Row spacing and planting density effects on the growth and yield of sugarcane. 3. Responses with different cultivars
A. L. Garside A C and M. J. Bell BSugar Yield Decline Joint Venture.
A BSES LTD, c/-CSIRO, PMB Aitkenvale, Townsville, Queensland 4814, Australia.
B Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries, PO Box 23, Kingaroy, Queensland 4610, Australia.
C Corresponding author. Email: Alan.Garside@csiro.au
Crop and Pasture Science 60(6) 555-565 https://doi.org/10.1071/CP08313
Submitted: 15 September 2008 Accepted: 3 March 2009 Published: 12 June 2009
Abstract
The promotion of controlled traffic (matching wheel and row spacing) in the Australian sugar industry is necessitating a widening of row spacing beyond the standard 1.5 m. As all cultivars grown in the Australian industry have been selected under the standard row spacing there are concerns that at least some cultivars may not be suitable for wider rows. To address this issue, experiments were established in northern and southern Queensland in which cultivars, with different growth characteristics, recommended for each region, were grown under a range of different row configurations. In the northern Queensland experiment at Gordonvale, cultivars Q187
, Q200, Q201, and Q218 were grown in 1.5-m single rows, 1.8-m single rows, 1.8-m dual rows (50 cm between duals), and 2.3-m dual rows (80 cm between duals). In the southern Queensland experiment at Farnsfield, cvv. Q138, Q205, Q222 and Q188 were also grown in 1.5-m single rows, 1.8-m single rows, 1.8-m dual rows (50 cm between duals), while 1.8-m-wide throat planted single row and 2.0-m dual row (80 cm between duals) configurations were also included.
There was no difference in yield between the different row configurations at Farnsfield but there was a significant row configuration × cultivar interaction at Gordonvale due to good yields in 1.8-m single and dual rows with Q201 and poor yields with Q200 at the same row spacings. There was no significant difference between the two cultivars in 1.5-m single and 2.3-m dual rows.
The experiments once again demonstrated the compensatory capacity that exists in sugarcane to manipulate stalk number and individual stalk weight as a means of producing similar yields across a range of row configurations and planting densities.
There was evidence of different growth patterns between cultivars in response to different row configurations (viz. propensity to tiller, susceptibility to lodging, ability to compensate between stalk number and stalk weight), suggesting that there may be genetic differences in response to row configuration. It is argued that there is a need to evaluate potential cultivars under a wider range of row configurations than the standard 1.5-m single rows. Cultivars that perform well in row configurations ranging from 1.8 to 2.0 m are essential if the adverse effects of soil compaction are to be managed through the adoption of controlled traffic.
Additional keywords: soil compaction, controlled traffic, multiple rows, stalk number/stalk weight compensation, growth habit.
Acknowledgments
The research reported in this paper was carried out as part of the Sugar Yield Decline Joint Venture program and was funded by the Sugar Research and Development Corporation, BSES LTD (formerly the Bureau of Sugar Experiment Stations), and the Queensland Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries. Technical assistance was provided by John Berthelsen, Neil Halpin, Lucca Pippia, Norm King, and Glen Park, Dr Nils Berding and Mr Tony Linedale advised on cultivars for the Gordonvale and Farnsfield experiments, respectively. Dr Nils Berding also carried out the CCS analysis using NIR technology for the Gordonvale experiment. The provision of experiment sites by Tom Watters (Gordonvale) and Geoff Plath (Farnsfield) is greatly appreciated. Helpful comments on the manuscript were provided by Drs Peter Allsopp, Bob Lawn, and Geoff-Inman Bamber.
Braunack MJ, Peatey TC
(1999) Changes in soil physical properties after one pass of a sugarcane haul-out unit. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 39, 733–742.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Garside AL
(2004) Wet Coast Breakers. BSES Bulletin (Issue 2), 24–26.
Garside AL, Bell MJ
(2009) Row spacing and planting density effects on the growth and yield of sugarcane. 1. Responses in fumigated and non-fumigated soil. Crop & Pasture Science 60, 532–543.
Garside AL,
Bell MJ, Robotham BG
(2009) Row spacing and planting density effects on the growth and yield of sugarcane. 2. Strategies for the adoption of controlled traffic. Crop & Pasture Science 60, 544–554.
Garside AL,
Bell MJ,
Robotham BG,
Magarey RC, Stirling GR
(2005) Managing yield decline in sugarcane cropping systems. International Sugar Journal 107(1273), 16–26.
Garside AL,
Salter B, Kidd J
(2008) Soil compaction is a major issue operating against the development of sustainable sugarcane cropping systems. Proceedings of the Australian Society of Agronomy 14 (CD-ROM),
Hurney AP,
Reghenzani JR,
Chapman LS, Spry E
(1979) No cane yield increase from Dual row planting. Cane Growers Quarterly Bulletin 42, 67–71.
Muchow RC,
Spillman MF,
Wood AW, Thomas MR
(1994) Radiation interception and biomass accumulation in a sugarcane crop grown under irrigated tropical conditions. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 45, 37–49.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Ridge DR, Hurney AP
(1994) A review of row spacing research in the Australian sugar industry. Proceedings of the Australian Society of Sugarcane Technologists 16, 63–69.
Singh G,
Chapman SC,
Jackson PA, Lawn RJ
(2002) Lodging reduces sucrose accumulation of sugarcane in the wet and dry tropics. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 53, 1183–1196.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
CAS |
Stirling GR
(2008) The impact of farming systems on soil biology and soil borne diseases: examples from the Australian sugar and vegetable industries—the case for better integration of sugarcane and vegetable production and implications for future research. Australasian Plant Pathology 37, 1–18.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
