs of these communities at both the regional and national levels could be achieved. Such a collaborative approach will allow us to find new ways of doing business and thus ultimately to sustain our forest industry. The size of the poplar resource, and the years of field trials and data enable us to benefit from the synergies of an integrated partnership between tree breeders, silviculture researchers, genomics experts and policy makers. Yet, despite the far-reaching benefits, there are fundamental differences between the key players that have made it very difficult to achieve the level of active exchange and collaboration that would allow synergies to develop and produce concrete solutions to fundamental industrial challenges.

The basic challenges involve communication and resources. To enhance the relationships, steps have been taken to assist each community to understand the other’s ‘culture’, to develop joint goals and objectives and to build an ongoing interface mechanism. Discussions between the two communities hosted by the Poplar Council of Canada (PCC) have suggested that progress might be made by focusing on the needs of each community that can be met by the other, rather than focusing on the differences. Other scientific disciplines, including silviculture, pathology, physiology, biochemistry and ecology, also need to be integrated into this collaborative effort in order to meet the needs of industry, policy makers and society most effectively and efficiently.

Due to the long time-lines often encountered when working with trees, each party in this collaborative effort would benefit greatly from a long-term funding source with an effective user - researcher interface as discussed above. When new poplar material is available for deployment, or biotechnological tools are available to assist with screening of the material, funding must be readily available and the government and policy environment must also be in place to support and promote its use.

There are two main directions possible for genomics research in the context of poplar production and industrial utilization. The first is development of new tools with currently unknown practical applications. The second goes beyond scientific publication of the technology to integrated operational application. These two directions for future research should ideally complement each other. Current molecular genetic tools must be used to their best advantage today for selected desired tree characteristics and applied at the most appropriate phase in a breeding, testing and selection program. Where many of the new tools will eventually lead in terms of practical application is unknown, and while it is likely that their development will continue with or without the participation of the potential end-users, communication between basic researchers and potential end-users during the development will help ensure their useful application.

Integration of the communities may need to be facilitated by an effective organization which can help bring together the different elements. The PCC is well suited to provide such an organizational structure, particularly at the national level. Its members include most of the professional and academic agencies and companies in Canada involved in studying, breeding, growing and industrial utilization of poplar. By organizing widely-attended meetings and workshops aimed at linking its own traditional community of poplar breeders and growers with the poplar genomics community, PCC has demonstrated its commitment and ability to take on this organizational role. In doing so, PCC can work with its membership and partners to raise awareness of these opportunities and in return, gain support for both administrative and technical requirements.

A Genomics to Production workshop organized in Edmonton in April 2005 by the PCC, with the aid of Genome Canada, identified a number of specific steps to foster better cooperation between poplar genomics scientists, breeders, growers and potential funders. Some of these steps have already been taken. Others include working towards establishing a Canadian Poplar Consortium including all key stakeholders, and using the Internet as a communications vehicle to share and discuss priority topics for research and to invite researchers and partners to sign up with expressions of interest.

[This article is adapted from the Executive Summary of a White Paper entitled ‘Poplar Genomics to Poplar Production: Bridging the gap for best use of our resources and knowledge’ by Barb Thomas and Jim Richardson of the PCC, prepared for Genome Canada. The full text of the paper is available elsewhere on this website. Click here to view the paper. The website also contains a number of papers related to the workshop held in Edmonton in April 2005, as well as a useful glossary of terminology for poplar genomics, genetics and utilization.]

Herbicide Working Group - What's New?

Cees van Oosten
Chair, Herbicide Working Group

The Herbicide Working Group (HWG) of the Poplar Council of Canada is facilitating and coordinating efforts to obtain minor use registrations of useful pesticides for use in new and established plantings of Populus species (poplar and aspens) and their hybrids, including short-rotation-intensive-culture (SRIC) Populus crops, seedlings and rooted cuttings. The HWG is dealing mainly with herbicides at the moment. The group’s members are: Al Bertschi (Alberta-Pacific Forest Industries Inc.), Florance Niemi (Daishowa-Marubeni International Ltd.), Larry White (Saskatchewan Forest Centre), Lyle Alspach (Shelterbelt Centre - Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration), Tim Gylander (Weyerhaeuser Company Ltd. - Forestlands) and Cees (“Case”) van Oosten (SilviConsult Woody Crops Technology Inc.), who chairs the group. The HWG has been active for several years now.

