Next Article in Journal
Local Observations of Climate Change and Adaptation Responses: A Case Study in the Mountain Region of Burundi-Rwanda
Previous Article in Journal
How Much Complexity Is Required for Modelling Grassland Production at Regional Scales?
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Land
Volume 12
Issue 2
10.3390/land12020328
land-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Communication

Seed and Straw Characterization of Nine New Varieties of Camelina sativa (L.) Crantz

by
Iris Montero-Muñoz
1,
David Mostaza-Colado
1,
Aníbal Capuano
2 and
Pedro V. Mauri Ablanque
1,*
1
Departamento de Investigación Agroambiental, Instituto Madrileño de Investigación y Desarrollo Rural, Agrario y Alimentario (IMIDRA), Finca El Encín, Autovía A-2. Km. 38, 28805 Madrid, Spain
2
Camelina Company S.L. Spain, Camino de la Carrera 11-11, Fuente el Saz de Jarama, 28140 Madrid, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Land 2023, 12(2), 328; https://doi.org/10.3390/land12020328
Submission received: 20 December 2022 / Revised: 16 January 2023 / Accepted: 18 January 2023 / Published: 25 January 2023
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Camelina sativa (L.) Crantz is a promising oilseed crop that has increased worldwide attention because of its agronomic characteristics and potential uses. From an agricultural point of view, this plant can grow in different environments, providing a good yield with low input requirements. In addition, camelina seeds contain a high percentage of oil (36–47%) and protein (24–31%), making them interesting for food or energy industries. Nevertheless, its cultivation is not widespread in Europe, particularly in Spain. In the present context of global change and the search for new sustainable crops, we are conducting two pilot projects aiming to confirm that camelina is a good option for oilseed crops in semi-arid climates (especially in central Spain, Madrid) and to find new profitable varieties for farmers. To reach our objective we have used nine new varieties, recently developed, to characterize and compare their seed oil content, and their seed and straw chemical composition. Finally, with our preliminary results, we determine which varieties present better properties to be used in future agricultural research or breeding programs. These results are part of a larger study that we are carrying out.

1. Introduction

Oilseed crops have great economic relevance worldwide, and occupy millions of hectares of land dedicated to agriculture. The high percentage of oils produced by their seeds and their agronomic characteristics allow them to be highly productive crops with low maintenance costs [1,2,3].
Within the groups of oilseeds, the Brassicaceae family stands out, in which we find numerous species that are used in the food industry (animal and human) as well as in the pharmaceutical and chemical industries. One of the oilseed species that has regained great interest in recent years is Camelina sativa (L.) Crantz due to its versatility [4]. This herbaceous annual with two biotypes (winter and spring; [5]), known as false flax, has been cultivated since the Late Stone Age and Middle Bronze Age in Scandinavia and Eastern Turkey [6]. The first hypotheses of the origin of its domestication suggested that it was in Europe or Western Asia, but recently, new studies propose the Caucasian region as the center of its domestication [7].
Morphologically [8], Camelina sativa is a highly branched plant, between 20−80 (−100) cm. It has a taproot and entire or dentate leaves; the basal ones form a rosette. The flowers are in terminal inflorescences, and they have yellow petals and four nectaries. The fruits are small silicles that contain numerous seeds (6–16) with a high oil content (36% to 47%; [9]).
The good agronomic characteristics of this oilseed can be of great interest in agriculture, which is currently becoming a serious problem for the environment and biodiversity [10]. Camelina sativa crops can help to mitigate this issue due to their great environmental adaptability; they resist drought and cold, and the attack of pests and/or pathogens, consequently reducing the number of inputs for their maintenance, especially irrigation, fertilizers, and pesticides [6,11,12]. Its short life cycle (85–100 days), root system, and cold tolerance make it a good option for crop rotation in arid and semi-arid regions, minimizing fallow and proposing an alternative to monoculture [13,14]. According to different studies, crop rotation and intercropping produce ecosystem benefits, such as erosion reduction, soil organic matter improvement, and weed control [15,16,17,18,19,20]. The use of camelina in the process of rotation is a good alternative for crop diversification. This oilseed species compete with others, and although it has a lower yield than, for example, rapeseed, it has minor requirements and numerous potential uses than others [6,14,21,22].
Another benefit that camelina crops could have is related to biodiversity. The loss of flower-rich habitats due to intensive agriculture has led to a decline in the number of pollinators. Camelina sativa has nectariferous flowers and recent studies indicate the positive effects of growing this species on the diversity of insects, providing a healthy habitat for them (forage, nectar, nesting, etc.), and thus increasing the crop yield [3,23,24].
In addition to its ecosystem benefits and its agronomic characteristics, camelina stands out for its wide variety of uses. The high percentage of oils present in its seeds makes it a very suitable and interesting resource for the production of biofuels [25,26,27,28,29], and for the food industry [30]. Studies are also being carried out to explore its possible use in animal and human feed because of the protein richness of seed meal [31,32,33,34,35] and the great nutritional value of its seed oil [36,37].
Finally, in this context of climate and global change, camelina crops can play a very important role in reducing the use of fossil fuels, land use, and the generation of greenhouse gases, hence helping to make circular and sustainable agriculture that does not harm ecosystems or biodiversity [27,38,39,40,41].
Nowadays, despite its agronomic properties and its possible uses, camelina cultivation in Europe is not very widespread [23]. Therefore, within the framework of our projects “PDR18-CAMEVAR” and “FP22-CAMEPRO” [42,43,44], we aim to increase the knowledge about this promising crop and we intend to select a variety of Camelina sativa adapted to the central region of Spain that is profitable for farmers and sustainable in its production. Therefore, with this work, we expect to characterize the seed and straw of nine new varieties of camelina to determine their oil content, chemical composition, and production to explore their potential uses. These preliminary results can help in future breeding programs to find new varieties and innovative bio-based products.

