Search

Menu
Search
in Ecology

Biomass formation and yield performance in diverse multicrops and their potential for biofuel use in short-growing boreal climate conditions

96 Views


Abstract

Herbaceous plant biomass is an important resource for energy production and an effective strategy to ensure energy supply independence. Growing agricultural plant mixtures (multicrops) contributes to increasing biomass yields, enhancing farm biodiversity, improving soil health, and promoting environmental sustainability. However, most crop mixtures have not been studied at all. For this reason, stationary field experiment was conducted from 2020 to 2022 at Vytautas Magnus University, Agriculture Academy, Kaunas reg., Lithuania. The aim of the study was to evaluate the development and productivity of maize, industrial hemp and faba bean single crops and its binary and ternary mixtures, as well as the related energy and environmental aspects of the applied agrotechnologies, under short growing season conditions. Faba bean ecosystem services improved maize and industrial hemp growth in mixtures, increasing plant height by 14%, leaf assimilation area by 24%, and chlorophyll index by 19%, indicating enhanced nitrogen availability and photosynthetic activity in companion crops. Although biomass of individual species decreased in more diverse mixtures, total plot biomass increased, with the ternary maize–hemp–faba bean crop producing 4–8 times more dried biomass than single crops in the first year. The ternary system achieved the highest Comprehensive evaluation index (CEI = 4.54) and the greatest net energy yield (367,668 MJ ha⁻1) despite higher fuel consumption (103.3 L ha⁻1). Pellets produced from ternary biomass met quality standards (density 1238 kg m⁻3, ash 6%, ash shrinkage temperature 1042 °C), while Life cycle assessment showed lower environmental impacts for mixed-crop biomass compared with single maize crop (29.1 kg CO₂ eq GJ⁻1). Overall, diversified cropping systems demonstrate strong potential for sustainable biomass production and environmentally efficient bioenergy generation.

Data availability

Described data and materials are available from the corresponding author upon request. The methodology for the comprehensive assessment and a detailed calculation example is provided in our previous article Kimbirauskienė R, Sinkevičienė A, Švereikaitė A, Romaneckas K. The Complex Effect of Different Tillage Systems on the Faba Bean Agroecosystem. Plants. 2024; 13(4):513. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13040513, Supplementary materials, Table S1. The meteorological indicators presented in the article were obtained from the Lithuanian Hydrometeorological Service, Kaunas Meteorological Station. [https://www.meteo.lt/en/organization/structure-and-contacts/contacts/] in Supplementary materials, Figure 2. Data on main characteristics of grown multi crop solid fuel pellets was referred from Petlickaitė, R., Jasinskas, A., Domeika, R., Pedišius, N., Lemanas, E., Praspaliauskas, M., Kukharets, S. Evaluation of the Processing of Multi-Crop Plants into Pelletized Biofuel and Its Use for Energy Conversion, Processes. 11(2), 421, https://doi.org/10.3390/pr11020421 (2023) in Supplementary materials, Table 3.

References

  1. Oishy, M. N. et al. Unravelling the effects of climate change on the soil-plant-atmosphere interactions: A critical review. SEH https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seh.2025.100130 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Erdiwansyah, A. G. et al. Prospects for renewable energy sources from biomass waste in Indonesia. Case Stud. Chem. Environ. Eng. 10, 100880. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscee.2024.100880 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Roy, R. et al. Steam explosion treated biomass as a renewable fuel source: A review from collection to combustion. Fuel 378, 132883. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2024.132883 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Licata, M. et al. A comparative study to assess the production of two oilseed crops (Brassica carinata A. Braun and Carthamus tinctorius L.) and the energy potential of their agricultural biomass residues. Heliyon 10(22), e38654. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e38654 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Jasinskas, A., Petlickaitė, R., Praspaliauskas, M., Romaneckas, K., & Sinkevičienė, A. Impact of ash obtained after multi-crop pellet burning on spring barley fertilization. In Engineering for Rural Development: 23rd International Scientific Conference, ERDev 2024-Proceedings. Latvia University of Life Sciences and Technologies, 23, pp. 644–649 (2024).

