CROP & ENVIRONMENT 2011, 2(1): 1-5 ISSN :2221-0237 (PRINT) ISSN :2221-0245 (ON LINE)

Optimizing the row spacing and seeding density to improve yield and quality of sugarcane
Ehsanullah1, Khawar Jabran1,2,*, Muhammad Jamil1 and Abdul Ghafar2
1 2

Department of Agronomy, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad-38040, Pakistan Agronomic Research Institute, Ayub Agricultural Research Institute, Faisalabad, Pakistan www.psa.net.pk

ARTICLE INFO
Article history: Received 02 Sep., 2010 Accepted 03 Nov., 2010 Key words: Sugarcane Row spacing Seeding density Yield Quality * Corresponding author: Tel.: 0333-8207927 khawarjabran@gmail.com

ABSTRACT
Row spacing and seeding densities have a key role in maximizing sugarcane yield and improving its quality. A field experiment was conducted to investigate the performance of sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) planted at different row spacings and seeding densities. The experiment was comprised of three row spacings (60 cm spaced single row, 90 cm spaced double row strips and 120 cm spaced triple row strips) and three seeding densities (60000, 75000 and 90000 double budded setts ha-1). The maximum number of millable canes m-2 (7.65) was produced with 75000 double budded setts ha-1 while the minimum number of millable canes m-2 (7.09) was recorded at seeding density of 60000 setts ha-1. Ninety cm double row strips achieved the maximum cane length (232 cm) and was at par with 120 cm triple row strips (228 cm), whereas the minimum cane length (224 cm) was observed at row spacing of 60 cm single row. The maximum cane yield (92.27 t ha-1) was achieved in row spacing of 90 cm spaced double row strips that was statistically at par with 60 cm single row. Regarding seeding density, 75000 double budded setts ha-1 produced the maximum cane yield (92.54 t ha-1) that was at par with 90000 double budded setts ha-1 (89.85 t ha-1), while the minimum cane yield (83.68 t ha-1) was recorded at seeding density of 60000 double budded setts ha-1. Row spacing and seeding density had no effect on sucrose contents of the cane juice and commercial cane sugar percentage. The maximum net return of Rs. 67046 ha-1 and highest benefit cost ratio of 1.63 were obtained by planting sugarcane in 90 cm double row strips with a seed rate of 75000 double budded setts ha-1.
2011 PSA. All rights reserved

INTRODUCTION
Sugar industry of Pakistan is dependent on the sugarcane production which is cultivated on an area of 1.1 million hectares with total production of 54.7 million ton giving average yield of 54.8 t ha-1. The contribution of sugarcane in GDP and value added in agriculture is 0.8% and 3.6%, respectively. The average cane yield per hectare in our country is lower as compared to other sugarcane growing countries of the world (GOP, 2009-10). Improper row spacing and seeding density are the most critical factors reducing sugarcane yield in the country (Bashir et al., 2000; Mahmood et al., 2007). Both sub-optimal seeding density and improper row spacing result in low plant population density and hence less number of millable canes per unit area which is the key component of cane yields (Bashir et al., 2000; Mahmood et al., 2005). Seeding density directly affects the number of stalks, stalk length and stalk diameter which are positively associated with cane yield per unit area (Nazir et al., 1999). There is a positive relationship between seeding density and plant population of sugarcane (Bashir et al.,

2000). The optimum crop stand is important to obtain high yield of sugarcane. Previous studies indicate that cane yield increases with increasing seeding densities to optimum levels (Bell and Garside, 2005). Above information suggests that maintenance of optimum plant population density can substantially increase cane yield per hectare, nevertheless the information on optimum plant population is lacking in the literature. The life duration of sugarcane crop encompasses approximately one year and has high tillering capacity but custom is to grow it on 60 cm spaced single rows (Yadav and Prasad, 1997). Although the closer spacing results in high plant population but obstructs the cultural operations. Contradictory results have been reported regarding the impacts of row spacings on the sugarcane yield (Yadav and Prasad, 1997; Garside et al., 2002; Manimaran et al., 2009). So the outcomes of sugarcane crop grown at various row spacings need to be investigated. There is a contradiction regarding the effect of row spacings and seeding densities on the quality parameters such as Brix, sucrose contents, juice extraction and commercial cane sugar etc. of sugarcane (Sharar et al., 2000; Asokan et al., 2005; El-Geddawy et

