KENAF

BOOKLET

Prepared in the framework

of the BIOKENAF project

QLK5 CT2001 01729

Prepared by:

CRES
UNICT
UTH
CETA
BTG
INIA
UniNOVA
UNIBO
NAGREF
A&F
INRA
ADAS
 KENAF BOOKLET

BIOKENAF CONSORTIUM

Partners Country Contact details

CRES Greece Dr. Efi Alexopoulou (ealex@cres.gr)
Center for Renewable
Tel: +30 210 66030382, Fax: +30 210 6603301
Energy Sources
Biomass Department Web-site: www.cres.gr
(Coordinator)
UNICT Italy Prof. Salvatore Luciano Cosentino
University of Catania (cosentin@unict.it)
Department of Agronomy Tel.: +39 095 23411, Fax: +39 095 234449
and Animal Production
(DACPA) Web-site: www.unict.it
UTH Greece Prof. Nikos Danalatos (danal@uth.gr)
University of Thessaly
Tel.: +30 421 74000, Fax: +30 421 74270
Department of Crop
Production Web-site: www.uth.gr
BTG The Netherlands Dr. Douwe van den Berg
Biomass Technology (vandenberg@btgworld.com)
Group B V
Tel.: +31 53 4862288, Fax: +31 53 4893116
Web-page: www.btgworld.com
CETA Italy Dr. Massimo Veccheit
Centre for Theoretical
(massimo.vecchiet@ceta.ts.it)
and Applied Ecology
Tel: +39 040 3755610, Fax: +39 0481 599268
Web-page: www.ceta.go.it,
www.technoline.area.trieste.it
INIA Spain Dr. Jose Luis Tenorio (tenorio@inia.es)
Instituto Nacional de
Tel: +34 91 8892943, Fax: +34 91 8828124
Investigacion y
Technologia Agraria y Web-page: www.inia.es
Alimentaria
UniNOVA Portugal Dr. Ana Luisa Fernando (ala@fct.unl.pt)
University of Lisbon
Tel: +351 21 2948563, Tel and Fax: +351 21 2948543
Grupo de Disciplinas de
Ecologia da Hidrosfera Web-site: http://campus.fct.unl.pt
NAGREF Greece Dr. Evripidis Kipriotis (nagrefk@otenet.gr)
Komotini Agricultural
Tel: +30 2531 0 81920, Fax: +30 531 0 33556
Research Station
Web-site: www.nagref.gr
A&F The Netherlands Dr. Steef Lips (steef.lips@wur.nl)
Agrotechnology & Food
Tel: +31 317 475 391, Fax: +31 317 475 347
Sciences Group
Web-page: www.afsg.wur.nl
UNIBO Italy Prof. Gianpetro Venturi (gventuri@unibo.it )
University of Bologna
Tel.: +39 051 2096652
Department of Agro
environmental Science Fax: +39 051 2096242, - 2096241
and Technologies (DiSTA) Web-page: www.unibo.it
INRA France Dr. Ghislain Gosse (gosse@mons.inra.fr)
Institut Nacional de
Tel.: +33 03 22 85 75 04, Fax: +33 03 22 85 69 96
Researche Agronomique
Web-page: www.inra.fr
ADAS UK Ltd UK Dr. Sarah Cook (sarah.cook@adas.co.uk)
Tel: +44 1354 697 203, Fax: +44 1354 694 488
Web-page: www.adas.co.uk

i
 KENAF BOOKLET

PREFACE
BIOKENAF project had as overall objective to introduce and evaluate kenaf
as a non-food crop through an integrated approach for alternative land use
in South EU that will provide diversified opportunities for farmers and
biological materials for the “bio-based industries” of the future.
The main research topics were the followings:

To determine the sustainable yielding potential of kenaf, as a non-
food crop at different locations in Southern Europe, namely Greece,
Italy, France, Spain and Portugal and to assess the limitations that
cultivating techniques, such are: irrigation, nitrogen, sowing date and
plant density place on crop growth and productivity.

To develop a dynamic crop growth simulation model for kenaf that
will be a very useful tool for yield predictions.

To evaluate the effect of harvesting time and storage methods to the
quantity and quality of the harvested material for industrial and energy
applications.

To evaluate the suitability of kenaf for both selected industrial
(high added value) and thermochemical energy applications
(combustion, gasification and pyrolysis).

To carry out environmental assessment and LCA that will contribute
to make scenarios for alternative land use in the agricultural regions
of south EU.

To conduct an economic evaluation of the crop for alternative land
use in selected agricultural systems of southern EU regions.

In the light of this project (http://www.cres.gr/biokenaf) this BOOKLET for

KENAF was prepared. The information provided in this booklet has been
organished in six chapters. The booklet starts (chapter 1) with a short
description of the crop (origin, botanical description, important of the crop
and area of cultivation). In chapter 2 the eco physiological requirements of
the crop described. The management of the crop (sowing dates, plant
densities, nitrogen and irrigation requirements and finally the weed
management) is presented in chapter 3 based on the international literature
as well as on the data that was collected in the framework of this project.
In chapter 4 the reported yields worldwide were recorded with special
emphasis on the type of the cultivated variety (early or late) and on the
new released varieties. Kenaf it is characterised as a multi purpose crop due
to its high number of final end uses that presented in chapter 5. The main
findings of the BIOKENAF research topics outlined in chapter 6 covering the
whole production chain (production-harvesting-storage-end use) through an
economic and environmental approach.

ii
 KENAF BOOKLET

CONTENTS
1. Short description of Kenaf 1
1.1 Taxonomy and origin 1
1.2 Botanical description of the crop 1
1.2.1 Stems 1
1.2.2 Leaves 2
1.2.3 Flowers and capsules 2
1.2.4 Root 4
1.3 Importance of the crop and state of the art on kenaf 5
research in Europe and worldwide
1.4 Area of cultivation and world production 6
2. Eco physiological requirements 8
3. Management of the crop 10
3.1 Sowing dates and plant densities 10
3.2 Nitrogen requirements 12
3.3 Irrigation requirements 13
3.4 Weed management 14
4. Biomass yields and varieties 16
4.1 Early maturity varieties 16
4.2 Late maturity varieties 18
4.3 New released varieties 19
5. Uses of the crop 20
6. Main results on the research topics that dealt in the 24
BIOKENAF project
6.1 Yields of kenaf in South Europe 24
6.1.1 Effect of sowing date 24
6.1.2 Effect of plant density 25
6.1.3 Effect of irrigation rate 26
6.1.4 Effect of nitrogen rate 27
6.1.5 Effect of variety 28
6.2 Development of a growth simulation model 29
6.3 Harvest and storage trials 31
6.4 Suitability of kenaf for selected industrial applications 33
6.5 Thermochemical kenaf applications 35
6.6 Environmental analysis and LCA 35
6.7 Economics analysis of the crop 36
References 37

iii
 KENAF BOOKLET

1. Short description of the crop

1.1 Taxonomy and origin

Kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) is a short-day annual herbaceous plant
mainly cultivated for the soft bast fiber in its stem (Dempsey, 1975). It
belongs to the Malvaceae, a family notable for both its economic and
horticulture importance. The genus of Hibiscus is widespread, including
some 200 annual and perennial species. Kenaf is closely related to cotton,
okra, and hollyhocks. Kenaf, along with roselle, is classified taxonomically
in the Furcaria section of Hibiscus. This section includes from 40 to 50
species that were described throughout the tropics and they are closely
related morphologically (Dempsey, 1975).
Kenaf has been cultivated long, probably as early as 4000 BC in western
Africa (Roseberg, 1996). This plant is known under a variety of names
(Wilson and Menzel, 1964) such as mesta (India, Bengal), stockroot (south
Africa), Java jute (Indonesia), and ambari (Taiwan). Next to cotton, is the
most widely cultivated fiber plant in the open country and can be found
from Senegal to Nigeria. The plant in Africa had several non-fiber uses.
Leaves and flowers are used as a vegetable, its seed are used for oil
production and various plant parts are used in medicines and in certain
superstitious rites.
According to Wilson (1978), kenaf occurs as a wild plant in Eastern Africa
(Kenya and Tanzania) as a component of native vegetation. This crop was
introduced into southern Asia around 1900. Principal production areas are
China, India and the Tashkent area of the former USSR. Essentially, kenaf is
a traditional third world crop that is poised to be introduced as a new
annually renewable source of industrial fiber in the so-called developed
economies.

1.2 Botanical description

1.2.1 Stems
Kenaf stems are generally round, and depend on variety, thorns on the
stems ranging from quite tiny to large such as on a black berry bush. Stem
color varies from pure green to deep burgundy. Kenaf plants tend to grow as
a single unbranded stem when planted at high production densities of
170,000 to 220,000 plants/ha with a height of 2.5 to 6m. Kenaf stems have a
thin bark over a woody core, surrounded by a leaft tuft (Kaldor, 1989).
Kenaf stems contain two major fiber types, the one contains long fibers
situated in the cortical layer, and the other one contains short fibers
located in the ligneous zone (Figure 1). The central area of the stem,
corresponding to pith, consists of sponge-like tissue. The outer bark contains
the bast fibers with an average length of 2.5mm and the woody core fibers
with an average of 0.6mm. Kenaf fibers have three principal chemical
constituents, which are the a-cellulose (58-63%), hemicelloluse (21-24%) and
lignin (12-14%). The minor constituents in kenaf stems are 0.4-0.8% fats and
waxes, 0.6 to 1.2% inorganic matter, 0.8-1.5% nitrogenous matter and traces

1
 KENAF BOOKLET

of pigments. In total these minor constituents account to about 2% (Stout,

1989).
The core contains more lignin and less cellulose than the bark (Clark et al.
1971). The bast fiber compromises 35 to 40 % of the dry weight of the plant
mature stem; and the core compromises the balance (Muchow, 1983 I). The
fiber content of the kenaf bark content is about 50-55%, increasing
according to the plant population density, while the less valuable short
fibers make up about 45-60% of the inner core (Clark and Wolff 1969; Wood
et al. 1983). Lower quality paper can be made from the short wood fibres of
the core, while high quality paper can be made from the long fibres of the
bark. Consequently, the core is more difficult to pulp than the bark,
requiring more alkali and giving lower pulp yields; the resultant pulps are
relatively slow draining with poor strength characteristics (Touzinsky et al.
1972; Bagdy et al. 1975).

Bark
Core

Figure 1. Kenaf stem fractions (bark and core) for the variety Everglades 41.
The separation was done by hand before the starting of the flowering phase
(Source: CRES)

1.2.2 Leaves
Leaf shape varies and strongly depends on the variety. Further to that,
kenaf varieties are divided into two categories; the varieties (Everglades 71)
with deeply lobed leaves (usually called split or divided) and varieties
(Everglades 41) with shallowly lobed leaves (usually called entire) (Figure
2). The divided leaf shape can create a problem because it resembles
marijuana. The entire leaf type has leaves that resemble those of its
relatives like okra and cotton (Baldwin, 1994b). It should be pointed out
that the first few juvenile leaves of all kenaf seedlings have more or less an
entire shape.

1.2.3 Flowers and capsules

The flowers (Figure 3) of section Furcaria are characterized by having a
calyx with prominent central rib and two prominent marginal ribs. These
rigid structures apparently are used for supporting the fragile and delicate
petals. Also, the flowers of all species have more or fewer narrow bracts,
which are borne below the calyx. The tip of these bracts may be unforked
as in kenaf or forked, according to the sectional name Furcaria. More

2
 KENAF BOOKLET

specifically, the flowers of kenaf are typical of hibiscus, showing the

characteristic fused statement column.

Kenaf variety with

deeply lobed leaves
that resembles
marijuana

Kenaf variety with

shallowly lobed
leaves that usually
called entire

Figure 2. View of kenaf variety with deeply lobed leaves and with shallowly
lobed leaves (Source: CRES)

Figure 3. Kenaf flowers on the upper part of the plant stem (Source: CRES)
The seed develops in five-lobular capsule. The capsules of cultivated
varieties are generally indehiscent and remain intact for several weeks after
reaching maturity. According to Baldwin (1994a) kenaf seeds take roughly
45 days to ripen. The seed is small (1.5-3.3 gr/100 seeds), black in color and
subreniform in shape (Figure 4). The seed retains viability for about 8
months under ordinary storage conditions.

3
 KENAF BOOKLET

Upper part of the

stems with the
capsules
Seeds

Figure 4. Kenaf capsules and seeds for the variety G4 (Source: CRES)

1.2.4 Root
The plant has a long effective tap root system and relatively deep, wide-
ranging lateral root system making the plant drought tolerant. Further to
that, kenaf with its tap root system is considered to be an excellent user of
residual nutrients from previous crops.
It is reported that kenaf root is very susceptible to root knot nematodes
(Wilson and Summers 1966; Adenyi 1970; Adamson et al. 1974; Pate et al.
1958, Ibrahim et al 1982) caused by Meloidogyne incognita, Meloidogyne
javanica and Meloidogyne arenaria. Nematodes are multicellular,
microscopic, worm-like animals that feed mainly on plant root systems
(Lawrence 1994). Leaves on plants infested with nematodes are yellow and
fall. The infested plants are stunted and in case of a heavy infestation the
plant may eventually die (Figure 5).
The problem is particularly severe in light, sandy soils (Vawdrey and Stirling
1992). Disease epidemics probably develop relatively slowly in compacted
clay soils because their texture appears to limit the capacity of nematodes
to move from plant to plant (Wood and Angus 1974).

Infested roots
Healthy root

Figure 5. View of roots that have been infested by nematodes (Source: CRES).