  6. Muthulakshmi, C., Sivaranjani, R. & Selvi, S. Modification of sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) for Triacylglycerol accumulation in plant biomass for biofuel applications. Biotechnol. Rep. 32, e00668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.btre.2021.e00668 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Wang, T. et al. From intercropping to monocropping: The effects of Pseudomonas strain to facilitate nutrient efficiency in peanut and soil. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 219, 109378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2024.109378 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Kumar, R. K. S., Sasikumar, R. & Dhilipkumar, T. Exploiting agro-waste for cleaner production: A review focusing on biofuel generation, bio-composite production, and environmental considerations. J. Clean. Prod. 435, 140536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.140536 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Alcon, F. et al. Cost benefit analysis of diversified farming systems across Europe: Incorporating non-market benefits of ecosystem services. Sci. Total Environ. 912, 169272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.169272 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hashakimana, L., Tessema, T., Niyitanga, F., Cyamweshi, A. R. & Mukuralinda, A. Comparative analysis of monocropping and mixed cropping systems on selected soil properties, soil organic carbon stocks, and simulated maize yields in drought-hotspot regions of Rwanda. Heliyon 9, e19041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e19041 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Léonidas, H. et al. Monocropping vs mixed cropping systems under a changing climate: Smallholder farmers’ perceptions and farm profitability in Eastern Rwanda. Environ. Sustain. Indic. 24, 100527. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indic.2024.100527 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Su, B., Liu, X., Cui, L., Xiang, B. & Yang, W. Suppression of weeds and increases in food production in higher crop diversity planting arrangements: A case study of relay intercropping. Crop Sci. 58(4), 1729–1739. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2017.11.0670 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Tariq, A. et al. Combining different species in restoration is not always the right decision: Monocultures can provide higher ecological functions than intercropping in a desert ecosystem. J. Environ. Manag. 357, 120807. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.120807 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Chimonyo, V. G. P., et al. Chapter 18 – Yield and water use gaps in cereal multicrop systems in sub-Saharan Africa under climate change. Food Processing Technology. Principles and Practice. A volume in Woodhead Publishing Series in Food Science, Technology and Nutrition, p. 313–329 (2021).

  15. Vanino, S. et al. A comprehensive assessment of diversified cropping systems on agro-environmental sustainability in three Mediterranean long-term field experiments. Eur. J. Agron. 140, 126598. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2022.126598 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Mamimin, C., O-Thong, S. & Reungsang, A. Enhancing biogas production from hemp biomass residue through hydrothermal pretreatment and co-digestion with cow manure: Insights into methane yield, microbial communities, and metabolic pathways. J. Environ. Manag. 370, 123039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.123039 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Vávrová, K. et al. Economic evaluation of hemp’s (Cannabis sativa) residual biomass for production of direct energy or biochar. Fuel 329, 125435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2022.125435 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Salentijn, E. M. J., Zhang, Q., Amaducci, S., Yang, M. & Trindade, L. M. New developments in fiber hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) breeding. Ind. Crops Prod. 68, 32–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2014.08.011 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Eaker, J. T. Influence of industrial hemp on soil health parameters in a Kentucky cropping system. Theses and Dissertations—Plant and Soil Sciences. https://doi.org/10.13023/etd.2025.425 (2025).

  20. Small, E. & Marcus, D. Hemp: A new crop with new uses for North America. Trends Plant Sci. 7(8), 409–415. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1360-1385(02)02344-0 (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Clarke, R. C. & Merlin, M. D. Cannabis: Evolution and ethnobotany (University of California Press, 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Global hemp production and use: Trends and statistics. FAO, https://www.fao.org/statistics/en (2019).