Please cite this article as: Ehsanullah, K. Jabran, M. Jamil and A. Ghafar. 2011. Optimizing the row spacing and seeding density to improve yield and quality of sugarcane. Crop Environ., 2: 1-5

Row spacing and seeding density in sugarcane / Crop & Environment 2011, 2(1): 1-5

al., 2005; Pawar et al., 2005). Nevertheless, most of the studies depict that sugarcane quality was not affected by row spacings and seeding densities (Asokan et al., 2005; El-Geddawy et al., 2005). In contrast, Pawar et al. (2005) reported that wider row spacings improved the sucrose contents and commercial cane sugar percentage. Similarly according to Sharar et al. (2000), higher seeding density (100000 setts ha-1) had improved sucrose contents and commercial cane sugar compared with the seeding density of 75000 setts ha-1. Patel et al. (2005) reported that higher seeding densities increased the commercial cane sugar. The present study was, therefore, planned with the objectives to evaluate the comparative effects of row spacings and seeding densities on the yield and quality of sugarcane.

weighed together and then average weight per cane was calculated. Tops weight from each plot was calculated in kg and then converted into tons ha-1. Trash weight from each plot was calculated in kg and then converted into t ha-1. Stripped cane yield from each plot was recorded in kg and then converted into t ha-1. Sucrose percentage was determined by Horns dry lead acetate method of sugar analysis. The canes were crushed in power cane crusher for juice extraction and Brix reading was recorded by Brix hydrometer standardized at 20 C and commercial cane sugar percent (C.C.S. %) was calculated by using formula: C.C.S. % = 3P/2[1- (F+5)/100] [B/2(1--F+3)/100] Where, P = Pole percent (sucrose %), F = fibre %, B = corrected brix % Harvest index was calculated as the ratio of economic yield to biological yield and expressed in percentage. Statistical analysis and economic analysis: The collected data were analyzed statistically using Fishers analysis of variance technique and treatment means were compared using least significant difference (LSD) at 5 % probability level (Steel et al., 1997). Economic analysis was done according to the procedure of CIMMYT (1988).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Site and soil: The proposed study was conducted at Postgraduate Agricultural Research Station (PARS), University of Agriculture, Faisalabad on sandy clay loam soil during kharif 2007-2008 Two composite samples of soil were taken randomly from each plot of experimental area, up to the depth of 30 cm before the application of fertilizer. The soil samples were analyzed and NPK were found 0.74%, 14.95 ppm and 174 ppm, respectively. Experimental design and experimental material: The experiment was laid out in split plot design using four replications, randomizing the row spacing in main plots and seeding densities in sub plots using sugarcane variety HSF-240 as test species. The net plot size was 7.20 m x 3.60 m. The crop was planted on March 30, 2007. Treatments: The row spacings included 60 cm spaced single row (S1), 90 cm spaced double row strips (S2) and 120 cm spaced triple row strips (S3), while seedling densities comprised of 60,000 double budded setts ha-1 (D1), 75,000 double budded setts ha-1 (D2) and 90,000 double budded setts ha-1 (D3). Crop husbandry: The crop was fertilized at the rate of 150-100-100 kg NPK ha-1 in the form of urea, diammonium phosphate and sulphate of potash, respectively. The whole phosphorous, potash and one third of nitrogen were applied at the time of sowing while the other two halves of nitrogen were added after the first and second month of sowing respectively. The crop was harvested manually on 20th February, 2008. Data recording: Emergence percentage was calculated as the ratio of germinating buds to total buds expressed in percentage. Number of millable and non millable canes m-2 was counted from each plot. Ten canes were selected at random from each plot to record cane length using meter rod and cane diameter using vernier caliper from bottom, mid and top portions of the individual canes and then averaged. All the ten canes were 2

