Chapter 1:\nThe Evolution of Switchgrass\nas an Energy Crop
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter discusses the prehistoric origins of switchgrass, its mid-twentieth century adoption as a crop, and late-twentieth century efforts to develop it into an energy crop. The species probably first appeared about 2 million years ago (MYA) and has continued to evolve since, producing two distinct ecotypes and widely varying ploidy levels. We build the case that all existing switchgrass lineages must be descended from plants that survived the most recent glaciation of North America and then, in just 11,000 years, re-colonized the eastern two-thirds of the continent. Moving to historic times, we discuss how switchgrass was first considered as a crop to be grown in monoculture only in the 1940s. Based on scientific reports indexed in a well-known database, interest in switchgrass grew very slowly from the 1940s until it began being considered by the US department of energy (DOE) as a potential energy crop in the 1980s. The history of how switchgrass became Doe’s ‘model’ herbaceous energy crop species is recounted here. Also chronicled are the early research efforts on switchgrass-for-energy in the US, Canada, and Europe and the explosive growth in the last decade of publications discussing switchgrass as an energy crop. If switchgrass—still very much a ‘wild’ species, especially compared to several domesticated grasses—truly attains global status as a species of choice for bioenergy technologies, it will have been a very remarkable evolution.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".