pakistan sugar journal - ssrissri.pk/psj/psj oct-dec-2014.pdf · 2020-02-13 · main cane carrier...

1 | P a g e

Editorial BoardMr. Altaf M. Saleem ChairmanDr. Shahid Afghan Editor-in-ChiefDr. Iftikhar Ahmed MemberDr. Muhammad Zubair MemberDr. Javed Iqbal MemberDr. Aamir Ali MemberMr. Aamir Shahzad EditorMs. Tooba Rauf Malik Associate EditorMs. Asia Naheed Associate Editor

SubscriptionAamir ShahzadShakarganj Sugar Research InstituteToba Road, JHANGPh: +92 47 763 1001-5 Ext. 603, 604Email: [email protected]

Subscription RatePakistan PKR 1,000/-OVERSEAS US$ 50/-

Recognized byHigher Education Commission (HEC) Pakistan

Cited byAsia Net Pakistan (Factiva International)Commonwealth Agriculture & BiologyInternational (CABI-UK)

ISSN 1028-1193

Panel of RefereesDr. P. Jackson: Principal Scientist, CSIRO, AustraliaDr. Raul O. Castillo: Director General, ResearchStation EI Triunfo, EcuadorDr. Benjamin Legendre: Interim Director, AudubonSugar Institute, USADr. Yong-Bao Pan: Research Plant MolecularGeneticist, USDA-ARS, USADr. Jack C. Comstock: Research Leader, ARSUSDA, Canal Point Florida, USADr. Sizuo Matsuoka: Director, Canavialis SA, BrazilDr. Niranjan Baisakh: Asstt. Professor, - SPESS, LSUUSADr. Abdul Rauf: Prof. & Chairman Plant PathologyPMAS Arid Agriculture University, RawalpindiDr. Asif Tanvir: Professor, Dept. of Agronomy,University of Agriculture Faisalabad, FaisalabadDr. Muhammad Bilal Chattha: Assistant Professor,(Agronomy). Institute of Agricultural Sciences,University of the Punjab, Lahore

CONTENTS02

Improving the cane milling efficiency at SangharSugar Mills Ltd., Sanghar

H. A. Naqvi, M. Sohrab Khan & Qurban Ali Jamali

09Response of sugarcane variety Larkana-2001 to

soil application of certain macro- and micro-nutrients for cane yield and sugar recoveryImdad Ali Sohu, Saleem M., & Hameed Memon

20Correlation of soil properties with weed

occurrence in sugarcane fieldsAdereti, R.O., Takim, F.O., Affinnih, K.O. & Abayomi, Y.A.

35Sugar Industry Abstracts

39International Events Calendar

40Social Action Program of SML

Annual Prize Distribution Ceremonies

42Sugar and Addiction

World Sugar Research Organization (WSRO) PositionStatement

47Story of Sweets

i. Brown Sugar Cookiesii. Chocolate-Mint Bars

48Guidelines for Authors

PAKISTAN SUGAR JOURNAL

2 | P a g e

October-December, 2014 Vol. XXIX, No.04

IMPROVING THE CANE MILLING EFFICIENCY ATSANGHAR SUGAR MILLS LTD., SANGHAR.

H.A. NAQVI, M. SOHRAB KHAN AND QURBAN ALI JAMALI

ABSTRACT

With 06 years (2007-08 to 2012-13) of study, identification of weak areas and removal of defects &deficiencies, etc. at the Sanghar Sugar Mills Ltd. (SSML), marked improvements were observed in themilling results as compared to the previous 20 years (1987-88 to 2006-07) working data. There was anincrease in daily crushing of sugar cane by 29.3%, mill extraction by 0.84o and milling time efficiency by8.5%.

INTRODUCTION

SSML with a crushingcapacity of 3000 tons caneper day (tcd) wasestablished in 1987-88.Later on during 1994 thecapacity was extended to+5000 tcd. From the verystart and especially afterthe capacityenhancement, theproblem of highermachinery breakdown,

lower milling timeefficiency, lower capacitycrushing, lower millextraction and highermoisture in bagasse wasthere. Several measureswere taken over the yearsto improve the working butnot with much success.From 2007 onwards moreserious efforts were madeto overcome the problems,and various steps taken

and results achieved areenumerated hereunder.

THE CANE MILLING PLANT:

Given below is the briefdescription of the SSMLcane milling plant as in2006-07.

Aux. cane carrier Length 36 MeterWidth & Depth 1800mm eachTwo nos. cane feeding tables installed on Aux. cane carrier.

Main cane carrier Length 42 MeterWidth & Depth 1800mm each

1st cane knives Elect. Motor 235 Kw, 600 rpmNo. of knives 40

2nd cane knives Elect. Motor 600 Kw, 600 rpmNo. of knives 88

Cane Shredder Steam Turbine 1500 KwSpeed 1200 rpmHammers 72 Nos. (21 Kg each)

3 roller mills with a pressure feeder Nos. of mills 05 Nos. (self setting FCB design)Size 900 x 1800mm

Steam turbine geared drive forindividual unit

Mill # 1 650 KwMill # 2 to 5 500 Kw each

3 | P a g e


Fig. nos., 1 & 2 gives the layout of cane carriers and the milling tandem.

WORKING RESULTS (1987-88 TO 2012-13)

Table – 1, below gives the SSML working results obtained during the 26 years (1987-88 to 2012-13) operation of the mills.

Description Five seasons average milling results (per season)2007-08

to2012-13

2002-03to

2006-07

1997-98to

2001-02

1992-93to

1996-97

1987-88to

1991-92Cane Crushing, days 132 130 121 164 171Cane Crushed, tons 592834 451435 406647 486520 443136Cane Crushing/day, tons(including stoppages)

4491.2 3472.52 3360.71 2966.58 2591.43Imbibition % fiber 302.00 270.11 228.05 179.22 164.24Pol % bagasse 1.67 1.98 2.55 2.64 3.29Mill extraction % (plain) 95.21 94.37 92.90 93.01 91.19Moisture % bagasse 51.8 54.0 53.5 52.8 52.5Purity drop from crusherjuice to mixed juice

1.28 1.52 1.46 1.52 1.58Milling time efficiency 90.82 83.70 81.41 84.63 83.93

4 | P a g e


From the Table-1, it will benoted that:

• The milling timeefficiency remainedlow due to frequentchoking of canecarrier and caneknives, overflow ofDonnelly chute,choking of mills, andbreakdown inmachinery. This alsoresulted in lower rateof cane crushing.

• Imbibition% fiber waslow resulting in higherbagasse pol andlower mill extraction.

• The moisture inbagasse was highresulting to difficultyin bagasse burning inboiler furnaces andfrequent steampressure fluctuationin boilers.

• The purity dropbetween crusherjuice and mixed juicewas higher.

Observing the mills workingand analysing the resultsobtained during theprevious crushing seasons,a comprehensive plan waschalked out for removal ofdefects & deficiencies andrevamping of the mills.Some of the major jobswhich were carried outduring 2008 to 2012 areenumerated hereunder.

1. Cane Carrier, CaneKnives and CaneShredder.

• Cane unloading atthe main canecarrier wasdiscontinued. As apolicy cane

unloading only at theauxiliary cane carrierwas adopted Inorder to avoidoverloading at themain cane carrier.

• The under capacityelectric motor of 235KW for 1st caneknives at the maincane carrier wasreplaced with abigger capacity 600KW steam turbinedrive.

One set of cane knives witha 400 KW electric motorwas installed at theauxiliary cane carrier. Itwas positioned over thedriving shaft of the auxiliarycane carrier at 30o fromvertical plane havingclearance of 600mm.Fig.no.3 gives the layout ofthe modified cane carrier.

5 | P a g e

Vol.XXIX,No.04

October-December, 2014 Vol. XXIX, No.04 Vol. XXIX, No.02

Due to heavy vibrations atthe speed reduction gearbox of the cane shredderturbine, etc., the shredderwas operated at a lowerspeed of 700rpm. The gearbox was repaired; faultybearings were replacedand properly aligned.

2. Misalignment of Mills.

• Mill no. 1: Breakage ofmill roller bearings,pinions, wearing-out ofbox coupling and tail barends of mill no. 1 wasobserved. Free floatationof top roller was not up tothe mark which wasadversely affecting themills extraction. Ondismantling, it was foundthat head stocks weremutually away by 10mmhorizontally. Similarlycentre line of the mill wasaway by 15mm fromcrown gear’s pinioncentre. Same wererectified and aligned.

Mill no. 5: Intermediategear box (between turbineand crown gear) wasgiving abnormal noise. Ondismantling, it wasobserved that the shaft ofpinion of crown wheel wasup by 01mm from theoutput shaft ofintermediate gear and alsopartially damaged teeth ofgear coupling. This wasrectified by machining of

plummer blocks of bothbearings of pinion shaftand aligned properly.

3. Sanitation at the mills

In order to minimize thepurity drop betweencrusher and mixed juices,proper sanitation at the millwas made a routine withthe use of steaming, hotwater washing, use ofbleaching powder andbiocide.

4. Screening of mixed juice

• The DSM screens werefound to be undercapacity resulting inpassing of lot of mixedjuice to the second millalong with the cush cush.This was adverselyaffecting the millsworking and the millingresults. Therefore, a rotaryscreen (size 1800 x3600mm) was installed inaddition to the existingDSM screens.

Cush cush de-wateringmills: one small 3-roller mill(SSML machine shopfabricated) of 368 x 812mmwith 18 KW electric motor,chain drive, 14rpm for de-watering of cush cush wasinstalled.

5. Imbibition water at themills:

• The imbibition water atthe mills was increased to300% on fiber.

• Instead of manualcontrol, an auto-controlsystem for application ofimbibition water at themill was provided.

• To overcome theproblem of high moisturein bagasse and difficultyin bagasse burning inboiler furnaces,arrangements weremade for heating/moisture evaporation ofbagasse with the boilerflue gases.

6. Overhead crane:

RCC columns of mill housewere extended to provideover-head crane service tothe cane shredder andcane knives at the maincane carrier. This alsoprovided extra space forstorage of rollers, shafts,etc.

7. Damage to mill rollershafts:

On an average, one millroller shaft was damagedevery season resulting incrushing stoppages, etc.Ultra sonic test of all theshafts were carried out.Damaged shafts with deepcracks were replaced withnew shafts. As a policy itwas also decided to get

6 | P a g e


only new shafts instead ofreplacing it with old shaftsfrom ships.

8. Auto control system forcarriers and mills:

An auto speed /feed,Donnelly chute levelcontrol at the carrier andmills was provided toimprove the mills working,avoid choking at caneknives and overflow ofDonnelly chutes, etc.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION:

Due to the abovementioned jobs carried outduring the last 5-6 years(2007-12), the mills workingbecame very regular andimprovements wereobserved on all the millingoperations which isdescribed as under:

1. Milling time efficiency:

The milling time efficiencyduring 2007-08 to 2012-13increased by 8.5% ascompared to previous fiveseasons 2002-03 to 2006-07.(Fig. 4) This was due tofewer breakdowns at themills and elimination of

choking of cane knives,etc.

2. Cane Crushing:

The average cane crushingper day during 2007-08 to2012-13 increased by 29.3%i.e. 1019 tcd as comparedto the average of previous05 seasons i.e. 2002-03 to2006-07 (Fig.05). This was

due to low breakdowns atthe mills, no choking ofcane knives, regular steampressure at the boilers andsmooth working of theboiling house

3. Sugar losses inbagasse:

The average pol% bagasseduring 2007-08 to 2012-13reduced by 18.5% ascompared to average ofprevious 05 season 2002-03to 2006-07. (Fig.06). This wasdue to improved canepreparations, higherimbibition and regularworking of the mills

4. Purity differencebetween Crusher andMixed Juice:

The average purity dropfrom crusher juice to mixedjuice during 2007-08 to2012-13 decreased by15.7% as compared to theaverage of previous 05seasons 2002-03 to 2006-07(Fig.07). This was achievedby maintaining propersanitation at the mills.

5. Mills Extraction:

The average millsextraction (plain) during2007-08 to 2012-13increased to 95.21% ascompared to 94.37% ofprevious 05 seasons i.e.2002-03 to 2006-07 (Fig.08).This was made possible dueto the improved millingtime efficiency, improvedcane preparation, higherimbibitions at the mills,

7 | P a g e


proper mills sanitation,installations of rotaryscreens for mixed juice,dewatering mills for cushcush and auto-controlsystem for cane carrier andmills, and smooth workingof boilers and boiling housedue to reduction inmoisture of bagasse withthe use of boiler stackgases

SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS

Various efficiencymeasures were adopted inSSML during the last 5-6years (2007-12) i.e.improving the canepreparation, installation ofauto cane carrier and millsfeed & imbibition watercontrol, repairs of speedreduction gear box ofcane shredder, alignmentof mills, increase inimbibition water at themills, moisture reduction inbagasse with these use ofboiler stack gases,improving the millssanitation, etc.

As a result of all thesemeasures there wasincrease in crushingcapacity by 1019tcd,increase in mill extractionby 0.84o, reduction inbagasse pol by 0.32o,increase in milling timeefficiency by 8.5% andreduction in purity dropfrom primary juice to mixedjuice by 0.29o.

Encouraged with theresults, it is under activeconsideration to increasethe crushing capacity ofthe mills to +7000 tcd.

REFERENCES

1. Hugot, E. 1986. Handbook of Cane Sugar Engineering. Elsevier Science Publishers, Oxford,New York, Tokyo. 1166 P.

2. Naqvi, H.A., M. Sohrab Khan and S. M. Moazzam. 2008. Operation of the mills auto feedsystem at Sanghar Sugar Mills Ltd., Proceedings 43rd annual convention, Pakistan Society ofSugar Technologists, Karachi. Pp 182-187.

3. Naqvi, H.A., M. S. Khan and H. R. Khan: 2012. An overview of five years of balancing andefficiency improvement at Sanghar Sugar Mills Ltd., Sanghar, Pakistan. International SugarJournal, England, U.K., Sep. 2012. pp. 646-649.

