M

Matt A. Sanderson

Oak Ridge National Laboratory

Publishes on Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology, Bioenergy crop production and management, Rangeland and Wildlife Management. 203 papers and 9.5k citations.

203Publications
9.5kTotal Citations

Is this you? Claim your profile.

Add your photo, update your bio, and get notified when your ranking changes.

Top publicationsby citations

An international terminology for grazing lands and grazing animals
V. G. Allen, Caterina Batello, E.J. Berretta et al.|Grass and Forage Science|2011
Cited by 876Open Access

In 1991, Terminology for Grazing Lands and Grazing Animals was published with the objective of ‘developing a consensus of clear definitions of terms used in the grazing of animals.’ This first effort involved primarily organizations and agencies within the USA but included representation from New Zealand and Australia. It was the intent from the beginning to expand this to a truly international effort at a later date. At the XVII International Grassland Congress (IGC), held jointly in New Zealand and Australia in 1993, a resolution was passed at the final business meeting as follows: ‘It is recommended that the International Grassland Congress endorse the continuing development of uniformity of terminology for grazing systems and grazing management, and that the Forage and Grazing Terminology Task Force report progress at the XVIII Congress.’ During the XVIII IGC, held in Canada in 1997, a new Terminology working group, chaired by Mort Kothmann, was formed to begin discussions regarding the first revision of this publication. As was the objective from the beginning, this first revision was to be international in scope and a focused effort was made to include broad international representation and expertise. Preliminary work by the working group was accomplished during the next few years. In 2000, Terminology became the first project to be jointly supported by the IGC and the International Rangeland Congress (IRC) and a new Terminology Committee was jointly appointed by Bob Clements (Chair, IGC Continuing Committee) and Maureen Wolfson (President, IRC Continuing Committee). Work of the Terminology Committee progressed leading up to the first joint meeting of the IGC and the IRC in Hohhot, Inner Mongolia in the Peoples Republic of China. At the meeting in 2008, resolutions were passed by both the IGC and the IRC requesting that Terminology for Grazing Lands and Grazing Animals be completed and presented at both the IX IRC in Argentina in 2011 and the XXII IGC in Australia in 2013. With the completion of this revision in 2010, the wishes of both congresses will be fulfilled. As with the first edition of Terminology, our objective has been to develop a consensus of terms and definitions to ensure clear international communication regarding grazing lands and grazing animals. Terms included here have relevance to both domesticated and wild grazing animals. It is intended that these terms enhance communication in education, science, industry and production and that they become the standard for use in publications. It has been our goal to include terms that are relevant specifically to grazing lands and grazing animals and to present these, where appropriate, in a hierarchy that shows the relationships among such terms. For example, certain terms such as ‘grazing land’ are all-inclusive and are then followed by terms relating to the various types of grazing lands. We have attempted to agree on a single, concise definition for each term and to avoid multiple definitions. Variations among terms used in countries where English is one of the official languages were taken into account. Because of international variations in a few terms, we have included a list of the various international interpretations in an Appendix but have recommended the use of a specific term and definition. It is hoped that this will take us towards a more uniform international language. In the case of most terms and definitions, we have arrived at a consensus opinion. In a few cases, use will be needed to see whether these will stand the test of time. We hope that in such cases, we have taken the steps to move the language forward towards more precise and meaningful terms and definitions. Finally, as we reviewed terms and definitions, there were some that did not appear to contribute to clear communication. We have listed these in an Appendix and provided an explanation for our recommendation that they are not used. Ours is a living language that will continue to evolve as new concepts emerge, techniques and methods change, and our international language becomes more precise. Thus, the mechanism established by the IGC and the IRC for periodic review and revision of Terminology for Grazing Lands and Grazing Animals must be continued but with sufficient time between revisions to allow for adequate testing to see where terms are missing and revisions are required. Finally, on behalf of the International Forage and Grazing Lands Terminology Committee, we are submitting this International Terminology for Grazing Lands and Grazing Animals to the IGC and the IRC with our appreciation for the challenge and opportunity that you have entrusted to us. It has been a privilege and an honour to serve. March, 2011 Vivien Allen, Chair, United States Caterina Batello, Italy Elbio J. Berretta, Uruguay John Hodgson, New Zealand Mort Kothmann, United States Xianglin Li, China John McIvor, Australia John Milne, United Kingdom Craig Morris, South Africa Alain Peeters, Belgium Matt Sanderson, United States Garry Lacefield Extension Forage Specialist University of Kentucky, USA Secretary, Forage and Grassland Foundation Jim O’Rourke Representative to the International Rangeland Congress Rancher, Chadron, Nebraska, USA Past president, International Rangeland Congress Continuing Committee Nan Zhibiao Representative to the International Grassland Congress Dean, College of Pastoral Agriculture Science and Technology Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China Member, International Grassland Congress Continuing Committee Guy Allard Associate Dean of Studies Université Laval, Québec, Canada Chair, International Grassland Congress Continuing Committee Iain Wright Regional Representative for Asia International Livestock Research Institute, India President, International Rangeland Congress Continuing Committee This publication was funded jointly by the Forage and Grassland Foundation, Inc., Lexington, Kentucky, USA, the International Grassland Congress, and the International Rangeland Congress. Appreciation is expressed to the Members of the Forage and Grazing Lands Task Force and Working Group (Mort Kothmann, Chair) for preliminary work and to all who contributed their knowledge and suggestions in the development of An International Terminology for Grazing Lands and Grazing Animals. Note No. 1. 