Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T05:04:54.710Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of Soil Fertility on Yield and Juice Quality of Sugarcane

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 October 2008

H. K. Pande  and
K. V. B. R. Tilak
H. K. Pande
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, India
K. V. B. R. Tilak
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, India
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Application of nitrogen (160 and 80 kg. N/ha.) and phosphate (80 and 40 kg. P2O5/ha.) increased the diameter and height of cane and number of shoots per metre of row, and consequently the yield of minable canes, with significant differences between the effects of the two levels of each nutrient. Potash did not affect the growth and yield of sugarcane. Application of 80 kg. P2O5/ha. was beneficial only with 160 kg. N/ha. but 40 kg. P2O5 proved effective with both 160 and 80 kg. N. because yield of millable cane with 80 kg. each of N and P2O5 was significantly lower than with 80 kg. N + 40 kg. P2O5.

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 6 , Issue 3 , July 1970 , pp. 205 - 211
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1970

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Association of Official Agricultural Chemists (1955). Official Method of Analysis (8th Ed.). Washington, D.C.: A.O.A.C.Google Scholar
Clements, H. F. (1951). Cited by Troug, E. (1967) in Mineral Nutrition of Plants. Calcutta (India): Oxford and IBH Publ. Co.Google Scholar
Clements, H. F. & Kubota, T. (1942). Haw. Plant. Rec. 47, 135 (abst. from Dillewijn, C. V.) (1952). Botany of Sugarcane. Waltham, Mass: Chronica Botanica.Google Scholar
Fort, C. A. & McKaig, M. (1939). Comparative Chemical Composition of Juices of Different Varieties of Louisiana Sugarcane. U.S.D.A. Tech. Bull. 688: 68.Google Scholar
Grunes, D. L. & Krantz, B. A. (1958). Agron. J. 50, 729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, M. L. (1962). Soil Chemical Analysis (1st Indian Ed.). Bombay: Pub. House.Google Scholar
Lakshmikantam, M. & Sankaram, A. (1949). Madras Agric. J. 36, 8.Google Scholar
Meyer, B. S., Anderson, D. B. & Bohnig, R. H. (1960). Introduction to Plant Physiology. New York: Van Nostrand Company.Google Scholar
Rege, R. D. (1963). Ind. J. Sugarcane Res. & Dev. 7, 183.Google Scholar
Rege, R. D. & Sannabhadti, S. K. (1943). Indian J. Agric. Sci. 13, 87.Google Scholar
Samueld, G., Lugo-Lopez, M. A. & Landraujr, . (1952). J. Agric. Univ. Puerto Rico 36, 194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. (1946). Statistical Methods (4th Ed.). Ames, Iowa: Iowa State College Press.Google ScholarPubMed
Yates, F. (1937). The Design and Analysis of Factorial Experiments. Imp. Bur. Soil Sci. Harpenden Tech. Comm. 35.Google Scholar