4. Peter, R., 2007. Cane Sugar Engineering. Verlag Dr. Albert Bartens KG Luckhoffstr, Berlin,Germany. 768 p.

8 | P a g e


9 | P a g e


RESPONSE OF SUGARCANE VARIETY LARKANA-2001TO SOIL APPLICATION OF CERTAIN MACRO- ANDMICRO-NUTRIENTS FOR CANE YIELD AND SUGAR

RECOVERY*Imdad Ali Sohu; **Saleem M; and **Hameed Memon

*Agriculture Research Institute TandoJam-Pakistan**Department of Soil Science, Sindh Agriculture University TandoJam-Pakistan

ABSTRACT

A field experiment was conducted during the year 2011-12 at the experimental field of Quaid-e-Awam Agriculture Research Institute Larkana to assess the effect macro- and micronutrientsat various concentrations on cane yield and recovery of sugarcane variety Larkana-2001. Thetreatments included: Recommended dose of NPK fertilizers 225-112-168 ha-1 (control), NPK+Zn@ 5.0 kg ha-1, NPK+Zn @ 7.0 kg ha-1, NPK+B @ 1.5 kg ha-1, NPK+B @ 2.0 kg ha-1, NPK+Zn-B @ 5.0-1.5 kg ha-1, NPK+Zn-B @ 5.0-2.0 kg ha-1, NPK+Zn-B @ 7.0-1.5 kg ha-1 and NPK+Zn-B @ 7.0-2.0 kgha-1. The experiment was conducted in a three replicated Randomized Complete BlockDesign. The crop receiving recommended dose of NPK + 7.0+2.0 kg ha-1 Zn-B produced 75.54percent germination, 303.00 cm cane length,3.33 cm cane girth, 6.33 tillers stool-1, 17.09internodes cane-1, 16.24 kg weight of 10 canes, 101.06 t ha-1 cane yield and 11.05% sugarrecovery. Sugarcane fertilized with NPK+Zn-B @ 7.0-1.5 kg ha-1 resulted in 75.09 percentgermination, 302.00 cm cane length, 3.32 cm cane girth, 6.31 tillers stool-1, 17.04 internodescane-1, 16.19 kg weight of 10 canes, 100.37 t ha-1 cane yield and 10.92% sugar recovery. Theremaining treatments as well as control resulted relatively in lower values for all the cane yieldand recovery contributing characters. Hence, it is concluded that Zn-B @ 7.0-1.5 kg ha-1 was anoptimum level for achieving economically maximum cane yield (100.37 t ha-1) and recovery(10.92%); and the differences were non-significant (P>0.05) when boron application wasincreased to 2.0 kg ha-1 with same zinc level (7.0 kg ha-1) in addition to NPK fertilizers.

Key Words: Sugarcane, macronutrients, micronutrients, cane yield, recovery

INTRODUCTION

Sugarcane, Saccharumofficinarum L. is a majorsource of raw material forthe production of whitesugar and a cash crop inPakistan. Its share in valueadded to agriculture andGDP is 3.2 and 0.7 percent,

respectively. Sugarcanewas cultivated on an areaof 1124 thousand hectares,6.2 percent higher than lastyear’s level of 1058thousand hectares.Sugarcane production forthe year 2012-13 was62.472 million tons asagainst the target

production of 59 milliontons last year. This indicatesa rise of 5.9 percent overthe production of last year(58.397 million tons). In caseof cane yield ha-1, during2012-13 the cane yield was55.580 tons ha-1 against55.196 tons ha-1 during lastyear showing 0.7 percent

10 | P a g e


increase this year in yield(GoP, 2013). In the country,there are 78 sugar factoriesin function. In Sindhprovince the sugarcanecultivation (2012-2013)was 280 thousandhectares with aproduction of 15350thousand metric tons(Carroll and Rehman,2010). This increase inproduction was mainlyassociated with increase inarea under sugarcanecultivation in the country.However, among thecauses for low yield atfarmer’s field one is theimbalanced applicationof nutrients required bysugarcane that results inless plant population,lodging, dwarf and thincanes and poor recoverypercentage (Hussain etal. 2010).

Nutrient requirement ofsugarcane can bedetermined on the basisof respective nutrient inselected index tissues atspecific crop stages.Higher growth rate ofsugarcane is mainlyassociated with enhanceduptake of N, P and K (Nasiret al., 2000). N, P and K areessential nutrient elementsthat contribute to optimumsugarcane yield anduptake (Morris et al. 2002).N, P and K applicationbeyond 100 percent of therecommended doseproduce only marginalincrease in cane and sugaryield (Alexander et al.,

2003). The use of nitrogen,phosphorous andpotassium fertilizers playkey role in development ofcane and sugar yields,because sugarcane isknown as a heavy feedercrop that depletes the soilof essential nutrients andtherefore, adequatenutrient addition is ofutmost importance(Korndorfer, 1990). Theaverage yield of thesugarcane varieties ismuch lower than theirpotential yield. Forinstance, throughapplication of balancedNPK fertilizers, the potentialyields are obtained upto165.176 t ha-1 (Khan et al.,2002). Fertilizer use forsugarcane cultivation inPakistan is imbalance andinappropriate; only 4percent of the canegrowers use NPK and 73percent of them rely onlyon NP fertilization (Karstenset al., 1992). Properfertilization is an importantmanagement function insugarcane production(Khan et al., 2005).Therefore, it is necessary tosupply sugarcane cropwith the big three (N, P andK) to secure good canequantity and quality(Elamin et al., 2007).

Micronutrients use insugarcane crop is a recentpractice that is not verywidespread. Among themicronutrients, Boron (B) isthat which is most

frequently found to bedeficient in most soils, withthe number of crops thatshow visual deficiencysymptoms growing(Moreira et al. 2000). To thismicronutrient is attributed afunction in metabolism ofcarbohydrates andtransport of sugars throughmembranes, a fact which ishighly important forsugarcane; synthesis ofnucleic acids and ofphytohormones; andformation of cell walls andcell division (Orlando Filhoet al. 2001). In addition toB, another micronutrientthat is commonly founddeficient in soils is zinc (Zn).Zn deficient plants haveshort internodes andreduced tillering (OrlandoFilho et al. 2001; Costa Filhoand Prado, 2008; Oliveiraet al. 2009). Ghaffar et al.(2011) reported thatapplication ofmicronutrients like Zn andFe in addition to NPKfertilizers was necessaryto obtain maximumbenefits from sugarcanecrop. The present studywas therefore carried outto investigate the effect ofinorganic NPK and soilapplied micronutrients (Znand B) on the cane yieldand recovery ofsugarcane.

11 | P a g e


MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study was carried out toinvestigate the effect ofinorganic NPK and soil appliedmicronutrients (Zn and B) onthe sugar recovery and caneyield of sugarcane. Theexperiment was conducted atthe experimental fields ofQuaid-e-Awam AgricultureResearch Institute, Larkana ina four replicated RandomizedComplete Block Designhaving plot size of 5m x 5m(25m2).

Land preparation:Sugarcane is a deep-rootedcrop and keeping this inmind a well-worked friablefully pulverized seedbedwas prepared. Theexperimental land wasprepared well beforesowing on off-season. Afterdeep plowing, crosswisegoble plough, followed byprecise levelling andcrosswise ploughing withcultivator were given. Deepplowing was doneparticularly to break thehard pan of theexperimental soil.Sowing: The planting of setswas done by Dry Method withend to end arrangement.After the proper landpreparation, the ridges/furrows were prepared at thedistance of 100 cm. The setswere placed in the furrows at6-8 inches depth of furrow.After covering, the field wasirrigated. The sowing wascompleted upto 2nd October2011. Forty thousand two-budded sets per acre withend to end arrangement wereplanted in single row system.

Seed selection and treatment:The cane seed was obtainedfrom the crop which was notmore than eight months inage (nursery seed used),upper 2/3 portion of stalk ofthe cane of fresh/plantsugarcane crop was used forseed purpose Seed sets weretreated with Vitavax @ 120g/100 litre water against theattack of seed bornesugarcane diseases likewhipsmut.

Irrigation: The irrigation wasapplied at 8-10 days interval insummer (April- August) and10-15 days interval in winter(November-March). There wasstill shortage of canal water;hence mostly tubewell waterwas applied.

Fertilizer application: The NPKfertilizers were applied in theform of Urea, Single SuperPhosphate and Sulphate ofPotash, respectively. The zincwill be used in the form ofZnSO4, while boron wasapplied in the form Borax assoil application. The soilapplied zinc and boron wereapplied at the time ofpreparation of ridges forsowing by mixing in the soil. AllP, K and Zn or B alongwith1/3rd of N were applied at thetime of sowing and remainingtwo N splits were applied atfirst earthing (3-1/2 monthsafter planting) and secondearthing (1-1/2 month afterfirst earthing) respectively.

Weeding: Weeds wereremoved from young crop,until the crop became in suchheight to shed the weeds. Theweeds were controlled withthe use of Gezapex Combi atthe rate of 1 to 1½ kg per acrewithin a period of 3 months

after planting. Weedicide wasapplied in moist conditions toget good results. First lightearthing was done after 3½months of planting andsecond after 1½ month of firstearthing.

Plant Protection:A comprehensive approachof I.P.M consisting of cultural,biological and chemicalmethod of control of insectpests and diseases wasadopted to maintain the pestpopulation level below theeconomic injury level.However Furadan 3G wasapplied against the borers.

Harvesting: The harvesting ofsugarcane crop was donewhen the 1/3rd leaves of thebasal portion of the canebecame dry and show thetendency of dropping on theground. Scientifically, the cropbecomes mature when thebrix is above 20% irrespectiveof any variety.

The quantitative parametersof the experimental crop weremeasured at the field, whilefor the qualitative parametersthe cane samples from fieldwere brought to thelaboratory.

Methods for recordingobservations

Germination (%): Germinationwas recorded on the basis oftotal setts (2 budded) sown ina plot and number ofseedlings germinated inpercentage.

Cane length: Cane lengthwas recorded at the field inthe labelled sugarcane plantsby measuring tape from

12 | P a g e


bottom of the cane upto thelast internode in centimetresand averaged.

Cane girth: Cane girth wasmeasured in each plot on thebasis of randomly selected(tagged) plants by means ofVernier Caliper in centimetresand average was worked out.

Tillers stool-1: Tillers stool-1 wasobserved by counting thestalks sprouted in each plantfrom the labelled plants ineach plot and average wascalculated.

Internodes cane-1: Internodescane-1 were counted fromthe bottom of the cane uptothe last internode for all thetillers in each plant in eachlabelled plant in eachtreatment plot and averaged.

Weight of 10 canes (kg): Forweighing the samples eachcomprised of 10 canes, fieldbalance was used andquantity was recorded inkilograms. These canes werealso used for crushing andfurther juice analysis.

Cane yield ha-1(mt): Thecane yield ha-1 wascalculated on the basis offollowing formula:Yield plot-1 of given treatment

Cane yield (m.t ha-1) =X 10000

Plot area (m2)

Brix (%): Brix percentage wasdetermined by means of BrixHydrometer. For this purpose200 ml cylinder alreadycleaned was filled withsample cane juice. TheHydrometer was placed in itand allowed to settle andthen reading was recorded.The temperature of juice was

noted and Hydrometerreading was correctedaccordingly.

Sugar recovery (%):Recovery was determinedby the procedure andmethod described inlaboratory manual forQueensland sugar mills inorder to calculate Pol andsugar recovery.The data on the abovecharacters was collectedand subjected to statisticalanalysis. Analysis ofvariance and meanseparation tests wasapplied (Gomez andGomez, 1984).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Germination PercentageThe crop receiving NPK (atthe recommended dose225-112-168 kg ha-1) + Zn-B@ 7.0-2.0 kg ha-1 resultedmaximum seed germination(75.54%), closely followedby NPK+Zn-B @ 7.0-1.5 kgha-1 with germination of75.09 percent. The seedgermination reduced to72.42, 71.02, 70.76, 69.44and 72.06 percent whenthe crop received NPK+Zn-B@ 5.0-2.0, 5.0-1.5, 0-2.0, 0-1.5and 7.0-0 kg ha-1,respectively. However, thedifferences in germinationpercentage between thesetreatments were non-significant (P>0.05). The croptreated with NPK+Zn-B levelsof 5.0-0 kg ha-1 resulted seedgermination of 69.05 percent;while the lowest seed

germination (67.28%) wasrecorded in control plots,where zinc and boronfertilizers were not applied. Thedifferences in germinationpercentage between Zn-Blevels of 7.0-2.0 and 7.0-1.5 kgha-1, respectively. Thisindicates that boronapplication at the rate of 1.5kg alongwith 7.0 kg Zn ha-1and recommended dose ofNPK would be an enoughlevel to optimize thegermination in sugarcane.

Cane length (cm)The sugarcane cropfertilized with NPK (at therecommended dose 225-112-168 kg ha-1) + Zn-B @7.0-2.0 kg ha-1 producedhighest cane length(303.00 cm), closelyfollowed by NPK+Zn-B @7.0-1.5 kg ha-1 with canelength of 302.00 cm. Thecane length decreased to286.67, 286.33, 285.00 and265.00 cm when thesugarcane received Zn-B @5.0-2.0, 7.0-0.0, 5.0-1.5 and5.0-0 kg ha-1, respectively.The crop fertilized with Zn-Batthe rate of 0-2.0 and 0-1.5 kg ha-1 resultedaverage cane length of256.67 and 254.00 cm,respectively. However, thelowest cane length of257.00 cm was recorded incontrol plots where onlyrecommended dose ofNPK fertilizers was appliedand no Zn-B were applied.This indicates that therewas marked effect of Znand B on the cane lengthof sugarcane; but Znproved to be the mostinfluencing factor and in

13 | P a g e


absence of Zn fertilizers, thecane length was moreadversely affected ascompared to absence ofboron. The differences incane length between Zn-Blevels of 7.0-2.0 kg ha-1 and7.0-1.5 kg ha-1 werestatistically non-significant(P>0.05) indicating that Zn-B application at the rate of7.0-1.5 kg ha-1 alongwithrecommended rate of NPKfertilizers would be anoptimum level forachieving economicallymaximum results in relationto cane length ofsugarcane.

Cane girth (cm)The crop fertilized with NPK(at the recommendeddose 225-112-168 kg ha-1) +Zn-B @ 7.0-2.0 kg ha-1

resulted in maximum canegirth of 3.33 cm, closelyfollowed by NPK+Zn-B @7.0-1.5 kg ha-1 with canegirth of 3.32 cm. The canegirth reduced to 3.15, 3.15and 3.13 cm when thesugarcane was fertilizedwith Zn-B levels of 5.0-2.0,7.0-0.0 and 5.0-1.5 kg ha-1,respectively. The croprecieving Zn-B at the rateof 0-2.0 and 0-1.5 kg ha-1

resulted average canegirth of 2.82 and 2.80 cm,respectively; while thecane girth of 2.83 cm wasobserved in control plotswhere recommendeddose of NPK fertilizers wasapplied without Zn-B. The

results showed that therewas marked increase in thecane girth when Zn wasadded in the nutrientprogramme. Although, theeffect of boron on canegirth was also noticed, butapparently there was littleneed of boron wasseemed.

Number of tillers stool-1

The application of NPK (atthe recommended dose225-112-168 kg ha-1) + Zn-B@ 7.0-2.0 kg ha-1 resulted inmaximum number of tillers(6.33) stool-1, closelyfollowed by NPK+Zn-B @7.0-1.5 kg ha-1 with 6.31tillers stool-1. The number oftillers stool-1 decreased to6.00, 5.98, 5.95 and 5.54when the crop wasfertilized with Zn-B levels of5.0-2.0, 7.0-0.0, 5.0-1.5 and5.0-0 kg ha-1, respectively.The crop recieving Zn-B atthe rate of 0-2.0 and 0-1.5kg ha-1 resulted in 5.36 and5.31 tillers stool-1,respectively; while thenumber of tillers stool-1 was5.37 in control plots whererecommended dose ofNPK fertilizers was appliedwithout Zn-B. It is evidentfrom the results that thenumber of tillers increasedsimultaneously withincreasing zinc levels, whileboron application did notshowed apparent effectson the number of tillersstool-1 in sugarcane.Moreover, the terminationof zinc application showeda marked decrease in the

number of tillers stool-1,even in addition of boronapplication.