2. Materials and Methods

The field experiments were carried out on three farms in the Community of Madrid (Spain), El Encín (Alcalá de Henares), La Chimenea (Aranjuez), and La Isla (Arganda), during two growing seasons 2019/20 and 2020/21 (Figure 1). As there are only slightly different environmental conditions, for this experiment we have not considered the effect of the environmental variability of the farms on each variety.
Camelina Company S.L. (Spain) has recently developed the nine commercial varieties used in this study. Five of them (V1, V2, V3, V4, and V13) were obtained by breeding and four (V6, V7, V8, and V11) were developed in grow chambers and selected by handpicking. The selection of varieties was based, mainly, on productivity and phenology, althoughcharacteristicss such as seed weight, shattering or resistance to diseases have been taken into account. One of the varieties, V7, is a winter genotype while the other eight are spring genotypes.
To carry out the field experiment, we selected nine plots of one hectare of extension for each variety. Next, we added triple 15 fertilizer (NPK 15-15-15) using a dose of 200-250 kg/ha. We sowed between the second fortnight of November and the first week of December, using a conventional cereal seeder (seed dose between 8 kg/ha and 10 kg/ha).
In January (one month after the sowing), during the rosette stage of the plant, we passed the roller again to guarantee compaction of the soil and avoid future problems with the harvester. At the beginning of winter (February) we fertilized the plots again with ammonium nitrosulfate (NSA) at a dose of 200–250 kg/ha. This fertilization happened just when the plant began to grow, to ensure the necessary nutrients for its growth and the proper development of the fruit.
The harvest was carried out at the beginning of July using a conventional harvester adjusted to the minimum air to reduce, as far as possible, the loss of seed. After harvesting each camelina variety, the machine was cleaned by harvesting barley, followed by a manual cleaning to avoid seed mixing. We stored the harvested material in 1000 kg bags in the facilities of Camelina Company S.L. There, they sieved and cleaned the samples using air and densimetric tables.
We performed chemical analyses only for the material harvested in the season 2020/2021, due to the coincidence of the 2019/2020 season with the COVID pandemic. Consequently, the characterization analyses of the seed and straw were outsourced and carried out at SERIDA (Regional Service for Agrifood Research and Development, Asturias, Spain); and the analysis of fatty acids at SETNA Nutrition and Services (Madrid, Spain). The fatty acid profile was obtained by gas chromatography and the chemical composition of the seed and the straw were obtained applying different techniques: calcination at 550 °C (ashes), Kjeldahl method (crude protein), extraction with petroleum ether (crude fat), Weende method (crude fiber), digestion in neutral buffer (neutral detergent fiber), digestion in acid buffer (acid detergent fiber), complexometric titration (calcium) and ultraviolet–visible spectroscopy (phosphorus).
Finally, we performed statistical analysis to compare the yield of the two seasons, using one-way ANOVA with appropriate post-hoc test and Student t-test using GraphPad Prism 9 (Graph Pad Software, San Diego, California, USA) and assuming a p-value below 0.05.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Yield

The varieties of camelina studied show an average yield of 1.29 ± 0.36 Tm/ha and 1.50 ± 0.23 Tm/ha during the 2019/20 and 2020/21 seasons respectively. In the first season, the yield ranged between 0.97 Tm/ha and 1.61 Tm/ha, and in the second season between 1.12 Tm/ha and 1.69 Tm/ha (Table 1). This means that in the second season, the production was higher than in the first one, although no statistically significant differences between seasons (paired Student t-test) or varieties (one-way ANOVA and Tukey post hoc) were found. Thus, the variations between seasons may be due to differences in weather or soil conditions during crop growth.
In the season 2019/20, the most productive varieties were V3 (1.57 Tm/ha) and V4 (1.61 Tm/ha), grown on the farm of El Encín (Alcalá de Henares). The variety less productive was V11 (0.59 Tm/ha), grown in La Isla (Arganda), but it should be noted that the low yield productivity of this variety was due to a rabbit plague that could not be treated due to the pandemic. In the season 2020/21 the most productive varieties were V1 (1.69 Tm/ha) and V4 (1.69 Tm/ha), and the less productive was V2 (1.12 Tm/ha) each one also grown in El Encín. The variety V7 was grown only in the second season and has a lower yield than other varieties (Table 1). Additionally, the results show that V4 is the variety that has the highest yield in both seasons.
If we compare the camelina production each season to other crops in Spain and the Community of Madrid (Figure 2A,B), the results indicate that camelina is more productive and profitable than other rainfed crops (wheat, barley, oats, etc.) and other oilseeds (rape or sunflower). Therefore, camelina could be a good option for farmers. Finally, the average yield of the camelina crop, 1.40 Tm/ha, is similar to that obtained in other studies carried out in different countries of the European Union [11,14,45,46,47,48], North America [49,50,51,52] and South America [53].

