IV. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
Field experiments were conducted at two different locations simultaneously,
Location – I was at the Experimental farm, Department of Agronomy, Annamalai
University, Annamalai Nagar, Tamil Nadu and Location - II was at Farmers’ field in
M. Kuchipalayam village, Vikravandi taluk, Villupuram district, Tamil Nadu during
2011–2013 to evolve optimum plant population with suitable nursery production
practice for productivity enhancement of plant and ratoon sugarcane under SSI
method. The results on the effects of various treatments are presented in this chapter.
4.1. Nursery Studies
4.1.1. Germination per cent (Table 13)
The effect of nursery treatments on germination per cent was reordered on 7
DAP. The treatment T3 (Chip bud – pro tray medium with acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1)
gave the highest germination percentage of 98.78. However the difference between
treatments was non significant.
4.1.2. Establishment per cent (Table 14)
The different treatment schedule on nursery production techniques was
recorded on 14 DAP. All the Treatments registered higher establishment per cent
(98.06 to 98.66). All the treatment combinations were not statistically differed each
other.
78
Table 13
Effect of Nursery Production Technology on Germination per cent at 7 DAP
Treatments
Germination %
T1 – Chip bud alone (No Treatment)
98.08 (82.03)
T2 – Chip bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith
98.33 (82.57)
T3 – Chip bud – pro tray medium with acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
98.78 (83.65)
T4 – Chip bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith + acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
98.36 (82.64)
T5 – Ring bud alone (No treatment)
98.19 (82.26)
T6 – Ring bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith
98.48 (82.91)
T7 – Ring bud – pro tray medium with acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
98.34 (82.59)
T8 – Ring bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith + acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
98.65 (83.32)
S.Ed
0.08
CD (P = 0.05)
NS
* Figure in the paranthesis are angular transformed values.
79
Table 14
Effect of Nursery Production Technology on Establishment per cent at 14 DAP
Treatments
Establishment %
T1 – Chip bud alone (No Treatment)
98.06 (81.99)
T2 – Chip bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith
98.28 (82.46)
T3 – Chip bud – pro tray medium with acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
98.21 (82.31)
T4 – Chip bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith + acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
98.37 (82.66)
T5 – Ring bud alone (No treatment)
98.16 (82.20)
T6 – Ring bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith
98.52 (83.01)
T7 – Ring bud – pro tray medium with acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
98.36 (82.64)
T8 – Ring bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith + acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
98.66 (83.35)
S.Ed
0.06
CD (P = 0.05)
NS
* Figure in the paranthesis are angular transformed values.
80
4.1.3. Plant Height (Table 15)
The plant height ranged from 6.65 to 6.28 cm at 7 DAP, 15.12 to 25.86 cm at
14 DAP and 19.12 to 36.68 cm @ 25 DAP, respectively. Treatment T8 (Ring bud –
pro tray medium. with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g kg–1 of coopith+ acetobacter @
600 g ha–1 recorded the highest plant of 16.28, 25.86 and 36.68 cm on 7, 14 and 25
DAP, respectively. This was followed by the treatment T6 – (Right bud – pro tray
medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g kg–1 of coco pith). This was on par with
the treatment, T4 (chip bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g kg–
1
of coco pith + acctobacter @ 600 g ha–1). The treatment, T1 – (chip bud alone
without any treatment) recorded the least plant height of 6.65, 15.12 and 19.12 cm on
7, 14 and 25 DAP, respectively.
4.1.4. Number of Leaves (Table 16)
All the Treatments significantly influenced the number of leaves plant–1.
Among the Treatments, T8 – (Ring bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85%
WSG) @ 2 g kg–1 of coco pith + acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1) recorded the highest
number of leaves plant–1 of 3.80 @ 25 DAP. The least number of leaves plant–1 was
recorded in treatment, T1 – (chip bud alone – No treatment).
4.1.5. Root Volume (Table 17)
Data on root volume @ 25 DAP showed statistical variance among different
Treatments. The treatment T8 – (Ring bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85%
WSG) @ 2 g kg–1 of coco pith + acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1) produced more volume of
roots of 1.38 cc.
It was followed by treatment, T6 – (Ring bud – pro tray medium
with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g kg–1 of coco pith). This was on par with
81
Table 15
Effect of Nursery Production Technology on Plant Height (cm)
Treatments
7 DAP
14 DAP
25 DAP
T1 – Chip bud alone (No Treatment)
6.65
15.12
19.12
T2 – Chip bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith
11.98
19.86
28.66
T3 – Chip bud – pro tray medium with acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
9.72
18.38
26.95
T4 – Chip bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith + acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
14.89
22.86
32.16
T5 – Ring bud alone (No treatment)
7.96
16.67
22.59
T6 – Ring bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith
14.96
23.18
33.08
T7 – Ring bud – pro tray medium with acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
12.35
20.12
29.15
T8 – Ring bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith + acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
16.28
25.86
36.68
S.Ed
0.64
0.73
0.68
CD (P = 0.05)
1.28
1.45
1.36
82
Table 16
Effect of Nursery Production Technology on Number of Leaves Plant–1 at 25 DAP
No. of Leaves Plant–1
Treatments
T1 – Chip bud alone (No Treatment)
3.80
T2 – Chip bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith
4.76
T3 – Chip bud – pro tray medium with acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
4.50
T4 – Chip bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith + acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
5.14
T5 – Ring bud alone (No treatment)
4.20
T6 – Ring bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith
5.16
T7 – Ring bud – pro tray medium with acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
4.80
T8 – Ring bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith + acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
5.4
S.Ed
0.10
CD (P = 0.05)
0.20
83
Table 17
Effect of Nursery Production Technology on Root Volume (cc) at 25 DAP
Treatments
Root Volume (cc)
T1 – Chip bud alone (No Treatment)
0.68
T2 – Chip bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith
1.11
T3 – Chip bud – pro tray medium with acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
0.97
T4 – Chip bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith + acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
1.24
T5 – Ring bud alone (No treatment)
0.82
T6 – Ring bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith
1.25
T7 – Ring bud – pro tray medium with acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
1.10
T8 – Ring bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith + acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
1.38
S.Ed
0.06
CD (P = 0.05)
0.12
84
treatment T4 – (Chip bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g kg–1
of coco pith + acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1). The least root volume of 0.68 cc recorded
in the treatment, T1 – (chip bud alone – No treatment).
4.1.6. Dry Matter Production (Table 18)
All the Treatments exerted significant influence on the Dry matter production
of nursery Treatments. The treatment, T8 – (Ring bud – pro tray medium with humic
acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g kg–1 of coco pith + acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1) recorded the
highest DMP of 46.86 g plant–1 @ 25 DAP. It was followed by treatment T6 – (Ring
bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g kg–1 of coco pith) and T4
– (Chip bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g kg–1 of coco pith
+ acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1). The treatment, T1 – (Chip bud alone No treatment)
recorded the least DMP of 31.85 g ha–1 at 25 DAP.
4.1.7. Seedling Vigour Index (Table 19)
The data recorded on seedling vigour index at 25 DAP showed statistical
variance among different Treatments schedule.
Seedling raised with treatment T8 – (Ring bud – pro tray medium with humic
acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g kg–1 of coco pith + acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1) recorded a
maximum seedling vigour index of 4622.74. This was followed by T6 – (Ring bud –
pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g kg–1 of coco pith) and T4 –
(Chip bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g kg–1 of coco pith +
acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1). Where as control, T1 – (Chip bud alone – No treatment)
recorded the minimum seedling vigour index of 3123.84.
