Response of Some Sugarcane Cultivars to Nitrogenous Fertilization and Micronutrients on Productivity and Quality

INTRODUCTION  

Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) is a commercial crop grown in tropical and sub-tropical regions for sugar production in climates ranging from hot dry environment near sea level to cool and moist environment at high elevations (Plaut et al., 2000). Apart from the main product, sugar, it produces many valuable co-products such as alcohol used by pharmaceutical industry and as fuel, bagasse for paper and chip board and press mud as a rich source of organic nutrients for crop production (Kumar et al., 1996 and Legendre et al., 2000).Thrives best a temperature above 20°C and requires a period of about 8 to 24 months to reach maturity (Nazir, 2000). Sugarcane is a major cash crop in Egypt, which not only provides man stay to sugar industry but also, row materials to many allied industries for alcohol and chip broad manufacturing (Naqvi, 2005).

Nitrogen is essential for vigorous vegetative growth and development, yield and quality in sugarcane. It is a constituent of plant cell components e.g. amino acids and nucleic acids and its deficiency inhibits plant growth, reduction in leaf area, thus causes a decrease in photosynthesis hence suppressing yield and quality (Taiz and Zeiger, 2002 and Sreewarome et al., 2007). Application of N fertilization is mandatory in intensive sugarcane cultivation which requires a high amount of nitrogen as a nutrient to produce high biomass (Thornburn et al., 2005). Excess N and low N uptake cause retarded growth phase and decreases photosynthetic capacity of leaves thus causing shorter internodes (Martin, 1994). For many locations the depletion of plant available soil N over time justifies the need for split application of yearly total N rate (Wiedenfeld, 1995).

Micronutrients can be applied directly into the soil or by foliar application. Foliar application has many advantages such as less application rate, even distribution of nutrients and immediate response of plant to applied material. It also, performs better where; soil alkalinity and permeability are more which leads to leaching of nutrients. Foliar application of nutrients is useful where the nutrients are fixed up to in the soil and thereby not available for absorption by the roots. Foliar application of zinc sulphate and iron sulphate increases cane yield (Chandra, 2005 and Boklar and Sakurai, 2005). The aim of this study was to examine the response of some sugarcane cultivars to nitrogenous fertilization and micronutrients on productivity and quality.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The present study was carried out at the experimental farm Kom-Omb-Aswan, Egypt, sugarcane is grown in the belt 32°N and 24°S, during the two successive growth seasons of 2014 and 2015 seasons to study the response of some sugarcane cultivars to nitrogenous fertilization and micronutrients on productivity and quality. The main physical and chemical properties of cultivated soil before planting and also, its content of some macro and micronutrients were determined according to the methods described byPage et al. (1982)as shown inTable (1)

Table (1). Some Physical and chemical properties of the experimental soil in 2014 and 2015 seasons.

A split split plot design with three replicates was used in both seasons. Three cultivars (Giza 9 (V1), Giza 47 (V2) and Giza 49 (V3) were randomly assigned to the main plots, three nitrogen fertilizer levels (120, 160 and 200 kg N/fed) were allocated to sub plots and three micronutrients treatments (Zn, Fe and Zn +Fe) were randomly distributed in sub sub plots.

The experiment was laid out as split split plot with three replicates Net plot size was 4.5m x 8.0 m for 75 cm spaced trenches.

Fertilization

Fertilizers were applied at the rate of 115 kg P₂O₅/ha and 115 kg/ha K₂O, respectively. Phosphorus (single super phosphate 15.5% was applied at the time of sowing and SOP (sulphate Potash, 48 %K₂O). The amount of Zn and Fe was applied at 2kg Zn and 2kg Fe/fed. The foliar spray of 1/3^rd dose of Zn and Fe and mixture Zn + Fe were applied 50 days after sowing and the remaining 2/3 was applied in two equal splits in 20 days intervals after the 1^st spray. The sources of Zn and Fe were Zn SO₄-H₂O (35% Zn) and FeSO₄ - 7H₂O (19.5 % Fe), respectively.

Recorded data

A. Growth attributes

• · Cane length (cm)
• · Cane diameter (cm)
• · Number of tillers/plant
• · Number of internods/plant
• · Leaf area index

B. Yield

• · Cane girth
• · Sugar yield (ton/ha) was determined by the following formula:

Sugar yield (t/ha)=

C. Qualitative traits

• · Brix %

  Ten cane randomly selected from every plot were crushed through a cane crusher and the juice was collected in glass jars. The reading brix (%) was recoded with brix hydrometer. Temperature of the juice was noted. These brix reading were corrected with the help of Schmitz table (Spancer and Meade, 1963).

• · Sucrose in juice %

  With the help of parameter, pol reading of extracted juice of every treatment was recorded. Sucrose contents of cane juice were calculated with the help of Schmitz table (Spancer and Meade, 1963).

• · Cane juice purity %

  Cane juice purity was determined at described by (Spancer and Meade, 1963).

Cane juice purity (%) =

• · P=Pol % in juice
• · B= Brix % in juice
• · F=Fiber % in juice (12.5%)
• Commerical cane sugar (CCS %) was determined by as per the method  described by Meady and Chen (1997).

CCS % = 3/2 (1- ) -1/2 B(1- )

Where S = Sucrose percent in juice

All the data collected were subjected to statistical analysis of Varian ANOVA and (L.S.D.) values to test the differences among the standard treatments means according to Gomez and Gomez (1984).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A. Growth attributes

All the studied growth characters were greatly increased by all treatments with significant differences in most cases.