3.2. Camelina Oil Content and Fatty Acid Composition

We found 23 fatty acids in the seeds of the different camelina varieties, although we did not find all of them in a single variety (Table 2).
Nine of them were saturated fatty acids (myristic acid (C14:0), pentadecanoic acid (C15:0), palmitic acid (C16:0), heptadecanoic acid (C17:0), stearic acid (C18:0), heneicosa-noic acid (C21:0), behenic acid (C22:0), tricosanoic acid (C23:0) and lignoceric acid (C24:0)) and 12 unsaturated fatty acids. Among them, six were monounsaturated (palmitoleic acid (C16:1), cis-10-heptadecenoic acid (C17:1), oleic acid (C18:1), eicosenoic acid (C20:1), erucic acid (C22: 1), nervonic acid (C24: 1)), and eight were polyunsaturated (linoleic acid (C18: 2, n-6), α-linolenic acid (C18: 3, n-3), cis-11,14-eicosadienoic acid (C20:2), eicosatrienoic acid (C20: 3), cis-13,16 docosadienoic acid (C22:2), arachidonic acid (C20:4), docosapentaenoic acid (DPA) (C22:5), and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA, C22:6)). The top five fatty acids found in all camelina varieties were α-linolenic, linoleic, oleic, eicosenoic and palmitic acid. In most varieties, polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) were present up to 53–57%, monounsaturated up to 31–34%, and saturated up to 8–11%. The slight differences in fatty acid composition between varieties may be due to their genetic background, soil quality, and/or weather conditions [54].
Regarding the varieties, there are no great changes among them in the content of fatty acids (Table 2). V8 and V11 were the richest, containing 22 of the 23 fatty acids found in camelina seeds and presenting a high percentage of polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fatty acids and, accordingly, a lower percentage of saturated fatty acids. These two varieties were grown in La Chimenea and La Isla respectively.
All the varieties are rich in PUFA (n-6/n-3), with V2 presenting the maximum percentage. The highest content of linolenic acid (34.86%) and erucic acid (3.17%) was found in V4, and V2 has the lowest percentage of erucic acid (Table 2).
Due to the high content of fatty acids, camelina oil is a promising option for biodiesel production or food use [25,26,27,28,29,55]. Nevertheless, the varieties of camelina with a high content of PUFA, especially linoleic and linolenic, are not appropriate as biofuels because the oxidative stability of the biodiesel obtained is very poor [28]. Thereby, V11, the variety with the lowest content of linolenic and linoleic acids (51.2 %), is potentially suitable to be considered for biofuel production. Furthermore, camelina V11 (along with V1) presents the highest ratio of monounsaturated to polyunsaturated fatty acids (Figure 3), a must-have condition to be competitive as a biofuel [56,57]. In this sense, obtaining camelina biodiesel has lower requirements and produces less greenhouse gas emissions than other crops [27], making it an environmentally interesting option. In all, camelina could be considered a suitable option for biofuel production.
Our results indicate that some varieties of camelina can be used for food purposes (Figure 3). Regarding this potential food use, camelina oil should have a balanced linolenic/linoleic acid ratio and a saturated fatty acid content below 10% [57,58]. Also, in Europe, the content of erucic acid must be <5% [59]. Consequently, as variety V13 has a good ratio linolenic/linoleic, a low percentage of erucic acid (2.79%), and the lowest content in saturated fatty acids (8.86%), the oil of this variety could be a candidate for human consumption.
The results obtained in this work confirm that the fatty acid content in Camelina sativa seed oil has a high amount of unsaturated (89%), polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fatty acids, especially linolenic (C18:3; 32%), linoleic (C18:2; 20%), oleic (C18:1; 15%) and ecosienoic (C20:1; 14.01%), and a lower percentage of saturated fatty acids (9.9 %), in agreement with other studies [6,28,46,54,55,60,61]. In addition, camelina seed oil composition includes other minor fatty acids such as palmitic (C16:0; 6%), stearic (C18:0; 2.4%), and erucic (C22:1; 3%) acids. The fatty acid profile of each variety might differ because of their different cultivation conditions, genotype, location, environmental conditions, and fertilizer inputs [62,63].
Therefore, from a nutritional perspective, the fatty acid composition of camelina oil is important because it has a high content of linolenic and linoleic acid, both included as omega 3-6 fatty acids, which help in human or animal diet, increasing its nutritional value. Ratusz et al. [37] confirmed that camelina oil, due to its high nutritional value, could be a new resource for the pharmaceutical and human food industry.
Comparing the oil content and fatty acids composition of Camelina sativa seeds with other oil crops, we can infer that camelina is a better option for food use. In comparison with other crops, such as palm, kernel, soybean, sunflower, or canola (Table 3), it has the highest content of linolenic acid and a higher percentage of linoleic than canola. Regarding saturated fatty acids (Table 3), camelina oilseed has the lowest content in this kind of acids together with the sunflower. The oilseed of LEAR canola oil has a fatty acids profile similar to C. sativa, but the erucic acid content, considered a limiting factor for human consumption, in the oil of C. sativa ranged from 2.68% to 3.17%, while in the LEAR canola is less than 2% [64]. Nevertheless, this makes camelina a potential option for human consumption.

3.3. Straw and Seed Chemical Composition

Regarding the seed and straw of Camelina sativa, we present the chemical composition: ashes, dry matter (DM), crude fat, crude protein (CP), crude fiber, metabolizable energy, digestibility, net energy for lactation, neutral detergent fiber (NDF), acid detergent fiber (ADF), calcium and phosphorus) of our cultivated varieties in Table 4 (straw) and Table 5 (seed).
Camelina sativa straw is nutritionally rich having DM content between 89 and 90%. The CP content is 7.47%, while camelina seed DM content ranges from 91 to 94%, and the CP from 27 to 29%. The crude fat concentration ranges between 0.47 and 1.12% in camelina straw and between 36 and 41% in camelina seeds. The net energy for lactation (NEL) of camelina straw ranges between 0.66 and 0.73 Mcal/kg, the digestibility between 31.11 and 38.55 %, and the metabolizable energy (ME) between 4.46 and 5.07 MJ/kg. Crude fiber (CF) content of camelina straw ranges from 49.92 to 57.91%, while camelina seed CF content is between 12.02 and 18.92%. The ash content of camelina straw has been reported between 3.58 and 6.06%, and in camelina seeds between 3.69 and 4.93%. The acid detergent fiber (ADF) ranges between 14.4% and 25.4%, whereas neutral detergent fiber (NDF) ranges between 19.8 and 49.5% in camelina straw. Moreover, in camelina seeds, we have found some minerals such as calcium (0.26-0.51%), and phosphorus (0.60–0.77%).
Crude fiber (CF) content of camelina straw ranges from 49.92 to 57.91%, while camelina seed CF content is between 12.02 and 18.92%. The ash content of camelina straw has been reported between 3.58 and 6.06%, and in camelina seeds between 3.69 and 4.93%. The acid detergent fiber (ADF) ranges between 14.4% and 25.4%, whereas neutral detergent fiber (NDF) ranges between 19.8 and 49.5% in camelina straw. Moreover, in camelina seeds, we have found some minerals such as calcium (0.26–0.51%), and phosphorus (0.60–0.77%).
The use of camelina seeds and straw is an opportunity to promote environmental sustainability and lower costs. Straw or seed could be an excellent addition to diets for ruminants [35]. In this sense, regarding the straw chemical composition of each variety (Table 4), we can see that V3, V4, and V6 present higher values of digestibility (38.55, 37.76, 37.75% respectively) and CP (8.27, 9.44, 9.43% respectively), and the lowest values of neutral NDF. Moreover, the variety which has the lowest content of ashes is V13, having a potential energetic valorization [67]. Camelina seed is nutritionally rich too. It has a high DM content, a high level of crude fat (oil and fatty acids), and minerals (Table 5). V8 is the variety that has the highest content in DM (94.68%), and varieties V4 and V6 present high values of crude fat (41.22 and 41.03% respectively) and low values of crude fiber (15.03 and 12.02% respectively). This means that these varieties could be suitable for animal feed. Finally, the variety with the lowest ash content is V13 (3.69%).
Comparing other oilseeds with camelina, camelina has a lower crude protein (CP) content (28.08%) than soybean meal (49.6%) and sunflower meal (39.3%) but is similar to canola meal (34.5%) [35,68]. Camelina meal contains about 15% crude fiber (CF) mostly accounted for by cellulose. The most EE content was in expeller-extracted camelina meal (CE) (13.5%) [60]. Moreover, we are analyzing camelina hulls but we do not have conclusive results yet. Previous studies [35,69] have seen that camelina hulls have a similar NDF and ADF content, as canola, and a high ADL, and lower CP than soybean [35,60]. Finally, some studies have shown that camelina has an average of 45–47% crude protein in the meal and 10–11% of fiber, similar to soybean [70]. This means that higher percentages of crude protein improve the quality of the meal. Some researchers observed that camelina oil could improve the fatty acid content in milk and meat [71,72]. Overall, camelina could be an alternative to traditional oilseed crops such as canola, soybean, and maize in animal diets [73,74].
Our results show that camelina is a promising oilseed crop with many potential uses: biofuel, animal feed, the human feed industry, and feedstock. In Spain, mainly in the center, agronomic research is needed to improve the production system and help to develop camelina as a commercial oilseed crop.

