Morphology of young sugarcane stalks produced at different stages of crop development
B. Salter A B C D F , G. D. Bonnett B E and R. J. Lawn A CA School of Tropical Biology, James Cook University, Townsville, Qld 4811, Australia.
B CSIRO Plant Industry, Davies Laboratory, PMB, PO Aitkenvale, Qld 4810, Australia.
C CRC for Sustainable Sugar Production, James Cook University, Townsville, Qld 4811, Australia.
D Current address: BSES Limited, PMB 57, Mackay Mail Centre, Qld 4741, Australia.
E Current address: CSIRO Plant Industry, Queensland Bioscience Precinct, 306 Carmody Road, St Lucia, Qld 4068, Australia.
F Corresponding author. Email: BSalter@bses.org.au
Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 59(2) 149-156 https://doi.org/10.1071/AR07049
Submitted: 6 February 2007 Accepted: 22 October 2007 Published: 19 February 2008
Abstract
Sugarcane suckers are tillers that appear late in crop development. They dilute the sucrose content of the harvested cane at the mill, reducing grower profitability. Suckers appear to have different morphology from other sugarcane stalks. Experiments were established to quantify some of these morphological differences, to determine whether these differences were conserved across a vegetatively propagated generation, and to investigate the influence of the mature stalk to which the sucker is attached on sucker morphology. Experiments were established in northern Queensland, Australia, using cvv. Q117, Q138, and Q152 to compare suckers with young primary stalks in a plant crop and/or young ratoon stalks. Leaf lamina length, breadth, area, height to last fully expanded leaf, internode diameter, and growth measurements were taken. Suckers had broader leaves, resulting in a smaller leaf length/breadth ratio, longer leaf sheaths, and lower specific leaf area at least for the first 3 leaves. Sucker stalks were thicker than normal stalks. Sucker growth was highly variable, but some were able to outgrow young primary stalks in a plant crop. When mature stalks, to which suckers were attached, were removed, the leaves produced by suckers were more similar to leaves on normal stalks with larger length/breadth ratio. The morphological differences were not carried over into plants arising from the buds on suckers. Although the reasons for these morphological differences are unknown, it is likely that the transfer of some factor(s) from the stalks to which suckers are attached, and/or an altered light environment within the canopy, may contribute to the morphology of sucker shoots.
Additional keywords: sucker, bud, leaf development.
Acknowledgments
The research reported here was conducted in partial fulfilment of the PhD degree awarded to Barry Salter by James Cook University, and was partly funded by the Sugar Research and Development Corporation and the CRC for Sustainable Sugar Production. Mr A. Hurney is thanked for his assistance in trials conducted on the Tully BSES research station. Mr A. Maifredi and Mr A. Zappalla are thanked for the use of their farms, and Mr M. Hewitt, Mr F. Zaini, and Miss R. Dunn are thanked for their assistance in experimental set up and data collection.
Berding N,
Hurney AP,
Salter B, Bonnett GD
(2005) Agronomic impact of sucker development in sugarcane under different environmental conditions. Field Crops Research 92, 203–217.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Bonnett GD,
Hewitt ML,
Salter B,
Glassop D,
Jackson PA,
Foreman JW,
Vickers JE, Grof CLP
(2005b) Townsville tall plant facility—examples of its application for sugarcane research. Proceedings of the Australian Society of Sugar Cane Technologists 27, 189–198.
Bonnett GD,
Salter B, Albertson PL
(2001) Biology of suckers: late-formed shoots in sugarcane. Annals of Applied Biology 138, 17–26.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Bonnett GD,
Salter B,
Berding N, Hurney AP
(2005a) Environmental stimuli promoting sucker initiation in sugarcane. Field Crops Research 92, 219–230.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Borden RJ
(1948) Nitrogen effects upon the yield and composition of sugar cane. The Hawaiian Planters’ Record 52, 1–51.
Casal JJ,
Sanchez RA, Deregibus VA
(1987) The effect of light quality on shoot extension growth in three species of grasses. Annals of Botany 59, 1–7.
Clarke WB,
Player MR, Weiss GH
(1988) Effect of extraneous matter on millers and growers costs. Proceedings of the Australian Society of Sugar Cane Technologists 10, 39–46.
Hartt CE,
Kortschak HP,
Forbes AJ, Burr GO
(1963) Translocation of C14 in sugarcane. Plant Physiology 38, 305–318.
| PubMed |
Henderson DE, Jose S
(2005) Production physiology of three fast-growing hardwood species along a soil resource gradient. Tree Physiology 25, 1487–1494.
| PubMed |
Hes JW
(1954) The influence of suckers on the yield of sugarcane. The Sugar Journal 16, 25–31.
Hughes RM, Muchow RC
(2000) Variation in sucrose concentration with crop age in primary, sucker and dead stalks in New South Wales environments. Proceedings of the Australian Society of Sugar Cane Technologists 22, 200–205.
Ivin PC, Doyle CD
(1989) Some measurements of the effect of tops and trash on cane quality. Proceedings of the Australian Society of Sugar Cane Technologists 11, 1–7.
Ludlow MM,
Ferraris R, Chapman L
(1990) Variation in the net photosynthetic rates of sugar cane leaves and differences in the ratio of red : far-red light beneath the canopy among varieties with different ratooning capacities. Proceedings of the Australian Society of Sugar Cane Technologists 12, 105–110.
Martin JP, Eckart RC
(1933) The effect of various intensities of light on the growth of the H 109 variety of sugar cane. The Hawaiin Planters’ Record 37, 53–66.
Montaldi ER
(1974) Effects of sucrose and other substances on leaf form of Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. Revista de la Facultad de Agronomia Universidad Nacional de la Plata 50, 61–74.
Park SE,
Robertson M, Inman-Bamber NG
(2005) Decline in the growth of a sugarcane crop with age under high input conditions. Field Crop Research 92, 305–320.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Pope GM
(1997) Mulgrave CCS declines to record low levels in 1993 and 1995. Proceedings of the Australian Society of Sugar Cane Technologists 19, 30–37.
Salter B, Bonnett GD
(2000) High soil nitrate concentrations during autumn and winter increase suckering. Proceedings of the Australian Society of Sugar Cane Technologists 22, 322–327.