85
Table 18
Effect of Nursery Treatments on Dry Matter Production (g Plant–1) at 25 DAP
DMP (G plant–1)
Treatments
T1 – Chip bud alone (No Treatment)
31.85
T2 – Chip bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith
42.06
T3 – Chip bud – pro tray medium with acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
38.18
T4 – Chip bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith + acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
43.68
T5 – Ring bud alone (No treatment)
35.15
T6 – Ring bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith
44.18
T7 – Ring bud – pro tray medium with acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
42.18
T8 – Ring bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith + acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
46.86
S.Ed
0.63
CD (P = 0.05)
1.30
86
Table 19
Effect of Nursery Production Technology on Seedling Vigour Index at 25 DAP
Treatments
Vigour Index
T1 – Chip bud alone (No Treatment)
3123.84
T2 – Chip bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith
4135.75
T3 – Chip bud – pro tray medium with acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
3752.33
T4 – Chip bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith + acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
4296.36
T5 – Ring bud alone (No treatment)
3451.37
T6 – Ring bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith
4350.84
T7 – Ring bud – pro tray medium with acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
4147.98
T8 – Ring bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith + acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
4622.74
S.Ed
74.19
CD (P = 0.05)
145.68
87
Table 20
Effect of Nursery Production Technology on Nutrient uptake (g Plant–1) at 25 DAP
Treatments
N
P
K
T1 – Chip bud alone (No Treatment)
11.89
7.68
15.02
T2 – Chip bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith
15.97
9.80
19.38
T3 – Chip bud – pro tray medium with acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
14.18
9.20
18.06
T4 – Chip bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith + acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
17.29
10.24
20.96
T5 – Ring bud alone (No treatment)
12.65
8.76
16.42
T6 – Ring bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith
17.46
10.28
21.08
T7 – Ring bud – pro tray medium with acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
16.05
9.84
19.52
T8 – Ring bud – pro tray medium with humic acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g
kg–1 of coco pith + acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1
18.38
10.68
22.86
S.Ed
0.59
0.20
0.62
CD (P = 0.05)
1.18
0.38
1.24
88
4.1.8. Nutrient update (Table 20)
All the Treatments exerted significant influence on the nutrient uptake by the
seedlings at 25 DAP. The treatment, T8 – (Ring bud – pro tray medium with humic
acid (85% WSG) @ 2 g kg–1 of coco pith + acetobacter @ 600 g ha–1) recorded the
highest nutrient uptake of 18.68, 10.68 and 22.86 g plant–1 of N, P2O5 and K2O,
respectively over other treatments. The treatment T1 (Chip bud alone – No treatment)
recorded the least nutrient uptake of 11.89, 7.68 and 15.02 g plant–1 of N, P2O5 and
K2O, respectively.
4.2. Main Field Studies
4.2.1. Growth Attributes
4.2.1.1. Establishment Per cent (Table 21, 22)
The effect of plant population on establishment per cent of sugarcane was
recorded at 35 DAP in both the locations. In Location-I, the establishment percentage
ranged from 83.65 to 96.72 and 81.92 to 96.25 in the main crop and ratoon crop
respectively. The Treatments T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 ×
30 cm spacing (SSI method), T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 ×
45 cm spacing (SSI method), T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 ×
60 cm spacing (SSI method), T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 ×
75 cm spacing (SSI method) and T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with
180 cm × end to end spacing (conventional method) were recorded higher
establishment per cent than T7 and T1 in main crop and ratoon crop, respectively.
However, the least establishment per cent at 35 DAP was recorded in treatment T1 –
Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing
(conventional method - FP practice as control) This same trend was observed in
Location-II experiment also.
89
Table 21
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Establishment Percentage of Seedlings at 35 DAP – Location-I
Treatments
Main Crop
Ratoon Crop
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method – FP practice as control)
83.65 (66.14)
81.92 (64.15)
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
96.65 (79.45)
96.52 (79.24)
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
96.72 (79.56)
96.12 (78.63)
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
96.18 (78.72)
96.25 (78.83)
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
96.68 (79.50)
96.25 (78.83)
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
96.37 (79.01)
96.18 (78.72)
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
92.18 (73.76)
92.25 (73.83)
S.Ed
0.64
0.68
CD (P = 0.05)
1.28
1.35
* Figure in the paranthesis are angular transformed values.
90
Table 22
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Establishment Percentage of Seedlings at 35 DAP – Location-II
Treatments
Main Crop
Ratoon Crop
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method – FP practice as control)
80.88 (64.07)
80.15 (63.54)
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
96.45 (79.13)
96.22 (78.78)
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
96.16 (78.69)
96.08 (78.55)
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
96.35 (78.98)
96.48 (79.18)
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
96.33 (78.95)
96.98 (79.99)
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
96.28 (78.87)
96.15 (78.68)
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
92.12 (73.69)
92.08 (73.65)
S.Ed
0.66
0.68
CD (P = 0.05)
1.32
1.36
* Figure in the paranthesis are angular transformed values.
91
Table 23
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Ratoon Sprouts ('000 ha–1) at 35 DAR
Treatments
Location-I
Location-II
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method – FP practice as control)
241.38
243.12
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
152.16
161.14
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
142.66
150.35
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
134.93
147.95
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
127.81
138.15
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
237.87
238.85
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
245.16
248.07
S.Ed
1.99
2.56
CD (P = 0.05)
3.98
5.12
92
4.2.1.2 Ratoon Sprouting (Table 23)
In order to study the impact of main field Treatments, which was imposed in
main crop, the ratoon crop was maintained as such with out gap filling. The ratoon
sprouts were recorded at 35 DAR in both the locations.
Significant variation in sprout population existed due to plant population. The
ratoon from the treatment, T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm ×
end to end spacing (conventional method) produced higher sprouts of 2,45,160 and
2,48,070 in Location-I and Location-II respectively. Where as treatment, T5 – Wider
row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm spacing (SSI method) produced
1,27,810 and 1,38,150 sprouts in Location-I and Location-II respectively.
4.2.1.3 Tiller Production (Table 24 and 25)
Location-I
The data on tiller count was recorded at 90 DAP. Plant population was
significantly influenced the tiller production.
The treatment, T1 – Normal row
planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to end spacing (conventional method farmers’ practice as control) recorded the highest number of tillers of 2,46,680 and
2,39,180 in main crop and ratoon crop, respectively. This treatment was followed by
treatment, T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method). The treatment, T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud
settling with 180 × 75 cm spacing (SSI method) recorded the least number of tillers in
both crops.
93
Table 24
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Tiller Production ('000 ha–1) at 90 DAP – Location-I
Treatments
Main Crop
Ratoon Crop
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method – FP practice as control)
246.68
239.18
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
142.59
145.36
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
134.98
135.45
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
127.50
127.57
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
113.58
119.69
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
230.72
230.97
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
242.70
238.85
S.Ed
3.49
3.44
CD (P = 0.05)
6.98
6.88
94
Table 25
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Tiller Production ('000 ha–1) at 90 DAP – Location-II
Treatments
Main Crop
Ratoon Crop
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method – FP practice as control)
248.15
241.86
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
154.96
156.74
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
147.21
148.85
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
138.46
140.96
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
128.71
132.07
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
234.69
231.86
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
246.44
239.75
S.Ed
3.37
3.45
CD (P = 0.05)
6.75
6.89
95
Location-II
The trend observed regard tiller production in Location-I was also observed in
Location-II. The treatment, T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm
× end to end spacing (conventional method - farmers’ practice as control) produced
higher tiller production of 2,48,150 and 2,41,860 in main and ratoon crops,
respectively. Where as lesser tiller production was observed in treatment, T5 – Wider
row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm spacing (SSI method) produced
1,28,710 and 1,32,070 tillers in main crop and ratoon crop, respectively.
4.2.1.4. Tiller Mortality (Table 26 and 27)
The tiller mortality (TM) was calculated from tiller produced at 90 DAP or
DAR by deducting number of millable cane (NMC) at harvest.
Location-I
In general, tiller mortality was higher in conventional method (90 cm) of
planting than in wide row (180 cm) space planting. Significant variation existed in
tiller mortality between plant populations. In treatment, T7 – Wider row planting of
single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end spacing (conventional method) recorded
higher tiller mortality of 1,69,080 and 1,63,740 in main crop and ratoon crop
respectively. This was followed by the treatment, T1 – Normal row planting of two
budded setts with 90 cm × end to end spacing (conventional method – farmers’
practice as control) with tiller mortality of 1,58,640 and 1,50,260 main and ratoon
crops respectively.
Where as in the treatment T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud
settling with 180 × 75 cm spacing (SSI method) recorded lower in tiller mortality of
40,440 and 39.940 in main crop and ratoon crop, respectively.