Number of internodes cane-1

The NPK (at therecommended dose 225-112-168 kg ha-1) + Zn-B @7.0-2.0 kg ha-1 produced inmaximum internodes(17.09) cane-1, closelyfollowed by NPK+Zn-B @7.0-1.5 kg ha-1 with 17.04internodes cane-1. Thenumber of internodescane-1 decreased to 16.18,16.16 and 16.08 when thecrop was fertilized with Zn-Blevels of 5.0-2.0, 7.0-0.0 and5.0-1.5 kg ha-1, respectively;but differences betweenthese treatments were non-significant (P>0.05). Thecrop recieving Zn-B at therate of 5.0-0, control (no Zn-B) and 0-2.0 kg ha-1

resulted in 14.95, 14.51 and14.49 internodes cane-1,respectively; while thenumber of internodescane-1 was lowest (14.33)where B was applied at therate of 1.5 kg ha-1, but Znapplication wasdiscontinued. Thedifferences between thesetreatments were also non-significant (P>0.05). Thisindicates that applicationof zinc at higher level of 7kg ha-1 resulted markedlyhigher number ofinternodes, but boronapplication did not showmarked effect oninternodes cane-1. Hence,for achieving desired resultsin case of internodes cane-

1, the crop may be givenZn-B at the rates 7.0-1.5 kg

14 | P a g e


ha-1 in addition torecommended rate of NPKfertilizers. Moreover, it wasobserved that boron incombination showedpositive impact on thisparameter, but in absenceof zinc application, theboron could not influencethis parameter significantlywhen compared withcontrol.

Weight of 10 canes (kg)The sugarcane cropreceiving recommendeddose of NPK (225-112-168kg ha-1) + Zn-B @ 7.0-2.0 kgha-1 resulted in highest 10canes weight of 16.24 kg,closely followed by 16.19kg weight of 10 canesachieved when Zn-B wereapplied at the rate of 7.0-1.5 kg ha-1 in addition torecommended dose ofNPK. Weight of 10 canesfollowed an adverse trendand it was 15.36, 15.35 and15.27 kg under Zn-B levelsof 5.0-2.0, 7.0-0.0 and 5.0-1.5 kg ha-1, respectively inaddition to recommendedNPK; but differencesbetween these treatmentswere non-significant(P>0.05). The croprecieving Zn-B at the rateof 5.0-0, control (no Zn-B)and 0-2.0 kg ha-1 resulted in14.20, 13.77 and 13.75 kgweight of 10 canes,respectively; while theweight of 10 canes wasminimum (13.62 kg) where

B was applied at the rateof 1.5 kg ha-1, and Znapplication wasterminated. The differencesin weight of 10 canesunder T1-T2-T4-T5; T6-T7 andT8-T9 were statistically non-significant (P>0.05).

Cane yield (tons ha-1)The crop fertilized with Zn-B@ 7.0-2.0 kg ha-1 in additionto recommended NPK(225-112-168 kg ha-1)produced highest caneyield of 101.06 t ha-1,closely followed by 100.37 tha-1 obtained when Zn-Bwere applied at the rate of7.0-1.5 kg ha-1 in additionto recommended dose ofNPK. There wasconsiderable reduction incane yield and it was95.28, 94.73 and 91.85 t ha-1

under Zn-B levels of 5.0-2.0,5.0-1.5 and 7.0-0 kg ha-1,respectively in addition torecommended NPK. Thecrop recieving Zn-B at therate of 5.0-0, 0-1.5, 0-2.0 kgha-1 and control (no Zn-B)produced average caneyield of 88.08, 86.81, 85.31and 85.42 t ha-1,respectively; but thedifferences betweenabove treatments for caneyield ha-1 were statisticallynon-significant (P>0.05).The results showed thatthere was marked increasein cane yield ha-1 due toapplication of Zn-B inaddition to recommendeddose of NPK fertilizers.However, combinedapplication of boron andzinc proved to be more

beneficial as compared toZn or B application alone.Hence, the for achievingeconomically maximumcane yield ha-1 thesugarcane crop needs tobe fertilized with 7 kg Znand 1.5 kg B in addition torecommended dose ofNPK fertilizers.

Sugar recovery (%)The highest recovery of11.05% was noted in juiceextracted from the cropreceiving Zn-B at the rateof 7.0-2.0 kg ha-1 in additionto recommended NPK(225-112-168 kg ha-1),closely followed by 11.02and 10.92% recovery notedin plots given Zn-B at therate of 7.0-0 and 7.0-1.5 kgha-1, respectively; but thedifferences between thesetreatments were non-significant (P>0.05). Thejuice extracted from thecrop receiving Zn-B at therates of 5.0-2.0, 5.0-0 and 0-1.5 kg ha-1 resultedrecovery of 10.62, 10.57and 10.39%, respectively;but differences betweenthese Zn-B levels were non-significant (P>0.05). Sugarrecovery further reducedto 10.32, 10.24 and 10.250%under Zn-B application atthe rate of 5.0-1.5, 0-2.0 kgha-1 and control (no Zn-B),respectively; & differencesbetween these treatmentsfor sugar recovery werestatistically non-significant

15 | P a g e


(P>0.05). There was positiveimpact of higher zinc levelson recovery andapplication of boron incombination with zincshowed more promisingresults, while boron alonewas less effective toimprove the sugarrecovery. However,regardless the boronapplication, higher Zn levelshowed positive impact onrecovery of sugarcane.

DISCUSSION

The present study showedthat the crop receivingrecommended dose ofNPK + 7.0+2.0 kg ha-1 Zn-Bproduced 101.06 t ha-1

cane yield and 11.05%sugar recovery; whilerecommended NPK+Zn-B @7.0-1.5 kg ha-1 resulted in100.37 t ha-1 cane yieldand 10.92% sugar recovery.The remaining treatmentsas well as control resultedrelatively in lower values forall the cane yield andrecovery contributingcharacters. After goingthrough the results, it wasobserved that combinedapplication of zinc andboron in addition torecommended dose ofNPK showed significantlypromising results, but boronwhen applied alone + NPKdid not show beneficialimpact on quantitative &

qualitative traits ofsugarcane. However, zincproved to be highlyeffective, even whenapplied without boron inaddition to NPK. Theseresults are furthersupported by Bokhtiar et al.(2001) who achievedhighest sugar yield (11.74 tha-1) with micronutrientapplication including zincwith mean cane yield of87.80 t ha-1. Panhwar et al.(2003) reported that foliarapplication of zinc sulfatehad more beneficialeffects than soil appli-cation when farm yardmanure, preferably wellrotten sheep or goatmanure at the time ofland preparation is incor-porated. Wang et al.(2005) evaluated theoptimum rate of Znapplication for sugarcaneproduction and indicatedthat Zn application asZnSO4 can significantlybenefit sugarcane prod-uction. Xiang (2010)studied the effect of zinc,boron, zinc + boron on theyield and quality, andanalysed the physiologicalcharacters, nourishmentcharacters, photosyntheticcharacters and agronomiccharacters of leaves insugarcane. All treatmentsimproved the actual sugar-cane yield; compared with

treatments of zinc, boron &zinc + boron increased thesucrose of sugarcane by0.68 %. The treatments ofzinc, zinc + boronincreased juice gravity ofsugarcane by 0.54%, butthe treatment of borondecreased juice gravity by0.45%. The treatments ofzinc, boron, zinc + boronincreased sucrose yield &according to general com-parison, treatment of zinc +boron was the best of all atthe condition of thisexperiment. Ghaffar et al.(2011) recommended thatsugarcane crop should beplanted at 120 cm spacedtrenches fertilized @ 5+10kg ha-1 of Zn+Fe for betteryield & quality production.Mariano et al. (2011)reported that Zn fertilizationimproved the stalktechnological quality, aswell as providing a residualeffect, increasing theabove ground biomass.Ghaffar et al. (2012)reported that Znapplication significantlyaffected the quantitativeparameters of sugarcaneincluding number ofinternodes, cane diameterand stripped cane weightand cane yield upto 112.8 tha-1; while application ofZn @ 5.0 and 10 kg ha-1

gave stripped cane yieldof 106.4 and 110.4 t ha-1.

16 | P a g e


Conclusions

After going through theresults, it was observed thatcombined application ofzinc and boron in additionto recommended dose ofNPK showed significantlypromising results, but boronwhen applied alone + NPKdid not show beneficial

impact on quantitativeand qualitative traits ofsugarcane. However, zincproved to be highlyeffective, even whenapplied without boron inaddition to NPK. Hence, it isconcluded that Zn-B @ 7.0-1.5 kg ha-1 was anoptimum level forachieving economically

maximum cane yield(100.37 t ha-1) andrecovery (10.92%); and thedifferences were non-significant (P>0.05) whenboron application wasincreased to 2.0 kg ha-1

with same zinc level (7.0 kgha-1) in addition to NPKfertilizers.

Table-1 Germination, cane length and girth of sugarcane variety Larkana-2001 as affectedby different levels of macro- and micronutrients

NPK + Zn/B levels Germination(%)

Cane length(cm)

Cane girth(cm)

N-P-K @ 225-112-168+0 kg ha-1 (control) 67.28 c 257.00 d 2.83 dNPK+Zn @ 5 kg ha-1 69.05 c 265.00 c 2.92 cNPK+Zn @ 7 kg ha-1 72.06 b 286.33 b 3.15 bNPK+B @ 1.5 kg ha-1 69.44 b 254.00 d 2.80 dNPK+B @ 2.0 kg ha-1 70.76 b 256.67 d 2.82 dNPK+Zn-B @ 5.0-1.5 kg ha-1 71.02 b 285.00 b 3.13 bNPK+Zn-B @ 5.0+2.0 kg ha-1 72.42 b 286.67 b 3.15 bNPK+Zn-B @ 7.0+1.5 kg ha-1 75.09 a 302.00 a 3.32 aNPK+Zn-B @ 7.0+2.0 kg ha-1 75.54 a 303.00 a 3.33 a

S.E. 1.5151 1.5918 0.0182LSD 0.05 3.2118 3.3745 0.0387LSD 0.01 4.4252 4.6494 0.0533

Table-2 Number of tillers stool-1, internodes cane-1 and weight of 10 canes of sugarcaneVariety Larkana-2001 as affected by different levels of macro- and micronutrientsGermination, Tillering and cane weight of different cane Varieties

NPK + Zn/B levels No. of Tillersplant-1

No. of internodescane-1

Weight of 10canes (kg)

N-P-K @ 225-112-168+0 kg ha-1 (control) 5.37 d 14.51 c 13.77 cNPK+Zn @ 5 kg ha-1 5.54 c 14.95 c 14.20 cNPK+Zn @ 7 kg ha-1 5.98 b 16.16 b 15.35 bNPK+B @ 1.5 kg ha-1 5.31 d 14.33 c 13.62 cNPK+B @ 2.0 kg ha-1 5.36 d 14.49 c 13.75 cNPK+Zn-B @ 5.0-1.5 kg ha-1 5.95 b 16.08 b 15.27 bNPK+Zn-B @ 5.0+2.0 kg ha-1 6.00 b 16.18 b 15.36 bNPK+Zn-B @ 7.0+1.5 kg ha-1 6.31 a 17.04 a 16.19 aNPK+Zn-B @ 7.0+2.0 kg ha-1 6.33 a 17.09 a 16.24 a

S.E. 0.0979 0.4200 0.5125LSD 0.05 0.2076 0.8904 1.0864LSD 0.01 0.2860 1.2268 1.4968

17 | P a g e


Table-3 Cane yield (t ha-1), brix and recovery of sugarcane variety Larkana-2001 asAffected by different levels of macro- and micronutrients

NPK + Zn/B levels Cane yield (t ha-1) Sugar recovery (%)N-P-K @ 225-112-168+0 kg ha-1 (control) 85.42 d 10.25 cNPK+Zn @ 5 kg ha-1 88.08 d 10.57 bNPK+Zn @ 7 kg ha-1 91.85 c 11.02 aNPK+B @ 1.5 kg ha-1 86.61 d 10.39 bNPK+B @ 2.0 kg ha-1 85.31 d 10.24 cNPK+Zn-B @ 5.0-1.5 kg ha-1 94.73 b 10.32 cNPK+Zn-B @ 5.0+2.0 kg ha-1 95.28 b 10.62 bNPK+Zn-B @ 7.0+1.5 kg ha-1 100.37 a 10.92 aNPK+Zn-B @ 7.0+2.0 kg ha-1 101.06 a 11.05 a

S.E. 1.2134 0.1510LSD 0.05 2.5724 0.3202LSD 0.01 3.5442 0.4412

LITERATURE CITED

Alexander, D., and T. Mathew.2003.Effect of planting dates, varieties and mineral nutrition on juicequality and cane productivity. Cooperative Sugar, 34 (100) : 793-795.

Alexander, D., Mathew, T., Deorge, B., Sreekumar, K., Kuriakose, J.M. and Jayakumar, G. 2003. Growthand yield of sugarcane as influenced by genotype and minerar nutrition. Bharatiya Sug., 28(3):21-25.

Bokhtiar, S. M., G. C. Paul, and M. L. Kabir. 2001. Effect of sulphur fertilization on the yield of sugarcane inchar land. Bangladesh Journal of Training and Development, 14 (1/2) : 57-62.

Carroll, J.M. and M.S.U. Rehman. 2009. Pakistan Sugar: Annual Report 2009. Gain Report: USDA ForeignAgricultural Service. Global Agriculture Information Network, GAIN Report Number: PK9005.

Costa Filho, R.T., and R.M. Prado. 2008. Application of zinc for production of sugarcane. STAB - Acu´car,A´ lcool e Subprodutos 26: 36–41.

Elamin, E.A., Tillb, M.A., Elnasikh, M.H., Ibrahim, S.H., Elsheikh, M.A. and Babiker. E.E. 2007.The influence of phosphorus and potassium fertilization on the quality of sugar of two sugarcanevarieties grown on three soil series of Sudan. J of App Scie. 7 (16): 2345-2350.

Ghaffar, A., Ehsanullah, N. Akbar and S.H. Khan. 2011. Influence of zinc and iron on yield and quality ofsugarcane planted under various trench spacings. Pak. J. Agri. Sci., 48(1) : 25-33.

Ghaffar, A., Ehsanullah,, N. Akbar, S.H. Khan, K. Jabran, R.Q. Hashmi, A. Iqbal and M.A. Ali. 2012. Effect oftrench spacing and micronutrients on growth and yield of sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.).Australian Journal of Crop Sciences, 6(1):1-9.

GoP, 2013. Agriculture: Economic Survey of Pakistan, 2012-13, Ministry of Food and Agriculture,Government of Pakistan, Islamabad.

Hussain M, M. Farooq, K. Jabran and A. Wahid. 2010. Foliar application of glycinebetaine and salicylicacid improves growth, yield and water productivity of hybrid sunflower planted by differentsowing methods. J Agron Crop Sci 196: 136-145.