  23. Grabowska, L., Rebarz, M. & Chudy, M. Breeding and cultivation of industrial hemp in Poland. Herba Pol. 55(3), 243–251 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Pancaldi, F., Salentijn, E. M. J. & Trindade, L. M. From fibers to flowering to metabolites: Unlocking hemp (Cannabis sativa) potential with the guidance of novel discoveries and tools. J. Exp. Bot. 76(1), 109–123. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erae405 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Chaowana, P. et al. Utilization of hemp stalk as a potential resource for bioenergy. Mat. Sci. En. Tech. 7, 19–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mset.2023.07.001 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Tripathi, M. et al. Conversion technologies for valorization of hemp lignocellulosic biomass for potential biorefinery applications. Sep. Purif. Technol. 320, 124018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2023.124018 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  27. Statistics Lithuania. Agricultural statistics 2024. Official Statistics Portal, https://osp.stat.gov.lt/services-portlet/pub-edition-file?id=43060 (2024).

  28. Kaur, G. & Kaur, P. Multi-dimensional maize biomass utilization: Mitigating existing agro-waste by meaningful value addition. J. Environ. Manag. 320, 126232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2025.126232 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Kamusoko, R. & Mukumba, P. Valorization of maize stover into biogas for heat and power generation: A South African perspective. Fermentation 11(6), 338. https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation11060338 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Gesteiro, N. et al. Breeding dual-purpose maize: Grain production and biofuel conversion of the stover. Agronomy 13(5), 1352. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13051352 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Jindo, K. et al. Assessment of trade-off balance of maize stover use for bioenergy and soil erosion mitigation in Western Kenya. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 9, 1409457. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2025.1409457 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  32. Allito, B. B. et al. Legume-Rhizobium specificity effect on nodulation, biomass production and partitioning of faba bean (Vicia faba L.). Sci. Rep. 11, 3678. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-83235-8 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  33. Serafin‑Andrzejewska, M., Falkiewicz, A., Wojciechowski, W. & Kozak, M. Yield and seed quality of faba bean (Vicia faba L. var. minor) as a result of symbiosis with nitrogen‑fixing bacteria. Agriculture 15(9), 960. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15090960 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Denton, M. D., Pearce, D. J. & Peoples, M. B. Nitrogen contributions from faba bean (Vicia faba L.) reliant on soil rhizobia or inoculation. Plant Soil 365(1), 363–374. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-012-1393-2 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  35. Gómez, L. D. et al. Valorising faba bean residual biomass: Effect of farming system and planting time on the potential for biofuel production. Biomass Bioenerg. 107, 227–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2017.10.019 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  36. Jasinskas, A., et al. Corn, Hemp and Bean Multi-Crop Biomass Pellets and/or Fertilizer. Patent LT6998B. Available online: https://search.vpb.lt/pdb/patent/dossier/48325/text (2022).

  37. IUSS Working Group WRB. World Reference Base for Soil Resources: International soil classification system for naming soils and creating legends for soil maps 4th edn. (Austria, 2022).

    Google Scholar 

  38. Romaneckas, K. et al. Short-term impact of multi-cropping on some soil physical properties and respiration. Agron. 12, 141. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12010141 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  39. Romaneckas, K., Švereikaitė, A., Kimbirauskienė, R., Sinkevičienė, A. & Balandaitė, J. The energy and environmental evaluation of maize, hemp and faba bean multi-crops. Agronomy 13, 2316. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13092316 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  40. Jolliffe, I. T. & Cadima, J. Principal component analysis: A review and recent developments. Philos. Trans. R Soc. Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 374, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2015.0202 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  41. Allego, D. L. & Gonzaga, A. B. Jr. Agronomic and carbon productivity of corn (Zea mays Linn.) and corn–legume intercropping under conservation agriculture practice system (CAPS). IJRSI. 11(4), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.51244/IJRSI.2024.1104001 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  42. Wondire, Z., Tadele, Y. & Kechero, Y. Effects of maize–lablab intercropping on agronomic traits, forage quality, and economic viability. Discov. Appl. Sci. 7(10), 1220 https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-025-07805-5 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  43. Fisher, J., Bohm, H. & Heβ, J. Maize–bean intercropping yields in Northern Germany are comparable to those of pure silage maize. Eur. J. Agron. 112, 125–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2019.125947 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  44. Hirpa, T. Effect of intercrop row arrangement on maize and haricot bean productivity and the residual soil. GJSFR. 14, 1–9 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  45. Li, Z. et al. The synergistic priming effect of exogenous salicylic acid and H2O2 on chilling tolerance enhancement during maize (Zea mays L.) seed germination. Front. Plant Sci. 8, 1153. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.01153 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  46. Balandaitė, J. Crop biodiversity influence on multi-crops sustainability, productivity and energy efficiency. Doctoral Thesis. Vytautas Magnus University, Kaunas, Lithuania, (2023).