96
Table 26
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Tiller Mortality ('000 ha–1) at 90 DAP/DAR – Location-I
Treatments
Main Crop
Ratoon Crop
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
158.64
150.26
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
57.54
60.40
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
50.77
49.93
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
46.15
45.01
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
40.44
39.94
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
148.57
145.93
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
169.08
163.74
S.Ed
1.71
1.75
CD (P = 0.05)
3.42
3.50
97
Table 27
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Tiller Mortality ('000 ha–1) at 90 DAP/DAR – Location-II
Treatments
Main Crop
Ratoon Crop
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
160.92
154.57
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
76.10
77.60
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
61.23
62.77
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
57.60
59.40
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
50.25
53.09
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
155.38
150.52
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
174.48
165.86
S.Ed
1.70
1.60
CD (P = 0.05)
3.40
3.21
98
Location-II
All the Treatments significantly influence the tiller mortality. The treatment,
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm spacing (SSI method)
recorded the least tiller mortality of 50,250 and 53,090 in main crop and ratoon crop,
respectively. This treatment was followed by treatment, T4 – Wider row planting of
ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm spacing (SSI method). The treatment, T7 – Wider
row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end spacing (conventional
method) recorded higher title mortality of 1,74,480 and 1,65,860 in main and ratoon
crops, respectively.
4.1.2.2.
Plant height (Table 28, 29, 30 and 31)
Plant height was measured at 90, 180, 270 DAP/DAR and at harvest of main
crop and ratton crop in both locations.
Location-I
Plant height was significantly influenced by the plant population at all stages
of crop growth. The Plant height ranged from 80.56 to 98.18 cm at 90 DAP, 186.86
to 210.18 cm @ 210 DAP, 274.06 to 298.42 cm @ 270 DAP and 288.38 to 316.85 cm
at harvest in main crop.
Treatment T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method) produced the tallest plants with Plant height of 98.18, 210.18,
298.42 and 316.85 cm at 90, 180, 270 DAP and at harvest stage at main crop and
101.24, 214.22, 301.68 and 322.14 cm at 90, 180, 270 DAR and at harvest of ratoon
99
Table 28
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of Plant Population on Plant height (cm) in Location-I
Main Crop
Treatments
90 DAP
180 DAP
270 DAP
Harvest
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
80.56
186.86
274.06
288.38
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
88.42
196.18
284.16
299.68
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
95.46
206.18
294.36
311.67
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
98.18
210.18
298.42
316.85
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
92.14
202.11
290.30
306.49
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
89.16
197.95
286.24
301.31
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
85.08
192.02
279.12
294.56
S.Ed
1.26
1.58
1.54
2.10
CD (P = 0.05)
2.52
3.16
3.06
4.18
100
Table 29
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of Plant Population on Plant height (cm) in Location-I
Ratoon Crop
Treatments
90 DAR
180 DAR
270 DAR
Harvest
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
83.72
190.34
278.56
291.30
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
90.88
198.98
287.08
302.18
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
98.42
210.18
297.42
316.75
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
101.24
214.22
301.68
322.14
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
94.84
205.86
293.16
311.31
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
91.26
201.54
288.90
288.90
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
87.30
194.66
282.82
296.74
S.Ed
1.29
1.66
1.64
2.21
CD (P = 0.05)
2.58
3.32
3.26
4.44
101
Table 30
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of Plant Population on Plant height (cm) in Location-II
Main Crop
Treatments
90 DAP
180 DAP
270 DAP
Harvest
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
87.83
192.12
281.66
284.02
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
94.15
201.48
290.18
294.18
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
101.04
211.50
300.06
305.68
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
103.56
216.18
303.72
310.18
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
97.88
206.82
295.80
300.65
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
94.72
202.14
291.54
295.59
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
90.99
196.80
285.92
289.10
S.Ed
1.08
1.83
1.65
2.04
CD (P = 0.05)
2.16
3.68
3.26
4.08
102
Table 31
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of Plant Population on Plant height (cm) in Location-II
Ratoon Crop
Treatments
90 DAR
180 DAR
270 DAR
Harvest
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
88.08
193.32
285.00
284.18
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
94.96
202.96
293.16
296.14
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
102.14
213.20
303.18
308.66
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
105.08
218.06
306.86
313.72
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
98.70
208.34
298.85
303.16
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
95.26
203.48
294.52
297.96
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
91.52
198.18
289.33
290.16
S.Ed
1.22
1.93
1.67
2.50
CD (P = 0.05)
2.44
3.86
3.33
4.98
103
crop, respectively. This was followed by the treatment, T3 – Wider row planting of
ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm spacing (SSI method). The treatment, T1 – Normal
row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm ´ end to end spacing (conventional
method – farmers’ practice as control) recorded the least plant height of 80.56,
186.86, 274.06 and 288.38 cm at 90, 180, 270 DAP and at harvest stage of main crop
and 83.72, 190.34, 278.56 and 291.30 cm at 90, 180, 270 DAR and at harvest of
ratoon crop, respectively.
Location-II
Similar trend was also observed in main and ratoon crop planted in Location-II
also.
All the Treatments significantly influenced the cane height.
Among the
Treatments, T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm spacing
(SSI method) recorded highest Plant height of 103.56, 216.18, 303.72 and 310.18 cm
in the main crop, 105.08, 218.06, 306.86 and 313.72 cm in the ratoon crop at 90, 180,
270 DAR and at harvest stages, respectively. The least Plant height was recorded in
treatment T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method – farmers’ practice as control) in both main and ratoon
crop, respectively.
4.2.1.6.
Dry Matter Production (DMP) (Table 32,33,34 and 35)
Cane dry matter production (DMP) was recorded at 90, 180, 270 DAP/DAR
and at harvest stages on both the crops.
104
Location-I
DMP was significantly influenced by the plant population at all stages. The
DMP was lower in the treatment, T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with
180 × 60 cm spacing (SSI method) and highest in treatment, T1 – Normal row
planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to end spacing (conventional method –
farmers’ practice as control) at tillering stage (90 DAP/DAR)
only, the remaining
stages (180, 270 days and at harvest stages on main crop and ratoon crop) recorded
the opposite trend. The treatment, T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with
180 × 60 cm spacing (SSI method) recorded the highest DMP of 35.18, 66.55 and
78.98 t ha–1 and 36.33, 67.58 and 80.12 t ha–1 recorded at 180, 270 days and at harvest
stages of cane on main crop and ratoon crops respectively. The Treatments T1 –
Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing
(conventional method – farmers’ practice as control) recorded the least DMP at 180,
270 DAP/DAR and at harvest stages on both the crops.
Location-II
Plant population is significantly influenced the DMP at Location-II as well.
Among the different stages of crop growth, upto tillering phase (90 day observation),
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm spacing (SSI method)
recorded the least DMP of 4.02 and 3.86 t ha–1 in main and ratoon crop, respectively.
The treatment, T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method – farmers’ practice as control) recorded highest
DMP of 4.52 and 4.66 t ha–1 in main and ratoon crop, respectively. But the trend
was opposite in other growth stages (180, 270 DAP/DAR and at harvest). In this
105
Table 32
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of Plant Population on DMP (t ha–1) in Location-I
Main Crop
Treatments
90 DAP
180 DAP
270 DAP
Harvest
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
4.38
28.68
54.20
66.22
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
4.15
31.16
59.06
71.22
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
3.88
33.98
64.23
76.65
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
3.78
35.18
66.55
78.98
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
4.0
32.62
62.17
74.12
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
4.12
32.58
59.18
71.98
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
4.27
29.98
56.86
68.98
S.Ed
0.05
0.59
0.98
1.05
CD (P = 0.05)
0.09
1.16
1.96
2.10
106
Table 33
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of Plant Population on DMP (t ha–1) in Location-I
Ratoon Crop
Treatments
90 DAR
180 DAR
270 DAR
Harvest
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
4.44
27.18
55.08
65.18
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
4.24
30.96
59.22
72.65
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
4.00
35.05
65.29
77.86
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
3.90
36.33
67.58
80.12
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
4.11
33.17
62.96
75.25
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
4.22
31.12
59.97
72.98
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
4.34
29.25
57.18
70.29
S.Ed
0.04
0.59
0.99
1.08
CD (P = 0.05)
0.08
1.18
1.99
2.16
107
Table 34
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of Plant Population on DMP (t ha–1) in Location-II
Main Crop
Treatments
90 DAP
180 DAP
270 DAP
Harvest
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
4.52
29.46
53.96
65.15
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
4.34
33.15
59.98
71.65
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
4.13
36.66
66.22
78.40
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
4.02
37.96
68.52
81.65
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
4.22
35.16
63.21
75.15
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
4.32
33.46
60.20
71.90
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
4.43
31.66
56.97
68.40
S.Ed
0.03
0.60
1.01
1.12
CD (P = 0.05)
0.07
1.20
2.01
2.25
108
Table 35
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of Plant Population on DMP (t ha–1) in Location-II
Ratoon Crop
Treatments
90 DAR
180 DAR
270 DAR
Harvest
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
4.66
27.76
54.08
66.58
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
4.37
31.22
60.18
73.18
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
4.04
35.90
66.61
79.85
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
3.86
38.12
69.66
83.15
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
4.19
33.68
63.56
76.55
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
4.34
31.46
60.51
73.25
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
4.52
29.98
57.13
69.88
S.Ed
0.06
0.61
1.03
1.15
CD (P = 0.05)
0.13
1.22
2.05
2.30
109
stages the treatment, T4 – recorded the highest DMP of 37.96, 68.52 and 80.12 t ha–1
in main crop and 38.12, 69.66 and 83.15 t ha–1 in ratoon crop at 180, 270 days and at
harvest stages respectively, like that least DMP was registered in the treatment, T1 –
Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to end spacing
(conventional method – farmers’ practice as control) in main and ratoon crops.