4
 KENAF BOOKLET

1.3 Importance of the crop and state of the art of kenaf research in
Europe and worldwide.
Kenaf like all the other important fibre crops (jute, roselle, hemp, flax,
ramie, etc.) can be pulped to make a range of paper and pulps comparable
in quality to those produced from wood. With forests dwindling and the
virgin wood become more expensive and the increasing demand for paper
products it is understood why the non-wood fibre crops such as kenaf could
are so important (Wood and de Jong, 1997, Fried 1999). Kenaf in a period of
six months reach a plant height of 3 to 4 m and its production is two to
three times higher (per ha and per year) than the southern pine forests
(Fried, 1999).
Although the importance of the crop is mainly referring to paper pulp
production, kenaf is being characterized as a multi-purpose crop because it
has a number of additional industrial applications. Thus kenaf fibers (either
derived from the bark or the core of the plant stem) can be an excellent
source for several other uses such as for fabrics, building materials
(particleboards, low-density panels, wall paper backing, furntiture
underlays etc.), bedding material, poultry and/or cat litter, oil absorbent,
etc. (Kugler, 1988; USDA, 1988; Perry et al., 1993; Kulger, 1996; Borazjani
and Diehl, 1994; Ramaswamy and Easter, 1997; Kaldor et al. 1990).
Additionally, the whole plant has high protein and good digestibility and
may be pelletized (Webber and Bledsoe, 1991).
Research work on kenaf is being carried out worldwide (USA, Australia,
South America, Thailand, India and Japan). Early research started in the
United States of America in the 1940s in order to use kenaf as a substitute
to jute due to the supply distribution from the Far East during the World
War II (Roseburg, 1996). In 1960 kenaf was selected by the United States
Department of Agriculture from among 500 crop species (which included
hemp) as the most promising non-wood fibre alternative for pulp and paper
production. Since then, in the framework of national programmes, a large
amount of research work has been carried out resulted in a complementary
mechanized approach, which has reduced labor requirements and
environmental impact. Nowadays, in USA more resources are asked for
putting into work focusing on market development instead of the standard
production research.
In Australia the research on kenaf was initiated in 1972. The research was
specifically directed towards growing the crop for the production of paper
and the field program was supported by studies on the paper making
properties of the stem material. The undertaken research has clearly
confirmed the potential of kenaf as a feedstock for paper production and
established the cultural practices necessary to cultivate the crop. The crop
has not yet commercialized in Australia due to the fact that the Australian
pulp mills are mainly based on wood (Wood, 1998).
Kenaf has been accepted by the European Community as a “non-food” crop
with high production of biomass, which is composed primarily of cellulose-
rich stalk (Venturi, 1990; Webber, 1993). It has designated for utilization in
the production of industrial fiber (EC Reg. 1765/92 of the Committee of 30th

5
 KENAF BOOKLET

April 1992 amended by EC Reg. 334/93 of the Committee of 15th February

1993). The research at European level on kenaf started in the early 1990’s
and the developments on the crop have been concentrated on the
Mediterranean region with sub-tropical climates and have been focused
mainly on the primary production in the framework of a European
demonstration project that was aimed at testing kenaf as raw material for
paper pulp production. In the view of this project (EUROKENAF)
demonstrative fields were carried out in all the Mediterranean countries to
produce the raw material for the paper pulp tests. According to the results
derived from the cultivation of kenaf in the demonstrative fields it has been
reported that the dry matter yields had been strongly depended on the
maturity type of the cultivated variety and was ranged from 8 to 18 t/ha in
Greece, from 12 to 17 t/ha in Italy, from 13 to 24 t/ha in Spain and from 12
to 20 t/ha in Portugal (Rego, 1998; Paschalidis et al., 1997).
The BIOKENAF project (http://www.cres.gr/biokenaf) offered an integrated
approach for kenaf covering the whole production chain (production,
harvesting and storage) testing the suitability of the crop for industrial
products (high added value) and energy. This integrated approach was
carried out taking into consideration the environmental and the economic
aspects of the crop and through a market feasibility study was led to the
production of industrial bio-products and biofuels with respect to security of
supply and the sustainable land management. In Chapter 6 of the KENAF
BOOKLET presented the main findings of this project.

1.4 Area of cultivation and world production

According to FAO (2003) the main cultivation areas for kenaf are China,
India, Thailand, Indonesia and Vietnam (Far East). It has been recorded
(FAO, 2003) that the kenaf production in 1998/2000 was 0.51 million tons,
among which production from China accounted for 44%, India for 39%,
Thailand for 12 %, and the remaining were from Indonesia, Vietnam and
other countries (Figure 6).

Kenaf World Production

China India Thailand Other

Figure 6. Main areas of kenaf cultivation in 1998-2000 (FAO, 2003).

At that time the total production of jute, kenaf and other allied fibres (JAF)
was 2.644 tonnes (Table 1) and the projection for 2010 is 2.342 tonnes that
corresponds to a decrease on the growth rate -1.6% per year (2000-2010).

6
 KENAF BOOKLET

Table 1. Total production of jute, kenaf and allied fibres (JAF) (FAO, 2003).
ACTUAL PROJECTED GROWTH RATES

PRODUCTION 1988-1990 1998-2000 2010 1988-90 to 1998-2000

Average Average 1998-2000 to 2010

000 tonnes Percent per year

WORLD 3311 2644 2342 -1.9 -1.6

Developing 3309 2637 2342 -1.9 -1.6

Africa 10 13 11 3.7 -1.2

L. America 58 26 18 -5.6 -3.2

Near East 8 4 0 -6.2 -6.3

Far East 3233 2595 2255 -1.9 -1.6

Bangladesh 850 768 721 - 0.9 -1.3

China 642 179 9 -14.8 -28.3

India 1472 1548 1494 1.4 -0.8

Nepal 16 15 18 0.7 0.3

Thailand 172 36 20 -17.7 -5.1

Vietnam 32 12 12 -9.8 0.1

Nowadays, it is not easy to find any huge kenaf cultivation area of kenaf
producing countries like China and Thailand. It has been noticed that now
kenaf is only planted on marginal lands with poor or no management
(http://www.chinaconsultinginc.com).
Japan consumes nearly all of the Asian kenaf production. The Japanese
industry has set a short-term goal of 1%, which would require about 300,000
tones of raw kenaf. In the longer term, the Japanese industry has set a goal
of 10% (Wood, 1998).
It is reported an area of cultivation of 1,000 ha in USA (Kugler, 1996). In
1999, an area of 2500 ha was planted in Texas, Mississippi and Missouri for a
number of fiber applications. In 2000, almost 10,000 ha of kenaf are being
cultivated in various parts of the United States. The four main areas of
commercial kenaf activity in the U.S.A. are Georgia, Texas, Mississippi and
New Mexico.
In Australia there is no commercial production of kenaf and all the present
fiber production is for experimental purposes.
In Europe a cultivation area of 700 ha is being reported in Bologna (Italy).
The harvested material is being used from the company KEFI ITALIA that is
located close to Bologna to produce insulation mats from the bark material
(http://www.kenaf-fiber.com). In Italy there is another company working
on kenaf namely “Agrikenaf Volturno” (http://www.agrikenaf.it) located
close to Napoli.

7
 KENAF BOOKLET

2. Eco physiological requirements of the crop

Although kenaf is capable of adapting itself to a large variety of climatic
conditions, it is grows up best in tropical and subtropical regions since it is
sensitive to frost. It is grown at latitudes from 450N to 300S (Mc Gregor 1976)
(Figure 7) and at altitudes from the sea level to 1000m above the sea level.
Areas where the plant is to be cultivated should be free or protected from
strong winds, since the growth is rapid and the plants get so tall that they
cannot stand much wind.

Figure 7. Zone that kenaf can successfully been cultivated.

Kenaf is recommended for tropical and subtropical climates and for this
reason it thrives best with air temperatures ranging from 15 to 270C during
its growing period. The plant is frost sensitive and damaged by heavy rains
and strong winds. Since the plant can be damaged by frost during the period
of growth, sowing is generally not carried out until soil temperature exceeds
120 C (Angelini et al. 1998). Germination and seedling development are
critical phases for kenaf and their duration is a function of temperature.
The base temperature for kenaf germination has been reported as 9.20C
(Angus et al. 1981) or 9.70C (Carberry and Abrecht, 1990).
The needed precipitation level is 500-600 mm for a growing period of 4 to 5
months. Extremely heavy rains are also detrimental because they beat down
the plants and caused difficulties in harvesting.
Kenaf grows well on light to middleweight quickly warming soils and sandy
soils also showing very good growth. A well-drained sandy-loam soil, about
neutral in reaction (pH 6-7), with considerable quality of humus, appears to
meet the requirements of kenaf better. Very wet soils are not suitable while
kenaf cannot tolerate waterlogging especially in the early stages of growth.
Moreover, kenaf does not perform well on soils with severe drainage
problems. Fields with high weed levels should be avoided (Rehm and Espig,
1991). Good fertility contributes to higher yields (White et al. 1970;
Dempsey 1975; Bhangoo et al. 1986). Kenaf was found to be moderately
tolerant towards saline irrigation water (Francois et al. 1990).

8
 KENAF BOOKLET

Although kenaf has been cultivated in many areas, the highest yields have
been generally observed under the following conditions: Warm soil and air
(mean daily air temperatures between 220 to 200C), sufficient moisture
(monthly precipitation of 90-275mm), fairly high relative humidity 65-85%, a
long frost free season, and fairly well drained soil which may otherwise vary
greatly in texture and chemistry (Dempsey, 1975).
The flowering of kenaf is indeterminate. Flowering of most kenaf varieties is
under photoperiodic control. The plant remains vegetative until the daylight
falls below 12h and 45min. Kenaf cultivars can be classified into early-
maturity types (flowering in July) and late-maturity ones (flowering in
September/October). To avoid reduced growth due to flowering and fruit
formation, it is recommended that the day-length be greater than 12.5
hours during the growing season (Rehn and Espig, 1991). According to
Whitely (1981) two weeks of very cloudy days will initiate flowering as day-
length approaches 12.5 hours. On the contrary, photoperiodic does not
influence the flowering of the early-maturity kenaf varieties. While
photoperiod is the major factor determinant of the time to flowering,
temperature has a modifying effect (Angelini et al., 1998).
Kenaf yields vary widely worldwide. The interactions between local climate,
crop management, cultivar, stand density, and plant mortality make it
difficult to predict stem and fiber yield without field tests (Clark and Wolff,
1969; Higgins and White 1970; White at al. 1970; Dempsey 1975; Campbell
and White 1982; Bhangoo et al., 1986, Scott et al., 1989).
Commercial yields in the range of 9 to 22 t/ha biomass dry weights have
often been reported. The higher yields were generally recorded when
growing conditions were improved, typically as one moves from dry, high
latitude locations to humid, lower latitude sites. In well-adapted areas, such
as the southeastern U.S., kenaf has typically yielded three to five times
more fiber per year than southern pine, the typically pulping raw material
source in that area (Wolff, 1964; USDA 1993). Testing at several higher
latitude temperate sites it is suggested that the adaptation of kenaf could
change quite rapidly with a fairly small climatic change (White et al., 1970;
Lauer 1990; Evans and Hang, 1993).
In southern Europe it has been reported production of 20 t/ha dry stem
(Mambelli and Grandi, 1995; Manzanares et al., 1993). In other research
works it has been reported up to 26 t/ha dry matter yields (Alexopoulou et
al. 1999; Alexopoulou et al. 2000a, 2000b, Petrini et al. 1994 and Quaranta
et al. 1998).
In the framework of the BIOKENAF project a large number of field trials
were conduced in Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal and France and it was found
that the recorded yields showed very large variations (from 6-25 t/ha dry
stem yields) depending on the specific soil climatic conditions of each site.
It should be also recorded that the highest yields were recorded in all sites
when the sowing took place from the end of April until the end of May and
any further delay in the sowing time after the middle of June resulted in
great yields reduction (http://www.cres.gr/biokenaf ).

9
 KENAF BOOKLET

3. Management of the crop

3.1 Sowing dates and plant densities
Kenaf seeds are relatively small and require good seed-soil contact for
germination. Therefore, a fine, firm, well-prepared seedbed is necessary.
The ground temperature should be 15 0C at least as warmer temperatures
result in an increase in growth rate. Seed should be planted less than 1 inch
deep, if the soil moisture and seedbed are suitable (Stricker et al., 1998).
Kenaf can emerge from a depth of 2.5 inches under the most favorable
conditions. The importance of high quality seed (germination over 80%) of
appropriate equipment that gives uniform seed placement and the good
seed-soil contact should be overemphasized. It should be noted that warm,
moist soils are the ideal planning conditions for kenaf.
Kenaf plants that had been grown under no-till conditions resulted in lowest
biomass accumulations. No-tillage systems may be a viable option in
increasing acreage of kenaf, if weed problem is controlled and water is not
a limited factor (Mosley and Baldwin, 1999).
When kenaf is cultivated at a plant population ranges from 300,000 to
500,000 plants/ha, it is required a total quantity of 10-15 kg seed/ha.
Kenaf is self-thinning and reduces its population during the growing season.
A row spacing of 36 to 40 inches appears to be adequate. A 70% success rate
results in a crop density of 30-35 plants per m2. With good soil conditions,
optimal temperature and moisture, plant emerges in 3 to 6 days.