  47. Balandaitė, J., Romaneckas, K., Kimbirauskienė, R. & Sinkevičienė, A. Comprehensive assessment of the effect of multi-cropping on agroecosystems. Plants 13(10), 1372. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13101372 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  48. Li, Y. et al. Maize–soybean relay cropping increases soybean yield synergistically by extending the post-anthesis leaf stay-fresh period and accelerating grain filling. Crop J. 11(6), 1921–1930. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cj.2023.05.011 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  49. Yang, Z. et al. GmPTF1 modifies root architecture responses to phosphate starvation primarily through regulating GmEXPB2 expression in soybean. Plant J. 107, 525–543. https://doi.org/10.1111/tpj.15307 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  50. Yang, H. et al. Yield photosynthesis and leaf anatomy of maize in inter- and mono-cropping systems at varying plant densities. Crop J. 10, 893–903 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  51. Corre-Hellou, G., Fustec, J. & Crozat, Y. Interspecific competition for soil N and its interaction with N2 fixation, leaf expansion and crop growth in pea–barley intercrops. Plant Soil 282, 95–208 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  52. Wu, Y. et al. Combining modelling and experiment to quantify light interception and inter row variability on intercropped soybean in strip intercropping. Eur. J. Agron. 164, 127508. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2025.127508 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  53. Peñafiel–Sandova, Z. B. Effect of urea on lead absorption in corn (Zea mays L), spinach (Spinacia olerácea L.) and cabbage (Brassica olerácea L.). Agron. Colomb. 38(2), 205–217. https://doi.org/10.15446/agron.colomb.v38n2.85082 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  54. Corre-Hellou, G., Hauggaard-Nielsen, H. & Jensen, E. S. Intercropping winter wheat with pea: Effects on growth, nitrogen uptake and chlorophyll content. Field Crops Res. 95(2–3), 347–358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2005.04.007 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  55. Pierre, J. F. et al. Effect of maize–legume intercropping on maize physio-agronomic parameters and beneficial insect abundance. Sustainability 14(19), 12385. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912385 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  56. Stoltz, E. & Nadeau, E. Effects of intercropping on yield, weed incidence, forage quality and soil residual N in organically grown forage maize (Zea mays L.) and faba bean (Vicia faba L.). Field Crops Res. 169, 21–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2014.09.004 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  57. Shtaya, M. J. Y. et al. Effects of crop mixtures on rust development on faba bean grown in Mediterranean climates. Crop Prot. 146, 105686. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2021.105686 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  58. Streit, J., Meinen, C., Nelson, W. C. D. & Rauber, R. Above and belowground biomass in a mixed cropping system with eight novel winter faba bean genotypes and winter wheat using FTIR spectroscopy for root species discrimination. Plant Soil 36, 141–158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-018-03904-y (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  59. Ciampitti, I. A. et al. Revisiting biological nitrogen fixation dynamics in soybeans. Front. Plant Sci. 12, 727021. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2021.727021 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  60. Nurgi, N., Tana, T., Dechassa, N., Tesso, B. & Alemayehu, Y. Effect of spatial arrangement of faba bean variety intercropping with maize on yield and yield components of the crops. Heliyon 9(6), e16751. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16751 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  61. Dzvene, A. R., Tesfuhunei, W. A., Walker, S. & Ceronio, G. Optimizing the planting time and stand density of sunn hemp intercropping for biomass productivity and competitiveness in a maize-based system. Field Crops Res. 304, 109179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2023.109179 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  62. Bybee-Finley, K. A., Mirsky, S. B. & Ryan, M. R. Crop Biomass not species richness drives weed suppression in warm-season annual grass–legume intercrops in the northeast. Weed Sci. 65, 669–680 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  63. Balandaitė, J. et al. Impact of multi‑cropping on some soil physical properties, nutrient proportion and enzymatic activity. Acta Agric. Scand. Sect. B Soil Plant Sci. https://doi.org/10.1080/09064710.2025.2590236 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  64. Branca, C., Blasi, C. D. & Galgano, A. Experimental analysis about the exploitation of industrial hemp (Cannabis sativa) in pyrolysis. Fuel Process. Technol. 162, 20–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2017.03.028 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  65. Hu, E. et al. Pyrolysis behaviors of corn stover in new two-stage rotary kiln with baffle. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrol. 161, 105398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaap.2021.105398 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  66. Aubin, M. P. et al. Industrial hemp response to nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium fertilization. Crop Forage Turfgrass Manag. 1(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.2134/cftm2015.0159 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  67. Šarauskis, E. et al. Energy balance, costs and CO2 analysis of tillage technologies in maize cultivation. Energy 69, 227–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2014.02.090 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  68. Petlickaitė, R. et al. Evaluation of the processing of multi-crop plants into pelletized biofuel and its use for energy conversion. Processes 11(2), 421. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr11020421 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  69. Petlickaitė, R. et al. Evaluation of multi-crop biofuel pellet properties and the life cycle assessment. Agriculture 14, 1162. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14071162 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The reported work in this article was partially supported by the Ministry of Education, Science and Sports of the Republic of Lithuania and Research Council of Lithuania (LMTLT) under the Program ‘University Excellence Initiative’ Project ‘Development of the Bioeconomy Research Center of Excellence’ (BioTEC), agreement No S-A-UEI-23-14.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Agroecosystems and Soil Sciences, Agriculture Academy, Vytautas Magnus University, Kaunas Reg., Lithuania