4. Conclusions

In this context of global change, agricultural production can play a very important role in reducing the use of fossil fuels, in land use, and in the generation of greenhouse gases, hence helping to make agriculture circular and sustainable. Finding new crops or varieties more adapted to the current climate could be a challenge for agriculture but could help to make it more sustainable and profitable for farmers. Camelina sativa possesses good agronomic properties and many studies show the potential uses of its oil. This work allowed identifying some camelina varieties, such as V1 and V4, which could be considered good candidates for improving seed yield, but also others, such as V11, highly suitable for improving seed oil content, V3 for animal food, and V13 for energetic valorization for biomass production. In addition, we confirm that camelina can become a profitable alternative to canola in Spain. These preliminary results may assist future experiments to develop higher-yielding varieties for several uses (increase seed oil content, crude protein, minerals, ashes, etc.) and adapt to different environmental conditions.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, D.M.-C. and P.V.M.A.; methodology, D.M.-C. and A.C.; validation, P.V.M.A. and D.M.-C.; formal analysis, D.M.-C.; investigation, P.V.M.A.; resources, A.C.; data curation, D.M.-C.; writing—original draft preparation, I.M.-M.; writing—review and editing, I.M.-M. and D.M.-C.; visualization, P.V.M.A.; supervision, D.M.-C.; project administration, D.M.-C. and P.V.M.A.; funding acquisition, P.V.M.A. and D.M.-C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by European Union through the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food of Spain, and the Community of Madrid through IMIDRA within the framework of the PDR-CM214-202, project number PDR18-CAMEVAR. FP22-CAMEPRO is funded by the Community of Madrid through IMIDRA.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to restrictions e.g., privacy.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Downey, R.K. Agricultural and Genetic Potentials of Cruciferous Oilseed Crops. J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc. 1971, 48, 718–722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Downey, R.K. The Origin and Description of the Brassica Oilseed crops. In High and Low Erucic Acid Rapesseed Oils; Kramer, P.J., Sauer, F.D., Pigden, W.J., Eds.; Academic Press, Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 1983; pp. 1–18. [Google Scholar]
  3. Zhang, C.; Kim, D.; Jiang, C.; Mahoney, J.; Liu, B.; Wang, Y.; Gao, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Sun, S.; Fan, J.; et al. Industrial Crops & Products Hourly pollen dispersal of Camelina sativa (L.) Crantz under different weather condtions and mitigation of wind-blown pollen dispersal using maize barrier. Ind. Crops Prod. 2021, 162, 113–318. [Google Scholar]
  4. Zanetti, F.; Gesch, R.W.; Walia, M.K.; Johnson, J.M.F.; Monti, A. Winter camelina root characteristics and yield performance under contrasting environmental conditions. Field Crops Res. 2020, 252, 107794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Chao, W.S.; Wang, H.; Horvath, D.P.; Anderson, J.V. Selection of endogenous reference genes for qRT-PCR analysis in Camelina sativa and identification of flowering locus C allele-specific markers to differentiate summer- and winter-biotypes. Ind. Crops Prod. 2019, 129, 495–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Berti, M.; Gesch, R.; Eynck, C.; Anderson, J.; Cermak, S. Camelina uses, genetics, genomics, production, and magafement. Ind. Crops Prod. 2016, 94, 690–710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Brock, J.R.; Ritchey, M.M.; Olsen, K.M. Molecular and archaeological evidence on the geographical origin of domestication for Camelina sativa. Am. J. Bot. 2022, 109, 1177–1190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. García Adá, R. Camelina Crantz. In Flora Iberica IV; Castroviejo, S., Aedo, C., Laínz, M., Muñoz Garmendia, F., Nieto Feliner, G., Paiva, J., Benedí, C., Eds.; Real Jardín Botánico, CSIC: Madrid, Spain, 1997; pp. 236–238. [Google Scholar]
  9. Luo, Z.; Brock, J.; Dyer, J.M.; Kutchan, T.; Schachtman, D.; Augustin, M.; Ge, Y.; Fahlgren, N.; Abdel-Haleem, H. Genetic Diversity and Population Structure of a Camelina sativa Spring Panel. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Reyes-Palomino, S.E.; Cano Ccoa, D.M. Efectos de la agricultura intensiva y el cambio climático sobre la biodiversidad. Rev. Investig. Altoandin. 2022, 24, 53–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Moser, B.R.; Vaughn, S.F. Evaluation of alkyl esters from Camelina sativa oil as biodiesel and as blend components in ultra low-sulfur diesel fuel. Bioresour. Technol. 