Kenaf plots
that were
sown at the
end of April
2004

Kenaf plots
that were
sown at the
end of May
2004

Figure 8. View of kenaf plots (Greece) that were sown at the end of April 2004
and at the end of May 2004 (Source: CRES)
The sowing date is strongly depends on the specific pedoclimatic conditions
of the area of cultivation. Early planting dates often result in poor
emergence and slow, non-competitive growth. On the other hand, the late
planting dates will often results in reduced yield potential due to the
reduced solar radiation availability. Due to the fact that the vegetative
growth for the late-maturity kenaf varieties continues until the appearance
of the first flowers (middle of September for the Mediterranean region), the

10
 KENAF BOOKLET

sowing should take place as soon as the soil temperature is higher than 15 0C
in order the vegetative stage of the crop is as long as possible.
According to the pedoclimatic conditions of southern EU, kenaf should be
sown from late April to late May, depending on the field specific
pedoclimatic conditions of the cultivation site (Figure 8).
A large number of research works have been carried out worldwide in order
to determine the appropriate plant population that results in maximization
of the crop’s yields. In the view of this plant populations between 99,000
plants/ha to 932,000 plants/ha have been tested for several kenaf varieties
throughout the world. In most of these research works it is reported that
the increase of the plant density from 150,000 to 350,000 plants/ha resulted
in maximization of the dry matter yields (Higgins and White, 1970; White,
1969; White et al. 1971; Bhangoo et al. 1986; Sarma and Boldoloi, 1995;
Sarma et al. 1996). Sahih (1978, 1982, and 1983) reported that for maximum
kenaf dry production in Sudan, the plant populations between 500,000 and
250,000 plants/ha were recommended for commercial production.
At high densities it was observed that there were decreases in plant
numbers (Scott, 1990) and moreover the number of branches per plant
decreased (Fahmy et al., 1985). Higgins and White (1970) and White et al.
(1971) found that the plant populations affected the plant height and the
basal stem diameter that significantly decreased, while the percentage of
dry matter at harvest increased (Naffes et al, 1983). Graham and Baldwin
(1999) reported that the plant population and the row spacing were not
found to effect the bast:core ratio of kenaf. Plants in stands that are too
dense for the cultivar or seasonal growing conditions tend to be short,
spindly and week-stemmed. Plants in stand that are too sparse produce
branches that are too heavy. In both cases lodging is inevitable.

Figure 9. Unbranched kenaf stem in plots that the plant density was 400,000
plants/ha (Source: CRES).
The choice of an optimum population (Muchow, 1979I; Muchow, 1979II;
Muchow 1979III; Muchow 1980) must consider not only the response of the

11
 KENAF BOOKLET

components of yield, but also its influence on the growth form of the plant
in terms of the ease of management. Since weeds can be efficiently
controlled by pre-sowing or pre-emergence herbicides and insects may be
controlled by aerial spraying, the only management factors requiring
consideration are harvesting and handling. Also the lower the population
was the greater the degree of branching was (Figure 9). This suggests that
an intermediate population should achieve a satisfactory balance. A harvest
population of 200,000 to 250,000 plants/ha is generally recommended.

3.2 Nitrogen requirements

Kenaf, unlike traditional agricultural crops that are grown for their seed, is
grown solely for its vegetation stalk. The removal of the nutrient–rich seed
from the field results in significant removal of minerals (and fertilizers)
from the source of production. The standing of the kenaf plants in the fields
until the first killing frost resulted in defoliation of the stems. This drop
returns significant quantities of nitrogen (as high as 4.0% by weight;
Hollowell, 1997) calcium, magnesium, phosphate and potassium back to the
soil where the stalks that remain prevent them from blooming away.
Standing in the field allows returns of nutrients from the leaves that have
already fallen and from the degradation of the non-fiber content of the
bark. By the time the harvest arrives, the only thing removed from the
kenaf field at harvest is the stalk, which derives from atmospheric
components (cellulose, hemi cellulose, lignin=carbon, hydrogen and oxygen)
(Dubard and Baldwin, 1999).
Kenaf’s response to added fertilizers depends on the soil nutrient levels,
cropping history and other environmental and management factors. A range
of fertility responses has been reported. In general, added nitrogen has
increased kenaf yields. Three important factors should be taken into
consideration for kenaf fertilization. First of all, it should be pointed out
that the fertility program should focus on vegetative needs of the crop than
the grain or reproductive needs. Secondly, kenaf with its deep taproot and
wide-spreading lateral root system is considered to be an excellent user or
residual nutrients from previous crops. Last but not least, it should be taken
into consideration the fact that the leaves that left in the field after the
harvest can return 60-120 pounds of N/acre (Bhangoo et al. 1986) or 50-100
pounds of N/acre (LeMahiew 2000).
According to Wood and Angus (1976), kenaf requirements for nitrogen are
high, up to 30 kg N per tone of stem. Wood and Muchow (1980) also
reported that the crop has a high requirement for nitrogen fertilizer; the
amount depends on the yield of the crop at the harvest. As nitrogen
fertilizer can constitute up to 20% of the cost of production of kenaf grown
for paper pulp production, accurate prediction of optimal rates of
application is needed.
As with other crops proper fertility maintenance, especially for
supplemental nitrogen application, is needed to optimize kenaf yields and
minimize production cost. Reports so far are inconsistent relative to the
effects of N on kenaf stalk yields (White and Higgins, 1965); researchers in
Georgia have reported both positive (Adamson et al. 1979; Amankwatia and

12
 KENAF BOOKLET

Takyi, 1975; Lakshminaray et al. 1980) and no benefits (Massey 1974,

Webber, 1996).
Studies in Florida demonstrated that the positive response to N applications
on stalk yields were dependent on the soil type (Joyner et al. 1965), while
kenaf grown on a sandy soil reported to N and did not respond to N on a
peat soil. Bhangoo et al. (1986) in California and Sij and Turner (1988) in
Texas increased stalk yields with the addition of N to soils with low
available nitrogen. Stalk yields in Missouri (Ching and Webber 1993) on a
silty clay soil and in Nebraska (Williams 1966) on a silty clay loam soil did
not benefit from N applications. Stalk yields have also reported differently
to N on the same location and soil throughout the years (Hovermale 1993).
Chew et al. (1982) found that the nitrogen fertilization increased the plant
height and the fibre yield of kenaf to the highest rate studied (112 and 120
kg/ha, respectively). K fertilisation increased kenaf height and fiber yield to
100 kg/ha at the 1-bloom stage, but to only 70 kg at the 5 to 10-bloom and
seed set stages kenaf increased in height and fiber yield between the 1-
bloom and seed set stages.

3.3 Irrigation requirements

Crane (1947) stated that 500-625mm of rainfall over a period of 5-6 months
is essential for a successful production of kenaf fibre. Haarer (1952) stated
that a well-distributed rainfall of about 125 mm for each month during the
growing season leads to optimum yield.
A series of research works has been carried worldwide in order to determine
both the maximization of the yields and the minimization of the applied
irrigation water. Where irrigation water is scare or expensive (Muchow and
Wood, 1981), the development of an effective water management strategy
needs to consider both the crop response to irrigation frequency and the
associated water application efficiency. When water is both plentiful and
cheap the efficiency of application is of less significance but it is still of
some economic importance. The efficiency of water application is inversely
related to the frequency of application, and also usually inversely related to
crop yield.
It has been reported that the dry matter yields were higher when the plants
irrigated well (Muchow, 1992; Robinson, 1990; Manzanares et al. 1993;
Mambelli et al. 1995). Further to that it has been reported that the dry
stem yields were linearly associated to the added irrigation water
(Manzanares et al. 1993; Mambelli et al. 1995).
Ogbonnaya et al. (1998) observed that the water deficit significantly
reduced height and collar diameter growth of kenaf. Kenaf could be
described as opportunistic in relation to water availability, with a high rate
of stomatal conductance and transpiration when soil water is available but
with markedly reduced leaf conductance and transpiration rate when water
is limited. Kenaf was also observed to roll its leaves during drought.
Muchow (1992) found that although the water deficit markedly reduced
biomass production, the crop was able to recover following re-watering.

13
 KENAF BOOKLET

Water stress is not always injurious. Although it reduces vegetative growth,

it sometimes improves the quality of plant products. It can be generally
hypothesized; therefore some level of stress may be required to improve the
fibre qualities of crop plants. This level of stress, which does not affect
growth, however, has to be worked out for each plant (Ogbonnaya et al.
1997).
According to Muchow and Wood (1980), the water stress resulted in shorter
kenaf plants, lower leaf area index, thinner stems and thicker leaves. In
Figure 10 the effect of irrigation on plant development is presented in fields
that were established in Greece. The plants that received 100% of PET had a
plant height from 250 to 300 cm 10 days before the beginning of the
flowering phase, while the plants that received only the 25% of had a plant
height that did not exceed 170 cm.
The percentage of bark in the stem material decreased only in the most
stressed irrigation regime. This was associated with an increase in the dry
matter content of the harvested material.
It has been reported (Cook et al. 1998; Bhangoo and Cook, 1998a) that
kenaf can be grown successfully on a saline soil when the irrigation water
has good quality.

Irrigated plants Plants that received only

(100% of PET) 25% of PET

Figure 10. Effect of irrigation on kenaf development (Source: CRES).

3.4 Weed management

Like any other crop, weed control is vital to successful crop production.
Kenaf is a vigorous growing plant and under optimum conditions it can form
a canopy over the row middles is as little as 5 weeks (Neil and Kurtz, 1994).

14
 KENAF BOOKLET

Once kenaf shades the row middles low, growing weeds and grasses are
shaded out and there is no need for additional weed control.
A pre or post emergence herbicide can be used, or a single hoeing after
germination may prove sufficient for combating weeds. If a more persistent
weed problem is present, hoeing twice may be necessary. This would be
done after the kenaf is at least 15 cm high and the weed is in the
germination leaf to 2-leaf stage. Because of kenaf’s fast growth, weeds are
not much of a problem once the plant is established.
In warm climates kenaf emerges and grows so rapidly that it competes with
weeds effectively. In cooler climates and with earlier planting dates,
cultivar and/or chemical weed control measures are more important. One
weed species, which is especially competitive with kenaf, is velvetleaf, a
relative of kenaf. At the seedling stage, velvetleaf and kenaf are very
similar in appearance and rate of growth. Fields with high populations of
this weed are not recommended for kenaf production.
Cultural practices that are available to a producer (such as timely planting,
narrow-row spacing, optimum fertilization, optimum plant populations,
etc.) should be used to reduce weed problems. In the absence of herbicide
registration for kenaf and particularly in cooler climates that the
development of the crop is slow the mechanical weed control should be
used.
It should be noted that few herbicides are available for weed control in
kenaf. In the USA, only Treflan EC, Treflan MTF, Treflan 5, Treflan TR-10,
Trilin, Bueno 6 and Fusilade 2000 are currently labeled for use in kenaf. The
last two herbicides are for post-emergence weed control, while the others
are used for pre-plant weed control (Kurtz, 1994a and 1994b).
A number of research works have been carried out in order to find out the
best pre or post emergence herbicides for kenaf. According to Hickman
(1990) the herbicides alachlor and metalachor may be the best solution for
season long weed control of kenaf. It is also reported (Webber III, 1994) that
triflualim and metalachlor provided excellent (>90%) weed control for
moderate weed problems in stem yields. The herbicides cyanazine, diuron,
fluometuron, lactofen, or prometryn can be used in kenaf production safety
(Kurtz, 1996; Kurtz and Neill, 1992; Kurtz and Neill, 1990). If registration is
obtained for these herbicides, they would very effectively control of a broad
spectrum of grass and broadleaf weeds.

15
 KENAF BOOKLET

4. Biomass yields and varieties

The selection of the best-adapted variety for each site is very important in
order to provide the highest economic returns (Bhangoo and Cook, 1998).
Breeders have produced many varieties, which vary in the form and color of
the leaves, stems, flowers and seeds and in their response to soil conditions,
climatic conditions and day length, as well as in the quality and yield of the
fiber which they produce (Catling, 1982).
Significant improvements in kenaf germplasm have been made since the
first projects were initiated in the 1940’s in the USA. Major gains have been
made in improving yield, bast fiber percentage, anthracnose resistance,
lodging resistance, and tolerance to the root-knot nematode and soil fungi
complex (Cook et al., 1998). Although the present varieties are capable of
achieving high biomass yields, there is interest in pursuing further
improvement of both productivity and fibre quality through breeding
activities because genetic gains can be exploited without a concomitant
increase in the cost of the crop management (Pace et al. 1958). Heterosis in
kenaf has already been observed (Pate and Joyner 1956; Nelson and Wilson
1965; Srivastava et al. 1978; Patil and Thombre 1980, 1981). The
development of superior hybrids could therefore contribute to the
improvement of kenaf productivity. Plant height, basal stem diameter, dry
bark weight and the ratio between dry bark weight and the core weight are
the major components of fiber yield and quality.
In the USA there are over 240 varieties of kenaf, but only about 10 are
commercially grown. In the U.S.A., the varieties used most extensively are
those developed by ARS researchers in Florida, “Everglades 41” and
“Everglades 71”. Both varieties are resistant to anthracnose. Since their
development in the 1960s, there has been little variety development
activity, although the ARS is initiating new breeding efforts. Genetic
improvements for adaptation in northern environments may be feasible.
Currently (USA), the principal commercial varieties are Everglades 41,
Everglades 71, Tainung 1, Tainung 2 and Cuba 2032. In small quantities the
photo-insensitive variety Guatemala 4 can be obtained. The recently
released USDA line SF459 has not yet increased for commercial sales
(Taylor, 1995).
Kenaf varieties, according to their reaction to flowering, are divided in two
groups the early and the late-maturity kenaf varieties.

4.1 Early maturity kenaf varieties

The flowering for the early maturity kenaf varieties is irrelevant to the day-
length. In the pedoclimatic conditions of the Mediterranean region, the
early maturity varieties are characterized by flowering dates that began
from mid-July to mid-August (Figure 11). The duration of the vegetative
cycle may be 75-105 days (early varieties) or 105-120 days (semi-early
varieties). Early maturity varieties have been produced for the Asiatic
regions of the former USSR.

16
 KENAF BOOKLET

In most research works, it is reported that the early maturity kenaf varieties
are less productive than the late maturity kenaf varieties due to the fact
that they have a shorter vegetative phase. Adamson et al. (1972) found that
the early maturity kenaf varieties (PI 329195, PI 323129, PI 343139, PI
343142 and PI 343150) that have been tested among other kenaf varieties
gave dry matter yields and that were always significantly lower than the
recorded yields for the late maturity kenaf varieties (C-2032, Everglades 41
and G-4). More specifically, the dry stem yields for the early maturity kenaf
varieties were 7.64 t/ha, while for the late ones were 17.9 t/ha.
G4 is the only variety that combines a short growing cycle and a high
productivity similar to those recorded for the late maturity kenaf varieties
(Figure 11). In central north Italy (Petrini et al., 1994) has been reported
dry yields of 24 t/ha for G-4. Grandall (1994) suggested that G4 is a
photoperiod-insensitive cultivar. According to Belocchni et al. (1998), the
early maturity G4 variety (in the Mediterranean region) needs from
emergence to anthesis a period of about 130 days. Although in the United
States and Southern Europe G4 is characterized as photo-insensitive with
short growing cycle, in Australia it appears to be the opposite. It is
suggested that the different conclusion of the control of flowering of G4
between Australian and United States researchers is due to the
amphiphotoperiodic response that appears to alter the photoperiodic
response in the two photoperiod regimes (Williams, 1994). However, in the
areas of the United States that the research for kenaf has been carried out
G4 flowers relatively rapid, due to the long days, with little radiation in
thermal time to flower among sowings.

Plot with the

new realized
variety Gregg,
Flowering in the flowering
plot with the hasn’t started
variety G4

Figure 11. Experimental field of kenaf in Greece in the beginning of September

2004; the plots of G4 variety were at the flowering phase from the middle of
August, while in the plot of the late variety Gregg the stems were at the
vegetable phase (Source: CRES)

17
 KENAF BOOKLET

4.2 Late maturity kenaf varieties

The flowering in the late maturity kenaf varieties strongly depends on the
daylight length and the first flowers appear when day-length is under 12
hours and 30 min. The duration of the vegetative cycle for the late maturity
kenaf varieties is 120-140 days. In the pedoclimatic conditions of the
Mediterranean region the flowering for the late maturity kenaf varieties did
not begin until the end of September (Figure 12). Consequently, the seed
set on the top part of the stem did not ripen because of the beginning of the
cold period (Siepe et al. 1997).
The late-maturity kenaf varieties due to the fact that the vegetative growth
lasts two months more produced significantly higher fresh and dry matter
yields. It is reported (Pertrini et al., 1991) that there is a relation between
kenaf productive and absence of the flower indication. This correlation can
be understood when taking into consideration that kenaf has an
indeterminate type of growth, which is rather rapid, until the first flowers
appear. Afterwards, vegetative growth does not stop, but its growth rates
decreases.
Among the late-maturity kenaf varieties, the most known are Everglades 41,
Everglades 71, Tainung 1 and Tainung 2. A large number of research works
has been carried out with the aforementioned kenaf varieties. Between the
kenaf varieties Everglades 41 and Everglades 71, it is reported that in most
of the cases Everglades 71 was more productive. In Arizona (McMillin et al.
1998) Everglades 41 gave 23.4 t/ha dry matter yields and Everglades 71 24.0
t/ha. The superiority of Everglades 71 over Everglades 41 was also reported
in another research work (Webber III, 1993). In this work, Everglades 71
gave dry matter yields of 15.9 t/ha and 14.5 t/ha Everglades 41. In central
Greece, Everglades 71 gave 20.58 t/ha dry matter yields and Everglades 41
18.14 t/ha.

Late maturity Early maturity

varieties at the end varieties at the end
of October are at the of October are at
end of the flowering the maturity phase
phase

Figure 12. View of kenaf field at the end of October 2002; the late varieties are
at the end of the flowering phase, while the early G4 is at the maturity phase
(Source: CRES).

18
 KENAF BOOKLET

Between the kenaf varieties Tainung 1 and Tainung 2, it should be pointed

out that in most of the cases Tainung 2 was the more productive of the two.
Further to that, in north-central Italy Tainung 2 gave almost 24 t/ha dry
matter yields, while the corresponding yields for Tainung 1 was 21 t/ha
(Petrini et al. 1994). In Mississippi (Ching, et al. 1993) both varieties
(Tainung 1 and Tainung 2) have yielded the same.

4.3 New released varieties

Recently, in the USA two newly kenaf varieties “Gregg” (Figure 13) and
“Dowling” that were released appeared to be clearly superior to the other
kenaf varieties in the later harvest (Scott et al. 1999). Further to that, it is
reported that the two new kenaf varieties (Gregg and Dowling) released
because of its improved total stalk yield and yield stability, high bast fiber
percentage, moderate tolerance to the root-knot nematode and improved
resistance to Cristulariella moricola. More specifically, the new variety
“Dowling”, a cordate leaf genotype released because not only because of
the improved total stalk fiber yield, the greater bast fiber percentage but
also for it’s less susceptibility to lodging (Cook et al. 1999).

Figure 13. Leaves and flowers of the three realized kenaf varieties (Gregg, SF
459 and Dowling) (Source: Onalee’s Home Grown Seeds and Plants,
http://www.onalee.com).
Apart from the two mentioned varieties a third kenaf variety named SF 459
was released (Figure 13). SF 459 was selected for its high biomass yields and
for its high resistant to nematodes.

19
 KENAF BOOKLET

5. USES OF THE CROP

The main products of the crops are presented in Figure 14. Although the
importance of the crop is mainly referring to paper pulp production, kenaf is
being characterized as a multi-purpose crop because it has a number of
additional industrial applications for both stem fractions. Thus kenaf fibers
can be an excellent source for several other uses such as for fabrics,
particleboards, bedding material, poultry and/or cat litter, oil absorbent,
etc (Kugler, 1988; USDA, 1988; Perry, et al., 1993). Furthermore, kenaf as a
fibrous crop appears to have enormous potential for becoming a valuable
biomass crop of the future. Last but not least young kenaf plants can be
used for animal feeding.

Figure 14. Kenaf products (Source: Photo courtesy USDA,

http://www.kenaf.com/products.html)
Kenaf pulps have been used for making several grades of paper including
newsprint (Kugler 1989; Fuwape 1993), bond, coating raw stock and
surfaced size (Figure 15). The results were positive, particularly in terms of
paper quality, durability, print quality and ink absorption.

Figure 15. Newspaper (Bakersfield Californian) produced by kenaf

(Source: http://www.naa.org/technews/tn950910/p18kenaf.html)

20
 KENAF BOOKLET

The whole stem can be pulped or the bark (35% of the stem) and woody core
(65% of the stem) can be separated and pulped separately. The quality of
paper from the core and the bast fiber is quite different. It is reported that
kenaf stems produce a pulp generally superior to hardwood pulps (apart
from the resistance to tear) and comparable in many respects with softwood
pulps (Badgy, 1999). The paper produced from core fibers is thin and dense,
whereas the paper produced from bast fiber is thicker, lighter, and
generally stronger (Han and Rymsza, 1999).
When the two fractions of the stems are separated after the harvest, the
core fraction can be used for energy production. The two stem fractions
after separation are presented in Figure 16.

Figure 16. Kenaf stem fractions, bark on the left and core on the right after the
separation (Source: Ankal Inc, http://www.kenaf.com/history.html).
According to the literature, in order to make use of the excellent strength
characteristics of kenaf bark in a range of high-value papers, chemical pulp
is desirable (Shorton, 1981). The soda AQ trials (Kaldor, 1989; Saikia et al.,
1995) with an environmentally friendly progress gave good results in terms
of strength and yield (63%) especially for the bark. The core material was
less suitable with poorer yield (46%), high chemical consumption and poor
drainage, but good bonding properties. Blends of 65% and 35% core had
generally intermediate properties and were acceptable for a range of
applications (Kaldor, 1989). The soda–AQ pulping of Sudanese whole stalk
kenaf produced pulps with good yield and strength properties with 14%
active alkali charge as Na20 (Kristova et al. 1998). Bark is the most valuable
fibre component of the stem material and has a relatively low lignin of 9 to
10% and requires only a relatively mild pulping process. The wood fraction
of the stem has a lignin content of 20-25% comparable to hardwoods.
Rasaswamy et al. (1994, 1995) have shown that kenaf fibers can be
mechanically processed, corded and made into yards and fabrics. The bast
fibers can also be used for growing lawns and possibly for a fiberglass
substitute. The core fibers can be used in the manufacture of particle
boards, animal bedding, oil absorbent materials for oil speal clean up
(Goforth, 1994), chicken liter, particle board and polting soil, a substitute
for non-renewable peat moss.

21
 KENAF BOOKLET

Kenaf fibers can be used in the manufacture as a substitute for fiberglass

and other synthetic fibers. Losure and Hudson (1999) investigated the
possibility of using kenaf bast fibers as fillers that can be combined with
PVC to lower the cost of the resulting product without unacceptable loss of
mechanical and physical properties (Figure 17). Adding fillers to plastics is a
way to economize on the amount of plastic resin despite some loss of physic
properties (Losure and Bartfield, 1998). Qualifying the loss of properties as a
function of kenaf content will allow blends to design for economical use of
resin, and ease of processing. According to Chow et al. (1998, 1999), kenaf
can be used as filler in plastics for producing thermoplastic composite
panels.

Figure 17. Kenaf bark fibers in plasticized PVC (Source: Mississippi State
University, http://www.msstate.edu/Dept/EMC/kenafresin.html).
Young plants can be used in forage applications (nutritious animal feeding)
as a high protein crop (Hurse and Bledsoe, 1990; Philips et al. 1990). Dry
matter digestibility is high and indicates that the fibre content is low even
in the 70-day material. In kenaf trials, it was recorded excellent re-growth
on plots cut between 40 to 70 days after sowing and it should be possible to
obtain at least two and possible more cuts from the one sowing (Wood,
1975). In the digestion trials with sheep in Thailand, kenaf leaf material was
compared with lucerne leaf material as a protein supplement for rice straw.
The energy and protein in the kenaf-supplemented diet had highest
digestibility although nitrogen retention was lower than with lucerne/rice
straw diet (Wood, 1975).
Grazing kenaf trials have been conducted in Mississippi. According to the
results, it was found out that the advantage of kenaf is that it is able to get
quality grazing until the end of November. This means less supplementation
with hay and grain after grazing (Hovermale and Louis, 1999).
The potential for mass production of oil as a byproduct of kenaf appears to
be excellent. The relatively high oil content of the seeds (20%), the unique
fatty acid composition that is similar to that of cottonseed oil, and the
reasonable amounts of phytosterols and phospholipids suggest that kenaf oil
can be used as a source of edible oil (Mohamed et al., 1995). The
polyunsaturated fatty acid content (linoleic acid) is too low for it to be used

22
 KENAF BOOKLET

for polyunsaturated margarines but it would appear suitable for the

vegetable fraction of margarine blends (Wood, 1975). Oil is also used in the
manufacture of soap, linoleum, paints and varnishes, and for illumination.
A wide range of new uses of kenaf has been tested worldwide recently. The
latest developments on kenaf uses are presented below.

Kenaf can be used as a bedding material (Moore and Burcham, 1999).
Having organic bedding is advantageous in most portable structures.
Kenaf also tends to stay dryer than most organic bedding sources.
Waldo et al. (1999) found that kenaf core can be an attractive source
for equine bedding.

The kenaf core appears to be a potential raw material for low-density
panels suitable for sound absorption type products (Sellers et al.
1995).

Kenaf core was compared to silica gel to determine suitability as a
packaging desiccant (Williams et al., 1998). While silica gel absorbed
more moisture than kenaf core, it appears that kenaf may be a
suitable organic alternative to silica gel.

Recently has been designed and demonstrated a kenaf Medium
Bioreactor Treatment System uses chopped whole-stalk as a medium
in an attached-growth bioreactor. According to this work (Burcham et
al., 1999), kenaf may provide a cost-effective means of odor
reduction.

Borazjani and Diehl (1994) released that addition of kenaf to sandy
soil contaminated with crude oil with or without added
microorganisms could enhance biodegradation of total petroleum
hydrocarbons in laboratory studies.

Kenaf core as a substrate for mushroom production showed good
results (Sameshima et al., 1999). The mushroom yield increased by
86% over straight hardwood production when core was mixed with
hardwood (80:20, respectively).

Inagaki et al. (1999) reported that a beautiful yellow dyed cloth (silk
and cotton) was achieved from a 0.5 to 2% pigment solution extracted
from the dry petals of the kenaf flower.

23
 KENAF BOOKLET

6 Main results on the BIOKENAF research topics

6.1. Yielding potential of kenaf in South Europe
In the BIOKENAF project a large number of kenaf trials for a period of four
subsequent years were carried out in several sites in South Europe (Aliartos-
Greece, Palamas-Greece, Catania-Italy, Bologna-Italy, Trieste-Italy, Estee
Mons-France, Toulouse-France, Madrid-Spain, Extremadura-Spain and
Lisbon-Portugal) and the main findings presented below:
6.1.1 Effect of the sowing time
The sowing time plays an important role on biomass yields and for yields
maximization in South Europe the sowing time should take place from the
end of April until the end of May. When the sowing time was postponed until
the middle of July (like in Lisbon in years 2003 and 2004) the produced dry
stem yields were quite low and did not exceed in any case the 6-8 t/ha
(Figure 18).
22

20

18
Final dry stem yields (t/ha)

16

14

12

10

0
Madrid (ES) -S1

Madrid (ES) -S2

Lisbon (PT) -S1

Lisbon (PT) -S2

Palamas (GR) -S1

Palamas (GR) -S2

Bologna (IT) -S1

Bologna (IT) -S2

Catania (IT)-S1

Catania (IT)-S2

Early sowing
Aliartos (GR) - S1

Aliartos (GR) - S2

Late sowing

Figure 18. Effect of the two sowing dates (early and late) on kenaf dry stem yields
(mean 2003-5, the vertical lines shows the variation among the years)
(source: BIOKENAF network).
Plots that were
sown at the
end of May
2005

Plots that were

sown at the
end of June
2005

Figure 19.View of the field trial in early July 2005 in Catania

(Source: University of CATANIA).

24
 KENAF BOOKLET

It should be pointed out that when the two sowing times were late April and
late May the recorded yields were higher in the case of the early sowing
(Figure 18, this is quite clear in the case of Palamas-Greece and Bologna-
Italy). The smallest effect of the early sowing on the yields was recorded in
the case of Aliartos-Greece and Madrid-Spain. In Figure 19 a photo of the
kenaf trial that carried out in Catania (early July 2005) is shown; half of the
plots were shown at the end of May 2005, while the other half were sown at
the end of June 2005.

6.1.2 Effect of plant density

A plant density from 200,000 to 250,000 plants/ha can ensure high stem
yields, unbranched stems as well as stems that are resistant to lodging. Two
plant densities were tested (200,000 and 400,000 plants/ha) and the mean
dry stem yields (averaged the years and the sites) were slighter higher in
the fields with the low density. Only in two cases (Bologna-Italy and Lisbon-
Portugal) the high density resulted in significant higher yields (Figure 20).
28
26
24
22
Dry matter yields (t/ha)

20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Palamas (GR) -P1

Palamas (GR) -P2

200,000 pl/ha

400,000 pl/ha
Bologna (IT) -P1

Bologna (IT) -P2

Aliartos (GR) - P1

Aliartos (GR) -P2

Madrid (ES) -P1

Madrid (ES) -P2

Lisbon (PT) -P1

Lisbon (PT) -P2

Paris (FR) -P1

Paris (FR) -P1

Catania (IT)-P1

Catania (IT)-P2

Figure 20. Effect of plant density (200,000 and 400,000 plants/ha) on dry stem
yields (mean of 2003-5, the vertical lines show the variation among the years)
(Source: BIOKENAF project).

6.1.3 Effect of Irrigation

Irrigation is a critical factor for high stem yields achievement, especially
in areas that in the summer months the rainfalls are very rare and the air
temperature is higher that 300C and in these cases a total quantity of
250mm of water is needed for moderate yields. The irrigation effect on the
stem yields was quite profound in the trials that took place in Madrid and
Catania (Figure 21). It should be mentioned that in most of the trials that
the irrigation rates was one of the tested factors statistical significant
differences among the rates were recorded.

25
 KENAF BOOKLET

25

20

15

10

0
tan 2

M id I0

Ma d I1

Ma d I2

I3

Lis I0

Li s n I2

I3

M I0
M I1

Me I2
I3
Ali s I0

lia 1
Al s I2

I3

Ca i a I0

ata 1

I3

Li n I1
I3
l am I1
lam I2

C ia I

Ca ia I
A os I

ia

id

an

n
an
n

n
tos

Pa as

as
P a as
rto

ea
ri

i
to

bo

bo

bo

ea
dr
n
tan

dr

dr
ad

sb

Me
t

lam

ta
iar
ar

iar

Ma

Li s
Ca
Al

Pa

Figure 21. Effect of irrigation rate (0, 25, 50 and 75% of PET) on dry stem
yields in five sites of South Europe (mean 2003-5, the vertical lines shows the
variation among the years) (Source: BIOKENAF project).

6.1.4 Nitrogen effect

Several nitrogen fertilization rates were tested. In four sites (Aliartos-
Greece, Catania-Italy, Madrid-Spain and Lisbon-Portugal) three nitrogen
rates were compared (0, 75 and 150 kg N/ha), while in two sites (Palamas-
Greece and Palamas-Greece) four nitrogen rates (0, 50, 100 and 150 kg
N/ha) were compared (Figures 22 and 23).
16

14

12

10

0
A liartos N0

A liartos N1

A liartos N2

Catania N0

Catania N1

Catania N2

M adrid N0

M adrid N1

M adrid N2

Lisbon N0

Lisbon N1

Lisbon N2

M ean N0

M ean N1

M ean N2

Figure 22. Effect of nitrogen rate (0, 75 and 150 kg N/ha) on dry stem yields in
four sites of South Europe (mean 2003-5, the vertical lines shows the variation
among the years) (Source: BIOKENAF project).

26
 KENAF BOOKLET
25

20

15

10

0
Palamas N0

Palamas N1

Palamas N2

Palamas N3

Bologna N0

Bologna N1

Bologna N2

Bologna N3

Mean N0

Mean N1

Mean N2

Mean N3
Figure 23. Effect of nitrogen rate (0, 50, 100 and 150 kg N/ha) on dry stem
yields in two sites of South Europe (mean 2003-5, the vertical lines shows the
variation among the years) (Source: BIOKENAF project).
In most sites the nitrogen fertilization did not play any role on the achieved
yields. The clearest effect of the nitrogen fertilization on yields was
recorded in Aliartos, Madrid and Lisbon (Figure 22) and in these cases some
statistical significant differences were recorded. In these cases the fields
characterized by low fertility and had organic matter less than 1%.

6.1.5 Effect of variety

The late maturity kenaf varieties were more productive compare to the
early one (G4) (Figure 24). The new realized varieties (Gregg, Dowling and
SF 459) had more or less the same productivity compared to the traditional
late varieties (Tainung 2 and Everglades 41) and at the same time the
variety SF 459 is a variety that is resistant to nematodes. In the 2004 and
2005 field trials that located in Aliartos-Greece the plants suffered from
root nematodes apart from the plants of the variety SF 459.
20

16
Dry stem yields (t/ha)

12

0
Tainung 2 Everglades Gregg Dowling SF 459 G4 Mean
41

Figure 24. Effect of variety (Tainung 2, Evergldes 41, Gregg, Dowling, SF 459
and G4) on final stem yields (mean 2003-5, the vertical lines shows the
variation among the years) (Source: BIOKENAF project).

27
 KENAF BOOKLET

6.2. Development of a growth simulation model

A new dynamic crop growth simulation model named “BIOKENAF” was
developed and it is able to predict kenaf phenology, growth characteristics
(leaf area index, soil water balance, etc.) and biomass yields (stems, leaves,
petioles) under a wide range of soil climatic environments in Europe. This
model was based on the Wageningen photosynthesis modeling approach and
it can simulate biomass production under two productions situations:
potential and water-limited.
After the development of the BIOKENAF model the validation was carried
out using data that were provided by all BIOKENAF partners from kenaf
fields that were established in several sites in Southern Europe for the
period 2003-5. In these trials, the growth and development of two important
kenaf varieties (Tainung 2 and Everglades 41) were studied under two plant
populations, two sowing dates, three irrigation and four nitrogen
fertilization rates.
The results on BIOKENAF model validation were quite encouraging, showing
a good agreement between the measured and simulated data on dry biomass
production per plant organ of kenaf (evolution throughout the growing
period and final yields).
Figure 26 demonstrates the good fit between measured and predicted values
of dry biomass per plant organ of kenaf throughout the growing periods of
the years 2003-2005 in central Greece. It is noticeable that the model
assesses well the negative growth rates of leaves and total dry weight due
to leaf senescence and to the low assimilation-respiration rate recorded at
advanced development stages. The measured data of years 2003-2004 were
used for model calibration whereas the data of 2005 can be used for model
validation. It should be noticed, that model calibration is a difficult exercise
since it is not sure that the field experimental data are always correct due
to the experimental error involved, and therefore the slight variation
between measured and calibrated values should not be attributed to model
weakness. Surely, during model calibration, an effort was made towards
better prediction of the dry matter yields during advanced development
stages and of course of the final yields. Based to these considerations, the
result of model validation for Greece 2005 (Figure 25) shows a very good fit
(coefficient of determination equals to 95.5%) between measured and
simulated total dry biomass yields of kenaf. The same holds for the
examples of Italy (2003) and France (2005) for which model validation gives
encouraging results (Figure 25). Note that the model may successfully
predict dry matter variation from over 22 t/ha to lower than 8 t/ha in the
different European environments, performing a substantial sensitivity
required in such broad predictions.
Particularly the model may predict quite successfully final biomass yields
production as this is reflected by the high values of the relevant indexes:
viz. r2=95%, RMSE<15 and ME ~ 0.8).

28
 KENAF BOOKLET
Figure 25. Measured versus
estimated total dry biomass
(kg/ha) throughout the growing
period of kenaf in selected
European sites and years
29
Figure 26. Measured (○,□,×,+) and
simulated (______) dry mater production
in Palamas, central Greece
(2003−2005). Predictions refer to
potential production situation. (○):
total, (□): stem, (×): leaf and (+): petiole
dry weight. Note: data 2003, 2004 used
for model calibration and data 2005
used for model validation.
 KENAF BOOKLET

6.3. Harvest and storage trials

Two different kenaf harvest systems were investigated in Trieste-Italy by
CETA: a) mowing-chopping harvested with sheltered storage of the product
and b) mowing-windrowing-baling. Both harvesting chains were performed
in late winter (January-February) when the stems were defoliated, the
moisture content of the stems were as low as possible and the fiber quality
was not the best. In the previous European kenaf projects the fields used to
be harvested in October when the fiber quality of the stem is the best. After
the harvesting the stems left in the fields for few days in order to lose the
leaves and the moisture content of the stems to be reduced (if the climatic
conditions at that time were appropriate).
The moving-windrowing-baling harvesting trial was carried out by using a
Caspardo FBR 175 (the stems had a stem height 160 cm, basal stem
diameter 12mm and moisture content 15%) and the harvested stems had to
be baled (the bale chamber was 35 cm x 47 cm). It was characterised by a
pick up width of 1.40m, a bale length adjustable (40-130 cm) and around 90
strokes per min by the plungerhead. It was failed to produce bales because
the baler was broken due to the high kenaf mass that was picked up that
caused a little plungerhead deviation and the following strokes caused the
breaking of the baler.

Figure 27. View of the harvesting (mowing-chopping) and storage trial in Trieste
(Italy) and transportation to KEFI ITALIA premises (Source: CETA).

30
 KENAF BOOKLET

The mowing-chopping chain was carried out by using a Janguar Claas 870
chopper that is usually used for maize in the area of the trial. This machine
works 350 to 400 hours per year on maize with 70% moisture content and
with a production flow 50-70 ton/ha chopped material. The chopped
material had a size of 34 mm and it was transported to KEFI ITALIA premises
to produce insulation mats from the bark with a variable density from 30 to
80 kg/m3 (Figure 27). In KEFI premises it was possible to obtain the core
fibre through a separation line. The whole harvesting chain was performed
with a work capacity of 1.2 ha per hour. The bulk density was about 32
kg/m3, while the chopped material had a moisture content of 12.2%.
Two storage trials were carried out: a) storage the chopped material with
size 34 mm in a pile covered by a plastic sheet and b) sheltered the chopped
material (10 and 34 mm) in a storehouse.
In Figure 27 the chopped material before transporting to KEFI premises was
piled up near the field border. The chopped material is a really soft
material and in order to reduce the pile volume the pile was compacted by
power shovel. Afterwards, the pile was covered with a plastic sheet,
normally used to cover the ensiled maize to prevent the chopped material
from becoming damp from rainfalls or snow. The low moisture content of
the chopped material during harvesting did not allow any fermentation
process to start inside the pile.
During the sheltered of the chopped material (10mm and 34 mm) in a
storehouse biodegradation of biomass was occurred due to the microbial
activity. During the storage period no fermentation process started inside
the piles, probably due to low moisture content at the harvest (17%). The
moisture content (%) of the stored material after two months storage was
reduced to 16% (Figure 28).

Figure 28. Storage trial of the chopped material (10 and 34 mm) in a
storehouse (Source: CETA)

31
 KENAF BOOKLET

6.4. Suitability of kenaf for selected industrial applications

Taking into account that fibres might be weakened during the winter period
in the field, the application of fibres in insulation mats is technically and
economically one of the best options. The use kenaf core particles as
absorber material are the most promising application of kenaf core.
BIOKENAF project focussed on the quality of the fibres, the application of
kenaf bast fibres for insulation mats and kenaf core as absorption particles
and did some tests with kenaf fibres in compounded composites.

Fibre extraction
It has been shown that kenaf fibres can be extracted from kenaf stems that
were harvested after winter without additional retting. Both on laboratory
and industrial scale fibre extraction was carried out without any problems.
After decortication the fibres still contained about 11% (w/w) of core
particles.
elementary fibre
microfibril
Ø 4 - 10 nm
elementary fibre
Ø 7 - 35 µm
kenaf stem
Ø 10 - 15 mm
CH2OH
bast fibre bundle O CH2OH O
HO
O O
HO
Ø 50 - 150 µm OH
HO
OH

wood cellulose AB 55 - 60% cellulose

AA 13 - 15% hemicellulose
AD 2 - 5% pectin
bast AC 9 - 13% lignin
pith

Figure 29. Schematic composition of kenaf stem and bast fibre (Source: A&F)

Insulation mats
No problems were met in producing insulation mats made of kenaf fibres
with 11% (w/w) core particles and these kenaf fibre mats show a thermal
conductivity close to commercial products from other fibres (Figure 30). In
spite of the quite high amount of core particles, the kenaf mats have
satisfying insulation properties.

Figure 30. Bark material after separation in KEFI ITALIA premises on the left
and insulation mats that produced from this material on the right (Source:
Reports of A&F, BIOKENAF project).

32
 KENAF BOOKLET

In insulation mats made from natural fibres, the moisture absorption under
humid conditions depends more on the applied additives like fire retardants
than on the origin of the natural fibres. Test show that especially when fire
retardants have to be used good ventilation on the outside of the mat is a
necessity to avoid build up of moisture in the mat, resulting in
microbiological decay.

Fibre quality
Fibres are affected by micro-organisms during the winter period in the field
(Figure 31), resulting in weaker fibres bundles with much heterogeneity. In
tensile tests, the cell wall of the elementary fibres break apart they are
weaker than the bonds between the elementary fibres. No difference in
fibre strength was found by additional warm water retting.
To ensure sustainable kenaf fibre business a broader range of possible
applications must be developed by improving the quality of the fibres.
Higher quality fibres might be achieved by studying and developing new
retting and extraction processes.

Figure 31. Affected kenaf stems on the left and unprotected fibre bundles on
surface of kenaf stem on the right (Source: A&F).
Composites
Test with kenaf fibres in PP compounds show
acceptable strength properties (Figure 32). No
differences were found in strength properties
of kenaf/PP composites between kenaf fibres
harvested before and after winter. However
because of the limited amount of samples and
tests, these experiments need to be
confirmed. The tested kenaf fibres can
compete with other natural fibres on flexural
strength properties, but not on impact
strength.

Figure 32. Composite test pieces

(Source: A&F)

33
 KENAF BOOKLET

Absorption
Absorption experiments show that kenaf core particles have water
absorption and water retention characteristics in the range of those of
commercial bedding materials. The large kenaf core particles show higher
water retention values, but this product contains too much bast fibres and it
is too coarse to be used as animal bedding. These large particles should be
reduced in size in the beginning of the separation process.
Absorption experiments show that kenaf core particles can be used as oil
spill absorber, but they need a size reduction to below 2 mm to be as
efficient as other natural absorbers like straw, wood shavings, flax core and
hemp core.
Kenaf /polyester mats show high absorption capacity for oil. They can be
pressed out and re-used at least six times without loosing their absorption
capacity.

6.5. Thermochemical kenaf applications

The measured ash content for kenaf core material was 2.0%, while for the
whole stem was 2.4% and both these values considered relatively low. Kenaf
–in particular the whole plant material - has a very low bulk density. This
has not only consequences for the operation of the gasification, combustion
and pyrolysis reactor itself, but also for the system that feeds the biomass
to the reactor. Due to the low bulk density of the material it will probably
not flow freely and the risk of bridging is significant. Also the actual feeding
rate might be lower than with e.g. wood chips. A fluidised bed
gasifier/combustor and a pyrolysis reactor are sensitive to irregular feeding.
Combustion: Based on the composition of the whole plant material, it is
expected that the high nitrogen content in the whole plant material may
cause quite high NOx levels even in a commercial (Figure 33), optimised
installation (a maximum content of 300 ppm NOx is expected).

4
concentration [vol%]

3 H2
CO
2
CH4

1 C2+

0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3

Lambda [-]

Figure 33. Combustion of Kenaf core material; hydrogen, CO, CH4 and C2+ as
function of lambda (Source: BTG)

34
 KENAF BOOKLET

Gasification: Whole plant material is considered as a difficult material to

feed in the gasifier/combustor. For an industrial installation further pre-
treatment may be desired. Core material can be used as such and no further
pre-treatment is needed. The core material behaves very much the same as
other energy crops like Arundo, Switchgrass and Miscanthus. Chlorine could
not be detected in the product gas. One explanation might be that chlorine
is captured by calcium and/or magnesium.
Pyrolysis: The total oil yield is relatively high compared to other energy
crops (like Miscanthus, Arundo, Switch grass, straw ~ 45 – 55 wt%), but low
compared to wood (~70wt%). The mass balance closure is 113 %, which is
mainly due to uncertainty in the amount of charcoal formed. Charcoal is not
removed from the system and used for internal heating. The charcoal
produced is calculated from the flue gas composition.
The oil has not been analysed in detail, but based on the analysis of the
kenaf quite some fuel nitrogen can be expected in the oil. Combustion of
the kenaf oil may result in high NOx emissions.

6. Environmental analysis and LCA

The energy balance is relatively insensitive to variation in cultivation, but
highly sensitive to biomass productivity, transportation and final end use
and disposal. When the yields were increasing the balance was improving.
The time of sowing and the level of irrigation are the main crop
management factors that affect biomass yields. So, these factors should be
addressed particularly in the production phase, in order to obtain a better
energy balance. The transportation distance increment will also worsen the
balance. Detailed consideration of the energy balances suggests that the use
of kenaf-fibres for the production of thermal insulation boards are favoured
over its use as an energy feedstock or as pulp for paper, where energy
balances may be poor. Also, kenaf for energy and for pulp for paper, are not
yet, current industrial end uses in the Mediterranean Region, by opposition
to the use of kenaf for the production of thermal insulation boards.
The life-cycle impacts of kenaf board have been compared with the
performance of a synthetic insulating product, such as polyurethane.
According to those results, Kenaf board production offers considerably
greater GHG emission reduction potential and acidifying gas emission
reduction potential, compared with polyurethane, and appears to represent
an efficient land-use option for this purpose. Net total emissions were
relatively insensitive to variation in cultivation emissions, but highly
sensitive to the productivity of the fields, transportation and final disposal,
as observed for the energy balance. Irrigation level and time of sowing are,
again, the production phase factors that may affect, significantly, the
results obtained.
Kenaf appears to represent an efficient land-use alternative in the
Mediterranean Region. Results showed that a sustainable production of
kenaf is promising when kenaf is grown on set-aside or on surplus
agricultural land following CAP reforms (like grassland and tobacco
cultivation) and when kenaf-fibres are used for the production of thermal
insulation boards.

35
 KENAF BOOKLET

3.7 Economic analysis of the crop

The economic analysis was based on data that were collected from fields
that had a size of 2ha and were located in Orestiada-Greece, Thessaloniki-
Greece, Trieste-Italy and Madrid-Spain.
The main results of the economic analysis are the followings:
• Market opportunities have been identified for kenaf as a fuel, in the
manufacture of paper, tea bags, and as a fibre-glass substitute. Kenaf
also is a viable feedstock for chemical pulp mills for the production of
speciality paper.
• High yields of 18 t/ha and above may be economically viable for kenaf as
an energy crop on large farms.
• Moderate yields of 14 t/ha will be economically viable for kenaf if the
product price is 80 euro per dry tone (Figure 34).
• There is an opportunity to increase gross margins/ha by optimizing the
seed, fertilization and irrigation (Table 2).

Table 2. Gross margin for Kenaf (€/ha) (figures taken from actual inputs made
to 2 ha areas of Kenaf grown within the project) (Source: ADAS).
Activity Mean Orestiada Thessalonika Spain Italy
Greece Greece

Total variable costs 836 895 845 741 558

Revenue
Price /t 80 80 80 80 80
Yield t/ha 13.1 12.0 14.0 19.0 7.3
Total Revenues from Sales 1045 960 1120 1520 581

Gross Margin (excluding 298 65 275 787 67

subsidies)

180
Project mean
Production costs (€/tonne)

150
Optimal
120

90

60

30

0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Yield (t/ha)

Figure 34. Influence of yield on variable costs of Kenaf

36
References
1. Adamson, W. C., Long, F. L. and M. O. Bagby. 1979. Effect of Nitrogen Fertilization on
Yield, Composition, and Quality of kenaf. Agronomy Journal 71, 11-14.
2. Adamson, W. C., White, A. and J. J. Higgins. 1972. Variation in Leaf Development and Dry
Matter Yield Among Kenaf Varieties and Introductions. Crop Science 12, 341-343.
3. Adamson, W.C. Stone, E.G. and Winton, N.A., 1974. Field resistance to the Javanese root-
knot nematode in Kenaf. Crop Science 14: 334-335.
4. Adenyi, M.O., 1970. Reactions of kenaf and roselle varieties to the root-knot nematodes in
Nigeria. Plant Disease Reporter 54: 547-549.
5. Alexopoulou, E., Christou, M., Mardikis, M. and A. Chatziathanassiou. 1999. Growth and
Yields of kenaf in central Greece. Proc. of the 6th Symposium on Renewable Sources
6. Alexopoulou, E., Christou, M., Mardikis, M. and A. Chatziathanassiou. 2000a. Growth and
Yields of kenaf in central Greece. Industrial Crops and Products 11, pp. 163-172.
7. Alexopoulou, E., Kipriotis, E., Chtistou, M., Mardikis, M. and S. Georgiadis. 2000b. The
Yielding Potential of Kenaf in Greece. Proc. of the 1est World Biomass Conference (in
press).
8. Amankwatia, Y. O. and S. K. Takyi. 1975. Some fertilizer experiments with kenaf (Hibiscus
cannabinus L.) in Chana. I, Preliminary studies on the effects of different levels of nitrogen
on the growth and fibre yield of kenaf. Chana Jnl. agric. Sci. 8, pp. 127-134.
9. Angelini, L.G., Macchia, M., Ceccarini, L. and Bonari, E., 1998. Screening of kenaf (Hibiscus
cannabinus L.) genotypes for low temperature requirements during germination and
evaluation of feasibility of seed production in Italy. Field Crops Research 59: 73-79.
10. Badby, M. O. 1990. Kenaf: The Papermaking Fiber. In: Kenaf Research, Development and
Commercialization. Proc. from the Association for the Advancement of Industrial Crops.
Annual Conference, Peoria, Illinois, pp. 1.
11. Bagby, M. O., Cunningham, R. L. and T. F. Clark. 1975. Kenaf pulp-soda vs sulphate. Tappi,
58:121-123.
12. Baldwin, B. S. 1994a. Physiological maturity determination and germination of kenaf seed.
Sixth Annu. Internat. Kenaf Conf. New Orleans, LA.
13. Baldwin, B. S. 1994b. Selection and Breeding of Kenaf for Mississippi. In M. J. Fuller (ed.), A
summary of Kenaf Production and Product Development Research 1989-1993. Miss. Agric.
and Forestry Exp. Sta., Mississippi State, MS, Bulletin 1011 (33 pgs.), pp. 9.
14. Belocchni, A., Quaranta, F. and E. Desiderio. 1998. Yield and adaptability of kenaf varieties
(Hibiscus cannabinus L.) for paper pulping in central Italy. Sustainable Agriculture for Food,
Energy and Industry, James & James (Science Publishers) Ltd. pp. 1039-1049.
15. Bhangoo, M. S. and Ch. G. Cook. 1998. Regional uniform kenaf variety and new breeding
lines in California (1997). Proceedings of the First Annual Conference of the American
Kenaf Society, pp. 13-16.
16. Bhangoo, M. S. and Ch. G. Cook. 1998a. Effect of soil salinity on kenaf performance in
California, 1997. Proceedings of the First Annual Conference of the American Kenaf
Society, pp. 21-26.
17. Bhangoo, M. S. Tehrani, H. S. and J. Henderson. 1986. Effect of Planning Date, Nitrogen
Levels, Row Spacing and Plant Population on Kenaf Performance in the San Joaquin Valley,
California. Agronomy Journal 78, 600-604.
18. Borazjani, A. and S. Diehl. 1994. Kenaf core as an enhancer of bioremediation. In Goforth,
C. E., Fuller, M. J. (Eds.), A Summary of Kenaf Production and Product Development
Research, 1989-1993. Mississippi Agriculture and Forestry Experiment Station Bulletin 1011,
Mississippi State University, pp. 26-27.
19. Burcham, T. N., Jones, J. M., Columbus, E. P. and M. E. Zappi. 1999. Kenaf Medium
Bioreactor Treatment System (KMBTS). Proceedings of the Second Annual Conference of the
American Kenaf Society, pp. 1-15.
20. Campell, T. A. and G. A. White, 1982. Population density and planting date effects on
kenaf performance, Agronomy Journal 74: pp. 74-77.
21. Carberry, P.S. and D. G. Abrecht. 1990. Germination and elongation of the hypocotyl and
radicle of kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) in response to temperature. Field Crops Research
24, 227-240.
22. Catling, P. M. 1982. Breeding systems of northeastern North American Spiranthes
(Orchidaceae). Canadian Journal of Botany 60:3017-3039.

37
23. Chew, W. Y., Abdul Malek, M. A. and K. Ramli. 1982. Nitrogen and potassium fertilization
of Congo Jute (Urena lobata) and kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus) on Malaysian peat. MARDI
Res. Bull.10, 3: pp. 317-322.
24. Ching, A. and C. L. Webber III. 1993. Effect of fertilizer applications on kenaf
photosynthesis, growth and yield. Proc. Fourth Int. Kenaf Conf., Int. Kenaf Assoc., Ladonia,
TX. pp. 17-23.
25. Ching, A., Webber III, C. L. and S. W. Neil. 1993. Effect of location and cultivar on kenaf
yield components. Industrial Crops and Products, 1: pp191-196.
26. Chow, P., Bajwa, D. S., Lu, Wen-da, Youngquist, J. A., Stark, N. M., Li Q., Enfglish, B. and
Ch. G. Cook. 1998. Injection-Molded Composites from Kenaf and Recycled Plastic.
Proceedings of the First Annual Conference of the American Kenaf Society, pp. 38-42.
27. Chow, P., Bowers, T., Bajwa, D. S., Youngquist, J. A., Muehl, J. H., Krzysik, A. M. and Ch.
G. Cook. 1999. Mechanical Holding Power of Melt-Blend Boards Made from Recycled Plastic.
Proceedings of the Second Annual Conference of the American Kenaf Society, pp. 31-36.
28. Clark, T. F. and I. A. Wolff. 1969. A search for new fiber crops, XI. Compositional
characteristics of Illinois kenaf at several population densities and maturities. TAPPI 52:
2606-2116.
29. Clark, T. F., Bagdy, M. O., Cunningham, R. L., Touzinsky, G. F. and W. H. Tallent. 1971.
Pulping of kenaf bark and woody fractions: preliminary investigations. TAPPI. Non-wood
plant fiber pulping. Progress Report No. 2: 153-159.
30. Cook, Ch., Escobar, D., Everitt, J., Cavazos, I., Robinson, F. and R. Davis. 1998. Airborne
Video Monitoring of Root-Knot Nematode Damage in Kenaf. Proceedings of the First Annual
Conference of the American Kenaf Society, pp. 145-148.
31. Cook, Ch., Scott, A. and J. Sij. 1999. Release of Kenaf Cultivars “Gregg” and “Dowling”.
Proceedings of the Second Annual Conference of the American Kenaf Society, pp. 138-140.
32. Crane, J. C. 1947. Kenaf: Fibre-plant, rival of jute. Economic Botany 1, 334-350.
33. Dempsey, J. M.1975. Fiber Crops. The University Press of Florida. Gainesville, Florida. 457
pages.
34. DuBard, K. and B. Baldwin. 1999. Preliminary Investigations on Biomass Production of
Mississippi-Grown Kenaf. Proceedings of the Second Annual Conference of the American
Kenaf Society, pp. 149-154.
35. Evans, D. W. and A. H. Hang, 1993. Kenaf in irrigated central Washington. In: J. Janick and
J. E. Simon (eds.), New crops, Wiley, New York, pp.409-410.
36. Fahmy, R., Aboushoba, L., Hella, A. M. and S. A. Abdel Salam. 1985. The effect of plant
population levels on growth, yield, and fiber quality of kenaf. Agricultural Research
Review, Vol. 63, no 7, pp. 137-145.
37. FAO. 2003. Commodities and Trade Technical Paper 1 Medium term prospects for
agricultural commodities. PROJECTIONS TO THE YEAR 2010, Rome 2003.
38. Francois, L. E., Donovan, T. J. and E. V. Maas. 1990. Salt tolerance of kenaf. In: J. Janick
and J. E. Simon (eds.). Advances in new crops. Timber Press, Portland, PP. 300-301.
39. Fried, R. 1999. Kafus Environmental Industries: Producing Forestry Products without Trees.
In Corporate Environmental Strategy, Vol. 6, Number 4, pp. 378-386.
40. Fuwape, J. A. 1993. Paper from kenaf fibre. Bioresource Technology 43, pp. 113-115.
41. Goforth, C. E. 1994. The Evaluation of Kenaf as an Oil Absorbent. In M. J. Fuller (ed.), A
summary of Kenaf Production and Product Development Research 1989-1993. Miss. Agric.
and Forestry Exp. Sta., Mississippi State, MS, Bulletin 1011 (33 pgs.), pp. 25.
42. Graham, J. W. and B. S. Bladwin. 1999. Effect of Plant Population and Row Spacing on the
Bast:Core Ration of Kenaf. Proceedings of the Second Annual Conference of the American
Kenaf Society, pp. 58-62.
43. Grandall, B. S. 1994. Performance of kenaf varieties under varying climatic conditions. In:
Proceedings of the Second International Kenaf Conference, Palm Beach, Florida 1: 202-206.
44. Han and Rymsza, 1999
45. Hickman, M. V. 1990. Pre-emergence Herbicides for Kenaf Production. In: Kenaf Research,
Development and Commercialization. Proc. from the Association for the Advancement of
Industrial Crops. Annual Conference, Peoria, Illinois, pp. 2.
46. Higgins, J. J. and G. A. White. 1970. Effects of Plant Population and Harvest Date on Stem
Yield and Growth Components of Kenaf in Maryland. Agronomy Journal 62, 667-668.

38
47. Hollowell, J. E. 1997. Nutritional and yield evaluation of kenaf (H. cannabinus L.) as a
potential high quality forage for the southern United States, MS Thesis, Mississippi State
University, Mississippi State, MS.
48. Hovermale, C. and D. St. Louis. 1999. Grazing Kenaf in South Mississippi. Proceedings of the
Second Annual Conference of the American Kenaf Society, pp. 50-57.
49. Hovermale, C. H. 1993. Effect of row width and nitrogen rate on biomass yield of kenaf.
Proc. Fourth Int. Kenaf Conf., Int. Kenaf Assoc., Ladonia, TX. pp. 35-40.
50. http://chinaconsultinginc.com
51. http://ww.cres.gr/biokenaf
52. http://www.agrikenal.it
53. http://www.cres.gr/biokenaf
54. http://www.fiber-italia.com
55. http://www.kenaf.com/history.html
56. http://www.kenaf.com/products.html
57. http://www.naa.org/technews/tn950910/018kenaf.html
58. Hurse, L. and R. E. Bledsoe. 1990. Kenaf Grown as a Forage Crop in Northern Texas. In:
Kenaf Research, Development and Commercialization. Proc. from the Association for the
Advancement of Industrial Crops. Annual Conference, Peoria, Illinois, pp. 13.
59. Ibrahim, I.K.A., Rezk, M.A. and H.A.A. Khalil. 1982. Reaction of fifteen Malvaceous plant
cultivars to root-knot nematodes, Meloidogyne spp. Nematol. Medot.., 10: pp. 135-139.
60. Inagaki, H., Yamada, C. and F. Naakano. 1999. Dyeing of Cloth with the Kenaf Flower.
Proceedings of the Second Annual Conference of the American Kenaf Society, pp. 65-71.
61. Joyner, J.F., D.F. Fishler, and F.D. Wilson. 1965. Fertility studies in kenaf. p. 105-118.
Proc. Second Int. Kenaf Conf., Palm Beach, FL.
62. Kaldor, A. F. 1989. Preparation of kenaf bark bark and core fibres for pulping by the Annkel
method. Tappi, J. 72 (9), 137-140.
63. Kaldor, A. F., Karlgren, C. and H. Yerwest. 1990. Kenaf – a fast growing fiber source for
papermaking. Tappi – J 73 11, pp. 205-209.
64. Kugler, D. E. 1988. Kenaf newsprint: realizing commercialization of a new crop after four
decades of research and development, a report on the kenaf demonstration project. USDA-
CSRS, Washington, D.C., 13pp.
65. Kugler, D. E. 1990. Non-wood Fiber Crops: Commercialization of Kenaf for Newsprint. In: J.
Janick and J. E. Simon (eds.), Advances in new crops. Timber Press, Portland, OR, pp. 289-
292.
66. Kugler, D.E. 1996. Kenaf Commercialization: 1986-1995. In: J. Janick (ed.), Progress in
new crops. ASHS Press, Arlington, VA., pp. 129-132.
67. Kurtz, M. E. 1994a. Tolerance of kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) to post-emergence directed
herbicides. Ind. Crop. Prod. 3, pp. 145-149.
68. Kurtz, M. E. 1994b. Weed Control in Kenaf. In M. J. Fuller (ed.), A summary of Kenaf
Production and Product Development Research 1989-1993. Miss. Agric. and Forestry Exp.
Sta., Mississippi State, MS, Bulletin 1011 (33 pgs.), pp. 10-13.
69. Kurtz, M. E. 1996. Kenaf tolerance to acifluorfen, cyanazine, diuron, fluometuron,
fomesafen, or prometryn applied postemergence-directed. Industrial Crops and Products 5,
pp. 119-124.
70. Kurtz, M. E. and S. Neill. 1992. Tolerance of kenaf to Selected Postmergence Herbicides.
Wood Technology 6, 125-128.
71. Kurtz, M. E. and S. W. Neill. 1990. Effect of Herbicides on Kenaf. In: Kenaf Research,
Development and Commercialization. Proc. from the Association for the Advancement of
Industrial Crops. Annual Conference, Peoria, Illinois, pp. 15-16.
72. Lakshminarayana, A., Krishna Murty, R., Rama Rao, M. and P.Appa Rao. 1980. Efficiency of
nitrogen utilization by roselle and kenaf. Indian J. agric. Sci. 50 (3): pp. 244-248.
73. Lauer, J. G. 1990. Kenaf production potential in northwest Wyoming. Wyoming Agr. Expt.
Sta. Bul. B-932. Feb.
74. Lawrence, G.W. 1994. Plant parasitic nematodes-pests of kenaf. pp. 13-14. In M.J.Fuller,
(ed.). A Summary of Kenaf Production and Product Development Research 1989-1993. Miss.
Agric. and Forestry Exp. Sta., Mississippi State, MS, Bulletin 1011, 33 pgs.
75. LeMahieu, P. J., Oplinger, E. S. and D. H. Putnam. 2000. Kenaf.
(http://hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/afcum/kenaf.html)

39
76. Losure, N. and J. Hudson. 1999. Kenaf Bast Fiber/PVC Composites. Proceedings of the
Second Annual Conference of the American Kenaf Society, pp. 20-30.
77. Losure, N. S. and C. A. Barfield. 1998. Properties of kenaf core flour blends with polyvinyl
chloride plastic. Proceedings of the First Annual Conference of the American Kenaf Society,
pp. 27-37.
78. Mambelli, S. and S. Grandi. 1995. Yield and quality of kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) stem
as affected by harvest date and irrigation. Industrial Crops and Products 4, pp. 97-104.
79. Manzanares, M., Tenorio J. L, Manzanares P. and L. Ayebre. 1993. Yield and development
of kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) crop in relation to water supply and intercepted
radiation. Biomass and Bioenergy VOL.5, No. 5, pp 337-345.
80. Massey, J. H. 1974. Effects of nitrogen levels and row widths on kenaf. Agronomy Journal
66, 822-823.
81. McGregor, S. E. 1976. Insect Pollination of Cultivated Crop Plants. Chapter 7: Small Fruits
and Brambles. Kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.), family Malvaceae.
82. McMillin, J. D., Wagner, M. R., Webber III, C. L., Mann, S. S., Nichols, J. D. and L. Jech.
1998. Potential for kenaf cultivation in south-central Arizona. Industrial Crops and Products
9, 73-77.
83. Mohamed, A., Bhardwaj, H, Hamama, A. and C. Webber, III. 1995. Chemical composition of
kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) seed oil. Ind. Crops and Products, 4: 157-165.
84. Moore, R. and T. Burcham. 1999. Evaluation of Kenaf as a Bedding Material in Dairy Free
Stalls. Proceedings of the Second Annual Conference of the American Kenaf Society, pp. 97-
101.
85. Mosley, J. and B. S. Baldwin. 1999. The Effects of Tillage Treatment on the Growth and
Development of Kenaf. Proceedings of the Second Annual Conference of the American
Kenaf Society, pp. 41-47.
86. Muchow, R. C. 1983. I. Effect of sowing date on the growth and yield of kenaf (Hibiscus
cannabinus) grown under irrigation in tropical Australia. Phenology and seed production.
Field Crops Research 7: pp 81-90.
87. Muchow, R. C. 1992. Effect of water and nitrogen supply on radiation interception and
biomass accumulation of kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) in a semi-arid tropical
environment. Field Crops Res. 28, 281-293.
88. Muchow, R. C., 1979. I. Effects of plant population and season on kenaf (Hibiscus
cannabinus L.) grown under irrigation in tropical Australia.1. Influence on the components
of yield. Field Crop Res. 2, 55-66.
89. Muchow, R. C., 1979. II. Effects of plant population and season on kenaf (Hibiscus
cannabinus L.) grown under irrigation in tropical. Seed yield and stem yield at maturity.
Field Crop Res. 3, 27-32.
90. Muchow, R. C., 1979. III. Effects of plant population and season on kenaf (Hibiscus
cannabinus L.) grown under irrigation in tropical Australia. Influence on growth parameters
and yield prediction. Field Crop Res. 2, 67-76.
91. Muchow, R. C., and I. M. Wood. 1980. Yield and growth responses of kenaf (Hibiscus
cannabinus L.), in a semi-arid tropical environment, to irrigation regimes based on leaf
water potential. Irrig. Sci. 1, 209-222.
92. Muchow, R.C., and I. M. Wood. 1981. Pattern of infiltration with furrow irrigation and
evaportanspiration of keanf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) grown on Cununurra clay in the Ord
Irrigation Area. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. Anim. Husb. 21, 101-108.
93. Naffes, M. Kanzanda and P. Shah. 1983. Effect of plant population on green stalk and fibre
yields of Jute and Kenaf varieties. Pakistan J. Agric. Res., Vol. 4, No2, pp. 111-115.
94. Neil, S. W. and M. E. Kurtz, 1994. The effect of plant population on kenaf yield. In M.J.
Fuller (ed.), A summary of kenaf production and product development research 1989-1993.
Miss. Agric. and Forestry Exp. Sta., Mississippi State, MS, Bulletin 1011, 33 pgs.
95. Nelson, E. G. and F. D. Wilson. 1965. Inheritance in kenaf as related selection of inbred
lines for composite varieties. Tech. Bull. USDA. No. 1319, pp. 1-28.
96. Ogbonnaya, C. I., Nwalozie, M. C., Roy-Macauley, H. and D. J. M. Annerose. 1998. Growth
and water relations of kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) under water deficit on a sandy soil.
Industrial Crops and Products 8, 65-76.
97. Ogbonnaya, C. I., Roy-Macauley, H., Nwalozie, M. C. and D. J. M. Annerose. 1997. Physical
and hystochemical properties of kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) grown under water deficit
on a sandy soil. Industrial Crops and Products 7, 9-18.

40
98. Paschalidis, Ch. D., Stavrinos, E. A., Mitsios, J. K. and S. V. Christidou. 1997. The Effect of
Nitrogen Uptake and Utilization on the Growth and the Yield Characteristics of Kenaf
(Hibiscus cannabinus, Malvaceae) in Entisols. Bulgarian Journal of Agricultural Science, 3,
pp. 411-418.
99. Pate, J. B. and J. F. Joyner. 1958. The inheritance of a male sterility factor in kenaf,
Hibiscus cannabinus L. Agronomy Journal 50, pp.402.
100. Pate, J. B., Summers, T. E. and M. Y. Menzel. 1958. Resistance of Hibiscus eetveldianus to
root-knot nematode and the possibility of its use as a source of resistance in kenaf, Hibiscis
cannabinus L. Plant Dis. Reptr., 42, pp. 796-797.
101. Patil, R. C., Thombre, M. V. 1980. Heterosis and combining ability studies in Hibiscus
canabinus (L). JMAU 5(52). 123-126.
102. Perry, R. C., Jones, D. E. and M. S. Bhangoo. 1993. “A Preliminary Study on Kenaf as a Feed
for Livestock (1992). Proc. of 5th Annual International Kenaf Association Conference, March
3-5, 1993, Fresno CA, pp. 45-48.
103. Pertini, C., Bazzocchi, R. and P. Montalti,. 1994. Yield potential and adaptation of kenaf
(Hibiscus cannabinus L.) in north-central Italy. 3, 11-15.
104. Petrini, C. and A. Belletti. 1991. Kenaf: adaptability and productivity potentialities in the
north centre of Italy. In: Biomass for Energy, Industry and Envoronment, 6th E.C.
Conference, Athens, pp. 292-296.
105. Phillips, W. A., Rao, A. and T. Dao. 1990. Nutritive Value of Immature Whole Plant Kenaf
and Mature Kenaf Tops for Growing Ruminants. In: Kenaf Research, Development and
Commercialization. Proc. from the Association for the Advancement of Industrial Crops.
Annual Conference, Peoria, Illinois, pp. 17-22.
106. Quaranta, F., A. Belocchi and E. Desiderio. 1998. Potentialities and limits of kenaf and
fibre sorghum for pulping cultivation in Italy: Results of a multi year cycle of Trials. 10th
European Conference.
107. Ramaswamy, G. N., Craft, S. and L. Wartelle. 1995. Uniformity and softness of kenaf fibers
for textile products. Tex. Res. J. 65, pp. 767-770.
108. Ramaswamy, G. N., Ruff, C. G. and C. R. Boyd. 1994. Effects of bacterial chemical retting
on kenaf fiber quality. Tex. Res. J. 64, pp. 305-308.
109. Rego, F. 1998. Production of kenaf in Portugal.
(http://btgs1.uwente.nl/acrive/biobase/B10246.html).
110. Rehm, S. and Espig, G. 1991. The Cultivated Plants of Tropics and Subtropics. Verlag
Joseph Margraf, Priese GmbH, Berlin.
111. Robinson, F. E. 1990. Irrigation of kenaf in a desert. In: USDA CSRS (Ed.) Kenaf Research,
Development and Commercialization. Proceedings from the Association for the
Advancement of Industrial Crops. 5 October, Peoria, IL, pp 23.26.
112. Roseberg, R. J. 1996. Underexploited temperate industrial and fiber crops. In: J. Janick
(ed.), Progress in new crops, ASHS Press, Alexandria, VA, p. 60-84.
113. Saikia, C. N., Ali, F. and T. C. Sarma. 1995. Hibiscus cannabinus - an annual source for
paper and cellulose industries. Advances in Forestry Research in India, 12, 116-146.
114. Salih, F. A. 1978. Effects of Population Densities and row spacing on kenaf yields and its
components in the Kenana Area of the Sudan. Acta Acad. Sci. Hung. 27, pp. 349-356.
115. Salih, F. A. 1982. Effect of variety, sowing date and nitrogen on kenaf yields in the Kenana
area of the Sudan. Acta Agronomica Acad. Sci. Hung. 31, pp. 58-66.
116. Salih, F. A. 1983. Effects of Population Densities and Nitrogen Levels on Kenaf Yields and its
Components in the Kenana Area of the Sudan. J. Agronomy & Crop Science 152, pp. 48-55.
117. Sameshima, K., Cheng, Z., Mazumder, B. B., Sameshima, I. and Y. Ohtani. 1999.
Development of Kenaf Activities in Kochi, Japan. Proceedings of the Second Annual
Conference of the American Kenaf Society, pp. 72-84.
118. Sarma, T. C. and D. N. Bordoloi. 1995. Yield and pulpable biomass of kenaf (Hibiscus
cannabinus) varieties under various row spacings and nitrogen. Indian J. Agron., 40(4): 722-
724.
119. Sarma, T. C., Ali, F., Boldloi, D. N., Chalika, B. P. and J. N. Baruah. 1996. Studies on
biomass production of kenaf. (Hibiscus cannabinus L.). Proceedings of symposium on
plantation opportunities in India Plantation Crops: Opportunities and Constraints, Vol. I,
pp. 143-151. Oxford & IBH Publishing Co., New Dehli.
120. Scott, A. W. 1990. Plant Population Density and Dates of Harvest on Kenaf Fiber Production
in the Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas. In: Kenaf Research, Development and

41
 Commercialization. Proc. from the Association for the Advancement of Industrial Crops.
Annual Conference, Peoria, Illinois, pp. 27-33.
121. Scott, A. W., Cook, Ch. G. and Ch. S. Taylor. 1999. The Effects of Harvest Timing on Kenaf
and Sunn Hemp. Proceedings of the Second Annual Conference of the American Kenaf
Society, pp. 37-40.
122. Scott, A. W., Garza, J.C. and T. G. Teague. 1989. Plant population density and dates of
harvest on kenaf fiber production in the lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas. Proc. Assoc.
Adv. Indust. Crops Annual Meeting, Peoria, IL, Oct. 5, pp. 27-33.
123. Sellers, T., Miller, G. D., Fullers, M. J., Broder, J. G., Loper, R. R. 1995. Lignocellulosic-
based composites made from core and annual agricultural crop. Twetieth IVFRO World
Congress#S5.05-01. Lignocellulosic-based composites. Tampere, Finland, August 6-12.
124. Shorton, E. J. 1981. Specialty papers from kenaf. In: Wood, I. M., Stuart, G. A. (Eds.),
Kenaf as a potential Source of Pulp in Australia. Proceedings of the Kenaf Conference.
Brisbane.
125. Siepe, T., Ventrella, D. and E. Lapenta. 1997. Evaluation of genetic in a collection of
Hibiscus cannabinus (L.) and Hibiscus spp (L.). Industrial Crops and Products 6, 343-352.
126. Sij J.W. and F.T. Turner. 1988. Varietal evaluations and fertility requirements of kenaf in
Southeast Texas. Texas Agr. Expt. Sta. Bul.
127. Singh, D.P., 1988. Breeding Mesta (Hibiscus cannabinus and H. sabdariffa L.) for better
quality. Induction of mutations superior in fats, fatty acids and amino acid content. Genet.
Agric., 42: 273-282.
128. Stivastava, S. K., Pandey, B. Pd., Lal, R.S. 1978. Combing ability in a six-parent diallel
cross in mesta. Ind. J. Agric. Sci. 49 (9), 724-730.
129. Stout, H. P. 1989. Jute and Kenaf. In “Handbook of fiber science and technology”. pp. 701-
726.
130. Taylor, S. 1995. Kenaf. New Crio FactSHEET
(http:www.hort.poudue.edu/newcrop.CropFactSheets/kenaf.html)
131. Touzinsky, G. F., Clark, T. F. and W. H. Tallent. 1972. Characteristics of sulphate pulps
from kenaf bark and core. TAPPI. Non-wood plant fiber pulping. Progress Report No., 3, pp.
25-53.
132. USDA. 1988. “Kenaf Paper - A Forest-saving Alternative”. Agricultural Research 36, pp. 6-8.
133. Venturi, G. 1990. II kenaf, Hibiscus cannabinus, “nuova” coltura alternativa?. L’Informatore
Agrario 46 (25), 5-8.
134. Webber III, C. L. 1996. Response of kenaf to Nitrogen Fertilization. Proc. of the Third
National Symposium. New Crops, New Opportunities, New Technologies. pp. 404-408.
135. Webber III, Ch. L. 1993. Yield Components of Five Kenaf Cultivars. In Agron. J. 85: 533-535.
136. Webber III, Ch. L. 1994. Kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) Response to Four Grass Control
Herbicides Broadcast Postemergence. Weed Technology, Volume 8: 457-460.
137. Webber, C. L. and R. E. Bledsoe. 1991. Kenaf. Production, Harvesting, processing and
products. In: Janick, J., Simon J. E (Eds), New Crops, wiley, New York, pp. 416-421.
138. White, G. A. 1969. A research for new fiber crops 12, Field yields of kenaf (Hibiscus
cannabinus L.) TAPPI 52, 4: 565-659.
139. White, G. A. and J. J. Higgins.1965. Growing kenaf for paper. Proc. Second Int. Kenaf
Conf., Palm Beach, FL. pp. 27-40.
140. White, G. A., Adamson, W. C. and J. J. Higgins. 1971. Effect of Population Levels on
Growth Factors in Kenaf Varieties. Agronomy Journal, Vol. 63, March-April, pp.233-235.
141. White, G. A., Cummins, D. G., Whitely, E. L., Fike, W. T., Greig, J. K. Martin, J. A.,
Killinger, G. B., Higgins, J.J. and T.F. Clark. 1970. Cultural and harvesting methods for
kenaf. USDA Prod. Res. Report 113. Washingtom, DC.
142. Whitely, E. L.1981. Kenaf Hibiscus cannabinus (production, cultural practices,
composition). In Handbook of Biosolar Resources (O.R. Zaporsky, T. A. McLure and Lipinsky,
Eds.), pp. 259-266. CRC Press Inc, Boca Raton, FL.
143. Williams, J. B., Burcham, T. N. and E. P. Columbus. 1998. Evaluation of Kenaf Core as a
Desiccant. Proceedings of the First Annual Conference of the American Kenaf Society, pp.
160.
144. Williams, J. H. 1966. Influence of Row Spacing and Nitrogen Levels on Dry Matter Yields of
Kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.). Agronomy Journal 58, 166-168.

42
145. Williams, R. L. 1994. Genetic variation of the control of flowering in kenaf with emphasis
on the ambiphotoperiodic response of cultivar Guatemala 4. Industrial Crops and Products
2, pp. 161-170.
146. Wilson, F. D. 1978. Wild kenaf, Hibiscus cannabinus L. (Malvaceae), and related species in
Kenya and Tanzania. Economy Botany 32: pp. 199-204.
147. Wilson, F. D. and M. Y. Menzel. 1964. Kenaf (H. cannabinus L.), roselle (H. sabdariffa).
Economy Botany 18(1), 80-91.
148. Wilson, F.D and Summers, T.E., 1966. Reaction of kenaf, roselle and related species of
Hibiscus to root-knot nematodes. Phytopathology 56: 687-690.
149. Wood, I. 1998. Kenaf: The forgotten fibre plant. Issue No 9,
www.newcrops.uq.edu.au/newslett/ncn10212.htm.
150. Wood, I. and Angus, 1976. Kenaf versus forests as a source of paper pulp. Aust. Forestry 39:
pp. 23-29.
151. Wood, I. M. 1975. KENAF a possible multi-purpose crop for the Ord River Irrigation Area.
Journal of Agriculture, Western Australia 16: 1, pp 14-18.
152. Wood, I. M. and J. F. Angus. 1974. A Review of Prospective Crops for the Ord Irrigation
Area. II. Division of land use research. Technical paper No. 36. Commonwealth scientific
and industrial research organization.
153. Wood, I. M. and R. C. Muchow. 1980. Estimation of optimal rate of application of nitrogen
for kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus) harvested at different ages for paper pulp production.
Tropical Agronomy Technical Memorandum. ISSN 0157-9711.
154. Wood, I. M. and S. de Jong. 1997. Plant fibre crops. In “The New Rural Industries”. A
handbook for Farmers and Investors. Edited by Keith Hype, pp. 453-463.
155. Wood, I. M., Muchow, R. C. and D. Ratcliff. 1983. Effect of sowing date on the growth and
yield of kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) grown under irrigation in tropical Australia. II. Stem
production. Field Crops Res. 7, 91-92.

43