18 | P a g e


Karstens, S., M. Ross, P. Luedders and A. Krauss. 1992. Nutritive status of sugarcane in Punjab,Pakistan.Pak. J. Agric. Res., 13(4): 327-333.

Khan, I. A., A. Khatri, G. S. Nizamani, M. A. Siddiqui, S. Raza, N. A. Dahar.2005. Effect of NPK fertilizers onthe growth of sugarcane clone AEC86-347 developed at NIA, Tando Jam, Pakistan. PakistanJournal of Botany, 37: 355-360.

Khan, I.A., M.A. Javed, A. Khatri, M.A. Siddiqui, M.K.R. Khan, N.A. Dahar, M.H. Khanzada and R. Khan.2002. Performance of exotic sugarcane clones at NIA, Tando Jam. Asian Journal of.Plant Sci., 1:238-240.

Korndorfer, G.H. 1990. Potassium and sugarcane quality. Informacoes Agronomicas 49: 1-3.

Mariano, F.H., E. Vitti, A. Faroni, C. Otto and R.T. Paulo. 2011. Sugarcane Response to Boron and Zinc inSoutheastern Brazil. Sugar Tech, 13 (1) : 86-95.

Moreira, A., J.G. Carvalho, L.A.C. Moraes, and J.O. Salvador. 2000. Effect of micronutrients on sugarcaneyield and recovery. Pesquisa Agropecua´ria Brasileira, 35: 2051–2056.

Morris, D.R., Glaz, B., Powel, G., Deren, C.M. Snyder, G.H., Perdomo, R. and Ulloa, M.F. 2002. Plantnutrition- Sugarcane leaf P diagnosis in organic soils. Absta. No. 4334. Sugarcane Iternational.Sep/ Oct.37.

Nasir, N.M., Qureshi, R.H., Aslam, M and Akhtar, J.I. (2000). Screening of sugarcane lines selected throughhydrolic studies in naturally salt affected field Pak. Sug. J., 15(4): 2-10.

Oliveira, E.C.A., P.C.O. Trivelin, H.C.J. Franco, R. Otto, and R.H. Sartori. 2009. Effect of micronutrients onphysiology of sugarcane. Paulo. In: Congresso Brasileiro de Cieˆncia do Solo, 2009. Fortaleza:Annals, SBCS, UFC, Pp. 109-114.

Orlando Filho, J., R. Rossetto, and A.A. Casagrande. 2001. Effect of Boron and Zinc on the physiologicaltraits of sugarcane. Brazilian Journal of Sugar Technologies. 5 : 355–374.

Panhwar, R. N., H.K. Keerio, Y.M. Memon, S. Junejo , M.Y. Arain, M. Chohan,A.R. Keerio and B.A.Abro.2003.Response of Thatta-10 sugarcane variety to soil and foliar application of zinc sulphate(ZnSO4, 7H2O) under half and full doses of NPK fertilizer. Pakistan Journal of Applied Sciences, 3(4):266-269.

Wang, J.J., C.W. Kennedy, H.P. Viator, A.E. Arceneaux and A.J. Guidry. 2005. Zinc fertilization ofsugarcane in acid and calcareous soils. J. Amer. Soc. Sugarcane Technol. 25:49-61.

Xiang, L.Y. 2010. The effect of zinc and boron micro-fertilizer applied in the soil at the early tillering stageof new-planting sugarcane. M.Sc. Thesis published in China Papers, Pp. 1-87.

19 | P a g e


20 | P a g e


CORRELATION OF SOIL PROPERTIES WITH WEEDOCCURRENCE IN SUGARCANE FIELDS

Adereti, R.O., *Takim, F.O., Affinnih, K.O. and Abayomi, Y.A.Department of Agronomy, Faculty of AgricultureUniversity of Ilorin, Ilorin, PMB 1515, Ilorin, Nigeria*Corresponding Author: [email protected]

ABSTRACTThe study was established on three sugarcane growing fields with known cropping history,located in the southern Guinea savanna ecological zone (Latitude 90 29' N and Longitude 40

35' E) of Nigeria during the 2012/2013 and 2014 growing seasons to determine the relationshipbetween weed seedling emergence and soil properties. Soil seedbank was sampled fromsugarcane fields to a depth of 0-10cm, 11-20cm, 21-30cm and was estimated using the directseedling germination method, and the emerged weed seedlings were monitored over aperiod of 8 months concurrently with a floristic survey conducted on same fields. Datacollected on weed seedling emergence were transformed and subjected to analysis ofvariance, regression and correlation analyses. The results of the study demonstrated that soilproperties exert significant influence on the occurrence and distribution of specific weedspecies in the sugarcane cultivated fields and there was a strong positive correlation (r=0.86,p≤0.003) between seedling emergence in the seedbank and field emergence. Paspalumscrobiculatum, dominant weed species, correlated positively with soil particle sizes and all thechemical properties except Na, K and acidity. This implies that predictable estimate of thesugarcane fields’ weed flora can be made from the soil seedbank and soil properties, withsuch information; it would be possible to schedule a more appropriate weed managementstrategy.Keywords: Soil properties, seedbank, weed emergence, floristic survey and sugarcane

INTRODUCTION

Sugarcane (Saccharumofficinarum L.) is one of themost important crops in theworld because of itsstrategic position in thesearch for renewable andcleaner energy sourcesand its immense uses in thedaily life of a nation as wellas for industrial uses aimedat nutritional andeconomic sustenance(Girei and Giroh, 2012). Theproduction of sugarcane in

Nigeria is still far below theworld average and one ofthe contributing factors isweed interference. Weedsare considered majorconstraints to higher yieldsin sugarcane productionbecause it can reducepotential sugar yield by 24to 93% as well as a loss ofsignificant quantities ofnutrients (Anon., 2013).Weed infestation dynamicsdepend on quantity(Forcella, 1992) andhorizontal distribution of the

seedbank (Wiles andBrodahl, 2004), as well asseedbank allotments invarious soil layers (Grundyet al., 1996). Seedbankdistribution depends ondepth of seed burial(Yenish et al., 1992).Differences in seed burialdepth can have importantimplications for relativetime of weed emergence,survival of weed seeds,and distribution of weedspecies.

21 | P a g e


Weed is not distributeduniformly along theground, and the spatialvariability of the infestationis observed, with stains orthick woods formations(Iwara et al., 2011). Soilphysical, chemical andbiological properties alsopresent spatial variability,assuming similar values toshort distances anddifferent values as thedistance betweenobservations increases. Thespatial variability of soilproperties and weedpresent occur due toseveral factors, amongwhich are: topography,structure and type of soil,groundwatercharacteristics,microclimate andmanagement practices(Silva et al., 2008).The dynamics and thedevelopment of weed soilseedbank vary accordingto time of year, the cropstage and edaphicconditions. Taking theseinto consideration, it isnecessary to know whichfactors may be related,directly or indirectly, anddetermining theoccurrence of some weedspecies, since, with suchinformation, it would bepossible to schedule amore appropriatemanagement. This study is

therefore designed todetermine the relationshipbetween weed seedlingemergence and soilchemical/ physicalproperties in a sugarcaneecology.

MATERIALS AND METHODSDescription of study areaThis study was conductedat the University of IlorinSugar Research Institute’sFarm between 2012/2013 -2014 growing seasons inthe southern Guineasavanna ecological zone(Latitude 90 29' N andLongitude 40 35' E) ofNigeria, which is 307 mabove sea level.The study was establishedon three sugarcanegrowing fields with differentcultivation periods (20years of continuouscropping, less than 5 yearsof cropping after 10 yearsof fallow and one year ofcropping after 15 years offallow). The fields hadsimilar tillage operations(ploughing, harrowing andridging) and the use ofbroad spectrum pre-emergence herbicides,supplemented with post-emergence (directedspray) application ofparaquat, ametryn or handhoeing in each croppingcycle. The soil wasclassified as Plinthustaffs,

having sandy texture in thefirst 30 cm of the surface(Ogunwale, 1991).

Soil samplingThe experimental field oneach of the 3 sugarcanemonoculture was dividedinto eight (8) cardinalpoints. One quadrat(0.5m2) was placed oneach of the cardinalpoints. Nine core samplewere collected from eachof the cardinal points usinga precision auger (7.4cm indiameter) to a depth of 0-10cm, 11-20cm, 21 -30cmand replicated three timesfor each experimentalfield. The soil samples wereair dried and passedthrough a 2mm diametersieve. The sieved sampleswere used for theestimation of the soil weedseedbank using the directseedling germinationmethod which is mainlyused to determine thedensity of the viable weedseeds in the seedbank(Swanton et al., 2000).One hundred grams of thesieved soil samples wasused to fill each plasticbowl (replicated threetimes) and were arrangedin the screen house forgermination. Each of thebowls had four perforationsat the base to facilitate thedrainage of excess water in

22 | P a g e


the soil samples. The soilsamples were watered onalternate days andmonitored for weed seedgermination/seedlingemergence at monthlyintervals. Emerging weedseedlings wereenumerated either asbroadleaves, grasses andsedges; identified tospecies level, counted andthen pulled out.Identification of weedseedlings was done withthe aid of weedhandbook, Akobundu andAgyakwa (1998). Soilsamples were stirred usinga spatula after eachassessment to stimulategermination by bringing tothe surface other weedseeds that might havebeen deeply buried inthem. The experiment wasterminated whenemergence ceased after aperiod of 8 months.

Soil analysisThe composite soil samplesat depths 0-10 cm, 11-20cm and 21-30 cm were airdried, crushed with mortarand pestle and sieved witha 2 mm diameter sieve.Particle size analyses wereperformed to obtain sand,silt and clay content whilechemical analyses werealso performed to obtaintotal available N, P,

exchangeable bases (Na,K, Mg), Ca, total acidity,soil pH, effective cationexchange capacity,organic carbon andorganic matter.

Floristic surveyFloristic survey wasconducted with the aid ofquadrat (0.5 x 0.5 m),launched randomly on thethree fields. The emergingweed seedlings wereobserved, counted, pulledfor identification. Theweeds were separated intobroadleaves, grasses andsedges.

Data analysisThe absolute and relativefrequencies, densities anddominances of weedspecies were recorded.The importance valueindex (IVI) was evaluated,which numericallyexpresses the importanceof a particular species in acommunity (Curtes &McIntosh, 1950).Sorensen similarities(Wolda, 1981) and Simpsondiversity (Anon., 2008)indices were used todetermine and comparethe weed species diversityof each field and theindices were computed asfollows: Sorensen similarityindex = (a/a+ b+ c) x 100.

Where a = number ofweed species common toboth fields, b= number ofweed species in first field,c= number of weedspecies in second field.Simpson’s diversity index=∑t-1 [ni (ni -1)] / [N (N-1)].Where n =total number ofeach species, N = totalfrequency of all species.The possible relationbetween weed densitiesfound through floristicsurvey and throughseedbank estimate withthe physical and chemicalproperties were evaluatedby correlation andregression analyses.

RESULTSA total of 43 weed speciesbelonging to 37 generaand 14 families wereenumerated across thesugarcane cultivated fields(Table 1). About 72 % of allthe genera enumeratedbelonged to the Poaceae(13), Asteraceae (5),Cyperaceae (5),Euphorbiaceae (5) andAmaranthaceae (3)families. About 58 % of thegenera were broadleavedspecies, 30 % grasses and12 % sedge weed species.Annual weed speciesaccounted for 65 %, 28 %perennials and about 7 %were annuals or perennials.

23 | P a g e


Twenty-five weed specieswithin 22 genera whichcomprised of 15broadleaves, 6 grasses and4 sedge weed seedlingswere enumerated from thesoil weed seedbank. Weedspecies with the highestpercent occurrenceincludes: Portulacaoleracea (9.63%),Euphorbia hirta (6.33%),Tridax procumbens (6.04 %)and so on (Table 2).

In the floristic surveyperformed, 45 weedspecies were identifiedacross the three fields whileonly 25 weed speciesemerged from the soilseedbank across soilsampling depths and 24 ofsuch were encounteredduring the survey exceptEuphorbia hirta. There wassignificant (p≤0.05) positivecorrelation (R2= 0.7373, R=0.8587) between floristicand seedbank emergence(Table 3).

The regression analyses forsoil physical and chemicalproperties did not showany significant (p≤0.05)relationship with populationof emerged weedseedlings from the soilseedbank (Table 4). Thus, inthe correlations shown, soilphysical propertiesindicated negative

relationship with emergedweed seedlings except %sand (R2 = 0.011 and R =0.103) while the soilchemical properties werepositively related withweed seedling emergenceexcept total acidity (R2

=0.170 and R = - 0.872),exchangeable Na (R2 =0.536 and R = - 0.662),exchangeable K (R2 = 0.438and R = - 0.732) and total N(R2 = 0.005 and R = - 0.408).High positive relationshipswere observed withexchangeable Mg (78.8%),available P (66.2%) whileorganic matter was 41.3%related to the emergenceof weed seedlings from thesoil seedbank.

The effect of soil propertieson weed morphologicalgroups was inconsistent.Soil physical propertiesshown on Table 5 indicatedthat sand positivelycorrelated with all themorphological groupsexcept broadleavedseedlings. The percent siltwas only related positivelywith broadleavedseedlings while claycorrelated positively(47.5%) with grass weedseedlings, showed anegative relationship withother weed morphologicalgroups.

The relationship betweensoil chemical propertiesand weed morphologicalgroup differed across soilparameters (Table 6).Cation exchangecapacity, Mg and Ppositively correlated withbroadleaved and sedgesbut negatively with grassweed seedlings. Acidity,pH, Na, K and N had anopposite trend whileorganic matter and Cacorrelated negatively withall the groups exceptsedges.Selected weed speciesfrom each morphologicalgroups that had highestimportance value indexwere correlated with soilproperties (Table 7) andthe analyses indicatedthat, all weed speciesidentified related positivelywith % sand and organiccarbon except Brachiariadeflexa and Cyperusdifformis Paspalumscrobiculatum (grass weedspecies), the dominantweed species correlatedpositively with all soilproperties except Na, Kand acidity.