Prairie Pesticide Minor Use Consortium (PPMUC)

Three years ago the Poplar Council of Canada took out a membership in the Prairie Pesticide Minor Use Consortium (PPMUC) in Alberta, where we have access to the expertise of Rudy Esau (minor use procurement officer) to assist in the preparation and submission of the application process to obtain minor use herbicide registrations.

• Lontrel 360 (clopyralid)
  The most recent success was the registration of a minor use label expansion for the product Lontrel 360, with the active ingredient clopyralid. This herbicide controls Canada thistle among others. Elsewhere in this newsletter is an article titled ‘Lontrel 360 (clopyralid), a newly registered herbicide for Populus species’, which lists recent experiences with this herbicide. The data used for this registration were made available by Alberta-Pacific Forest Industries Inc., Daishowa-Marubeni International Ltd. and by the Shelterbelt Centre - Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration.


• Poast Ultra (sethoxydim)
  An application for the herbicide Poast Ultra (sethoxydim) was recently submitted to the Pest Management Regulatory Agency - PMRA of Health Canada. Rather than using efficacy and tolerance data, the submission was based on the following rationale:
  
  • Several deciduous tree species are already listed on its label,
  • US reports list it as safe to use over the top of poplars and
  • The active ingredient (a.i.) targets specific enzyme action that is only present in grasses and not in deciduous species.
  
  The PMRA had indicated at the PPMUC annual meeting last February in Taber (AB), which was attended by Cees van Oosten, that it would be possible to obtain a minor use label expansion based on a good rationale. We are hopeful this application will be successful.

Competitive disadvantage & SureGuard® (flumioxazin)

For years growers of minor crops in Canada have complained about the competitive disadvantage they have compared with their US counterparts in getting new pesticides registered in Canada for use on minor crops. Chemical companies are not prepared to spend the time and effort to register new pesticides for minor uses, such as poplar, in a small market like Canada. The registration process for new pesticides is quite involved and takes a substantial amount of funds to complete. To alleviate the competitive disadvantage Canadian growers of minor crops (including poplar crops) face, the Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) of Health Canada initiated a program ‘competitive disadvantage’ to consider a form of registration of active ingredients that are not registered in Canada, but are in the US.

• SureGuard® (flumioxazin)
  The HWG submitted the active ingredient flumioxazin through Doug Billett (Provincial Minor Use Coordinator with Saskatchewan Agriculture and Food) for consideration. Flumioxazin is the active ingredient (a.i.) in the product SureGuard® (EPA Reg No. 59639-120 - US registration), made by Valent Professional Products. This herbicide can be used as a pre- and post-emergent herbicide with Populus species in the US. Rudy Esau (PPMUC) recently reported that: “The active (ingredient) flumioxazin has been identified as a potential solution for a number of crops including potato and strawberry. The manufacturer has supported these and other potential uses of flumioxazin and plans to register the product in Canada.” The HWG will have to submit an application to get this herbicide registered.


• Fungicides for leaf diseases
  Larry White identified the need for poplar growers to have access to fungicides to deal with several leaf diseases, especially during the establishment period of poplar, and has made some enquiries with a specialist in Saskatchewan. The plan was to include one or more fungicides under the PMRA initiative of ‘competitive disadvantage’; however, the contacted specialist was unable to reply by the very tight deadline. We still have this as an active request. Several fungicides are already registered for use in Canada on poplar to deal with diseases such as Marssonina leaf spot (Marssonina brunnea & Marssonina populi) and Septoria leaf spot (Septoria musiva & Septoria populicola). There are no fungicide registrations for Melampsora rusts species or for Venturia leaf blight (Venturia spp.); clearly these two fungi are of greater concern at the moment. There is no known fungicide that controls Septoria stem cankers (Septoria musiva).