RESULTS AND DISSCUSSION

Interactive effects of row spacing and seeding density on various yield and quality parameters of sugarcane were non-significant; thus only the main effects have been presented (Table 1, 2). Row spacing and seeding density had no effect on emergence percentage. Seeding density significantly affected the number of millable canes. The maximum number of millable canes m-2 (7.65 and 7.55) was recorded in 75000 setts ha-1 and 90000 setts ha-1, respectively and the minimum number of millable canes (7.09) was recorded at seeding density of 60000 setts ha-1. Cane length was significantly affected by row spacing while seeding density had no effect. The maximum cane length (2.32 and 2.28 m) was recorded in 90 cm spaced double row strips and 120 cm spaced triple row strips, respectively while the minimum cane length (2.24 m) was recorded in 60 cm spaced single rows (Table 1). Row spacing and seeding density significantly affected the cane diameter. The maximum cane diameter (2.26 and 2.27 cm) was recorded from 60 cm spaced single row and 90 cm spaced double row strips, respectively while the minimum cane diameter was recorded from 120 cm spaced triple row strips (Table 1). Maximum cane diameter was recorded in crop planted at seeding density of 60000 and 75000 setts ha-1 while the minimum was recorded at seeding

Ehsanullah et al. / Crop & Environment 2011, 2(1): 1-5

Table 1. Effect of row spacing and seeding density on emergence percentage, number of millable canes, number of non millable canes, cane length, cane diameter, weight per cane and number of internodes per cane of sugarcane
Treatments Emergence (%) Number of millable canes (m-2) 7.42NS 7.64 7.24 7.09 b 7.65 a 7.55 a 0.04077 Number of non millable canes (m-2) 1.54 NS 1.50 1.54 1.48 NS 1.52 1.58 Cane length (cm) 224 b 232 a 228 a 4.467 227 NS 230 227 Cane diameter (cm) 2.27 a 2.26 a 2.24 b 0.03159 2.27 a 2.26 a 2.24 b 0.02712 Weight per cane (kg) 1.17 b 1.20 a 1.18 a 0.0296 1.18 a 1.20 a 1.17 b 0.02512 Number of internodes per cane 18.31NS 18.15 17.88 17.93 b 18.47 a 17.95 b 0.4752

Row Spacings (S) S1 45.52NS S2 47.58 S3 48.26 LSD at P5 for S Seeding Densities (D) D1 47.48NS D2 47.68 D3 46.21 LSD at P5 for D

S1 = 60 cm spaced single row; S2 = 90 cm spaced 2-row strips; S3 = 120 cm spaced 3-row strips; D1 = Seeding density 60,000 double budded setts (DBS) ha-1; D2 = Seeding density 75,000 DBS ha-1; D3 = Seeding density 90,000 DBS ha-1. Two means not sharing a letter in common differ significantly at P<0.05. NS = Non-significant

density of 90000 setts ha-1 (Table 1).Row spacing and seeding density had a significant effect on cane weight (Table 1). The maximum cane weight (1.20 and 1.18 kg) was recorded from 90 cm spaced double row strips and 120 cm spaced triple row strips, respectively while the minimum cane weight was recorded at row spacing of 60 cm spaced single row (Table 1). The maximum cane weight (1.18 and 1.20 kg) was recorded in crop planted at seeding density of 60000 and 75000 setts ha-1 while the minimum cane weight was recorded at seeding density of 90000 setts ha-1 (Table 1). Row spacing had no effect on the number of internodes per cane while the 60000 setts ha-1 and 90000 setts ha-1 produced the similar number of internodes per cane but statistically lower than 75000 setts ha-1.