1. In this publication, ‘grazing animals’ refers to grazing herbivores, both domesticated and wild, that feed mainly or only on forage and does not include insects or other animals that consume vegetation to some degree. 2. Some of the definitions of grazing land types (below) imply current land use and some are based on potential vegetation or land capability. The context should be specified if it is not apparent. 3. The grazing land terms, cropland, forestland, pastureland/grassland and rangeland can provide the basis for land-use mapping units. 4. The definitions given are generic with some potential for overlap (i.e. grassland). The term grassland bridges pastureland and rangeland and may be either a natural or an imposed ecosystem. Grassland has evolved to imply broad interpretation for lands committed to a forage use. 1.1 Grazing land (n.). Any vegetated land that is grazed or has the potential to be grazed by animals (domestic and wild). This term is all-inclusive and covers all kinds and types of land that can be grazed. 1.1.1 Cropland (n.). Land devoted to the production of cultivated crops. May be used to produce forage crops (cf. Crop, 2.1.1; Forage crop, 2.1.1.1). 1.1.2 Forestland (n.). Land on which the vegetation is dominated by trees or, if trees are lacking, the land bears evidence of former forest and has not been converted to other vegetation or land use. Note No. 1.1.2. This is a general definition. For land-mapping purposes, the proportion of tree canopy cover and other characteristics may be defined precisely. 1.1.2.1 Agroforestry (n.). Land-use system in which trees are used for forest products (e.g. timber, pulp, fruits, rubber, syrup and browse) combined with agricultural crops including forage crops and/or animal production. Note No. 1.1.2.1. The following terms are sometimes used and apply to agroforestry as follows: Agro-silvo-pastoralism (n.). Incorporates agricultural crops, potentially including forage crops and livestock production, where trees may produce timber, pulp, fruits, rubber, syrup or browse for grazing animals. Silvo-pastoralism (n.). Refers to the exclusive use of land for forest products and animal production by browsing of shrubs and trees and/or grazing of co-existing forage crops. 1.1.2.2 Grazable forestland (n.). Forestland that produces, at least periodically, understory (understorey) vegetation that can be grazed. Forage is indigenous or, if introduced, it is managed as though it were indigenous (cf. Rangeland, 1.1.4). 1.1.2.3 Woodland (n.). A plant community in which, in contrast to a typical forest, the trees are often small, characteristically short-boled relative to their crown depth and forming only an open canopy with the intervening area being occupied by shorter vegetation, commonly grass (cf. Savanna, 1.1.4.2.7). See Helms (1998). 1.1.3 Pastureland (n.). Land (and the vegetation growing on it) devoted to the production of introduced or indigenous forage for harvest by grazing, cutting, or both. Usually managed to arrest successional processes (cf. Grassland, Note No. 1.1.3; Pasture, 5.3.4; Rangeland, 1.1.4). Note No. 1.1.3. 1.1.3 Grassland (n.). The term ‘grassland’ is synonymous with pastureland when referring to an imposed grazing-land ecosystem. The vegetation of grassland in this context is broadly interpreted to include grasses, legumes and other forbs, and at times woody species may be present (cf. Native or Natural Grassland, 1.1.4.2). There are many descriptive terms for pastureland/grassland that take into account their age and stability. The following are recommended. 1.1.3.1 Annual pastureland/grassland (n.). Forage is established annually, usually with annual plants, and generally involves soil disturbance, removal of existing vegetation, and other cultivation practices. 1.1.3.2 Cultivated pastureland/grassland (n.). Forage is established with domesticated introduced or indigenous species that may receive periodic cultural treatment such as renovation, fertilization or weed control. 1.1.3.3 Permanent pastureland/grassland (n.). Land on which vegetation is composed of perennial or self-seeding annual forage species which may persist indefinitely. It may include either naturalized or cultivated forages. 1.1.3.4 Temporary pastureland/grassland (n.). Land on which vegetation is composed of annual, biennial, or perennial forage species kept for a short period of time (usually only a few years). Note No. 1.1.3.4. Temporary pastureland/grassland can be regularly resown or can be integrated in a crop rotation (ley). It is usually composed of simple mixtures of grasses, grass/legume or legume species. 1.1.3.4.1 Ley (n.). Temporary pastureland/grassland that is integrated in a crop rotation. 1.1.3.5 Naturalized pastureland/grassland (n.). Forage species present are primarily introduced from other geographical regions that have become established and have persisted under the existing conditions of environment and management over a long time. 1.1.3.6 Semi-natural pastureland/grassland (n.). Managed ecosystem dominated by indigenous or naturally occurring grasses and other herbaceous species (cf. Native grassland, 1.1.4.2). 1.1.3.6.1 Meadow (n.). A natural or semi-natural grassland often associated with the conservation of hay or silage. Note No. 1.1.3.6.1. A meadow may exist as a result of discontinuous features of hydrology, landscape position, or soil characteristics that differ from the surrounding landscape and vegetation. Descriptive terms include ‘mountain meadow,’‘alpine meadow,’‘wet meadow,’ and ‘hay meadow.’