Sweet Sorghum Improvement

1
Sweet Sorghum Improvement and Production
in Brazil
Consultation on Pro-poor Sweet Sorghum
Development for Bio-ethanol - IFAD November
8-9, 2007
Robert E. Schaffert Embrapa Milho e
Sorgo schaffer_at_cnpms.embrapa.br www.cnpms.embrap
a.br
2
In the late 1970s Brazil initiated a bio-energy
program (Pro-Alcohol) anticipating an energy
crises caused be a shortage of petroleum to meet
Brazil's fuel needs. There was a strong
incentive to develop technology for
micro-distilleries (100L hr-1) and
mini-distilleries (1000L hr-1) Embrapas sweet
sorghum program was developed to provide raw
material for these distilleries. Pilot Projects
were successfully developed in the mid-1980s at
Sete Lagoas, Brasilia, and Pelotas to process
sweet sorghum in micro-distilleries.
3
(No Transcript)
4
Advantages of Using Sweet Sorghum vs. Sugarcane

• Sweet sorghum may be harvested 3 4 months
• after planting
• Sweet sorghum production can be completely
• mechanized
• The sweet sorghum crop can be established
• from seed
• The grain from sweet sorghum can be used as
• food, feed or fuel
• The bagasse from sweet sorghum has a higher
• biological value than the bagasse from
• sugarcane when used as a forage for
  animals
• Sweet sorghum is more water use efficient

5
Sweet Sorghum Sugarcane
Micro- distillary
Other uses
Integrated rural energy system developed at
Embrapa Maize and Sorghum 1980
Integrated Rural Energy System
Developed at
Embrapa Maize and Sorghum
1980
xxxxxxxx
6
Development of Sweet Sorghum Cultivars
Breeding priorities depend upon how the product
will be used

• Panicles removed for food or feed
• Small vs. large panicles
• Juice is extracted from stalks and leaves
• Not feasible to separate leaves and
  stalks
• Juice fermented in micro- and mini-distilleries
• Juice extraction less efficient in
  smaller
• distilleries
• Bagasse used for forage or fuel
• Starch present in sorghum juice and
  stalk
• Biological value of sweet sorghum
  bagasse is
• greater for sweet sorghum than for
  sugarcane
• Tillering vs. Non-tillering to control stalk
  diameter

7
(No Transcript)
8
Industrial Planning
J F M A M
J J A S O N D
Ratoon Harvest Irrigation Required
9

• Establish minimum parameters for determining
  Period of
• Industrial Utilization (PIU - 80 kg
  1t-1 biomass)
• Minimum PIU 30 days