Tops weights and trash weight were significantly affected by row spacing while seeding density had no effect on them (Table 2). The maximum tops weight (12.69 t ha-1) was recorded from 120 cm spaced triple row strips while the crop planted at 60 cm spaced single row and 90 cm spaced double row produced statistically similar tops weight which was lower than 120 cm spaced triple row strips (Table 2). The maximum trash weight (8.35 t ha-1) was recorded from 120 cm spaced triple row which was statistically at par with 60 cm spaced single row while the minimum trash weight (7.92 t ha-1) was recorded from 90 cm spaced double row strips (Table 2). Row spacing and seeding densities significantly affected the stripped cane yield (Table 2). The maximum cane yield (92.27 t ha-1) was recorded

Table 2. Effect of row spacing and seeding density on top weight, trash weight, stripped cane yield, harvest index, sucrose percentage, commercial cane sugar percentage and total sugar of sugarcane
Treatments Row Spacings (S) S1 S2 S3 LSD at P5 for RS Seeding Densities (D) D1 D2 D3 LSD at P5 for SD Tops weight (t ha-1) 11.51b 11.18b 12.69a 1.182 Trash weight (t ha-1) 8.13 ab 7.92 b 8.35 a 0.2234 Stripped cane yield (t ha-1) 87.4 ab 92.27 a 86.42 b 5.105 Harvest index (%) 81.53 b 82.84 a 80.58 c 0.6558 Sucrose (%) 18.4 NS 18.80 18.51 Commercial cane sugar (%) 14.1 NS 14.41 14.22 Total sugar (t ha-1) 12.33b 13.24a 12.29b 0.8453

11.77 NS 11.94 11.68

8.01 NS 8.17 8.21

83.68 b 92.54 a 89.85 a 5.22

80.91 b 82.12 a 81.91 a 0.8876

18.51 NS 18.57 18.67

14.16 NS 14.24 14.32

11.86 b 13.18 a 12.86 a 0.893

S1 = 60 cm spaced single row; S2 = 90 cm spaced 2-row strips; S3 = 120 cm spaced 3-row strips; D1 = Seeding density 60,000 double budded setts (DBS) ha-1; D2 = Seeding density 75,000 DBS ha-1; D3 = Seeding density 90,000 DBS ha-1. Two means not sharing a letter in common differ significantly at P<0.05. NS = Non-significant

Row spacing and seeding density in sugarcane / Crop & Environment 2011, 2(1): 1-5

Table 3. Economics analysis

Treatments S1D1 S1D2 S1D3 S2D1 S2D2 S2D3 S3D1 S3D2 S3D3 Sugarcane (t ha-1) 80.42 91.75 90.00 89.67 98.20 88.92 80.95 87.67 90.67 Value Rs. 141597.5* 161437.7 158351.2 157762.0 172701.2 156435.0 142517.2 154382 159623.5 Gross Income 141597.5 161437.8 158351.3 157762.0 172701.3 156435.0 142517.3 154382.0 159623.5 Variable cost 32094.5 38143.8 41250.0 34175.8 39595.0 41007.0 32213.8 37225.0 41400.8 Gross cost 98154.5 104203.8 107310.0 100235.8 105655.0 107067.0 98273.8 103285.0 107460.8 Net return Rs. ha-1 43443.0 57234.0 51041.3 57526.3 67046.3 49368.0 44243.5 51097.0 52162.8 Benefits cost ratio (BCR) 1.44 1.55 1.47 1.57 1.63 1.46 1.45 1.48 1.50

*Sugarcane = 1750 Rs. per ton S1D1 = 60 cm spaced single row + 60,000 setts ha-1 S1D3 = 60 cm spaced single row + 90,000 setts ha -1 S2D2 = 90 cm spaced double row + 75,000 setts ha-1 S3D1 = 120 cm spaced triple row + 60,000 setts ha-1 S3D3 = 120 cm spaced triple row + 90,000 setts ha-1