‘Flower meadows’ are kept for aesthetic interest and can also provide feeding or bedding. 1.1.4 Rangeland (n.). Land on which the indigenous vegetation (climax or sub-climax) is predominantly grasses, grass-like plants, forbs or shrubs that are grazed or have the potential to be grazed, and which is used as a natural ecosystem for the production of grazing livestock and wildlife. Note No. 1.1.4. Rangelands may include natural grasslands, savannas, shrublands, many deserts, steppes, tundras, alpine communities and marshes. 1.1.4.1 Desertland (n.). Land on which vegetation is sparse or absent and is characterized by an arid climate. Deserts may be classified as hot or cold deserts depending on latitude and elevation. 1.1.4.2 Native or natural grassland (n.). Natural ecosystem dominated by indigenous or naturally occurring grasses and other herbaceous species used mainly for grazing by livestock and wildlife (cf. Naturalized pastureland, 1.1.3.5; Rangeland, 1.1.4; Pastureland and Grassland, 1.1.3). Note No. 1.1.4.2. There are many types of natural grasslands, with vegetation characteristics determined by climate and soil conditions, by grazing animals and by fire. Examples of local/regional variations follow. Geographical regions where examples may be found are provided in parentheses following the definition. This is not an all-inclusive list of grassland types or of locations in which they are found but provides some examples. 1.1.4.2.1 Campos (n.). Grassland consisting mainly of grasses, along with herbs, small shrubs and occasional trees; on undulating and hilly landscape, with variable soil fertility. Differs from Cerrado in having a longer and more severe winter and a relative abundance of native legumes. The campos is the northern part of the Pampa. The sub-tropical climate is humid, warm in summer and mild in winter. (Examples: Uruguay, southern Brazil and north-eastern Argentina). 1.1.4.2.2 Cerrado (n.). Savanna (1.1.4.2.7) with varying amounts of trees and shrubs along rivers and in valley bottoms. It is characterized by a tropical climate with alternating wet and dry seasons. The wet season lasts usually 6 months. (Example: central Brazil). 1.1.4.2.3 Llanos (n.). Extensive system of grasslands, seasonally flooded, with infertile and acidic soils. The tropical climate is characterized by alternating wet and dry seasons. (Examples: plains east of the Andes in Bolivia, Colombia and Venezuela). 1.1.4.2.4 Pampa (n.). Treeless grasslands on flat and fertile plains. The Pampa is a temperate grassland or a sub-tropical steppe. The climate is humid to arid; summers are warm and winters are mild. (Examples: eastern and central Argentina). 1.1.4.2.5 Prairie (n.). Nearly level or rolling grassland, originally treeless or with a few scattered trees, and usually on fertile soils. It may be characterized as a short-grass, intermediate-grass, or tall-grass prairie depending on the influence of a continental climate and variation in total summer precipitation, rate of evapo-transpiration, periodic fire and soil depth. Soil depth and precipitation generally increase from west to east and vegetation changes from short-grass prairie in the west to tall-grass prairie in the east. (Example: North America). 1.1.4.2.6 Sahelian steppe (n.). Discontinuous vegetation dominated by annual C4 plants, especially grasses, and scattered shrubs. The arid or semi-arid tropical climate with alternating wet and dry seasons is characterized by a strong variability in rainfall patterns and one short rainy season. The soils are generally poor. (Example: Sahel at the south margin of the Sahara in Africa). 1.1.4.2.7 Savanna (n.). Grassland characterized by precipitation between 375 and 1500 mm year−1, variable proportions of trees or large shrubs, especially in tropical and sub-tropical regions. It is often a transitional vegetation type between grassland and forestland. Tropical savannas are characterized by a climate with alternating wet and dry seasons. The wet season usually ranges between 5 and 9 months. Sub-tropical savannas have a wet climate with warm summers and mild winters. (Example: South America, Africa, Australia, sub-tropical and tropical regions of North America). 1.1.4.2.8 Steppe (n.). Semi-arid, sparse to rolling grassland characterized by short to medium-height grasses occurring with other herbaceous vegetation and occasional shrubs. Russian steppes are characterized by the high severity and length of continental winters with precipitation between 250 and 500 mm year−1. Forest-steppe soils are black or brown-earth with high to medium contents of organic matter and high mineral contents. (Examples: south-eastern Europe, Asia, North America). 1.1.4.2.9 Veld (n.). Indigenous vegetation used as grazing and/or browsing which may be composed of any of a number of plant growth forms (predominantly C4 grasses and Acacia or broad-leaf trees) and need not necessarily be climax vegetation (See Booysen, 1967). (Example: South Africa). 1.1.4.3 Marshland (n.). Flat, wet, treeless wetland usually covered by shallow water and dominated by marsh grasses, rushes, sedges, other grass-like plants and forbs. 1.1.4.4 Shrubland (n.). Land on which the vegetation is dominated by low-growing woody plants (cf. Shrub, 2.2.6). 1.1.4.5 Tundra (n.). Land areas in arctic and alpine regions devoid of large trees, varying from bare ground to various types of vegetation consisting of grasses, sedges, forbs, dwarf shrubs and trees, mosses and lichens. Note No. 2. This section is concerned with the characteristics of vegetation on grazing lands and of the forage harvested from such lands either by grazing animals or by cutting and harvesting. 2.1 Vegetation (n.). Plant life in general (Webster’s New World Dictionary of American English, 1988; cf. Flora, 2.1.2). Note No. 2.1. The vegetation of grazing lands may be indigenous or exotic and may be a monoculture, a mixture of two or more species, a plant community or several plant communities. 2.1.1 Crop (n.). The cultivated produce of the land (cf. Forage, 2.1.3; Forage crop, 2.1.1.1). 2.1.1.1 Forage crop (n.). A crop of cultivated plants, other than separated grain, produced to be grazed or harvested for use as feed for animals (cf. Forage, 2.1.3). 2.1.2 Flora (n.). All plant species occurring within a site or a region. Note No. 2.1.2. The flora of a site, region or country may be described in a systematized list of the collective species. 2.1.3 Forage (n.). Edible parts of plants, other than separated grain, that can provide feed for grazing animals or that can be harvested for feeding [cf. Forage (v.), 3.2.1.2]. 2.1.3.1 Browse (n.). Leaf and twig growth of shrubs, woody vines, trees, cacti and other non-herbaceous vegetation that can be ingested by herbivores [cf. Browse (v.), 3.2.1.1]. 2.1.3.2 Herbage (n.). The above-ground biomass of herbaceous plants, other than separated grain. Grasses, grass-like species, herbaceous legumes and other forbs collectively; the foliage and edible stems of herbs (cf. Herbaceous, 2.2.4). 2.1.3.3 Mast (n.). Fruit and seed of shrubs, woody vines, trees, cacti and other non-herbaceous vegetation available for consumption by animals. 2.1.3.3.1 Fruit (n.). The seeds of plants and pulpy surrounding tissues. 2.1.3.3.2 Pod (n.). The seed case of a leguminous plant. 2.1.3.3.3 Seed (n.). Mature (ripened) ovules consisting of an embryonic plant and a store of food (stored in the endosperm, in some species), all surrounded by a protective seed coat. Note No. 2.2. This section is concerned with descriptions of the characteristics of forage plant species. 2.2.1 Forb (n.). Any herbaceous, dicotyledonous broad-leaved plant (cf. Legume, 2.2.5; (n.). Plant or plant species of the Note No. the of grasses in grazing other terms have been used to specific examples are given in and grass (n.). but not or and having an and growth (Examples: grass (n.). by or both. a (n.). usually a of the or which are that are to grasses in refers to the above-ground parts of grass-like and species are from woody species by not having perennial woody (n.). Plant or plant species of the with a of characteristics from herbaceous forbs to and tree forms (cf. Shrub, Note No. The to a with to is found in many species of legumes. (n.). A woody plant having multiple stems at or the Mature is generally (n.). A woody plant characteristically with one from the Mature generally than 5 growth on a tree may have multiple Note No. This section is concerned with the terms used to the characteristics of the plant characteristics are the of processes of and The used here is to the of in this section from the defined in 3. (n.). A or a community of herbaceous plants characterized by a short of growth and ground including both and (n.). The above-ground parts of a or community of forage It may include both herbaceous and woody vegetation. (n.). The and of the parts of the cover (n.). The proportion of the ground area covered by the canopy when (n.). The of the canopy (n.). The of an canopy or the of a from ground (n.). The relative proportions of the plant and in a canopy a defined ground Note No. may be based on forage or is in of proportion or is or that the is the number of area (e.g. plants Leaf area (n.). The area of of Refers to only or to the area of and (n.). The total dry of vegetation of land a defined usually ground at a specific time (cf. Forage Forage (n.). The total dry of forage area of land a defined usually ground at a specific time (cf. also to 2.1.3.2 and No. and 1. is defined as at to a 2. and forage are over a of of are over time or the is determined by the between an and an 3. can include both forage and vegetation area forage is specific to forage 4. on biomass and forage should be specified as above-ground at a specified cutting or as described by In the soil can be to and the and the of and may be but the methods used to the soil should be It should be specified whether the biomass or forage is or at the time of and the proportions of each if both are The term forage is to and which canopy characteristics and The term is also used as a for but is for use as a of the proportion of ground covered by a crop canopy (cf. of terms to an of forage is not recommended. (n.). Forage that following a (n.). Forage on the land harvest (cf. (n.). The of stems and of herbaceous plants harvest (cf. (n.). An of plant at the soil Note No. appropriate, may be more for as tree woody including and is used as a term for herbaceous Note No. 3. In this terms are defined primarily in the context of grazed but are relevant to harvested forages. may be in terms of or dry matter or organic matter area and time but may also be expressed plant or plant Note No. Terms in this section are presented in of and not in (n.). The production of new plant by forage Note No. The term forage growth is used here specifically to the rate of production of new plant It can also be used as a general of plant development and over time (n.). The increase in forage over a specified the among of and consumption by animals. (n.). to plants or it is the of and of from to plant that with age of plant or or by and is usually by and of is by a of dry matter as contents of the are and/or (n.). The processes of of plant including from the to the and into soil organic (n.). of plant by grazing animals or Note No. is from which under grazing or harvest stems and in varying Browse consume browse in by animals [cf. Browse Forage, Forage for or to consume forage [cf. Forage 2.1.3; consume predominantly herbaceous forage in by animals [cf. Forage, 3.2.1.2]. Note No. The should be used in the with the animal as the The should not be used in the as to imply that a is the or not (n.). Forage by a grazing or cutting, or over a of or It may be as a or or annual Note No. The terms and are often used as to the term but may be in the context of (cf. Forage the of grazing land that is not grazed by animals the of plants or plant parts that are not grazed by animals (cf. (n.). The of forage for use. Forage can be in (e.g. or and (e.g. (n.). forage to It and (n.). forage by generally to a of than (n.). forage at a of than 500 (n.). Forage harvested and at high contents by organic produced during produce by the of of forages. (n.). The used in the of forage as silage. forage (n.). Forage to for grazing at a later time South Note No. Forage is often for later grazing in a period when growth is or