4.2.2. Physiological Parameters
4.2.2.1. Leaf Area Index (LAI) (Table 36,37,38 and 39)
Leaf area index was recorded at 90, 180, 270 DAP/DAR and at harvest.
Location-I
Leaf area index was significantly influenced by plant population. The LAI
was lower in the treatment, T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm
× end to end spacing (conventional method – farmers’ practice as control) at 90
DAP/DAR stage only.
The opposite trend was registered at 180, 270 days and at
harvest stages of main crop and ratoon crop respectively.
The treatment T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method) recorded the least leaf area index of 2.41 and 2.35 at 90
DAP/DAR where as the same treatment recorded the highest leaf area index of 4.59,
5.62 and 4.98 in the main crop and 4.92, 5.66 and 4.98 in ratoon crop on 180, 270
DAP/DAR and at harvest stage, respectively.
The treatment T1 – Normal row
planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to end spacing (conventional method –
farmers’ practice as control) recorded highest leaf area index at 90 DAP/DAR and
lesser leaf area index was registered on other growth stages in both the crops.
110
Table 36
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of Plant Population on LAI in Location-I
Main Crop
Treatments
90 DAP
180 DAP
270 DAP
Harvest
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
2.86
3.98
4.23
4.01
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
2.70
4.38
4.92
4.38
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
2.50
4.75
5.44
4.82
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
2.41
4.59
5.62
4.98
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
2.60
4.58
5.22
4.62
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
2.68
4.42
4.98
4.42
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
2.78
4.22
4.72
4.22
S.Ed
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.07
CD (P = 0.05)
0.07
0.12
0.16
0.14
111
Table 37
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of Plant Population on LAI in Location-I
Ratoon Crop
Treatments
90 DAR
180 DAR
270 DAR
Harvest
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
2.88
4.03
4.45
4.00
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
2.68
4.38
4.98
4.38
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
2.44
4.77
5.45
4.80
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
2.35
4.92
5.66
4.98
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
2.56
4.62
5.21
4.62
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
2.66
4.44
5.01
4.42
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
2.78
4.22
4.78
4.18
S.Ed
0.04
0.06
0.09
0.07
CD (P = 0.05)
0.08
0.13
0.17
0.15
112
Table 38
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of Plant Population on LAI in Location-II
Main Crop
Treatments
90 DAP
180 DAP
270 DAP
Harvest
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
2.90
4.08
4.44
3.72
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
2.68
4.45
5.22
4.31
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
2.44
4.81
5.65
4.78
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
2.33
4.96
5.86
4.99
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
2.56
4.65
5.44
4.58
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
2.67
4.49
5.25
4.38
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
2.79
4.29
5.01
4.12
S.Ed
0.04
0.07
0.08
0.07
D (P = 0.05)
0.09
0.13
0.17
0.15
113
Table 39
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of Plant Population on LAI in Location-II
Ratoon Crop
Treatments
90 DAR
180 DAR
270 DAR
Harvest
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
2.92
3.90
4.58
3.76
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
2.68
4.28
5.14
4.28
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
2.42
4.80
5.66
4.80
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
2.30
4.98
5.92
5.02
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
2.54
4.60
5.42
4.62
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
2.66
4.40
5.18
4.40
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
2.80
4.10
4.88
4.02
S.Ed
0.05
0.07
0.10
0.08
CD (P = 0.05)
0.10
0.15
0.19
0.16
114
Location-II
All the Treatments significantly influenced the leaf area index of sugar cane.
Among the different stages of observation, 90 DAP/DAR the treatment, T4 – Wider
row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm spacing (SSI method) recorded the
least leaf area index of 2.33 and 2.30 in main and ratoon crops respectively. But the
trend was opposite in other stages of observation. The treatment, T1 – Normal row
planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to end spacing (conventional method –
farmers’ practice as control) registered the least leaf area index (4.08, 4.44 and 3.72)
in main crop and (3.90, 4.58 and 3.76) in ratoon crop respectively at other growth
stages viz. 180, 270 days and at harvest, respectively.
Whereas, the treatment, T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180
× 60 cm spacing (SSI method) recorded the higher leaf area index of 4.96, 5.86 and
4.99 (in main crop) and 4.98, 5.92 and 5.02 (in ratoon crop) at 180, 270 DAP/DAR
and at harvest stage, respectively. The treatment T1 – Normal row planting of two
budded setts with 90 cm × end to end spacing (conventional method – farmers’
practice as control) recorded the least leaf area index in main and ratoon crop,
respectively at other growth stages.
4.2.2.2.
Crop Growth Rate (CGR) (Table 40,41,42 and 43)
The Crop growth rate was estimated at various stages viz, 90 to 180, 180 to
270 DAP/DAR and 270 DAP/DAR to at harvest. The CGR was higher upto 180
DAP/DAR and started declining @ 270 DAP/DAR and at harvest stages in main and
ratoon crop.
115
Location-I
The planting techniques had a profound influence on crop growth rate in both
the main and ratoon crops. The treatment, T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud
settling with 180 × 60 cm spacing (SSI method) recorded higher crop growth rate of
33.89, 33.86 and 18.12 g m–2 day–1 in main crop and 35.03, 33.72 and 18.29 g m–2
day–1 in ratoon crop at 90 to 180, 180 to 270 and 270 to harvest DAP/DAR,
respectively. This was followed by T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with
180 × 45 cm spacing (SSI method) the CGR of 32.44, 32.61 and 18.11 g m–2 day–1 in
main crop and 33.5, 32.60 and 18.34 g m–2 day–1 in ratoon crop, respectively. The
treatment T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method – farmers’ practice as control) recorded the least crop
growth rate in both the crops.
Location-II
All the Treatments exerted significant influence on the crop growth rate in
both the crops. The treatment, T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180
× 60 cm spacing (SSI method) recorded the highest crop growth rate of 36.71, 32.96
and 19.20 g m–2 day–1 in main crop and 37.07, 34.04 and 19.75 g m–2 day–1 in ratoon
crop at 90 to 180, 180 to 270 and 270 to at harvest stage, respectively. The treatment,
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to end spacing
(conventional method - farmers’ practice as control) recorded the lowest crop growth
rate of 26.71, 26.22 and 16.22 g m–2 day–1 in main crop and 24.67 28.24 and 18.23 g
m–2 day–1 in ratoon crop at 90 to 180, 180 to 270 and 270 DAR to harvest stage,
respectively.