    Jovita Balandaitė, Kęstutis Romaneckas, Rasa Kimbirauskienė, Aušra Sinkevičienė & Aušra Marcinkevičienė

  2. Bioeconomy Research Institute, Vytautas Magnus University, Kaunas Reg., Lithuania

    Jovita Balandaitė, Kęstutis Romaneckas, Rasa Kimbirauskienė, Aušra Sinkevičienė & Aušra Marcinkevičienė

Authors

  1. Jovita Balandaitė
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kęstutis Romaneckas
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rasa Kimbirauskienė
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Aušra Sinkevičienė
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Aušra Marcinkevičienė
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization, K.R., J.B.; methodology, K.R., J.B.; software, J.B.; validation, J.B., K.R.; formal analysis, J.B., K.R., A.M.; investigation, J.B., R.K., A.S. and K.R.; resources, J.B, R.K., A.S. and K.R.; data curation, J.B.; writing—original draft preparation, J.B., K.R.; writing—review and editing, K.R., J.B., R.K. and A.S; visualization, J.B., K.R., A.M.; supervision, K.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to
Kęstutis Romaneckas.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1 (download DOCX )

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Balandaitė, J., Romaneckas, K., Kimbirauskienė, R. et al. Biomass formation and yield performance in diverse multicrops and their potential for biofuel use in short-growing boreal climate conditions.
Sci Rep (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-46324-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-46324-0

Keywords

  • Biomass
  • Biofuel pellets
  • Environment
  • Faba bean
  • Industrial hemp
  • Maize
  • Multicrops

Source: Ecology - nature.com

Accelerating coral assisted evolution to keep pace with climate change

Surface water quality and heavy metal assessment in a tropical coastal zone for identifying favorable crop production seasons

This portal is not a newspaper as it is updated without periodicity. It cannot be considered an editorial product pursuant to law n. 62 of 7.03.2001. The author of the portal is not responsible for the content of comments to posts, the content of the linked sites. Some texts or images included in this portal are taken from the internet and, therefore, considered to be in the public domain; if their publication is violated, the copyright will be promptly communicated via e-mail. They will be immediately removed.

Back to Top
Close