Shelterbelt herbicides - potential for SRIC poplar crops

In 2005 the HWG made several presentations on intensive crop management of poplar, so-called short-rotation-intensive-culture (SRIC) poplar. One presentation was made to the PMRA in Ottawa, with subsequent presentations to the Provincial Minor Use Coordinators (PMUC) of all but the Atlantic Provinces and Quebec. The PMRA has accepted our definition of SRIC poplar as an agronomic crop, grown on farmland. This is a significant development, as it sets it apart from forestry uses which will ease the registration process. This has been an advantage in an initiative taken by Doug Billet, the PMUC for Saskatchewan Agriculture and Food, who has applied to obtain minor use label expansions for several of the ‘shelterbelt poplar’ herbicides that are currently not available to poplar crop growers. This initiative was undertaken in close cooperation with the HWG. Letters of support were obtained from the respective chemical companies and the formal application was submitted recently.

1. Roundup WeatherMax with Transorb 2 Technology Liquid Herbicide (PCP 27487) – active ingredient: glyphosate (Monsanto Canada Inc.);
2. Vantage Plus Max Herbicide Solution (PCP 27615) – active ingredient: glyphosate (Dow AgroSciences Canada Inc.);
3. Treflan E.C. Herbicide (PCP 23933) – active ingredient: trifluralin (Dow AgroSciences Canada Inc.);
4. Amitrol 240 Liquid Herbicide (PCP 25684) – active ingredient: amitrol (Nufarm Agriculture Inc.);
5. Lorox L Herbicide (PCP 16279) – active ingredient: linuron (E.I. du Pont Canada Company.);
6. Sencor Solupak 75 DF Herbicide (PCP 20968) – active ingredient: metribuzin (Bayer CropScience Inc.);
7. Sencor 480 F Herbicide (PCP 26280) – active ingredient: metribuzin (Bayer CropScience Inc.);
8. Sencor 75 DF Herbicide (PCP 17242) – active ingredient: metribuzin (Bayer CropScience Inc.).

In 2005 the HWG coordinated four Goal trials, one each in Alberta and Saskatchewan and two in Ontario. The trial in Alberta was funded by Daishowa-Marubeni International Ltd., Alberta-Pacific Forest Industries Inc. and the Western Boreal Aspen Corp., the Saskatchewan trial by the Saskatchewan Forest Centre and the Ontario trials by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. Adequate control of weeds was achieved without any crop injury using an application rate that was two to four times higher than the currently registered application rate in Canada for use on onions, strawberries and raspberries. It is noteworthy that the product is registered in the US for use on poplar at the rates we have requested.

The PMRA argued that the Canadian registration for onions, strawberries and raspberries was based on adequate weed control at the currently registered rate that we have deemed too low. In order to obtain registration in Canada for this product at our requested application rates, the PMRA requested a second batch of Goal trials to substantiate the efficacy claims. These new trials are funded by and were established under supervision of Agriculture Canada in Saskatchewan (Saskatchewan Forest centre), Alberta (Alberta-Pacific Forest Industries Inc.) and Ontario (two trials by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources). The preliminary results in Alberta and Saskatchewan by the start of August already show that the currently registered application rate (the low rate) in Canada is inadequate. The results are due in November 2006.

Farewell from Sandra Williams

Goodbye…..

Recently I began working for the Canadian Forest Service on a full-time permanent basis, therefore it is time for me to say goodbye to the members and associates of the Poplar Council of Canada. I have had the opportunity of seeing many interesting presentations at conferences and field tours and it has been a pleasure to meet many poplar people from Canada, the USA and around the globe. Working with the PCC has been a valuable learning experience which I won’t soon forget.

For several months now Lisa Bowker has been hired on as Executive Secretary to the PCC. Lisa has worked with the CFS for a number of years in various capacities. She is a very capable and valuable resource for the PCC as the Council continues to grow and evolve. I encourage you to assist Lisa in her responsibilities by sending in lots of articles for the newsletter!