116
Table 40
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of Plant Population on Crop Growth Rate (g m–2 day–1) in Location-I
Main Crop
Treatments
90 - 180 DAP
180 – 270 DAP
270 - Harvest
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
26.00
27.36
17.49
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
29.01
30.00
17.71
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
32.44
32.61
18.11
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
33.89
33.86
18.12
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
30.80
31.83
17.38
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
30.62
28.56
18.69
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
27.57
28.87
17.65
S.Ed
0.08
0.09
0.01
CD (P = 0.05)
0.16
0.17
0.02
117
Table 41
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of Plant Population on Crop Growth Rate (g m–2 day–1) in Location-I
Ratoon Crop
Treatments
90 - 180 DAR
180 – 270 DAR
270 – Harvest
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
24.27
30.00
14.54
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
28.69
30.40
19.66
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
33.50
32.60
18.34
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
35.03
33.72
18.29
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
31.29
32.10
17.91
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
28.89
31.06
19.02
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
26.68
30.03
19.17
S.Ed
0.11
0.21
0.01
CD (P = 0.05)
0.22
0.42
0.02
118
Table 42
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of Plant Population on Crop Growth Rate(g m–2 day–1) in Location-II
Main Crop
Treatments
90 - 180 DAP
180 – 270 DAP
270 – Harvest
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
26.71
26.22
16.22
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
31.01
28.81
16.95
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
35.14
31.84
17.74
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
36.71
32.96
19.20
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
33.38
30.17
17.34
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
31.38
28.71
17.00
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
29.26
27.12
16.58
S.Ed
0.20
0.09
0.01
CD (P = 0.05)
0.40
0.18
0.02
119
Table 43
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of Plant Population on Crop Growth Rate(g m–2 day–1) in Location-II
Ratoon Crop
Treatments
90 - 180 DAR
180 – 270 DAR
270 – Harvest
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
24.67
28.24
18.23
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
28.83
31.18
19.00
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
34.40
33.12
19.37
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
37.07
34.04
19.75
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
31.77
32.20
18.98
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
29.13
31.28
18.60
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
27.29
29.17
18.62
S.Ed
0.22
0.09
0.01
CD (P = 0.05)
0.42
0.18
0.02
120
4.2.3.
Yield Attributes
4.2.3.1. Number of Millable Cane (NMC) (Table 44 and 45)
Location-I
Significant effect on Number of Millable Cane was noted due to plant
population. In general the Treatments recorded higher NMC than wider row (180
cm) spacing Treatments in main and ratoon crops, respectively. T1 – Normal row
planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to end spacing (conventional method –
farmers’ practice as control) registered higher NMR of 88,040 and 88,920 ha–1 at
harvest on main and ratoon crop respectively. The least number of millable cane were
recorded in the treatment, T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm ×
end to end spacing (conventional method) with the NMC of 73,620 and 75,110 ha–1 in
both the crops.
Location-II
Among the Treatments, T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with
90 cm × end to end spacing (conventional method – farmers’ practice as control)
recorded the highest NMC of 87,230 and 87,290 ha–1 at harvest in main and ratoon
crops respectively. This was followed by the treatment, T3 – Wider row planting of
ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm spacing (SSI method) with the NMC of 85,980 and
86,080 ha–1 in both the crops. The least number of millable cane were recorded in the
treatment, T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method) with 71,960 and 73,890 NMC ha–1 in main and ratoon
crops, respectively.
121
Table 44
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Number of Millable Canes ('000 ha–1) at harvest – Location-I
Treatments
Main Crop
Ratoon Crop
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
88.04
88.92
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
82.05
84.96
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
84.21
85.52
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
81.35
82.57
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
79.14
80.02
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
82.15
85.04
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
73.62
75.11
S.Ed
1.12
1.36
CD (P = 0.05)
2.24
2.70
122
Table 45
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Number of Millable Canes ('000 ha–1) at harvest – Location-II
Treatments
Main Crop
Ratoon Crop
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
87.23
87.29
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
78.86
79.14
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
85.98
86.08
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
81.06
81.56
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
78.46
78.98
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
79.31
81.34
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
71.96
73.89
S.Ed
0.59
0.60
CD (P = 0.05)
1.18
1.19
123
4.2.3.2.Internode Length (Table 46 and 47)
Location-I
Different Plant Population Treatments significantly influenced the internode
length of cane. Among the Treatments, T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling
with 180 × 60 cm spacing (SSI method) recorded the highest length of intercede of
20.86 and 21.08 cm in main crop and ratoon crop, respectively. The treatment T3 –
Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm spacing (SSI method)
ranked second. The least internode length was recorded in the treatment, T1 – Normal
row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to end spacing (conventional
method – farmers’ practice as control) in both the crops.
Location-II
Different spacing adopted in the treatment schedule gave significance on
internode length of cane. The treatment, T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling
with 180 × 60 cm spacing (SSI method) recorded highest internode length of 21.16
and 21.22 cm in main and ratoon crops respectively when compared to all other
Treatments. The lowest internode length (11.45 and 11.54 cm in main and ratoon
crops respectively) was registered by the treatment, T1 – Normal row planting of two
budded setts with 90 cm × end to end spacing (conventional method – farmers’
practice as control).
124
Table 46
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of Plant Population on Internode Length (cm) – Location-I
Treatments
Main Crop
Ratoon Crop
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
10.59
11.04
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
14.88
16.14
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
19.20
19.50
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
20.86
21.08
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
17.15
17.98
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
15.06
16.28
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
13.08
13.54
S.Ed
0.74
0.75
CD (P = 0.05)
1.49
1.50
125
Table 47
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of Plant Population on Internode Length (cm) – Location-II
Treatments
Main Crop
Ratoon Crop
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
11.45
11.54
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
15.95
16.26
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
19.56
19.58
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
21.16
21.22
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
17.86
18.00
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
16.08
16.36
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
13.96
13.99
S.Ed
0.76
0.77
CD (P = 0.05)
1.51
1.54
126
4.2.3.3. Cane Girth (Table 48 and 49)
Cane girth was significantly influenced by different plant population
Treatments in both locations. In general, the cane girth was higher in wider (180 cm)
space planted crops. The cane girth was recorded at cane harvest stage.
Location-I
Among the different spacing Treatments, T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud
settling with 180 × 75 cm spacing (SSI method) recorded thicker cane girth of 3.94
and 3.97 cm in main crop and ratoon crop, respectively. This was onpar with the
treatment, T4. The treatment T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm
× end to end spacing (conventional method) registered thin cane of 2.04 and 2.12 cm
girth in both the crops.
Location-II
The plant population adopted in different Treatments appreciably enhanced
the cane girth. Treatment T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75
cm spacing (SSI method) registered higher cane girth of 4.04 and 4.05 cm in main and
ratoon crops, respectively. The least cane girth (2.22 and 2.71 cm in main and ratoon
crops, respectively) was recorded in the treatment, T7 – Wider row planting of single
bud setts with 180 cm × end to end spacing (conventional method) in both the crops.
127
Table 48
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Cane girth (cm) – Location-I
Main Crop
Ratoon Crop
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method – FP practice as control)
2.72
2.88
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
3.10
3.21
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
3.48
3.54
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
3.86
3.88
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
3.94
3.97
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
2.34
2.45
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
2.04
2.12
S.Ed
0.14
0.15
CD (P = 0.05)
0.28
0.30
Treatments
128
Table 49
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Cane Girth (cm) – Location-II
Treatments
Main Crop
Ratoon Crop
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
2.96
2.97
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
3.32
3.29
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
3.65
3.61
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
3.92
3.94
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
4.04
4.05
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
2.65
2.66
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
2.22
2.71
S.Ed
0.13
0.14
CD (P = 0.05)
0.26
0.28
129
4.2.3.4. Individual Cane Weight (Table 50 and 51)
Significant variation was observed on individual cane weight due to different
plant population adopted in the experiment on both the locations. The individual cane
weight was recorded higher in wider spaced crops than normal planting.
Location-I
Individual cane weight was significantly influenced by the varied plant
population. The treatment T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60
cm spacing (SSI method) produced heavier cane weight (2.60 and 2.65 kg cane–1) in
main and ratoon crops. Which was followed by Treatments T5 – Wider row planting
of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm spacing (SSI method) with a individual cane
weight of 2.40 and 2.42 kg cane–1 in main crop and ratoon crop, respectively. The
lesser cane weight of 1.38 and 1.42 kg cane–1 in both the crops respectively was
registered in the treatment T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm
× end to end spacing (conventional method – farmers’ practice as control).
Location-II
Individual cane weight was higher in Location-II when compared to LocationI, wide row spacing sugar cane produced higher individual cane weight than normal
row spacing crop. The treatment, T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with
180 × 60 cm spacing (SSI method) recorded higher individual cane weight of 2.63
and 2.71 kg cane–1 in main and ratoon crops respectively. Which was followed by
treatment T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm spacing (SSI
method). The lowest (1.40 and 1.45 kg cane–1) individual cane weight was recorded
in the treatment T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method – farmers’ practice as control).