DISCUSSION

Weed seedlingcomposition was similaracross the three sugarcane

24 | P a g e


fields. The relativeproportion of weed speciesshowed that about 29 % ofthe encountered weedswere members of Poaceaefamily, Asteraceae,Cyperaceae,Euphorbiaceae each had11 % relative occurrence,Amaranthaceae had 6.7 %while other weed speciesbelonging to the otherfamilies had about 2 %occurrence each. Theresult showed that, grassweed seedlings dominatedthe sugarcane weedcommunity whilebroadleaves had higherdiversity in species. Thisagreed with the findings ofNdarubu and Fadayomi(2006) who observed thatbroadleaves had higherdiversity while density ofgrasses was higher acrossthe sugarcane fields ofNigerian Sugar Company,Bacita while Takim andAmodu (2013) alsoreported similarobservation in a surveyconducted on the farms ofUnilorin Sugar ResearchInstitute during 2011and2012 growing seasons.This also shows thepresence of weedsparticular to sugarcanemonoculture and agreeswith Derksen et al., (1993)that morphologicalsimilarity of crops and

weeds influenced the typeof weed species present.Liebman and Dyck (1993)demonstrated thatmonoculture can lead to aless diverse and moreintractable weed flora thancrop rotation. Owen (1998)concluded thatadaptation of weedpopulations to continuouscropping is due to aconsistently hospitableenvironment for weedsthat have phenologicaland physiologicalsimilarities to the crop.Therefore, the structure ofthe current weed speciesin a seedbank ofsugarcane ecology isinfluenced by thesugarcane and thecropping system.Significantly higher densityof weed seedlings werefound to emerge in newlyopen fields compared tofield characterized bycontinuous sugarcanecultivation. In other words,the increase in the periodof cultivation reduces thediversity of weed seedlingsand induced dominanceof certain weed specieswere created while agradual shift from thenatural vegetation withpredominant annualbroadleaves to an inducedvegetation of perennialgrasses was associated

with the fallow fields (Takimand Amodu, 2013). Thehigher density of weedseedlings in the newlyopen fields could be as aresult of weed seeddormancy breaking pointwhich invariable means acondition in which weedseed regains its viabilityafter long period of beingdormant and also thepresence of conduciveenvironment. It isunderstandable asreported by Szott et al.(1991) and later confirmedby Ekeleme et al. (2004)that weed seedbank isusually low in the seasonafter opening field that hasbeen under long fallowand this could translateinto low weed density inthat season while increasein weed density will beobserved in the presidingseason.

All the weed speciesemerged from soilseedbank were identifiedon the field survey exceptEuphorbia hirta. Thedominant weed specieswere similar in bothenumeration whichindicates that the verylarge size of this seedbankis probably due to both itsprolific seed productionand the ability of its seedsto persist more during the

25 | P a g e


cultivation periods. Therewas a strong positivecorrelation (r=0.86,p≤0.003) between seedlingemergence in theseedbank and fieldemergence. A similar studycarried out by Ndarubuand Fadayomi (2006),reported non-significant(p≤0.05) linear correlationbetween weed speciesdiversity based on floristicsurvey and estimatedmorphological groups,while Takim et al.(2013)reported a strongpositive relationship (r=0.98,p≤0.003) between weedseed number in the soil andthe number of emergedseedlings on the field. Theauthors further stated thatan average of 15.8-30.6%of weed seeds in theseedbank could emerge inany given year. This studyaffirmed that soil seedbankdata on weed densitycould be used to predictthe floristic weed densitywhereas the floristicspecies’ diversity may notbe precisely predictablefrom the soil seedbankestimation. This implies thatpredictable estimate of thesugarcane fields’ weedflora can be made fromthe soil seedbank analysis.

The soil seedbank densitydecreased with increase in

soil depth. The pattern ofdepth distribution ofseedbank is similar for allthe weed species. In thethree fields, all the weedspecies encountered wereconcentrated in the upper0-10 cm of the soil. In Ohio,Cardina et al. (1992)studied three soils withdifferent cropping historyand reported that the top0-5 cm of the soil had thehighest numbers of thetotal weed seeds. Similarly,Zhang et al. (1998)observed that weedseedling emergence andseedbank depletion aregreater from seeds nearthe soil surface than fromthose more deeply buriedbecause more seedsencounter conditionsfavourable for germination,Rahman et al. (2000) whostudied four cultivationtreatment on thedistribution of weed seedsin the soil profile at theWaikato Orchard nearHamilton found that largerseedbank and more weedseedlings were in the upper5 cm of the soil profile andthere was no difference innumber of seeds between0-5 and 5-10 cm depths.This phenomenon might bepartly attributed to the factthat it takes some time forseed produced by theweed species to penetrate

the lower soil layer and thisagrees with the findings ofWagner et al. (2003). Thislarge surface seed stockcould also be due to theconsiderable seed rain andlack or inadequate weedcontrol at the end of thecropping season becausemost farmers have thetendency of not removinglate weeds.An equal distribution ofweed seeds in the 11-20cm and 21-30 cm soildepths were also observedand this supported thereports of Yenish et al.(1992). Different types ofcultivation also influencedseed distribution amongsoil aggregates and in thesoil profile. Studies of thehorizontal movement ofweed seeds followingcultivation with differentimplements have shownthat majority of seedmoved <1 m from theirsource (Rew and Cussans,1997). The vertical seedmovement is of greaterconsequence as differenttypes of cultivation moveseeds to different depths inthe soil (Dessaint et al.,1996). Clement et al. (1996)concluded that the typeand frequency of landpreparation influences theseed dispersion in the soilprofile; the managementat same depth, favour

26 | P a g e


uniform distribution of theseeds in the soil profile,finding lower seedpopulations deeper in thesoil.

The relationship betweensoil properties and weedseedling emergence wasinconsistent. In other words,soil conditions affected thearable soil seedbankdirectly or indirectly. It wasobserved that % sand,ECEC, Mg and P had highpositive influence onemergence of weedseedlings while a stronglynegative effect on weedemergence were obtainedwith % silt, %clay, acidityand K. The ECEC and Mghad strong positivecorrelation withemergence ofbroadleaved and sedgeweed seedling whilegrasses were highlyinfluenced by aciditycontent and K. The positivecorrelation observedbetween weed seedlingemergence and ECEC, Mgand P contents implies thatsoil fertility influence weedseedling emergence andthere are more demandingthan others in certainnutrients (Lousada et al.,2013).

The dominant species,Paspalum scrobiculatumwas strongly (positive)

influenced by the 3 soilphysical properties whilethe chemical propertiesshowed inconsistent results,while P, organic matterand Ca related highlypositively, Na and K werehighly negativelycorrelated withemergence of P.scrobiculatum. Udoh et al.,(2007) studying theinfluence of physico-chemical soil properties onthe weed distribution in fivedifferent soils in Nigeria,observed that thedistribution andoccurrence of thedominant species, Tridaxprocumbens was stronglyinfluenced by 21 soilproperties, including C, Kand high sand content.These authors concludedthat this species has thegreatest potential forgrowth and developmentin a variety of soils andconditions, since of the fiveareas observed, it wasfound in four while Lousadaet al. (2013) reported that,Cyperus rotundus was thedominant weed species inCampos dos Goytacazes,in the northern region ofthe state of Rio de Janeiroin the two seasonsevaluated and correlatedwith some soilcharacteristics such as P, K,C and high clay content.

Elucidating the factors thatcontribute to an increasedoccurrence anddistribution of the dominantweed species areextremely important inorder to elaborate anintegrated and efficientmanagement. Differentplants are known to havedifferent requirements,which demonstrate thatdifferences in thedistribution andabundance of weed florain a scenario may indicatethe variation of soilproperties (Udoh et al.,2007).Soil properties at differentlevels can influence weeddensity in the area. Whenspecies are slightly favoredby some soil property andslightly impaired by otherproperties, it means thatthere is a high relation ofdensity of species in areaswith differentcharacteristics, that is, thediffusion of that speciesmay occur in differenttypes of soil. However,when the density of somespecies is strictly related tosome soil characteristic,the incidence of thatspecies in the field can berestricted to the existenceof that property (Otto etal., 2007).The influences ofsoil types and soilproperties on the

27 | P a g e


distribution of weedspecies have earlier beenobserved by other workers.Woo et al. (1991), Malikand Born (1988) and Frick(1984), in their variousstudies observed thatweed species distributionwas influenced by soilproperties. Similarly, Petryet al. (1991) observed theinfluence of organicmatter, while Andreasenand Streibig (1990) andSharma (1986) observedthe influence of soil textureon weed occurrence. Onthe other hand, Aarssen etal. (1986) observed thatfive Vicia species were nothighly specialized in theirsubstrate requirements,although they weregenerally associated withsandy soils.

The positive effect of weedseedling emergence and% sand could be attributedto germination of seeds atshallow depth which wasstimulated by the moist

environment around seeds,thereby prevented seedsand seedlings from dryingout (Benvenuti et al., 2001).However, in the silt andclay fraction with a morecompact pore space,there was dormancyacquisition by weed seedsas a result of higher soilmoisture, lowertemperature, poor gasexchange and higher Co2

levels. Also, limiting lightintensity in these two soilformation might affectseed dormancy whichcould almost be detectedin top soil sand fraction,thus the positive effectobserved in the latter.

The results of correlation ofphysical and chemical soilproperties with weedseedling emergence candefine & explain why somespecies are spread throughout area & others focus onspecific points. This isbecause different plantsare known to have

different requirements,which demonstrate thedifferences in thedistribution andabundance of weed florain a scenario which mayindicate the variation of soilproperties (Udoh et al.,2007).

CONCLUSION

The study demonstratedthat, there was a strongpositive correlation (r=0.86,p≤0.003) between seedlingemergence in the seedbank and field emergenceand certain soil physicaland chemical propertiesexert significant influenceon the occurrences oftypes and distribution ofspecific weed species inthe sugarcane cultivatedfields. This implies thatpredictable estimate of thesugarcane fields’ weedflora can be made fromthe soil seed bank analysis.

28 | P a g e


Table-1 Importance value index (IVI) weeds of sugarcane across different period ofcultivation of sugarcane

FAMILY WEED SPECIESImportance Value Index

MG LC CSC FW2 FW1Aizoaceae Trianthema portulacastrum L. B A 8.46 9.51 9.71

Amaranthaceae Achyranthes aspera L. B A 5.51 2.1 1.27

Celosia leptostachya Benth. B A 0.62 2.27 0.62

Gomphrena celosoides Mart. B A/P 7.73 6.21 7.5

Asteraceae Agerantum conyzoides L. B A 0.84 1.27 7.07

Chromolena odorata L. B P 11.39 10.19 7.35

Tridax procumbens L. B A 16.74 6.33 4.43

Vernonia cinerea L. B A 1.92 0.99 1.1

V. galamensis Cass. B A 3.87 7 7.2

Commelinaceae Commelina benghalensis L. B A/P 0.31 4.55 6.92

Cyperaceae Cyperus diffformis L. S A 9.51 13.38 12.09

C. esculentus L. S P 3.43 4.99 2.21

Fimbrystylis litoralis Gaudet S A 5.89 3.4 5.8

Fuirena umbellata Rottb S P 3.99 5.71 5.52

Mariscus alternifolus Vahl S P 11.79 7.56 5.41

Euphorbiaceae Croton hirtus L’Hert B A 9.15 7.21 4.94

C. lobatus L. B A 7.12 8.28 7.61

Euphorbia heterophylla L. B A 4.03 7.98 5.64

E. hyssopifolia L. B A 10.28 10.57 8.96

Phyllantus amarus Schum B A 7.1 6.32 6.04

Fabaceae Senna obtusifolia (L.) H. S. Iruun &Barneby

B A/P 5.92 7.98 8.31

Mimosa pudica L. B P 0.47 0.67 1.22

Spigelia anthelmia L. B A 8.93 8.55 7.79

Tephrosia bracteolate Guil. B A 7.09 6.59 6.16

Nyctaginaceae Boerhavia diffusa L. B P 6.86 7.9 8.52

Onagraceae Ludwigia decurrens Walt. B A 9.45 10.56 12.54

Poaceae Andropogon gayanus Kunth G P 7.79 7.58 5.63

Axonopus compresus (Sw.) P. Beauv. G P 7.67 8.93 9.09

29 | P a g e


Table-2 Weed species enumerated from soil seedbank across soil sampling depths

Weed species Percentage weed species occurrence

SD1 SD2 SD3 Mean

Portulaca oleracea 8.82 10.52 9.56 9.63

Euphorbia hirta 5.26 4.54 9.20 6.33

Tridax procumbens 6.70 5.29 6.13 6.04

Setaria barbata 5.32 7.26 5.13 5.90

Odellandia corymbosa 5.26 5.14 6.13 5.51

Phyllantus amarus 3.59 6.13 6.52 5.41

Cyperus difformis 6.80 4.69 4.28 5.26

Brachiaria lata 5.65 7.41 2.70 5.25

Euphorbia hyssopifolia 5.37 4.39 5.55 5.10

Euphorbia heterophylla 3.82 4.31 6.67 4.93

Brachiaria deflexa 5.07 4.39 4.89 4.78

Fimbrystylis litoralis 5.30 4.99 3.48 4.59

Croton lobatus 4.44 3.86 3.84 4.05

Hyptis lanceolata 5.15 3.40 3.36 3.97

Spigelia anthelmia 4.38 3.70 2.72 3.60

Chromolena odorata 4.69 2.87 2.97 3.51

Agerantum conyzoides 2.87 4.46 1.99 3.11

Digitaria horizontalis 2.69 3.78 2.53 3.01

Tephrosia bracteolate 1.98 3.70 2.53 2.74

Panicum repens 1.73 2.34 1.55 1.88

Ludwigia decurrens 1.92 0.68 2.62 1.74

Paspalum scrobiculatum 0.90 0.68 3.01 1.53

Fuirena umbellate 0.74 0.15 1.55 0.81

Mariscus alternifolus 0.74 0.68 0.87 0.76

Vernonia galamensis 0.66 0.52 0.09 0.42

SD1= 0-10cm soil depth, SD2= 11-20cm soil depth, SD3= 21-30cm soil depth

30 | P a g e


Table-3 Details of diversity, similarity and regression statistic between floristic and seedbankweed seedling emergence

Indices Floristic emergence Seedbank emergenceSpecies Richness 45 25Sorensen similarity index 51%Regression Equation Y= 0.0143x + 15.148

0.73730.85870.003

R2

RProbability

Table-4 Regression statistics for the total emergence from soil weed seedbank (Y) relative toSoil properties (x) across land use intensities and soil sampling depth

Soil property Regression equation R2 R% clay Y= -3 x 10-7x + 5.921 0.344 -0.587% silt Y= -3 x 10-7x + 0.269 0.166 -0.073% sand Y= -9 x 10-7x + 81.952 0.011 0.103Ph Y= -2 x 10-7x + 6.233 0.166 -0.408Acidity (cmol/kg) Y= 4 x 10-7x + 0.271 0.170 -0.872Organic matter (O.M)g/kg Y= -1 x 10-6x + 1.083 0.760 0.413ECEC (cmol/kg) Y= 8 x 10-6x + 5.699 0.667 0.816Na (cmol/kg) Y= -6 x 10-6x + 3.375 0.536 -0.662K (cmol/kg) Y= -1 x 10-5x + 6.878 0.438 -0.732Mg (cmol/kg) Y= 7 x 10-6x + 4.402 0.620 0.788Ca (cmol/kg) Y= 2 x 10-7x + 1.297 0.119 0.345P (mg/kg) Y= 1 x 10-6x + 0.131 0.438 0.662N (kg/ha) Y= -6 x 10-7x + 12.127 0.005 -0.408R2 = coefficient of determination, R = correlation coefficient of seedbank emergence

Table-5 The regression statistics for emergence of weed morphological groups (Y)relative to soil physical properties (x) across soil depths