S1D2 = 60 cm spaced single row + 75,000 setts ha -1 S2D1 = 90 cm spaced double row + 60,000 setts ha-1 S2D3 = 90 cm spaced double row + 90,000 setts ha-1 S3D2 = 120 cm spaced triple row + 75,000 setts ha-1

from 90 cm spaced double row strips that was statistically at par with 60 cm single row (Table 2). Maximum cane yield (92.54 and 89.85 t ha-1) was recorded at seeding density of 75000 and 90000 setts ha-1, respectively while the minimum cane yield was recorded at seeding density of 60000 setts ha-1(Table 2). The effects of row spacing and seeding density on harvest index were significant (Table 2). The maximum harvest index percentage (82.84%) was recorded from 90 cm spaced double row strips while the minimum harvest index (80.58%) was obtained from 120 cm spaced triple row strips (Table 2). The maximum harvest index (82.12 and 81.91%) was recorded at seeding density of 75000 and 90000 setts ha-1, respectively while the minimum harvest index percentage (80.91) was recorded at seeding density of 60000 setts ha-1 (Table 2). Row spacing and seeding density did not affect the sucrose contents of the cane juice and commercial cane sugar but significantly affected the sugar yield (Table 2). The maximum sugar yield (13.24 t ha-1) was recorded from 90 cm spaced double row strips. The crop planted at 60 cm spaced single row and 120 cm spaced triple row strips produced statistically similar sugar yield but significantly lower than 90 cm double row strips (Table 2). Maximum sugar yield (13.18 and 12.86 t ha-1) was recorded at seeding density of 75000 and 90000 setts ha-1, respectively while the minimum sugar yield (11.86 t ha-1) was recorded at seeding density of 60000 setts ha-1 (Table 2). Sugarcane planted at 90 cm spaced double row strips using 75000 double budded sets ha-1 gave the maximum net return of Rs. 67046 ha-1 and maximum benefit cost ratio of 1.63 (Table 3). Minimum net returns and benefit cost ratio (Rs. 43443 ha-1 and 1.44 respectively) were noted where sugarcane was planted in 60 cm spaced single rows with a seed rate of 60000 double budded setts ha-1; almost equal to the treatment 120 cm spaced triple row strip with 60000 double 4

budded sets ha-1 resulting in net benefit of Rs. 44243 ha-1 and benefit cost ratio of 1.45 (Table 3). The number of millable canes is a vital yield contributing parameter. Maximum number of millable canes m-2 at higher seeding density might be due to greater number of total tillers formed at higher seeding densities (Bell and Garside, 2005). Number of millable canes per unit area is increased with the increase in seeding density (Garside et al., 2002). Sugarcane planted in double and triple rows with wider inter-row spaces produces relatively longer canes as compared to 60 cm single row spacing (Garside et al., 2002). The less cane diameter at higher density was due to more competition at higher plant population per unit area because the maximum thickness of cane is obtained in crop raised by using the lowest seeding density (Ahmad et al., 1995). The maximum cane weight at 90 cm spaced double row strips and 120 cm spaced triple row strips was due to longer canes compared with 60 cm spaced single rows. The results suggest an inverse relationship between seeding density and weight per cane. Less cane weight at higher seeding density was ascribed to less cane weight probably due to the enhanced interplant competition and greater number of stalks m-2 (Bell and Garside, 2005). More number of internodes per cane at seeding density of 75000 setts ha1 was probably because of more cane length. The difference in top weight between different row spacings may be due to variable number of millable canes per unit area. The sugarcane planted in the fashion of 90 cm spaced double row strips utilized the production resources more efficiently towards cane development than that planted in 120 cm spaced triple row strips because of relatively high plant population per unit area (Manimaran et al., 2009). The higher cane yield of 75000 and 90000 setts ha-1 was due to more number of millable canes per unit area (Bell and Garside, 2005).