130
Table 50
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Individual cane weight (kg cane–1) – Location-I
Treatments
Main Crop
Ratoon Crop
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
1.38
1.42
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
1.96
1.98
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
2.20
2.23
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
2.60
2.65
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
2.40
2.42
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
1.98
2.00
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
1.78
1.80
S.Ed
0.09
0.07
CD (P = 0.05)
0.18
0.15
131
Table 51
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Individual cane weight (kg cane–1) – Location-II
Treatments
Main Crop
Ratoon Crop
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
1.40
1.45
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
2.07
2.12
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
2.37
2.44
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
2.63
2.71
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
2.46
2.52
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
2.09
2.15
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
1.88
1.92
S.Ed
0.08
0.07
CD (P = 0.05)
0.16
0.14
132
4.2.4. Yield
4.2.4.1.Cane Yield (Table 52 and 53)
Cane yield was recorded at harvest from net plot area and converted to per
hectare yield.
Location-I
The different plant population had a profound influence on cane yield.
Among the different Treatments, T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with
180 × 60 cm spacing (SSI method) recorded highest cane yield of 209.56 and 216.18 t
ha–1 in main and ratoon crops respectively. The treatment, T3 – Wider row planting of
ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm spacing (SSI method) as next in the order of
ranking. Compared to normal row spacing treatment, (T1) – with wider row spacing
Treatments, T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm spacing
(SSI method) resulted in an increased cane yield of 72.5 and 73.6 t ha–1 in main crop
and ratoon crop, respectively. The treatment T6 – Wider row planting of two budded
setts with 180 cm × end to end spacing (conventional method) and T2 – Wider row
planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm spacing (SSI method) with no distinct
difference between them. This was followed by treatment T7 – Wider row planting of
single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end spacing (conventional method). The least
cane yield of 120.12 and 124.38 t ha–1 in the main crop and ratoon crop, respectively
were recorded in the treatment T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90
cm × end to end spacing (conventional method – farmers’ practice as control) in both
the crops.
133
Location-II
In general the cane yield recorded in location-II was higher than the location-I.
Different plant population adopted in the Treatments recorded significantly higher
cane yield than control. Among the Treatments, T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud
settling with 180 × 60 cm spacing (SSI method) recorded highest care yield of 210.56
and 218.32 t ha–1 in main crop and ratoon crop, respectively. This was followed by
the treatment T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm spacing
(SSI method) with cane yield of 203.03 and 209.00 t ha–1 in main crop and ratoon
crop, respectively. When compared to control treatment (T1) with wider row space
treatment, T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm spacing (SSI
method) resulted in an increased cane yield percentage of 58 in both the crops. The
treatment T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method) recorded the cane yield of 163.68 and 172.74 t ha–1 in
main crop and ratoon crop, respectively, which was on par (161.19 and 167.24 t ha–1)
with T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm spacing (SSI
method). The treatment, T1 - Normal row (90 cm) spacing with two budded setts end
to end planting conventional method as control – registered least (121.98 and 125.88
t ha–1) cane yield on both the crops.
134
Table 52
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Cane yield (t ha–1) – Location-I
Treatments
Main Crop
Ratoon Crop
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method – FP practice as control)
120.12
124.38
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
158.86
164.70
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
201.08
207.08
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
209.56
216.18
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
192.60
197.98
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
160.68
168.88
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
131.96
133.40
S.Ed
2.24
4.05
CD (P = 0.05)
4.48
8.10
135
Table 53
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Cane yield (t ha–1) – Location-II
Treatments
Main Crop
Ratoon Crop
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
121.98
125.88
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
161.19
167.24
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
203.03
209.00
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
210.56
218.32
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
193.15
198.86
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
163.68
172.74
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
133.41
139.95
S.Ed
3.73
3.34
CD (P = 0.05)
7.44
6.66
136
4.2.4.1.Sugar Yield (Table 54 and 55)
Sugar yield is the resultant products of cane yield and CCS per cent.
Location-I
In both the crops, the Treatments exerted significance influence on the sugar
yield. Among the Treatments, T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180
× 60 cm spacing (SSI method) recorded highest sugar yield of 25.50 and 26.02 t ha–1
in main crop and ratoon crop respectively. The treatment, T3 – Wider row planting of
ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm spacing (SSI method) was next in the order of
ranking. The least sugar yield of 13.52 and 14.01 t ha–1 in main crop and ratoon crop
respectively was recorded in the treatment T1 – Normal row planting of two budded
setts with 90 cm × end to end spacing (conventional method – farmers’ practice as
control).
Location-II
The plant population Treatments adopted in Location-II, exhibited a
significant effect on sugar yield of both the crops. In general wide row (180 cm)
spacing produced higher sugar yield than conventional (90 cm row spacing) practice
in main and ratoon crops. Among the Treatments, T4 – Wider row planting of ring
bud settling with 180 × 60 cm spacing (SSI method) recorded the highest sugar yield
of 25.45 and 26.76 t ha–1 in main crop and ratoon crop respectively. This was
followed by T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm spacing
(SSI method), which recorded 24.42 and 26.68 t ha–1 of sugar yield in both the crops.
The control treatment (T1) – recorded the least (13.91 and 14.38 t ha–1) sugar yield on
both the crops.
137
Table 54
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Sugar yield (t ha–1) – Location-I
Treatments
Main Crop
Ratoon Crop
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
13.52
14.01
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
18.45
19.38
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
24.33
25.03
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
25.50
26.02
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
22.47
23.69
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
18.63
20.04
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
14.85
15.47
S.Ed
0.43
0.56
CD (P = 0.05)
0.86
1.12
138
Table 55
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Sugar yield (t ha–1) – Location-II
Main Crop
Ratoon Crop
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
13.91
14.38
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
19.34
19.65
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
24.42
26.68
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
25.45
26.76
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
23.08
23.76
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
19.31
20.38
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
15.67
16.29
S.Ed
0.46
0.49
CD (P = 0.05)
0.92
0.98
Treatments
139
4.2.5. Quality Parameters
The quality parameters viz., total solids, sucrose per cent, purity co – efficient
and CCS per cent were estimated at the time of harvest in main and ratoon crops.
4.2.5.1.Total Solids (Brix per cent) (Table 56 and 57)
Brix per cent of cane juice did not show any significant difference by the plant
population Treatments, in both the locations. However, the treatment T4 – Wider row
planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm spacing (SSI method) showed its
superiority by registering higher brix per cent of 19.40, 19.60, 19.58 and 19.48 in
main crop and ratoon crop on both the locations, respectively.
4.2.5.2.Sucrose Per cent (Pol) (Table 58 and 59)
The effect of plant population did not differ significantly in respect of sucrose
per cent on both the locations.
4.2.5.3.Purity Co – efficient (Table 60 and 61)
The different plant population viz. wide row spacing close row spacing,
farmers’ practice etc., did not differ significantly with respect of purity co – efficient
per cent of cane juice in main and ratoon crops at both the locations, respectively.
4.2.5.4. Commercial Cane Sugar (CCS) Per cent (Table 62 and 63)
Commercial Cane Sugar (CCS) per cent is the computed value of brix (%) and
sucrose (%) of cane juice recorded at harvest. In both the locations, the Treatments
did not exert influence on the CCS per cent on main crop and ratoon crop
respectively.