Biomass Yield and Biofuel Quality of Switchgrass Harvested in Fall or Spring
Paul R. Adler, Matt A. Sanderson, Akwasi A. Boateng et al.|Agronomy Journal|2006
Cited by 394

Seasonal time of switchgrass ( Panicum virgatum L.) harvest affects yield and biofuel quality and balancing these two components may vary depending on conversion system. A field study compared fall and spring harvest measuring biomass yield, element concentration, carbohydrate characterization, and total synthetic gas production as indicators of biofuel quality for direct combustion, ethanol production, and gasification systems for generation of energy. Switchgrass yields decreased almost 40% (from about 7–4.4 Mg ha −1 ) in winters with above average snowfall when harvest was delayed over winter until spring. The moisture concentration also decreased (from about 350–70 g kg −1 ) only reaching low enough levels for safe storage by spring. About 10% of the yield reduction during winter resulted from decreases in tiller mass; however, almost 90% of the yield reduction was due to an increase in biomass left behind by the baler. Mineral element concentrations generally decreased with the delay in harvest until spring. Energy yield from gasification did not decrease on a unit biomass basis, whereas ethanol production was variable depending on the assessment method. When expressed on a unit area basis, energy yield decreased. Biofuel conversion systems may determine harvest timing. For direct combustion, the reduced mineral concentrations in spring‐harvested biomass are desirable. For ethanol fermentation and gasification systems, however, lignocellulose yield may be more important. On conservations lands, the wildlife cover provided by switchgrass over the winter may increase the desirability of spring harvest along with the higher biofuel quality.