10
(No Transcript)
11
Sweet Sorghum Nomenclature
Average values of brix, total invert sugars, juice extraction, and fiber of selected sweet sorghum varieties grown at Araras, São Paulo, Brazil in 1981. Average values of brix, total invert sugars, juice extraction, and fiber of selected sweet sorghum varieties grown at Araras, São Paulo, Brazil in 1981. Average values of brix, total invert sugars, juice extraction, and fiber of selected sweet sorghum varieties grown at Araras, São Paulo, Brazil in 1981. Average values of brix, total invert sugars, juice extraction, and fiber of selected sweet sorghum varieties grown at Araras, São Paulo, Brazil in 1981. Average values of brix, total invert sugars, juice extraction, and fiber of selected sweet sorghum varieties grown at Araras, São Paulo, Brazil in 1981.
Variety Brix Total invert sugars ( juice) Extraction ( sorghum stalks) Fiber ( sorghum stalk)
Brandes 16.7 14.7 63.2 12.5
Honey 13.0 11.1 73.0 11.6
Sart 14.7 12.4 69.8 14.8
Rio 16.4 14.2 57.6 16.1
MN 1500 14.2 11.4 61.1 18.5
MN 1048 14.1 13.4 56.5 22.0
MN 1030 15.2 10.0 47.6 25.8
MN 4008 10.6 10.5 74.9 12.0
Williams 13.5 12.4 70.5 10.1
MN 4080 14.1 ----- 45.7 26.6
Wray 19.3 16.8 67.5 14.8
Theis 16.4 14.2 71.5 14.8
Redlan 10.5 7.4 67.0 13.6
Tx623 10.8 7.0 64.0 13.6
Source Schaffert and Borgonovi (1980) Source Schaffert and Borgonovi (1980) Source Schaffert and Borgonovi (1980) Source Schaffert and Borgonovi (1980)  
Sweet sorghum variety names that begin with the
letter or sound or R are high sucrose types and
variety names that begin with other letters are
low sucrose types. Redlan and Tx623 are
non-sweet juicy stem female lines.
12
RIO
PIU 32 days
XXX
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx x
The interaction of refractometry Brix and percent
total reduced sugars in the juice and percent
fiber, percent juice extraction, and percent
sugar extraction of sorghum stalks during the
maturity phase for the varieties Rio and Wray
grown in Brazil, (Embrapa Maize and Sorghum)
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
WRAY
PIU 58days
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxx Zzzz
13
(No Transcript)
14
Period for Industrial Utilization
Wray 9 Total sugars
Wray 8 Total sugars
xxxx
Wray PUI 32 days Wray PUE 51 days
xxxxxxxxxx
15
PUI 28 days
The interaction of refractometry Brix and percent
total invert sugars in the juice and percent
fiber, percent juice extraction, and percent
sugar extraction of sorghum stalks during the
maturity phase for the variety Rio grown in
Brazil (Embrapa Maize and sorghum) .
16
Sugar extraction ()
PUI 35 days
The interaction of refractometry Brix and percent
total invert sugars in the juice and percent
fiber, percent juice extraction, and percent
sugar extraction of stalks during the maturity
phase for the variety Brandes grown in Brazil
(Embrapa Maize and Sorghum).
17
CMSXS 623 (Brandes Derivative)
Brix, total sugars (), fiber (), and juice
extraction ()
Sugar extraction ()
PUI 37 days
The interaction of refractometry Brix and percent
total invert sugars in the juice and percent
fiber, percent juice extraction, and percent
sugar extraction of stalks during the maturity
phase for the variety Brandes grown in Brazil
(Embrapa Maize and Sorghum).
Days after planting The interaction of
refractometry Brix and percent total invert
sugars in the juice and percent fiber, percent
juice extraction, and percent sugar extraction of
sorghum stalks during the maturity phase for the
variety CMSXS 623 grown in Brazil (Embrapa Maize
and sorghum).
18
PUI 54 days
The interaction of refractometry Brix and percent
total invert sugars in the juice and percent
fiber, percent juice extraction, and percent
sugar extraction of sorghum stalks during the
maturity phase for the variety Wray grown in
Brazil (Embrapa Maize and sorghum) .
The interaction of refractometry Brix and percent
total invert sugars in the juice and percent
fiber, percent juice extraction, and percent
sugar extraction of stalks during the maturity
phase for the variety Brandes grown in Brazil
(Embrapa Maize and Sorghum).
19
Biomass and Alcohol Production of two new
Cultivars, BR506 and BR507, Compared to Brandes
and Wray
Cultivar Biomass Production (t ha-1) Extracted Sugar Yield (kg 100 kg-1) (t ha-1) Extracted Sugar Yield (kg 100 kg-1) (t ha-1) Alcohol Yield Alcohol Yield Alcohol Yield
Cultivar Biomass Production (t ha-1) Extracted Sugar Yield (kg 100 kg-1) (t ha-1) Extracted Sugar Yield (kg 100 kg-1) (t ha-1) Ideal (L ha-1) 81 Efficient (L ha-1) Relative ( Wray)
Brandes Wray BR506 BR507 47.4 44.6 48.8 52.0 7.2 10.9 9.7 9.6 3.4 4.6 4.7 5.0 2208 2946 3062 3231 1788 2386 2481 2617 75 100 104 110

Embrapa Maize and Sorghum 1986/87
20
(No Transcript)
21
Plant Breeding Strategies and Priorities (cont.)

• Develop high yielding biomass cultivars for
  cellulose conversion
• to bio-energy
• - Identify molecular markers for maturity genes
  Ma5 and Ma6
• to be able to develop
  photosensitive (PS) sorghum biomass
• hybrids

Ma5Ma5ma6ma6 is photo-insensitive (PIS) and
flowers in approximately 60 days regardless of
day length. ma5ma5Ma6Ma6 is photo-insensitive and
flowers in approximately 60 days regardless of
day length. The hybrid between these genotypes,
Ma5ma5Ma6ma6 is photo-sensitive (PS) and floral
initiation is only induced with day lengths less
than 12h and 20min. This can be useful in both
sweet sorghum and biomass sorghum in locations
farther from the equator where there is more
variation in day lengths (McCollum et al.
reported average yield increases of 25 of PS
hybrids over PIS hybrids at Amarillo, Texas).
22
Plant Breeding Strategies and Priorities (cont.)