2010, 1012, 646–653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Bacenetti, J.; Restuccia, A.; Schillaci, G.; Failla, S. Biodiesel production from unconventional oilseed crops (Linum usitatissimum L. and Camelina sativa L.) in Mediterranean conditions: Environmental sustainability assessment. Renew. Energy 2017, 112, 444–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Zanetti, F.; Monti, A.; Berti, M.T. Challenges and opportunities for new industrial oilseed crops in EU-27: A review. Ind. Crops Prod. 2013, 50, 580–595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Zanetti, F.; Eynck, C.; Christou, M.; Krzyżaniak, M.; Righinia, D.; Alexopoulou, E.; Stolarski, M.J.; Van Loo, E.N.; Puttick, D.; Montia, A. Agronomic performance and seed quality attributes of Camelina (Camelina sativa L. crantz) in multi-environment trials across Europe and Canada. Ind. Crops Prod. 2017, 107, 602–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Ehui, S.K.; Kang, B.T.; Spencer, D.S.C. Economic Analysis of Soil Erosion Effects in Alley Cropping, No-till and Bush Fallow Systems in South Western Nigeria. Agric. Syst. 1990, 34, 349–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Liebman, M.; Gallandt, E.R. Many little hammers: Ecological management of crop-weed interactions. In Ecology in Agriculture; Jackson, L.E., Ed.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1997; pp. 291–343. [Google Scholar]
  17. Miralles de Imperial Hornedo, R.; Martín Sánchez, J.V.; Lobo Bedmar, M.C.; Plaza Benito, A.; Delgado Arroyo, M.M. Respuesta del rendimiento biológico y agrícola de plantas de camelina (Camelina sativa) y del contenido de proteína y aceite de sus granos al efecto residual de la fertilización orgánica y mineral. Rev. Int. Contam. Ambient. 2015, 31, 377–387. [Google Scholar]
  18. Leclère, M.; Jeuffroy, M.-H.; Butier, A.; Chatain, C.; Loyce, C. Controlling weeds in camelina with innovative herbicide-free crop management routes across various environments. Ind. Crops Prod. 2019, 140, 111605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Bowles, T.M.; Mooshammer, M.; Socolar, Y.; Calderón, F.; Cavigelli, M.A.; Culman, S.W.; Deen, W.; Drury, C.F.; Garcia y Garcia, A.; Gaudin, A.C.M.; et al. Long-term evidence shows that crop-rotation diversification increases agricultural resilience to adverse growing conditions in North America. One Earth 2020, 2, 284–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Codina-Pascual, N.; Torra, J.; Baraibar, B.; Royo-Esnal, A. Weed suppression capacity of camelina (Camelina sativa) against winter weeds: The example of corn-poppy (Papaver rhoeas). Ind. Crops Prod. 2022, 184, 115063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Liu, K.; Johnson, E.N.; Blackshaw, R.E.; Hossain, Z.; Gan, Y. Improving the productivity and stability of oilseed cropping systems through crop diversification. Field Crops Res. 2019, 237, 65–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Scott, D.A.; Eberle, C.; Gesch, R.W.; Schneider, S.; Weyers, S.; Johnson, J.M.F. Yield, nitrogen, and water use benefits of diversifying crop rotations with specialty oilseeds. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2021, 317, 107472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Eberle, C.A.; Thom, M.D.; Nemec, K.T.; Forcella, F.; Lundgren, J.G.; Gesch, R.W.; Riedell, W.E.; Papiernik, S.K.; Wagner, A.; Peterson, D.H.; et al. Using pennycress, camelina, and canola cash cover crops to provision pollinators. Ind. Crops Prod. 2015, 75, 20–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Zanetti, F.; Alberghini, B.; Jeromela, A.M.; Grahovac, N.; Rajković, D.; Kiprovski, B.; Monti, A. Camelina, an ancient oilseed crop actively contributing to the rural renaissance in Europe. A review. ASD 2021, 41, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Ghamkhar, K.; Croser, J.; Aryamanesh, N.; Campbell, M.; Kon’kova, N.; Francis, C. Camelina (Camelina sativa (L.) Crantz) as an alternative oilseed: Molecular and ecogeographic analyses. Genome 2010, 53, 558–567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Moser, B.R. Camelina (Camelina sativa L.) oil as a biofuels feedstock: Golden opportunity or false hope? Lipid Technol. 2010, 22, 270–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Krohn, B.J.; Fripp, M. A life cycle assessment of biodiesel derived from the “niche filling” energy crop camelina in the USA. Appl. Energy 2012, 92, 92–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Yang, J.; Caldwell, C.; Corscadden, K.; He, Q.S.; Li, J. An evaluation of biodiesel production from Camelina sativa grown in Nova Scotia. Ind. Crops Prod. 2016, 81, 162–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Stamenković, O.S.; Gautam, K.; Singla-Pareek, S.L.; Dhankher, O.P.; Djalović, I.G.; Kostić, M.D.; Mitrović, P.M.; Pareek, A.; Veljković, V.B. Biodiesel production from camelina oil: Present status and future perspectives. Food Energy Secur. 2021, 12, e340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Pilgeram, A.L.; Sands, D.C.; Boss, D.; Dale, N.; Wichman, D.; Lamb, P.; Lu, C.; Barrows, R.; Kirkpatrick, M.; Thompson, B.; et al. Camelina sativa, a Montana omega-3 fatty acid and fuel crop. In Issues in New Crops and New Uses; Janick, J., Whipkey, A., Eds.; ASHS Press: Alexandria, Egypt, 2007; pp. 129–131. [Google Scholar]
  31. Ciurescu, G.; Ropota, M.; Toncea, I.; Habeanu, M. Camelia (Camelina sativa L. Crantz variety) oil and seeds as n-3 fatty acids rich products in broiler diets and its effects on performance, meat fatty acid composition, immune tissue weights, and plasma metabolic profile. JAST 2016, 18, 315–326. [Google Scholar]