Regarding sugarcane varieties effect on cane length at all sampling dates and number of tillers/plant, number of internode/plant, leaf area index and cane diameter in both seasons, data in Table (2) show highly significant difference among sugarcane varieties for growth attributes. The Giza 9 variety produced the greatest values of all traits in the two seasons of study. This superiority can be mainly attributes to the increase in their number of tillers/plant and leaf area index and consequently increased photosynthesis by plant. These results are in agreement with those obtained by Nazir (2000) and Naqvi (2005).

Results recorded in Tables (3 and 4) revealed that cane length at four sampling dates, also, number of tillers/plant, number of internode/plant, leaf area index and cane diameter (cm) significantly increased by increasing the rate of nitrogen fertilizer (200 kg N/fed) in both growing seasons. The highest increases in these growth characters were obtained by application of 200 kg N/fed. However, the lowest values were recorded by using 120 kg N/fed. It is evident that each increase in the rate of nitrogen fertilizer from 120 to 200 kg N/fed was accompanied by highly significant increased in all growth characters. Similar results were found by Wiedenfeld (1995) and Thorburn et al. (2005).

Different dates of nutrients show significant effect of all growth attributes during both seasons. However, the application of Zn +Fe produced the highest all growth attributes in both seasons. The findings of Khan et al. (1997) and Tunio et al. (2004) are in contrast with these results they reported that of the most micronutrient exhibited a positive of all growth attributes.  

Tables (3 and 4) indicated that growth characters of sugarcane plants significantly affected by the nitrogenous fertilizer and micronutrients, as well as, their interactions.

Concerning the interaction effect, data in Tables (3 and 4) indicated that Giza 9 variety and application of 200 kg N/fed produced the highest cane length, number of tillers/plant, number of internode/plant, leaf area index and cane diameter (cm) in both seasons.

The results reported inTables (3 and 4) indicated that the effective treatments for cane length of four sampling dates and number of tillers/plant, number of internode/plant, leaf area index and cane diameter were obtained from Giza 9 with foliar application of Zn +Fe treatment in both seasons.

Regarding the effect of interaction among sugarcane varieties, nitrogen fertilizer levels and micronutrients on all growth attributes characters in both seasons.

Table  (2). Number of tillers/plant, Number of internode/plant, Leaf area index and Cane diameter as affectedby three varieties, nitrogen fertilizer and some micronutrients in 2014 and 2015 seasons.

Means in the same column followed by the same letter are statistically equalled according to       LSD (0.05) probability level.

 *: Significant at (0.05) probability level

Table (3). Cane length (cm) as affected by three varieties, nitrogen fertilizer and some micronutrients in 2014 and  2015 seasons.

Means in the same column followed by the same letter are statistically equalled according to LSD (0.05) probability level.

 *: Significant at (0.05) probability level

ns: not significant

Table (4). Interaction between three cultivars and N-levels on cane length (cm)at three sampling dates in 2014 and 2015 seasons.

B. Yield and Qualitative characters

Data inTables (5 and 6) showed that Giza 9 variety was significantly superior in yield and Qualitative characters i.e. cane girth, cane yield, Brix percentage of TSS%, sucrose %, purity % and commercial sugar (CCS%) than the other two sugarcane varieties Giza 47,  Giza 49 varieties. Differences in these traits among sugarcane varieties under study may be due to differences in their genetic make and to response to environmental factors affecting development processe and ability to uptake the available nutrients. These results are in harmony with those obtained by Sharma et al. (2002) and Wilson and Leslie (1997).The obtained results given in Tables (5 and 6) showed, clearly, that nitrogen fertilizer levels exhibited significant effect on all estimated traits during the two cropping seasons of the study. Notably increasing nitrogen fertilizer level resulted in a significant increase in cane girth, cane yield (ton/ha), Birx percentage (TSS %), sucrose %, purity % and CCS%. These findings might be attributed to more adsorption of nutrition which reflect more growth substance more cell division and enlargement more tissues and organs and plant elongation. Also, the nitrogen fertilizer may increase the synthesis of endogenous phytohormones which cause the formation of big active root system which allow more nutrients uptake. The previous results agreed more or less with the findings obtained by Yadava (1991), Wiedenfeld (1995) and Pratop et al. (1996). Effect of Fe + Zn treatments on sugarcane are presented in Tables (5 and 6). Data cleared that application of all treatments caused marked increases in yield and qualitative characters. The highest values of cane girth, cane yield (ton/ha), Brix percentage (TSS %), sucrose %, Purity % and CCS % by foliar application of mixture Zn +Fe in both seasons. Similary, Dhanascharan and Bhuvaneswari (2004), noticed that Zinc and iron or in combination significantly increased Purity (%) of cane juice, sucrose (%) and Brix (TSS %). Similar results were obtained by Sharma et al. (2002) and Raskar and Bhai (2004).All first and second order interaction on yield and quality were significant in both seasons, Tables (5 and 6). Generally, Giza 9 variety with application of 200 kg N/fed and mixture of Zn +Fe treatment gave the best growth characters, yield and quality for sugarcane under Aswan conditions. 

 Table (5). Cane girth and cane yield (ton/ha) as affected by three varieties, nitrogen levels and micronutrients during 2014 and 2015 seasons.

Means in the same column followed by the same letter are statistically equalled according to LSD (0.05) probability level.

  *: Significant at (0.05) probability level

Table (6). Total soluble solids (TSS), Sucrose content and juice Purity (%) and Commercial cane sugar (CCS%) as affected  by three varieties, nitrogen fertilizer and some micronutrients in 2014 and 2015 seasons.

Means in the same column followed by the same letter are statistically equalled according to LSD (0.05) probability level.

*: Significant at (0.05) probability level 

ns: not significant