• Develop high yielding biomass cultivars for
  cellulose conversion
• to bio-energy
• - Identify molecular markers for brown midrib
  low lignin
• genes genes brm-6 and brm-12

Homozygous brm-6 hybrids and brm-12 hybrids have
been reported to reduce lignin content in sorghum
biomass by 50
23
Production Cost of alcohol from sweet sorghum in Brazil in micro-distilleries in November, 1980. Production Cost of alcohol from sweet sorghum in Brazil in micro-distilleries in November, 1980.
Item US
Production Cost /ha 320.00
Cost/t stalks (30 t/ha) 10.67
Cost/t stalks (40 t/ha) 8.00
Cost/t alcohol (45 liter/t and 40 t/ha) 0.22
Cost/t alcohol (59 liter/t and 40 t/ha) 0.20
Cost/t alcohol (68 liter/t and 40 t/ha) 0.17
Source Embrapa Maize and Sorghum, Sete Lagoas, MG, Brazil. Source Embrapa Maize and Sorghum, Sete Lagoas, MG, Brazil.
The price of ethanol today (November 5, 2007) is
about US 0.35 L-1 at the distillery gate
and US 0.75 to 0.90 at the pump, depending on
the distance from distilleries
24
(No Transcript)
25
COELHO SCHAFFERT, 2005
26
Intra-Specific Diversity for Al Tolerance in
Sorghum

• SC283 and SC566 rely on the same locus AltSB for
  Al tolerance
• Genetic basis apparently narrow
• 8 different Al tolerant sources x BR012
• Inheritance study and linkage analysis to
  markers in the AltSB region
• SSR-based phylogenetic analysis

• Al tolerance gene diversity for pyramidation via
  breeding
• Stronger alleles of AltSB
• Different haplotypes at AltSB for candidate gene
  validation
• Foundation for future association tests

27
Desenvolvimento de Sorgo Mais Eficiente na
Aquisição de P

• A identificação e conhecimento das mudanças no
  rhizosfero, mecanismos de aquisição e utilização
  de P facilitarão a manipulação destes parâmetros.
• Não existe conhecimento de parâmetros nos cereais
  correlacionados a eficiência de
  aquisição/utilização de P.

    Grão Grão Resposta Classe
Pedigree Tol Baixa P Alta P ao P  
  Al t/ha t/ha ()  
BR 007B S 1.95 4.86 2.49 IR
SC283 T 2.66 3.29 1.23 E N
BR 005R S 2.74 3.51 1.28 E N
Médio Ensaio   2.16 3.60 1.43  
xx
xxx
Plantas de Sorgo com 21 Dias em Rhizobox

• Tem a necessidade de identificar ou desenvolver
  genótipos com diferenças na habilidade de
  adquirir e utilizar P eficientemente
• Utilizando condições de campo, solução nutritiva,
  e casa de vegetação, identificamos genótipos de
  sorgo contrastantes para aquisição e resposta ao
  P

BR007B
SC 283 P -P
28
Produção diferencial de Sorgoleone em Sorgo
Sorgoleone Production by Various Sorghum
Genotypesa
Sorghum Genotype Root Fresh Wt (RFW) (g) Sorgoleone mg Sorgoleone per unit RFW (mg/g) Purity
RTx433 0.15 0.10 0.67 91.8
RTx7078 0.15 1.80 12.00 98.7
RTx430 0.08 0.30 3.75 94.9
B Redlan 0.15 2.67 17.80 80.2
B Wheatland 0.33 0.83 2.50 78.3
a- three replicates of 25 seedlings each Fonte
Chandrashekhar I, et al. J. Agric. Food Chem.
1996, 44, 1343-1347
Photomicrograph of Sorghum bicolor roots showing
a sorgoleone-rich oily exudate secreted from the
root hairs (Bar80 µm) and b closer view of a
root hair with sorgoleone exuding at the tip
(Bar15 µm). Sorgoleone-rich oil from tip of root
hairs also exudes from secondary roots
originating either from c roots (Bar125 µm) or d
stem (adventitious roots) (Bar350 µm) Fonte
F.E. Dayan, USDA-ARS Natural Products Utilization
Research Unit, P.O. Box 8048, University,
MS 38677, USA
29
Desenvolvimento de Cultivares de Sorgo Forrageiro
de Alta Qualidade (bmr6 bmr6)
Linhagens R bmr6
Linhagens A e B bmr6
Desenvolvimento de novas linhagens bmr6 A/B e R
com tolerância ao múltiplo estresse
A/BTx 635 A/B BR007 A/B CMSXS205 A/B CMSXS206 A/B
BR008 A/B CMSXS156 A/B CMSXS 157
RTx2784 RTx2785 CMSXS912 CMSXS225
30
Final Remarks