In Memoriam - Bob Gambles

Bob gained his PhD in wood science at the University of Toronto and held a position there as a research assistant for a number of years before his time became dedicated primarily to IEA Bioenergy as well as to PCC, as assistant and ‘right-hand man’ to Dr. Zsuffa. His quiet efficiency, skilful organization and attention to detail, combined with a broad knowledge of forestry, were a valuable asset to the development and management of the Poplar Council during its formative years. Following his resignation as Executive Secretary in 1991 and subsequent retirement from IEA in 1997, Bob devoted his time to his hobbies, particularly bird-watching, and to assisting his wife Susan in her work as Institute Secretary of the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants. We extend our sympathy to Susan.

Lontrel 360 (Clopyralid), a newly registered herbicide for poplar growers

Cees van Oosten
Chair, Herbicide Working Group

The Pest Management Regulatory Agency - PMRA of Health Canada recently approved the herbicide Lontrel 360 (PCP # 23545) for use in new and established short rotation intensive culture (so-called SRIC) crops of poplar (Populus) species and their hybrids. Poplar refers to all species of Populus.

Lontrel 360 (a Group 4 herbicide) is a post-emergent herbicide that can be sprayed while the trees are actively growing. The active ingredient clopyralid is a synthetic auxin, which disrupts plant cell growth in the newly forming stems and leaves, and affects protein synthesis and normal cell division, leading to malformed growth and tumours. The main target weed is Canada thistle (best results are obtained when Canada thistle is in the rosette to pre-bud stage of growth). Other labelled weeds are scentless chamomile, wild buckwheat, perennial sow-thistle (top growth control), common groundsel and volunteer alfalfa. For satisfactory weed control, the recommended rates are 0.56 - 0.83 L/ha of product; however, this herbicide can and does affect some hybrid poplar clones and the effect can differ substantially from clone to clone. Any impact will be temporary. The product label states this in the form of the following warning:

The maximum labelled rate is 0.83 L/ha of product, applied once per year. Although this rate worked fine for the clone Assiniboine in this instance, without ill effects, it may be too high for other poplar clones. For instance, the rate of 0.42 L/ha was reported effective in one trial to control weeds without impacting the clone. Only temporary and minor cupping of leaves was noted at 0.56 L/ha for most clones, which is considered a good rate for control without crop injury. At rates closer to 0.83 L/ha it was observed that young poplar stems started to grow horizontally for a while and lay flat on the ground.

Some clones are much less sensitive and have already outgrown the injury.

All these symptoms will disappear over time and normal growth will resume. To avoid these symptoms, especially the laying flat of the stems, it is strongly recommended to do some testing by clone before applying this herbicide at a larger scale, as the herbicide label clearly states.

Proper calibration of field sprayers is also critical to avoid an over-application of the herbicide. Mixing and agitation instructions on the label should be followed to avoid a higher concentration of herbicide ending up in the spray boom at the start of the application; this could cause unintended crop injury.

Of four clones observed recently in Saskatchewan, it appears that clones Walker and Brooks 6 (a.k.a. Green Giant) are more sensitive to Lontrel injury than clones Hill and Northwest. The clone Walker appeared to be the most sensitive and some of the symptoms showed a loss of apical dominance and stunted cupped leaves. The clone Hill appeared to be the least sensitive to Lontrel 360.

Timing of spraying is also a critical factor in controlling the weeds. When the weeds are sprayed in the flower stage, which is not recommended on the label, there will be some impact on the weeds; however, there appeared to still be lots of viable seed produced. Early spraying could have prevented this.

Thanks to Al Jurgens, Larry White (both Saskatchewan Forest Centre), Al Bertschi (Alberta-Pacific Forest Industries Inc.) and Lyle Alspach (Shelterbelt Centre – Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration (PFRA) for sharing information, hosting a field inspection and for the review of this article.

Home | Members | About PCC | Contact PCC | Publications | Links

Copyright © 2004 Poplar Council of Canada

Last edit: 2007-02-28