Soil Physical Property Regression Equation R2 R

Broadleaf weed seedling% Sand Y= 0.7569x + 78.875 0.1079 -0.3286% Silt Y= - 5.927x + 13.765 0.1278 0.3571% Clay Y= - 0.1641x + 6.3395 0.0352 -0.1877

Grass weed seedling% Sand Y= 0.1807x + 81.578 0.0008 0.0287% Silt Y= - 0.3536x + 13.229 0.0035 -0.0590% Clay Y= 0.1729x + 5.1932 0.2256 0.4750

Sedge weed seedling% Sand Y= 0.7569x + 78.875 0.0291 0.1705% Silt Y= - 0.5927x + 13.765 0.0197 -0.1405% Clay Y= - 0.164x + 6.3395 0.4100 -0.6403

31 | P a g e


Table-6 The regression statistics for emergence of weed morphological groups (Y) relative tosoil Chemical properties (x) across soil depthsSoil chemical Properties Regression Equation R2 R

Broadleaf weed seedling

ECEC (cmol/kg) Y=54.092x – 222 0.9688 0.9843

pH Y=-23539x + 16.977 0.5727 -0.7568

Organic matter (O.M)g/kg Y=-9.4648x + 40.903 0.9946 -0.0128

Acidity (cmol/kg) Y=-0.0687x + 0.6781 0.0002 -0.9973

N (kg/ha) Y=-2.8247x + 12.202 0.5727 -0.7568

P (mg/kg) Y=2.987x - 12.207 0.0793 0.2816

Mg (cmol/kg) Y=54.33x - 224.36 0.9499 0.9746

Na (cmol/kg) Y=-0.2387x + 2.3618 0.0074 -0.2816

K (cmol/kg) Y=-32.246x + 140.07 0.793 -0.3738

Ca (cmol/kg) Y=-18.779x + 81.326 0.1397 -0.0859

Grass weed seedling

ECEC (cmol/kg) Y=-5.6928x + 28.888 0.7838 -0.8853

pH Y=0.19078x + 5.467 0.2752 0.5246

Organic matter (O.M.)g/kg Y=-0.1821x + 1.0531 0.0836 -0.2891

Acidity (cmol/kg) Y=1.0313x - 3.1258 0.8624 0.9287

N (kg/ha) Y=0.2291x - 0.6496 0.2752 0.5246

P (mg/kg) Y=-0.69214x + 3.0319 0.311 -0.5577

Mg (cmol/kg) Y=-5.6218x + 27.281 0.7429 -0.8619

Na (cmol/kg) Y=7.4725x - 24.44 0.3109 0.5576

K (mg/kg) Y=3.738x - 12.232 0.4043 0.6359

Ca (cmol/kg) Y=-0.071x + 1.6066 0.0477 -0.2183

ECEC (cmol/kg) Y=3.5114x - 2.9436 0.6011 0.7753

pH Y=0.0884x + 6.443 0.1191 -0.345

Organic matter (O.M.)g/kg Y=0.21x - 0.2701 0.2242 0.4735

Acidity (cmol/kg) Y=-0.6543x + 2.6974 0.6697 -0.8365

N (kg/ha) Y=-0.106x + 0.5216 0.1191 -0.345

P (mg/kg) Y=0.6219x - 1.4471 0.5062 0.7115

Mg (cmol/kg) Y=3.4079x - 3.9984 0.5536 0.744

Na (cmol/kg) Y=0.0934x + 1.0548 -0.1663 -0.7114

K (cmol/kg) Y=-3.2154x + 11.512 0.603 -0.7765

Ca cmol/kg Y=-6.7147x + 23.922 0.5061 0.4078

32 | P a g e


Table 7. The regression statistics for emergence of selected weed seedling (Y) relative to soil physical andchemical properties (x) across soil depths

Weed species % Sand % Silt % Clay N Na P Organicmatter pH K Mg Acidity Ca EC

BroadleavesEuphorbia hirta 0.054 -0.084 0.452 0.546 0.536 -0.536 -0.264 0.546 0.616 -0.874 0.939 -0.193 -0.896Portulacaoleracea

0.015 0.015 -0.513 -0.486 -0.593 0.593 0.330 -0.486 -0.669 0.838 -0.911 0.260 0.864

Tridaxprocumbens

0.993 -0.996 -0.801 0.918 -0.739 0.739 0.904 0.918 -0.670 -0.627 0.502 0.933 -0.589

GrassesBrachiariadeflexa

-0.140 0.110 0.616 0.373 0.689 -0.689 -0.446 0.373 0.756 -0.764 0.852 -0.377 -0.794

Digitariahorizontalis

0.986 0.990 -0.771 0.936 -0.706 0.706 0.883 0.936 0.634 -0.663 0.043 0.915 -0.627

Panicum repens 0.139 -0.109 0.615 -0.374 0.688 0.689 0.445 -0.374 -0.756 0.764 -0.853 0.378 0.794Paspalumscrobiculatum

0.761 0.741 0.983 0.385 -0.996 0.996 0.927 0.335 -0.999 0.144 -0.292 0.897 0.191

SedgesCyperus difformis -0.768 0.787 0.345 -0.985 0.253 -0.253 -0.526 -0.985 0.157 0.950 -0.892 0.586 0.934Fimbrystylis litoralis 0.827 -0.809 -0.997 0.435 -0.999 0.999 0.982 0.435 0.992 0.035 -0.186 0.940 0.084

33 | P a g e


REFERENCES

1. Aarssen, L.W., Hall, I.V. and Jensen, K. 1986. The Biology of Canadian Weeds. Canadian Journalof Pant Science, 66:711–37.

2. Akobundu, I.O. and Agyakwa, C.W. 1989. A Hand book of West African Weeds. IITA, Ibadan-Nigeria. 521pp.

3. Andreasen, C. and Streibig, J.C. 1990. Impact of soil factors on weeds in Danish cereals crops.Weed Abstract, 39:434–435.

4. Anonymous, 2008. Ecology and Simpson’s Diversity Index: advanced applied science: GCEA2 Units: 1- 9.

5. Anonymous, 2013. Sugarcane: Cultural Management- Bicol. bicol.da.gov.ph/…/topic13.html.6. Cardina, J. and Sparrow, D.H. 1996. A comparison of methods to predict weed seedling

populations from the soil seedbank. Weed Science, 44: 46-51.7. Clements, D.R., Benoit, D.L. and Swanton, C.J. 1996. Tillage effects on weed seed return and

seed bank composition. Weed Science, 44: 314-322.8. Curtes, J.T. and McIntosh, R.P. 1950. The interrelations of certain Analytic and Synthetic

Phytosociological Characters. Ecology 31:434-455.9. Derksen, D. A., Lafond, G. P., Thomas, A. G., Loeppky, H. A. and Swanton, C. J. 1993. The

impact of agronomic practices on weed communities: tillage systems. Weed Science. 41:409–417.

10. Dessaint, F. Barralis, G., Caixinhas, M.L., Mayor, J.P., Recasens, J. and Zanin, G. 1996. Precisionof soil seedbank sampling: how many soil cores? Weed Research, 36:143-151.

11. Ekeleme, F., Chikoye, D. and Akobundu, I.O. 2004. Changes in size and composition of weedcommunities during planted and natural fallows. Basic and Applied Ecology, 5:25-33.

12. Forcella, F. 1992. Prediction of weed seedling densities from buried seed reserves. WeedResearch, 32:29–38.

13. Girei, A.A. and Giroh, D.Y. 2012. Analysis of the Factors affecting Sugarcane (Saccharumofficinarum) Production under the Out growers Scheme in Numan Local GovernmentArea Adamawa State, Nigeria. Journal of Education and Practice, 3(8):195-200.

14. Grundy, A.C., Mead, A. and Bond, W. 1996. Modelling the effect of weed-seed distribution in thesoil profile on seedling emergence. Weed Research, 36: 375–384.

15. Iwara, A.I., Gani, B.S., Njar, G.N. and Deekor, D.N. 2011. Influence of physic-chemicalproperties on the distribution of woody tree/shrub species in South-Southern Nigeria.Journal of Agricultural Science, 2(2):69-75.

16. Lousada, L.L., Freitas, S.P., Marciano, C.R., Esteves, B.S., Muniz, R.A. andSiqueira, D.P. 2013.Correlation of Soil Properties with Weed Occurrence in Sugarcane Areas. Planta Daninha,31(4):765-775.

17. Malik, N. and Vanden Born, W.H. 1988. The biology of Canadian weeds, Galium aparine L.and Galium spurium L. Canadian Journal of Plant Science, 68:481–499.

18. Ndarubu, A.A. and Fadayomi, O. 2006. Relationship between soil, weed-seed bank andfloristic survey estimations of weed density and species’ diversity on the sugarcane estateof the Nigerian Sugar Company (NISUCO) Ltd, Bacita, Nigeria. Nigerian Journal ofWeed Science, 19:23-31.

19. Ogunwale, J. A. 1991. Effect of Source of nitrogen’s and levels of nitrogen and phosphorus onthe performance of soyabeans at Ilorin. Annual Report of the Chair of Agronomyendowed by the International Merchant Bank Ltd. (part 1):16-24.

34 | P a g e


20. Owen, M.D.K. 1998. Producer attitudes and weed management. In: Hatfield, J.L., Buhler, D.D.and Stewart, B.A. (Eds.) Integrated weed and soil management. Ann Arbor Press, USA.pp. 43-60.

21. Petry, E., Switzer, R.E. and Cole, W. 1991. Effect of topsoil thickness on winter annual weedBiomass Production and Nutrient Flux. Weed Technology, 5: 864–867.

22. Rahman, A., James, T.K., Mellsop, J. and Grabavac, N. 2000. Effect of cultivation methods onweed seed distribution and seedling emergence. New Zealand Plant Protection, 53:28-33.

23. Sharma, M.P. 1986. The biology of Canadian weeds. Fagopyram tetaricum (L.) Gaertu.Canadian Journal Plant Science, 66: 381–93.

24. Silva, A.A., Ferreira, F.A., Ferreira, L.R. and Santos, J.B. 2007. Biologia de plantas daninhas, In:Tópicos em Manejo de Plantas Daninhas, Silva, A.A. & Silva, J.F Universidade Federal deViçosa, ISBN 978-857-2692-75-5, Viçosa, Brazil. pp. 17-61.

25. Swanton, C. J., Shrestha, A., Knezevic, S. Z., Roy, R. C., Ball-Coelho, B. R. 2000. Influence oftillage type on vertical weed seedbank distribution in a sandy soil. Canadian Journal ofPlant Science, 80, 2:455–457.

26. Szott, L.T., Palm, C.A., Sanchez, P.A., 1991. Agroforestry in acid soils of the humid tropics.Advanced Agronomy, 45: 275–301.

27. Takim, F.O. and Amodu, A. 2013. Quantitative Estimate of Weeds of Sugarcane (Saccharumofficinarum L.) Crop in Ilorin, Southern Guinea Savanna of Nigeria. Ethiopian Journal ofEnvironmental Studies and Management, 6(6):611-619.

28. Takim, F. O., Fadayomi, O., Ekeleme, F. and Amosun, J. O 2013. Relationship between theSoil Seedbank and Weed Population as influenced by Land Use Intensity in SouthernGuinea Savanna of Nigeria. Nigerian Journal of Agriculture, Food and Environment.9(3):36-41.

29. Udoh, B.T., Ogunkunle, A.O. and Ndaeyo, N.U. 2007. Influence of soil series and physic-chemical properties on weed flora distribution at moor plantation Ibadan, SouthwesternNigeria. Journal of Agricultural Social Science, 3(2):55-58.

30. Wagner, M., Poschlod, P. and Setchfield, R.P. 2003. Soil seedbank in managed and abandonedsemi-natural meadows in Soomaa National Park, Estonia. Annuals of Botany Fennici,41:87-100.

31. Wiles, L. and Brodahl, M. 2004. Exploratory data analysis to identify factors influencing spatialdistributions of weed seed banks. Weed Science, 52:936–947.

32. Wolda, H. (1981). Similarity Indices, Sample Size and Diversity. OecoIogia (Berl), 50:296-302.33. Woo, S.L., Thomas, A.G., Peschken, D.P., Bowes, G.G., Douglas, D.W., Harms, V.L. and Pleclay,

A.S. 1991. The biology of Canadian weeds 99. Matricaria perforata Merat (asteraceae).Canadian Journal Plant Science, 71:1101–1119.

34. Yenish, J. P., Doll, J.D. and Buhler, D.D. 1992. Effects of tillage on vertical distribution and viabilityof weed seed in soil. Weed Science 40:429-433.

35. Zhang, J., Hamill, A.S., Gardiner, I.O., Weaver, S.E. 1998. Dependence of weed flora on theactive soil seedbank. Weed Research, 38: 143-152.

35 | P a g e


SUGAR INDUSTRY ABSTRACTSPREDICTING CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS ON SUGARCANE PRODUCTION AT SITES IN AUSTRALIA,

BRAZIL AND SOUTH AFRICA USING THE CANEGRO MODEL

A. SINGELS, M. JONES , F. MARIN, A.C. RUANE and P. THORBURNProc. Int. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol., Vol. 28, 2013

F UTURE CLIMATE CHANGE is expected to have important consequences for sugarcane production, andreliable predictions of crop response to climate change are necessary to plan adaptation strategies. Theobjective of this study was to assess the use of global climate models (GCMs) and a crop simulationmodel for predicting climate change impacts on sugarcane production. The Canegro model was usedto simulate growth and development of sugarcane crops under typical management conditions at threesites (irrigated crops at Ayr, Australia; rainfed crops at Piracicaba, Brazil and La Mercy, South Africa) forcurrent and three future climate scenarios. The baseline scenario consisted of a 30-year time series ofhistorical daily weather records and atmospheric CO 2 concentration ([CO 2 ]) set at 360 ppm. Futureclimate scenarios were derived from three GCMs for the A2 greenhouse gas emission scenario and [CO 2] set at 734 ppm. The three GCMs were chosen to represent the uncertainty in projected rainfall changes.Future cane yields are expected to increase at all three sites, ranging from +4% for Ayr, to +9% and +20%for Piracicaba and La Mercy. The uncertainty of these predictions correlates with the magnitude of thepredicted yield increase. Canopy development was accelerated at all three sites by increasedtemperature, which led to increased interception of radiation, increased transpiration, and slightincreases in drought stress at rainfed sites. For the high potential sites (Ayr and Piracicaba), yield increaseswere limited by large increases in maintenance respiration which consumed most of the daily assimilatewhen high biomass was achieved. A weakness of the climate data used was the assumption of nochange in rainfall distribution, solar radiation and relative humidity–variables that are crucial indetermining the water status of rainfed sugarcane. Crop model aspects that need refinement includeimproved simulation of (1) elevated [CO 2 ] effects on crop photosynthesis and transpiration, and (2)high temperature effects on crop development, photosynthesis and respiration.

