TABLE 2.
Comparison of site yields (all four fields) and modelled tillage field yields.
| Harvest year | Measured site yields | Modelled field yields | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Start | End | Mg odt ha−1 | Mg odt ha−1 |
| 05/04/2013 | 31/03/2014 | 1.28 a | 0.62 |
| 01/04/2014 | 31/03/2015 | 6.32 | 3.08 |
| 01/04/2015 | 31/03/2016 | 8.61 | 4.29 |
| 01/04/2016 | 31/03/2017 | 6.47 b | 5.69 |
| 01/04/2017 | 31/03/2018 | 7.94 | 6.30 |
| Total | 29.34 | 19.98 | |
a
Based on destructive subsample of tilled field taken by Keane et al. (2019). Note while the crop was cut in March 2014, it was considered uneconomically to bale thus the above ground biomass was left on site.
b
Miscanthus Field D was not harvested due to extremely wet conditions, instead sub‐soiling was conducted to improve drainage. Site yields therefore excluded this field.