• Embrapa has a relative large number (50 -60)
  of sweet sorghum varieties
• available for characterization for
  quality and utilization in developing
• experimental hybrids.
• The variety BR501 (Brandes) is tolerant to Al
  toxicity and is the restorer
• parent in two commercial forage sorghum
  hybrids. Brandes probably
• was selected 25 years ago because it
  was tolerant to Al toxicity.
• Brandes was successfully used in two pilot
  sweet sorghum distilleries in
• Jundiai, SP and Pelotus, RS.
• The proof of concept of sweet sorghum as a
  biofuel source has been
• determined. The next step is an
  economic evaluation for
• competitiveness with other available
  raw materials.
• Embrapa is currently evaluating the return to
  an active research and
• development program with sweet sorghum
  as a source for bio-fuels.

31
Thank You Robert Schaffert Embrapa Maize and
Sorghum reschaffert_at_hotmail.com schaffer_at_cnpms.em
brapa.br Tel [phone]
32
(No Transcript)
33
(No Transcript)
34
(No Transcript)
35
Fiber Increases and Juice Extraction Decreases
with Time
Brandes
Wray
36
Juice Extraction Varies Between Cultivars
37
(No Transcript)
38
(No Transcript)
39
Agricultural and Industrial yields of sweet sorghum in Brazil. Agricultural and Industrial yields of sweet sorghum in Brazil. Agricultural and Industrial yields of sweet sorghum in Brazil. Agricultural and Industrial yields of sweet sorghum in Brazil. Agricultural and Industrial yields of sweet sorghum in Brazil.
Component Component Agricultural Yield Alcohol yield Alcohol yield
    (t/ha) (liter/t) (liter/ha per harvest)
Stalks Range 22 - 66 55 - 85 1210 - 5610
Average 37.7 70 2639
Grain Range 1.4 - 6.6 310 - 370 434 - 2442
Average 2.2 340 748
Total Range 1644 - 8052
Average 3387
Source Schaffert and Borgonovi (1980) Source Schaffert and Borgonovi (1980) Source Schaffert and Borgonovi (1980) Source Schaffert and Borgonovi (1980)  
40
Mean yield of stalk, fermentable sugar, alcohol,
fresh biomass and seed of sweet sorghum in
experiments at the Beijing Botanical Garden
Cultivar Cultivar Cultivar Cultivar Cultivar Cultivar
Theis M-81E Wray Keller Brandes Rio
Stalk (kg/ha) 95 89 76 76 62 52
Fermentable sugar (t/ha) 10.6 9.6 10.3 10.5 6.4 6.2
Alcohol (l/ha) 6 159 5 607 5 981 6 131 3 696 3 617
Fresh material (t/ha) 125 128 106 107 89 82
Seed (kg/ha) 6 674 6 213 1 426 1 960 3 500 2 866
41
(No Transcript)
42
(No Transcript)
43
(No Transcript)
44
Comparison of juice between sweet sorghum and sugarcane in Brazil. Comparison of juice between sweet sorghum and sugarcane in Brazil. Comparison of juice between sweet sorghum and sugarcane in Brazil. Comparison of juice between sweet sorghum and sugarcane in Brazil. Comparison of juice between sweet sorghum and sugarcane in Brazil. Comparison of juice between sweet sorghum and sugarcane in Brazil.
Sweet Sorghum Sweet Sorghum
Trait     Literature National Trials Sugarcane (São Paulo averages)
Juice extraction () Juice extraction () 350 - 600 500 - 700 600 - 800
Retractometer Brix Retractometer Brix 16 - 20 14 - 20. 18 -21
Sucrose ( juice) Sucrose ( juice) 10 -15 8 - 16. 15 - 18
Invert sugars ( juice) Invert sugars ( juice) Invert sugars ( juice) 1 - 4 0.7 - 7.3 0.2 - 1.5
Total invert sugars ( juice) Total invert sugars ( juice) Total invert sugars ( juice) 14 - 20 14 - 18 16 - 19
Source Schaffert and Borgonovi (1980) Source Schaffert and Borgonovi (1980) Source Schaffert and Borgonovi (1980) Source Schaffert and Borgonovi (1980)    
45
(No Transcript)
46
(No Transcript)
47
Sucrose vs. Total sugars
48
Maximum dry matter production and maximum growth rates of several crops. Maximum dry matter production and maximum growth rates of several crops. Maximum dry matter production and maximum growth rates of several crops. Maximum dry matter production and maximum growth rates of several crops. Maximum dry matter production and maximum growth rates of several crops.
Dry Matter Production Maturity Average Growth rate Maximum growth rate
Crop (t/ha) (days) (gm/m2 per day) (gm/m2 per day)
Napier 106 365 26 -----
Sugarcane 70 365 18 38
sugarbeet 47 300 14 31
Forage sorghum 30 120 22 -----
Forage sorghum 43 210 19 -----
Sudangrass 33 160 18 51
Alfafa 36 250 13 23
Bermudagrass 35 230 14 20
Alga 44 - 74 300 15 - 22 28
Source Loomis and Willian (1963) Source Loomis and Willian (1963) Source Loomis and Willian (1963)    
49
National Forage Sorghum Trial - 1986/87 Embrapa Maize and Sorghum National Forage Sorghum Trial - 1986/87 Embrapa Maize and Sorghum National Forage Sorghum Trial - 1986/87 Embrapa Maize and Sorghum National Forage Sorghum Trial - 1986/87 Embrapa Maize and Sorghum National Forage Sorghum Trial - 1986/87 Embrapa Maize and Sorghum National Forage Sorghum Trial - 1986/87 Embrapa Maize and Sorghum National Forage Sorghum Trial - 1986/87 Embrapa Maize and Sorghum National Forage Sorghum Trial - 1986/87 Embrapa Maize and Sorghum National Forage Sorghum Trial - 1986/87 Embrapa Maize and Sorghum National Forage Sorghum Trial - 1986/87 Embrapa Maize and Sorghum National Forage Sorghum Trial - 1986/87 Embrapa Maize and Sorghum    
  Location and Date of Planting   Location and Date of Planting   Location and Date of Planting   Location and Date of Planting   Location and Date of Planting   Location and Date of Planting
Linhares Goiânia Capinópolis Ituiutaba Ituiutaba Ituiutaba Taquari Taquari Cruz Alta S.J. dos Campos Mean Relative
ES GO MG MG MG MG RS RS RS SP Mean
Cultivar 10.12.86 29.12.86 01.12.86 16.12.86 16.12.86 16.12.86 12.12.86 12.12.86 04.12.86 09.01.87 BR601 ()
      Biomass Production (t/ha wet weight) Biomass Production (t/ha wet weight) Biomass Production (t/ha wet weight) Biomass Production (t/ha wet weight) Biomass Production (t/ha wet weight) Biomass Production (t/ha wet weight) Biomass Production (t/ha wet weight)      
BR506 (V) 46.3 55.2 43.3 43.3 43.3 55.5 55.5 41.9 59.3 50.8 52.8 109
BR507 (V) 41.1 53.2 43.7 43.7 43.7 47.3 47.3 39.8 55.7 68.1 49.5 102
BR601(H) 47.3 44.1 41.1 41.1 41.1 54.3 54.3 47.6 55.1 66.0 48.6 100
BR126 (MV) 19.1 39.6 36.6 36.6 36.6 35.0 35.0 25.5 32.3 36.0 32.1 66
      Biomass Production (t/ha dry weight) Biomass Production (t/ha dry weight) Biomass Production (t/ha dry weight) Biomass Production (t/ha dry weight) Biomass Production (t/ha dry weight) Biomass Production (t/ha dry weight) Biomass Production (t/ha dry weight)      
BR506 (V) 14.4 11.6 10.2 10.2 NA NA 13.4 13.4 17.7 18.7 14.6 108
BR507 (V) 15.6 12.4 11.7 11.7 NA NA 14.1 14.1 18.9 18.2 15.6 115
BR601(H) 12.0 14.6 12.7 12.7 NA NA 14.8 14.8 18.3 14.3 13.5 100
BR126 (MV) 7.4 16.9 15.4 15.4 NA NA 9.9 9.9 11.8 12.7 11.5 85
Forage Maize Variety Forage Maize Variety


50
(No Transcript)
51
(No Transcript)
52
Estimated approximate composition of sweet
sorghum sugar varieties in the United States
(Nathan, 1978)
53
(No Transcript)