Switchgrass as a biofuels feedstock in the USA
Matt A. Sanderson, Paul R. Adler, Akwasi A. Boateng et al.|Canadian Journal of Plant Science|2006
Cited by 314Open Access

Switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) has been identified as a model herbaceous energy crop for the USA. In this review, we selectively highlight current USDA-ARS research on switchgrass for biomass energy. Intensive research on switchgrass as a biomass feedstock in the 1990s greatly improved our understanding of the adaptation of switchgrass cultivars, production practices, and environmental benefits. Several constraints still remain in terms of economic production of switchgrass for biomass feedstock including reliable establishment practices to ensure productive stands in the seeding year, efficient use of fertilizers, and more efficient methods to convert lignocellulose to biofuels. Overcoming the biological constraints will require genetic enhancement, molecular biology, and plant breeding efforts to improve switchgrass cultivars. New genomic resources will aid in developing molecular markers, and should allow for marker-assisted selection of improved germplasm. Research is also needed on profitable management practices for switchgrass production appropriate to specific agro-ecoregions and breakthroughs in conversion methodology. Current higher costs of biofuels compared to fossil fuels may be offset by accurately valuing environmental benefits associated with perennial grasses such as reduced runoff and erosion and associated reduced losses of soil nutrients and organic matter, increased incorporation of soil carbon and reduced use of agricultural chemicals. Use of warm-season perennial grasses in bioenergy cropping systems may also mitigate increases in atmospheric CO 2 . A critical need is teams of scientists, extension staff, and producer-cooperators in key agro-ecoregions to develop profitable management practices for the production of biomass feedstocks appropriate to those agro-ecoregions. Key words: Bioenergy, biomass conversion technologies, Panicum virgatum L., stand establishment, switchgrass improvement, USDA-ARS

High-Value Renewable Energy from Prairie Grasses
S. B. McLaughlin, Daniel De La Torre Ugarte, Charles T. Garten et al.|Environmental Science & Technology|2002
Cited by 314

Projected economic benefits of renewable energy derived from a native prairie grass, switchgrass, include nonmarket values that can reduce net fuel costs to near zero. At a farm gate price of $44.00/dry Mg, an agricultural sector model predicts higher profits for switchgrass than conventional crops on 16.9 million hectares (ha). Benefits would include an annual increase of $6 billion in net farm returns, a $1.86 billion reduction in government subsidies, and displacement of 44-159 Tg/year (1 Tg = 1012 g) of greenhouse gas emissions. Incorporating these values into the pricing structure for switchgrass bioenergy could accelerate commercialization and provide net benefits to the U.S. economy.