FUNCTIONAL RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN DRY ABOVE-GROUND BIOMASS AND THE ENERGY YIELD OFSUGARCANE

J. L. CHOPART, L. BONNAL, J.F. MARTINE and D. SABATIERProc. Int. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol., Vol. 28, 2013

TWO STUDIES CONDUCTED in Guadeloupe (West Indies) and Réunion (Indian Ocean) Islands weredesigned to investigate the benefits of producing sugarcane as an energy crop and to assess theinfluence of agroclimatic factors on energy efficiency, respectively. In this context, it is essential to knowthe low heating value of the dry above-ground biomass (LHVd, MJ/kg) and its energy yield (EY, MJ/m 2)in order to select the best varieties and set up a payment method for growers. Eighteen Poaceae(sugarcane and Erianthus) cultivars were compared under wet tropical environmental conditions inGuadeloupe. Three sugarcane cultivars were studied in four contrasting environments in Réunion. Thepartition sampling and biomass measurement procedures were identical at both locations. Low heatingvalue (LHV) predictions were achieved using near-infrared reflectance spectroscopy (NIRS) after specificcalibration (Guadeloupe), or arithmetically after lignocellulosic compound prediction (Réunion). In bothstudies, LHV variability was very low and slightly dependent on the site, cultivar and above-groundbiomass components (millable stalks and tops, and green and dead leaves). Considering the overall dryabove-ground biomass (DAB, kg/m 2 ), the LHVd was calculated by averaging 159 samples (mean 16.65MJ/kg) in Guadeloupe and 315 samples (mean 16.45 MJ/kg) for Réunion. An excellent linear relationshipbetween the DAB and its EY, regardless of cultivar, age and environment, was found (n = 474 and R2 =0.99). Sugarcane energy content assessment could thus be simplified by measuring the DAB, whileenabling development of a faster method of payment for growers based on the DAB measurement andthe correlation between DAB and EY. Finally, the findings of this study should allow growers to rapidlydetermine the commercial value of their sugarcane crops, and also enable purchasers to assess theamount of recoverable energy.

36 | P a g e


EFFECTS OF SUGARCANE RESIDUES ON SOIL MICROBIAL BIOMASS-CARBONAND SUGARCANE YIELD IN A TROPICAL ULTISOL

SRI HARYANI, HERU GUNITO and NORMA MULYANIProc. Int. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol., Vol. 28, 2013

ORGANIC MATTER INPUTS restore and sustain soil fertility under intensive sugarcane cropping. Soilmicrobial biomass-carbon (SMBC) is an indicator used for assessing the effect of soil melioration,particularly organic matter addition. An experiment was conducted to study the effectiveness ofdifferent sugarcane organic residues at different rates to sustain SMBC and improve sugarcane yield on atropical Ultisol in Gunung Madu sugar plantation, Lampung, Indonesia. The organic inputs were 5:3:1mixtures of bagasse, filter-cake, and boiler ash (BFA) in composted and raw form (BFA-compost and BFA-raw), and raw bagasse alone (RB), with C:N ratios of pproximately 25:1, 35:1, and > 75:1, respectively. Thestudy was conducted as both pot and field trials, wherein 0–400 t/ha rates of application were tested.Field trial results showed that the annual mean of SMBC in RB treatments was 39.28 mg/kg, whereas inBFA-compost and BFA-raw SMBC, means were 26.70 and 33.39 mg/kg, respectively. Based on rates ofapplication, the highest SMBC of 48.55 mg/kg (114.34% >control or zero application) corresponded to thehighest rate of pplication (400 t/ha). Meanwhile, sugarcane yields averaged 92.2, 99.8, 106.3, 117.0, and120.3 t/ha at 0, 50, 100, 200, and 400 t/ha application, respectively, indicating a positive yield response toapplication of sugarcane residues. Average sugarcane yields were 101.2, 100.2, and 120.0 t/ha for BFA-compost, BFA-raw, and RB, respectively. These results indicate that application of RB alone, despite itshigh C:N ratio, could improve SMBC and sugarcane yield, comparable to BFA-compost and BFA-raw. Allthese bulk organic inputs, however, contributed only short-term improvement (less than one year) ofSMBC under this particular Ultisol and the local sugarcane cropping system. Regular application of RB at50 t/ha may be considered at a commercial scale.

NITRATE LEACHING IN AN ARGIUDOLL CULTIVATED WITH SUGARCANE

R. DE LOS A. PORTOCARRERO, M. M. ACRECHE and R. A. SOPENAProc. Int. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol., Vol. 28, 2013

T HE AIM OF the study was to quantify nitrate leaching from an Aquic Argiudoll cultivated with sugarcanein Tucuman, Argentina. Two field trials were conducted during the 2010–11 and 2011–12 seasons with thevariety LCP 85-384. Treatments consisted of N fertilisation with urea with doses of 0 and 81 or 88 kg N/hafor second or third ratoon, respectively. Fertilisation was performed following standard cane farmingrecommendations in Tucuman on October 26, 2010 and November 16, 2011. In order to determine nitrateconcentration, samples were taken from soil solutions at 85 cm depth using ceramic soil water suctionsamplers, while water flow was simulated with the LEACH-W model. There were similar trends in bothseasons. In 2010–11, unfertilised plots had no nitrates in soil solution, while fertilised plots leached nitratesfrom 29 to 57 days after fertiliser application, coinciding with the onset of percolating rains. In 2011-12,although unfertilised plots had nitrates in solution, they were significantly less than in fertilised plots. In thelatter, leaching time lasted from 16 to 34 days after N fertilisation. The main conclusions of this study are: 1)there is low nitrate leaching from sugarcane cultivation in an Argiudoll with frequent N applications usedin the production system in Tucuman, and 2) nitrate leaching was observed when both deep drainage ofwater and available nitrates are simultaneously present, as occurred at the onset of the rainy season.

37 | P a g e


EFFECT OF TRASH MANAGEMENT ON NITROGEN DYNAMICS AND YIELD: MODELLING LONG-TERMEXPERIMENTAL RESULTS OF SUGARCANE IN BRAZILIAN COASTAL TABLELANDS

ANA PAULA PESSIM DE OLIVEIRA, PETER J. THORBURN, JODY S. BIGGS,EDUARDO LIMA, LÚCIA HELENA CUNHA DOS ANJOS and MARCOS GERVASIO PEREIRA

Proc. Int. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol., Vol. 28, 2013T O EVALUATE THE impacts of trash management on sugarcane production in Brazil, including the long-term fate of N contained in trash and the N fertiliser management implications of trash retention, asimulation study was conducted with the APSIM- Sugar cropping systems model. Simulations wereconducted over the past 14 years with data from an experiment in the municipality of Linhares-ES. Thetrash management systems simulated were (1) Green Cane Harvesting and Trash Blanketing (GCTB), (2)half GCTB, and (3) burnt trash. N fertiliser management systems were simulated by varying N fertiliserapplication with rates from 0 to 240 kg/ha (in 40 kg/ha increments) on the ratoon crops. Cane yields fromthe experiment were simulated well by the model with Root Mean Square Errors between predicted andmeasured values of 14.02 t/ha and 13.45 t/ha for the for the burnt and GCTB treatments, respectively. Thesimulation study showed that cane yield responded positively to the GCTB and half GCTB systems, but themagnitude of the response was dependent on N-fertiliser applied to crops. The removal of half the trashreduced yield potential in sugarcane. Additional N fertiliser was required following recent trash depositionto avoid yield reduction caused by N immobilisation. Implications of this disequilibrium period on the resultsof short-term trash management trials and the transition from trash burning to conserving systems arediscussed. The simulations also indicate that average environmental losses of N are likely to be greaterfrom GCTB systems at all rates of N fertiliser applications due to higher SOM concentration which may resultin higher soil mineralisation rates and greater nitrate release to soil solution conditions which are favourablefor N loss. Thus, particular care should be taken to avoid excessive application of N fertiliser.

TRINEXAPAC-ETHYL: WILL IT INCREASE EARLY SEASON SUGAR ACCUMULATION?A. J. ORGERON, J. L. GRIFFIN, B. L. LEGENDRE, K.A. GRAVOIS,

D.K. MILLER 4 and M.J. PONTIFProc. Int. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol., Vol. 28, 2013

U TILISATION OF SYNTHETIC ripeners to improve early season stalk sucrose concentration has become anormal management practice for many sugarcane producers in Louisiana.This study evaluated the effectof synthetic ripeners, trinexapac-ethyl and glyphosate,on five commercial Louisiana sugarcane cultivars.The randomised complete block design included five cultivars (HoCP 96-540, L 99-226, L 99-233, HoCP 00-950, L 01-283) and four ripener applications [none, glyphosate (210 g ae/ha), and trinexapac-ethyl (300and 350 g ai/ha)]. Yield of theoretical recoverable sugar per tonne of sugarcane (TRS) at eight weeks afterglyphosate application increased from 9.5% (L 01-283) to 27.7% (L99-226) compared to their nontreatedcontrols. In contrast, trinexapac-ethyl at 350 g/ha increased TRS from 7.2% (HoCP 00-950) to 10.2% (L 99-233). Averaged across cultivars, TRS was increased 17.5% with glyphosate compared to 9.7% for the highrate of trinexapac-ethyl. Averaged across cultivars, yield of tonnes cane per hectare (TC/H) did not differsignificantly across glyphosate and trinexapac-ethyl treatments, but averaged 7.3% less than thenontreated control. A cultivar by ripener treatment interaction was not observed for the yield oftheoretical recoverable sugar per hectare (TRS/H). TRS/H was increased by glyphosate for only onecultivar, HoCP 96-540 (15.7%) and by the low rate of trinexapac-ethyl for only one cultivar, L 01-283 (3.2%).When averaged across cultivars, TRS/H was increased 7.4% for glyphosate but no increase was observedfor either rate of trinexapac-ethyl. In conclusion, both glyphosate and the high rate of trinexapac-ethyleffectively increased TRS of all cultivars abovetheir nontreated controls. Although the high rate oftrinexapac-ethyl improved TRS, the response was less than for glyphosate. Glyphosate and both rates oftrinexapac-ethyl decreased TC/H below their nontreated controls. Although an equal reduction in TC/Hwas observed for both glyphosate and trinexapac-ethyl, glyphosate application led to greaterimprovements in TRS/H. When considering only TRS/H, results of this study bring into question the value ofusing trinexapac-ethyl as a ripener to improve early- season sugar accumulation for the Louisianasugarcane industry.

38 | P a g e


39 | P a g e


INTERNATIONAL EVENTS CALENDAR

February 1 3, 2015ASBF Annual Meetng Long Beach, CA USA ASBF

February 2-4, 2015Louisiana Division of ASSCT, Lafayette, LA USA ASSCT

May 17-20, 2015Sugar Industry Technologists Annual Meeting Osaka, Japan SIT

February 23 26, 2015ASSBT Clearwater, FL USA ASSBT

November 10 13, 2014Bonsucro Week 2014, Manila, Philippines Bonsucro

June 22 24, 2015Florida and Louisiana Joint Division of ASSCT New Orleans, LA USA ASSCT

October 19-24, 2015Latin American Sugar Technologist Meeting (ATALAC), Olinda, Pernambucco, Brazil

40 | P a g e


SHAKARGANJ FOUNDATION

Annual Prize Distribution CeremoniesEach year ShakarganjFoundation holds theprized distributionceremonies to honor thoseof its students who havemade the school proudwith their brilliant efforts.

This year ShakarganjFoundation successfullyconducted prizedistribution ceremonies inits all 35 – adoptedGovernment Girls / Boys

Primary & ElementarySchools. ShakarganjFoundation alwaysbelieves to provide qualityeducation to the studentswho belong to neglectedand rural community. Themain aim of this activitywas to encourage thebrilliant students.

Prizes were distributedamong position holders,headmistresses and

teaching staff of theschools were part ofceremonies.

Shakarganj Foundation onbehalf of the teaching staffand students of theadopted schools conveymany thanks to ShakarganjOfficers Club whogenerously donated tomake this activity possible.

41 | P a g e


The data of the adopted schools are as under;

Schools Enrollment Passed out Fail Drop out Success %age

ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS 6,323 5,989 297 37 95%PRIMARY SCHOOLS 763 646 111 6 85%Total 7,086 6,635 408 43 94%

70866635

408 43

G r a p h ic a l D a ta o f A d o p te d S c h o o ls

Enrollm ent

Pa s s ed out

Fa il

D rop Out

42 | P a g e


SUGAR AND ADDICTIONWorld Sugar Research Organization (WSRO) Position Statements

Sugar and Health: Judgingthe Evidence

Written September 2011

Background

Evidence for a role of sugarin health derives fromepidemiological andexperimental studies.Epidemiology attempts toexplain disease distributionswithin populations byobserving any associationbetween disease andexposure to some possiblecausative agent, such asdiet. Experimental (orintervention) studies attemptto manipulate exposureunder more controlledconditions and measure theeffect. Both types of studieshave their limitations.However, evidence fromintervention studies isgenerally considered morereliable than that fromobservational studies.

Epidemiological studies ofdiet

Epidemiological studies ofdiet fall into a number of sub-divisions. The simplest type ofstudy involves observing theaverage diet and diseaseexperience of a populationand comparing it with theobserved diet and disease of

other populations. These arecalled “ecological studies”.Such studies usually usenational estimates ofaverage food intake perperson to represent nutrientintake. These nutrientestimates may arise fromindividual food consumptionsurveys for a representativesample of the population.However, this data is notavailable in all countries, inwhich case, researchers mayoften use data on foodsupply to the population,together with an estimate ofwaste. Such estimates ofdietary intake are far fromsatisfactory in forming aclear picture of nutrientintake and disease - see‘General Limitations ofEpidemiological Studies’ and‘Dietary Assessment’ below.Ecological studies aregenerally considered toprovide the weakestevidence concerningassociations betweennutrition and disease.However, such studies allowan inexpensive preliminaryexamination of hypotheses inadvance of more valid, andusually more expensive,investigations.

A second type of study in thisgroup is the “case control

study”. In such studies, foodintake is estimated, usuallyretrospectively, in individualsdiagnosed with a specificdisease, and compared toan appropriate disease-freecontrol group. Case controlstudies may suffer fromdifficulties in identifying anappropriate control group.The reliability of patients’recollection of their dietmonths or years prior todiagnosis may not bereliable. In addition, patientsburdened with disease maybe biased to selectivelyrecall certain aspects of theirdiets prior to their diagnosis.In “prospective cohortstudies”, the diet ofindividuals, usually assumedhealthy, is estimated and thecohort is followed for aperiod of time, which is oftenyears. The participatingsubjects are usually chosenfor their comparability inmost respects other thantheir potential exposure to aparticular dietarycomponent. Comparisonsare then made between thediets of those thatsubsequently developed adisease or health outcomeversus those that did not.Large numbers of subjectsare often involved inprospective studies, which

43 | P a g e


therefore usually employfood-frequency 2questionnaires or 24-h dietaryrecall to estimate nutrientintake. In some prospectivestudies, dietary intake isassessed part-way throughthe study in addition to thebaseline in an attempt toimprove accuracy. “Crosssectional studies” examinethe association betweendisease and exposure at aspecific point in time. Thisdesign suffers from thedanger that people whohave developed a diseaseor health condition mayhave changed their diet.Consequently, their diet atthe time it is estimated maynot correspond to theirpreceding diet. Generallimitations of epidemiologicalstudies. Epidemiologicalstudy designs share anumber of limitations. Sincethey are observational innature, they can onlyprovide a correlationbetween disease outcomeand a dietary component orpattern. The intake of anindividual diagnosed with adisease or health outcomemay not correspond to thepopulation average.Correlations do not provecausality and shouldpreferably only be employedto direct further experimentalstudies.

All observational studies aresubject to the risk ofconfounding. That is, thepresence of other variableswhich are they themselvesrelated to the exposure andthe outcome. These othervariables may either nothave been recognised bythe researchers or may nothave been measured forsome practical reason. As aresult, a correlation betweensome aspect of diet and adisease outcome may bemisleading. If theconfounder is known andmeasured, then a correctionfactor is applied to allow amore accurate estimate ofthe degree of influence froma particular aspect of diet.However, measurement ofthese other influences is alsosubject to error, which thenintroduces furtherinaccuracies into the finalestimate of the importanceof diet.

Errors may also arise from theuse of inappropriatestatistical tests. In moststudies of diet, a largenumber of different dietarycomponents and patternsare examined forcorrelations with diseaseoutcome. Tests are thenapplied to estimate whethera correlation that is observedcould have arisen bychance. These statistical testsneed to make allowance for

the number of correlationsbeing made. If no correctionis made then correlationsclaimed to be statisticallysignificant (that is that theyare unlikely to be the result ofchance) may actually notbe significant. This problem ismade worse by the habit ofsome researchers to publishthe results of a single study ina number of separatepapers over several years. Itis then not immediatelyapparent whether acorrection for multiplecorrelations was undertaken.

Experimental Studies

The most reliable form ofevidence is provided byexperimental studies inhuman subjects, oftenreferred to as interventionstudies. Ideally, the design ofsuch studies should involvethe random assignment ofsimilar subjects into at leasttwo groups, an experimentaland a control group. Thisdesign is termed a“randomised controlled trial(RCT)”. Confoundingvariables should becontrolled as much aspossible by the selection ofsimilar subjects acrossgroups, and by controllinglifestyle factors for at leastthe duration of the study.The groups are thencompared for specificoutcomes resulting from theexperimental intervention. 3

44 | P a g e


Intervention studies may beundertaken under controlledconditions, usually in alaboratory setting, where allfood is provided to subjectsand confounders such asphysical activity can becontrolled. RCTs may alsobe undertaken in a free livingsetting where either food isagain provided, or food istaken ad libitum with specificinstructions as to the dietaryintervention. In the latterscenario, the subject’sdietary intake needs to bechecked to ensure that thesubjects adhere to theintervention, and that allother dietary componentsand confounders haveremained stable for theduration of the study. It is,however, extremely difficultto change one aspect of thediet without consequentchanges arising in otheraspects of diet. Where thechange is to a macronutrientthere must always be acompensating change toother macronutrients if adifference in total foodenergy intake is to beavoided. To minimise theeffect of knowledge of theexperimental design on theresults, it is preferable toensure that bothinvestigators andparticipants are unaware ofthe nature of the interventionand of which subjects havebeen assigned to the

different groups. This studydesign is termed “doubleblind”. In practice this isparticularly difficult toachieve in studies involvingdiet. A major constraint ofintervention studies in humansubjects relates to ethics. It israrely permitted toundertake an experimentthat may cause significantharm to the subjects. As aresult, studies into thepossible adverse effects ofsome aspect of diet arerestricted. In some cases,indirect evidence may beobtained by studying theeffect of reducing the intakeof a potentially harmfuldietary component belowthat usually consumed. Inother cases, if a biologicalindicator of future potentialharm exists, then a short termincrease in consumption(that is not likely to causepermanent effects) ispermitted with the effects onthe biological indicatorbeing monitored. Forexample, a short term rise inblood cholesterol would beconsidered an indicator thatcardiovascular disease riskwould be increased if the risewere permanent. However,due to the ability of humansto adapt to a wide variety ofdiets, acute changes maynot necessarily reflect longterm effects. The cost oflongduration studies is usuallyfinancially impractical.

Therefore, given the longtime frame thought to beinvolved in the developmentof all the major non-communicable diseases, theresults of acute studies needto be viewed with caution.Experimental evidence mayalso be gained from animaland in vitro studies. Althoughanimal studies may allowsome insight into nutrition-health interactions, theresults can never beassumed to apply in humanswithout direct confirmationfrom human studies. In vitrostudies are generallyundertaken on cells whichare exposed to an agent.However, again the resultscannot be extrapolated to awhole body human system.

Dietary Assessment

Most studies of therelationship between dietand disease fundamentallyrely on estimates of thehabitual diet of individualsubjects. These estimatesinvariably arise from self-reports of food intake. Sincean individual’s food intakevaries from day to day, andindividuals may not reportwhat they eat accurately,such estimates arenotoriously unreliable (Lioretet al., 2011, Siebelink et al.,2011, Stote et al., 2011).

The most commontechniques for assessing

45 | P a g e


subject’s usual diet comprisediet histories, 24-h dietaryrecall, and food frequencyquestionnaires. Diet historiesare 4 usually undertaken byinterview to gain anunderstanding of what aperson usually eats anddrinks. 24-h recall requiressubjects to remembereverything they ate anddrank in the previous 24 h.Food frequencyquestionnaires usuallyexplore an individual’sgeneral consumptionpatterns, or exploreconsumption of a specifictype of food or drink and fora specific duration eg. theprevious year. Thesemethods have all beenshown to be inaccurate.Numerous replicatemeasures of intake arerequired to obtain morereliable estimates of usualintake (Balogh et al., 1971,Pereira et al., 2010, Stote etal., 2011). For example,Balogh (1971) estimated thatmore than 11 random 24-hrecalls would be required toachieve an estimate with±20% accuracy of anindividual’s mean intake ofdietary sugar. Therefore, thepractice of employing asingle, or even dual estimateof intake to reflect dietarypattern over a number ofyears is highly questionable.Indeed, the inaccuracy ofdietary data in

epidemiological studies hasbeen used as acounterargument when theresults of such studies do notcorrespond to the outcomeobserved in interventionstudies (Kromhout et al.,2011).

Food diaries, where all foodand drink consumption isrecorded for a period of time(usually 3 or seven days), inparticular when the amountsare measured, areconsidered the highestquality of nutritionalassessment. However, theyare costly and thus rarelyundertaken inepidemiological studies. Inaddition, there is always arisk that subjects will changetheir dietary habits, or mis-record simply because theyare being monitored. Under-reporting of energy ordietary components thesubject considers in anegative light are ofparticular concern. Under-reporting has been identifiedto be more likely inoverweight and obeseindividuals and thoseconsciously trying to limittheir food intake. (Lichtmanet al., 1992).

Physical Activity and Cardio-respiratory Fitness asConfounders Physical activityand cardio-respiratory fitnessare major confounders instudies examining the effects

of nutrition on a number ofdiseases and thereforeneeds to be controlled, oradjusted for, in studies. Moststudies employ self-reportand questionnaires to assessphysical activity andconsequently, like dietaryassessment, are subject toerror. For example, theHealth Survey for England(NHS Information Centre,2009) reported that morethan 60% of UK adults (>16 y)did not meet the minimumrecommended physicalactivity guidelines, asassessed by self-report. Thisnumber rose to ~95% whenassessed by the moreobjective method ofaccelerometry.

Drawing conclusions fromthe evidence

Due to the limitations in allcurrent methods ofdetermining the preciserelationship between nutrientintake and disease,conclusions must be basedon the balance of evidencefrom all relevant studies,rather than that from anindividual study, or selectedgroup of studies. When anumber of studies have beenundertaken, the overallweight of evidence shouldbe determined from highquality, systematic literaturereviews or meta-analysis. Inrecent years, there has beenincreased recognition of the

46 | P a g e


need to move away fromexamining the evidenceselectively using purelynarrative reviews, which maybe more open to bias.Systematic reviews of all theevidence are essential,particularly when theevidence is to be employedin guiding public health. Abiologically plausiblemechanism for an effect isalso required. The strengthof the evidence that anutritional factor eitherincreases or 5 decreasesdisease risk may then beclassified, for example, asbeing ‘convincing’,‘probable’, ‘possible’,‘suggestive’, ‘limited’, or,‘unlikely’ etc. However, thecriteria used in assigning theevidence to one of thesecategories currently varybetween different nationaland internationalorganisations.

STATEMENT

WSRO considers that only thehighest level of evidence i.e.convincing, should beemployed when providingguidance on nutrient intaketo the public. Furthermore,WSRO considers that agrading criteria of‘convincing’ should only beused when evidence exists

from more than one type ofscientific

study, including fromappropriately designed RCTs,and supported by systematicreviews and meta-analyses.Observationalepidemiological studies,however large and wellconducted, are insufficient.Their increasing use as abasis for public healthadvice and policy ishazardous, for the reasonsoutline above. Numerousexamples exist whereevidence from largeprospective studies has notbeen onfirmed bysubsequent RCTs.

References

Balogh, M., Kahn, H. A. &Medalie, J. H. (1971)Random repeat 24-hourdietary recalls. Am J ClinNutr, 24, 304-10.

NHS Information Centre(2009) Health Survey forEngland - 2009: Health andLifestyles. Accessed

Kromhout, D., Geleijnse, J.M., Menotti, A., et al. (2011)The confusion about dietaryfatty acidsrecommendations for CHDprevention. Br J Nutr, 106,627-32.

Lichtman, S. W., Pisarska, K.,Berman, E. R., et al. (1992)Discrepancy between self-reported and actual caloricintake and exercise in obesesubjects. N Engl J Med, 327,1893-8.

Lioret, S., Touvier, M., Balin,M., et al. (2011)Characteristics of energyunderreporting in childrenand adolescents. Br J Nutr,105, 1671-80.

Pereira, R. A., Araujo, M. C.,Lopes Tde, S., et al. (2010)How many 24-hour recalls orfood records are required toestimate usual energy andnutrient intake? Cad SaudePublica, 26, 2101-11.

Siebelink, E., Geelen, A. & deVries, J. H. (2011) Self-reported energy intake byFFQ compared with actualenergy intake to maintainbody weight in 516 adults. BrJ Nutr, 1-8.

Stote, K. S., Radecki, S. V.,Moshfegh, A. J., et al. (2011)The number of 24 h dietaryrecalls using the USDepartment of Agriculture'sautomated multiplepassmethod required to estimatenutrient intake in overweightand obese adults. PublicHealth Nutr, 14, 1736-42.

47 | P a g e


STORY OF SWEETS

1. Brown Sugar CookiesIngredients:Yield: 36-42Cookies Units: US | Metric1 cup shortening (we usemargarine)2 cups light brown sugar2 large eggs2 tablespoons water

2 teaspoons vanilla3 1/2 cups flour2 teaspoons bakingpowder1 teaspoon baking soda1 teaspoon salt1 teaspoon cinnamon

Directions:Cream shortening and sugar; add eggs, water and vanilla.Sift dry ingredients and mix well.We take little balls of dough and mash down with fork; or you can roll it out and cutwith cookie cutter. Bake 8 to 10 minutes at 350°.A vanilla or caramel icing is good; or sprinkle brown sugar or coconut on top beforebaking.

2. Chocolate-Mint BarsIngredientsBottom layer:4 1/2 ounces all-purposeflour (about 1 cup1/2 teaspoon salt1 cup granulated sugar1/2 cup egg substitute1/4 cup butter, melted2 tablespoons water1 teaspoon vanilla extract

2 large eggs, beaten1 (16-ounce) canchocolate syrupCooking sprayMint layer:2 cups powdered sugar1/4 cup butter, melted2 tablespoons fat-free milk1/2 teaspoon peppermintextract2 drops green food

coloringGlaze:3/4 cupsemisweetchocolate chips3 tablespoons butter

Directions:

Preheat oven to 350°. To prepare bottom layer, weigh or lightly spoon flour into a measuring cup;level with a knife. Combine flour & salt; stir with a whisk. Combine granulated sugar, egg substitute,¼ cup melted butter, 2 tablespoons water, vanilla, eggs, and chocolate syrup in a medium bowl;stir until smooth. Add flour mixture to chocolate mixture, stirring until blended. Pour batter into a 13 x9 inch metal baking pan coated with cooking spray. Bake at 350° for 23 minutes or until a woodenpick inserted in center comes out almost clean. Cool completely in pan on a wire rack.To prepare mint layer, combine powdered sugar, ¼ cup melted butter, and next 3 ingredients(through food coloring) in a medium bowl; beat with a mixer until smooth. Spread mint mixture overcooled cake. To prepare glaze, combine chocolate chips and 3 tablespoons butter in a mediummicrowave-safe bowl. Microwave at HIGH 1 minute or until melted, stirring after 30 seconds. Letstand 2 minutes. Spread chocolate mixture evenly over top. Cover and refrigerate until ready toserve. Cut into 20 pieces.

48 | P a g e


GUIDELINES FOR AUTHORS

Dear Fellow Author(s),

Pakistan Sugar Journal (PSJ) offers research, analysis, and reviews to keep its localand international readership up to date with latest developments in the sugarindustry. PSJ takes into account the application of research and focuses on areas inagriculture related to sugar, milling and processing.

In order to have your articles published in the PSJ, you are requested to adhere tothe below instructions and prerequisites to enable timely review of your submissionsby the editorial board:

I. Write the title of your article in CAPITAL LETTERS in the center of the page.II. Write the complete name of all authors with their addresses – it is compulsory in

the text. References should be cited by author and years as, for one, two ormore authors (Hammer, 1994, Hammer and Rouf, 1995; Hammer et al., 1993),respectively.

III. Write HEADINGS in bold letters and in the center of the page.IV. Type your article only in TIMES NEW ROMAN format.V. Send TABLES and FIGURES on separate page with bold title and mark its

numbers correctly.VI. Observe the following rule for REFERENCE, for one author: Hussain, K. 1991 for

two authors; Khan, M. and A. Habib 1995, for more than two; Ali, K., A.Hussain and S. Nasir, 1990.

VII. Always send two soft copies and one hard copy of CD. Please do not useFLOPPY DISK for this purpose.

VIII. Send copies on an A-4 size page, preferable LASER PRINT in word documentIX. Papers published in the PSJ are free of charges (for authors).X. Send your papers to following address by mail or email:

Dr. Shahid AfghanEditor-in-Chief, Pakistan Sugar JournalShakarganj Sugar Research Institute, Jhang (Pakistan)Phone: +92 47 763 1001-5 | Ext. 602, 603Mobile: +92 347 654 2858Email: [email protected]

Asia NaheedAssociate Editor, Pakistan Sugar JournalShakarganj Sugar Research Institute, Jhang (Pakistan)Phone: +92 47 763 1001-5 | Ext. 603, 606E-mail: [email protected]

pakistan sugar journal - ssrissri.pk/psj/psj oct-dec-2014.pdf · 2020-02-13 · main cane carrier...

Documents