  32. Hixson, S.M.; Parrish, C.C.; Wells, J.S.; Winkowski, E.M.; Anderson, D.M.; Bullerwell, C.N. Inclusion of camelina meal as a protein source in diets for farmed salmonids. Aquac. Nutr. 2016, 22, 615–630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Brock, J.R.; Dönmez, A.A.; Beilstein, M.A.; Olsen, K.M. Phylogenetics of Camelina Crantz. (Brassicaceae) and insights on the origin of gold-of-pleasure (Camelina sativa). Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2018, 127, 834–842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Martínez, S.; Álvarez, S.; Capuano, A.; Delgado, M.M. Environmental performance of animal feed production from Camelina sativa (L.) Crantz: Influence of crop management practices under Mediterranean conditions. Agric. Syst. 2020, 177, 102717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Riaz, R.; Ahmed, I.; Sizmaz, O.; Ahsan, U. Use of Camelina sativa and By-Products in Diets for Dairy Cows: A Review. Animals 2022, 12, 1082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Ratusz, K.; Popis, E.; Ciemniewska-Żytkiewicz, H. Oxidative stability of camelina (Camelina sativa L.) oil using pressure dif-ferential scanning calorimetry and Rancimat method. J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 2016, 126, 343–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Ratusz, K.; Symoniuk, E.; Wroniak, M.; Rudzińska, M. Bioactive Compounds, Nutritional Quality and Oxidative Stability of Cold-Pressed Camelina (Camelina sativa L.) Oils. Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 2606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Šípalová, M.; Lošák, T.; Hlušek, J.; Vollmann, J.; Hudec, J.; Filipčík, R.; Macek, M.; Kráčmar, S. Fatty acid composition of Camelina sativa as affected by combined nitrogen and sulphur fertilisation. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 2011, 16, 3919–3923. [Google Scholar]
  39. Vollmann, J.; Eynck, C. Camelina as a sustainable oilseed crop: Contributions of plant breeding and genetic engineering. Biotechnol. J. 2015, 10, 525–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Sindelar, A.J.; Schmer, M.R.; Gesch, R.W.; Forcella, F.; Eberle, C.A.; Thom, M.D.; Archer, D.W. Winter oilseed production for biofuel in the US Corn Belt: Opportunities and limitations. Glob. Change Biol. Bioenergy 2017, 9, 508–524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Neupane, D.; Lohaus, R.H.; Solomon, J.K.Q.; Cushman, J.C. Realizing the Potential of Camelina sativa as a Bioenergy Crop for a Changing Global Climate. Plants 2022, 11, 772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Mauri, P.V.; Mostaza-Colado, D.; Plaza, A.; Ruiz-Fernandez, J.; Prieto, J.; Capuano, A. Variability of camelina production in the center of Spain in two years of cultivation, a new profitable and alternative crop. In Proceedings of the 27th European Biomass Conference and Exhibition, Lisbon, Portugal, 27–31 May 2019. [Google Scholar]
  43. Mostaza-Colado, D.; Mauri Ablanque, P.V.; Capuano, A. Assessing the Yield of a Multi-varieties Crop of Camelina sativa (L.) Crantz through NDVI Remote Sensing. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Internet of Things: Systems, Management and Security (IOTSMS), Granada, Spain, 22–25 October 2019. [Google Scholar]
  44. Parra, M.; Parra, L.; Mostaza-Colado, D.; Mauri, P.V.; Lloret, J. Using Satellite Imagery and Vegetation Indices to Monitor and Quantify the Performance of Different Varieties of Camelina sativa. In Proceedings of the GEOProcessing, Twelfth International Conference on Advanced Geographic Information Systems, Applications, and Services, Valencia, Spain, 22–26 March 2020. [Google Scholar]
  45. Agegnehu, M.; Honermeier, B. Effects of seeding rates and nitrogen fertilization on seed yield, seed quality and yield components of false flax (Camelina sativa Crtz.). Bodenkultur 1997, 48, 15–21. [Google Scholar]
  46. Vollmann, J.; Moritz, T.; Kargl, C.; Baumgartner, S.; Wagentristl, H. Agronomic evaluation of camelina genotypes selected for seed quality characteristics. Ind. Crops Prod. 2007, 26, 270–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Kurasiak-Popowska, D.; Rynska, B.; Stuper-Szablewska, K. Analysis of distribution of selected bioactive compounds in Camelina sativa from seeds to pomace and oil. Agronomy 2019, 9, 168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Walia, M.K.; Zanetti, F.; Gesch, R.W.; Krzyżaniak, M.; Eynck, C.; Puttick, D.; Alexopoulou, E.; Royo-Esnal, A.; Stolarski, M.J.; Isbell, T.; et al. Winter camelina seed quality in different growing environments across Northern America and Europe. Ind. Crops Prod. 2021, 169, 113639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Plessers, A.G.; McGregor, W.G.; Carson, R.B.; Nakoneshny, W. Species trials with oilseed plants. II. Camelina. Can. J. Plant Sci. 1962, 42, 452–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Urbaniak, S.D.; Caldwell, C.D.; Zheljazkov, V.D.; Lada, R.; Luan, L. The effect of cultivar and applied nitrogen on the performance of Camelina sativa L. in the maritime provinces of Canada. Can. J. Plant Sci. 2008, 88, 111–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Obour, A.K.; Obeng, E.; Mohammed, Y.A.; Ciampitti, I.A.; Durett, T.P.; Aznar-Moreno, J.A.; Chen, C. Camelina seed yield and fatty acids as influenced by genotype and environment. Agron. J. 2017, 109, 947–956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Gesch, R.; Archer, D.; Berti, M. Dual cropping winter camelina with soybean in the northern corn belt. Agron. J. 2014, 106, 1735–1745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Berti, M.; Wilckens, R.; Fischer, S.; Solis, A.; Johnson, B. Seeding date influence on camelina seed yield, yield components, and oil content in Chile. Ind. Crops Prod. 2011, 34, 1358–1365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Zubr, J.; Matthäus, B. Effects of growth conditions on fatty acids and tocopherols in Camelina sativa oil. Ind. Crops Prod. 2002, 15, 155–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Zubr, J. Oil-seed crop: Camelina sativa. Ind. Crops Prod. 1997, 6, 113–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Knothe, G.; Steidley, K.R. Kinematic viscosity of biodiesel fuel components and related compounds. Influence of compound structure and comparison to petrodiesel fuel components. Fuel 2005, 84, 1059–1065. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Campbell, M.C.; Rossi, A.F.; Erskine, W. Camelina (Camelina sativa (L.) Crantz): Agronomic potential in Mediterranean environments and diversity for biofuel and food uses. Crop Past. Sci. 2013, 64, 388–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Alais, C.; Linden, G. Biochimie Alimentaire, 2nd ed.; Masson: Paris, France, 1991; p. 245. [Google Scholar]
  59. Council Directive 76/621/EEC, Official Journal of the European Communities No. L, 202; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 1976; pp. 35–37.
  60. Wu, X.; Leung, D.Y. Optimization of biodiesel production from camelina oil using orthogonal experiment. Appl. Energy 2011, 88, 3615–3624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Raczyk, M.; Popis, E.; Kruszewski, B.; Ratusz, K.; Rudzinska, M. Physicochemical quality and oxidative stability of linseed (Linum usitatissimum) and camelina (Camelina sativa) cold-pressed oils from retail outlets. Eur. J. Lipid Sci. Technol. 2016, 118, 834–839. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Zubr, J. Qualitative variation of Camelina sativa seed from different locations. Ind. Crops Prod. 2003, 17, 161–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Jiang, Y.; Caldwell, C.D.; Falk, K.C. Camelina seed quality in response to applied nitrogen, genotype and environment. Can. J. Plant Sci. 2014, 94, 971–980. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  64. Przybylski, R. Canola/Rapeseed oil. In Vegetable Oils in Food Technology: Composition, Properties and Uses; Gunstone, F., Ed.; Wiley-Blackwell: Oxford, UK, 2011; pp. 107–136. [Google Scholar]
  65. Harwood, J.L.; Woodfield, H.K.; Chen, G.; Weselake, R.J. Modification of Oil Crops to Produce Fatty Acids for Industrial Applications. In Fatty Acids: Chemistry, Synthesis, and Applications; Ahmad, M.U., Ed.; Academic Press and AOCS Press: Libertyville, IL, USA, 2017; pp. 187–236. [Google Scholar]
  66. Sharafi, Y.; Majidi, M.M.; Hossein Goli, S.A.; Rashidi, F. Oil Content and Fatty Acids Composition in Brassica Species. Int. J. Food Prop. 2015, 18, 2145–2154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  67. Skøtt, T.; Hinge, J.; Johnson, K. Straw to Energy Technologies, Policy and Innovation in Denmark, 2nd ed.; Food & Bio Cluster: Aarhus, Denmark, 2021; p. 53. [Google Scholar]
  68. Salas, H.; Castillejos, L.; Ferret, A. Camelina meal, camelina expeller and camelina hulls: Nutritional characterization and in vitro digestibility. In Proceedings of the XVII Jornadas sobre Producción Animal, Zaragoza, Spain, 30–31 May 2017; pp. 147–149. [Google Scholar]
  69. Kahindi, R.K.; Woyengo, T.A.; Thacker, P.; Nyachoti, C. Energy and amino acid digestibility of camelina cake fed to growing pigs. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2014, 193, 93–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Korsrud, G.O.; Keith, M.O.; Bell, J.M. A comparison of the nutritional value of crambe and camelina seed meals with egg and casein. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 1978, 58, 493–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Cieslak, A.; Stanisz, M.; Wojtowski, J.; Pers-Kamczyc, E.; Szczechowiak, J.; El-Sherbiny, M.; Szumacher-Strabel, M. Camelina sativa affects the fatty acid contents in M. longissimus muscle of lambs. Eur. J. Lipid Sci. Technol. 2013, 115, 1258–1265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Mihhejev, K.; Henno, M.; Ots, M.; Rihma, E.; Elias, P.; Kuusik, S.; Kärt, O. Effects of fat-rich oil cakes on cheese fatty acid composition, and on cheese quality. Vet. Zootech. 2007, 40, 55–61. [Google Scholar]
  73. Nayigihugu, V.; Cappellozza, B.; Gonçalves, E.; Krall, J.; Foulke, T.; Cammack, K.; Hess, B. Camelina meal and crude glycerin as feed supplements for developing replacement beef heifers. J. Anim. Sci. 2011, 89, 4314–4324. [Google Scholar]
  74. Cais-Sokolinska, D.; Majcher, M.; Pikul, J.; Bielinska, S.; Czauderna, M.; Wójtowski, J. The effect of Camelina sativa cake diet supplementation on sensory and volatile profiles of ewe’s milk. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 2011, 10, 7245–7252. [Google Scholar]
Land 12 00328 g001 550
Figure 1. Location of the farms (A) and varieties used (B) in this study.
Figure 1. Location of the farms (A) and varieties used (B) in this study.
Land 12 00328 g001
Land 12 00328 g002 550
Figure 2. Camelina yield compared to other crops in Spain and in the Community of Madrid (Data obtained from Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries, and Food of Spain: Encuesta sobre Superficies y Rendimientos Cultivos).