140
Table 56
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Total Solids (Brix per cent) – Location-I
Treatments
Main Crop
Ratoon Crop
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
19.20
19.18
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
19.30
18.92
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
19.20
19.50
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
19.40
19.60
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
18.90
18.90
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
18.80
18.88
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
19.40
19.38
S.Ed
0.01
0.02
CD (P = 0.05)
NS
NS
141
Table 57
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Total Solids (Brix per cent) – Location-II
Treatments
Main Crop
Ratoon Crop
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
19.08
19.35
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
18.42
19.18
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
19.42
19.20
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
19.58
19.48
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
18.98
18.98
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
19.01
18.99
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
18.65
19.25
S.Ed
0.03
0.04
CD (P = 0.05)
NS
NS
142
Table 58
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Sucrose per cent (Pol) – Location-I
Treatments
Main Crop
Ratoon Crop
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
16.50
16.51
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
16.88
16.92
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
17.32
17.40
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
17.45
17.38
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
16.82
17.12
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
16.72
17.01
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
16.56
16.88
S.Ed
0.04
0.03
CD (P = 0.05)
NS
NS
143
Table 59
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Sucrose per cent (Pol) – Location-II
Treatments
Main Crop
Ratoon Crop
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
16.62
16.72
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
16.95
16.98
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
17.32
17.45
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
17.42
17.52
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
17.12
17.12
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
16.98
16.97
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
16.82
16.89
S.Ed
0.04
0.02
CD (P = 0.05)
NS
NS
144
Table 60
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Purity co-efficient (per cent) – Location-I
Treatments
Main Crop
Ratoon Crop
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
85.94
83.34
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
87.46
89.43
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
90.21
89.23
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
89.95
88.67
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
88.99
90.58
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
88.94
90.09
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
85.36
87.10
S.Ed
0.08
0.12
CD (P = 0.05)
NS
NS
145
Table 61
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Purity co-efficient (per cent) – Location-II
Treatments
Main Crop
Ratoon Crop
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
87.11
86.41
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
92.02
88.53
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
89.19
90.89
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
88.97
89.94
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
90.20
90.20
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
89.32
89.36
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
90.18
87.74
S.Ed
0.09
0.09
CD (P = 0.05)
NS
NS
146
Table 62
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Commercial cane sugar (per cent) – Location-I
Treatments
Main Crop
Ratoon Crop
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
11.26
11.27
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
11.62
11.77
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
12.10
12.09
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
12.17
12.04
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
11.67
11.97
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
11.60
11.87
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
11.26
11.60
S.Ed
0.08
0.04
CD (P = 0.05)
NS
NS
147
Table 63
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Commercial cane sugar (per cent) – Location-II
Main Crop
Ratoon Crop
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
11.41
11.43
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
12.0
11.75
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
12.03
12.77
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
12.09
12.26
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
11.95
11.95
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
11.80
11.80
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
11.75
11.64
S.Ed
0.07
0.08
CD (P = 0.05)
NS
NS
Treatments
148
4.2.6. Nutrient Uptake Pattern (Table 64,65,66 and 67)
Nutrient uptake was estimated in main and ratoon crops at harvest.
Location-I
Nutrient uptake was varied due to adoption of different plant population. The
uptake was higher in wide row spacing Treatments when compared to normal row
spacing Treatments in both the crops. Among the Treatments, T4 – Wider row
planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm spacing (SSI method) recorded the
highest nutrient uptake of 106.18, 35.08 and 169.46 Kg ha–1 of N, P2 O5 and K2O in
main crop and 106.88, 35.65 and 170.12 Kg ha–1 of N, P2 O5 and K2O in ratoon crop
respectively. This was followed by the treatment, T3 – Wider row planting of ring
bud settling with 180 × 45 cm spacing (SSI method). Normal row planting registered
lowest nutrient uptake of 85.22, 25.59 and 137.38 kg ha–1 of N, P2 O5 and K2O
in
main crop and 85.72, 25.61 and 137.54 kg ha–1 of N, P2 O5 and K2O in ratoon crop
respectively.
Location-II
In both the crops, the Treatments exerted significant influence on the nutrient
uptake. Among the Treatments, T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180
× 60 cm spacing (SSI method) recorded the highest nutrient uptake of 107.12, 35.98
and 170.88 kg ha–1 of N, P2 O5 and K2 O in main crop and 107.85, 36.12 and 171.12
Kg ha–1 of N, P2 O5 and K2 O
in ratoon crop, respectively. The Treatments, T3 –
Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm spacing (SSI method) was
the next in the order of magnitude.
149
Table 64
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of Plant Population on Nutrient uptake (kg ha–1) in Location-I
Main Crop
Treatments
N
P
K
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
85.22
25.59
137.38
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
94.98
31.09
150.16
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
102.15
33.69
163.07
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
106.18
35.08
169.46
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
98.47
32.45
156.68
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
95.09
31.18
150.29
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
91.50
29.78
143.77
S.Ed
1.64
0.59
2.69
CD (P = 0.05)
3.28
1.19
5.39
150
Table 65
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of Plant Population on Nutrient uptake (kg ha–1) in Location-I
Ratoon Crop
Treatments
N
P
K
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
85.72
25.61
137.54
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
94.75
30.88
150.98
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
102.62
33.49
163.90
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
106.88
35.65
170.12
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
98.36
32.18
157.68
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
94.98
30.99
151.46
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
90.98
29.65
144.76
S.Ed
1.62
0.58
2.59
CD (P = 0.05)
3.26
1.16
5.22
151
Table 66
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of Plant Population on Nutrient uptake (kg ha–1) in Location-II
Main Crop
Treatments
N
P
K
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
85.15
25.61
137.42
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
95.15
30.74
150.66
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
102.92
33.83
163.18
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
107.12
35.98
170.88
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
98.72
32.18
156.71
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
95.42
30.91
150.32
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
91.35
29.48
143.65
S.Ed
1.60
0.58
2.59
CD (P = 0.05)
3.20
1.15
5.18
152
Table 67
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of Plant Population on Nutrient uptake (kg ha–1) in Location-II
Ratoon Crop
Treatments
N
N
N
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
85.10
85.10
85.10
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
95.06
95.06
95.06
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
102.96
102.96
102.96
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
107.85
107.85
107.85
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
98.82
98.82
98.82
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
95.12
95.12
95.12
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
91.12
91.12
91.12
S.Ed
1.58
1.58
1.58
CD (P = 0.05)
3.15
3.15
3.15
153
The least nutrient uptake of 85.15, 25.61 and 137.42 Kg ha–1 of N, P2 O5 and
K2 O in main crop and 85.10, 25.69 and 137.72 Kg ha–1 of N, P2 O5 and K2O in
ratoon crop, respectively was recorded in treatment, T1 – Normal row planting of two
budded setts with 90 cm × end to end spacing (conventional method – farmers’
practice as control).
4.2.7. Post Harvest Soil Analysis (Table 68,69,70 and 71)
Soil samples were drawn from each treatment after harvest of sugarcane and
analysed for available N, P2 O5 and K2 O.
Location-I
Different plant population Treatments markedly influenced the soil available
N, P2 O5 and K2 O . Higher soil available nutrients were recorded in wide row spacing
Treatments than normal row planting in both the crops. Highest soil available, N, P2
O5 and K2 O of 228.20, 18.65 and 316.68 kg ha–1 in main crop and 228.12, 18.42 and
316.42 Kg ha–1 in ratoon crop respectively were recorded in T4 – Wider row planting
of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm spacing (SSI method), which was followed by
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm spacing (SSI method).
The treatment T1 – (Normal row (90 cm) spacing with two budded setts end to end
planting – conventional method as control) recorded lowest soil available N, P2 O5
and K2O of 204.66, 11.93 and 295.88 Kg ha–1 in main crop and 204.56, 11.96 and
295.48 kg ha–1 in ratoon, respectively.
154
Table 68
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Post harvest soil available Nutrient (kg ha–1) in Location-I
Main Crop
Treatments
N
P
K
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
204.66
11.93
295.88
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
213.96
14.62
304.18
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
223.55
17.35
312.53
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
228.20
18.65
316.68
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
218.90
16.05
308.38
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
214.25
14.75
304.23
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
209.31
13.32
300.03
S.Ed
1.83
0.15
1.58
CD (P = 0.05)
3.65
0.30
3.15
155
Table 69
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Post harvest soil available Nutrient (kg ha–1) in Location-I
Ratoon Crop
Treatments
N
P
K
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
204.56
11.96
295.48
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
213.98
14.52
303.45
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
223.43
17.14
312.02
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
228.12
18.42
316.12
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
218.74
15.86
307.92
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
214.05
14.58
303.82
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
209.29
13.24
299.58
S.Ed
1.85
0.14
1.55
CD (P = 0.05)
3.69
0.28
3.10
156
Table 70
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Post harvest soil available Nutrient (kg ha–1) in Location-II
Main Crop
Treatments
N
P
K
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
214.08
13.86
308.68
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
222.88
16.28
316.84
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
231.78
18.90
325.10
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
236.18
20.12
329.18
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
227.38
17.68
321.02
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
222.98
16.46
316.94
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
218.48
15.08
312.76
S.Ed
1.70
0.11
1.54
CD (P = 0.05)
3.40
0.22
3.08
157
Table 71
Effect of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of
Plant Population on Post harvest soil available Nutrient (kg ha–1) in Location-II
Ratoon Crop
Treatments
N
P
K
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
312.74
13.61
307.96
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
321.18
16.01
316.08
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
329.96
18.45
324.36
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
334.18
19.65
328.42
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
325.74
17.25
320.30
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
321.52
16.05
316.24
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
316.96
14.81
312.02
S.Ed
1.61
0.10
1.53
CD (P = 0.05)
3.22
0.20
3.06
158
Location-II
In both the crops, the Treatments markedly influenced the soil available
nutrients. Among the Treatments, the treatment T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud
settling with 180 × 60 cm spacing (SSI method) recorded highest soil available
nutrients (236.18, 20.12 and 329.18 kg ha–1 of N, P2 O5 and K2O in main crop and
334.18, 19.65 and 328.42 Kg ha–1 of N, P2 O5 and K2O in ratoon crop respectively).
Which was comparable with T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 ×
45 cm spacing (SSI method) with regard to soil available N, where as with respect to
P2 O5 and K2O availability, T4 was followed by T3. Significantly lowest (214.08,
13.86 and 308.68 Kg ha–1 of N, P2 O5 and K2O in main crop and 312.74, 13.61 and
307.96 Kg ha–1 of N, P2 O5 and K2O in ratoon crop respectively) soil available
nutrieints were registered in T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm
× end to end spacing (conventional method – farmers’ practice as control).
4.2.8. Economic Analysis
Economic parameters like gross return, net return and benefit cost ratio (BCR)
were worked out for all the Treatments in both the locations.
4.2.8.1. Location-I (Table 72 & 73)
4.2.8.1.1 Gross Return
The gross return ranged from ` 2,40,240 to 4,19,120 ha–1 in main crop and
from ` 2,79,855 to 4,86,405 in ratoon crop. The highest (` 4,19,120 and 4,86,405 in
main and ratoon crops respectively) gross return was obtained from the Wide row
(180 cm) spacing with ring bud of 60 cm inter settling planting – SSI method (T4).
The treatment, T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm spacing
159
(SSI method) and T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method) where the next in the order of magnitude. Where as T6 – Wider
row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to end spacing (conventional
method) and the treatment. T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 ×
30 cm spacing (SSI method) were closer to each other. This was followed by Wide
row (180 cm) spacing with single bud setts end to end planting - conventional method
(T7). The treatment T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method – farmers’ practice as control) recorded the lower
(` 2,40,240 and 2,79,855 in main and ratoon crops respectively) gross return
compared to rest of the Treatments.
4.2.8.1.2. Net Return
The net return varied among the different Treatments. The net return ranged
from ` 1,21,606 to 2,71,210 ha–1 in main crop and from ` 1,65,384 to 3,50,624 in
ratoon crop. The wide row spacing crop produced higher net return compared to
normal row space planting crop. The treatment, T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud
settling with 180 × 60 cm spacing (SSI method) recorded the highest net return of `
2,71,210 in main crop and ` 3,50,624 in ratoon crop, respectively. Where as, the
treatment T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method - farmers’ practice as control) produced lowest net
return from both the crops.
4.2.8.1.3. B : C Ratio
The B : C ratio was affected by the different Treatments adopted in this study.
All the wide row spacing Treatments observed highest B : C ratio compared to normal
row spacing Treatments. Among the Treatments T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud
160
Table 72
Economics of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of Plant Population in Sugar cane at Location-I
Main Crop
Cost of
Cultivation
(` ha–1)
Gross
Return
(` ha–1)
Net
Return
(` ha–1)
BCR
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
118646
240240
121606
2.02
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
123120
317720
194600
2.58
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
142760
402160
259400
2.81
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
147910
419120
271210
2.83
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
138470
385200
246730
2.78
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
130430
321360
190930
2.46
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
117810
263920
146110
2.24
Treatments
1. Cane price (per ton) ` 2,000.00 2. Pro tray raised settling (1 No.) ` 1.25 3. Seed cane cost (per ton) ` 2,250.00 4. Manual harvesting (per ton) ` 500.00
5. Urea (1 kg) ` 5.50
6. Single super phosphate (1 kg) ` 4.20 7. Muriate of potash (1 kg) ` 5.20
161
Table 73
Economics of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of Plant Population in Sugar cane at Location-I
Ratoon Crop
Cost of
Cultivation
(` ha–1)
Gross
Return
(` ha–1)
Net
Return
(` ha–1)
BCR
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
114471
279855
165384
2.44
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
112615
370575
257960
3.29
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
131686
465930
334244
3.53
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
135781
486405
350624
3.58
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
127591
445455
317864
3.49
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
114496
379980
265484
3.31
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
102530
300150
197620
2.92
Treatments
1. Cane price (per ton) ` 2,250.00
4. Single super phosphate (1 kg) ` 7.60
2. Manual harvesting (per ton) ` 600.00
5. Muriate of potash (1 kg) ` 16.00
3. Urea (1 kg) ` 5.80
162
settling with 180 × 60 cm spacing (SSI method) recorded highest B: C ratio of 2.83
and 3.58 in main and ratoon crops, respectively. The least B: C ratio was realished in
the treatment, T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method – farmers’ practice as control).
4.2.8.1. Location-II (Table 74, 75)
4.2.8.2.1. Gross Return
The gross return varied due to different Treatments adopted in main crop of
this Location-II. It ranged from ` 2,43,960 to 4,21,120 per hectare in main crop and
from ` 2,83,230 to 4,91,220 per hectare in ratoon crop, respectively. The highest
gross return was received from T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180
× 60 cm spacing (SSI method) with ` 4,21,120 and 4,91,220 per hectare in main and
ratoon crops, respectively. Normal row (90 cm) spacing with two budded setts end to
end planting – conventional method as control. (T1) recorded least (` 2,43,960 and
2,83,230 in main and ratoon crop respectively) gross return compared to all other
Treatments.
4.2.8.2.2. Net Return
Among the Treatments, T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180
× 60 cm spacing (SSI method) gave the highest net return of ` 2,70,810 and 3,54,072
in main and ratoon crops, respectively. This was followed by Treatments, T3 – Wider
row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm spacing (SSI method) and T5 –
Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm spacing (SSI method). The
realized in Treatments, T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm ×
end to end spacing (conventional method – farmers’ practice as control).
163
Table 74
Economics of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of Plant Population in Sugar cane at Location-II
Main Crop
Cost of
Cultivation
(` ha–1)
Gross
Return
(` ha–1)
Net
Return
(` ha–1)
BCR
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
121260
243960
122700
2.01
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
126320
322380
196060
2.55
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
145860
406060
260200
2.78
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
150310
421120
270810
2.80
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
141270
386300
245030
2.74
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
132030
327360
195330
2.47
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
119610
266820
147210
2.23
Treatments
1. Cane price (per ton) ` 2,000.00 2. Pro tray raised settling (1 No.) ` 1.25 3. Seed cane cost (per ton) ` 2,250.00 4. Manual harvesting (per ton) ` 500.00
5. Urea (1 kg) ` 5.50
6. Single super phosphate (1 kg) ` 4.20 7. Muriate of potash (1 kg) ` 5.20
164
Table 75
Economics of Nursery Production Technology and Optimization of Plant Population in Sugar cane at Location-II
Ratoon Crop
Cost of
Cultivation
(` ha–1)
Gross
Return
(` ha–1)
Net
Return
(` ha–1)
BCR
T1 – Normal row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method - FP practice as control)
115960
283230
167270
2.44
T2 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 30 cm
spacing (SSI method)
114275
376290
262015
3.29
T3 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 45 cm
spacing (SSI method)
133486
470250
336764
3.52
T4 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm
spacing (SSI method)
137148
491220
354072
3.58
T5 – Wider row planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 75 cm
spacing (SSI method)
129436
447435
317999
3.45
T6 – Wider row planting of two budded setts with 180 cm × end to
end spacing (conventional method)
116495
388665
272170
3.33
T7 – Wider row planting of single bud setts with 180 cm × end to end
spacing (conventional method)
104266
314887
210620
3.02
Treatments
1. Cane price (per ton) ` 2,250.00
5. Muriate of potash (1 kg) ` 16.00
2. Manual harvesting (per ton) ` 600.00
3. Urea (1 kg) ` 5.80 4. Single super phosphate (1 kg) ` 7.60
165
4.2.8.2.3. B : C Ratio
The general, wide row space planting method of sugar cane produced higher
B : C ratio than normal row space method of planting. It ranged from 2.01 to 2.80 in
main crop and 2.44 to 3.58 in ratoon crops, respectively. Highest B : C ratio (2.80 in
main crop and 3.58 in ratooncrop) was recorded by the treatment, T4 – Wider row
planting of ring bud settling with 180 × 60 cm spacing (SSI method) T1 – Normal
row planting of two budded setts with 90 cm × end to end spacing (conventional
method – farmers’ practice as control) recorded the lowest B : C ratio (2.01 and 2.44)
in both the crops.