Ehsanullah et al. / Crop & Environment 2011, 2(1): 1-5

CONCLUSION
Cane length, cane diameter, stripped cane yield, harvest index and total sugar were recorded maximum when sugarcane was grown in 90 cm spaced double row strips. The highest number of millable canes, cane diameter, weight per cane, number of internodes per cane, stripped cane yield, harvest index and total sugar yield were recorded at the seeding density of 75000 double budded sets per hectare. The maximum net return of Rs. 67046 ha-1 and highest benefit cost ratio 1.63 were obtained by planting sugarcane in 90 cm double row strips with a seed rate of 75000 double budded setts ha-1

REFERENCES
Ahmad, Z., S. Khan, S. Rehman and G. Ahmad. 1995. Effect of nitrogen levels and setts density on various agronomic characteristic of sugarcane. Pak. Sugar J., 9: 7-11. Asokan, S., A.N. Murthi and M. Mahadevaswamy. 2005. Effect of nitrogen levels and row spacing on yield, commercial cane sugar percentage and nitrogen uptake in different sugarcane varieties. Sugar Technol. 7: 44-47. Bashir, S., M. Saeed, A. Ghaffar, Z. Ali and R. M. Z. Khan. 2000. Analysis of economic aspects of raising autumn sugarcane at different planting patterns and seeding densities. Int. J. Agri. Biol., 2: 322-325. Bell, M.J. and A.L. Garside. 2005. Shoot and stalk dynamics and the yield of sugarcane crops in tropical and subtropical Queensland, Australia. Field Crops Res. 92: 231-248. CIMMYT, 1988. From Agronomic Data to Farmers Recommendations, p: 313. A Farmers Training Manual CIMMYT, Mexico El-Geddawy, I.H., Z.A Ahmed and A.M. Ahmed. 2005. Seeding rates and number of hoeing in relation to yield and quality of sugarcane variety G 85-37. Egypt. J. Agric. 83: 1225-1235. Garside, A.L., M.J. Bell, J.E. Berthelsen and N.V. Halpin. 2002. Effects of fumigation, density and row spacing on

the growth and yield of sugarcane in two diverse environments. Proc. Aust. Soc. Sugarcane Technol., 24: 135144. Government of Pakistan. 2010. Economic Survey of Pakistan, 2009-10. Economic Advisors Wing, Finance Division, Isalmabad Mahmood, A., M. Ishfaq, J. Iqbal and M. S. Nazir. 2007. Agronomic performance and juice quality of autumn planted sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) as affected by flat, ditch and pit planting under different spatial arrangements. Int. J. Agri. Biol., 9: 167-169. Mahmood, K.M., A. Rasheed, B.M.M. Rehman and M.S. Rehman. 2005. Effect of planting techniques on productivity enhancement of chewing canes. Pak. Sugar J., 20: 9-12. Manimaran, S., D. Kalyanasundaram, S. Ramesh and K. Sivakumar. 2009. Maximizing sugarcane yield through efficient planting methods and nutrient management practices. Sugar Technol., 11: 395-397. Nazir, M.S., A. Ghafoor, K. Mahmood, S. Nawaz and M. Aslam. 1999. Morpho-qualitative traits of autumn planted sugarcane as influenced by seedling density and nutrient management. Int. J. Agri. Biol., 4: 238-240. Patel, C.L., N.B. Patel, H.V. Pandva, S.C. Mali and M.N. Patel. 2005. Response of sugarcane genotypes to planting geometry and seed rates. Ind. Sugar, 55: 23-28. Pawar, M.W., D.B. More, V.T. Amodkar and S. Joshi. 2005. Effect of intersettling spacing on sugarcane yield and quality. Sugar Technol., 7: 87-89. Sharar, M.S., M. Ayub, M.A. Choudhry, M.M.Z. Amin and M.M. Khalid. 2000. Morpho-qualitative traits of sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) varieties as influenced by seeding density. Pak. J. Biol. Sci., 3: 1156-1157. Steel, R.G.D., J.H. Torrie, and D.A. Dickey.1997. Principles and Procedures of Statistics. A Biometrical Approach. 3rd Ed. McGraw Hill Book Co. Inc., New York, USA. 172-177. Yadav, R.L. and S.R. Prasad. 1997. Maximizing sugarcane yield by increasing plant population density, minimizing NO3-N leaching and improving soil organic matter in different crop rotations. J. Agron. Crop Sci., 178: 117-123