Figure 2. Camelina yield compared to other crops in Spain and in the Community of Madrid (Data obtained from Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries, and Food of Spain: Encuesta sobre Superficies y Rendimientos Cultivos).
Land 12 00328 g002
Land 12 00328 g003 550
Figure 3. Presentation of nine varieties of Camelina sativa reflecting their potential use for food (linolenic/linoleic acid) and biofuel (monounsaturated fatty acids/ polyunsaturated fatty acids).
Figure 3. Presentation of nine varieties of Camelina sativa reflecting their potential use for food (linolenic/linoleic acid) and biofuel (monounsaturated fatty acids/ polyunsaturated fatty acids).
Land 12 00328 g003
Table
Table 1. Yields of Camelina sativa varieties (season 2019/2020).
Table 1. Yields of Camelina sativa varieties (season 2019/2020).
SeasonFarmVarietyhaGross Weight (Tm)Yield (Tm/ha)
2019/20El EncínV11.071.241.16
V20.851.241.46
V30.951.491.57
V41.081.741.61
V61.00.970.97
V7---
V130.550.831.51
La ChimeneaV81.522.251.48
La IslaV111.01.180.59
Mean ± SD1.29 ± 0.36
2020/21El EncínV10.661.111.69
V21.451.621.12
V30.400.621.55
V40.801.351.69
V60.450.751.67
V70.650.891.36
V131.451.661.14
La ChimeneaV81.352.161.60
La IslaV110.951.581.67
Mean ± SD1.50 ± 0.23
Table
Table 2. Fatty acid content (% based on dry seed mass) of camelina seeds varieties in the season 2020/21.
Table 2. Fatty acid content (% based on dry seed mass) of camelina seeds varieties in the season 2020/21.
V1V2V13V3V4V6V8V7V11
C14:00.000.040.040.050.010.060.040.050.05
C15:0-0.020.02-0.010.020.03-0.03
C16:05.205.825.765.595.886.546.566.466.02
C16:10.040.030.030.030.040.030.010.040.04
C17:0-0.040.05-0.04-0.04-0.05
C17:10.010.02-0.020.010.020.020.020.03
C18:02.762.892.732.592.632.870.012.602.54
C18:115.9514.2015.6012.9113.2114.1215.5813.8116.00
C18:217.3421.5020.7620.0418.4419.1422.7021.9918.90
C18:334.6732.1932.0634.5534.8633.1929.7231.9332.30
Ratio C18:3/C18:22.001.501.541.721.891.731.311.451.71
C20:115.3514.2513.9414.8914.3814.8413.9213.5214.91
C20:21.572.001.902.001.971.871.691.771.58
C20:3-1.201.22---1.01-1.17
C20:40.260.280.270.260.240.290.340.340.32
C22:01.29--1.371.491.39-1.15-
C21:00.040.020.020.030.020.020.010.02-
C22:12.852.682.793.163.173.022.773.173.32
C22:20.120.150.140.170.160.150.150.160.16
C22:5----0.030.01---
C22:60.04-0.010.01-0.040.020.020.02
C24:10.770.690.700.540.690.610.670.620.67
C23:00.040.050.040.050.05-0.050.060.04
C24:00.340.150.210.430.280.430.190.420.26
Saturated9.699.048.8610.1010.3911.329.9710.768.99
Monounsaturated34.9931.8733.0731.5531.4932.6532.9631.1834.97
Polyunsaturated53.9857.3256.3657.0455.6954.6755.6256.2154.46
Ratio Mono/Poly0.650.560.590.550.570.600.590.560.64
Table
Table 3. Typical fatty acid composition in major oil crops and camelina (%).
Table 3. Typical fatty acid composition in major oil crops and camelina (%).
a Palma Kernela Soybeana Sunflowerb Canolac Camelina
C16:04481064.56.0 ± 0.5
C18:042452.42.4 ± 0.9
C18:13916182261.814.6 ± 1.2
C18:2103556617.320.1 ± 1.8
C18:3<0.5<0.513<0.56.832.8 ± 1.7
a [65]; b [66]; c Data from this work.
Table
Table 4. Nutrient composition of Camelina sativa straw.
Table 4. Nutrient composition of Camelina sativa straw.
V1V2V13V3V4V6V8V7V11
Dry matter (%)89.6990.1890.3889.9190.1390.5390.0990.4890.76
Ashes (% dsm)4.833.833.586.065.524.624.654.993.89
Crude protein (% dsm)8.087.726.388.279.449.435.496.805.64
Crude fat/ether (% dsm)0.880.650.670.681.120.980.620.720.47
Crude fiber (% dsm)51.3054.0155.8951.9249.9251.1056.9753.2957.91
Neutral detergent fiber (% dsm)78.3380.4583.6576.6276.1976.3381.0379.0582.82
Acid detergent fiber (% dsm)59.5761.0063.7359.5858.1160.0463.1360.6763.85
Digestibility (%)36.2136.1934.5138.5537.7637.7535.8631.1133.15
Metabolizable Energy (MJ/kg MS)4.824.874.665.074.995.044.794.804.46
Net Energy for lactation (NRC89; Mcal/kg MS)0.690.690.660.730.710.720.680.680.63
Table
Table 5. Nutrient composition (%) of Camelina sativa seed.
Table 5. Nutrient composition (%) of Camelina sativa seed.
V1V2V13V3V4V6V8V7V11
Dry matter (%)91.5492.2592.3493.2493.9493.7694.6894.0792.78
Ashes (% dsm)4.203.733.693.763.824.194.104.344.93
Crude protein (% dsm)28.3827.7727.0728.0827.8727.1727.6629.9628.78
Crude fat/ether(% dsm)39.1740.4739.1240.3441.2241.0337.9036.7236.18
Crude fiber (% dsm)14.8213.1617.4615.7815.0312.0218.9215.1513.70
Calcium (% dsm)0.310.300.260.290.280.290.270.260.51
Phosphorus (% dsm)0.690.600.600.640.660.680.700.770.75
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Montero-Muñoz, I.; Mostaza-Colado, D.; Capuano, A.; Mauri Ablanque, P.V. Seed and Straw Characterization of Nine New Varieties of Camelina sativa (L.) Crantz. Land 2023, 12, 328. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12020328

AMA Style

Montero-Muñoz I, Mostaza-Colado D, Capuano A, Mauri Ablanque PV. Seed and Straw Characterization of Nine New Varieties of Camelina sativa (L.) Crantz. Land. 2023; 12(2):328. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12020328

Chicago/Turabian Style

Montero-Muñoz, Iris, David Mostaza-Colado, Aníbal Capuano, and Pedro V. Mauri Ablanque. 2023. "Seed and Straw Characterization of Nine New Varieties of Camelina sativa (L.) Crantz" Land 12, no. 2: 328. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12020328

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop