american society of sugar cane technologists - Forgotten Books

2001 JOINT EXECUTIVE COMMITTEEAMERICAN SOCIETY OF SUGAR CANE TECHNOLOGISTS

General Secretary-TreasurerDenverT. Loupe

Florida Division Office Lou isiana Division

David G. Hall PresidentJohn A. Panjul First Vice-PresidentJamesM. Shine Second Vice-PresidentJohn Dunckelman Chairman

,Agricultural Section

Michael Darnms Chairman,Manufacturing Section

Tere Johnson Chairman at LargeCarmen Baez-Smith Past President

Thomas Schueneman Secretary-Treasurer

EDITORSJournal American Society of Sugar Cane Technologists

Volume 22June

,2002

Managing EditorRon Destefano

Agricultural EditorNael El-Hout

Manufacturing Editor

Manolo Garcia

PROGRAM CHAIRMAN3 1 st Annual JointMeeting

American Society of Sugar Cane TechnologistsT. E. Reagan

Honorarymembership shall be conferred on any individual who has distinguished himselfor herself in the sugar industry, and has been elected by a majority vote of the Joint ExecutiveCommittee . Honorarymembership shall be exempt from dues and entitled to all the privileges ofactivemembership . EachDivisionmayhave up to 15 livingHonoraryMembers . In addition,

there

maybe up to 5 livingHonorarymembers assigned to the two Divisions jointly. (Article 1,Section

4 of the Constitution of the American Society of Sugar Cane Technologists) .

As ofMay 2001 , the following is the list of the living Honorarymembers of the AmericanSociety of Sugar Cane Technologists forFlorida and LouisianaD ivisions:

Florida Division Joint Division Louisiana Division

Guillermo Aleman Jack L. Dean

Henry J . Andreis Preston H. Dunckelman

Pedro Arellano Lloyd L. Lauden

Enrique Arias DenverT. LoupeAntonio Arvesu Harold A .Willett

John B . Boy

David G. Holder

ArthurKirsteinm WW W

Jimmy D .MillerJoseph Orsenigo

EdRice A 5’

(a

B las Rodrigues

George H.Wedgworth 0 0 7

2001 OUTSTANDING PRESENTATION AWARDS

GreggNuessly. Feeding Effects ofYellow Sugarcane Aphid on Sugarcane .

Victoria Singleton . A New PolarimetricMethod for the Analysis ofDextran and Sucrose .

Michael E .Selassi . Economically Optimal Crop Cycle forMajor Sugarcane Vari eties in

Louisiana.

Nell Swift . Heat TransferDevices .

Felix Gus B lanchardRichard Breaux

P .I . Pete"deGravellesGilbert Durbin

Minus GrangerSess D . HensleyJames E. Irvine

Dalton P . Landry

Lowell L.McCormick

Joe PolackCharles Savoie

TABLE OF CONTENTS

President'sMessage Florida Division

David G. Hall

President'sMessage Lo uisianaD ivisionWill E. Legendre

PEERREFEREED JOURNAL ARTICLES Agricultural Section

Effect of Silicon-Rich Slag and Lime on Phosphorus Leaching in Sandy SoilsV . V .Matichenkov , B . Ande, P . Ande

,D . V . Calvert, and E. A. Bochamikova

Silicon as a Beneficial Element'

for SugarcaneV . V .Matichenkov andD . V . Calvert

Maximizing Economic Returns from Sugarcane Production throughOptimal Harvest Scheduling

Michael E . Selassi,Lonni e P . Champagne, and Benjamin L. L eGendre

Cultivar and Crop Effects of Sugarcane Bull Shoots on Sugarcane

Yields in LouisianaKenneth A. Gravois, Benjamin L . L eGendre, andKeith P . B iscoff

Economically Optimal Crop Cycle Length forMajor SugarcaneVarieties in Louisiana

Michael E. Selassi and Janis Breaux

SeasonallyMaintained ShallowWaterTables Improve Sustainability ofHistosols P lanted to Sugarcane

Brandon C . Grigg, George H. Snyder,and Jimmy D .Miller

Sugarcane Genotype Repeatability in Replicated Selection Stages

and Commercial AdoptionBarry Glaz, JimmyMiller, Chri stopherDerren,

Manj it S . Kang,

PaulM. Lyrene, and Bikram S . Gill

PEERREFEREED JOURNAL ARTICLES Manufacturi ng Section

Comparing the Effects of SulphurDioxide onModel Sucroseand Cane Juice Systems

L. S . Andrews andM. A. Godshall

The Effects ofTwo Loui siana Soils on Cane Juice QualityMaryAn Godshall, Scott K . Spear, andRichardM. Johnson

iii

A New PolarimetricMethod for the Analysis ofDextran and SucroseVictoria Singleton, JenniferHorn, Chris Bucke, andMax Adlard

AGRICULTURAL ABSTRACTS

The Louisiana Basic Breeding Program-Past, Present, and Future

Thomas L. Tew

Assessment of Stalk Cold Tolerance ofLouisianaVari etiesDuring the 2000-2001 Crop Year

Benjamin L. L eGendre, Harold B irkett, and Jeanie Stein

Post-Freeze Performance of 16 Sugarcane Cultivars Following the

December 3 1 , 2000 Freeze Event in FloridaJ . M. Shine, R. A. Gilbert, and J . D .Miller

Sugarcane Tissue Phosphorus Concentration as Affected by P RatesApplied to a FloridaHistosol

Y . Luo andRosaM.Muchovej

Sugarcane Root and SoilMicrobial Responses to Intermittent FloodingD . R.Morris, B . Glaz, and S . Daroub

Effect ofNitrogen FertilizerRates on ProducerEconomic Returns of

Variety LCP 85-384 on aHeavy-Textured Soil in LouisianaW. B . Hallmark, G. J .Williams

, G. L. Hawkins, andM. E. Selassi

Production Trends of theMajor Cane Sugar Producing Countries in theWorldChen-Jian Hou

Potential Effect ofYellow Leaf Syndrome on the Louisiana Sugarcane IndustryM. P . Grisharn, Y . B . Pan

,W. H.Wh ite,M. A. Godshall,B . L. L eGendre, and J . C . Comstock

Feeding Effects ofYellow Sugarcane Aphid on SugarcaneGreggNuessly andMatthew Hentz

Relative Abundance andDiversity ofAphid Species Collected in TrapsAdjacent to Sugarcane Fields in Florida

R. N . Raid, G. S . Nuessly, andR. H. Cherry

Fifteen Years ofRecurrent Selection for Sugarcane BorerResistance

W. H. Wh ite, T. L. Tew, and J . D .Miller

Mexican Rice Borer on Sugarcane andRice :Significance to Louisiana and Texas Industries

M. 0 .Way, T. E. Reagan, andF.R. Posey

Economically Optimal Crop Cycle Length forMajor SugarcaneVarieties in Louisiana

Michael E. Selassi and Janis Breaux

OptimalMaturity ofCP sugarcane Clones forHarvest Scheduling in FloridaR. A. Gilbert, J .M. Shine,

’

and J . D .Miller

Protox InhibitorHerbicide Effects on Pythium andRootRot of SugarcaneJ . H. Daugrois, J .W. Hoy, and J . L. Gri n

Irrigation of Sugarcane on Clay in aHigh-Rainfall Environment

Howard P . Viator

Effect ofTissue CultureMethod on Sugarcane Yield ComponentsJ . W. Hoy, K . P . B ischoff, K . A. Gravois, and S . B .Milligan

GenesExpressed DuringRegeneration in Tissue Culture

Robin Rowe, C andace Timple, and Sarah Lingle

A Technique to Breed forRatoon Stunting D isease in SugarcaneJ . D .Miller, J . C . Comstock, P . Y. P . Tai , and B . Glaz

Progress in the Development ofTransgenic Disease-Resistant Sugarcane

Z. Ying andM. J . Davis

Potential Impact ofDNAMarkerTechnology on Sugarcane BreedingYong-Bao Pan

In Vivo Viability of Sugarcane Pollen Stored atUltra L ow TemperatureFollowing Preservation Treatments

P . Y . P . Tai and J . D .Miller

MANUFACTURING AB STRACTS

The Freeze of 200 1-A “New Book isWritten”

John A. Fanjul

The Breakage in SugarcaneMill RollsJorge Okhuysen

Material Balance and Equipment Requirements of a Typical SugarMillEduardo Sarnour andWilliam Easdale

Reducing Equipment Cost Best Equipmentmanagement PracticesNeal Hahn

What You Should Learn from Your Chemical SupplierStephen J . Clarke

The Effect ofTwo Louisiana Soils on Cane Juice QualityMaryAn Godshall, Scott S . Spear

,andRichardM. Johnson

Mill House Operation : Composition of Juice from IndividualMillsKhalid Iqbal,MaryAn Godshall, and Linda Andrews

A New PolarimetricMethod for the Analysis ofDextran and SucroseVictoria Singleton

Comparative Performance ofHot, Cold, and Intermediate Lime Clarification

at Cora Texas Factory

Gillian Eggleston,B laine E. Ogier

,andAdrianMonge

Advance Report on the Use ofLime Saccharate in the Alcalinizationof Sugarcane Juice

Miguel Lama, Jr. andRaul O. Rodriguez

The R'

e-Introduction ofFormal SugarEngineering Courses at LSUPeterW. Rein

SAT Process for Production ofWhi te Sugar from SugarMillsChung Chi Chou

The Biorefinery ConceptWillem H. Kampen andHenryNjapau

Evaporator Scale-Minimization with Electro-Coagulationand Improved Cleaning with Chelates

HenryNjapau andWillem H. Kampen

Evaporator Performance During Cr0p 2000-2001 at Cajun SugarFactory

WalterHauck

Mixed Juice ClarifierD istribution at Clewiston

Mike Damms and Carlos Bernhardt

Goats,Mice, andDextran ,The Road to aMonoclonal Antibody Test Kit

Don F. Day, D . Sarkar, and J. Rauh

Comparing the Effects of SulphurDioxide onModel Sucrose

and Cane Juice SystemsL . S . Andrews andM. A. Godshall

Advances in Technology ofBoilerWaterTreatment inLouisiana SugarcaneMills

BrentWeber, Brian Cochran,and Bri an Kitchen

Heat TransferDevices

Nell Swift

INMEMORIAM

Enrique R. Arias

S . J . P . Chilton

Jack Dean

vii

Editorial Policy

Rules for Preparing Papers to be Printed in the Journal of theAmerican Society of Sugar Cane Technologists

Guidelines for Preparing Papers for Journal ofASSCT

Constitution of the American Society of Sugar Cane Technologists

Author Index

To order an extra copy of this volume, or a previous journal ofAmerican Society of Sugar CaneTechnologists, write to :

General Secretary-TreasurerAmerican Society of Sugar Cane Technologists

P . 0 . Box 25 100

Baton Rouge, LA 70894—5 100

Copies shipped within the USA are (postage included)

Copies shipped outside the USA are (postage not included)Please add sh ipping costs as follows

Select method of delivery :surface mail (4 6 week delivery) : add per item

airmail (7 10 day delivery) : add $ 10 per item

viii

PRESIDENT'S MESSAGEFLORIDA DIVISION

David G. Hall, Ph .D.

Research DepartmentUnited States Sugar Corporation

PO . Drawer 1207Clewiston, FL 33440

On behalf of the Florida Division of the Ameri can Society of Sugar Cane Technologists,

I bring the Louisiana Division greetings and thanks for hostingthi s year’s annual j oint meeting.

To my Florida colleagues, I thank you for giving me the opportunity to serve as your presidentthis year. It has been a privilege and an honor.

Following our Society’s tradition, I offer the following summary of the harvest seasonjust completed in Florida. A total of acres of cane was grown in Florida this pastseason,

ofwhich acres were harvested for sugar. The first mill to begin gri nding started

on October 12 , 2000 , and the last mill to complete its crop finished on April 7,200 1 . The 2000

200 1 harvest season therefore spanned 177 days . On an individual mill basis,the shortest

gri nding season was 125 days and the longest was 172 days, with an average of 153 days acrossFlorida’s six mills . Two back-to-back hard freezes occurred during early January 200 1

,about

mid-way through our harvest season. These freezes forced growers and mills to quicklyprioritize the order in which to harvest the remaining fields .

The 2000-200 1 harvest season was our second largest over the last 20 years with respectto raw sugar produced (Figure According to records compiled by the Florida Sugar CaneLeague for the 2000-2001 harvest season,

Florida sugarcane growers and mills producedshort tons raw value basis sugar and gallons of final molasses fromgross tons of cane . The average sugar recovery per n et ton of cane was

pounds . The average cane yield for the harvest season was gross tons of cane per acre withan average yield of pounds of 96° sugar per acre . The January freezes reduced overallyield during the 2000-2001 harvest season and have hurt the yield potential of cane being grownfor the 2001-2002 harvest season .

As every AS SCT member knows, the price of raw sugar took a dive early during 2000,dropping to a record low of 16 cents per pound of raw sugar. Although prices have improvedsomewhat

,economists forecast that we may never again see raw sugar above 20 cents per pound .

A permanent,large drop in value may occur if the sugar policy in the Farm Bill is not revamped,

if the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) problems withMexico are not resolved,

and if the importation ofmolasses stuffed with sucrose from Canada continues .

Figure 1 . S ome harve st figures for the Florida sugar industry

(source : Florida S ugarCane League ).

2500

1 980-8 1 1 985-86 1 990-9 1 1 995 -96 2000-01

If sugarcane growers in the United States find themselves living with a permanentlydepressed sugar market, we will have to scramble to find ways to enhance productivity and

reduce production costs . In this event,a number of avenues could be explored for both the

milling and agricultural sides of our industry. These avenues include increased automation and

mechanization ; decision-making computermodels ; modified agronomic systems ; biotechnology;and enh anced biological systems . In the face of these challenges (and because I am an

entomologist) , I would like to share with you a few thoughts about pest control . An underlying

stimulus formy comments was the following question : If sugar prices drop , how can we reducelosses to pests and simultaneously reduce our expenditures on pest control without sacrificingproductivity"

Pest problems in our sugarcane fields fluctuate from year-to-year and from decade-todecade . This is true with respect to the specific pest species, the intensity of their damage, and

the regional spread of their infestations . Each of us knows the particular complex of pest specieswe need to be concerned about . Just because 1999 or 2000 was a light year with respect toinfestations and damage by these pests does notmean they have gone away.

Wireworrns are currently the most important insect pests of sugarcane in Florida.

Fortunately, chemical control tactics for wireworrns are effective . Two granularorganophosphates are labeled for wireworm control : ethoprop (Mocap) and phorate (Thimet) .Unfortunately, due to factors such as the Food Quality Protection Act passed by Congress andsupported by our industry, the sugarcane labels for these two pesticides could soon be inj eopardy, perhaps as early as this year . Our industry therefore needs to be searching foralternatives . I call upon our universities, the United States Department of Agriculture and our

friends in the chemical industry to assist us with this .

Florida sugarcane growers usually apply a pesticide for wireworm control once everythree to five years when they plant a field unless they are planting after ri ce . The extent to whichthese insecticide applications are needed remains unclear. Growers would like to reduce theirdependency and expenditures on insecticides forwireworm control in Florida, but they need helpfrom scientists to do this .

The lesser comstalk borer continues annually to be a common pest in some Floridasugarcane fields . Management guidelines and emergency control tactics are currently not

available for this pest in sugarcane . We could use help from our universities,the USDA and the

chemical industry in coming up with an effective, affordable management program for the lessercomstalk borer.

The sugarcane borer is recognized as being a more important economic pest in Louisianathan in Florida. However, growers need to remember that the borer does cause economic lossesin Florida sugarcane . Granted, the borer causes larger economic losses during some years thanothers, and outbreaks are more likely to occur in some areas than others . Some Florida growerslose money to the sugarcane borer, but they don

’t know it because they don’t scout . Wh ileemergency control tactics are available for the borer

,the cost of these in conjunction with the

cost of a tradi tional scouting program may not be profitable during some years except inlocalized areas .

‘

Monitoring methods less expensive than traditional scouting might help withthi s problem.

This is the new millenn ium ,the age of new and constantly changing technologies

,

computers and computer modeling. Researchers working in sugarcane pest control should takegreater advantage of these technologies . It is possible that growers and scouting companiescould reduce pest management costs and achieve satisfactory levels of pest control usingtechnologies such as remote sensing and computer modeling to predict pest outbreaks inconjunction with either traditional scouting methods or new , nontraditional monitoring methods .

We have a good handle on control thresholds for two insects,the sugarcane borer and the

sugarcane wireworm. We could use similar information for other insects pests such as the lessercomstalk borer. Regardless of the particular insect pest, control thresholds need to be based notonly on the value of pest damage but also on the costs of control and scouting . As the sugar

price decreases, the economic thresholds for pests increase .

“ At or below some market value ofsugar, pests may no longer cause economic losses large enough to justify expenditures onfrequent scouting and emergency control, particularly if the cost of scouting and control increase.This would elevate the need for less expensive approaches to detecting and managing losses topests . The development and implementation of low-cost

,low-input management strategies such

as pest-resistant clones and biological control could become critical .

Providing growers with sugarcane clones resistant to pests has been and will continue tobe one of our most important strategies for pest control . This tactic could become essential forinsect control if the market value of sugar drops . Louisiana has capitalized on plant resistance tothe sugarcane borer

,at least in the past . Economic damage by other pests -including the yellow

sugarcane aphid and the lesser comstalk borer -might be significantly reduced by growingvarieties with even modest levels of pest resistance . Compromises may be necessary betweenyield and pest resistance . Conventional plant breeding programs need to be continued withincreased emphasis on pest control . Although we do not know if orwhen we might be willing tomarket sugar from a genetically modified sugarcane, I believe we need to be developingtransgenic clones with pest resistance and be prepared to implement them commercially.

Finally,the importance continues in intercepting sugarcane pests new to the United

States . Four pests new to Florida sugarcane have been found over the past 25 years: thesugarcane aphid Melanap h is sacchari ; the sugarcane delphacid P erkins iella saccharic ida ,

thesugarcane lacebug L ep todictya tabida ,

and the weevil Metamas ius hemip teras . I commendFederal and State agencies for their daily efforts to catch exotic pests being imported intoFlorida

,though increased resources are needed for these agencies to accomplish the job . This

critical function is becoming harder and harder as foreign travel increases and more airports andmarine ports accept foreign travel . Quarantining foreign plant material imported for scientificreasons remains critical . Ornamental and horticultural plants being brought into the UnitedStates must be screened for sugarcane pests . We need to support continued funding of

quarantine facilities such as the APHIS Federal quarantine center in Beltsville and ensure theyuse the most modern methods available to protect our industry. With respect to sugarcane pests

already present in some areas of the United States, let’s guard against spreading them to other

areas .

In summary, certain sugarcane pests continue to reduce the profitability of growingsugarcane in Florida and will continue doing so if management tactics are not fully developed

and used. Non-chemical control methods are needed for sugarcane wireworms,in Florida but,

until these are available,we need to ensure chemical control methods remain available . If the

market value of sugar decreases, expenditures on pest control will need to be reduced withoutdecreasing productivity in order to maintain profits . This can only be accomplished through the

development of new low cost, low input management tactics . The members of this society havethe expertise to address these issues . In the meantime, let

’s hope no new insect pests of

sugarcane find theirway into the continental United States .

I thank you for your attention and hope that this 3 l stAnnualMeeting of the Am erican Society of

Sugar Cane Technologists is one of ourmost fi'

uitful .

PRESIDENT’S MESSAGELOUISIANA DIVIS ION

Will E. L eGendre

Jeanerette Sugar Co . , Inc .

PO . Box 648

Jeanerette, LA 70544

On behalfof themembers of the LouisianaDivision of the American Society of SugarCane

Technologi sts, I would like to express my most sincere welcome to the Florida division of theSociety to the Thirty-First Annual JointMeeting at New Orleans, Louisiana. I would also like towelcome all of the fri ends and family members of the Society and give thanks for their enduringsupport to what I consider the sweetest industry in the world. Iwill saywith the highest degree ofconfidence that this year

’3meetingwill engageprolific ideas and technology exchange to continually

advance the US Mainland sugarcane industry .

In reading the production report for the year 2000 in Louisiana, an anticipated record yearturned into only a good year even though the Louisiana industry produced the second largest crop

in the state’s h istory. Eighteen factories producing tons of sugar, raw value, ground a total

of tons of cane . This is about tons of sugar less than 1999 record productionwith sugarrecovery also dropping from in 1999 to in 2000 . Approximately

acres of cane, a new state record, were harvested yielding a cane production of tons per acre,down from 37 tons per acre the previous year.

The decline in production from the previous year can be summed up into one word,DROUGHT. The wintermonths of 1999 and 2000 were relatively dry andmild. This was idealweather for the harvest season for 1999 . L ay

-by at the beginning of 2000 went“ very smoothly due

to the dry conditions . With a record amount _of acreage in cane and amild winter behind them

,the

Louisiana sugarcane farmer was anx iously awaiting a record-shattering crop . The only twoingredients neededwere rain and sunshine. The scorching sunshine did itsjob enthusiastically,whi le

the timely rains took a long summer vacation . Drought conditions had carried over from 1999 and

put a choke hold on South Louisiana in 2000. For some areas , 30-inch deficits were noted bySeptember. The cane was stressed and below the average height nearing the end of the growingseason. The new prediction for the 2000 harvest was asmuch as 20% below the earlier estimates .

Finally, the rains did come but in September,whichbrought about an abnormally late growthperiod .

Tonnage looked as though it would recover but sucrose content was sacrificed because of the lategrowth spurt. Natural ripening was delayed and the response to the chemical ripener, glyphosate

(Polado) was reduced especially during the early weeks of the harvest . Sucrose content made avaliant, come from behind charge to present a respectable yield of by the end of the crop ;however, sucrose levels took a nose dive following a killing freeze on December 20 . There weresmall areas in the state that received some timely rainfall and benefitted from early applications ofPolado, whi ch in turn increased sucrose yield from the start of the crop and continued through theend.

What’s in the crystal ball for the Louisiana sugar industry"Wemust address the issues thatare ofmajor importance in the United States and in the world today. Look up the spot price on sugar

today and it is virtually unchanged from twenty years ago . Who among us would not love to go outand buy a new F- 150 for ten thousand dollars or experience unchanged grocery prices over the lasttwo decades . Reflect back a mere five years ago and track the retail prices of food that containsubstantial amounts of sugar. Breakfast cereal prices are up candies

,cakes and cookies up

and ice cream up Sadly, we are all well aware of the stagnant price of sugar during the sametime period. The foodmanufacturers have the audacity to cryto the legi slature that the pri ce of sugaris hampering their profits . There are a number of factors that deter us from true economic supplyand demand. The current U S . trade agreements that allow importation ofup to mi llion tons ofsugar from forty-one countries can easily exceed the demand, thus suppress prices . In addition,

theUnited States quota system never envisioned sugar being smuggled into the country by way of“

stuffed molasses”or other desugarization products. It will be a tough battle,but it appears our

fri ends inWashington can potentially resolve these and other issues to bring a stable and fairmarketvalue to the sugar we produce, especially ifwe resolve to add our voices to their efforts .

What can be done here at home"Over the past ten years, our number one priority asproducers was to increase volume . Put as much cane through ourmi lls as possible and try to keeplosses in sucrose to an acceptable Louisiana level . Various alterations were utilized to achieve

record volumes, for instance, starting the harvest season earlier and fini shing later, and acquiring

largerprocessmachinery. We were aware that these early starts could result in immature cane,low

sugar content, and problems in the factory with starches and other impurities . But, with properapplications of chemical ripeners, we were able to bring this window forward to a degree. Inaddition

,hardiervarieties developed by the LouisianaAgri culturalExperiment Station,

USDA-ARS

and the American Sugar Cane League, working cooperatively, were less vulnerable to marginalfreezes over a short period of time, providing some peace of mind on the backside of harvest .During the 2000 harvest season,Mother Nature brought an early freeze in November that causedmoderate damage to the northern parishes of the state, but surprisingly, sparedmost of the cane inthe south. However, on December 20 the entire sugarcane belt experienced a killing freeze thatultimately

,with subsequent freezes the first week of January, caused a dramatic reduction in

recoverable sugarby the end of the harvest . It appears that we arewilling to accept this inherent riskin an attempt to achi eve higher volumes . Processing records tons of cane per day in an attempt to

achi eve over one million tones per season became the goal ofmanymills .

In today’smarket,wemust not lose sight of the potential degree of greater sugar loss when

production is increased . Keeping our focus on efficiencies aswell as higher volume is imperative.

In 2000we saw sugar prices plummet to a 30 year low while watching natural gas prices skyrocket.

How can an industry thri ve with its product price so low and fuel costs exorbitantly high"Fortunately, as we reach mid-2001 , sugar prices have rebounded some and natural gas prices havedropped slightly. Nonetheless, ourpriority remains yielding themost sugarwith a low operating cost

andminimal losses . Research is an invaluable tool that can heighten our abilities and thus keep us

competitive in the domesticmarket as well as globally. Scientists with the LouisianaAgri culturalExperiment Station,

USDA-ARAand theAmerican Sugarcane League,working cooperatively, havein recent years developed outstanding, high-yielding varieties such as LC 85-384 andHoCP 85-845 ,which now occupy over 85 percent ofourplanted acreage . These new vari eties, especially LCP 85

384, led to the industry switching from whole-stalk to combine harvesting; this revolutionized ourharvestingmethods andminimized field losses while increasing sugar per acre . Ongoing research

in processing is needed nowmore than ever to develop new technology and improve old technology.

6

Reducing labor requirements by implementing automation in various processes has been andwillcontinue to be a positive result of ongoing research.

The Louisiana sugar industry with its uniquely short gri nding season can ill afford toexperimentwithpioneering, unproven, process equipment . Theoretically, this new equipment couldimprove efficiencies, but losses could be significant if the equipment fails and processing stops .There are high expectations for the resurgence ofAudubon Sugar Institute to provide new product

research andpractical solutions . With our assistance and cooperation,Audubon is positioning itselfonce again to be the premier sugar institute in the world . Through its highly qualified staff, training

and educating factory personnel is an integral part ofASI’s commitment to the sugar industry and

its future success .

The time has come for theUnited States sugar industry to acknowledge that we can no longer

survive on arazorthinprofitmargin. Increasingbureaucratic regulation, increased operational costs,decreasing qualified personnel, shouldmotivate us as an industry to define and implement a course

of action to move forward and create successes . Education, communication, cooperation,and

motivation are key elements forany successful businesses facing filture challenges . Throughout the

history of the sugar industry challenges and obstacles have plagued us in one form oranotherbut we

have always persevered, overcome, andultimately thrived. The resolution ofproblematic obstaclesis relative to its place in history. No era exists in this industry thatwaswithout its tribulations . Thetechnology and resources of these eras have historically resolved the problems of a particular time

andmore significantly forged the industry ahead to a higher level .

Meetings such as this,where all facets ofthe industry come togetherand share ideas, studies ,experiences, and technology is an integral part of the future success ofour beloved industry. Sugar

has been in the Legendre family for four generations ; therefore, one could surmise that it is in myblood to have chosen such a profession . That may have some validity, although a deeper bondcomes from the character of its associates . The willingness to help out .a colleague with technicalinformation

,lend equipment and assistance to get neighboring factories back on line

,is a unique

quality found in no other industry. This fraternal relationship generates apassionwithin our industrythat can only result in future prosperity for generations come .

PEER

REFEREED

JOURNAL

AGRICULTURAL

SECTION

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

Matichenkov et al. : Effect of Silica-rich Slag and Lime on P Leaching in Sandy Soils

the application of various Si-richmaterials reduced P leaching by 30 to 90% (Matichenkov et al .,2000)

The objective of thi s studywas to compare the effect of Si slag (a finely processed calciummagnesium silica slag, PRO-CHEM Chemical Company, FL ) with lime on P leaching from soilsclassified as cultivated Spodosols, Entisols, andAlfisols in column and greenhouse experiments .

MATERIALS ANDMETHODS

Soil samples representing two soil orders were collected at theUniversity ofFlorida, IndianRiverResearch andEducation Center in Fort Pierce, FL . Soil samples were selected at the depth of0-20 cm from a cultivated Alfisol (Winder series, fine-loamy, siliceous, hypertherrnic Typic

Grossaqualfs) and a cultivated Spodosol (Ankona series, sandy, siliceous, hyperthenn ic , orsteinArenicHaplaquods) . Sampling sites for theAlfisol and the Spodosol were under citrus groves . Soilsamples representing a third soil order a cultivated Entisol (Margate series, sandy, siliceous,hyperthermicMollie Psammaquents) were collected

"

in Hendry county in a commercial sugarcanefield at the depth of 0-20 cm.

The study involved both column and greenhouse experiments . The column experimentwasused tomodel P leaching using Si slag and lime at 10 tha

’ 1mixedwith the different soils . The plastic

column had a volume of 60 cm3and a diameter of cm. Distilled water or a P-bearing solution

(prepared from dissolving KH2P0 4, 10 mg P L") was added to the colrunn at 6-8 mL h

’ 1 using aperistaltic pump . The percolate was collected in 20mL intervals . Collected solutions were placed

in a refii gerator at 4°

C after adding a drop of chloroform forreduction ofmicrobial activity. A totalof 300 mL of solution was applied to each column . Each column was replicated three times andtriplicate analysesweremade on each liquid sample. After the leaching experimentwas completed,the soils were dried at 65°C andpassed through a 1-mm sieve . Tri plicate soil and sand sampleswereanalyzed forwater-extractable and acid — extractable MHCl) P . Phosphorus concentrationwasdetermined according to the method ofWalsh and Beaton (197

The greenhouse experiment was conducted with a cultivated Entisol. The soil was mixed

with Si-rich slag or lime at the rates of0 and 10 t ha". The P fertilizer (ground superphosphate)wasapplied at the rates of 0, 50 and 100 kg P ha

". One kg of treated soil was then placed into plastic

pots . Bahiagrass was used as a test plant (120 seeds per pot) . Each variant had 2 replications .

Irrigation was conducted with distilled water. After seeding and once aweek thereafter, percolatesamples were collected from the bottom ofeachpot and analyzed. The percolates andwaterandacidextracts of the soil were analyzed colorimetrically forP using a spectrophotometer at awave length

of 880 um (Eaton, et. al .,

All data were subjected to a statistical analysis based on comparative methods using the

P<O.OS value obtained from amultiple comparison test ofvariance andDuncan’s coe"cients (Parl,

1967)

RESULTS AND DIS CUSSION

Irrigation with distilled water in the column experiment was intended to represent thepercolation ofheavy rainfall (ISO-mm cm

’z

) . In the Entisol, the concentration ofP in the percolate

10

Journal American Society of Sugarcane Technonogists, Vol. 22, 2002

gradually decreased from to mg P L"in the control, from to mg P L

"in the lime

treated soil, and from to mg P L"in the Si-slag—treated soil (Figure Irri gation with the P

bearing solution represented both heavy rainfall and P fertilization. The Entisol soil was graduallysaturated with P (Figure The concentration ofP in the percolate solution increased from to

mg P L"in the control, from to mg P L

"in the lime-treated soil and fiom to mg

P L"in the Si—slag-treated soil (Figure

In the Spodosol treated with Si slag or lime, the P concentration in the percolate was

relatively stable under irrigation with distilled water (Figure while that for the control sharplyincreased and then decreased. In the Spodosol irrigated with the P-bearing solution,

the P in thepercolate sharp ly increased both in the control and in the lime-treated soil,while the soil treatedwith

Si slag showed only a small amount ofP leaching (Figure

Phosphorus concentration in the percolate from the Alfisol under distilled water irri gationsharply increased from to mg P L

"in the control and from to mg P L

"in the lime

treated soil, but stayed relatively stable (from to mg P L") in the Si- slag-treated soil (Figure

Under ini gation with the P-bearing solution, P in the percolate gradually increased from to

mg P L"in the control and from to mg P L

"in the lime-treated soil

,but remained stable

(from to mg P L") for the Si- slag—treated soil (Figure

The column experiment demonstrated that Si slag adsorbedmobileP considerablybetterthanlime and had appreciably less P leaching than the lime treatment in all soils investigated (Figures 1

This effect may have been caused by the action of several mechanisms . For example,Si slag

contains Si, Al and Fe compounds and it is possible that both chemical and physical P adsorptionmechanisms by Si slag were involved.

Application of lime or Si slag alongwith P fertilizer(Figure 7, 8 and9) influenced P leachingfrom theEntisol soil in the greenhouse experiment . Lime by itself slightly increased P leaching fromtheEntisolwithout P fertilization (Figure Lime had its greatest effect in reducingP leaching fromthe Entisol treated with 50 kg P ha"(Figure However, Si slag showed a greater reduction in Pleaching than lime at all treatment levels ofP fertilization (Figure 7, 8 and These data support the

results of the column experiment (Figures 1-6) in that Si slag adsorbs considerably greaterconcentrations ofmobile P than limestone.

Addition ofeitherP or Si slag to the soil increased themass of shoots androots ofBah iagrass

(Table whereas the lime treatment either had a negative or neutral effect on grass growth. A

reduction of P concentration was shown in plants receiving the Si slag treatment (Table For

example, P concentration in Bahiagrass shoots decreased from 404 to 309 mg P l oog",from 422 to

239 mg P l oog",and from 48 1 to 339 mg P l oog

"in the treatments with 0

,50 and 100 kg P ha"

,

respectively. Considering the significant effects of Si slag on the Bahiagrass mass (Table thedecreased plant P concentrationmayhave been a dilution effect . The content ofP in the shoots andthe roots after3months of growth were examined to see if Si slag had increased P availability to theplants . Data on total P content per 100 plants confirmed this hypothesis (Table The Si slagtreatment increased the total amount of P in the shoots (except at 50 kg P ha

") and roots of

Bahiagrass. Conversely, lime had the opposite effect on the shoots, but not roots ofBah iagrass .

l l

Matichenkov et al.zEffect of Silica-ri ch Slag and Lime on P Leaching in Sandy Soils

The concentration of P in Bahiagrass was higherwith the control and lime treatments thanwith the Si slag treatment

'

(Tab1e However, the content of P in both the shoots and roots wasgreaterwith the Si slag treatment than with the control or the lime treatment (Table These datacan be explained by considering themagni tude of increase in thebiomass ofBahiagrass (Table

When compared with the control and lime treatments, Si slag application essentially doubled thebiomass of shoots and increased the biomass of roots approximately 7 times . Although Si slagapplication resulted in a P dilution effect in the shoots and roots

,the Bahiagrass absorbed more P

with the Si slag treatment than with the control or the lime treatrnent.

Data onwater-extractable and acid-extractable P in the soil after the greenhouse experimentshowed that the application of Si slag allowed P to remain in a plant-available form (TableLiming resulted in a reduction in P leaching (Figure 8 and but mobile P apparently wastransformed into plant-unavailableP . Si slag also reducedmobileP leaching

,probablybyadsorption

on the surface, but keptP in aplant-available form . Therefore, there appears to be a strongpossibilitythat the application ofSi slag to sandy soils could preserve natural waters from P contamination andimprove P plant nutrition more efficiently than lime applications .

ACNOWL EDGEMENTS

This researchwas supported by a grant from the South FloridaWaterManagement Distri ct

andRECMIX PA Co .

REFERENCES

Campbell, K .L .,J .S . Rogers, and DR . Hensel. 1985 . Drainage water quality from potato

production . Trans . ASAE ,28 : 1798-1801 .

Eaton,A.D .,

L .S . Clesceri , and AB. Greenberg (Ed) . 1995 . Standard Methods for

Examination ofWater andWastewater, Am . Publ . Health As .

Harri s,W.G.,

R.D .Rhue,G.Kidder,R.B . Brown , andR. Littell . 1996 . Phosphorus retention

as related tomorphology of sandy coastal plain soilmaterials . Soil Sci . Soc .Am . J . 60 : 15 13

152 1

Lindsay,W.L . 1979 . Chemical Equilibria in Soil . JohnWiley Sons, New York.

Mansell, R.S .,S .A. B loom

,andB . Burgoa. 199 1 . Phosphorus transport with water flow in

an acid, sandy soil . In Jacob B ., andM.Y. Corapcioglu (Ed) . Transport process in porous

media. KulwerAcad. Publ ., Dorchester, the Netherlands, p .27l -3 14.

Mansell, R. S .,S . A. B loom,

andB . Burqua. 199 1 . Phosphorus transport with waterflow in

an acid sandy soil . In Jacob , B . andM. Y. Corapcioglu Transport process in porous

media. KulwerAcad. Publ . , Dorchester, the Netherlands, pp . 271-3 14 .

Matichenkov , V .V .,V .M. Dyakov, and EA. Bocham ikova. 1997. The complex silicon

phosphate fertilizer. Russian patent, registration No .9712 1543 .

12

Journal American Society of Sugarcane Technonogists, Vol. 22 , 2002

Matichenkov , V.V., D .V. Calvert, G.H. Snyder, B . Whalen,and Y . Wan . 2000 . Nutrients

leaching reduction by Si-rich substances in themodel experiments . In Proc . 7thInter. Conf.

Wetland systems forwaterpollution control, Lake BuenaVista, Florida, Nov. 1 1- 16,2000,

583-592 .

Parl, B . 1967. Basic Statistics . Doubleday Co ., Inc ., Garden City, N Y. p . 364.

Richardson, C .J., and P . Vaithiyanathan . 1995 . Phosphorus sorption characteristics ofEverglades soils along a eutrophication gradient. Soil Sci . Soc . Am . J . 82- 1788 .

Rochev ,V.A,R.V. Shveikina,G.A.Barsukova, andN .N. Popova. 1980 . The effect ofsilica

gel on agrochemical soil properties and crop of agri cultural plants . In P lant Nutrition and

Programming ofAgri cultural P lants . Proceed. SverdlovskyACI, Perm,-68 .

Sims,J . T.,

Simard RR ,and BC . Joem . 1998 . Phosphorus loss in agri cultural drainage :

histori cal perspective and current research. J . Environ. Qual ., 7-293 .

Walsh, L .M., and J .D . Beaton 1973 . Soil testing and plant analysis . Soil Sci . Soc . Am. Inc .,

Madi son,Wisconsin, USA.

13

Matichenkov et ai Effect of Silica-rich Slag and Lime on P Leaching in Sandy Soils

Tab le 1 . The weight of fresh shoots and roots ofBahiagrass after growing 3 months in a

greenhouse .

Using Duncan’s multiple range test, values within a column followed by the same letter are not

statistically different

Tab le 2. The concentration ofP in shootsand roots ofBahiagrass after growing 3 months in a

greenhouse .

Using Duncan’s multiple range test, values within a coltunn followed by the same letter are not


14

Journal Ameri can Society of Sugarcane Technonogists ,Vol. 22 , 2002

Table 3. Total content ofP in shoots and roots ofBahiagrass after growing 3 months in a

greenhouse .



Tab le 4. The concentration ofwater and acid-extractable P in Entisol after growing Bah iagrass in



15

Matichenkov et al .zEffectof Silica-rich S lag and Lime on P Leaching in Sandy Soils

Figure 1 Effect of irri gationwith distilledwateronphosphorus concentration in apercolate solutionfrom an Entisol treated with Si slag or limestone . Error bars indicate standard errors of the mean .

Volume ofwater (ml/cmz

)

Figure 2 . Effect of irrigation with a P—bearing solution on phosphorus concentration in a percolate

solution from an Entisol treated with Si slag or limestone . Errorbars indicate standard errors of the

mean .

16

Matichenkov et al .zEffect of Silica-rich Slag and Lime on P Leaching in Sandy Soi ls

Figure 5 . Effect of irri gation with distilled water on phosphorus concentration in a percolate froman Alfisol treated with Si slag or limestone . Error bars indicate standard error of the mean .

Figure 6 . Effect of irrigation with a P -bearing solution on phosphorus concentration in a percolate

solution from anAlfisol treated with Si slag or limestone . Errorbars indicate standard errors of the

mean .

18

Journal American Society of Sugarcane Technonogists , Vol. 22, 2002

Figure 7. Phosphorus concentration in a percolate solution fiom the greenhouse experiment with

an Butisol . Error bars indicate standard errors of the mean .

Figure 8 . Phosphorus concentration in a percolate solution from the greenhouse experiment with

an Entisol treated with P ferti lizer (50 kg P/ha) . Error bars indicate standard errors of themean .

Weeks

19

Matichenkov et al.zEffect of Silica-rich Slag and Lime on P Leaching in Sandy Soils

20

Journal American Society of Sugarcane Technologists , Vol. 22 , 2002

SILICON AS A BENEFICIAL ELEMENT FOR SUGARCANE

V.V.Matich enkov and D.V. CalvertIndian RiverRes . and Edu . Center

,Fort P ierce, FL 34945-3 138

ABSTRACT

A numberoffield and greenhouse studies have demonstrated that silicon (Si) is an importantbeneficial element for sugarcane (Saccharum ofiic inarum Effectivemanagement practices utilizeSi fertilization on soils deficient in plant-available Si . Thus far, knowledge Of the direct effects OfSi fertilizers on sugarcane has not advanced as rapidly as for rice . Silica concentration in cultivated

plants ranges from to A range of 2 10-224 million tons of Si or 70-800 kg ha"Of plantavailable Si is harvested with the sugarcane crop from arable soils annually. Crop removal Of Si by

sugarcane exceeds those Of the macronutri ents N,P

,and K . Usually the concentration Of Si in

sugarcane leaves varies from to Higher yield of sugarcane is associated with higherconcentration Of Si in the leaves . Field and greenhouse experiments conducted in the USA (FloridaandHawaii) andMauri tius demonstrated that application ofSi fertilizers had a positive effect on thedisease pest and frost-resistance of sugarcane . Itwas shown that sugarcane productivity increased

from 17 to 30 whereas production of'

sugar rose from 23 to 58% with increasing Si fertilization .

One of themost important functions ofSiwas the stimulation of the plant’s defense abilities against

abiotic and biotic stresses . Literature data demonstrated that improved sugarcane nutrition brought

about by fertilization with Si was shown to reinforce the plant’s protection properties against leaffreckle, sugarcane rust,

'

aud sugarcane ringspot. In addition,Si fertilization has amore positive effect

than liming on the chemical and physical properties Of the soil .

INTRODUCTION

Beginning in 1840, numerous laboratory, greenhouse and field experiments showedsustainable benefits OfSi fertilization forrice (Oryza sativa barley (Hordeum vulgare L wheat

(Triticum vulgare Vil), corn (Zea mays sugarcane, cucumber (Cucumus sativa L), tomato

(Lycop ers icon esculentum Mill) , citrus (Citrus ta itentis Risso) and other crops (Epstein, 1999 ;

Liebig,1840; Matichenkov et al .

,1999 ; Savant et al ., Unfortunately, the present Opinion

about Si being an inert element is prevalent in plant physiology and agri culture despite the fact thatSi is a biogeochemically active element and that Si fertilization has significant effects on cropproduction

,soil fertility, and environmental quality (Epstein,

1999 ;Matichenkov andBocham ikova,

2000; Voronkov et al .,

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Silicon in th e Soil-Plant System.

Silicon is the most abundant element in the earth’s crust after oxygen : 200 to 350 g Si kg"

in clay soils and 450 to 480 g Si kg"in sandy soils (Kovda, It is the current opinion that Siis an inert element and cannot play an important role in the biological and chemical processes .

However many Si compounds are not inert . Silicon can form numerous compounds with high

2 1

Matichenkov and Calvert: Silicon as a Beneficial Element for Sugarcane

chemical andbiochemical activities .Fourelements, carbon (C), aluminum (Al), phosphorus (P), andgermanium (Ge) surround Si in the Periodic Table ofElements . The properties of Si are somewhatsimilar to those of the surrounding elements . Only Si can form stable polymers similar to C (Her,

Silicon is similar to Al in that it can act similarly in formattingminerals (Sokolova,Silicon can replace P inDNAWoronkov et al ., 197 Also

,Si has simi larmetallic properties to Ge

(Iler, Usually plants absorb Si more than other elements (Savant et al ., Theseproperties in turn determine si licon’s effect on soil fertility and plants .

Soils generally contain from 5 to 40% Si (Kovda, The main portions of soil Si-ri chcompounds are represented by quartz or crystalline silicates,which are inert . Inmany respects, thesesilicates form the skeleton of the soil . The physically and chemically active Si substances in the soilare represented by soluble and weakly adsorbed monosilicic acids, polysilicic acids

, and

organosilicon compounds (Matichenkov andAmmosova, These form s are interchangeable

with each otheraswell aswith other crystallineminerals and living organi sms (soilmicroorganisms

andplants) .Monosilicic acid is the centerofthese interactions and transformations .Monosilicic acidis a product Of Si-rich mineral dissolution (Lindsay, 197 The soluble and weakly adsorbed

monosilicic acids are absorbedbyplants andmicroorganisms (Yoshida, Theyalso control soilchemical and biological properties (P ,

Al,Fe

,Mn and heavy metal mobility, microbial activity,

stability of soil organi cmatter) and the formation ofpolysilicic acids and secondaryminerals in the

soil (Matichenkov et al ., 1995 ; Sokolova, P lants and microorgani sms can absorb only

monosilicic acid (Yoshida, Polysilicic acid has a significant effect on soil texture, waterholding capacity, adsorption capacity, and soil erosion stability (Matichenkov et al .,

Using data from the literature on Si removal by different cultivated plants (Reimers, 1990;Bazilev ish et. al ., 1975) and from the FAO database on world crop production (FAO InternetDatabase

,itwas calculated that 2 10-224million tons Ofplant-available Si is removed from

arable soils annually.Harvesting cultivated plants usuallyresults in Si removal from the soil . Inmostcases much more Si is removed than other elements (Savant et al ., For example, potatoes

remove 50 to 70 kg Si ha". Various cereals remove 100 to 300 kg Si ha"(Bazilev ich et al,Sugarcane removes more Si than other cultivated plants . Sugarcane removes 500 to 700 kg Si ha"(Anderson,

At the same time sugarcane absorbs 40 to 80 kg P ha", 100 to 300 kgK ha", and50 to 500 kg N ha"(Anderson,

Studies have shown that while otherplant-available elements were restored by fertilization,

Siwas not. Soi l fertility degradation started because the reduction ofmonosilicic acid concentration

in the soil initiated decomposition of secondary minerals that control numerous soil properties

(Karrnin, 1986 ; Marsan and Torrent, A second negative effect of reduced monosilicic acidconcentration in the soil is decreased plant disease andpest resistance (Epstein,

1999 ;Matichenkov

et al . , 1999 ; Savant et ai .,

In recent years we tested the concentration ofmonosilicic acid, polysilicic acids, and acidextractable Si in Florida and Louisiana soils (Matichenkov and Snyder, 1996 ; Matichenkov et al.,

1997;Matichenkov et al ., The concentration ofmonosilicic and polysilicic acids in the soil

can be analyzed only from fresh soil samples (Matichenkov et al ., The concentration Ofacid

22

Journal American Society of Sugarcane Technologists , Vol. 22, 2002

extractable Si is positively correlated with biochemically active Si or sources ofplant-available Si

in the soil (Barsykova andRochev ,197

Selected data on the concentration ofmonosilicic acid, polysilicic acid, and acid-extractableSi in Histosols, Spodosols, Entisols and Mollisols are presented in Table 1 . The lowestconcentrations of soluble and biochemically active Si substances are found in the sandy soil (TableCultivation can increase the concentration ofmonosilicic acids, probablybecause plant residuals

(especially burned sugarcane leaves) are not removed from the soil . Even so,the concentration of

soluble and biochemically active Si-ri ch compounds remains critically low .

The concentration ofmonosilicic acid in a native Histosol is usually characterized as being

medium to high . The sources ofplant-available Si are extremely critical (Table and cultivation

results in sharply reduced monosilicic acid levels in the soil . In commercial rice and sugarcane

production in the Everglades Agri cultural Area, growers usually use Si soil amendments forincreased crop production and quality (Datnoff et al ., 1997, Savant et al ., Sugarcane usually

is grown afterrice . The application of Si fertilizerhas beneficial effects on both rice and sugarcane

(Savant et al . , The concentration ofmonosilicic acid, polysilicic acid, and acid-extractableSi increasedwith cultivation (Table Themost dramatic increasewas Observed foracid-extractableSi . This parameterdetermines the amount ofbiogeochemically active Si and is apotential source forplant-available Si (Barsykova and Rochev Native Histosols have extremely low levels ofbiogeochemically active orplant-available Si . On the otherhand cultivatedHistosols havemediumto high level ofmonosilicic acid or plant-available Si (Table

The native soils from Louisianawere characterized by a high concentration Of soluble andbiochemically active Si (Table High levels of biogeochemically active Si were found inaccumulative alluvial soils (Kovda, Louisiana soils were collected in theMississippi deltaandwere formed underalluvial accumulative processes .The long periodOfcultivation of these soilsresulted in the decrease ofmonosilicic acid and acid-extractable Si (Table Most likely this is aresult ofmonosilicic acid absorption by cultivated plants rather than leaching, becausemonosilicic

acid is characterized by a low capacity to move down the soil profile (Matichenkov and Snyder,

However,the content of polysilicic acids increased, which is probably associated with

degradation of soilminerals (Matichenkov et al., 1995 Iler, 197 The decrease ofacid-extractable

Si supports this conclusion. As a result of agri cultural activity, the concentration ofplant-availableSi was decreased and soil fertility was degraded.

These data demonstrate that Si fertilization is needed for all four soils under investigationto assure adequate Si nutrition of sugarcane and to optimize the fertility of these soils .

Effect of S i on Sugarcane

Silicon fertilizers influence plants in twoways : 1) the indirect influence on soil fertility, and

(2) the direct effect on the plant.Most investigations ofmonosilicic acid effects on soil properties

23

Matichenkov and Calvert: Silicon as a Beneficial Element for Sugarcane

concern their interactionwith soil phosphates (Matichenkov andAmmosova, Silicon ferti lizerapplied into the soil initiates two processes . The first process involves increases in the concentrationOf monosilicic acids resulting in the transformation of slightly soluble phosphates into plantavailable phosphates (Lindsay, 1979 ;Matichenkov , The equations for these reactions are asfollows :

CaHPO, Si(OH), casio, H20 H,PO,

2A1(HzPO4)3 SH"A12S i20 5 5H3PO4+ 51120

2FePO4+ Si(OH), 2H+

FeZS iO4 2H3PO4

Secondly,Si fertilizer adsorbs P , thereby decreasing P leaching by 40-90 (Matichenkov et al .

,

It is noteworthy that adsorbed P is kept in a plant-available form .

Silicon fertilizers are usually neutral to slightly alkaline (Lindsay, Soluble Si reduces

AI toxicity because monosilicic acid reacts with mobile Al and forms slightly soluble

alurninoSilicates (Lumsdon and Farmer, This means that Si amendments may be used forimproving the chemical properties ofacid soils .Numerous field experiments have demonstrated thatSi fertilization hasmore influence on plant growth on acid soils than liming (Ayres, 1966 ; Fox et al .,

Silicon fertilizer can increase plant resistance to heavy metals (Epstein 1999) and toxichydrocarbons (Bochamikova et al .

,Both effects of Si fertilizer appear to occur through

optimization ofsoil properties and the direct effect on Soilmicroorgan isms .Our earlier investigationdemonstrated that soil treatment with Si-richmaterials increased both water-holding capacity andsoil adsorption capacity for ions (Matichenkov and Bochamikova,

The direct effect of Si fertilizer on plants is primari lymanifested in increasing disease andpest resistance . Data in the literature showed that Si fert ilization increased the resistance ofsugarcane to sugarcane rust (Dean and Todd, leaf freckle (Fox et al . , sugarcane

ringspot (Raid et al ., leaf disorder (Clements, and stalk and stem borers (Edward et

al .,1985 ;Meyer andKeeping, Except forbiotic stresses such as pests and plant diseases, Si

fertilization increased sugarcane resistance to abiotic stresses such as soil water shortage, coldtemperature, UV-B radiation, and forFe, Al andMn toxicities (Savant et al .,

The field experiments in Hawaii, Mauritius and Florida demonstrated high response of

sugarcane to Si fertilizer (Table It is important to note that Si fertilizer increased not only theproductivity ofcane but also the concentration of sugar in the plants aswell (Table It is probablethat Si has a direct effect on biochemical processes in sugarcane that are similar to responses

Observed for sugar beet (Liebig,

CONCLUSIONS

Soils used for sugarcane in Flori da and Louisiana usually have low concentrations ofplant

available Si and biogeochemically active Si . The removal of Si by sugarcane initiated soil fertility

24

Matichenkov and Calvert : Silicon as a Beneficial Element for Sugarcane

Fox,R.L .

, J .A. Silva, O .R.Younge, D .L . P lucknett, andGD . Sherman . 1967. Soil andplantsilicon and silicate response by sugar cane . Soil Sci . Soc .Amer. 3 1 :775-779 .

Iler, R.K . 1979 . The chemistry of silica.Wiley,New York.

Karrnin, Z . 1986 . Formation of ferrihydri te by inhibition of grun rust structures in thepresence of silicon. Soil Sci . Soc . Amer. J -254.

Kovda,VA . 1973 . The bases of learning about soils.Moscow : Nayka, 2 v.

Liebig,J . Von. 1840. Organic chemistry in its application to agri culture and physiology.

Ed.from themanuscript of the author by Lyon P layfair. Taylor andWalton,London.

Lindsay,W.L . 1979 . Chemical equilibria in soil. JohnWiley Sons

,New York

L umsdon, D .G., andV .C . Farm er. 1995 . Solubility characteri stics of proto-imogolite sols :how silicic acid can detoxify aluminium solutions . European Soil Sci ., - 186 .

Marsan,FA , and J . Torrent . 1989 . Fragipan bonding by silica and iron oxides in a soil from

northwestren Italy. Soil Sci . Soc . Amer. J -1 145 .

Matichenkov , V.V. 1990 . Amorphous oxide of silicon in soddy podzolic soil and itsinfluence on plants . Author reference ofCan. Diss .,Moscow State University .

Matichenkov , V.V., D .L . P insky,and EA. Bochamikova. 1995 . Influence ofmechanical

compaction of soils on the state and form of available silicon. Eurasian Soil Science-67.

Matichenkov ,V .V., and J .M.Ammosova. 1996 .Effect ofamorphous silicaon soil properties

of a sod-podzolic soil . Eurasian Soil Science -99 .

Matichenkov ,V.V. andG.H. Snyder. 1996 . The mobile silicon compounds in some South

Florida soils . Eurasian Soil Science - 1 173 .

Matichenkov ,V .V .

,Ya. M. Ammosova, and EA. Bochamikova. 1997. The method for

determination ofplant available silica in soil . Agrochemistry 6-84 .

Matichenkov ,V.V.,

D .V . Calvert, and G.H. Snyder. 1999 . Silicon fertilizers for citrus in

Florida. Proc . Fla. State Hort . Soc .-8 .

26


Matichenkov ,V.V., E.A.Bochamikova,D .V. Calvert, andG.H. Snyder. 2000. Compari sonstudy of soil silicon status in sandy soils of south Florida. S oil Crop Sci . Florida Proc .

- 137.

Matichenkov ,V.V., D .V. Calvert, G.H. Snyder, B . Whalen, and Y. Wan . 2000 . Nutrients

leaching reduction by Si-rich substances in themodel experiments . In Proc . 7thInter. conf.

wetland systems forwater pollution control, Lake BuenaVista, Florida, Nov . 1 1- 16,2000,

583-592 .

Matichenkov ,V.V . andEA.Bochamikova. 2000 .The relationship of silicon to soil physical

and chemical properties . Proc . Inter. Conf. Silicon in agri culture, in press .

Meyer, J . H. aridM. Keeping. 1999 . Past, present and future silicon research in the SouthAfrican sugar industry. In Silicon in agri culture, Program agenda and abstracts

,Sept. 26-30,

1999 , Fort Lauderdale, Florida, USA, 10 .

Raid,R.N.,D .L . Anderson , andM.F. Ulloa. 199 1 Influence Ofcultivar and soil amendment

with calcium silicate slag on foliar disease development and yield of sugarcane . FloridaAgri cultural Experimental Station Journal Ser. N R-01689 .

Reimers, N.F. . 1990 . Natural uses . Dictionary-reference book,Moscow,Misl.

Savant,N .K .,G.H. Snyder

,andL E.Datnoff. 1997. Siliconmanagement and sustainable rice

production . Advances in Agronomy 58 : 15 1-199 .

Savant,N .K .

, G.H. Komdorfer, L .E.Datnoff, andG.H. Snyder. 1999 . Silicon nutrition and

sugarcane production : a review. J . P lant Nutr.- 1903 .

Silva, I .A. 1969 . The role of research in sugar production . Hawaiian Sugar Technologists

Association: 1969 Report .

Sokolova,TA 1985 .The clayminerals in the humid regions ofUSSR.Novosibirsk,Nayka.

Voronkov,M.G., G.I. Zelchan ,andA.Y. Lykevic . 1978 . Silicon and life . Riga, Zinatne .

Yoshida, S .

,1975 . The physiology of silicon in rice . Tech. Bull . n .25 ., Food Fert . Tech .

Centr., Taipei , Taiwan.

27

Matichenkov and Calvert: Si licon as a Beneficial Element for Sugarcane

Table 1 . Concentrations ofmonosilicic acid, polysilicic acid and acid-extractable Si in Histosols,Spodosols, Entisols, andMollisols (mg Si kg

"of soil) .

28


Tab le 2. The effect of location, soil type, source and rate of fertilizer application on yield ofsugarcane and sugar.

29

Se lassi et al .z Maximizing Economic Returns from Sugarcane Harvesting through Optimal Harvest Scheduling

MAXIMIZING ECONOMIC RETURNS FROM SUGARCANE PRODUCTIONTHROUGH OPTIMAL HARVEST SCHEDULING

Mich ael E. SalassiDepartment OfAgri cultural Economics andAgri business

LouisianaAgri cultural Experiment StationLSU Agri cultural Center, Baton Rouge, LA 70803

Lonnie P . ChampagneLouisiana Sugar Cane Products Inc .

Baldwin, LA 705 14

Benjamin L. LegendreDivision OfP lant Science

Louisiana Cooperative Extension ServiceLSU Agri cultural Center, Baton Rouge, LA 70803

ABSTRACT

The long-tenn viability of the sugar industry depends upon finding ways to produce sugarmore economically through production management decisions which can reduce production costsor increase returns . Harvest scheduling is one such practice which has a direct impact on net farmreturns . Sugarcane cultivars have distinct sucrosematuration curves, whi chmay vary up or downfrom year to year depending upon weather and other factors . A study was conducted on a

commercial sugarcane farm to predict sugar per acre across the harvest season and to develop aprogrammingmodel which could determine the order ofharvest offields on the farmwhich wouldmaximize total sugar produced andnet returns above harvest costs . Optimal adjustment Ofharvestof individual fields resulted in increased sugar yield per acre and total farm net returns .

INTRODUCTION

As a sugarcane plant matures throughout the growing season, the amount of sucrose in thecane increases . Most Of this sucrose production occurswhen the plant is fullymature andbegins to

ripen . Several studies have developedmodels to predict the sucrose level in sugarcane . Crane et al.

(1982) developed a stubble replacement decision model for Florida sugarcane producers . They

reported that sugar accumulation is a function ofboth sucrose accumulation and vegetative growth.

The study suggested that the accumulation Of sugarmaybe approximated as a quadratic function of

time . Chang in research on Taiwanese sugarcane cultivars, suggested that individualcultivars have distinct sucrose maturation curves with different peak levels . The study concludedthat the sugar content Ofa cultivar could be predicted as a function Of time with reasonable accuracy

and that the within- season trend Of sucrose accumulation follows a second order curve .

During the harvest season, second stubble andOlder stubble fields are usually harvested first,followed bymore recently planted fields

,first stubble and then plantcane . Within this general order

of crop harvest, producers attempt to estimate the sugar content of cane in the field in order to

30


harvest fields at a point where the sugar content in the cane is at ornear amaximum . If individualsugarcane cultivars have distinct sucrosematuration curves,whichmay vary up or down from yearto year depending upon weather and other factors, then the sugar content of individual fields couldbe incorporated into amodel which would determine an optimal order Ofharvest for all fields on a

particular farm,which would maximize total sugar produced (or total net returns received) on the

farm.

Applications of crop harvest scheduling models utilizing some type Of operations researchprocedure are most common in the timber industry. Most of these applications involve the use ofeither linearprogramming or simulationmodels . Recent studies have investigated the use ofMonteCarlo integerprogramming (Nelson et al .

,199 1 ; Daust andNelson,

bayesian concepts (Van

Deusen,and tabu search procedures (Brumelle et al .

, Several studies have developedcrop growth models to predict the harvest date of agricultural crops (Lass et al . ,1993 ; Malezieux ,

1994;Wolf, However,most ofthese studies utilize Optimal harvest decision rules based uponagronomic characteristics of the crop rather than economic principles .

Several studies have addressed various aspects of sugarcane productivity and harvestoperations . Two studies have evaluated the economics of sugarcane stubble crop replacement in

Florida (Crane et al ., 1982) andLouisiana (Salassi andMilligan, These studies evaluated theoptimal crop cycle length by comparing annualized future net returns from replanting to estimated

returns from extending the current crop cycle for another year. S emenzato ( 1995) developed asimulation algorithm for scheduling sugarcane harvest operations at the individual farm level in such

away that the lapse of time between the end ofburning and processing is minimized. The model

calculated themaximum size of a field which could be harvested and have all of its cane processedwithin a specified period of time . Thi s study focused on farm size and equipment availability inorder to efficiently utilize limited resources in a timely manner. A recent study in Australia diddetermine optimal sugarcane harvest schedules whic

'

h maximized net returns using mathematical

prograrrrrning procedures (Higgins et al . , 1998 ; Muchow et al,

However,the modeling

framework in this study encompassed many farms within a production region over a multi-yearharvest peri od. Furthermore

,the smallest un it of time within the harvest schedulingmodelwas one

The purpose of this study was to develop a methodology for the incorporation ofwithinseason sucrose accumulation in sugarcane into an optimal single-season,

daily harvest scheduling

model at the individual farm level . The objective of the generalmodeling procedure was to capture

the dynamic effect of sucrose accumulation during the growing season and to utilize this

information,within a mathematical program modeling framework, in determining when specific

sugarcane fields should be harvested in order to maximize total farm net returns . Data for this

analysis were obtained from Agricultural Research Service, USDA experimental research testsconducted in Louisiana over several years . Sucrose levels were estimated as a function of time for

majorcultivars currentlyproduced commercially in the state . These datawere then incorporated into

a mathematical programming model which determined an optimal harvest schedule which

maximizes whole farm net returns for a given farm situation . Production and harvest data collected

from a commercial sugarcane farm in Louisiana in 1996 were used to evaluate the ability of the

m odeling procedure to improve farm returns through adjustrnent of the actual harvest schedule .

3 1

Selassi et a] Maximizing Economic Returns from Sugarcane Harvesting through Optimal Harvest Scheduling


Sugar Prediction Models

The amount of raw sugar in a field of sugarcane is a function of several variables . Twoimportantmeasures of sugarcane yield include tons of sugarcane per acre and pounds ofraw sugarproduced per acre . The relationship between sugar per acre and factors which influence it can bestated simply as follows :

TRS TONS TRS POP X STWT

where SA is total pounds of raw sugar per acre, TRS is theoretical recoverable sugar in pounds ofsugar per ton of cane, TONS is the tons of sugarcane produced per acre, POP is the per acrepopulation of sugarcane stalks in the field, and STWT is the stalk weight . Although the populationof sugarcane stalks within a field can be assumed to be constant throughout the harvest season

,the

same assumption cannot bemade for the other factors in the relationship . Theoretical recoverablesugar and stalk weight both increase as the harvest season progresses . In order to incorporate thisyield increase within awhole-farrnmathematical programmingharvest schedulingmodel, estimates

must be obtained for the predicted levels of each of these factors for each variety of sugarcaneproduced on the farm for every day of the harvest season.

Sucrosematurity data developed at the ARS , USDA Sugar CaneResearch Uni t inHouma,Louisiana

,were used in the analysis . Stalk weight and sugar content of the commercial sugarcane

cultivars grown in Louisianawere sampled at intervals during the harvest season fiom 198 1 to 1996 .

The data included measurements of theoretical recoverable sugar, sugar per stalk and stalk weightby julian date for 3 to l 6 years, depending upon variety . The harvest season for sugarcane inLouisianahas hi storically run from the first ofOctober through the end ofDecember. Observations

for each commercial cultivar ranged from julian date 255 to 346 or approximately the middle ofSeptember through the middle ofDecember. The age of the crop (plantcane or stubble) was also

included .

Models were estimated for stalk weight and sugar per stalk in order to predict the amount ofsugarcane and raw sugar in the field for each dayof the harvest season . Previous research suggeststhat a quadratic model can be used to model sugar accumulation (Crane et al ., Graphi cal

analysis of both the stalk weight as well as the sugar per stalk data suggested that these vari ablescould be estimated using a semi-log functional form. Biological response functions of stalk weight

and sugar per stalk were estimated for each cultivar as follows :

srwr = p0 +i=81

i=81

32

Selassi et al. : Maximizing Economic Returns from Sugarcane Harvesting through Optimal Harvest Scheduling

stalk population perfield . Ten-stalk sampleswere cut fromrandomly selected locations in each fieldon October7 and 9 , 1996 . Each stalk sample was weighed andmilled to obtain a juice sample foranalysis . The average stalk weight and estimated theoretical recoverable sugar fi'

om the juiceanalysis were combined with field information to develop stalk weight and sugar per stalkmeasurements by field.

Prediction models of stalk weight and sugar per stalk were then adjusted to the 1996 cropyear. This adjustmentwas incorporated into eachpredictionmodel as aparallel shift in the intercept .Stalk weight and sugar per stalk were then estimated for each day of the harvest season using theestimated prediction models with adjusted intercepts .

Estimates of tons of sugarcane per acre andpounds ofraw sugarper acre were calculated bymultiplying stalk weight and sugar per stalk by stalk population as follows :

CANE, POPf x STWT / 2ooo

SUGARfl= POPf x SPS

where CANEft is the estimated tons of sugarcane per acre in fieldf on julian date t, POPf is theestimated stalk population per acre in fieldfl STWTct is the estimated stalk weight in pounds forcultivar c on julian date t, SUGARfi is the estimated pounds ofraw sugarper acre in fieldf on juliandate t, and SPS ct is the estimated sugarper stalk in pounds for cultivar c on julian date t. Estimatedyields perfield were then adjusted forfield conditions (recovery and trash) and differences betweentheoretical recoverable sugar and commercial recoverable sugar as follows :

ADJCANEfi CANE ft x (1 + TRASH.) x FIELDRECOVERYf

ADJSUGARft SUGARfl x x SCAL EFACTOR

ADJCANEfi represents the tons of sugarcane actually harvested from the field and delivered to themill forprocessing . TRASHf is apercentage estimate of leafmatter and other trash in the harvestedcane, andF LDRECOVERYfis apercentage estimate the amount Of sugarcane in the field actually

recovered by harvest operations . Estimated levels of trash and field recovery were determined on

an individual field basis from producer information. ADJSUGARfl represents the actual pounds of

raw sugarrecovered from the processed cane . The estimated sugaryield ismultiplied by a standard

factor to convert theoretical recoverable sugar into commercially recoverable sugar. Thisstandard is used by sugarmills to estimate recovery since the actual liquidation factorwill not be

known until the end of season . Accoun ting fordifferences from the laboratory analysis to the fields,the estimated sugar per field is reduced by a scale factor. The assumed scale factor is

MathematicalProgramming Formu lation

The determination of a harvest schedule was formulated as a linear mathematicalprogramming model which maximized producer net returns above harvest costs over total farm

acreage . Farm return swere derived from the sale ofsugar andmolasses less apercentage of the totalproduction as a “ payment—in-kind”to the factory for processing and a percentage of the producer

’s

34


share paid to the land owner as rent. Since preharvest production costs were assumed to beindependent of harvest operations, only harvest costs were included in the model . Harvest costswere assumed to be a function of the total tonnage of sugarcane harvested. The objective functionfor the model was defined as follows :

where Z represents total farm level producer net returns from sugar andmolasses production above

harvesting costs, P ,represents the price received per pound of sugar (cents per pound) , Sp is the

producer’s share of sugar produced (pounds) , Pm is the price ofmolasses (dollars per gallon),Mpis

the producer’s share ofmolasses (gallons), Ch is the cost of harvesting sugarcane (dollars per ton),and T

,is the total tons of sugarcane harvested:

The functional constraints in themodel consist of two sets ofbinding constraints and severaltransfer rows . The first three functional constraints are transfer rows that accumulate the totalpounds of sugar produced, tons of sugarcane harvested, and gallons of molasses recovered,respectively. The first set ofbinding constraints forces themodel to choose each field exactly onceduring the harvest season . The model can harvest any percentage of a field on any available day.

Harvest of individual fields were restri cted to certain defined periods, based upon crop age , byincluding estimated daily sugar accumulation for only the days during which harvest of the field ispermitted. The second set ofbinding constraints creates a daily limit on the tons of sugarcane that

maybe harvested in one day. Each day has a constraint row that limits the tons of cane harvestedto less than a specified daily quota amount . The model can be expanded to handle any number offields

,and the days available for harvest can be customized to any particular harvest season length.


Two different harvest scenarios were solved by the harvest schedulingmodel. The Solutionresults for each of these two scenarios are shown in Table 4 . The first solution represents resultsfrom simulating the producer’s actual dai ly harvest schedule . After the 1996 harvest season ended

,

the producer provided information on the specific day each field was harvested as well as actualsugaryields obtained. The actual harvest schedule solution inTable 4 is based on the date of actualharvest by field and the predicted sugarcane and sugar yields from the estimated predictionmodels .Sugarcane (tons) and sugar (pounds) yields per acre achieved by the producer closely matchedpredicted yields from the estimatedmodels . Predicted total sugarcane production was tons

of sugarcane compared to the actual production of tons reported by the producer. Estimatedproducer return s above harvest costs for the actual harvest schedule were Averagesugarcane yield over the whole farm was tons per acre, resulting in an average sugar yield of

pounds per acre .

A second harvest scheduling model was solved for a solution in which harvest dates forindividual fieldswere constrained to specified intervals . InLouisiana, sugarcane harvest beginswithfields which contain the oldest stubble crops (secondstubble and older) , then proceeds to younger,first stubble crops . All stubble crop fields are usually harvested first . Within each stubble group,varieties are usually harvested in order ofmaturi ty class : very early, early, andmid-season (Faw,

Finally, fields containing plantcanewhich are being harvested for the first time are harvested

35

Selassi et a] Maximizing Economic Returns from Sugarcane Harvesting through Optimal Harvest Scheduling

at the end of the harvest season in order to avoid damage of future stubble crops from early harvest.Plantcane fields are usually harvested beginning wi th varieties that deteriorate rapidly afterafieezeand endwith harvest ofvarieties that deteriorate at a slowerrate afterafi'

eeze (more freeze tolerant) .An additional consideration whi ch impacts the harvest schedule is soil type . Extended periods ofrain during the harvest season makes harvest of sugarcane on heavy textured clay soils difficult .Harvest operations on excessively wet fields containing clay soils can severely rut a field and

possibly damage the stubble crop whi ch would be harvested the following year. As a result,fields

containing heavy textured clay soils would generally be harvested before fields containing lightertextured sandy soils .

In the constrained harvestmodel, possible harvest dates were specified for each field in thesample data setwhich conformed to traditional harvesting practices . Generally stated, these harvestdate ranges began with second-stubble harvest beginning on October 1St and continuing intoNovember, first- stubble harvest beginning in late October and continuing through November, and

plantcane harvest beginning in late November and continuing through the end of December.

Harvesting peri ods by crop age in the constrained harvest model were also adjusted for soil type.The resulting defined harvest periods included in the model were as follows : (a.) October 1Novemberl : secondstubble and older crops, all soil types ; (b .) October 20 November 15 : firststubble crops, heavy soil; (0 ) October 25 November 25 : first-stubble crops

,mixed soil ; (d.)

November 1 December 3 1 : first-stubble crops,light soil ; (e .) November 25 December 31 :

plantcane crops, heavy soil ; (f.) December 1 December 3 1 : plantcane crops, mixed soil; and (g .)December 10 December 3 1 plantcane crops, light soil . These defined harvest peri odswere based

on the distribution of soil types on the particular farm being analyzed. A farm with a di fferentdistribution of soil typeswould probably have had a Slightly different set ofdefined harvest periods .Solution results from thismodel indicated that sugarproduction andnet return s could be increasedwith relativelyminor adjustments to the actual harvest schedule. Optimal adjustment ofharvest ofindividual fields resulted in a proj ected increase in total farm net returns of or

approximately $3 1 perharvested acre . Average harvested yield of sugarcane increased by tons

per acre resulting in an increase in average sugar yield per acre of 263 pounds . Analysis Of

individual field results indicated that the optimal harvest date changed an average of 13 days fromthe actual harvest date with some fields being harvested earlierand otherfields harvested later in the

season .

One factor which would have an effect on Optimal harvest schedule determ ination to

maximize net returns would be related to harvest travel costs . Harvest travel cost, i .e ., the cost of

moving sugarcane harvesting equipment from one field to another on the farm during the harvest

season,would significantly impact net returns above harvest costs for farms on which individual

fields are located at considerable distances from one another. Although harvest travel costs were not

included in the analysis presented here, they should be considered when comparing alternativeharvest schedules with the purpose ofmaximizingnetreturns . The relevant costmeasure to consider

in this decision analysis would be the change in travel costs among different schedules. For a

specific change from one harvest schedule to another, this change in travel cost could be positive or

negative . Inclusion of travel costs in the analysis should be considered in awhole farm basis . Whole

farm harvest travel costs can beminimized by restricting harvest offieldswithin close proximity toeach otherto one defined harvest period andrestri cting fields in another locality to adi fferent harvest

period.

36

Journal Ameri can Society of Sugarcane Technologists , Vol . 22, 2002

CONCLUSIONS

The long term viabilityofthe sugarindustrywill depend upon findingways to produce sugarmore economically through reduction of production costs and efficient management of available

resources . Max imizing net returns for a whole farm,rather than trying to produce the maximum

amount of sugar per field, Should be the primary goal ofproducers . The purpose of this studywasto develop a methodology to assist in scheduling the sequence in which sugarcane fields areharvested tomaximize producers’economic returns . Modelswhi chpredicted stalkweight and sugar

per stalk by cultivar were estimated as a function of julian date and crop age as well as indicatorvariables representing years of production with different growing conditions . These models werethen used to predict sugar yields by cultivar and field for a sample farm . The optimization linearprogrammingmodel used the estimated accumul ation of stalk weight and sugarper stalk with fieldinformation to generate yieldpredictions . The predicted yieldswere used to select aharvest schedulesubject to constraints that maximized producer net returns above harvest cost .

The ability to predict sugarcane tonnage and raw sugar yields allows producers and mill

personnel tomore effectively plan the harvest ofa sugarcane crop based on the current status Of thatcrop . The type Ofharvest schedulingmodel developed here, although somewhat complex , could bestandardized to allow for easy imputation Of sucrose and tonnage accumulation data as well asindividual farm data. A producer, or crop consultant

-

could potentially analyze the yield of each

cultivarof sugarcane in the farm’s cropmix andmake decisions concerning harvest aswell as future

plantings . Optimization ofharvest schedules could potentially recovermore sugar from the fields,which directly increases the sugarrecovered by themills . Knowledge of the size andmaturity stage

of the crop could allowmills to more effectively assign delivery quotas among producers and planthe harvest schedule to maximize sugar production . Interest in site specific farming using globalpositioning satellites (GPS ) and global information system (GIS ) is growing among sugarcaneproducers, but the limiting factor is the ability to attribute yield to location. T hemodel developedin this study allows for the possibility of predicting sugar yield for individual fields . This

information can be useful in designing fertility programs, weed control programs and in makingcrop replacement decisions on an individual field basis .

REFERENCES

Brumelle, Shelby, Daniel Granot, Merja Hahne, and Ilan Vertinsky. 1998 . A tabu searchalgorithm for finding good forest harvest schedules satisfying green-up constraints .European Joumal ofOperational Research.

-424.

Chang,Y . S . 1995 . The trend of sucrose accmnulation duringmaturation of sugarcane with

special reference to the maturi ty of sugarcane cultivars . Report of the Taiwan Sugar

Research Institute. 148 : 1-9 .

Crane, DonaldR., T.H. Spreen,J Alvarez andG. Kidder. 1982 . An analysis of the stubble

replacement decision for Florida sugarcane growers, Agricultural Experiment Station,

Institute ofFood andAgricultural Sciences, University ofFlorida. Bulletin 822 .

37

Selassi et ai Maximizing Economic Returns from Sugarcane Harv esting through Optimal Harvest Scheduling

Daust,DavidK . and JohnD .Nelson. 1993 . Spatial reduction factors for strata-based harvest

schedules . Forest Science . 39 : 152- 165 .

Faw,Wade F. 1998 Sugarcane Harvesting Schedule . Sugarcane Circular LetterNo . 1 1-98 ,

Louisiana Cooperative Extension Service, Louisiana State University Agri cultural Center.

Higgins, A . J R. C .Muchow, A. V .Rudd, andA.W. Ford . 1998 . Optimising harvest date

in sugarproduction : a casestudy for theMossmanmill region inAustralia 1.DevelopmentOf operations research model and solution . Field Crops Research.

-162 .

Lass, L .W.,R.H. Callihan,

andD . O. Everson. 1993 . Forecasting the harvest date andyieldof sweet corn by complex regression models . Journal Of the American Society forHorticultural Science . 1 -455 .

Malezieux,E. 1994 . Predicting pineapple harvest date in different environments using a

computer simulationmodel . Agronomy Journal . -6 17.

Muchow,R C .

,A. J . Higgins, A. V . Rudd, andA.W. Ford. 1998 . Optimising harvest date

in sugarproduction : a case study for theMossmanmill region inAustralia I. Sensitivity tocrop age and crop class distribution . Field Crops Research.

-25 1 .

Nelson,John,

J .DouglasBrodie, andJohn Sessions . 199 1 Integrating short-term, area-basedlogging plans with long-term harvest schedules . Forest Science . 37: 101- 122 .

Salassi,M. E .,and S . B .Milligan. 1997 Economic analysis of sugarcane variety selection,

crop yield patterns,and ratoon cropplow out decisions . Journal ofProduction Agriculture.

39-545 .

SAS Institute . 1989 . SAS/ORUser’sGuide,Version 6 , 1 edition . SAS Institute, Cary,NC .

Semenzato,R. 1995 . A simulation study of sugar cane harvesting. Agri cultural Systems .

47:427-437

Van Deusen,Paul C . 1996 . Habitat and harvest scheduling using Bayesian statistical

concepts . Canadian Journal ofForest Research.-1383 .

Wh ite,H. 1980 . Aheteroskedasticity-consistent covariancematri x estimatorandadirect test

of heteroSkedasticity. Econometri ca. 48 8 17-838 .

Wolf, S . 1986 . Predicting harvesting date Of processing tomatoes by a simulation model .

Journal of the American Society forHorticultural Science .- 16 .

38

Journal American Society of Sugarcane Technologists , Vol . 22, 2002

Tab le 1 . ParameterEstimates for StalkWeight PredictionModels

Sugarcane Varieties

LNH)

CROP

Notes : Numbers in parentheses are t-values . Single and double asterisks denote statisticalsignificance at the 10% and 5% levels, respectively, n is the sample size, DWis the DurbinWatson statistic, and Wh ite p rb is the probability level of theWh ite test for heteroskedasticity.

39

Selassi et al .z Maximizing Economic Returns from Sugarcane Harvesting through Optimal Harvest Scheduling

Tab le 2. ParameterEstimates for Sugar per Stalk PredictionModels

Sugarcane Varieties

VAR

LNH)

CROP

Notes : Numbers in parentheses are t-values . Single and double asterisks denote statistical

significance at the 10% and 5% levels, respectively, n is the sample size, DWis the Durbin

Watson statistic, and White p rb is the probability level of theWhite test for heteroskedasticity.

40

Gravois et al Cultivar and crop effects of sugarcane bull shoots on sugarcane yield in Louisiana.

CULTIVARAND CROP EFFECTS OF SUGARCANE BULL SHOOTSON SUGARCANE YIELD IN LOUISIANA

Kenneth A. Gravois ] , Benjamin L . Legendre’, and Keith P . Bisch off

l

1Louisiana State University Agricultural Center, SugarResearch Station, PO . Box 604,St.

Gabri el, LA 70776 .

2Louisiana State University Agri cultural Center,Cooperative Extension

Service, BatonRouge, LA 70894 . (formerly of USDA-ARS ,Southern Regional Research Center

Sugarcane Research Unit, P O . Box 470, Houma, LA

ABSTRACT

Bull shoots are late-sprouting, large-diameter tillers that often appear late in the season insugarcane (Saccharum spp .) grown in south Louisiana. The effect ofbull shoots on sugarcane yieldhas not been assessed in Louisiana. The objectives of thi s study were to evaluate the cultivar andcrop effects ofbull shoots on sugarcane yield and yield components . Cultivar effects ofbull shootswere evaluated during 1998 and 1999 at the USDA-ARS Ardoyne Farm at Chacahoula

,LA. Crop

effects of bull Shoots were evaluated during 1998 at a test conducted on Joel Landry’s farm nearPaincourtville, LA . Sugarcane cultivars produced significantly different amounts Of bull shoots .

Sugarcane cultivars LHO 83- 153 and L CP 85-384 produced the least amount of cane yield derivedfrom bull Shoots

,averaging and percent of the total cane yield for the two years, respectively.

Sugarcane cultivarHoCP 85-845 produced the greatest cane yield derived from bull shoots,

percent of the total cane yield for the two years . For all cultivars,both sucrose concentration and

fiber content were lower for the bull shoots than for the whole stalks . For the test conducted at theJoel Landry Farm,

the plantcane crop derived percent Of its total cane yield from bull shoots,

whereas the first-ratoon crop derived percent Of its total cane yield from bull shoots . Forbothtests

,the overall effect of bull shoots was positive because of the net increase in sucrose yield per

unit area. However, bull shoots may have an adverse effect on processing because of addedpolysaccharides, starch, and color precursors . With the additional costs Of transportation and

processing and the negative effects on sugar quality, bull shootsmay likely have anoverall negative

effect on overall sugar production .

INTRODUCTION

Bull shoots are late-Sprouting, large-diarneter tillers that often appear late in the growing

season in sugarcane grown in south Louisiana. Bull shoots are also referred to as suckers orwater

sprouts . Some sugarcane cultivars tend to produce more bull shoots than others, and the problem

is more pronounced in some years . Bull Shoots are consideredto produce additional weight withminimal sucrose concentration adding Significant transportation andmilling costs .

Sugarcane is clonallypropagated forcommercial production . In Louisiana,whole stalks and,to a lesser extent, smallerbillet pieces are planted in the soil duringAugust and September to begin

a cycle of crops . Usually, aplantcane crop and two to three ratoon crops are harvested from a singleplanting . Because ofLouisiana’s temperate climate

,the crop remains dormant in the wintermonths

following harvest . In the Spring, new shoots emerge to begin the subsequent crop . Once a sugarcanecrop is harvested, the roots are physiologicallyactive foronly a short whi le (Baveret al ., The

roots cease to function and quickly die . For each new ratoon,a shoot that develops from an

42

Journal American Society of Sugarcane Technologists, Vol. 22, 2001

underground overwinteringbud quicklydevelops its own root system . Likemany grasses,sugarcane

relies on tillering to attain a desired plant population. In Louisiana, the tillering period usuallyranges from late April through early Jun e . Maximum tillering occurs approximately SOO°C (1 afterregrowth (Inman-Bamber, More tillers are produced than can normally become maturemillable stalks . Tiller senescence occurs after the canopy closes beyond 70% interception of

photosynthetically active radiation (Inman-Bamber,

Suckering, or the formation of bull shoots, begins in fields that are six to seven months ofage (Hess, The formation ofbull shoots begins in fields where sunlight is able to penetrateto the soil surface . It is common to observe a flush of bull shoots produced after sugarcane haslodged. In Hawaii, this flush of tillers is important to the overall contribution of cane yield. In

Mauritius, bull shoots arenot cut during hand harvesting and serve asan important beginning towardthe next crop cycle . In Louisiana, some cultivars, like HoCP 85-845 , can produce bull shoots evenwhen the crop remains erect with a dense canopy. The cultivar CP 72-370 also has a tendency toproduce bull shoots in Louisiana. However, the leafangle ofCP 72-370 is extremely erect andmayallow enough sunlight to penetrate the canopy, thus allowing bull shoots to form late in the growing

season. Salter andBonnet (2000) indicated that high soil ni trogen level was one of several factorsthat may contri bute to late season sucker production.

The effects Of sugarcane bull shoots on sugarcane yield parameters have not been quantifiedfor different cultivars or for different sugarcane crops (plantcane vs first ratoon) . Therefore, ourobjectives were to assess cultivar and crop effects of sugarcane bull shoots on sugarcane yield andyield components .

MATERIALS METHODS

Tests were conducted in 1998 and 1999 to determine the effect of bull shoots on different

sugarcane cultivars at the USDA-ARS Sugarcane Research Uni t’s Ardoyne Farm at Chacahoula,LA. Datawere collected each year from the plantcane crop of the second line trials of the USDAARS sugarcane breeding program . Cultivars used as controls in the second line trials (CP 70-32 1 ,LHO 83- 153, L CP 85-384, andHoCP 85-845) were replicated five times throughout the tri als andwere harvested from thi s test for analyses . Each plot was a single row m long and mwide .

The control cultivars in the second line tri als were arranged as arandomized complete block design .

The soil type was a Commerce silt loam.

In 1998 , a test was conducted on Joel LandryFarm s in Paincourtville, LA to determine theeffect of sugarcane bull shoots on different sugarcane crops (plantcane VS first ratoon) . The soil typefor this testwas also aCommerce silt loam . The cultivar testedwasHoCP 85-845 in adjacent fieldsof a plantcane and first

-ratoon crop . The experimental design at this location was a randomized

complete block with a split-plot arrangement of treatments . Whole plots were crop, and sub plotswere whole stalk and bull shoot treatments . Each plotwas a single row m long and mwide .

The tests conducted at the Ardoyne Farm were harvested on December 17, 1998 and

November 23,1999 . The test conducted at the Joel Landry Farm was harvested on December 18,

1998 . Just prior to harvest, all stalk types were counted in each plot . For the Ardoyne Farm tests,whole stalks were counted as well as bull shoots, which were divided into two categories : those

stalks greater than onemeterand those stalks less than onemeter in height . Hand-cut stalk samples

43

Gravois et ai Cultivar and crop effects of sugarcane bull shoots on sugarcane yield in Louisiana.

of five stalks of each stalk type were harvested and sent to the sucrose laboratory for qualityanalyses . In some instances, less than five stalks were harvested when stalk type counts were lessthan five . In the Joel LandryFarm test, stalk counts were done similarly except that the bull shootswere not categorized by height . Ten hand-cut stalks of each stalk type were harvested for analysesin the sucrose laboratory. All samples were cut level with the ground, topped through the apical bud,stri pped of leafmaterial, bundled, and tagged. Bundle weight was recorded upon entry into thesucrose laboratories .

The samples from the Joel Landry farm were processed at the LSU SugarResearch Stationsucrose laboratory at St . Gabriel, LA. Fiber content (g/kg) was determined by chopping six stalkswith a Jeffco cutter-grinder (Jeffress Brothers Ltd. ,

Brisbane Queensland, Australia) , mixing, andtaking a 600-g sub-sample for fiber analysis (Tanimoto, Each sample was pressedwith ahydraulic press at MP a pressure for one minute to separate the juice from the residue

(bagasse) . The residuewasweighed and then oven-dried for three days at a temperature of °C .

Theweight of the dryplugwas then recorded . A portion of the crusherjuicewas analyzed forBrix

(percent soluble solidsw/w) by refiactometer (Chen andChou, Pol of the clarifiedjuicewasobtained with an automated saccharimeter. Fiber content and sucrose concentrationwere estimated

as described by Gravois andMilligan

Samples from the Ardoyne Farm were analyzed each year at the USDA-ARS SugarcaneResearchUni t’8 sucrose laboratory at theArdoyneFarm . Sampleswere prepared with aprebreaker

(Legendre, For quality analysis, 1000-

g samples were pressed with pressure for

seventy-five seconds . The remaining sample plugwas oven-dri ed for three days at a temperature of405

°C . Sucrose concentration (g/kg) was Obtained using Brix, pol, and fiber percent cane along

with recentmodifications to the formula (Legendre, Using thefibraque correction,NewFiber

content Fiber New Pol Pol (100 New Fiber) ;New Bri x Brix (100

New -Fiber) Z,where Z CorrectedResidueWeight)/ The

factorZ further corrects theBrix to reflect the lowerpuri ty of the juice remaining in the pressed core

sample . Thus, theWinter-Carp formula is calculated as follows:

Sucrose concentration a: New Pol New Brix) (100 at New

New

These modifications in the sucrose concentration formula result in lower values andmore closely

reflect the yield of commercially recoverable sugar as reported by themills .

Cane'

yield (Mg/ha) was estimated as the product of stalk number per unit area (no . perm2

)and mean stalk weight (kg) . Sucrose yield (Mg/ha) was the product Of cane yield and sucrose

concentration divided by 10 .

Data for the USDA Ardoyne Farm experiment were analyzed with the following mixed

model :

whereflwas the overallmean ; Y,was year i ;Rm) was replicationj within Year i ; V,was Cultivark,

44

Journal Ameri can Society of Sugarcane Technologists, Vol. 22, 2001

S,was stalk type I. YV,k , VSk, and YVSMwere the interactions, andEykwas the residual . Cropand stalk type and their interaction were considered fixed effects

,with the remaining effects

considered as random effects in themodel.

Data for the Joel LandryFarm experiment were analyzed with the followingmixed model :

I“ C: Rm) Sk Csik E

ij k

where TU),is observationj in crop i , of stalk type k, ,u is the overallmean ; C,

is crop i ; S, is stalk typeIr, CS fl, is stalk typeby crop interaction ; andEMis the residual . Replicationwas considered a randomeffect, and crop and stalk type were considered fixed effects in the model . Means separationtechniques were based on L SD

A separate experimentwas conducted in 1986 to determine the effect ofdate ofsampling andsucrose concentration On stalk density . Five experimental clones from the L 84 assignment series andthe control cultivar CP 65-357 were sampled from the infield tests at the St. Gabriel ResearchStation. Stalk density and sucrose concentration were evaluated for each cultivar on August 13 ,1986 ; October 2, 1986 ; andDecember 1 , 1986 . Stalk density was estimated based on stalkheight (cm), stalk diameter (cm), and stalk weight (g)measurements from five stalks . Stalk volumewas estimated as : n stalk height ac (radius)

2. Stalk density was estimated as stalk weight/stalk

volume“

. Sucrose concentrationwas estimated as described byGravois andMilligan Partialcorrelation coefficients among the traits were Obtained afteradjusting fordate andreplication effectsin themodel .

RE SULTS DISCUSSION

For the tests conducted at the Ardoyne Farm, both sugarcane cultivars and stalk types

differed significantly forall traits (Table l ) . Based on cane yield in 1998, the cultivarHoCP 85-845's

total bull shoot cane yield was Mg/ha, which was percent of the total cane yield for thatcultivar (Table In contrast, only Mg/ha or percent of the total cane yield of the cultivarLHo 83- 153 was attributed to bull shoots . LCP 85-384 is the most widely grown cultivar inLouisiana, harvested on 71 percent Of the state

’s 2000 acreage (Louisiana Cooperative ExtensionService Census The effect of bull Shoots on LCP 85-384 was minimal . Only and

percent,in 1998 and 1999 , respectively, Of L CP 85-384

's total cane yield was contri buted by bull

shoots,with themajority ofbull shoots being under onemeter in 1998 . In 1999 , L CP 85-384 was

the cultivarwith the least amount of cane yield derived from bull shoots .

The effect Of crop on bull Shoot production was evaluated in the 1998 test conducted at theJoel Landry Farm. HoCP 85-845 stalk type (whole stalks , bull shoots, and total stalks) wassignificantly different forall sugarcane traits (Table Crop (plantcane vs . first ratoon) effectsweresignificant for sucrose yield, sucrose concentration,

stalk number, stalk weight, and fiber content .

Sucrose yield, sucrose concentration, and stalk weightmeans of the bull shoots were significantlyhigher for the plantcane crop than for the first-ratoon crop (Table Conversely, fiber content ofthe bull shootswas significantly lower for the plantcane crop than for the first-ratoon crop . Similar

to the results of the Ardoyne Farm test, the bull shoots had a lower sucrose concentration and fibercontent compared to the whole stalks . In the Joel Landry Farm test, bull shoots accounted for

45

Gravois et al.z Cultivar and crop effects of sugarcane bull shoots on sugarcane yield in Louisiana.

and percent of the total cane yield in the plantcane and first-ratoon crops, respectively. The

overall effect of bull shoots on sugarcane production was positive when assessed by sucrose yieldfor both plantcane and first-ratoon crops .

The production of sugarcane ismeasured by the field cane yield produced perunit area. The

quality of that cane yield is measured by the sucrose concentration . In sugarcane produced inLouisiana, the tops and side leaves of the stalks are removed eitherby controlled agri cultural burnsormechanicallyby extractor fans in combine harvesting systems . Tops and side leaves can decreasesugarcane quality ifprocessed with whole stalks of sugarcane (Ivin andDoyle

,

In a combine harvesting system, short bull shoots would likely be easily extracted with thetops and Side leaves through the extractor fan systems . Some portion of the tall bull Shoots wouldlikely have a greater chance of being discarded through the extractor fans becauseof their lowersucrose concentration, which makes these stalk portions less dense than the whole stalks . Tri spremise is supported by the data collected in the 1986 stalk density study. As expected

,sucrose

concentration S ignificantly increased for each sampling date (August through December) . Likewise,stalk density significantly increased for each sampling date : g/cm

3in August

, glem3in

October, and g/cm3in December. As the sucrose concentration of the stalks increased

,stalk

density increased . Therewas no vari ety x date interaction,indicating that all vari eties followed this

pattern. The lower stalk density of the bull Shoots would make separation of the bull shoots fromthe whole stalks more achievable through an air flow fan extractor system . However

,as noted in

these studies, the bull shoots had larger stalk diameters . Bull shoot billet pieces would likelyweighmore than whole stalk billet pieces of similar length, which would tend to offset the stalk densitydifferential between the two stalk types .

In awhole stalk harvesting system,both short and tall bull shootswould be harvested and

sent to the factory, although some of the Shorterbull shoots would not carry over to the heap . Sincebull Shoots are living green shoots, burning would haveaminimal effect on reducing the cane yieldderived from bull shoots . The increase in cane yield is offset by a lower sucroseconcentration for

the bull shoots . However, the overall effect ofbull shoots asmeasured by sucrose yieldwas positive

in the Ardoyne Farm test for each cultivar in both 1998 and 1999 and in the Joel LandryFarm test

in 1998 . Other economic factorswould tend to diminish the positive effect Ofbull shoots on sucroseyield. First, both the factory and grower are incurring transportation costs to what is essentiallypoorquality cane . The overall effect of bull shoots at the factory would be to lower both sucroseconcentration, anegative aspect, and fiber content, apositive aspect . Whi le the overall effect ofbullshoots on sucrose yield in the field is positive, bull shootsmayhave an adverse effect on processingbecause Of added polysaccharides, starch, and color precursors . With the additional costs oftransportation andprocessing and the negative effects on sugar concentration, bull shootsmay likely

have a negative effect on overall sugar production.

46

Journal American Society of Sugarcane Technologists , Vol. 22, 200 ]

REFERENCES

Baver, L .D .,H .W. Brodie, T. Tanimoto , andAC . Trouse . 1962 . New approaches to the

study of cane root systems . Proc . Int. Soc . Sugar Cane Techno]. Congr.-252 .

Chen,J .C .P . and CC . Chou . 1993 . Meade-Chen Cane Sugar Handbook

,12

th ed. John

Wiley and Sons, Inc .

Gravois,K .A. and SB .Milligan . 1992 . Genetic relationships between fiber and sugarcaneyield components . Crop Sci . -67.

Hess, J .W. 1954 . The influence of suckers on the yield of sugarcane . Sugar Joumal

3 1 .

Inman-Bamber’

,N.G. 1994 . Temperature and seasonal effects Of canopy development andlight interception Of sugarcane . Field Crops Res .

-5 1 .

Ivin,PC . andCD .Doyle . 1989 . Somemeasurements ofthe effect of tops and trash on cane

quality . Proc . Australian Soc . Sugar Cane Techno]. -7.

Legendre,B .L .

(

1992 . The core/pressmethod Ofpredicting the sugaryield from cane forusein payment . Sugar J . -7.

Salter, B . and GD . Bonnett . 2000 . High soil nitrate concentrations during autumn and

winter increase suckering . Proc . Australian Soc . Sugar Cane Techno]. -327.

Tanimoto, T. 1964. The pressmethod of cane analysis . Hawaii,P lant .Rec . 133- 150 .

47

Gravo i s et al.z Cultivar and crop effects of sugarcane bull shoots on sugarcane yield in Louisiana.

Gravois et a] Cultivar and crop effects of sugarcane bull shoots on sugarcane yield in Louisiana.

Table 2. cont’d.

Sucrose Cane Sucrose Stalk Stalk FiberCultivar

a field y ield concentration number weight content

1 Length of short bull meter,and the bull shoots was over one

meter.

50

Journal Ameri can Soc ietv of Sug arcane Technologists , Vol. 22, 2001

Gravoi s et al.z Cultivar and crop effects of sugarcane bull shoots on sugarcane yield in Louisiana.

Table 4. Trait means by crop for the Joel Landry Farm test conducted during

Sucrose Sucrose

95639

26898

122537

878 11L SD values to compare two main-plot (crop) means at the same or different sub-plot (stalk type)treatments are Mg/ha for sucrose yield, g/kg for sucrose concentration,

7179 No ./ha for

stalk number, kg for stalk weight, and g/kg for fiber content .

52

Journal American Society of Sugarcane Technologists , Vol. 22, 2002 .

ECONOMICALLY OPTIMAL CROP CYCLE LENGTHFORMAJOR SUGARCANE VARIETIES IN LOUISIANA

Mich ael E. Salassi and Janis BreauxDepartment ofAgri cultural Economics andAgribusinessLSU Agri cultural Center, Baton Rouge, LA 70803

ABSTRACT

Thewidespread adoption ofthehigh-yielding variety LCP85-384has resulted in two significant changesin the production sector of the Louisiana sugarcane industry. Plant characteri stics of this varietymakeit very suitable for combine harvesting and have helped promote the conversion from wholestalk

harvesting to combine harvesting in the state. Secondly, the variety is also an excellent stubbling variety,resulting in the expansion of standard sugarcane crop cycles beyond harvest of second stubble. Outfieldtri al yield data over the 1996-2000peri od formajor sugarcane varieties produced in Louisianawere used

to determine the optimal crop cycle length which would maximize the net present value of producerreturns . Cane yield and sugarperton data forplantcane through third stubble were used to estimate the

annualized net return of crop cycles through harvest of second and third stubble and to determine thebreakeven level of fourth stubble yields which would justifyproduction and harvest. Analysis ofyield

andnet return data for the varieties CP 70-32 1, LCP 85-384, andHoCP 85-845 indicated thatminimumyield levels necessary to keep Older stubble in production forharvest depend directly upon the yields ofthe pri or crop cycle phases and differ significantly across varieties.

INTRODUCTION

Theproduction sectorOftheLouisiana sugarcane industry has undergone tremendous change overthe past few years . Many sugarcane producers have switched from the use ofwholestalk harvesters tocombine harvesters. The performance rate difference between these two harvesters, coupled with the

relativelymore perishable billeted sugarcane, has caused producers andmillsto lookmore closely at thetiming and scheduling of sugarcane harvesting, transport, andmilling Operations. The release of the

variety LCP 85-384 in 1993 has resulted in substantial changes in the sugarcane varieties grown in

Lo uisiana. Tris variety is a high yielding variety wi th excellent stubbling ability (Legendre, In

1995 , the leading sugarcane varietygrown in Louisianawas CP 70-321, accounting for49 percent oftotal

acreage (Gravois, Other leading varieties produced included CP’

65-357 and LCP 82—89,

representing 15 percent and 13 percent oftotal state acreage, respectively. Acreage OfLCP 85-384 only

accounted for 3 percent Of total sugarcane acreage in 1995 . By 2000, acreage of LCP 85-384 had

increased to 71 percent of total state sugarcane acreage . CP 70-321 andHoCP 85-845 were the second

and third leading varieties produced in 2000 with only 14 percent and 8 percent of total acreage,respectively. Partlydue to thewidespread adoption OfLCP 85-384 aswell as the expansion ofsugarcane

intonewproduction areas, total sugarcane acreage inLouisianahas increased from acres in 1996

to acres in 2000 (USDA,Total sugarproduction over the four-year period increased by

57percent to million tons of sugar, raw value.

Thewidespread adoption of the variety LCP 85-384 has caused producers to reevaluate the

number of stubble crops to keep in production before plowing out and replanting. Traditionally, mostsugarcane producers in Louisianawould harvest aplantcane crop and two stubble crops and then plow

53

Selassi and Breaux : Economically Optimal Crop Cycle Length forMajor Sugarcane Vari eties in Io uisisana

out the stubble afterharvest of the second stubble crop . As a result of the excellent stubbling ability ofLCP 85-384, producers are now considering suchproduction decisions as how long should stubble crops

be kept in production before plowing out orwhether a stubble crop should be kept in production ifanetprofit could bemade from its harvest. Although these questions are currently related to the productionOfLCP 85-384 in Louisiana, this basic production decision is relevant to the production ofany sugarcane

variety in any region or location.

Crane et al. (1980, 1982) developed a conceptualmodel of the stubble replacement decision forsugarcane production in Florida. Yield prediction equations (Alvarez et al ., 1982) were estimated andintegrated into a decision model of the stubble replacement problem for sugarcane varieties grown inFlorida at that time. A more recent study in Louisiana used net present value methods to estimate theeconomic return s from the production of sugarcane varieties over an entire crop cycle (Salassi andMilligan,

This study utilized data from advanced variety tri als conducted at ten locations across

Lo uisiana from 1990 through 1994.

The basic purpose of thi s article is to outline amethodologywhich can be used to detennine theoptimal numberof sugarcane stubble crops to keep in productionwith the goal ofmaxirrrizing producer

net returns. Time value Ofmoney concepts are presented forpurposes of evaluating the total cash flow

of“

a sugarcane crop cycle over amultiyearperiod. Plantcane and stubble crop yields from outfield tests

are then used to determine the optimal number of stubble crops for three major sugarcane varieti es

currently produced in Lo uisiana.

MATERIAL S AND METHODS

Economic evaluation ofsugarcane crop cycle length is generally concernedwith determining the

optimal length of a crop cycle which wouldmaximize economic returns . More specifically, it involvesthe determination ofwhen to plow out the existing stubble crop andreplant to start anew crop cycle. The

Objective is to determine the optimal number Of sugarcane stubble crops to harvest which would

maximize average net returns to the producer over the entire crop cycle. Therefore, planting costs,cultivation andharvest costs, as well as yields and raw sugarprices,must be considered over the entirecrop cycle. In order to correctly evaluate stubble decisions, the total cash flow from a sugarcane cropcycle

,along with the appropriate adjustments for the time value ofmoney,must be considered.

The cash flow stream from a sugarcane crop cycle can be depicted in the following

manner:

m 1

P lanting costs

Plantcane net returns

First stubble net returnsSecond stubble net returns

Third stubble net return s

n- l stubble net returns

At the beginning of the crop cycle, planting costs per acre (PC) are incurred with harvest beginningthe following year. Net returns peracre to the producerare then received for the harvest ofplantcane

54

Journal Ameri can Society of Sugarcane Technologists , Vol. 22, 2002 .

(R1) through the final stubble crop harvest (Rn) . The decision faced by the producer iswhen to endthe crop cycle with the objective ofmaximizing net returns . Thi s problem is a farmmanagementexample of investment analysis, inwhi ch a sum ofmoney is investedwhich yields annual netreturns

in the following years (Boehlje and Eidman, 1984 ; Kay and Edwards,

The net present value (NPV) of a crop cycle income stream can be represented as :R] R2 R3 R4 Rn PC

( l t r)l

(H r)2

1+r)3

( l t r)4

whereNPV is the netpresent value per acre of the income stream,R1 is the net returns peracre from

plantcane,R2 is the net returns per acre from first stubble,R3 is the net returns per acre from secondstubble

,PC is the initial planting cost per acre, and r is a discount rate. The NPV of income from

a crop cycle can be interpreted as the total income from harvest ofplantcane and stubble crops lessplanting costs and all cultivation and harvest costs incurred adjusted for the time value Ofmoney.

In order to compare the relative profitability of different crop cycles and to determinebreakeven yields and sugarprices required to keep a stubble crop in production forharvest

,theNPV

of the income stream must be annualized This annualized value (ANPV) can be Obtained bymultiplying the NPV estimate by a capital recovery factor:

11

ANPV = [ r / l - PC

t 1

The annualized net present value (ANPV) of a crop cycle income stream can be interpreted as the

average net return peryear over a particular crop cycle . This is the net income estimate that shouldbemaximized in order to maximize returns fiom a crop cycle. The decision rule which can be usedwould state that a sugarcane stubble crop should be kept in production for harvest if the net returns

from harvest of that crop would increase theANPV of the crop cycle income stream . Ifharvest Ofthe stubble crop would result in a decrease in the average annualized net income, it should be plowed

out even ifaprofit could bemade fiom its harvest. Positive net returns from Older stubble crops areno guarantee that average net returns are beingmaximized.

To evaluate optimal sugarcane crop cycle length formajorvarieties produced in Louisiana,yield data forplantcane through third stubble crops were obtained from outfield tests conducted bythe LSU Agricultural Center, the USDA Sugarcane Research Unit, and the Ameri can Sugar CaneLeague over the 1996-2000 period . Sugar per acre, cane yield in tons per acre, and sugar per ton

values for the varieties CP 70-32 1 , LCP 85-384, and HoCP 85-845 are shown in Table 1 . Net

return s per acre to the producerwere estimated for a raw sugarprice of 19 cents perpound andwith

a 30 pound per ton reduction in sugarper ton to reflect a 10 percent trash content in commercially

recoverable sugar (CRS ) . Estimated production costs forvarious phases ofthe sugarcane production

55

Selassi and Breaux : Economically Optimal Crop Cycle Length forMajor Sugarcane Varieties in Io uisisana

cycle in Louisianawere taken from published 2001 estimates (Breaux and Salassi, Present

value ofnet returns were calculated using a five percent discount rate . Total planting costs peracreof production cane is shown in Table 2 and includes all costs associated with fallow and seedbed

preparation, purchase and expansion of seedcane, as well as the final mechanical planting of

production cane .


Total NPV andANPV estimates ofnet returns were estimated for the vari eties CP 70-321 ,LCP 85-384, andHoCP 85-845 forcrop cycles extending throughharvest ofsecond and third stubble

(Tables 3 P lanting cost andproduction cost estimates for2001 were used in the analysis . Basedon the sugaryields used in this analysis, producernet returns would bemaximized in the productionof all three varieties by extending the crop cycle through harvest of at least third stubble.

Sugarper acre yields for CP 70-32 1 , adjusted for average trash content, ranged frompounds per acre forplantcane to pounds per acre for third stubble (Table Harvest throughsecond stubble yielded aNPV of $39 per acre and aANPV of $ 14 per acre . Estimated net returns

peracre from a third stubble crop were $96 peracre,which is higher than theANPV through second

stubble . Therefore, the average net returns over the crop cycle could be increased by extending thecrop cycle through harvest of a third stubble crop . After factoring in third stubble net returns, the

NPV of the cropcycle increased to $ 1 18 per acre, or $33 per acre per year.

Higher sugar per acre yields for L CP 85-384 resulted in higher estimates ofnet returns peracre compared to other varieties . With plantcane, first stubble, and second stubble sugar per acreyields above pounds, theNPV ofnet returns ofa crop cycle through harvest of second stubblewas estimated to be $379 per acre, or an average of $ 139 per acre per year of harvest (Table

Third stubble yield of pounds of sugar per acre resulted in producer net returns of $22 1 per

acre, higher than the ANPV through second stubble . Extension of the crop cycle through a third

stubble harvest increasedNPV ofnet returns to $562 per acre, or $ 158 per acre onan annual basis .

The NPV Of crop cycle net returns for HoCP 85-845 were estimated to be $ 127 per acrethrough harvest Of second stubble and $336 per acre through harvest Of third stubble (TableCommercially recoverable sugar per acre yields declined to pounds for second stubble butincreased to pounds for third stubble . As a result, extension of the crop cycle through harvest

of a third stubble crop increased annual net returns by $48 per acre.

Although no yield data were available for fourth stubble yields, breakeven sugar yields

required to economicallyjustifyharvest ofa fourth stubble crop were estimated for each of the threevarieties at two different raw sugarprice levels (Table In order tomaximize net returns over thecrop cycle, a fourth stubble crop should be kept in production for harvest only if the projected net

returns per acre equal or exceed the ANPV through third stubble . Average CRS values for eachvariety were used to determine breakeven sugar per acre and tonnage per acre values for a fourth

stubble crop . At a raw sugarprice of 19 cents perpound, breakeven fourth stubble sugar yieldswereestimated to be pounds per acre for CP 70-32 1 , pounds per acre for LCP 85 -384, and

pounds per acre forHoCP 85-845 . An increase in projected raw sugar price to 2 1 cents per

pound lowered the required breakeven sugar per acre yields by approximately 500 pounds .

56

Selassi and Breaux : EconomicallyOptimal Crop Cycle Length forMajor Sugarcane Varieties in Io uisisana

Crane, D .R.,T.H. Spreen, J . Alvarez, and G. Kidder. 1982 . An analysis of the stubble

replacement decision for Flori da sugarcane growers . University of Florida Agri culturalExperiment Station Bulletin No . 882 .

Gravois,Kenneth. 1999 . The 1999 Louisiana sugarcane vari ety survey. Sugarcaneresearch

annual progress report, 1999 . LouisianaAgri cultural Experiment Station,Louisiana State

University Agri cultural Center, BatonRouge, LA., pp . 9 1-96 .

Kay, Ronald D ., and William M. Edwards . 1999 . Farm Management,4th edition.

WCB/McGraw-Hill, New York.

Legendre,Benjamin L . 2000 . Sugarcane planting recommendations and suggestions .

Louisiana Cooperative Extension Service, Louisiana State University Agri cultural Center,Baton Rouge, LA.

Salassi,M. E., and S . B .Milligan. 1997. Economic analysis Of sugarcane variety selection,

crop yield patterns, and ratoon crop plow out decisions . Journal ofProduction Agri culture.

1 39-545 .

United StatesDepartment ofAgri culture. Sugar and Sweetener Situation andOutlook

Report. Economic Research Service, SSS-230, January.

58


Table 1 . Mean sugarcane yields for three commercial varieties across locations, 1996-2000 .

Variety Sugar per ton

Plantcane, 1996-2000 :

First stubble, 1996-2000 :

Second stubble L 1996-2000 :

Third stubblen l 997-2000 :

Table 2. Total sugarcane planting costs per acre .

Cost per acre Percent Of acre Total cost per acre

Cost item :

Fallow seedbed preparation

Cultured seedcaneHand planting seedcane

Propagated seedcane

Mechanical planting seedcaneTotal planting cost

Planting cost allocation based on an initial planting of acres of cultured

two seedcane expansions using a planting ratio .

59

(dollars p er acre)

seedcane followed by

Selassi and Breaux : Economically Optimal Crop Cycle Length forMajor Sugarcane Varieties in Iouisisana

Table 3 . Annualized crop cycle net returns for CP 70-321 .

Crop cycle phase Harvest through

second stubble

Plantcane

First stubble b

Second stubble b

Third stubble b

NPV of total returns

ANPV of total returns d

3 Nominal fallow,seedbed preparation and planting cost.

b Nominal net returns per acre above cultivation and harvest costs .

Net present value of total net returns over crop cycle.d Annualized net present value ofnet returns .

Tab le 4. Annualized crop cycle net returns for LCP 85-384.

Crop cycle phase Harvest throughsecond stubble

Fallow P lant

Plantcaneb

First stubble b

Second Stubble b

Th ird stubble b



3 Nominal fallow,seedbed preparation and planting cost.

b Nominal net retums per acre above cultivation and harvest costs .

Net present value of total net returns over crop cycle.d Annualized net present value ofnet returns .

60

Harvest throughthird stubble



Tab le 5 . Annualized crop cycle net retums forHoCP 85-845 .

Crop cycle phase Harvest throughsecond stubble

Fallow P lant

Plantcaneb

First stubble b

Second stubble b

Third stubble b



3 Nominal fallow, seedbed preparation and planting cost.bNominal net returns per acre above cultivation and harvest costs .Net present value of total net returns over crop cycle .

dAnnualized net present value ofnet returns .

Table 6. Breakeven fourth stubble yields for threemajor varieties .

Fourth stubble yield CP 70-321 LCP 85-384

ANPVa

(third stubble)

Breakeven y_ield :

Sugarper acre

Avg. CRSb

Est. tons per acre

Sugar per acre (21

Avg. CRSb

Est. tons per acrea Annualized net present value ofnet returns .“b Average commercially recoverable sugar in pounds per ton of cane .

6 1


HoCP 85-845

Grigg et al.zSeasonal lyMamtained Shal lowWater Tables Improve Sustainability ofHistosols Planted to Sugarcane

SEASONALLYMAINTAINED SHAL LOW WATERTABLES IMPROVESUSTAINABILITY OF HISTOSOL S PLANTED TO SUGARCANE

Brandon C. Grigg

Soil andWaterResearch Unit, USDA-ARS ,BatonRouge

,LA 70808

George H. SnyderEverglades Research and Education Center

University ofFlori da, IPAS , Belle Glade, FL 33430

Jimmy D.MillerSugarcane Field Station, USDA-ARS ,

Canal Point, FL 33438

ABSTRACT

Subsidence Oi stosols, caused by microbial degradation of these drained soils, is amajorconcern in theEvergladesAgri culturalArea (BAA) ofsouthFlori da. OurObjectivewas to determineif seasonal maintenance of shallow water tables would effectively decrease soil degradation and

subsidence whi le allowing conventional production of sugarcane (Saccharum We comparedthe effects Of seasonally maintained water tables at and m depths

,and the currently

practiced m depth, on microbial degradation of a Lauderhill soil (Lithic Medisaprist) . We

maintained seasonal water tables from the beginning ofMay through September during the typicalwet season . Fieldswere drained to orbelow m from the soil surface during the remainder Of theyear to allow for conventional harvest and cultural management . We took surface soil samplesbimonthly, applied the substrate

14C-benzoate, andmoni tored

14CO2 respiration as an indicator of

Histosol degradation. Seasonally maintained water tables at and m reduced microbialdegradation of the organic soil, resulting in modeled subsidence rates of cm y"and cm y"

,

respectively,when compared to cm y"for the conventional m depth. Decreased soil

degradation and increased sustainabilityresultingfi'

om Shallowwatertablemaintenancewas adirect

result of increased soil water content and the corresponding decrease in air-filled pore space .

Seasonalmaintenance of shallowwater tables appears compatible with current production practices

for sugarcane, andwill enable Significant conservation OfBAAHistosols .

INTRODUCTION

Histosols, the organic soils common to the EAA,are fertile, with high native carbon (C),

nitrogen (N) , and phosphorus (P) levels . Conventional agricultural practices for sugarcaneproduction in the EAA includemaintenance ofwater tables at orbelow m from the soil surface.

The aerobic soil environment created by agricultural drainage enables microbial mineralization of

the organic soil, and release ofC,N

,and P formicrobial and plant uptake . Off-loading of excess N

and P resulting from soil mineralization has been addressed through development and adoption of

on—farrn management practices (Izuno et. al., During soil mineralization, the rate ofC lost

as carbon dioxide (COZ) exceeds the rate of C attenuation and storage . This results in landsubsidence of up to 4 cm y"(Stephens and Johnson,

195 1 ; Stephens et al., However, no

sugarcanemanagement practices have been adopted to address the land subsidence issue .

62

Journal Ameri can Society of Sugarcane Technologists , Vol. 22 , 2002

Considering the economic impact of sugarcane production on the BAA region and the state

(Schueneman,it is important to maintain sugarcane production in this region . However

,it

is also important to explore sugarcane management practices that ensure soil resource and

environmental sustainability. Oneway to reducemicrobial degradation and to increase soil resourcesustainability is to maintain Shallow water tables . This practice would decrease aerobic soildegradation of the organic soil, primarily by reducing the air-filled pore space and the oxygen (0 2)

Past research Shows that sugarcane is tolerant of, and canbe successfully grown in ,soils with

a seasonallymaintained shallow water table (Gascho and Shih, 1979 ; Kang et. al ., 1986 ; Snyder et.al .

,However, past research relating shallow water table management to soil sustainability

OfEAAHistosols considers onlyfull- seasonwater tablemaintenance (Stephens and Johnson, 195 1

Volk,

The impacts Of seasonallymaintained water tables on Histosol Sustainability are notadequately quantified. We suggest that seasonallymaintained shallowwatertables can substantially

improve soil sustainability, whi le allowing for current crop management practices and yield. Our

objectivewas to assay the effects of seasonal shallowwater tablemanagement on soil sustainability.


The research site was established in 1997near South Bay, FL (Figure 1) and consisted ofseven ha fields (180 m x 370 m) . The organic soil was a Lauderhill muck soil (Lithic

Medisaprist) . Bulk density and particle density were determined in the lab and were then used todetermine pore Space by calculation (B lake andHartge, 1986a; B lake andHartge, 1986b ; Danielsonand Sutherland,

Three fields underwater table management, one each'

at target water table depths of

(WT- l ), (WT and m (WT-3) below soil surface (Figure were planted to sugarcane

andwere separated by four unplanted buffer fields of equal size. Water tables in each field werecontrolled at the previouslymentioned depths using automatically-controlled, diesel-poweredpumpspositioned at the supply canal inlet and outlet for each experimental field . In response to needsexpressedbyGlaz watertables weremaintained from approximatelyMay(following Springgermination and stand establishment) through September (Figure This corresponds with the

warm, lrigh-rainfall portion of the growing season . During the remainder of the year

,fields were

drained, with a target water table depth of m (Figure 2) to allow for conventional harvest andcultural practices .

Using a stainless steel bucket auger m diameter), field soil samples were collectedevery twomonths from the surface -0 .15m of the soil profile

,midwaybetween sugarcane rows .

Weweighed tri plicate soil samples, dri ed them in a 105°

C oven for 24 h, and determined soil water

content by difference .

Tate ( l 979a and 1979b) used a substrate-induced respiration assay to successfully modeleffects offloodedmanagement onmicrobial decomposition oi stosols Of the BAA. Wemodifiedthe assay, using benzoate instead of salicylate tomodel organic soilmineralization, as suggested by

Williams andCrawford Williams andCrawford ( 1983) successfullyused benzoate tomodel

63

Gri gg et a] SeasonallyMaintained ShallowWater Tables Improve Sustainability ofHistosols P lanted to Sugarcane

degradation of peat Similar in many respects to Histosols of the BAA. In concurrent studies thebenzoate assay -

was sensitive to changes in watermanagement on BAAHistosols (datanot Shown) .We applied 14

C(carboxyl)-benzoate at a rate of 86 1 MBq kg"wet soil (specific activity, 577MBq

Sigma Chemicals, St . Louis,MO) .

We assayed 6 homogenous soil samples from each field . We conducted substrate assays atroom temperature (22 :t 1

°

C)within 6 h ofsample collection . Substratesweremixed with 10 g (wetweight) ofsoil from each Of the field samples . Samples were incubated for2 h (Zibilske, and

evolved CO2 including14CO2was collected in a 1MNaoH trap solution . Following incubation

,we

mixed 1 mL of the trap solution with 5 mL of scintillation cocktail (ScintoSafe P lus FisherScientific, Pittsburgh, PA) and determined rate of

14CO2 respired by microorganisms in the soil

degradation process (Model LS 380 1 , Beckman Instruments, Fullerton,CA) .

Data were analyzed using the Analysis ofVariance procedure in SAS v .8 software (SAS ,and statistical differences between means were determined using Fisher’s L SD

Regression analysis was also conducted using the SAS v .8 software .


Seasonal Shallow water table maintenance treatments resulted in significant differences insoil water content (Table Seasonal maintenance Of water tables at the m depth (W-T- 1)Sign ificantlyincreasedwatercontent ofthe surface soi l .OnlyWT- l caused soi l aeration to fall below

10 air-filledporosity (Table aminimum volume required foradequate soil aeration and aerobic

microbial activity (Paul and Clark, The depth to the shallow water tablewas highly variableduring the free-drainage period resulting in no significant differences in soil water content, howeverthere was a trend for greater soil water content and decreased air-filled porosity with the seasonal

WT- l treatment when compared to eitherWT-2 orWT-3 treatments (Table Wh ile the seasonalshallow water tables were maintained, WT-2 increased soil water content in comparison to

conventional water table management (WT This difference was not significant at the a=0 .05

level,but was Significant at the a=0 . 10 level .

Assay results (Table 2) indicated shifts in responses to changes in water tablemanagement

similar in magnitude to those for gross respiration reported by Volk who evaluated water

table impacts on subsidence ofEAAHistosols in lysimeters with re-packed soil. During periods Of

Shallow water table maintenance, the conventional watermanagement practice (WT—3) resulted in

the greatest assayedmicrobial activities (Table 2 and Figure

Elevated assay results associated with conventional management (WT-3) indicate

significantly reduced sustainability Of the organic soil relative to either WT- l or WT-2,the

seasonallymaintained shallowwater tables . Moreover,when compared toWT-3 , seasonal shallow

water table treatments generally improved sustainability Of organic matter throughout the periods

of free drainage (Table Wemaintained shallow water tables for only four to fivemonths duringthe warm

,wet portion of each year. This suggests that WT- l and WT-2 resul t in residual

suppression of soil degradation whi ch has not been previously reported forHistosols of the EAA

64

Grigg et al .zSeasonal lyMaintained Shal lowWater Tables Improve Sustainability ofHistosols Planted to Sugarcane

correlation of assay results to directlymeasured subsidence rates should Show that seasonal watertable management is as effective as full-seasonmaintenance in improving soil sustainability.

Given the current sugarcane varieties andproduction technology, an immediate shift to full

season shallow water table management is not realistic without negatively influencing sugarcaneproduction and the EAAandFlorida agri cultural econorrries . WT-2 appears the best fit with cmrentsugarcane varieties andproduction technology. TheWT- l treatment provides the greatest potentialincrease in soil sustainability. Research should be conducted to develop new sugarcane vari etiessuitable for production under seasonallymaintained shallow water tables .

Shih and others (1997) reported decreased subsidence rates for the last 10 years based onchanges in soil elevation on known transects throughout the BAA. They attri bute decreased

subsidence in part to Shallow water table management, a result of Best Management Practiceimplementation forP Off-loading (Shih et al . , Decreased soil degradation andmineralizationwould result in reduced nutri ent Off-loading as indicated byDavis Future research should

also address the effects of seasonal shallow water table management on nutri ent Off-loading .

Improved sugarcane management including shallow water table maintenance can be an

environmentally and economically sound production system. As a conservation practice,seasonal

shallow water table management could double the production life of valuable BAA soil resources .

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We express our appreciation to the Florida SugarCane League, Clewiston, FL , forfinancialsupport , and theU S . SugarCorporation, Clewiston,

FL,forproviding andmaintaining the research

site. We thankDr.RobertTate II] ,Department ofEnvironmental Sciences,RutgersUniversity,New

Brunswick,NJ, for consultation onmethodology. We also thank Drs . JoanDusky andVanWaddill

of the Everglades Research and Education Center, Belle Glade, FL ,for providing equrpment and

facilities for this research project .

REFERENCES

Blake, GR ,andK .H. Hartge . 1986a. Bulk Density p . 363-375 . In A. Klute (ed Methods

of So ilAnalys is, Part 1 Phys ical andMineralogi calMethods . ASA-SSSA,Madison,WI. .

B lake, GR , and K .H . Hartge . 1986b . Particle Density. p . 377-382 . In A. Klute

Methods of So il Analys is, Part 1 P hys ical and Mineralog ical Methods . ASA-S SSA,

Madison,WI. .

Danielson,RE

,andPL . Sutherland . 1986 . Porosity. p . 443-461 . InA.Klute Methods

of So ilAna lys is , Part 1 Phys ical andMineralog icalMethods . ASA-S SSA,Madison,WI

Davis, S M. 199 1 . Growth, decomposition, and nutri ent retention of Cladiumj ama icense

Crantz and Typ ha doming ens is Pers . in the Florida Everglades . Aquat. Bot.-224 .

66


Gascho, G.J., and SF . Shih. 1979 . Varietal response of sugarcane to water table depth. 1 .

Lysimeter perform ance and plant response . Soil and Crop Science Society of FloridaProceedings . -27.

Glaz, B . 1995 . Research seeking agricultural and ecological benefits in the Everglades . J .SoilWater Conserv .

-6 12 .

Izuno , F.T.,A.B . Bottcher, F.J. Coale, C .A. Sanchez, and DB . Jones . 1995 . Agri cultural

BMP S for phosphorus reduction in South Florida. Trans . ASAE.-744.

Kang, M.S ., G.H. Snyder, and J .D . Miller. 1986 . Evaluation of Saccharum and related

gennplasm for tolerance to highwater table on organi c soil . J .Am . Soc . SugarcaneTechno].-63 .

Paul,EA , andFE . Clark. 1989 . Soilmicrobiology and biochemis try .Academic Press

,Inc .

,

San Diego, CA. p . 17.

SAS . 1999 . SAS P rocedures Gu ide, Vers ion 8 . SAS Institute, Inc ., Cary, N. C ., 1643 pp .

Schueneman,T.J. 1998 .An overview OfFlorida sugarcane . Florida Cooperative Extension

Service, IFAS ,University ofFlorida

, Gainesville, S S -AGR-232 .

Shih, S E ,B . Glaz , andRE . Barnes

, Jr. 1997. Subsidence lines revisited in the Everglades

Agri cultural Area, 1997. Agri cultural Experiment Station, IFAS , University of Florida,Gainesville, Bulletin 902 .

Snyder, G.H., H.W. Burdine, J .R. Crockett, G.J. Gascho , D .S . Harrison, G. Kidder,J .W.

Mishoe, D .L .Myhre, F.M. Pate, and SF . Shih. 1978 .Water table management for.organicsoil conservation and crop production in the Florida Everglades . Agri cultural ExperimentStation

,IPAS

,University OfFlorida, Gainesvi lle, Bulletin 80 1 .

Stephens, J .C .,L .H. Allen, Jr.

,and E. Chen. 1984. Organic soil subsidence . In T.L . Holzer

Man-induced land subsidence :Geological SocietyofAmericaReviews inEngineering

Geology. 6 : 107- 122 .

Stephens, J .C ., and L. John son . 195 1 . Subsidence of organi c soils in the upperEverglades

region ofFlorida. Soil and Crop Sci . Soc . Fla. Proc . -237.

Tate,R.L ., III. l 979a. Effect of flooding on microbial activities in organic soils : carbon

metabolism. Soil Sci . -273 .

Tate, R.L .,HI. 1979b .Microbial activity in organic soils as affected by soil depth and crop .

Appl. Environ.Microbiol . -1090.

67

Gri gg et al Seasonally Maintained ShallowWater Tables Improve Sustainability’

ofHistosols Planted to Sugarcane

Volk, B .G. 1972 . EvergladesHistosol subsidence : 1 . CO2 evolution as affected by soil type,temperature, andmoisture. Soil and Crop Sci . Soc . Fla. Proc . -135 .

Williams, RT , and Crawford, R.L . 1983 . Effects of various physiochemical factors onmicrobial activity in peatlands aerobic biodegradative processes . Can . J . Microbiol.

- 1437.

Zibilske, L .M. 1994 . Carbon Mineralization . p . 835-863 . In R.W. Weaver et a].

Methods ofSo ilAnalys is, P artZ-Microbiolog ical andBiochemicalP rop erties . ASA-S SSA,

Madison,WI.

68


Tab le 1 . Treatment impacts on soil water content and air-filled porosity for the period whenshallow water tables were maintained, for the drained period enabling conventional harvest and

Average SoilWater Content [Air-Filled Porosityl]

Treatment ShallowWaterTable Drained Overallt

WT l

WT-2

WT—3

TAir-filled porosity determined as the difference between calculated total porosity and volumetric

water content .IOverall refers to the overall water treatment effect, being the average water content or air-filledporosity for the entire year, including the periods of shallow water table management and free

drainage .

§Treatments are based on the depth atwhich the seasonal shallow water table wasmaintained with

WT m depth, WT m depth, andWT m depth.

“Statistical comparisons are valid in a soil depth, within a column . Means followed by the same

letter are not significantly different (Fisher's L SD , a

69

Gri gg et a] SeasonallyMaintained ShallowWaterTables Improve Sustainability ofHistosols Planted to Sugarcane

Tab le 2. Watermanagement impacts on the benzoate assay of soil degradation for the period whenshallow water tables were maintained, for the drained period enabling conventional harvest and

Benzoate Assay ofHistosol Degradation

Treatment ShallowWaterTable Drained

WT- l i a§

a a

WT-2 b a b

WT-3 b a b

lOverall refers to the overall water treatment effect, being the average benzoate assay ofHistosoldegradation for the entire year, including the periods of shallow water table management and free

drainage .

ITreatments are based on the depth atwhich the seasonal shallow water table wasmaintained with

WT m depth,WT m depth, andWT m depth.

§Statistical comparisons are valid in a soil depth, within a column . Means followed by the same

letter are not significantly different (Fisher's L SD , a

70


Figure 1 . The research Site located in the Everglades Agri cultural Area lies south of LakeOkeechobee (shaded black) in western Palm Beach County, Florida.

Figure 2 . Water table depth for each treatment [WT 15 m depth,WT m depth, andWT

m depth] during seasonal shallow water table maintenance and during free drainage .

7]

Gri gg et al.zSeasonal lyMaintained ShallowWater Tables ImproveSustainability ofHistosols Planted to Sugarcane

SAMPLEDATE

Figure 3 . Study-long assay results as affected by water table management . Error bars indicate

standard error of themean . Treatments are based on the depth atwhich the seasonal shallow watertable was maintained withWT m depth,WT-2=O.4m depth, andWT m depth.

72

Olaz et ai Sugarcane Genotype Repeatability in Replicated Selection Stages and Commercial Adoption

due to disease susceptibility and poor agronomic type . It is unlikely that advancing more than 1 1genotypes from Stage III would improve the likelihood of identifying productive commercial

cultivars, unless other changes aremade that improve the quality ofgenotypes advanced to Stage 111 .

INTRODUCTION

The sugarcane breeding and selection program at Canal Point, Florida is a cooperative

program conducted by the USDA-Agri cultural Research Service, the Florida Sugar Cane League,Inc .

,and the University ofFlorida Institute ofFood and Agri cultural Sciences . A previous study

examined the final replicated testing stage (Stage IV) of the CP program (Brown andGlaz,

Before that study, 1 1 promising genotypes were tested at 10 locations in Stage IV. Each genotypewas replicated eight times and harvested as three annual crops

,the plant-cane

, first-ratoon, and

second-ratoon crops at each location. The 1 1 promising genotypes in Stage IVwere advanced fromapproximately 130 genotypes that were annually advanced from Stage II to Stage III (Glaz et al.,

Major criteria for advancement from one stage to the next are high yields,economic index,

disease resistance or tolerance, and agronomic traits . A principal conclusion ofBrown and Glaz

(2001)was that experimental precisionwould remain similar in Stage IV ifreplications were reducedfrom eight to four.

The Florida Sugarcane Variety Committee selects the genotypes to advance from Stage I

to Stage IV . This committee is composed ofpersonnel representing growers,mills, andresearch andextension agencies participating in the CP breeding and selection program . Many criteria are

considered in the selection process by committee members . However, most Of the genotypesadvanced to Stage IV in any given year can be classified into three groups using yield, disease, andagronomic criteri a. The first group ofgenotypes has high yields and acceptable disease profiles andagronomic characteristics at all locations in Stage III . The secondmost desirable group is composed

ofgenotypeswith high yields at some locations . If 1 1 genotypes are not yet selected, the remainingentri es are selected from among genotypes that hadmediocre yields in Stage 111 butmay have had

some otherredeeming characteristics, such as desirable agronomic traits, high theoretical recoverable

sugar yields, or excellent di sease resistance .

The comm ittee usually limited its selections to 1 1 genotypes due to resources assigned to

Stage IV. However, Brown andGlaz (2001) proposed a redistri bution ofresources in Stage IV thatwould not compromise experimental precision and allow for testing ofmore genotypes . In mostyears

,there were notmore than 1 1 genotypes in the first two groups of genotypes advanced from

Stage to Stage IV . However, several genotypes from the third group usually needed to be

discarded when only 1 1 genotypes were advanced.

Among the genotypes with high yields, several usually have severe disease susceptibilities .

The committee is very strict about not advancing such genotypes to Stage IV . Due to this policy and

the ever increasingdisease pressures on sugarcane inFlorida, the committee often selected genotypes

that ranked below 2oth in yield or economic index in Stage III to advance 1 1 relatively disease-free

genotypes .

74


Kang et al . (1988) reported that genotype repeatabilitywas low between the two stages for1 1 genotypes tested for one Stage HI and one Stage IV cycle . Glaz andMiller ( 1982) reported thatStage IV results predicted reasonably well the commercial yields of five released genotypes . Alogical follow-up to the studies ofBrown andGlaz Kang et al . (198 andGlaz andMiller

(1982) was to determine how well genotype performance in Stage corresponded to performance

in Stage IV ,and ultimately to commercial success for many Stage I and IV cycles . With this

information, a more informed choice could be made about whether to reduce replications andincrease the number of genotypes in Stage IV . Themajorpurpose Of thi s studywas to determine ifadvancing an additional three new genotypes to Stage IVwould improve the likelihood of identifying

successful cultivars . Thi s led into a secondary objective whichwas to determine ifa genotype withhigh ormediocre yields in Stage I I would be expected to have similar yields in Stage IV.


Results from 24 Stage III cycles from the CP 69 through the CP 92 series ofthe CP sugarcanecooperative breeding and selection program were reviewed. The CP 69 serieswas planted in Stage

III in 1970 ; and the final harvest of the CP 92 series in Stage Li was in 1995 . Stage III is thepenultimate selection stage, and the first stage Of the program in which genotypes are planted atmultiple locations, replications, andannual crop cycles About 130 new genotypes are now annually

advanced to Stage II I. These remain in the field for a plant-cane and a first-ratoon harvest . Thisstudy specifically focused on 2 1 to 42 of the Stage III genotypes in each Stage III cycle forwhichdatawere collected for both the plant-cane and first-ratoon crops .

Sixteen Stage IV cycles were reviewed; these Cycles included the CP 77 through the CP'

92

series . The CP 77 series was planted in Stage IV in 1980 ; and the final harvest Of the CP 92 seri esin Stage IV was in 1999 . Stage IV is the final selection stage in the CP program. Ten to 13 new

genotypes were advanced to most of these Stage IV cycles, but only 10 or l ] were planted at allStage IV locations . The genotypes in Stage IV were analyzed from the plant-cane through thesecond-ratoon crop . The characteristics compared between Stage I and Stage IV were sugaryield

,

(Mg sugar and economic index,measured in ha"(Deren et al ., The economic index

calculation accounts for costs such as planting, milling, and transportation of cane to themill. Forcalculations of economic index, the same costs were used over all years Of the study. Also

,

theoretical recoverable sugar (kg sugarMg"cane) was discussed for some genotypes . Theoretical

recoverable sugar (TRS) was calculated according to Arceneaux (1935) until 1993 and accordingto Legendre (1992) since 1993 .

Sugaryield and economic index were reported forboth Stage I and Stage IV as apercentage

of a commercially grown check cultivar. The check was CP 63-588 in Stages III and IV in the CP

77 and 78 series . In the CP 79 series, the check remained CP 63-588 in Stage I but was CP 701 133 (Rice et al ., 1978) in Stage IV. From the CP 80 through the CP 92 series, the check was CP

70-1 133 in both Stage III and Stage IV.

Stage IIIwas planted at four locations each year, three with organic soils and onewith a sand

soil . Inmost cases, Stage IVwas planted at these same locations, on the same days as Stage The

organic soilswereTerraCeiamucks (Euic , hypertherrnicTypicMedisaprists), Pahokeemucks (Euic,

75

Glaz et al.zSugarcane Genotype Repeatabili ty in Replicated Selection Stages and Commercial Adoption

hyperthermic LithicMedisaprists), Lauderhillmucks (Euic , hyperthermic LithicMedisaprists), andDaniamucks (Euic , hyperthermic , shallow LithicMedisapri sts) . The sand soilswereMalabar sands

(Loamy, siliceous, hyperthermic Grossarenic Ochraqualfs and Pompano Fine sands (Siliceous,hyperthermic Typic Psammaquents) . Stage IV was planted at an additional 5 to 8 locations eachyear . One of these locations hadPompano Fine sand soils

, and anotherhadTorrymuck soils (Buie,hyperthermic TypicMedisaprists) . The Torrymucks have 30-50% organic matter rather than 7085% organic matter which is characteristic Of the organic soils at the Stage 1 locations . The

remaining Stage IV tests were on organic soils Similar to the organic soils of the Stage locations .

Stage plots were m long with rows spaced m apart. Plots were two rows wide,

with aborderrow surrounding the Stage experiment,but not individual plots . Each Stage I plot

had a m alley on. one end and a 6 m alley on the other end. Stage I experiments were planted

in randomized complete-block designswith two replications . Stage IV plots were m long with

rows spaced m apart and m alleys, andplanted in randomized complete-block designs . Fromthe CP 77through the CP 88 series, plotswere fourrows widewith four replications per experiment.From the CP 89 through the CP 92 seri es, plots were two rows wide with eight replications perexperiment. A borderrow surrounded all Stage IV experiments, and in the case ofthe CP 89 throughthe CP 92 series, a border row surrounded each Stage IV plot. Agronomic practices, such as

fertilization,pesticide application,

cultivation,andwater control, were conducted by the landowner

in whose field each experiment was planted.

Sugaryieldwas estimatedbymultiplying cane tonnagebyTRS . Cane tonnagewas estimatedbymultiplying stalk number by stalk weight in all Stage tests and in all Stage IV tests after the

CP 88 series . Stalk number was estimated by counting total millable stalks per plot duri ng the

summer. Stalk weight was estimated from a lo- stalk sample collected in October in Stage I and

from October throughApri l in Stage IV. The TRS was estimated from the juice extracted from the

same 10- Stalk sample . In Stage IV,from the CP 77 through the CP 88 series, cane tonnage was

estimated by weighing entire plots, and TRS was estimated from 15-stalk samples . The stalk

samples fromwhich TRS and stalk weightswere estimated were collected from srigarcane thatwasburnt in the field before it was cut and sampled for the Stage IV CP 77 through CP 88 series . Allother stalk samples were of stalks not previously burnt .


By the year 2000, 32 CP sugarcane cultivars were released in Florida Since the CP 69 seriesfinished its second year of testing in Stage in 1972 (Table With sugar yield used as the

ranking criterion ,18 of these 32 cultivars ranked among the top four places in Stage I I (Fig .

Eight of these 32 Cultivars ranked number one in Stage in sugaryield . Five cultivars ranked from

fifth through eighth place, seven ranked from ninth through tw elfth place, one ranked in fourteenth

place,and one ranked below fifteenth place .

Ranking based on economic index resulted in a similar distri bution as for sugar yield (Fig .

Seventeen genotypes ranked from first through fourth place in Stage III, five ranked fifth througheighth

,seven ranked from ninth through thirteenth place, and three cultivars ranked below fifteenth

in economic index in Stage III.

76


The only genotype from Stage III with a rank inferior to 15th that was released on the basisof sugaryieldwas CP 89- 1509 (Tai et al., 2000) (Table CP 89- 1509 was released forproductionon sand soils only; itwas not evaluated on organic soils in Stage IV due to its low yields on organi csoils in Stage III . Using economic index as the selection criterion

,three genotypes that ranked

inferior to 15th in Stage IIIwere released. One was CP 89- 1509 . Also released were CP 85- 1308

(Tai et al ., 1995) and CP 85- 1432 (Deren et al . , None of these cultivars has been used onmore than 1% ofFlorida’s sugarcane hectarage in any one year.

These 24 cycles of Stage data Show that the better the ranking for either sugar yield oreconomic index in Stage III , the more likelihood that the genotype would eventually be released.

Twenty-eight of3 1 CP cultivars released since 1979 ranked better than 15th in both sugaryield andeconomic index in Stage II Z. Only one has been released that ranked below 15th in both sugar yield

and economic index, and two ranked inferior to 15th in economic index , but better than 15th in sugaryield . Of these three cultivars, one was a special release for sand soils .

Moni toring the level of commercial use after a genotype’s release is a furthermeasure of its

success . We considered that a cultivarwascommercially successful inFlorida if itwas used at least

forone yearon 1% ofFlori da’s sugarcane hectarage . With this lenient criterion,only 14 of the 32

released cultivars became commercially successful (Table Eleven of these 14 cultivars rankedfirst through fourth in Stage 1 using sugar yield as the ranking criterion . The worst rank in Stagewas ninth. Using economic index as the ranking criterion gave similar results

,except that one

cultivar ranked l 0th and one 13th in Stage

Five of the CP cultivars that were tested in Stage III since 1970were used onmore than 15%of the hectarage for at least one year (Table The lowest ranking in Stage 13] for any of these“widely used”cultivars in Stage I was forCP 72- 12 10 (Miller et al ., it ranked sixth in both

Mg sugar and ha"

. Cultivars CP 70- 1 133 and CP 80- 1743 (Deren et al ., 199 1) were first in bothcategories, CP 72-2086 (Miller et al ., 1984) second in both categories, andCP 80- 1827 (Glaz et al . ,1990) third in both categories in Stage III .

Most genotypes that laterbecame commercial cultivars ranked among the top 15 in Stage

in either sugaryield or economic index . Further, the worst rank in Stage III for either sugaryield oreconomic index of anywidely used cultivarwas sixth. A conservative conclusion is that as long asthere are at least 1 1 genotypes advanced from Stage 131 to Stage IV, Stage under its current

structure, is adequate for identifying genotypes that will be widely used commercial cultivars in

Florida. For the goal of identifying successful commercial cultivars (used on at least 1% of

commercial hectarage for at least 1 year) forFlorida, these data indicate that sufficient confidencecan be placed in Stage rankings to warrant not increasing the number of Stage IV entri es beyond

1 1 if doing so would require advancing genotypes from Stage III that ranked worse than 15th in

sugar yield and economic index .

For genotypes that are advanced from Stage III to Stage IV but not released commercially,anothermeasurement of their success is howwell they yielded in Stage IV. A benefit of identifyinghigh-yielding genotypes in Stage IV is that they become a source of parental clones with reliableprobabilities of producing commercially acceptable progeny. In general, both sugar yield and

economic index as apercent of the check cultivar in Stage IIIwere not good predictors ofproduction

77

Glaz et al.zSugarcane Genotype Repeatability in Replicated Selection Stages and Commercial Adoption

in Stage IV. Correlations were significant but low (Fig . 3 and Thi s indicates that some genotypes

that had poor yields in Stage III had hi gh yields in Stage IV and vice versa. Therefore,we looked

specifically at performance in Stage IV of ( 1) genotypes that ranked worse than 14th in sugar yieldor economic index in Stage III and (2) genotypes that ranked either first or second in sugar yield inStage I.

From the CP 77 through the CP 92 series, 40 genotypes advanced from Stage III to Stage IVrankedworse than 14th in Stage III in either sugaryield or economic i

'

ndex (Table Twenty-sevenof these genotypes ranked worse than 14th inMg sugar ha

"in Stage III . Five of these 27proceeded

to rank either first or second in sugar yield in Stage IV . Twenty-five genotypes ranked worse than14th in economic index in Stage I I . Six of these 25 ranked eitherfirst or second in economic indexin Stage IV . Of these six, CP 85- 1308 eventually became a commercial cultivar. Approximately20% of the genotypes that weremediocre in Stage III were highly successfirl in Stage IV. Severalof these genotypes probably would have b een released commercially except for diseasesusceptibilities that manifested after they were advanced to Stage IV . Attempts were made to useall of these successful Stage IV genotypes in crosses for several years at Canal Point .

Amore detailed analysis further refines the strategy of advancing genotypes from Stage IHto Stage IV. The lowest ranked genotype in Stage I to later rank either first or second in Stage IVwasCP 85- 1308 , whi ch ranked 2 l st in economic index in Stage III (Table However

,it also

ranked seventh in sugar yield in Stage III. Cultivar CP 85-1308 helps identify a characteri stic ofother genotypes that had poor rankings in Stage III, but then ranked either first or second in StageIV in one of these characters . Each of these genotypes ranked better than 2oth in either sugaryieldor economic index in Stage II I. Thus, the selection comm ittee could choose not to advance to StageIV any genotype that ranked below 2oth in both sugar yield and economic index . However

,the

selection committee should be careful not to follow the above guideline when there are severalgenotypes with consecutive ranks and similar percentages of the check that rank below 20th in both

sugar yield and economic index .

Another issue is how soon within the selection program decisionmakers can be reasonablycertain that they have identified genotypes that will perform well commercially. In the case of the

CP program ,this question could be posed as : if a superior genotype is identified in Stage I is it

necessary to further evaluate it in Stage IV or could its release be immediately put on a fast track"There were 25 genotypes that ranked either first or second in sugaryield in Stage III from the CP 77through the CP 92 series (Table Of the 14 that ranked first in Stage III, two ranked first in Stage

IV,and 6 became commercial cultivars . Of the 1 1 genotypes that ranked second in Stage III, two

ranked first in Stage IV and only these two became commercial cultivars. Thus, 8 of the 25

genotypes that ranked either first or second in Stage III became commercial cultivars . However, 8others of the 25 genotypes that ranked first or second in Stage III then ranked among the lowest 6

Stage IV genotypes in sugar ha"and ha"

. This shows that although Stage III successfully

identified some high-yielding Stage IV genotypes, it also incorrectly predicted that an equal number

would be high yielding .

There are several explanations for the poor correlations between Stage III and Stage IV

yields . Stage has smallerplots, fewer replications, and fewer locations than Stage IV . Probably

of more importance, all Stage I samples for TRS were taken during the final three weeks of

78

Journal Ameri can Society of Sugarcane Technologists, Vol. 22 , 2002

October. For Stage IV,TRS sampleswere collected fromOctober throughApril

,the typical Florida

harvest season . Some genotypes remain low in TRS in October and through November and

sometimes December, others remain low throughout the harvest season. Recently, additional TRS

sampling was begun for Stage HI in January and February. This new practice may help improve

agreement between Stage and Stage IV genotype performance.

Another important reason that genotype performancemaynot agree well between Stage Iand Stage IV is that Stage data are collected through the first-ratoon crop and Stage IV throughthe second-ratoon crop . Genotype CP 90- 1 1 13 serves as an example that second-ratoon yields canbe markedly different from those of plant cane and first ratoon for a given genotype . In Stage III

,

CP 90- 1 1 13 ranked first in sugaryield and second in economic index (Table In Stage IV, CP 90

1 1 13 had hi gh sugar yields in the plant-cane crop (Glaz et al., 1995) but ranked among the lowest

in sugar yield in the second-ratoon crop (Glaz et al . , Alvarez and Schueneman (199 1)reported that the cost Ofplanting is high relative to other costs in the Florida sugarcane cycle . Due

to this high cost,the Canal Point program tries to release genotypes that will maintain high yields

through at least three annual harvests . Therefore, it is critical to identify genotypes such as CP 90

1 1 13 in Stage IV before they are released. However, this decline in yield does not occur withsufficient frequency among genotypes to warrant extending Stage III one more crop year.

Poor repeatability between the two selection stages can also be explained by using

CP 80 1743 as an example. CP 80-1743 was the highest ranking genotype in its Stage cycle forboth sugar yield and economic index but was mediocre in Stage IV for both characters (Table

From the CP 77 through the CP 88 seri es, yields were estimated in Stage III by counting stalks andweighing a 10-Sta1k sample . In Stage IV , whole plots were weighed . After the CP 88 series, yieldswere estimated in both stages by counting stalks and weighing stalk samples . The Stageprocedure was probably the more accurate for CP 80- 1743 because its plot weights weresubstantially reduced in almost all Stage IV plots by severe rat damage after stalk counting wouldhave occurred but before plots were weighed. Similar damage was not caused to other genotypes

in the same Stage IV tests ; and CP 80- 1743 was identified as amediocre genotype in Stage IV forsugaryield

,although itwas identified as a genotype with a highTRS (Glaz et al., Itwas only

due to laterwork ofEilandandMiller (1992) thatCP 80 1743was released. CP 80- 1743 is currentlythe most widely grown cultivar in Florida (Glaz, which suggests that rat damage inexperimental plots does not predict similar damage in commercial fields .

Anotherreason thatmay account for differences in genotype performance between Stage III‘

and Stage IV is that the genotypes are evaluated in each stage in different years . ForFlorida, Kang

et al. (1987) reported significant genotype x year interaction forplant-cane sugar yields of Stagegenotypes; whereas, Brown andGlaz (200 1) suggested that genotype performance across yearswassimilar. in Stage IV . Milligan et al . ( 1990) reported that genotype x year effects weremost importantin ratoon crops in Louisiana, but notmore important than genotype x location effects . Since Stage

IV tests genotypes during later years than Stage III, genotype x year interactionmay play a role inthe differences in genotype performance noted between Stages III and IV.

Thi s study reviewed 24 cycles of Stage III and 16 cycles of Stage IV data. During these

cycles, at least 10 or 1 1 genotypes peryearwere advanced to all Stage IV locations where theywere

evaluated as potential commercial cultivars forFlorida. The intent of the committee responsible for

79

Glaz et al.zSugarcane Genotype Repeatability in Replicated Selection Stages and Commercial Adoption

advancing genotypes from Stage III to Stage IVwas generally to advance the genotypes with thehighest rankings for sugar yield and economic index . However

,due to concerns with pests and

agronomic type, several lower ranking genotypes from Stage IIIwere routinely advanced to StageIV .

Stage results were analyzed by comparing them to actual commercial use and to StageNdata. One conclusionwas that advancing 1 1 genotypes from Stage III to Stage IVwas sufficient foridentifying commercial cultivars that would be widely used in Florida. The data showed that itwould be very unlikely to identifywidely used cultivars from genotypes that rankedworse than 15thin both sugar yield and economic index in Stage III as it is currently structured.

The study ofBrown andGlaz (2001) has helped improve a limiting factor in the CP program,

the low number of genotypes that can be analyzed in Stage IV . To take advantage of this

opportunity, we recommend improving the caliber of genotypes that are advanced to Stage III to

improve the likelihood of identifying cultivars fiom 14 advanced genotypes to Stage IV. Themostlogical immediate approach to achieve thi s objective is to expand genotype numbers in the three

selection stages prior to Stage III: Seedlings, Stage I, and Stage II. However, Tai et al. (1980)reported that sugaryield in StageHwas not an effective predictorof sugaryield in Stage III. Further,much of the percentage of increased genotypesmaybe lost to disease susceptibility ifnew diseases

or races Of current diseases appear. Therefore, ongoing monitoring and review would be animportant component of this strategy.

ACKNOWL EDGMENTS

The authors acknowledge the assistance ofVeltonBanks,Weldin Cardin,DowMcc lelland,Wayne Jarriel, Lewis S choolfield, Louis Serraes, and Howard Weir who served as agri cultural

science technicians for at least 5 years in either the Stage III or Stage IV phase of the Canal Point

program during the years forwhich datawere reviewed in this study.

REFERENCES

Alvarez, J . andT.J. Schueneman. 199 1 . Costs and return s for sugarcane production onmuck

soils . Information Report EI 9 1-3 , Food andResource Economics Department, Institute of

Food andAgri cultural Sciences, University ofFlorida.

Arceneaux , G. 1935 . A simplifiedmethod ofmaking theoretical sugar yield calculations

in accordancewithWinter-Carp-Geerligs formula. International Sugar Joumal 37:264-265 .

Brown,J .S . and B . Glaz . 2001 . Analysis of resource allocation in final stage sugarcane

clonal selection. Crop Science -62 .

Deren, C .W.,J . Alvarez, andB . Glaz. 1995 . Use of economic criteria for selecting clones

in a sugarcane breeding program. Proc . Int. Soc . Sugar Cane Tech. 437-447.

80

Olaz et al Sugarcane Genotype Repeatabi lity in Replicated Selection Stages and Commercial Adoption

Miller, J .D ., P .Y.P . Tai , B . Glaz , J .L . Dean, andMS . Kang. 1984 . Registration ofCP 722086 sugarcane . Crop Sci .

Miller, J .D ., E.R. Rice, J.L . Dean, and P .Y.P . Tai . 198 1 . Registration of CP 72-12 10

sugarcane . Crop Sci .

Milligan, S .B .,K .A. Gravis, K .P . B ischoff, andRA.Martin. 1990 . Crop effects on broad

sense heritabilities and genetic variances of sugarcane yield components . Crop Sci .349 .

Rice, E.R.,J .D . Miller

,N .I. James, and J .L . Dean. 1978 . Registration of CP 70- 1 133

sugarcane . Crop Sci .

Tai, B . Glaz, J .D .Miller, J .M. Shine, Jr., J.E. Follis, and J .C . Comstock. 2000 .

Registration of‘

CP 89 - 1509' sugarcane . Crop Sci .

Tai, J .D .Miller, C .W. Deren,B . Glaz, J .M. Shine, and J .C . Comstock. 1995 .

Registration of‘

CP 85- 1308'sugarcane . Crop Sci .

Tai,

J,D .Miller, B .S . Gi ll, andV . Chew . Correlations among characters of

sugarcane in two intermediate selection stages . Proc . Int. Soc . SugarCaneTech. 1 1 19

1 128 .

82


Table 1 . Commercial sugarcane cultivars released inFlorida that were tested in Stage I since 1970,the year each cultivar was advanced from Stage

Cultivar

CP 69-1052

CP 70- 1 133

CP 72- 12 10

CP 72-2086

CP 73- 1547

CP 74—2005

CP 75- 1082

CP 75- 1553

CP 75-1632

CP 77- 1776

CP 78- 1247

CP 78- 1628

CP 78-21 14

CP 80-1743

CP 80- 1827

CP 81- 1238

CP 8 1- 1254

CP 82- 1 172

CP 84— 1 198T

CP 85- 1308

CP 85— 1382

CP 85- 1432

CP 85- 149 1

CP 88- 1508

CP 88- 1540

CP 88- 1762

CP 89-1509

CP 89-2 143

CP 89-2377

CP 92- 12 13

CP 92- 1640

CP 92- 1666

TAnote describing CP 84- 1 198 suggests an

not discussed in the text .

1972

1973

1974

1976

1976

1977

1978

1978

1978

1980

198 1

198 1

198 1

1983

1983

1984

1984

1985

1987

1988

1988

1988

1988

199 1

199 1

199 1

1992

1992

1992

1995

1995

1995

I to Stage IV, number of genotypes with which

83

Rank in Stage 1

Mg sugar ha"

Olaz et a] Sugarcane Genotype Repeatability in Replicated Selection Stages and Commercial Adoption

Tab le 2. Rank and Of check in Stages III and IV for sugar yield and economic index of 40genotypes from 16 years of Stage III that ranked worse than 14th in either sugar yield or economic

Stage Stage

84


Tab le 3. Rank and of check from 16 years of Stages and IV for sugar yield and economic

Stage Stage

of check

cultivars Florida.

85

Olaz et al. : Sugarcane Genotype Repeatability in Replicated Selection Stages and Commercial Adoption

6 7 8 9

Sugaryie ld rank in Stage III

Figure 1 . Rank Of sugar yield (Mg sugar ha") in Stage and number of genotypes with the

same rank for 32 sugarcane genotypes that became commercial cultivars in Florida fromthe CP 69 through the CP 92 seri es .

6 7 8 9

per ha rank in Stage III

Figure 2 . Rank of economic index (8 ha") in Stage and number of genotypes with the same

rank for 32 sugarcane genotypes that became commercial cultivars in Florida from the

CP 69 through the CP 92 series .

86

Journal American Society of Sugarcane Technologists, Vol. 22 , 2002

r = ol 7

95 98 101

Stage III genotypes check)

Figure 3 . Correlation of sugar yield (measured as Mg sugar ha") as percent of check cultivar in

Stage III with sugar yield as percent of check cultivar in Stage IV for 1 17 genotypes

from 16 Stage III and Stage IV cycles .

87

Olaz et a] Sugarcane Genotype Repeatability in Replicated Selection Stages and Commercial Adoption

S tage III genotypes check)

Figure 4 . Correlation of economic index ha") as percent of check cultivar in Stage III with

economic index as percent of check cultivar in Stage IV for 1 17 genotypes from 16

Stage and Stage IV cycles .

88

Andrews and Godshall : Comparing the Effects of SulphurDioxide onModel Sucrose andCane Juice Systems

COMPARING THE EFFECTS OF SULPHURDIOXIDEONMODEL SUCROSE AND CANE JUICE SYSTEMS

L .S . Andrews and M.A. Godshall

Sugar Processing Research Institute,Inc .

1 100 Robert E. Lee B lvdNew Orleans, LA

ABSTRACT

Sulphur dioxide (80 2) has been used for centuries tominimize color in food processing andfruit and vegetable storage . In the sugar industry, it is used routinely by sugar beet processors toreduce and prevent color formation in white refined sugar. Sugarcane processors throughout the

world use SO2 to produce plantationwhite sugars. This studywas undertaken to determine the effectof SOZ on pure sucrose solutions in comparison to real factory sugarcane juice streams . Sugarsystems included 15 brix pure sucrose, clarifiedjuice andmixedjuicefiomaLouisiana sugarcanemill.A pH of was obtained by adding milk of lime then lowered to approximately pH with either

SO"Z orHC] (control) . Several samples ranging from pH 5 to 8 were processed at 0-120 min at 85

0

C. Analyses included pH, 80 2, color, calcium, and invert (as ameasure of sucrose loss) . Resultsindicated that themodel systemwasmuchmore sensitive to low levels of SO2 than real juice samples

which demonstrated a greater buffering capacity. The pH levels of the model sucrose solution

dropped rapidly, and invert levels increased with time . There was loss of sucrose in the SOZtrial as comparedwith no sucrose losswithHc l. Clarifiedjuice resisted changes inpHwith both 80 2andHG]. Sucrose loss at 120 min Of processing and a pH Of was only There was a

maximum colorreduction of 10- 15 in the S0 2 trial,whereas no colorreduction or sucrose losswas

observed in the HC] trial. The mixed juice was very resistant to pH changes, and aminimum pH of

was achieved with 4800 ppm SO, NO sucrose losswas observed in either trialwithmixed juice,and color reductionwas the same in both the SO2 andHCl trials . In real juice streams, SO2 reduced

color by 10- 15 more than clarification alone but also induced some sucrose loss after a

INTRODUCTION

Sulphur dioxide has traditionally been used in food processing and produce storage to

minimize color formation due to browning reactions associated with amino acids interacting withinvert sugars in theMaillard reaction. Sugar beet processors routinelyuse sulphur dioxide in process

streams for the same purpose . Among sugar cane processors worldwide there ismixed interest in

usage of sulfitation. In the United States, sulfitation has rarely been used in cane raw sugar factoriessince the 1950's. Today, there is renewed interest in the effectiveness of sulfur dioxide as a color

retardant as many US factories are considering the production ofhigh quality low color raw sugar

to be sold as a food grade sugar.

Under normal ambient temperature and pressure, sulphur dioxide is a colorless, pungentsmelling, nonflammable gas. In very low concentrations this gas can cause extreme eye and

respiratory irritation, thus must be used in a controlled environment (Anonymous, The

90


Egyptians andRomans burned sulfur to form sulfur dioxide (SO2) as a means of sanitizing wine

making equipment and today S0 2 is used to treatmost light colored dehydratedfi'

uit andvegetables

to prevent undesirable enzymatic and non enzymatic “browning”reactions . Sulfirr dioxide providesthe added benefit ofacting as a food preservative and functions as an antioxidant (McWeeny,

Sulfite additive has beenused extensively in the food industry to retardMaillard reactions .McWeeny

(198 1) discussed the two main groups of reactions between sugars, ascorbic acid and their

dehydration products and bisulfite, primarily the hydroxy sulfonate and organo sulfur compounds.

Browning reactions , ofwhatever type, are caused by the formation ofunsaturated, coloredpolymers ofvarying composition. Compounds that engenderbrowning usually contain a carbonyl orpotential carbonyl grouping (Hodge, Browning can be inhibited by compounds that block oreliminate or combine with carbonyl groups. Themultiplicity of studies regarding browning reactiontheories is reviewed thoroughly in Hodge’s ( 1953) review article.

The purposeof sulfiting purified and clarified thin beet juices are 1) to control juice color

formation; 2) to improve the bo iling properties of the juices; and 3) reduce the excess alkalinity(McGinnis , Two methods of sulfuring are 1) by sulfur stove, burning elemental sulfur forproduction of sulfite and 2)bubbling sulfur dioxide through process streams . Also produced duringthese processes is the undesired sulfate ion that can interfere with crystallization causing an increaseinmolasses purity and production. Theoxidation of sulfite to sulfate is greatly retarded as the sugar

concentration is increased. Sulfitation can control juice co lor by interfering with chromophoricmolecular groups include carbonyl (ketones) , carbonyl (aldehyde carboxyl, and amido .

“Thesecompounds are characterized by an electron imbalance

,an electronically excited state, amolecular

resonance, an absorptionofspecific bands oftransmitted light, andto the beholder, color”(McGinnis ,

Color compounds in cane andbeet sugarproductsinclude naturally occurring pigments alongwith a large heterogeneous variation of color compounds produced during processing. It has beenestimated that fora 98 .5

°pol raw sugar, colorants account forapproximately 15-20 of the weightof non sugars. In granulated refined sugar the estimate is approximately 30 ppm (Clarke andGodshall,

In the cane sugarfactory, themajorrole of sulfur dioxide has been tomake white sugar ratherthan raw sugar through inhibition ofcolor forming reactions . This is achieved by addition of SOZ tothe alkenic double bond in an unsaturated carbonyl intermediate as well as to the carbonyl

group, which yields fl-Sulfonated aldehydes that are of comparatively low reactivity in reactionsleading to the production ofbrowning compounds by theMaillard reaction and degradation of invert

sugars (Shore, et al ., Sulfirr dioxide also has the ability to inhibit or retard enzymaticbrowning reactions. Sulfurdioxide added as 300-500ppm to raw beet juice resulted inminimal (5colorreduction (Shore, et al., Onna and Sloane (1978) reported that 300ppmdecreased colorin syrup and whole raw sugars by about 25% with crystal color reduced by Final refined

granulated sugar from this process had 35% less color.

During processing and storage at elevated temperatures, sugar products will darken. Allindustries that use sugarproducts are in turn susceptible to color changes in theirproducts whichmayormay not be desirable (Zerbau, When cane and beet juices are heated and limed during

clarification, invert sugar disappears and the colorofjuices increases with the amount of lime added.

9 1

Andrews andGodshall : Comparing the Effects of SulphurDioxide onModel Sucrose andCane Juice Systems

Much of this color is bound to calcium precipitate in the defecation process. Color changesadditionally occur during heating and evaporationprocesses

,since thejuices are exposed to continual

heating (70-75°C) over several hours at slightly alkaline pH in the beet industry and slightly acid pH

in the cane industry. The higher the alkalinity of clarified beet juice, the greater the color increase .The color of clarified cane juice also increases during evaporation and crystallization even though itis kept on the slightly acid side .

In cane andbeet processing , there aremany variations in procedure for adding sulfur dioxide.There is cold sullitationwith SOZ added to cold raw juice then limed; alkaline sulfitationwhere juiceis limed then sulfited and again sulfite added to syrup prior to pan boiling. Hot sulfitationwhere juiceis heated first then sulfited and limed, thismethod is used to reduce the solubility of calcium sulfite.

Other modification of these procedures are used according to plant capabilities etc. In NorthernEurope, amethod of combining sulfitation with preliming of d usion juice was developed . Smalladditions Of SO2 to an acidic(pH 5 .5 6 .0) di usion juice improved fi tration and sedimentation, aswell as reduced juice color development (Dandar, et al., 1973) Effect on sucrose recovery was notdiscussed. Indonesian cane processors have developed a similar process using sulfitation with limewith the productionof ahigh standard qualitywhite consumption sugar for export (Marches,This plantationwhite sugar is the result of two sulfitation procedures, first at original clarifierwhenadded with lime and second as syrup sulfitation prior to vacuum pan .

S irlfitation in Louisiana is a Very old'

process, possibly originating with French or English

sett lers (Spencer, et Cold raw juice was pumped through a sulfur tower with a

countercurrent of sulfiir dioxide to produce a fairly good, irregular, near or off-white sugar. By the

late 1930's use of sulfurdioxidewas on the decline andwas thenmainly used forproduction ofdirectconsumptionmolasses.

This studywas undertaken to determine the effect of sulphur dioxide onmodel and real caneprocess streams . This work is part of SPRI’S continuing research on determining the effect of invertand pH on sucrose recovery and color formation.


Sugar Solutions : 15 brix pure sucrose, clarified cane juice andmixed raw cane juice .

Sulfitation: Sugar systems were brought to a pH of withmilk of lime (cold lime) The pHwas

then adjusted with either sulphur dioxide (S0 2) or hydrochloric acid(HCl) , as a control, to

approximate cane juice pH of 5-6 . Sulphur dioxide was bubbled through the sugar system using a

micro valve controller. Samples were taken as pH dropped from 8 to 5 .

Processing : The pure sucrose solutionwas then processed-

in a gyratory shaker for up to 60 min at

85°C . Clarified juice andmixed juice were treated for up to l 20min. Time was extended for juice

samples due to lack of Significant reactions at 60 min.

Analyses: Samples were analyzed for pH,SOZ by ICUMSArosaniline colorimetricmethod, calcium

byHPIC, color by ICUMSAmethod, invert byHPIC .

92

Andrews and Godshal l : Comparing theEffects of SulphurDioxide onModel Sucrose andCane Juice Systems

Tables 1-3 summarize the results of treating the various solutions with sulfirr dioxide .

The pure sucrosemodel systemresponded tominimal amounts ofsulphurdioxide (2-29 ppm)with a rapid reduction in pH (Table Processing times up to 60 minutes with pH below alsoindicated rapid deterioration in sucrose as evident by the increase in glucose . When sucrose loss iscalculated as 2 X the relative increase in glucose (DeBruin, in this model system,

gluco seincreased by asmuch as 8000 ppm on solids after 60minutes ofprocessing at a beginning pH of5 .9 .

This calculated to loss of 1 .6% sucrose based on solids. In contrast,under the same conditions, the

HC] control systemhadminimal sucrose loss 03% on solids) whichwas directly attributable to acidhydrolysis. NO changes occurred in color or calcium residuals with eitherof these process systems.

After heat treatment no residual SO, remained.

The clarified juice results (Table 2) were very different from those of the model sucrosesystem. The observation time was increased to 120min because no significant changes were notedat 60 min. The juices were treated with 0-1700 ppm SO,. These high levels were needed to bringthe

'pH down to the desired level. The SO, treated samples generally Showed a decrease in color overtime, withmore colordecrease (up to 15 in the highest treatment level. These results were similarto tho se reported by Kort ( 1995) who showed a 15% reduction in color with >200ppm SO,.

However, some earlier papers reported a somewhat better colorreduction of25-35% with 250-500

ppm SO2 (Onna and Sloan,1978 ; Fort andWalton, The Hcl-treated samples showed some

color increase . Glucose formation was insignificant throughout, indicating little or no sucrosehydrolysis with either 80 2 orHCl. No residual SO, remained when initial treatmentwas <500 ppm.

The rrrixed raw juice results (Table 3) were also different fiom those of the model sucrosesystem. Aswith the clarifiedjuice, the process timewas increased to 120minbecause few significantchanges were noted at 60min. These juices were treated with up to 4700 ppm SO2 to achieve the

same pH range as with themodel system. The rate ofclearance ofSO, from the juice systems duringprocessing is noted on the table . Calcium levels (data not shown) dropped an average of 100-400

ppm with the lower pH and greater SO, concentrations. This in effect was a sulfo-defecation orclarification process induced by liming, reduction to acid pH, andheat processing. The calcium likelybecoming bound up in colorant and/or polysaccharide andwas precipitated. There was a small butconsistent drop in glucose in both SO,-treated andHcl-treated samples. Therewas also a significantcolor drop in both SO,-treated and Hcl-treated samples. Silva and Zarpelon (1977) reported a

similar drop in color using mixed juice systems through the sulfo-defecation process.

CONCLUS IONS

There is renewed interest in the United States to produce a high quality food grade sugar at

the raw sugarmill . Severalmeans for achieving high quality, low color sugar exist, one ofwhich issulfitation. The USFDA currently has a 10 ppm limit on residual sulphur dioxide allowed in foodproducts. If sulphitation is being considered forwhite sugar production, themanufacturermust takecaution to keep residuals below this limit .

It is apparent through these studies that attempting to predict juice streambehaviors bymodelsucrose solutions is not a valid hypothesis for SO, treatment . However, a positive result gained from

94


this studywas that withminimal application of sulphur dioxide, color can be reduced by at least 10Currently in Louisiana during late season, raw sugar qualitymeets all the criteria forBlanco

Directo (Bennett andRoss, 1988) except for color and turbidity (Table The authors feel that by

using a colorminimizer, such as sulphurdioxide or other, Louisiana raw sugar couldmeet the qualitystandards forfood ingredient sugar such as the Blanco-Directo sold to soft drink processors in someCaribbean countries, or other locations where sugar is used to sweeten food ingredients.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors thank SaraMoore andRon Triche for their technical assistance .

REFERENCES

Anonymous . 1996 . SulfurDioxide. Food Chemicals Codex,4th edition. National Academy

Press.

Bennett , MC . and Ross, B .G. 1988 . Blanco-Directo production at Hawaiian-Philippines

Company. Proceeding ofWorkshop onWhite Sugar Quality, Viewpoint of producers andusers. SPRI, pp 3-6 .

de Bruijn, J.M. , Struijs, J.L ., and Bout-Diederen,M.E.. 1998 . Sugar degradation and colourformation. Proceedings on Sugar Processing Research, SPRI Conference. Savannah, GA.,

pp127-143.

Clarke, M.A. and Godshall, M.A, eds . Chemistry and Processing of Sugarbeet and

Sugarcane . Chapter 13 , The nature of colorants in sugarcane and beet sugarmanufacture .

Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam.

Dandar, A., Basatko , J. and Rajinakova, A. 1973 . Influence of sulphitation of beet juicebefore progressive preliming according to Dedek and Vasatko on the purification effect .Zucker 593-597.

El-Kadar,A.A.El-Kadar,MansourandYassin,AA . 1983 . Influence ofclarification on sugarcane juices by the sulphitation and phosphatation processes. Proceedings IS SCT, XVIII

Congress, pp 507-530, Havana, Cuba.

Fort, CA . andWalton, CF . 1932 . Effect of clarification on quality of raw and plantationwhite sugars. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, Vo l.25 , No -68 1 .

Hodge, J.E. 1953 . Dehydrated foods : Chemistry of browning reactions in model systems .

Agri . andFood Chem , Vol. 1, No -943 .

Kort,MJ . 1995 . Sulphitation ofmixed juice. Sugar Processing Research Institute, AnnualReport. Dalbridge, SouthAttica.

95

Andrews andGodshal l : Comparing the Efiects of SulphurDioxide onModel Sucrose andCane Juice Systems

Marches, J. 1953 . Clarification ofcane juice s bymeans ofthe sulphitation process.Princip lesof Sugar Technology, Chapter 15 , edited by P . Honig. Elsevier Publishing Company.

McGinnis, R.A. 1982 . Beet Sugar Technology, 3'dedition. Sulfitation, pp 265-274.

McWeeny, DJ . 198 1 . Sulfirrdioxide and theMaillard reaction in food. Prog.Fd.Nutr. Sci.,

V0 1 5 , pp . 395-404.

Onna, K. And Sloane, GE . 1978 . 1977 juice sulfitation test at Puna Sugar Company.

Reports, Hawaiian Sugar Technologists, Vol -28 .

Silva, J.F. and Zarpelon, F. 1977. Color and ash levels in process streams at three factories

producing raw, sulfitation white and high pol raw sugars. Processing :2787-2795 .

Shore, Broughton, N.W.,

Dutton, J.V. and Sissons, A. 1984. Factors affecting white

sugar colour. Sugar TechnologyReviews, -99 .

Spencer, G.L . andWiley, J. 1945 . Cane SugarHandbook, 8thedition, ppl 09

1 10.

Zerbau, F.W. 1947. The colorproblem in sucrosemanufacture.TechnicalReport SeriesNo .

2,SugarResearch Foundation, Inc . New York.

96

Andrews andGodshall : Comparing the Effects of SulphurDioxide onModel Sucrose and Cane Juice Systems

Table 2 Effect ofSO, on Brix clarified juice. Solution initially brought to pH withmilk

98


Table 3 : Effect ofSO2 on Brixmixed raw juice. Solution initially brought to pH withmilk

of lime.

99

Andrews andGodshall : Compan'

ng the Effects ofSulphurDioxide onModel Sucrose and Cane Juice Systems

Tab le 4. Quality comparison ofBlanco Directo and Louisiana raw sugars.

Godshal l et al.zThe Eflbct ofTwo Louisianl Soils onCame Juice Quality

juice. The presence of green leaves, especially tops, significantly increased both color and

polysaccharides in cane juice.

Figures 1 and2 show the results ofa previously unpublished study conducted on samples fortheAmerican Sugar Cane League. Additionof5% Sharkey clay to cane juice from topped canewithside leaves decreased color to the level ofhand stripped clean cane juice. Addition of 10% Sharkeyclay to the same juice decreased polysaccharide to the level of hand stripped clean cane juice,representing a decrease of20% color and 30% polysaccharide.

1 . Effect of 5% and 10% Sharkey clay (mjuice.

color

1m

Treatment

Figure 2 . Effect of 5% and 10% Sharkey clay on juice polysaccharide level.

Treatment

102

Journal American Society ofSugarcane Technologists , Vol. 22, 2002

Polysaccharides in Cane Juice

Polysaccharides are naturally present inmilled cane juice. They include starch and solublecell wall polysaccharides that are released when cane is crushed and the cells disrupted. Sugarcanepolysaccharides are associated with highmolecularweight color in canejuice,may increase viscosity,and contribute to increased color and turbidity in raw sugar. The levels of polysaccharides in canejuice range from dissolved solids, with leaves and tops contributing to the higher levels

(Godshall, .et al ., The concentration ofpolysaccharide in cane juice is also influenced by thecane variety, but not as much as whether or not green leaves are included in the crush.

Louisiana Soils

Sugarcane in mainly grown in the soil areas known as the SubtropicalMississippi ValleyAlluvium, with the dominant soils being Sharkey,Mhoon and Commerce. Some cane is also grownin the extreme southern part of the RedRiver Valley Alluvium in Norwood soil. Commerce andMhoon soils are fi'iable silt loams and silty clay loams . Sharkey soil is clayey. The Sharkey seriesconsists of very deep, poorly drained, very slowly permeable soils that formed in clayey alluvium.

These soils are onflood plains and low terraces oftheMississippiRiver. Norwood soils occupy lownatural levees at the highest elevations of the flood plains . The reddish-brown color ofNorwood isa characteristic of the geological sediments of the PemijanRedBed deposits on the eastern Slope ofthe RockyMountains Which were carried into Louisiana by the Red and other rivers. Norwood isa silty loam soil (Lytle) .


Norwood (fine-silty, mixed, superactive, hyperthermic Fluventic Eutrudept) and Sharkey

(very-fine, smectitic, thermic Chromic Epiaquerts) soils were provided by Chris Fingerat theUSDASugarcane Research Unit inHouma, Louisiana. The soils were washed and decanted of trash anddried and sieved <2 mm) before using .

Raw cane juice consisted of 6 samples fiom green cane, topped, with side leaves, left on aheap for 1, 2 or 3 days (2 samples ofeach), provided by the American SugarCane League. Sampleshad been kept deep fi'

ozen prior to use and were microwave defiosted.

To test the effect of the soil, 5 g of soil was added to 50 ml of cane juice, then placed on a

gyratory shaker for 30 min. Experiments were conducted at 25°C and 80

°C. Treated juice was

analyzed forpH, co lor, total po lysaccharides (TPS ), ash and filtration rate. Color and conductivityash weremeasured using standard ICUMSAmethods (ICUMSA Total polysacchari des weredetermined by the SPRImethod (Roberts, Filtration ratewas determined asml cane juice thatpassed through a 47mm diameter, 0.45upore-size membrane in 5 minutes, us ing vacuum at 30 in

Hg, and reported as ml/min.

Soil chemical analysiswas done by the SoilTesting Laboratory atLouisiana StateUniversity.

Organic matterwas determined byWalkley-Black wet oxidation (Nelson and Sommers, soil

103

Godshall et al The Eflbct ofTwo Louisianl Soils onCane JuiceQuality

pH by a 1 : 1 soilzwaterratio in deionized water, and ions were extractedwith 1Mammonium acetate,pH and analyzed by ICP . Soil texture was determined by the hydrometermethod (Day


Properties of the Soils

Tables 1a and 1b show the properties of the two soils under test . The cation exchange

capacity (CBC) is the sum ofthe basic cations present on the soilmatrix. It is used as an index ofthetotal exchange capacity of the soil. The magnitude of the CBC is strongly correlated to the soil

’s

content ofclay and organicmatter. The greaterCBC for the Sharkey soil is associatedwith this soil’shigher clay content and the predominance of smectite (principallymontmorillonite) minerals in theclay fraction. Montmorillonite, and other smectite clayminerals, are expansible layer silicates. Theypossess ahighCEC, large surface areaanddue to theirability to adsorb large quantities ofwaterhavea significant shrink-swell potential (Borchardt,

*CEC Cation Exchange Capacity.

Effect ofHeat on Cane Ju ice

Table 2 reports the composition of the cane juice at room temperature, andTable 3 showsthe composition ofthe juice after 30min at 80°C. Heat decreased the juice color by and total

polysaccharide concentration by_

Ash increased and ti tration rate increased

There was essentially no change in pH pH unit decrease at 80°C) . The data are summarized

in Table 4 .

Note should be made of the fact that the total polysaccharide concentration did not changeduring the 3 days the green cane stalks were on the heap. An earlier study had shown that whole,green stalks, piled in a small heap in coolweatherremained stable for3 days (Godshall, et al.,

104

Godshal l et al The Effect ofTwo Louisianl Soils onCane Juice Quality

Effect of Soil on Cane Juice

Tables 5 and 6 report the effect of Sharkey clay on cane juice at 25°C and 80°C.

Table after treatment at 25°C with

The effect of Sharkey on cane juice color in each sarnple at 80° C is shown in Figure 3 and

on polysaccharides in Figure 4. InFigure 3, It is noted that samples 5 and 6 had a slight increase in

color compared to the controls. Since this was cane juice from cane left on the heap row for 3 days,it is possible that changes in

'

the type of colorant in the cane had occurred over that period of tirne .

The same effect was noted with the Norwood soil on the day 3 samples. The removal of

polysaccharides, however, was not affected in samples 5 and 6 .

106

Journal AmericanSociety ofSugarcaneTechnolosim.Vol. 22.2002

Figure 3. Efi’ect of Sharkey clay on juice color at 80°C .

Control E: sum y

Effect of Sharkey clay on juice polysaccharides at 80°C.

comer [Z ] arr-ray

Sample ,80 c

Godshall et al The Efi'

ect ofTo ouisianl Soils onCan: JuiceQuality

Tables 7and 8 report the effect ofNorwood on cane juice at 25°C and 80°C.

Table 9a compares themeanresults ofalltreatments. Table 9b shows the percentage Changwith so ils treatment ; comparisons are made for the same temperature of treatment .

108

Godshall cl ai The Effect ofTwo Louisianl Soils on Cane Juice Quality

Ash . Sharkey clay gave a 4-5% decrease in ash, which was contrary to what might have beenexpected. Both so ils had been washed, so ash solubilized from the soils was probably alreadyremoved. The decrease in ash caused by Sharkey clay may also be a function of the exchange

capacity of the Sharkey clay. Whether these soils contribute to the ash load in juice in the field stillneeds to be investigated. Norwood clay loam caused a small increase ofash, at 25

°C and a

very slight decrease of at 80°C.

Filtration rate. Norwood increased the filtration rate at 25°C and 35 .0%at 80

°C. Sharkey

clay doubled the filtration rate at 25°C but showed no change at 80

°C. This result is

probably anomalous, asmany filtrations with Sharkey clay in cane juice had shown asmuch as a 10fold increase in filtration rate at room temperature. However, with this series, the claywas allowedto settle for only a few minutes, and it is possible that the fines clogged the filtermembrane. It

should be noted that this filtration test is very stringent, as sample is filtered through a very tightmedium of p, and a different filtrationmediummay show different results.

CONCLUSIONS

This study has shown that two soils , Norwood and Sharkey, found in the Louisiana cane

growing area have the ability to remove a small amount of color and a significant amount ofpolysaccharide from cane juice, while improving filterability. At the same time, the ash level ofthe

juice is not changed, or is slightly decreased, and there is no deleterious effect on pH. Sharkey soil,because of its clay content and greater ion exchange capac ity, removes slighlymore color, but bothNorwood and Sharkey remove about the same amount ofpo lysaccharide.

The larger co lor removal by Sharkey clay in earlier studies is attributed to the fact that the

samples had stayed in contact with the soil over a long storage period prior to analysis, whereas thesamples in the current study had been exposed to the soil for only 30min. However, the removal of

polysaccharides was not afl'

ected by storage.

These results are of interest because they are contrary to the reports from SouthAfi'ica and

Australia, which indicate large co lor increases in cane juice in the presence of soils .

This work rs not intended to advocate or recommend bringing soil in with harvested cane.

The cleaner the juice, the betterm the long run. Soil has destructive effects on the mills, increasesthe burden to the clarifier, and contributes to disposal costs. The results are ofconsiderable interest

because they can help explain some anomalous behavior in cane juice quality when there is a lot of

mud brought into themill. Itmaybe possible, in the future, to consider how to exploit the beneficial

effects of the so ils in the cane growing area ofLouisiana.

1 10

Joumal American Society of Sugarcane Technologists,Vol. 22, 2002

REFERENCES

Chen, and Chou, C C ( 1993) Cane SugarHandbook, 12“Edition, John Wiley

Sons, Inc ., New York, 55 , 563, 886-903.

Chen, J.C.P . ( 1985)Meade-Chen Cane Sugar handbook, Edition, JohnWiley Sons,Inc ., New York, 59 .

Day, PR. ( 1965) Partic le fi'

actionation and part icle-size analysis. Pages 545-567, In C.A.

Black (cd.)Methods ofSoilAnalysis Part 1 . Agronomy Society ofAmerica, Inc.,Madison,WI.

Fors, A., and Arias, R. (1997) The effects of trash components in factory performance .

Sugar J., Dec . 1997, 25-26.

Godshall,M.A Legendre, B.L ., Richard, C andTriche, R. (2000) Efl'

ect ofharvest

systemon cane juice quality. Proc. Sugar Processing Research Conf., 222-236.

ICUMSAMethods, 1994/First Supplement, 1998. Methods of the InternationalCommission forUniformMethods of SugarAnalysis, ICUMSAPublications, NorwichEngland. MethodGS l -7, Raw Sugar So lution Colour;Method -13,

ConductivityAsh inRaw Sugar.

Ivin, RC , andDoyle, CD . (1989) Somemeasurements on the effect of tops and trash oncane quality. Proc . Australian Soc. Sugar Cane Technol, 1-7.

Legendre, B.L Godshall,M.A. andMiranda, K.M. (1996) A preliminary study on theeffect of sugarcane leaves andmud on co lor in sugarcane juice. Proc . Sugar ProcessingResearch Conf., 447-452 .

Lytle, SA . Themorphological characteristics and reliefrelationships ofrepresentativesoils inLouisiana.

Nelson, D .W. and L E. Sommers. ( 1982) Total carbon, organic carbon and organicmatter. Pages 539-577. InMethods of Soil Analysis. AgronomyNo . 9, Part 2, AmericanSociety ofAgronomy,Madison, WI

Purchase, B.S ., L ionnet, G.R.E Reid,M.I Wienese, A., andDeBeer, A.G. (1991)Options for and implications of increasing the supply ofbagasse by including tops in trashwith cane. Proc. Sugar Processing Research Conf., 229-243 .

Roberts, E.J. ( 1980) Estimation of the soluble polysaccharides in sugar: A rapid test for

total polysaccharides. Proc . Technical Session Cane SugarRefining Research, 130-133 .

1 1 1

Singleton et al ANew Polarimetri c Method for the Analysis of Dextran and Sucrose

ANEW POLARIMETRIC METHOD FORTHE ANALYS IS OF DEXTRANAND SUCROSE

Victoria Singleton Dr. Jennifer Horn]

, Prof. Ch ris Bucke2and Dr.Max Adlard

2

1 . Optical Activity Ltd. Cambridgeshire, England.

2 . University ofWestminster, London, England.

ABSTRACT

A new method for dextran quantification has been developed and field-tri alled in Jamaica,in association with the Sugar Industry Research Institute. The method uses a near infrared (NIR)polarimeter and a specific dextranase . The dextranase selectively breaks down the dextran intosugars of lesser specific rotations without affecting any other substance present in the juice. Theinitial dextran concentration is derived from the calibration curve of the change in observed opticalrotation (OR) due to enzymatic hydrolysis and output automatically by the polarimeter. Readingsare not affected by the molecular weight of the dextrans, the entire procedure takes less than 10minutes to perform and it is semi-automated. Use of a NIRpolarimeternegates the need for lead

acetate clarification. Themethod is suitable for both juice and raw sugar samples .

Keywords : Dextranase, Near Infrared (NIR) polarimeter, Polysaccharides .

INTRODUCTION

Dextran is produced by microorganisms which infect the cane and feed on the sucrose;therefore, the presence of dextran immediately indicates lost sugar.

‘

The bacteria are mainlyLeuconostoc species and are ubiquitous in the soil. They enter the cane at places of exposed tissuecaused by machine harvesting, cutting, burning, growth, freezing, di sease and pests . Any delay inthe kill-to-mill time allows the bacteria to proliferate and the dextran levels to soar, especially in

wetmuddy cane.

The name dextran refers to a large family of glucose polymers whose structures and

subsequent properties can varywidely. Technically the molecular weight (Mr) can range between

1500 and several million ; therefore, a dextran of say 1 mi llion Mr has potentially thousands of

possible structures due to its branched nature. This massive variation in structure poses a hugechallenge for any analyst trying to detect the molecules especially against a substantial background

of saccharides with simi lar structures and properties.

Consequences ofDextran

Dextran is highly dextrorotatory, approximately three times that of sucrose, and, since the

farmer is largely paid on the basis of the polarimeter reading, there is an obvious need for as saying

for dextran in the core lab . This would allow correction of the falsified reading and identification of

the sources of dextran contamination entering the factory. The problems associated with dextran

contamination in both the factory and the refinery are well documented in the literature and so are

briefly summarised below in Table 1 .

1 12

Singleton et al.zA New Po larimetri c Method for the Analysis ofDextran and Sucrose

color remaining after conventional filtration using a filteraid. Readings obtained using NIRpolarimetry in compari son to those at the sodium wavelength have been previously shown to bemore reproducible and more sensitive to interference by high dextran concentrations (Wilson,1996)

Not only does the poisonous and environmentally unsound lead subacetate treatmentdamage enzymes ; it also removes an unknown portion of the dextrans

, making it an unsuitableclarifier in both thi s and other dextran methods . Thi s latter point, of dextran removal, is also thecase with a number of the more recent commercial clarifiers. In this method a conventional filteraid is employed which successfully clarifies the juice or sugar solution without removing dextran .

This filter-aid is paramount to the successful clarification of the juice sample .

Thi s procedure is centered on the use of a NIR polarimeter manufactured by OpticalActivity Ltd. in conjunction with a specific dextranase totally fi‘

ee of invertase activity. The dextranis hydrolysed into smaller dextrans and constituting smaller units such as isomaltotri ose, isomaltoseand glucose, each ofWhich is less optically active than dextran . Th e hydrolytic reactions are rapidwhen the enzyme is used in excess . The change in rotation between that of the original sample andthat observed at a predetermined time after the addition of dextranase can be calibrated to theoriginal concentration of dextran present in th e sample


TheNIRpolarimeter used was a SacchAAr 880, manufactured by Optical Activity Ltd. The

polarimeter sample tube (also manufactured by Optical Activity Ltd.) was an A2 with a bore of4mm and 200mm path length. The tube is jacketed and the temperature maintained at 20

°

C usingan Index Instruments Ltd. thermocirculator.

The enzyme concentration in the sample and the total sample volume were previouslyoptimised for thi s procedure and are 1 ml enzyme solution (see below) added to 19 ml sample . A

selected pure dextranase preparation with activity of units/m1 is diluted in distilledwater. It is always used at this dilution,

except for those experiments that involve the use of

impregnated filter papers . In order to assist the user and prevent any error inmeasuring quantities ofliquid

,the enzyme will be available commercially in this form . These papers will consistently carry

the required amount of dextranase to carry out the reaction within the desired time limit and have

already been tested in field tri als during the work with the Sugar Industry Research Institute of

Jamaica.

RESULTS

Effect ofMolecularWeigh t

It was necessary to determine if the extent of the change in rotation due to hydrolysis is

influenced by molecular weight . The following different molecular weight range dextrans weredried for aweek in a desiccator containing P20 5 and thenmade up to 4000ppm in distilled water:

-9 ,5kDa (Sigma Cat. No . D-9260)71 .4kDa (Sigma Cat.No . D-3759)

-2,000kDa (Sigma Cat. No . D-5376)

1 14


After quantifying the control readings, 1ml of dextranase solution was added to 19m] ofdextran solution,

rapidly shaken and inj ected into the sample tube. The results (Table 2) were

recorded when the readings had reached a stable minimum. It can be observed that there is nosystematic or significant effect of Mr on the change in OR due to enzymatic hydrolysis. Thevariability in the results is thought to be due to structural and preparative differences between thecommercially available dextrans reflected by differences in appearance (powders flakes) .

Tab le 2. The change in ORdue to enzyme action for three differentmolecularweight dextrans .

Confirmation of Enzymatic Specifi city

Many commercial enzyme preparations contain several enzyme activities in addition to themajor activity that is purchased. It was necessary to ensure that the dextranase preparation wasunable to hydrolyse sucrose and non-dextran polysaccharides .

A selection of possible alternative saccharides were chosen and 5% solutions made up indistilled water. 1ml of dextranase solution was added to l 9m] of the analyte solution and the ORobserved for 20 minutes. Little or no change in the reading over time (other than that accounted forby the controls and the accuracy of the instrument) indicates no reaction (Table

Table 3.The effect of dextranase on other possible analytes .

Although the above list is non-exhaustive, there are no apparent reactions with these substances,

which form themajori ty ofdi ssolved carbohydrates constituent in sugar samples .

Calibration Curve Constructed in 15% Sucrose

Using the calibration curve and the preloaded filter papers, it becomes possible to transformthe assay from a fairly technical laboratory assay into a kit for use by unskilled workers . The

calibration data will be incorporated into the software of the polarimeter negating the need forlengthy calculations and reducing the chances of operator error.

Using an 188kDa dextran (Sigma Cat No, D4876), solutions of 8000ppm,4000ppm,

2000ppm, 800ppm,400ppm and 200ppm weremade up in 15% sucrose (since sucrose is known to

mildly retard the rate of the reactionwith dextran v ia non-competitive inhibition) .

1 15

Singleton et al.zA New Polarimetri c Method for the Analysis of Dextran and Sucrose

The dextranase solution was added to the dextran just prior to inj ection into the polarimeterand the OR followed for 15 minutes . The readings were recorded at 5-second intervals by a datacollection program .

Figure 1 . The relationship between dextran concentration and change in OR due to hydrolysis bydextanase enzyme.

The relationship shown in Figure 1 is clearly linear in character but has a slight curve

(which in this data is a change in x/y) . This relationship is reproducible on a day-to-daybasis

and has been curve-fitted and the algorithm incorporated into the instrument's software to allowaccurate automatic readings of dextran concentration to be instantly generated.

Detecting Spiked Dextran in Cane Juice

Dextran-free cane juice was obtained and subjected to standard addition with a known

mass of dextran to demonstrate that dextran could be detected and quantified in the cane juice aseffectively and accurately as in distilled water.

A 2000ppm solution of dextran (71 .4kDa) was made up in distilled water and the OR

deterrrrined. 200ml of cane juice were vacuum filtered with filteraid (2g/100ml) and the ORdetermined. g dextran was weighed into a 5om] flask, which was filled to the mark with canejuice and the OR determined. All three samples where then subjected to the new dextran method

(Table

1 16

Singleton et al A New Polarimetri c Method for the Analysis ofDextran and Sucrose

Tab le 5 . Increase in dextran over time . The dextran is calculated by using the quadratic equationfitted to the calibration curve.

From the above set of experiments, it is evident that the theoretical basis of the assay

remains sound when put into practice. The enzyme selected for this work appears to be specific for

a single substrate, namely dextrans . The calibration curve has been previously shown to beunaffected by factors such as molecularweight of the substrate and the pH of the medium in which

measurements are made with detection limits that cover the entire range ofmarket requirements.

This assay procedure is robust, rapid, simple to perform and through subsequent development of theinstrument is now semi-automated. The presence of dextran in sugar represents financial losses at

almost every stage of the process from cane to cube. It is hoped that thi s new analyticalmethod will

now make it possible for both the factory and the refinery to identify dextran sources and take aninformed approach to employing the correct remedial actions in both the short and long term.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authorwishes to acknowledge the invaluable assistance of the Sugar IndustryResearch

Institute, Jamaica.

REFERENCES

Brown ,C . F. and Inkerman,

P . A. 1992 . Specific method for quantitative measurement of

the total dextran content of raw sugar. J. Agri c . Food Chem .-233 .

Curtin,J . H. and McCowage, R. J . 1986 . Dextran measurement in cane products. Proc.

ISSCT.-764.

Destefano, R. P . and Irey, M. S . 1986 . Measuring dextran in raw sugars historicalperspective and state of the art. J . Am. Soc . SugarCane Technol. 6 : 1 12-120 .

Irnrie F. K . E. andTilburyR. H. 1972 . Polysaccharides in sugar cane and its products . Sugar

Techno].Rev .-36 1 .

1 18

Journal Ameri can Society of Sugarcane Technologists , Vol. 22, 2002

Keniry ,J .S .

,Lee, J. B . and Mahoney, V.C. 1969 . Improvements in the dextran assay of

sugar canematerials . Int. Sugar J. 71 :230—233 .

Kubik, C ., Galas, E. and Sikoro, B . 1994. Determination of dextran in raw beet juices by the

haze enzymaticmethod. Int. Sugar J . -360.

Muller, B.G. 1981 . Dextran. Tate and Lyle's SIA.- 148 .

Roberts, E . J . 1983 . A quantitativemethod for dextran analysis . Int. Sugar J. -13 .

Wilson, T. E. 1996 . A comparison of raw sugar polarisation methods . Int. Sugar J .—174.

1 19

Journal Ameri can Society of Sugarcane Technologists ,Vol. 22, 2002


Th e Louisiana Basic Breeding Program-Past, Present, and Future

Thomas L. Tew

USDA-ARS Sugarcane Research CenterHouma

,LA

With the extraordinary success of LCP85-384, a Saccharum sp ontaneum BC4 derivativereleased in 1993, and the release of HoCP85-845 , also a S . sp ontaneum BC4 derivative, it isobvious that the USDA-ARS Basic Breeding Program at Houma

,LA has provided tremendous

dividends to the Louisiana sugar industry. Both clones were bred during the year 1980, and bothinvolved S . sp ontane

‘

um clone, U SS6-15-8 . S ome questions we need to address now are"What

has happened during the past 20 years of crossing with basic germplasm that would give usreason to believe that further benefits can be expected from the basic breeding program"""Where are we today in our basic breeding program"""What must we do to maximize thelikelihood of success in the future"A review of our own program along with other breedingprograms

,particularly in Argentina, indicate that, with an

“

intensified effort and some

modifications in our breeding and selection approach based on lessons learned from the past, we

should expect to see further substantial genetic improvement through basic breeding . Topicsdiscussed will include : 1) number of BC generations needed to obtain commercial cultivars, 2)years needed between BC generations, 3) need for recombination between BC generations toexploit desirable recessive traits, 4) use ofmarker-assisted selection,

5) formation of complex S .

sp ontaneum crosses, and 6) greater focus on populations rather than individuals .

Assessment of Stalk Cold Tolerance of Louisiana Varieties During th e 2000-2001 CropYear

Benjamin L . LegendreDivision ofP lant Science

Louisiana Cooperative Extension ServiceLSU Agri cultural Center, Baton Rouge, Louisiana

Harold B irkett and Jeanie SteinAudubon Sugar Institute

LSU Agri cultural Center, Baton Rouge, Louisiana

The exposure of sugarcane to damaging frosts occurs in over 20 of the 79 sugarcaneproducing countries of the world, but is most frequent on the mainland of the United States . The

frequent winter freezes in the sugarcane area of Louisiana forced the industry to adapt to a short

growing season (7-9 months) and a short milling season (about 3 months) . Field experiments

consisting of 3-row plots (18 ft) by 45 ft long are routinely planted at the Ardoyne Farm of the

USDA-ARS ,SRRC at Houma

,Louisiana, for the estimating stalk cold tolerance of commercial

and candidate vari eties . For the 2000-2001 crop-year study, two commerc ial vari eties, CP

120

Journal Ameri can Society of Sugarcane Technologists,Vol. 22, 2002

Post-Freeze Performance of 16 Sugarcane Cultivars Following th e December 31 , 2000Freeze Event in Florida

J.M. Sh ine, Jr.Sugar Cane Growers Cooperative ofFlorida

Belle Glade, FL 33430

R. A. Gilbert

University ofFloridaEverglades Research and Education Center


J D.MillerUSDA-ARS Sugarcane Field Station

Canal Point,Florida 33438

Freezing temperatures occurred for an extended period of time on the night ofDecember

3 1,2001 and morning of January 1 , 2000. Temperatures below -2

°C occurred for more than

four hours in much of the Everglades Agri cultural Area. The performance of 16 cultivarsplanted “

in six experiments planted at five locations was characterized by determining sugarcontent per gross ton of cane . Replicated variety tri als at five locations were sampled serially ontwo-week intervals following the freeze event until March 20, 2000 and ground for sugar yield .

Four of the five locations were exposed to freezing temperatures for more than 10 hours whileone location received no freeze injury. Sucrose content of the 16 cultivars occurring at least at

two of the freeze damaged experiments were contrast with sucrose content at the freezeprotected location . CP89-2 143 had the highest sugar per ton

“

of cane at 80-days post-freeze anddemonstrated relative losses comparable to CP72-2086, a known “

freeze-tolerant cultivar.

CP85-1308 showed the greatest relative losses following the freeze event. CP8O- 1743 , CP84

1 198 , CP85- 1382 and CP88- 1762 demonstrated relative losses similar to CP70- 1 133 , a known

freeze-susceptible”cultivar.

Sugarcane Tissue Ph osphorus Concentration as Affected by P Rates App lied to a FloridaHistosol

Y. L uo and RosaM.MuchovejUniversity ofFlorida

Southwest FloridaResearch and Education CenterIrnmokalee, Florida

Approximately 85% of the sugarcane (Saccharum ofii c inarum L ) acreage in Florida are

located in the Everglades Agri cultural Area, where soils are typically organic in nature.

Phosphorus, K,and several micronutrients are commonly applied to histosols to produce

acceptable yields . Because of increasing environment concerns, P application to all agri culturalcrops has been receiving increased attention . Though many studies on sugarcane response to P

122

Journal American Societyof Sugarcane Technologists , Vol. 22, 2002

fertilizer have been carried out worldwide, little information is available on the effects of P

fertilization,especially with respect to seasonal tissue P concentration, for sugarcane grown on

Florida’s h istosols . The objective of this field study was to assess tissue P concentration of

sugarcane varieties at the different growth stages in response to increasing P rates . Five P rates

(0, 34, 67, 101 , 135 kg P20 5 kg") and four sugarcane varieties (CP70- 1 133 , CP72-2086, CP7S

1628 , and CP80- 1827) were evaluated in a randomized complete block design (RCBD), in six

replications at two sites . Top visible dewlap (TVD) leaf samples were collected at the early,

grand growth, and late crop stages . Results indicated increases in tissue P concentration as P

rate increased, especially in the early stages of crop growth. Phosphorus concentration was alsohighest in the early stages and lowest in late stages, nearing harvest date . First year, i .e .,

plant,

sugarcane had higher tissue P concentration than first ratoon cane . Variety CP80- 1827 presentedthe highest tissue P concentration in all the samplings . Interpretation and utilization of sugarcanetissue P concentrations for determining plant nutri tional status and fertilizer recommendationshould take into account time of sampling, P rate applied, and variety planted.

Sugarcane Root and SoilMicrob ial Responses to Intermittent Flooding

D.R.Morris and B . Glaz

USDA,ARS , Sugarcane Field StationCanal Point, FL 33438

S. BarouhUniv . FloridaERECBelle Glade, FL 33430

Sugarcane is one of the most environmental fii endly agri cultural crops grown in theEverglades Agri cultural Area because it can tolerate short periods o f flooding and has beenreported to have less soil organic matter oxidation compared to other agri cultural crops . Soiloxidation results primarily from aerobic microbial activity. Since flooding reduces soil oxygenlevels

,flooding as well as growing sugarcane may reduce soil organi c matter oxidation . One

concern regarding flooding of sugarcane is that mechanical harvesters would reduce yields of

subsequent ratoons by pulling entire stools from the soil due to weakened root systems caused bythe flooding . An experiment was conducted to determine the combined effect ofw ater-tabledepth and intermittent flooding on soil organi c matter oxidation potential and sugarcane rootgrowth. Sugarcane was grown in X X (wide, long, and deep

,respectively) m

polyethylene lysimeters out doors . Lysimeters were filled with a Pahokee muck soil . Afterplants reached an 8-cm height, intermittent flooding treatments were imposed consisting of 7days flooding followed by 14 days drained to 16, 33, and 50-cm depths . A continuous 50-cm

water table was used as a control . Starting July 10, soil samples were taken during the drainperiod on day 0, 3, 7, and 14 and analyzed for oxidation potential . Soil sampling continued over5 consecutive cycles . On Jan . 19 , 2001 sugarcane was harvested and shortly afterwards

,root

samples were taken . Root samples were extracted by taking four -cm cores to 0 to 15 15 to30 and 30 to 45-cm depths at a distance about 5 cm from the rows of sugarcane . Roots werewashed and analyzed for drywt, length, volume, surface area, and diameter. Soil organ ic matter

123

Journal American Society of Sugarcane Technologists ,Vol. 22 , 2002

oxidation potential averaged over 5 drain cycles indicated that soil oxidation started increasingimmediately after drainage and reached its maximum activity about one week later. Also

,there

appeared to be a residual effect of flooding as the oxidation potential of the flooding treatmentswas less than the continuously drained treatment over the 14-day drain cycle . The 16-cm watertable had soil oxidation potentials that were less than half those of the other flooding treatments .Average root dry wt, length, surface area, and volume from hi gh water table treatments in thesampled area were about twice those fiom continuously drained treatment . It appears that withintermittent flooding, roots around the sugarcane stool can compensate for unfavorable rootenvironments by developing more roots in the less aerated soil compared to continuously drainedsoil . Combining raised water tables with intermittent flooding should improve both soilconservation and sugarcane root growth.

Effect ofNitrogen Fertilizer Rates on Producer Economic Returns ofVariety L CP 85-384on a Heavy-Textured Soil in Louisiana

W. B . Hallmark and G. J.WilliamsIberiaResearch Station

Louisiana State UniversityAgri cultural Center

G. L. Hawkins

SugarResearch StationLouisiana State University Agri cultural Center

M. E . SalassiDepartment ofAgricultural Economics andAgri business

Louisiana State UniversityAgri cultural Center

Recommended nitrogen fertilizer rates for strong stands of sugarcane (Saccharum spp .)on heavy-textured soils in Louisiana are 1 12 to 135 kg N/ha for plant cane, and 157 to 179 kgN/ha for stubble cane . The high sugar yields (20% hi gher than the next best vari ety) obtainedwith variety L CP 85-384 raise questions about whether this variety has different nitrogenfertilizer requirements than other recommended varieties grown in Louisiana. To answer thisquestion,

twelve site-years of yield data from ni trogen rate studies with LCP 85-384 on a

Baldwin silty-clay loam (thermic Vertie Ochraqualf) soil were used to determine economicreturns (based on $0 .42/kg of sugar, $0 .66/kg of N,

and the producer giving half of his crop tothe sugar mill and landlord) to producers . The best economic returns for plant cane in fivestudies were at 0, 56, 67, 135 , and 157 kg N/ha, respectively, compared to the recommendednitrogen application rate of 1 12 to 135 kg/ha. The highest economic return s for first- stubblecane in five studies were 67, 1 12 , 1 12 , 1 12 , and 135 kgN/ha compared to the recommended rateof 157 to 179 kg N/ha. Consequently

,the recommended N application rate for LCP 85-384

first-stubble cane appears to be too high and better economic yield responses could be obtainedif it were fertilized like plant cane . There was only one site-year of data for second and

124

Journal American Societyof Sugarcane Technologists ,Vol. 22, 2002

per unit area) was observed in LCP 82-89 , with the greatest loss in the second-ratoon cropQuality components, Brix , sucrose, puri ty, and starch concentration, of the stafiks

did not differ between SCYLV-infected and uninfected ; however, in the tops, leaves and theimmature portion of the stalk, Brix, sucrose

,purity, and starch concentration were higher

in SCYLV-infected plants of both cultivars . Dextran content was inconsistent . Tops of stalksare normally removed by the mechanical harvester; however, they may not be removed if thecane is lodged and/or during wet weather harvesting. Green leaves and immature tissuecontaining elevated levels of starch delivered to themillmay reduce processing efficiency.

A collection of 407 parental sugarcane clones grown at Canal Point,Florida and used for

making crosses for the Louisiana Industry were assayed for infection by SCYLV . As a result ofnatural spread, SCYLV infection was found in approximately 50% of the cultivars

, indicating ahigh level of susceptibility to infection within the Louisiana germplasm.

Although visible symptoms of yellow leaf syndrome (YL S ) caused by SCYL V are rarelyobserved in Louisiana, yield loss was observed in SCYLV-infected LCP 82-89 in the absence ofsymptoms and the virus in both cultivars affected quality components in leaves . With the recentdiscovery ofMelanap h is saccharalis in Louisiana

,a demonstrated vector of SCYLV, and the

demonstration of yield and quality effects on sugarcane even in the absence of symptoms, YL Sis a potential problem to the Louisiana industry.

Feeding Effects ofYellow Sugarcane Aph id on Sugarcane

Gregg Nuessly andMatthew Hentz

Everglades Research and Education CenterUniversity ofFlorida, Belle Glade, Florida

Feeding by yellow sugarcane aphid, S ipka flava (Forbes), can cause reddening,

premature yellowing and death of sugarcane leaves . Prolonged feeding by large populations ofthis aphid can lead to plant death. We report here the results of experiments using a susceptiblesugarcane cultivar (CP80— 1827) to quantify the growth and yield effects of early season S .flavafeeding . Two-month old plants grown from single-eye setts in 5-gallon buckets were firstsubjected to yellow sugarcane aphid feeding for 8 to 10 weeks . P lant damage was rated on thenumber of leaves (0, 1 , 2 , 3 , and 4) below the TVD on the primary stalk with <50% S . flavadamage symptoms . These ratings were used to group plants for comparison of growth and yieldeffects against plants grown without aphid exposure (controls) . Aphids were then removed andthe plants transplanted into the field where they were maintained aphid-flee for 7months untilharvest. S . flava feeding resulted in the production of longer, faster growing leaves and

intemodes,but also thinner, lighter stalks compared to the controls . Each leaf and intemode that

was produced after aphids were removed from the plants expanded slightly less than theprevious one and gradually approached the length of these structures on control plants, but nodediameters remained thinner on previously infested stalks . Intemode volumes were reduced an

average of 2 1% on plants in the highest damage category. Aphid-damaged stalks with thinintemodes at their bases were more likely to lodge from wind and rat damage than controls .

126


Apparent sucrose was lower in juice from plants previously infested by S . flava than from thosenot exposed to the aphids . When combined with the reductions in intemode volume andweight,even light S .flava damage two out of six leaves below TVD with >50% damage) resultedin a 6% reduction in sugar yield . Heavy damage six out of six leaves below TVD with>50% damage) to sugarcane plants from yellow sugarcane aphid feeding early in the seasonreduced sugar yield by

Relative Abundance and Diversity ofAph id Species Collected in Trap s Adjacent toSugarcane Fields in Florida

R. N.Raid, G. S . Nuessly, and R. H. Ch erryUniversity ofFlorida

,IPAS

Everglades Research and Education CenterP . 0 . Box 8003


Even with the rapid expansion of the state’s sugarcane industry during the 1960s,sugarcane mosaic, caused by the sugarcane mosaic virus potyvirus (SCMV), remained a diseaseof minor importance in Florida for nearly four decades . Although detected in sugarcane andweeds

,disease incidence rarely exceeded several percent . Since the late 1990s

,however

,

observers have noted a marked increase in SCMV incidence, particularly in the variety CP722086 . A mainstay of the Florida industry, presence of SCMV in this variety could have seriousrepercussions . For even though CP72-2086 has demonstrated yield tolerance

,it could serve as a

significant pathogen reservoir, facilitating the spread of SCMV to other susceptible, but lesstolerant varieties . In nature, SCMV is transmi tted mechanically (i .e . planting of infected seedpieces) and by aphid species in a semi-persistentmanner. With a paucity of baseline informationon aphid diversity and populations in the Everglades Agricultural Area

,investigations were

conducted using standard yellow sticky traps to monitor aphid activity adjacent to sugarcanefields . Five traps were positioned for a 14-day period at monthly intervals along transectsparalleling sugarcane fields located in areas representative of the western

,central, and eastern

cane-growing areas of the EAA. Cumulative numbers of aphids trapped peaked in March and

then again in November. A total of 23 identifiable species were collected,representing 12

genera. Two of these species, Rhop a los ip hum ma idis and Schizap his graminium, have beendemonstrated to be capable of transmitting SCMV in nature. Two aphid species that commonlycolonize sugarcane, S ipkaflava andMelanap his sacchari , were trapped relatively infrequently.

Possible associations of the recent surge in SCMV in Florida and aphid populations will bediscussed.

127

Journal American Society of Sugarcane Technologists ,Vol. 22, 2002

Fifteen Years ofRecurrent Selection for Sugarcane Borer Resistance

W . H.Wh ite and T. L . Tew

USDA-ARS , SRRC, Sugarcane Research Uni t, Houma, LA;

J. D.MillerUSDA, ARS , Sugarcane Field Station,

Canal Point, FL

The sugarcane borer, D iatraea saccharalis (F is an important insect pest of sugarcanein the Americas and the key insect pest of sugarcane in Louisiana. Long managed in Louisianausing an IPM program primarily relying on insecticides

,there is increasing economic and

environmental pressures to reduce the management program's dependency on insecticides . P lant

resistance is an attractive alternative to insecticides .

In 1986 we began a satellite recurrent selection program to increase levels of borerresistance among parental lines used in the Louisiana Commercial Breeding Program. Followingthe initial crosses in 1985 among resistant parents identified from the USDA’s 1983 Series,approximately seedlings have been evaluated. Fifi

'

y-one selections were given the in

house designation RSB (recurrent selection borer) . Of these 5 1 selections, 33 were assignedpermanent numbers (US) and 18 were identified as having commercial potential. A total of 17selections were registered with the Crop Science Society of America as germplasm clones .Biparental crosses have been made among these resistant clones and selections are being madeto advance a new generation of recurrent selection.

Mexican Rice Borer on Sugarcane and RiceSignifi cance to Louisiana and Texas Industries

M. 0 .Way

Texas A&MResearch and Extension CenterBeaumont, TX

T. E. Reagan and F.R. PoseyDepartment ofEntomology

LSUAgCenterBatonRouge, LA

The sugarcane borer D iatraea sacchara lis (F.) is the most common stem borer in the

Texas rice belt, but the Mexican rice borer (MRE) Eoreuma loftini is becoming an

increasing problem,particularly in the southern region of the Texas Rice Belt Calhoun,

Jackson,Victoria, and Matagorda Counties . The MRE was introduced prior to 1980 from

Mexico into the Lower Rio Grande Valley where it immediately became a serious pest of

sugarcane . In 1987, the MRB was first detected in the Texas Rice Belt in Jackson and Victoria

Counties . In 2000, pheromone traps were set out in most Texas Rice Belt counties around

128


characteristics of this varietymake it very suitable for combine harvesting and helped to promotethe conversion from whole stalk harvesting to combine harvesting in the state . Secondly

,the

variety is also an excellent Stubbling vari ety, resulting in the expansion of standard sugarcanecrop cycles beyond harvest .of second stubble . Outfield trials yield data over the 1996-2000

period for major sugarcane varieties produced in Louisiana was used to determine the optimalcrop cycle length, .whi ch would maximize the net present value of producer returns . Cane yieldand sugar per ton data for plant cane through third stubble was used to estimate the annualizednet return of crop cycles through harvest of second and third stubble and to determine thebreakeven level of fourth stubble yields whi ch would justify production and harvest. Analysis of

yield and net return data for the varieties CP 70-32 1 , LCP 85-384, and HoCP 85-845 indicatedthat minimum yield levels necessary to keep older stubble in production for harvest dependdirectly upon the yields of the pri or crop cycle phasesand differ significantly across varieties .

OptimumMaturity of CP Sugarcane Clones for Harvest Sch eduling in Florida

R. A. Gilbert

University ofFloridaEvergladesResearch and Education Center

B elle Glade, FL 33430

J.M. Sh ine, Jr.

Sugar Cane Growers Cooperative ofFloridaBelle Glade, FL 33430

J. D.MillerUSDA-ARS Sugarcane Field Station

Canal Point, Florida 33438

Variety maturity tests were conducted on 16 Canal Point (CP) clones at 5 locations over

3 years in the Everglades Agri cultural Area in Florida. Cane sugar quality was measured at

biweekly intervals during the October to March harvest season in each year. A quadratic

response function of lbs . sucrose per gross ton of cane (SPT) vs . sampling date was calculated

for each c lone using the entire 3—year data set, and date and magnitude of maximum SPT

calculated . CP89 -2 143 and CP72-2086 had the highest predicted SPT at 305 and 285 on Feb 9

and Feb 13 , respectively. Model fit varied greatly between clones, with R2 values ranging from

In general, clones with higher R2 values tended to have maximum SPT after

February 1 . The SPT data was then divided into“ early”,

“

middle and“

late”maturity classes

and the CP clones ranked based on average SPT within a given class . Results of thi s analysiswill be discussed in terms of a harvest scheduling aid forFlorida growers.

130

Journal American Societyof Sugarcane Technologists,Vol. 22, 2002

Protox Inh ib itor Herb icide Effects on Pyth ium and Root Rot of Sugarcane

J. H. Daugrois

Cirad-ca, Sugarcane ProgramStation de Roujol, Guadeloupe, 97170 Petit Bourg, PWI

J.W . Hoy and J. L. Griffin

Department ofP lant Pathology and Crop PhysiologyLSUAgCenter, Baton Rouge, LA 70803

A complex of root pathogens contri butes to yield decline of sugarcane . Pythium root rot,caused by P . arrhenomanes , is one component. of the disease complex . Root rot control wouldincrease yield and could allow additional ratoons to be obtained. Herbicides can have non-targeteffects

,such as enhancing or reducing root disease severity. Protoporphyrinogen oxidase

(protox) inhibitor herbicides may reduce fungal disease severity in other crops by inducing hostresistance. In addition

,visual growth increases in sugarcane early growth following application

of one protox inh ibitor herbicide have been observed. Therefore,lab and greenhouse

experiments were conducted to determine protox inhibitor herbicide effects on Pyth ium, root rotseverity

,and sugarcane growth.

Three protox inhibitor herbicides, Milestone (azafeniden), Spartan (sulfentrazone), andValor (flumioxazin) were evaluated for their effects on in vitro mycelial growth rate of P .

arrhenomanes, P . ultimum,and P . ap hanidermatum and Pythium root rot and growth of

sugarcane in two greenhouse experiments . Effects on sugarcane growth and root rot wereevaluated afier herbicide leaf or soil application at the recommended rate and l/10 and therecommended rate . Three types of soil were used, field soil (FS), sterilized field soil (SFS ), andsterilized field soil infested with P . arrhenomanes

All three herbicides strongly reduced Pythiummycelial growth"in vitro . No growth of P .

arrhenomanes occurred when rate one or above was applied in the growth medium . Mycelialgrowth inhibition still occurred at a 200-fold dilution of the recommended rate . Milestone hadthe strongest effect followed by Spartan and Valor. In the greenhouse

,all three herbicides

reduced P . arrhenomanes root colonization in some cases, but results were erratic betweenexperiments . Milestone and Valor were phytotoxic in sterile and nonsterile soils, and with a

short duration experiment, the damage may have made it difficult to detect effects on root rotseverity and plant growth . No treatment clearly reduced visual root rot symptoms . Only 1/10 rateSpartan applied to leaves significantly reduced P . arrhenomanes colonization in SFS+P and

increased plant growth. In field soil, more treatments reduced Pythium root colonization,but

only leaf-applied Spartan at rate one and 1/10 rate Valor increased some component of

sugarcane growth.

No consistent effects on disease severity and plant growth were shown . However,the

greenhouse experimental system may not have been sufficient to clearly demonstrate the effectsof the protox inhibitor herbicides on sugarcane root rot. Although variable , the results suggestthese herbicides may be capable of reducing P . arrhenomanes infection and increasing plantgrowth through reduced root rot severity. The slight increases in plant growth following leafapplication ofherbicide suggest an indirect effect through induced resistance .

13 1

Journal AmericanSociety of Sugarcane Technologists ,Vol. 22 , 2002

Irrigation of Sugarcane on Clay in a High-Rainfall Environment

Howard P . ViatorIberiaResearch StationLSUAgCenter

Variable yield responses to irrigation of sugarcane, Saccharum spp . , in Louisiana’s

humid climate have made it difficult . to evaluate its economic soundness . Nevertheless, theoccurrence of several droughts during the past decade in southern Louisiana has intensified theinterest in supplemental irrigation. During the severe drought of 2000, a study to evaluate theresponse of LCP 85-384 plant cane to irrigation was conducted on an Alligator clay soil (thermicVertic Haplaquept), a soil textural class that tends to restrict root development under droughtconditions . Irri gation was scheduled when stalks elongated 5 cm or less per week.

Supplemental water was supplied in fiirrows on May 5 , May 25 , July 2 1 and August 28 for acumulative total of 1 130 m3 The experimental site received a total of only cm of rain

from May through October, a rainfall deficit of cm when compared to a 25-yr average forthe same period . Height difference at harvest between the irrigated and non-ini gated plots was

50 cm . Yields mirrored the plant height disparity, with irrigated plots producing 44% highercane (P .06) and sugar (P .08) yields than the control plots . The magnitude of the yield

responses to irrigation in this experiment, Mg ha- 1 of cane and Mg ha- 1 of sugar, wascomparable to that observed elsewhere under similar dry conditions .

Effect ofTissue CultureMethod on Sugarcane Yield Compnents

J.W . Hoy

Department ofP lant Pathology and Crop PhysiologyLSUAgCenter, BatonRouge, LA 70803

K. P . B ischoff and K. A. GravoisSugarResearch Station

LSU AgCenter, St . Gabriel, LA 70776

S . B .MilliganUni ted States Sugar Corporation

Clewiston,FL 33440

Vegetative propagation is conducive to the spread of systemic sugarcane diseases, such

as ratoon stunting disease (RSD) . This important disease is now controlled in Louisiana largel

by planting commercial seed-cane initially produced through tissue culture . Kleentek

seed-cane has been available to farmers since the late 19805 . In the early years, farmers

sometimes noted that tissue culture deri ved plants had smaller stalk diameter and weight and a

higher stalk population . The tissue culture method used at that time was leaf roll callus culture .

Since then,the method has been changed to direct regeneration from the apical meristem to

132


third codes for a hypothetical proteinwith a 37% homology to extension in canola. The lastcodes for a hypothetical protein that has a 93% homology to a putative glucose-6

phosphate/phosphate translocator in rice . Whether these sequences are unique to a specifictissue type is still under investigation.

A Technique to Breed for Ratoon Stunting Disease in Sugarcane

J. D.Miller, J. C. Comstock, P .Y. P . Tai, and B. Glaz

USDA-ARS Sugarcane Research StationCanal Point, Florida

Ratoon stunting disease (RSD) causedby Clavibacter xyli subsp . xyli is one of themostimportant sugarcane (interspecific hybrids of Saccharum spp .) diseases in Florida. The

objective of thi s studywas to evaluate the effectiveness of stubble inoculation and determine if itcould be used in a program to breed forRSD resistance . Field grown seedling sugarcane plantswere inoculated atmaturity by cutting with knives dipped in juice infected with ratoon stuntingdisease bacteria (RSD) . The regrowth from these stools was sampled at the base of the maturestalks andRSD susceptibility was based on the number of colonized vascular bundlesdeterm ined using the tissue blot immunoassay. After selection based on vegetativecharacteristics in Seedlings, the average RSD rating of 12 crosses with 658 selections wasWh en resampled asmature plants in Stage I, the average rating was The plants werereinoculated and replanted into a Stage I sized plot . There were 67 clones selected foradvancement to Stage 11 . They had an average RSD rating of One major advantage of thi ssystem is that it requires no special planting in which to evaluate RSD resistance . Themajordisadvantage of this system from our standpoint in Florida is that it requires that seedlingselection be done in the ratoon crop and that all clones in the breeding program wouldpotentially be infected withRSD . In all probability very high yielding susceptible clones wouldbe dropped with thi s selection scheme . Growers in Florida now manage RSD with acombination of genetic resistance and clean seed cane . Therefore, our industry is notwilling tolose those potentially high yielding clones that are susceptible but could be profitable whengrown without RSD .

Progress in th e Development ofTransgenic Disease-Resistant Sugarcane

Z . Ying andM. J. DavisUniversity ofFlorida, Tropical Research and Education Center

Homestead,Florida

Efforts are underway to develop sugarcane with transgenic resistance to the sugarcaneyellow leaf luteovirus (SCYLV), leaf scald disease (L SD), and ratoon stunting disease (RSD) .

Genetic constructs containing the SCYLV coat protein in the sense (pFM395) and antisense

(pFM396) orientations were obtain from T. E.Mirkov (Texas A&M,Weslaco) . A geneticconstruct (pM 3P39-22) containing amodified cecropin gene (MB39) was obtained from Lowell

134


Owens (USDA, Beltsville,MD) . In vitro growth inhibition assays indicated thatM 339 shouldbe highly active against theRSD and L SD pathogens, Clavibacter xyli subsp . xyli and

Xanthomonas albilineans , respectively. A number of otherDNA constructs were madeincluding those with the cecropin gene under control of the maize ubiquitan promoter (pZY-C),and the antisense SCYLV gene fii sedwith the cecropin gene both under control of the ubiquitanpromoter (pZY-GSA) . Sugarcane callus cultures were co-bombarded with the individualconstructs and another construct containing the NPTH gene as a selectable marker. Geneticallytransformed plants were regenerated from these materials and are being tested further.

Potential Impact ofDNAMarker Technology on Sugarcane Breeding

Yong-Bao PanUSDA-ARS ,

SouthernRegional Research Center, Sugarcane Research Unit,5883 USDARoad, Houma, LA 70360, U S A.

At the turn of the new millennium, breeders have begun to realize how DNA markertechnology may potentially impact traditional sugarcane breeding programs . Sugarcane is atropical grass with both male and female organs within each tiny flower. Self-pollination mayoccur even after a male-sterility treatment such as the immersion of tassels in hot water or

alcohol . The use of DNA marker technology may allow breeders to eliminate progeny fromunwanted selfs early in the basic and commercial programs . At least five classes of DNAmarkers are available to use, each having its strong and weak points . These are restrictionfragment length polymorphism (RFLP), random amplified polymorphi c DNA (RAPD),polymerase chain reaction (PCR) , simple sequence repeat (SSR) or microsatellites

, and

amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) . Unlike the morphological traits,DNA

fingerprints constructed with these classes ofmarkers are quite reliable and not influenced by theenvironment . A few PCR (Eri3/Eri4 and GigI/PII) , RAPD (OPA1 1 and SSR (SMC334BS ,SMC336BS andMCSA068G08) markers, that prove to be species-specific , have been developedto assist in the basic selection program at the Sugarcane Research Unit at Houma, Louisiana.

Multi-disciplinary studies are underway to identify and clone RAPD or AFLP markers that aretightly linked to genes contri buting to important agronomic traits . Multi-institutionalcollaborations are also being sought to construct microsatellite linkage maps from severalgenetic populations (F1 , F2, BC 1) of sugarcane .

In Vivo Viability Assay of Sugarcane Pollen Stored atUltra L ow Temperature FollowingPreservation Treatments

P. Y. P. Tai and J. D.Miller‘

USDA-ARS Sugarcane Field StationCanal Point, Florida

Storage of sugarcane pollen is desirable for enhancing germplasm because of thedifferent flowering time . The viability of Saccharum sp ontaneum pollen can be significantlyprolonged under low temperature after being properly air dried to reduce its moisture content .

135


The information on pollen viability of commercial cultivars (CP 70-1 133 , CP 98- 1301 , and CP98- 1654) were used to examine their viability after being stored at low temperature . Pollensamples were collected in the early morning after anthesis and divided into two sets: the firstwas dried in a cool dehumidified room for three hours and the second set was treated withcryoprotectants . Both sets of .pollen were

.

stored immediately at — 80°

C for l to 4 months .

Cryoprotectants included M solutions in various combinations of dimenthyl sulfoxide,glycerol

,sorbitol

,and sucrose . An in vivo assay was used to measure the pollen viability.

Pollen was applied onto the tassels of green canes, CP 65-357 and Green German (S .

officinarum), in the morning during the flowering season . Fuzz was harvested about 30 daysafter pollination for germination test . Seedlings were transplanted to field . Seedlings fromcrosses derived from stored S . officinarum pollen were classified based “

on the gross plantmorphology at 4-month-old while seedlings derived from crosses with stored pollen of

commercial cultivars were classified based on stalk colors . Stalk color was determined by oneintemode from each of 12-month-old seedlings that was cut and dipped vertically in 5%

sulfurous acid solution for 3-4 days to eliminate chlorophyll pigment . Loss of pollen viabilitydue to preservation treatments was estimated by [ 1 (seed set from stored set

from fresh pollen)]100 . Results showed that pollen of neither S . sp ontaneum nor commercialcultivars produced viable seedlings when they were stored at —

,SO

°C after being treated with

cryoprotectants . After being exposed to air drying, pollen _of both S . sp ontaneum and

commercial cultivars produced viable seedlings ranging from poor to good seed set when the

stored pollen was used to cross with CP 65 -357 or Green German . Average losses of pollenviability were 50% and 88% for CP 98-1654 . In addition to the use of thepollen storage for germplasm enhancement, this study suggests that stored pollen with genetic

markermay be used to help identify hybrids for genetic and breeding investigations .

136

Journal American Society of Sugarcane Technologists,Vol. 22, 2002

The results are presented in vari ous charts . These were developed, to illustrate different

volumes of materi als that can be expected in the boiling house,under different cane quality

conditions . Other charts are also presented such as: heating surface required for Juice heaters onthe various stages, evaporation rates necessary to satisfy the demands of vacuum pans

, and

heaters . These figures are usefirl for sizing the proper equipment required under differentconditions and gri nding rate.

Properly planning an expansion proj ect, after evaluating all the areas of the mill,will

help mill managers spend their investment dollars in the areas were equipment is most needed.

A properly balanced factory, provides a smooth operation that enable the mill engineers to focustheir attention on increasing efficiency, rather than coping with the added material they have toprocess .

Reducing Equipment Cost/Best EquipmentManagement Practices

Neal HahnNortrax Equipment Company South

Baton Rouge, Louisiana

The owning and operating cost ofmobile equipment can have an adverse effect on a

mill’s profitability. Cost control is important . The core business of the rrri ll is gri nding cane,rather than mobile equrpmentmanagement. Manymanagers do not take the time to consider thiskey area of operation . The productivity of equipment is directly proportional to the effectivenessof an equipment management strategy. Equipment that stays idle during productive times is asubstantial cost to the mill. Utilization tracking can be used to determ ine if added equipment isrequired. Downtime can be an indicator both of equipment andmaintenance problems . A goodprogram ofmaintenance for high -tech equipmentmust include oil sampling, repair optionmanagement, preventative maintenance

,and life cycle planning. A good record keeping system

should also include an effort to make historical comparisons of cost per hour. The equipmentdivision of each mill should also have a Standard Operating Procedures guide, which would

address the key areas of equipment operation andmaintenance. This paperwill provide ideas onbetter equipment management and review specific examples key to lowering the Operating costof equipment .

What You Should Learn from Your Ch emical Supplier

Stephen J. ClarkeFlorida Crystals Corporation

This paper surveys the issues of selection, use and fate of chemicals used as processing

aids in sugar production and in equipment cleaning. The chemical sales business is extremelycompetitive and it is essential that the sugar technologist (chemical user) be aware of thebenefits

,costs, and possible unforeseen consequences of each chemical used. The chemical

supplier who should be fami liar with the scientific basis for the application must provide thisinformation there is no magic in this business . Chemical use should be minimal but is

138


unavoidable, and factory personnel must have the information required to avoid unnecessary use .

Examples of cases where problems and new consumer issues have arisen will be presented,

along with some suggestions ofnew chemical applications .

Th e Effect ofTwo Louisiana Soils on Cane Juice Quality

Mary An Godsh allSugar ProcessingResearch Institute

New Orleans, LA.

S cott S . Spear

University ofAlabamaCenter forGreenManufacturi ng

Tuscaloosa, AL

RichardM Johnson

SouthernRegional Research Center,ARS , USDA

New Orleans, LA

As part of a large- scale investigation on the effect of various field practices on the qualityof cane juice in Louisiana, it was noted that when soil was added to the cane juice to assess theeffect of soil on cane juice quality, the juice color lightened. In a study during the cropin Louisiana, with addition of 5% and 10% soil, it was noted that polysaccharide was alsoremoved, the first time this had been reported. These observations run contrary to expectationsthat soil would degrade the quality of cane juice . Two soils from the Louisiana cane growingarea, Sharkey clay and Norwood silty clay loam from Bunkie, were tested on raw juice fromgreencane, topped, with side leaves, at a 10% add-on to juice. The juice was treated for 30minutes in a shaker either at room temperature (25

°

C) or heated Changes in pH,color

,

and total polysaccharide, ash and filtration rate were noted. Both soils caused significantdecreases in color and total polysaccharide and increased the filtration rate. Ash and pH werenot significantly changed.

Mill House Operation : Composition of Juice from IndividualMills

Kh alid Iqbal,Mary An Godsh all, and Linda AndrewsSugar ProcessingResearch Institute

New Orleans, LA.

Although a lot of work has been done to study and improve sucrose extraction byindividual mi lls in the factory, little information is available about the nature and composition of

the juice exiting each mill . The type and concentration of the impurities entering into theprocess with the extra sucrose may affect processing and the quality of sugar, a subject that hasnot been addressed to the fullest extent . From a processing point of view, it is usefirl to havedetailed knowledge of every sugar-bearing stream within a sugar factory. Samples of individualmill juices were collected from mills at a local factory during the 2000 gri nding season. Juice

139


samples were analyzed for puri ty, invert, color, total polysaccharides, conductivity ash , cations,anions, and nitrogen content. The level of extraction of non-sucrose components generallyincreased across the mills, while the sucrose content decreased. Purity drop was in the range of3 to 10 degrees while color, total polysaccharides and nitrogen content increased 2 to 4 timesfrom mill #1 to #6 . Among cations, sodium and potassium increased

,phosphate plateaued at

mill #3 or #4, and chloride did not change very much. Potential application of thi s informationwill be discussed .

A New Polarimetric Method for th e Analysis ofDextran and Sucrose

Victoria Singleton

Optical Activity Ltd.

Cambri dgeshire,England.

A new method for dextran quantification has been developed and field-tri alled inJamaica, in association with the Sugar Industry Research Institute. The method uses a nearinfrared (NIR) polarimeter and a specific dextranase . The dextranase - selectively breaks-downthe dextran into sugars of lesser specific rotations without affecting any other substance presentin the juice . The initial dextran concentration is derived from the calibration curve of the changein observed optical rotation (OR) due to enzymatic hydrolysis and outputted automatically by the

polarimeter, Readings are not affected by the molecular weight of the dextrans,the entire

procedure takes less than 10 minutes to perform and it is semi-automated . Use of a NIR

polarimeter negates the need for lead clari fication . The method is suitable for both juice and raw

sugar samples .

Comparative Performance ofHot, Cold, and Intermediate Lime Clarifi cation at CoraTexas Factory

Gillian Eggleston and Blaine E. OgierUSDA-ARS -Southem Regional Research Center

1 100 Robert E. Lee B lvdNew Orleans, LA 70 124

AdrianMonge

Cora TexasManufacturing Co .

Res . 32540 B Texas RdWhite Castle, LA 70788

Since 1996 , Cora Texas factory in Louisiana has been operating intermediate limeclarification and was, therefore, one of the few U .S . factories that did not operate cold limeclarification . In an attempt to further improve clarification performance, the factory made thedecision to convert to hot lime clarification during the 2000-gri nding season . Thi s comparativeinvestigation of hot versus intermediate and cold lime clarification was undertaken toquantitative performance . In cold liming, mixed juice (MJ) was incubated and then limed in a

lime tank (4min) , both at ambient temperature For interm ediate liming, 50% of the

140

Journal Ameri can Societyof Sugarcane Technologists ,Vol. 22, 2002

Engineeri ng. In addition, options forMasters students in engineering to take the sugar coursesexist, aimed at producing graduate students with a comprehensive lmowledge of sugar. The

benefits to the industry, to Audubon Sugar Institute, and the University are highlighted.

SAT Process for Production ofWh ite Sugar from SugarMills

Chung Ch i ChouChou Technologies, Inc .

New Orleans, LA

Due to the uncertainty in the government's sugar program and the threat of globalcompetition,

the US domestic sugar industry is under pressure to develop a new strategy for the

new millennium . One of the potential solution is to produce whi te sugar directly from sugarmills with minimal nominal capital cost.

l

with thi s vision in mind, the SAT process wasdeveloped at Sugar Processing Research Institute under the direction of its former managingdirector, Dr. Chung Chi Chou and is the subject of this paper.

For the cane sugar industry, sugar is extracted from sugar cane, processed to produce raw

sugar in a sugar factory and then further purified to refined whi te sugar in a sugar refinery.

However, beet sugar-does not require a two-stage process to achieve white sugar in a beet sugar

factory. By studying the basic differences in the nature of colorants and various composition of

sugar streams from both sugar cane and sugar beet, the SAT process is developed successfully toproduce white sugar using clarified juice fiom sugar

'

mills with color ranging from 80 to 150

ICUMSA. In this paper, the SAT process itself and its benefit to sugarmills will be presented.

Th e Biorefinery Concept

W illem H. Kampen and Henry NjapauAudubon Sugar InstituteLSU Agri cultural CenterBaton Rouge, Louisiana

In response to the present energy problems, global warming and the lack of a nationalenergy policy, US Government agencies as USDA, EPA,

DOE and others are presentlypreparing a strategic plan entitled :

“

Fostering The B iology Revolution . .In Biobased Products

and B iobased Energy”. The national goal is to triple the U S . use of biobased products and

bioenergy by 2010 . The biorefinery concept is based upon (cheap) sugars from whi ch a diverse

and flexible mix of energy, fuel, chemical and material products from biomass resources isproduced ; sugarcane should play amajor role .

R&D to reduce the cost of the sugar cane crop has to be part of th is effort . It already has

been demonstrated that betaine can improve the sucrose yield in Louisiana. Most of theblackstrap molasses produced in Louisiana is leaving the state. With a large biorefinery we can

produce from molasses and waste sugars (as an example) : bioethanol, carbon dioxide, inositol,glycerine, itaconic acid and succinic acid. Other value-added or co-products such as lactic acid

142


and thetins could be recovered as well. An example of a biorefinery with a modern wastetreatment system based upon incineration and heat recovery is presented. These biorefineries canhave much higherReturn On Investments then (raw) sugar factories .

Evaporator Scale-Minimization with Electro—Coagulation and Improved Cleaning withCh elates

Henry Njapau andWillem H. Kampen

Audubon Sugar InstituteLSU Agri cultural CenterBatonRouge, Louisiana

Electro-coagulation of clarified juice resulted in the removal of essentially all the silicondioxide silicates plus from 10 to 40% of calcium, magnesium and (inorganic) phosphate. Thismay reduce scaling by up to Preliminary work on mixed juice indicates that it is likely thatelectro-coagulation can be effective before clarification also .

The removal of scale is typically accomplished by boiling with an alkaline solution, a

waterwash and an acid solution . A new acid is being tested, which shows promise as a cleaningagent. However, in testing several BASF-chelate solutions we have identified two types of

chelate solutions that show much improved cleaning over the standard method(s) and inamatterof two hours of boiling time . These chelates most likely can replace both the alkaline and acidboils

,will be cost effective and save on downtime .

Evaporator Performance During Crop 2000-2001 at Cajun Sugar Factory

Walter Hauck

Cajun Sugar Cooperative, INC .

New Iberia, Louisiana

During the crop 2000 2001 we tri ed at Cajun Sugar Cooperative a scale inh ibitor. We

could extend our grinding between the clean outs from TC to TC . We also usedproducts in the cleaning solutions . To our caustic soda of 25 Be we added 5% of soda ash

together with an activator and a dispersant. We observed that the juice heaters after the cropwhere cleaner then before we started the crop . In our acid boiling we used HCl togetherwith 3% ammonium bifloride diluted muriatic acid. We also used a new inhibitor, whichallows us to boil the acid for hours . The total cleaning cycle was done in approximately 10hours including a calandria test in 3 evaporators . The cleaning solutions we used helped us toobtain perfectly cleaned heating surfaces . In the original paper I will include more detailed factsand analysis from the scaling we could remove or not.

143


Mixed Juice Clarifier Distribution at Clewiston

Mike Damms and Carlos BernhardtUnited States Sugar Corporation

Clewiston SugarMill

For the crushing season, it was necessary to install a new mixed juice flashtank at the Clewiston milling facility. Along with the flash tank installation

, a new mixed juicedistri bution system,

feeding the clarifiers, was also commissioned . The distri bution system isfully automatic and has several novel features that enhance the operation .

This paper discusses the installation and its benefits as well as limitations after one

season of operation. Overall the project was very successfirl and will lead the way to a reductionin the high retention times currently being experienced in the mixed juice clarifiers. P lans forthe future are also listed.

Goats,Mice, and Dextran, th e Road to aMonoclonal Antibody Test Kit

Don F. Day and D . SarkarAudubon Sugar InstituteLSU Agri cultural CenterBaton Rouge

,Louisiana

J.Rauh

MidlandResearch Laboratories, Inc .

Lenexa, Kansas

For several years we have been pursuing the development and commercialization of a

rapid antibody-based ki t for the quantitation of dextran in a diverse range of sugar streams . Thereport will detail the development process that finally resulted in the a rapid test for dextran.

Comparing th e Effects of Su lphur Dioxide onModel Sucrose and Cane Juice Systems

L .S . Andrews andM.A. Godsh allSugar Processing Research Institute, Inc .

1 100 Robert E . Lee B lvdNew Orleans, LA

Sulphur dioxide (SO2) has been used for centuries to minimize color in food processingand fruit and vegetable storage . In the sugar industry, sugar beet processors to reduce and

prevent color formation in white refined sugar use it routinely. Sugarcane processors throughoutthe world use 80 2 to produce plantation whi te sugars. This study was undertaken to determinethe effect of $ 0 2 on pure sucrose solutions in compari son to real factory sugarcane juicestreams . Sugar systems included 15 brix pure sucrose, clari fied juice and mixed juice from a

Louisiana sugarcane mill . A pH of was obtained by adding milk of lime then lowered to

144

Journal Ameri can Societyof Sugarcane Technologists,Vol. 22, 2002

Heat Transfer Devices

Nell SwiftAlfa Laval Inc .

5400 International DriveRichmond

,Virginia

In the past 2 decades, great advances have been made in the use of lower cost and moreefficient heat transfer devices . In the presentation,

we will look at how the sugarcane industry inthe USA can best take advantage of this technology. We will examine the origins of the plateheat exchanger and the latest developments up to the present day where we have p lateevaporators playing an ever- larger role in sugar processing. We will cover the 4 major areas inwhich plates can be beneficial, namely raw juice heaters, clari fied juice heaters, evaporators, andmolasses coolers .

Special attention will be paid to the installation and operation of plates with regard to thesugarcane process and its particular fouling i ssues . We will discuss key design points thatshould be taken into account before a plate heater or evaporator is installed and the importanceofv enting non condensable gases andmaintaining minimum flows . All of these factors need tobe taken into account by the plant engineer or designer when he/she is looking to use plate heatexchanger technology.

146

INMEMORIAM

147


In Memoriam

ENRIQUE R. ARIASSeptember 13, 19 18 January 1 , 2002

The sugar industry was deeply saddened by the loss ofEnriqueR. Ari as on January 1

,2002 .

Mr . Arias was the Executive Vice President of theSugar Cane Growers Cooperative of Florida before hisretirement in June 1994 .

Born in Havana, Cuba in 19 18, his expertise in thesugar business goes back to his roots. Following in his father'sfootsteps, Mr. Arias attended the University o f Notre Damewhere he earned a Bachelor of Science degree in 1940 and laterreturned to Cuba where he studied sugar chemistry and sugarengineering at the University ofHavana.

‘

His first work in thesugar industry was with the Arechabala group which ownedand operated a sugar based industri al complex and two sugarmills in the Province ofMatanzas, Cuba.

In 1957, he founded the Industri al Service and Construction Company and led the field in

the conversion of raw sugar handling from bags to bulk.

Mr. Ari as moved his family to the United States in October 1960 . In 1961 he joined FarrelBirmingham Company ofAnsonia, Connecticut andwas moved to Florida to become the ResidentManager for the construction of Glades Sugar House owned by the Sugar Cane GrowersCooperative ofFlorida.

Upon completion of the project he joined the National SugarRefining Company as Directorof Project Engineering and successively held the positions ofDirector of P lanning

,Vice President

Planning andVice President Operations .

In 1970, Mr. Arias joined the staff of Sugar Cane Growers Cooperative ofFlorida as VicePresident P lanning and later became Executive Vice President. He managed the feasibility studies,engineering and construction functions to increase the capacity of Glades Sugar House in severalsteps from tons per day to and tons per day.

At the Port of Pahn Beach,Mr. Arias directed the design,construction and operation of the

bulk sugar shipment facilities of the Flori da Sugar Marketing and Terminal Association and theexpansion of themolasses shipping facilities of the FloridaMolasses Exchange .

He was active in many professional and sugar-related organizations including chairing the

Florida Sugar Cane League's Environmental Quality Technical Sub-Committee and the technicalcommittee of the Florida Sugar Marketing Terminal Association . He was past-president of the

148


InMemoriam

S .J.P . CHILTONFebruary 3, 1909-Apri1 2, 2001

Dr. St . John Poindexter Chilton passed away on April 2, 2001 inRapidesRegionalMedicalCenter in Alexandria, Louisiana. Probably very few of today’s growers and processors in theLouisiana industry rememberDr. Chilton, although there are a few of us who rememberhim quitewell . Dr. Chilton was 92 when hepassed away and is survived by his wife

,Alice Hunter Chilton

ofBayou Rapides . The official notice of his death states that he was retired as a plant pathologyprofessor and department head at Louisiana State University in BatonRouge . Hewas also a formerconsultant for the Nicaragua Sugar Estates, director of L aPlace Enterprises, president of the localchapter of SAR,

past president of the LouisianaHistorical and Genealogical Society, president ofthe Historical Association of Central Louisiana, a Rotarian and was listed in Wh o’s Who in theWorld.

F rom a personal recollection, Dr. Chi lton was bigger than all those things . He was mostinstrumental in establishing the sugarcane crossing and selectionprogram atLSU . During the 1950s,6os and early 70s, he and Elias Paliatseas were the individuals who led the crossing and selectionprogram at LSU . Preston Dunckelman was also part of that team in the early years . It was

demonstrated that sugarcane could be forced to flower in Louisiana using a photoperiod regime and

that viable seed could be produced from these crosses . Thisworkwas done in the early 19505 . The

Grand Isle crossing facilitywas established, although itwas used forflowering and crossing foronly

a couple of years and seed were planted in Baton Rouge for selection . The“L”selection program

was established andhigh sugar contentwas amajor objective in their selection effort . In fact, L 6O

25 was the first variety to come from that initiative and set anew high watermark in term s of sugarcontent in the industry. The variety lasted only a few years because of mosaic and RSD

susceptibility, but defini tely brought thi s industry into the era ofhigh sugar varieties .

Dr. Chilton,while known for his determ ination,

aggressiveness and dedication toward the

sugar industry, was also sometimes regarded as a“ tough individual”and someone who could be

quite combative . Those who crossed h im soon learned how powerful he could be. He served on

many a graduate student’s committee, and from a personal standpoint, lived up to hi s reputation as

“ tough and spirited”

. He often kept the “

fire lit”underpeoplemaking sure theywere alwaysmoving

and he was always eager to share his sugarcane breeding philosophies with those interested in

listening . He will always be remembered for h is dedication, determination and the direction hebrought to the LSU selection program. He will be sadly missed by his relatives and fri ends

throughout the international sugar community.

150


InMemoriam

Jack L. Dean

March 15 , l 925-August 4, 2001

Dr. Jack L. Dean, a retired USDA-ARS research plant pathologist,died on August 4

,2001 .

Dr. Dean was born in Keota, Oklahoma onMarch 15 , 1925 . He served in the U . S . Navy during

WorldWar I] and after the war, he obtained his BS in botany in 1949 and hi sMS degree in plantpathology in 195 1 fromOklahoma State University. From 195 1 to 1966 , hewas aUSDA-ARS plantpathologist and then a research plant pathologist at Meridian ,

Mississippi . During thi s time hecompleted his PhD in plant pathology at Lo uisiana State University. In 1966, Dr. Dean moved tothe Sugarcane Field Station at Canal Point, Florida where he served as a Research Sugarcane

Pathologist until he retired for the first time in 1987. Dr. Dean then became one of the oldest ifnotthe most experienced of research associates at the University of Florida working with Dr. Mike

Davis until he retired again in 1993 . During his careerhe authored and/or co-authored 100 researchpapers . He developed inoculation techniques for sugarcanemosaic and leaf scald to select resistant

cultivars that are still used at Canal Point . During the 1970's and 1980's he addressed the threat ofsugarcane rust and smut that were introduced on the US mainland. Dr. Dean understood the

theoretical bases of statistics and stressed their practical impact on the selection of CP cultivars .

During the last phase ofDr. Dean’s career he helped determine the importance of ratoon stuntingdisease inFloridaandhelped develop techniques to screen forresistance . Dr.Deanwas anHonorary

member of the Joint D ivision of the American Society of Sugar Cane Technologists .

JackDeanwas born to be a scientist. Hemay neverhave come across a biological problemthat didnot intriguehim. Th is quality, combinedwith hi s experience andknowledge,made him both

amentor and a youthful inspiration to his fellow scientists in his final years at Canal Point . Manywill remember Dr. Dean’s contributions to sugarcane pathology. Those of us who knew himpersonally will also remember him for his humor and his intense thought which at times couldoverride the more tri vial aspects on a person’s mind. Jack probably entered more than one

colleague’s office forgettingwhyhewas there. Thiswas not a fault, itwas how hewaswhen hewasthinking about research. For those fortunate enough to know him

,we consider ourselves lucky. He

was a goodman .

15 1


AMERICAN SOCIETY OF SUGAR CANE TECHNOL OGISTSEDITORIAL POL ICY

Nature ofpap ers to be published :

Papers submittedmust represent a significant technological or scientific contri bution .Papers

will be limited to the production and processing of sugarcane, or to subj ects logically related.

Authorsmay submit papers that represent a review, anew approach to field or factory problems, or

new knowledge gained through experimentation. Papers promoting machinery or commercialproducts will not be acceptable .

Frequency ofpublication :

The Journal will appear at least once a year. At the direction of the Joint ExecutiveCommittee, the Journalmayappearmore frequently. Contri buted papers not presented at ameetingmay be reviewed, edited, and published if the editorial criteria aremet.

The Editori al Comm ittee shall be composed of theManaging Editor, Technical Editor forthe Agri cultural Section, and Technical Editor for the Manufacturing Section. The Editorial

Committee shall regulate the Journal content and assure its quality. It is charged with the authoritynecessaryto achieve these goals . TheEditorial Committee shall determine broadpolicy. Each editorwill serve for three years ; andmay at the Joint Executive Committee

’s discretion,serve beyond the

expiration of hi s or her term .

Handling ofmanuscripts :

Four copies of eachmanuscript are initially submitted to theManaging Editor. Manuscriptsreceived by theManaging Editorwill be assigned a registration number determined serially by thedate ofreceipt . TheManagingEditorwri tes to the onewho submitted the paper to inform the author

of the receipt of the paper and the registration numberwhich must be used in all correspondence

regarding it.

TheTechnical Editors obtain at least two reviews for each paperfrom qualified persons . Theidentities ofreviewersmust notbe revealed to each othernorto the authorduring the reviewprocess .

Instructions sent with the papers emphasize the necessity forpromptness aswell as thoroughness in

making the review . Page charges will be assessed for the entire manuscript for non-members .

Members will be assessed for those pages in excess of ten (10) double spaced Times New Roman

(TT) 12 pt typed pages of 8 x 1 1"dimension with one ( 1) inchmargins .

When a paper is returned by reviewers, the Technical Editor evaluates the paper and the

recommendations ofthe reviewers . Ifmajorrevisions are recommended, theTechnicalEditor sendsthe paper to the author for this purpose, along with anonymous copies of reviewers’

recommendations . When the paper is returned to the Technical Editor, he/she will judge the

adequacy of the revision andmay send the paperback to any reviewer for furtherreview . When the

152


RULES FOR PREPARING PAPERS TO BE PRINTED IN THEJOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF SUGAR CANE TECHNOLOGISTS

Format

Unless the nature of themanuscript prevents, it should include the following sections in theorder. listed : AB STRACT, INTRODUCTION, MATERIALS and METHODS

, RESUL TS ,DISCUSSION (ORRESUL TSAND DISCUSSION) , CONCLUSIONS ,ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ,and REFERENCES . Not all the sections listed above will be included in each paper

,but each

section should have an appropriate heading that is centered on the page with all letters capitalized.

Scientific names shall be italicized .

All material (including tab les and figures) sh all be submitted on X 1 1 inch paper

with one inch margins on all sides. If using WordPerfect, set the bottom margin at inches .

This will set the page number at inches and the"final line of text at 1 inch from the bottom

margin . Exactness in reproduction can be insured if electronic copies of the final versions ofmanuscripts are submitted . Authors are encouraged to contact the managing editor for specificsregarding software and formatting software to achieve ease of electronic transfer.

Authorship

Name of the authors, institution or organization with which they are associated, and theirlocations should follow the title of the paper.

Abstract

The abstract should be placed at the beginning of themanuscript, immediately following the

author’s name, organization and location . The abstract should be limited to a single self-containedparagraph ofabout 250words . State your rationale, objectives,methods, results, and theirmeaning

or scope ofapplication . Be specific . Identify the crops or organisms involved, aswell as soil type,chemicals

,or other details that figure in interpretation of the results . Do not cite tables, figures, or

references . Avoid equations unless they are the focus of the paper.

Tables

Number the tables consecutively and refer to them in the text as Table 1 , Table 2, etc . Each

table must have a heading or caption . Capitalize only the initial word and proper names in tableheadings . Headings and text of tables should be single spaced . U se TAB function rather than

SPACE BAR to separate columns of a table .

Number the figures consecutively and refer to them in the text as Figure 1 , Figure 2, etc .

Each figure must have a legend. Figures must be of sufficient quality to reproduce legibly.

154


Drawings Photoggaphs

Drawings andphotographsmust be provided separately from the text of themanuscript andidentified on the back of each. Type figure numbers and legends on separate pieces ofpaperwithproper identification . Drawings and photographs should be of sufficient quality that they will

reproduce legibly.

The heading forthe literature cited shouldbeREFERENCES . References should be arrangedsuch that the literature cited will be numbered consecutively and placed in alphabetical orderaccording to the surname of the senior author. In the text, references to literature cited should be

made byname ofauthor(s) and year ofpublication from list ofreferences . Do not use capital lettersin the titles of such articles except in initial words andpropernames, but capitalize words in the titlesof the peri odicals or books .

ITCHGRAS S (ROTTBOEL L IA COCHINCHINENS IS) CONTROL

IN SUGARCANEWITH POSTEMERGENCE HERBICIDES

Reed J. L encse and James L. Griffin

Department ofP lant Pathology and Crop PhysiologyLouisianaAgri cultural Experiment Station, LSU Agri cultural Center

Baton Rouge, LA 70803

and

Edward P.Richard, Jr.

Sugarcane Research Uni t, USDA-ARS , Houma, LA 7036 1

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION


RESUL TS AND DISCUSSION

Table 1 . Visual itchgrass control and sugarcane injury as influenced by over-the-top herbicideapplication atMaringouin andThibodaux, LA, 1989 .

CONCLUSIONS

ACKNOWL EDGMENTS

REFERENCES

155


GUIDELINES FOR PREPARING PAPERS FORJOURNAL OF AS SCT

The following guidelines forWordPerfect software are intended to facilitate the productionofthis joumal . Authors are strongly encouraged to prepare theirfinalmanuscripts withWordPerfect

or a later version forWindows . P lease contact theManaging Editor if you will not use one ofthose software packages .

Paper Marg ins : Allmaterial (including tables and figures) shall be submitted on X 1 1 inchpaperwith one inch margins on all sides . To achieve thi s withWordPerfect, set the top, left , andrightmargins at one inch. However, set the bottommargin at inches . This will place the pagenumber at i nches and the final line of text at one inch.

Fonts : Submit your document in the Times New Roman (TT) 12pt font . If you do not have thi sfont

,contact theManaging Editor.

Alignment : Choose the full alignment option to prepare yourmanuscript . The use ofSPACEBARfor alignment is not acceptable . As a general rule SPACE BAR should only be used for spacebetweenwords and limited other uses . Do not use space bar to indent paragraphs, align and indentcolumns

,or create tables .

Do not use hard returns at the end of sentences within a paragraph. Hard returns are to beused when ending paragraphs or producing a short line .

Place tab les and figures with in the textwhere you wish th em to appear . Otherwise, all

tables and figures will appear after yourReferences section .

n'

les: Italicize scientific names . Do not use underline.

Tab les : U se Tab stops and the Graph ics line draw option when constructing tables . Avoid thespace bar to separate columns (see alignment) . All lines should begin with the leftmost symbol intheir left most column and should endwith the right most symbol in their right most column .

Smith, I.M.,H. P . Jones, C .W. Doe

,199 1 . The use ofmultidiscipline approaches to control

rodent populations in plants . Journal ofAmerican Society ofP lantManagement .394.

156

Section 4 .

Section 5 .

Section 6 .

Section 7.

Section 8 .

Section 9 .


Honorary membership shall be conferred on any individual who has distinguishedhimself or herself in the sugar industry, and has been elected by amajority vote of theJoint Executive Committee . Honorary membership shall be exempt from dues andentitled to all the privileges of activemembership . Each D ivisionmay have up to 15livingHonoraryMembers . In addition, theremaybe up to 5 livingHonorarymembersassigned to the two Divisions jointly.

Off-shore or foreign members shall be individuals not residing in the continentalUnited States who may be interested in the objects of the Society.

Supporting members shall be persons engaged in the manufacturing,production or

distribution ofequipment or supplies used in conjunctionwithproduction ofsugarcaneor cane sugar, or any corporation,

firm or other organization engaged in the productionof sugar cane or the-manufacture of cane sugar, who may be interested in the objectsof the Society.

Applicants for new membership shall“

make written application to the SecretaryTreasurer. of the respective divisions, endorsed by two members of the division,

and

such applications shall be acted upon by the division membership committee .

Minimum charge for annual dues shall be as follows :

ActiveMembershipAssociateMembershipHonoraryMembershipOff-shore or ForeignMembershipSupportingMembership

Each Division can assess charges for dues more than the above schedule asdeterm ined by theD ivision officers orby themembership at the discretion of theofficers of each Division .

Dues for each calendar year shall be paid not later than 3 months prior to theannualmeeting ofthemember's division . Newmembers shall pay the full amountof dues

,irrespective of when they join . Any changes in dues will become

effective in the subsequent calendar year.

Dues shall be collected by each oftheDivision's Secretary-Treasurerfrom the membersin their-respective divisions . Unless anduntil changed by action of the JointExecutiveCommittee

,50 percent of theminimum charge forannual dues, as described in Section

8 foreachmembership class, shall be transmitted to the office oftheGeneral SecretaryTreasurer.

Members in arrears for dues formore than a yearwill be dropped from membershipafter thirty days notice to this effect from the Secretary-Treasurer. Members thusdroppedmay be reinstated only after payment ofback dues and assessments .

Only active members of the Society whose dues are not in arrears and honorarymembers shall have the privilege of voting and holding office . Only members (allclasses) shall have the privilege of speaking atmeetings of the Society.

158

Section 1 .

Section 2 .

Section 1 .

Section 2 .

Section 3 .

Section 4.

Section 5 .

Section 6 .

Section 7.


ARTICLE IV

General Secretary -Treasurer and Joint Executive Committee

The General Secretary-Treasurer shall serve as Chi ef Admini strative Officer of theSociety and shall coordinate the activities of the divisions and the sections . He or shewill serve as ex-officio Chairperson of the Joint Executive Committee and as GeneralChairperson of the General SocietyMeetings, and shall have such other duties asmaybe delegated to him or her by the Joint Executive Committee . The office of theGeneral Secretary-Treasurer shall be the domicile of the Society.

The Joint Executive Committee shall be composed of the electedmembers of the twodivision Executive Comm ittees, and is vested with full authority to conduct thebusiness and affairs of the Society.

ARTICLE V

The officers ofeach division ofthe Society shall be : aPresident, aFirst Vice-President,a Second Vice-President, a Secretary-Treasurer or a Secretary and aTreasurer, and anExecutive Comm ittee composed of these officers and four othermembers

,one from

each section of the Division (as descri bed in Section 3 ofArticle VII) , one elected atlarge, and the President ofthe previousExecutive Committeewho shall serve as an ExOfficio member of the Division Executive Committee . The Office of the SecretaryTreasurer in thi s constitution indicates either the Secretary-Treasurer, or the Secretaryand the Treasurer.

These officers, except Secretary-Treasurer, shall be nominated by a nominatingcommittee and voted upon before the annual division meeting. Notices of suchnominations shall bemailed to eachmember at least onemonth before suchmeeting.

Ballots not received before the annually specified date will not be counted .

The Secretary-Treasurer shall be appointed by and serve as anon-votingmemberat thepleasure of theDivisionExecutive Committee . The Secretary-Treasurermaynotholdan elected office on the Executive Committee .

The duties of these officers shall be such as usually pertain to such officers in similarsocieties .

Each section as described in Article VII shall be represented in the offices of thePresident andVice-President .

The President, First Vice-President, and Second Vice-President of eachD ivision shallnot hold the same 0 . ce for two consecutive years . Either Section Chairperson (asdescribed in Section 3 of Article VII) may hold the same office for up to twoconsecutive years . The terms of the other officers shall be unlimited .

The President shall be elected each year alternately from the two sections hereinafterprovided for. In anygiven year, the Presidents ofthe twoDivisions shall be nominatedand elected from different sections . The President from the LouisianaDivision for theyear beginning February, 1970, shall be nominated and elected from the Agri culturalSection. The president from the Florida Division for the year beginning February,

159

Section 8 .

Section 9 .

Section 2 .

Section 1 .

Section 2 .

Section 3 .

Section 4 .

Section 1 .


1970, shall be nominated and elected from theManufacturi ng Section .

Vacancies occurring between meetings shall be filled by the D ivi sion ExecutiveCommittee .

The terms year and consecutive year as used in Articles V and VI shall beconsidered to be comprised of the elapsed time between one annual divisionmeetingof the Society and the following annual division meeting of the Society.

ARTICLE VI

The President of each division shall appoint a committee of three to serve as aMembership Committee. It will be the duty of this committee to pass uponapplications formembership in

x

the division and report to the Secretary-Treasurer.

The President of each division shall appoint each year a committee of three to serve asaNominating Committee. Itwill be the duty of the Secretary-TreasureroftheDivisionto notify all active and honorarymembers of the Division as to the personnel of thiscomm ittee . Itwill be the duty of this committee to receive nominations and to preparea list ofnominees andmai l th is to eachmemberof theDivision at least amonth beforethe annual meeting.

ARTICLE VII

Sections

There shall be two sections of each Division, to be designated as :

1 . Agri cultural2 . Manufacturi ng

Each active member shall designate whether he or she desires to be enrolled in theAgri cultural Section or theManufacturing Section.

There shall be aChairperson for each section ofeachDivisionwho will be the memberfrom that Section elected to the Executive Committee. It will be the duty of theChairperson of a section to arrange the program for the annual D ivisionmeeting .

The Executive Committee of each Division is empowered to elect one of their ownnumber or to appoint another person to handle the details of printing, proof reading,etc .

,in connection with these programs and to authorize the Secretary-Treasurer to

make whatever payments may be necessary for same .

ARTICLE VIII

The annual GeneralMeeting of themembers of the Society shall be held in June eachyear on a date and at a place

“ to be determined, from time to time, by the JointExecutive Committee . At allmeetings ofthe twoDivisions ofthe Society, five percentof the activemembers shall constitute a quorum. The program for the annualmeeting

160

Section 3 .

Section 1 .

Section 1 .


be appointed by the Joint Executive Committee no later than 6 months pri or to thebeginning of hi s or her term . A term will coincide with the date of the annual JointMeeting of the Society. No one shall serve two consecutive terms unless there is nosuitable candidate from eitherDivisionwilling to rep lace the currentManagingEditor.

If theManaging Editor serves less than one year ofhis orher three-year term,another

candidate is nominated by the same Division, approved by the other D ivision,and

appointed by theGeneral Secretary-Treasurer to afull three-year term. Ifthe appointedManaging Editor serves more than one year but less than the firll three-year term

,the

Technical Editor from the same Division will fi ll the unexpired term of the departedManaging Editor. In the event that the Technical Editor declines the nomination

,the

General Secretary-Treasurerwill appoint aManaging Editor from the same Divisionto serve the unexpired term .

The Journal of the American Society of Sugar Cane Technologists shall have twoTechnical Editors, which are an Agri cultural Editor and aManufacturing Editor. The

ManagingEditor shall appoint the Techni cal Editors for terms not to exceed hi s orherterm of office. Any Techni cal Editor shall be a member of either the Louisiana orFloridaDivision . EachDivisionwill be represented by one techni cal editor at all timesunless the Executive Committee of one Division and theManaging Editor agree thatthere is no suitable candidate willing to serve from that Division .

Any member or nonmember wishing to contribute to the Journal of the AmericanSociety of Sugar Cane Technologists shall submit his or her manuscri pt to theManaging Editor. The Managing Editor shall then assign the manuscript to theappropriate Technical Editor. The Technical Editor shall solicit peerreviews until, inthe opinion of the Technical Editor, two responsible reviews have been obtained thateither accept (with orwithoutmajor or

“

minor revision) or rej ect the manuscript . Forarticles accepted with major revision,

it shall be the responsibility of the TechnicalEditor to decide if the authors have satisfactorily completed themajorrevision(s) . TheTechnical Editormay solicit the opinion of the reviewers when making this decision.

The Technical Editors shall not divulge the identity of any reviewer. TheManagingEditor shall serve as Technical Editor of anymanuscript which includes a TechnicalEditor as an author.

ARTICLE XI

Amendments to this Constitution may be made only at the annual meeting of theSociety or at a special meeting of the Society. Written notices of such proposedamendments, accompanied by the signature of at least twenty (20) active or honorarymembers must be given to the General Secretary-Treasurer at least thirty (30) daysbefore the date of themeeting, andhe or shemust notify eachmemberofth e proposedamendment before the date of themeeting.

ARTICLEXII

D issolution

All members must receive notification from the General Secretary-Treasurer of anymeeting called for the purpose of terminating the Society at least thirty (30) days priorto the date of the meeting. After all members have been properly notified, thisorganizationmaybe terminated atany time, atanyregularor specialmeeting called for

162

Section 1 .


that purpose, by an affirm ative vote of two-tlrirds of the total honorary and activemembers in good standing present at the meeting. Thereupon

,the organization shall

be dissolved by such legal proceedings as are provided by law . Upon dissolution oftheJoint Society, its assets will be divided equally between the two D ivisions of theSociety. Dissolution of the Joint Society will not be cause for automatic dissolutionof eitherD ivision. Upon dissolution of eitherDivision,

its assets will be divided inaccordance with the wishes of its members and in conformity with existing IRSregulations and other laws applicable at the time of dissolution .

ARTICLEXIII

Assets

No member shall have any vested right, interest or privilege of, in , or to the assets,functions, affairs or franchises of the organization; nor any right, interest or privilegewhich may be transferable or inheritable .

163

Journal American Soci ety of Sugarcane Technologists , Vol . 22, 2002

Adland,Max

Ande, BAnde

,P .

Andrews, Linda S . .

Bernhardt,Carlos .

Birkett,Harold

Bischoff, K . P .

Bochamikova, E. A .

Breaux,Janis .

Bucke,Chri s

Calvert,D . V

Champagne, LonnieP .

Cherry,R. H.

Chou,Chung Chi .

Clarke, Stephen J

Cochran, J. CComstock, J . C . .

Damms,Mike .

Daroub, SDaugrois, J . H .

Davis,M. J. .

Day, Don F

Deren,ChristopherW

Easdale,WilliamEggleston, Gillian .

Panjul,John A. .

Gilbert, R. A. .

Gill, B ikram S .

Glaz, Barry.

Godshall,MaryAn . 90,1

Gravois, K . A.

Griffin,J . L

Grigg, Brandon C . .

Grisham ,M. P .

Hahn , Neal .Hallmark,W. B .

Hauck,Walter.

Hawkins,G. L .

Hentz,MatthewHorn, Jenni fer.

Hoy, J.W.

Hou,Chen-Jian

Iqbal, KhalidJohnson

,RichardM.

AUTHOR INDEX

164

30, 42

128,130,

30, 53

Kampen,Willem H.

Kang,Manj it S .

Kitchen,Bri an

Lama Jr.,Miguel

Legendre, Benjamin L .

Lingle,Sarah

L uo, Y.

L yrene, PaulM.

Matichenkov , V . V .

Miller,J. D . 62 , 73 , 122,

Milligan,

'

Scott B

Monge, Adri anMorris,-D . R.

Muchovej , RosaM.

Njapou, HenryNuessly, Gregg

Ogier, B laine E.

Okhuysen, JorgePan, Yong .

-Bao .

Posey, F. R.

Raid, R. N .

Rauh , J .

Reagan, T. E.

Rein, PeterW.

Rodriguez, Raul O .

Rowe, RobinSamour, EduardoSarkar

,D .

Selassi,M. E.

Shine Jr., J .M.

Singleton,Victoria

Snyder, George H.

Spear, Scott S .

Stein, JeanieSwift

,Nell

Tai,P . Y . P .

Tew,Thomas L .

Timple, CandaceViator, Howard P .

Way,M. O.

Weber, BrentWhite,W. H.

Williams, G. J .Ying, Z .

Honorary -membership shall be conferred on any individual who has distinguished himselfor herself in the sugar industry, and has been elected by a majority vote of the Joint Executive

Committee . Honorarymembership shall be exempt from dues and entitled to all the privileges ofactivemembership . EachDivisionmayhave up to 15 livingHonoraryMembers . In addition,

there

maybe up to 5 livingHonorarymembers assigned to the two D ivisions jointly. (Article 1 Section4 of the Constitution of the American Society of Sugar Cane Technologists) .

As ofMay 2002, the following is the list of the living Honorarymembers of the AmericanSociety of Sugar Cane Technologists for Florida and LouisianaD ivisions :

Florida Division Joint Division Louisiana Division

Guillermo Aleman Preston H. Dunckelman

Henry J . Andreis Lloyd L. Lauden

Pedro Arellano DenverT. Loupe

Antonio Arvesu Harold A .WillettJohn B . Boy PeterTai

David G. Holder

ArthurKirstein 111

JimmyD .Miller

Joseph OrsenigoEdRiceBlas Rodri guez

George H.Wedgworth

MW 144 Au .

2002 DENVERT. LOUPE BEST PRE SENTATION AWARDS

H.Waguespack, Jr.,W. Jackson,B . Viator and C . Viator. The Effect Of Combine Speed on Cane

Quality at Ahna P lantation in 2001 .

TrevorD . Endres . Experiences with Unwashed Cane atRaceland.

M. P . Grisham . Molecular Identification OfVirus Isolates CausingMosaic in LouisianaSugarcane

J . A. DaS ilva. Development OfMicrosatelliteMarkers from Sugarcane Resistance RelatedGenes

Felix Gus B lanchardRichard Breaux

P .J. Pete"deGravellesGilbert DurbinMinus GrangerSess D . HensleyJames E. IrvineDalton P . Landry

Lowell L.McCormick

Joe PolackCharles Savoie

TABLE OF CONTENTS

President'sMessage FloridaDivision

John A. Panjul

President'sMessage LouisianaDivisionChri sMattingly

PEERREFEREED JOURNAL ARTICLES Agri cultural Section

Laboratory Screening of Insecticides for Preventing Injury by theWirewormMelanotus Communis (Coleoptera: Elateridae) to Germ inating Sugarcane

David G. Hall

Early Generation Selection of Sugarcane Familiesand Clones in Australia: A ReviewCollins A. Kimbeng andMike C . Cox

RepeatabilityWithin and Between Selection Stages in a Sugarcane Breeding ProgramJose A. Bressiani , Roland Vencovsky, and Jorge A. G. dasilva

Enhanced Sugarcane Establishment Using P lant GrowthRegulators

Bob Wiedenfeld

Estimating the Family Performance Of Sugarcane Crosses Using Small Progeny Test .

P . Y. P . Tai, J.M. Shine, Jr., J . D .Miller, and S . J . Edme

Incidence and Spread of Sugarcane Yellow LeafVirus in Sugarcane Clones

in the CP-CultivarDevelopment Program at Canal PointJ . C . Comstock and J . D .Miller

PEERREFEREED JOURNAL ARTICLES Manufacturing Section

Evaluation of aNear Infrared Spectrometer for the Direct Analysis of Sugar CaneL. R.Mac

‘

sen, II, B . E.Whi te, and P .W.Rein


Green Cane Trash Blankets : Influence on Ratoon Crops in LouisianaE. P . Richard, Jr. andR. L. Johnson

The Effect OfCombine Speed on Cane Quality atAlma P lantation in 2001H.Waguespack, Jr.,W. Jackson, B . Viator, and C . Viator

Use OfCover Crops inRotation with Sugarcane in a South FloridaMineral SoilR.M.Muchovej , J . J.Mullahey, T. A. Obreza, and P .R. Newman

iii

Evaluation of Sorghum-Sudangrass Hybrids forBiomass Potential in

Southern Louisiana'

T. L. Tew

ENVOKE : A New Herbicide forWeed Control in U. S . Sugarcane

E . K. Rawls ,M. Johnson, S .Martin, L Glasgow , J . Shine , J Powell

B .Watson , andA. Bennett

Experimental Products forWeed Control in Florida SugarcaneA. C . Bennett

Effect Of Calcitic Lime and Calcium Silicate SlagRates and P lacement on

LCP 85-384 P lant Cane on a Light-Textured SoilW. B . Hallmark, G. J .Williams , G. L. Hawkins , and V . V .Matichenkov

Sugarcane Leaf P D iagnosis in Organic Soils

D . R.Morris , B . Olaz , G. Powell , C .W . Deren,

G. H.Snyder, R. Perdomo , andM. F. Ulloa

Wireworm Effects on Sugarcane Emergence After Short-Duration Flood

B . Glaz andR. Cherry

Laboratory Screening Of Insecticides for Preventing Injury by theWirewormMelanotus communis (Coleoptera: Elateri dae) to Germinating Sugarcane

D . G. Hall

Management Thresholds for the Sugarcane Bore r on Louisiana VarietiesF. R. Posey, C . D .McAllister, T. E. Reagan, and T. L. Bacon

Yellow Sugarcane Aphid (S ipkaflava) Colonization Strategy and itsEffect onDevelopment andReproductive Rates on Sugarcane

G. S . Nuessly andM. G. Hentz

Field Tri als of aMultiple-Pathogen Bioherbicide System with PotentialtoManage Guineagrass in Flori da Sugarcane

S . Chandramohan,M. J . Duchrow, J .M. Shine , Jr E . N . Rosskopf,

andR. Charudattan

Molecular Identification ofVirus Isolates CausingMosaic in Louisiana SugarcaneM. P . Gri sham and Y.

-B . Pan

Incidence of Sugarcane Yellow LeafVirus in Clones of Saccharum spp . in theWorldCollection atMiami and in the Collection at the Sugarcane Field Station, Canal Point

I . C . Comstock, J . D .Miller, andR. J Schnell

iv

Organic Acids inthe SugarFactory Environment

D . F. Day andW.H. Kampen

Experiences with Unwashed Cane atRacelandT. D . Endres

POSTER SESS ION

Soil ErosionResearch on Alluvial Soils Planted to Sugarcane :Experimental Approach and PreliminaryResults

T. S . Komecki, B . C . Grigg,-

J. L. Pouss, and L.M. Southwick

LaboratoryRearing Of the Parasitoid Cotes iaflavip es on Sugarcane BorerD iatraea sacchara lis

G. Hannig andD . G. Hall

Disease Incidence and Yield Comparisons OfKLEENTEK® S eedcane toTraditional Sources in Four Commercial Varieties in South Florida

J . L. Flynn ,K . Quebedaux , L. Baucum,

andR. Waguespack

vi

Editorial Policy

Rules forPreparing Papers to be Printed in the Journal Of theAmerican Society Of Sugar Cane Technologists

Guidelines forPreparing Papers for Journal OfASSCT

Constitution of the American Society of Sugar Cane Technologists

Author Index

To order an extra copy Of thi s volume, or a previous journal Of American Society of Sugar CaneTechnologists, write to:

General Secretary-TreasurerAmerican Society of Sugar Cane TechnologistsP . 0 . Box 25 100

BatonRouge, LA 70894—5 100

Copies shipped within the USA are (postage included)

Copies shipped outside the USA are (postage not included)Please add sh ipping costs as followsSelectmethod of delivery :surface mail (4 6 week delivery) : add per itemairmail (7 10 day delivery) : add $ 10 per item

vii

represent a verypositive economic impact on our industry.Dryweatherduring harvest allowed bothgrowers andmills a chance to reduce costs and tomaximize efficiency. One such examplewas thatmanymills were able to reduce or eliminate cane washing during good weatherallowingmore sugarrecovery per ton Of cane .

The Louisiana sugar industry has the opportuni ty to use a special harvest permit,which

allows cane haulers up to pound gross vehicle weight . This privilege means a substantial

cost savings to the whole industry, and it is important that we maintain this ability in spite ofopposition from other groups. In an effort to combat abuse Of this privilege

,the industrymade the

decision to self-regulate its cane hauling thi s past harvest . With the State Legislature passing anindustry-sponsored concurrent resolution thatmandates all sugarmill scales be locked outatpounds, the incentive foroverloading is removed since there is no payment for cane over the

pound level . Complaints have been greatlyreduced about overloaded trucks spilling cane and tearingup the highways . A similar success has been achieved with the cane burning issue by implementinga voluntary smoke and ash management program for the 2000 crop . There are numerous

environmental and public issues associated with cane burning; therefore the state and the sugarindustry have implemented thi s program to assist growers in addressing these types of issues . Thesignificant reduction in the number of smoke and ash-related complaints this past year attest to thesuccess Of thi s program . In both of these cases the industry has been praised for taking positive stepsto solve its own problems .

Another hi gh point of the 2001 crop has been a record setting performance by a Louisianamill gri nding twomillion tons of cane in a single season. On January 8 , the Enterpri semill OfM.A.

Patout Son, Ltd. made Louisiana history by being the only mill in the state to ever gri nd twomillion tons Of cane . Congratulations toM.A. Patout Son, Ltd. along with all of the growers andemployees of the Enterprisemill .

NO agri cultural industryor commodity can bank on being successful orprofitable everyyear.

Th ere are just too many variables and no guarantees . A couple of things such as hard work,dedication,

and the willingness and ability to do what it takes will certainly improve chances for

success .The Louisiana sugar industryhas always realized the value Of thi s phi losophy and embracedit . It is no secret that increased production and improved efficiency of our factories and our farms

are the best way to combat rising costs and depressed sugar prices . Dedicated scientists doing

research and developing the technologies to keep our industry competitive and progressive

accomplish these Objectives .

One of the most basic and important types Of research work is the variety developmentprogram .Thi s work is a cooperative effort by theUSDA-ARS inHouma, the SugarResearch Station

of the LSUAg Center, and the American SugarCane League. Together they are responsible for thebreeding, selection, andadvancement Ofnew vari eties inLouisiana.The LSUAg CenterandUSDA

ARS also provide valuable information to growers from research they conduct on all culturalpractices from planting to harvest, crop protection, pestmanagement, and economics . In addition,

they team-up with the American Sugar Cane League and Audubon Sugar Institute to study canequality issues affecting both growers and processors. Sugarmills in Louisiana look to Audubon

Sugar Institute for new mi ll research along with help with processing problems and training of

factory personnel . The American Sugar Cane League works with both growers and processors on

2

awide variety Of issues . The League handlesmost of the political issues and the lobbying efforts forthe industry. Through its network of local, state, and national committees, the Farm Bureau Often

assists the sugar industry on commodity and political issues .

The information generated by the research andwork of these groups is Of vital importanceto our industry.Variousmeetings, conferences, field days and our own society plays an integral part

in disseminating thi s information . The American Society Of Sugar Cane Technologists joint

meeting aswell as ourrespective divisionmeetings provide excellentmediums forreport ing results

of research, new technologies, and product development.

With the invaluable assistance Of these support groups and the continued hard work anddedication of the growers and processors, our industry demonstrates its willingness and ability tosucceed. Because the firture holds no guarantees, we are poised to face its challenges . Ourmost

immediate challenge is to as sure the industry of a favorable sugar provision in the upcoming FarmBill.Much hard work has gone into thi s effort and at this time (May 1) things look favorable. Theproblems withMexico overNAFTA are ongoing, but it appears that the prob lem with importationOf stuffedmolasses from Canada is heading towards a permanent resolution thanks to the work ofSenatorBreaux . The industry faces a constant battle tomarket sugar at a fairprice .Will the growersandmills in Louisiana own a refinery in the future"Less mills grindingmore cane means longergri ndings .Ourresearchers are challenged to develop varieties thatmature earlierandhave bettercoldtolerance and post freeze deterioration. Can we develop a cane ri pener that.works quickly and hasno adverse affect on subsequent stubble crops"Will an equitable cane payment formula bedeveloped that rewards growers for delivering quality cane and rewards mills for recoveringmore

sugar from this cane"These andmany other challenges will face our industry in the future, andwewill be prepared

to face them ifwe work together.No individual or group can do it alone._

It has takenmany peopleworking together to make the Louisiana Sugar Industry the success that it is today, and it will takethis continued cooperation to ensure our future.

PRES IDENT’S MES SAGEFL ORIDA DIVISION

John A. FanjulAtlantic SugarAssociation

P . 0 . Box 1570


Thi s past crop forFlorida, in spite of freezes on January 1 and 6 , 2001 , the drought duringthe spring growth period, followed by flooding in late summer, early fall,managed to be very good.

Looking back five years, thi s yearwas the third largest crop and had the second best yield to date.

I think that the 2001-02 crop yearpresented a real revolution in the mainland cane sugar industry,especially in Florida. As ofNovember, 2001 , more than ifnot all of the Florida industry canbe said to have become “ vertically integrated,

”with the purchase of the Domino SugarRefineries

by.

The American Sugar Refining Company, formed by the growers of the Sugar Cane GrowersCooperative, Florida Crystals Corporation, andAtlantic SugarAssociation.

This venture brings togetherOkeelanta’s refinery, R.S .I. Yonkers refinery, and Domino

’s

Baltimore, New York, andNew Orleans refineries, into one corporation, whi ch togetherwith U S .

Sugar’s Clewiston refinery, means that for the first time in hi story, one can say that almost 50percent Of all the refined sugarmade from sugar cane is truly

“

From the Field to the Table .

”

All of this presents andwill present new challenges and Opportunities for all Of us . I thinkwe will be more demanding Of ourselves in every aspect of our industry, becoming a truly agri

industri al business .We are now responsible forour productwaybeyond our traditional boundaries ;therefore, we have to -be more conscientious of our bottom line, all the way up from agri culture

research and development to quality control at themi ll/sugarhouse, through our own refineries, to

the ultimate consumer.

Themotto of the ASSCT is : Organized for the Advancement Of theMainland Cane Sugar

Industry.

”Neverbefore has thi s everbeen so important. Ibelieve that to survive in the nearand longterm ,

wemust be aware that on an ascending scale in ourvertically integrated industry, all ofus are

responsible for improving efficiencies, which will increase productivity with cost effectiveness

through positive accountability, in order to achievemaximum profitability.

Todaywe are tied together into fourmajor sections ordivisions, each ofwhich has their own

subdivisions :

1.Agri culture :with it’s researchanddevelopmentworking on developingnew cane varieties through

traditional genetic development, andusing transengerrics andbio-technology,mustmaintain this ever

important work that helps us increase our sugarperacre production, which inmy opinion, is, at our

level,the true “bottom line”goal .We need optimum soil fertility working hand in hand with cane

varieties to maintain high yields through recycling mill muds and preventing erosion . Soilconservation is Of the highest priority, especially in Flori da. Agronomy togetherwith best farming

practices, within our own ecosystem is everyone’s concern.

Farming and land preparation are Of the utmost importance, and rotation guided by research

4

of our goals in order to survive . The refining sectorwill, in all probability, demand a better quality

Of raw sugar from us andwe have to get ready to do so on a consistent basis, in the near future.

There aremany other outside pressures that come andwill come to bear on us in the future;NAFTA, federal, state and local politics, aswell as environmental issues .We as technologistsmustbecome more pro-active in our industry in all aspects, especially in increasing productivity andefficiency, which at the end of the day, is our Obligation. Also in the political and public relationsarea, I believe that if any Of us have good scientific data that can be useful to our public relationsdepartment, we should let them know it.

There are many misconceptions continuously expounded in the press against sugar, forexample, the calorie count in a teaspoon Of sugar is only 15 , hardly an alarming number by anymeans . The press however, would like you to believe that sugar is one of the evils of life .

Another is that we are ahuge industrywhen the reality is thi s : Let’s say in Texas, Louisiana,

and Florida, we produce tons of raw cane sugar a year, at a ton. That’s

$ 1 total sales in one year.To put that in perspective, this is equal to twoweeks sales

ofAlbertsons Supermarkets or four days ofGeneralMotors sales"As you can see, in our country

’s economy, we are a very small fish in a huge pond,yet the

perception is that we are exploiting theUS . taxpayer.We aren’t, andby the same token,we providejobs and are responsible for over families, pay taxes, and diligently cooperate with the state

and federal agencies to protect our environment, feed our citizens and care for our nation.

Themessage Iwant to get across today, is that we need to work togetherwithin andwithouteach sectorOfour industry, in order to increase our efficiency, productivity, and profitability so ourchildren and our chi ldren’s chi ldren can continue this wonderful agri -industry,with over 200 years

Of tradition in the Uni ted States.

Th is is our challenge; let’smake it our opportunity"

PEER

REFEREED

JOURNAL

ARTICL ES

AGRICULTURAL

SECTION

Hal l : Laboratory Screening of Insecticides for Preventing Injury by theWirewormMelanotus Communis (Coleoptera Elateridae) toGenninating Sugarcane

LABORATORY SCREENING OF INSECTICIDES FOR PREVENTING INJURY BYTHEWIREWORMMELANOTUS COMMUNIS (COL EOPTERA: EL ATERIDAE) TO

GERMINATING SUGARCANE

David G. Hall

Research DepartmentUnited States Sugar Corporation

PO . Drawer 1207Clewiston, FL 33440

ABSTRACT

A laboratory bioassay was investigated for screening insecticides for preventing standlosses by the wirewormMelanotus communis (Gyllenhal) to germinating plant cane . For liquidmaterials, single-eye billets were dipped into different concentrations of a candidate insecticideand then planted in plastic containers Of organic soil ; wireworrns were then introduced, airtightlids were placed onto the containers, and wireworm survival and damage were assessed 4 wklater. Tests with granularmaterials were simi lar except the containers were partially filled withuntreated soil ; 30 cc Of soil treated with granular material were then added to the container; anuntreated single-eye billet was placed onto this treated soil ; an additional 30 cc of treated soilwas then placed on and around the billet; and finally untreated soil was added to fill thecontainer. Conditions inside the bioassay containers were suitable for germination and earlygrowth of most cultivars . The airt ight lids were advantageous from the standpoint of

maintaining soil moisture .

Among six candidate insecticides studied, bifentlni n ZEC, thiamethoxam 25WG,

thiarnethoxarn 2G,and tefluthrin 3G each reduced damage by wireworrn s to germinating eyes of

seed cane planted in organic soils . Wireworrns frequently survived in containers Of seed-piecestreated with these materials yet did not damage eyes before germ ination, indicating the materialsrepelled wireworm s . However, germinated shoots Of billets treated with these materials weresometimes injured by the surviving wireworms .

INTRODUCTION

The wirewormMelanotus communis (Gyllenhal) (Coleoptera: Elateridae) is currently thesingle-most important insect pest Of sugarcane in Florida based on economic damage potential,frequency Of infestations, andmoney spent to prevent damage (Hall Preventing economiclosses to M. communis using cultural tactics has histori cally been di

“

cult particularly in a

successive-plant situation, and biological control has Offered little promise as a managementtactic (Hall Two insecticides, ethoprop and phorate, are currently labeled and effective

for reducing wireworm damage to newly-planted sugarcane . Additional insecticides for

wireworm control in Florida sugarcane would be desirable, particularly since there is someconcern that the sugarcane labels for ethoprop and phorate may eventually be cancelled .

To find new wireworm insecticides, candidate materials can be initially screened for

efficacy under a laboratory setting and the most promising materials can later be field-tested.

Hall : Laboratory Screening of Insecticides for Preventing Injury by theWirewormMelanotus Communis (Coleoptera Elateri dae) toGerminating Sugarcane

a container (9 cm diameter, 63 .7 cm2 surface area) .

After setting up containers for a tri al, three field-collectedM. communis wireworms wereintroduced onto the soil surface of each container. The lidded containers were then placed eitherinto an environmental chamber or onto a lab bench and checked every 1-2 days to determinewhen shoots emerged . When a shoot emerged, the contents of the container were emptied toassess wireworm survival and damage to the shoot. The bioassays were terminated after 4 wk

, at

which time each Of the remaining containers was emptied to assess wireworm survival, damageto non-

gerrninated buds and damage to germinated shoots . A wireworm was considered dead ifit displayed no movement when prodded.

Most Of the bioassays were conducted using sugarcane cultivar CL77-797, but other

cultivars were utilized in some assays . Organic soil (55 to 80% organic matter, silica pH

Obtained from sugarcane fields infested by wireworms was used in all tri al s . The soilwas stored in sealed plastic bags in an air-conditioned lab until employed for the assays . Bystoring the fresh soil in sealed plastic bags, percentage moisture Of the field-collected organicsoil wasmaintained (50 to 55% by weight for the soil used in these tri als) . Prior to using the soilin an assay, it was forced through a 4.75 mm sieve to destroy clods and remove unwantedmateri al . Wirewonns used in the bioassays were collected fiom sugarcane fields duringNovember-January andmaintained rn plastic boxes containing organic soil and pi eces Of carrots .Lids were placed onto these boxes, but the lidded boxes were not airtight. New carrots wereplaced into the boxes every 2-3 weeks and water was periodically added. The individualwireworms used in the assays were mid to late-instar larvae generally weighing around 50 to 80mg . M. communis wireworms in Florida sugarcane during December average mg in weight

(SEM n=2 10) (Hall, unpublished) . The bioassays were conducted at 20° to 24°C, as this

rangewas representative of temperatures at planting during the fall in Florida.

B ioassaysWithout Insecticides

Two tri als were conducted in which no wireworm control materials were tested. One Of

these was conducted during 2000 to evaluate germination of eight different sugarcane cultivarsplanted in the bioassay container (airtight lids, 55 day tri al, no wireworms, 22

°C ,

Ten single-eye billets Of each cultivar were studied, with 5 billets planted with the eye in an upposition and 5 with the eye in a down position. The number of days from planting untilemergence was recorded. At the end of the tri al, all containers without emerged shoots wereemptied and whether or not eyes had germ inated was determined. Among plants whichemerged, the average number of days from planting to emergence and percent emergence weredetermined for each cultivar. Also for each cultivar, the percentage of eyes which germ inatedwas calculated. ANOVA was conducted to compare cultivars with respect to percent emergenceand percent germination (percentages log-transformed) ; the ANOVA was based on two quasireplications, one for billets in an up position and one for billets in a down position, and meancomparisons were made using Duncan

’s multiple range test. In the second tri al withoutinsecticides, damage by wireworms newly-collected from a sugarcane field was compared todamage by wireworms which had been maintained in a laboratory for 50-54 wk (airtight lids,6 1-620, billets planted with the eye in a side position, 30 replications per wireworm type, 4 wktest

, 1 wireworm per container, 22°C) .

10


Bioassayswith Candidate Insecticides for Preventing Damage byWireworms

Seven tri als were conducted in which six candidate wireworm control materials weretested : bifenthrin 2 EC (Capture, 240 g ai/l, FMC), ethipriole 1OBC (RPA 107382 , 100 g ai/l,Aventis) , tefluthri n 3G (Force, 3% ai, Zeneca), thiamethoxam

_

25WG (CGA293343, 25% ai ,

Syngenta), thiamethoxam ZG (CGA293343, 2% ai , Syngenta), and zeta-cypennethrin EC

(Fury, 96 g ai/l, FMC) . Several Of these compounds were screened simultaneously in some tri alswhile other tri als involved screening a single compound. The seven tri als were conducted as

follows .

Trial 1 Billets dipped in bifenthrin ppm) or ethiprole ppm), February 2001 ,wireworms collected 2-4 wk before the tri al, CL6 1-620, 22

°C .

Trial 2 Billets dipped in ethiprole or ppm) or bifenthrin or

ppm), February 2001 ; wireworms collected 6-10 wk before the tri al, CL61-620, 22°C .

Trial 3 Billets dipped in bifenthrin or ppm), ethiprole or

ppm), or thiamethoxam 25WG or ppm), April 2001 , wireworms collected 1 1-18wk before the trial, CP84-1 198, 22

°C .

Tri al 4 Billets dipped in ethiprole or ppm) or thiamethoxam 25WGor ppm), January 2002, wireworms collected 2-8 wk before the tri al,

CL77-797, 23 .7°C (SEM

Trial 5 Billets dipped in zeta-cypermethrin (75 , 100 or 125 ppm), March 2002 , wirewormscollected 8-12 wk before the tri al, CL77-797, 23 .2

°C (SEM

Trial 6 Billets planted m a pocket of soil treated with tefluthrin 3G or 1 1 .0 g/mz; 83,

165 or 330 mg ai/m2 January 2002, wireworms collected 4-6 wk before the trial, CL77 797,

23 .6°C (SEM 0 .01

°C) .

Trial 7 Billets plan ted m a pocket Of soil treated with thiamethoxam 2G (2 .75 , or g/mz;

or 220 mg ai/m2February 2002, wireworms collected 5-1 1 wk before the tri al, CL77

797, 23 .2°C (SEM 0 .02

°C) .

Billets were planted with eyes positioned to the side in all tri als . Twenty containers weretested for each rate of each test material except in tri al two, where ten containers were tested foreach rate Of each material . For each tri al, the containers of each treatment were randomlyassigned to one of four rep lications (5 containers per replication) (exception,

trial two consistedOf only two replications) . At the end of each tri al, numbers of wireworms surviving,percentages of eyes germinated, eyes damaged before germination, and shoots damaged aftergerm ination were determ ined. The percentages of plants damaged before and after genrrinationwere added to obtain a total index Of damage per container. ANOVA was conducted for eachtri al (log-transformed data for percentages), and means among treatments were compared usingDuncan’s new multiple range test.

1 1

Hall : laboratory Screening of Insecticides for Preventing Injury by the WirewormMelanotus Communis (Coleoptera Elateridae) toGerminating SugarcaneRESUL TS

BioassaysWithout Insecticides

Among the eight cultivars tested, percent germination of single-eye billets planted inairtight containers ranged from 20 to 100% (Table From 80 to 100% germination occurredfor six Of the cultivars, and 100% germination occurred for three cultivars . Percent germinationOf one cultivar (CP73- 1547) wasmediocre and of another (CL78-1600) poor Withrespect to speed of germination and emergence under the bioassay conditions

,CL61-620, CP78

1628 and CP84- 1 198 developed the fastest ; CL83-4266 and CP80- 1743 were slower; and CL77797 and CP73- 1547 were slowest. CL78-1600 showed little

"

development over the 55-dayperiod. With eyes positioned down, plant emergence was delayed by more than 33 days forCL77-797 and by from 17 to 2 1 days for CL61-620, CL83-4266 and CP8O- 1743 (Table Lessof a delay was Observed for CP73-1547 and CP79- 1628 (with buds positioned down ,

plantemergence was delayed by only about 5 days) . I n the second tri al, wireworms held for 2—3 wkbefore being used in the bioassay damaged 47% Of the eyes while wireworm s held for 50-54 wkdamaged 20% of the eyes .

Bioassayswith Candidate Insecticides for Preventing Damage byWireworms

Ethiprole ppm solution) and bifenthrin ppm solution) appearedmoderately toxic to wireworms in the first tri al, each material causing a significant reduction inwireworm survival (Table Low percent germ ination of CL61-620 billets dipped into theethiprole treatment indicated the material may have been phytotoxic . Percent germination of

billets dipped into the bifenthrin treatment was lower than expected but better than under theinfested-check treatment . Wireworms caused considerable damage to seed under the infestedcheck treatment and some damage to eyes of billets treated with ethiprole, but no damage bywireworms occurred to the eyes of billets treated with bifenthri n. Although bifenthrin providedgood protection of eyes from damage, the treatment did not prevent damage to some germinatedshoots .

In the second tri al, no significant reductions in numbers of live wireworms occurred incontainers holding billets treated with or ppm solutions of eth iprole (Table

Billets of CL6 1-620 dipped into a ppm solution Of ethiprole had significantly poorergermination than billets dipped into a ppm solution, but germination under the

ppm ethiprole treatment was generally better than in the first tri al with this variety. A significant

reduction in numbers of live wireworms occurred in containers holding billets treated with a

ppm solution ofbifenthrin but not in containers holding billets treated with a ppm

solution. Good levels of germination occurred in containers holding billets treated with

bifenthrin at each rate. No damage by wireworms was observed to eyes or germ inated shootsunder eitherbifenthrin treatment regardless of the presence of live wireworms.

12

Hal l : Laboratory Screening of Insecticides for Preventing Injury by theWirewormMelanotus Communis (Coleoptera Elateri dae) toGerminating Sugarcane

Table 3 . Efficacy Of different liquid treatments for preventing wireworm damage under the

Rate

(22111)MaterialTrial 1 : cultivar CL 6 1-620ethiprole

bifenthrin

infested check

Trial 2 : cultivar CL 61-620ethiprole

infested checknon-infested check

Trial 3 : cultivar CP84-1 1ethiprole

ethiprole

bifenthrin

bifenthrin

bifenthrin

thiamethoxam

thiamethoxam

infested checknon-infested check

Trial 4 : cultivar CL 77-797

thiamethoxam

thiamethoxam

ethiprole

ethiprole

ethiprole

infested checknon-infested checknon-infested ethiprole

Trial 5 : cultivar CL 77-797zeta-cypermethrin

zeta-cypermethrinzeta-cypermethrininfested checknon-infested check21

For each trial,means in the same column followedDuncan

’s test .

Mean numberwirewormssurviving

1 .5b

l .3b

2 .4a

14

Meanplants

Meanplants

Mean ki lled killed total

germ. before after stand loss

Mean

5 .ob

45 .0a

lo.ob

20.0b

0.oc

70 .0a

0 .0a

15 .0a

5 .oa

20.0ab

15 .0b

75 .0a

20.0ab

15 .0ab

10 .0ab

30 .0a 80 .0a

o.oh 0 .0c

significantly different

75 .0a

70 .0a

40 .0b


NO significant wireworm mortality occurred in containers Of billets treated with ethiprole

at either or ppm in the third tri al (Table With respect to bifenthrin, significantwireworm mortality occurred in containers with billets dipped into a ppm solution. NO

significant wireworm mortality occurred in containers with billets dipped into thiamethoxam

25WG at either or ppm. Respectable levels Of CP84-1 198 germination occurredunder all treatments except ppm solutions of ethiprole. A low level of damage to eyes

was observed under the ppm ethiprole treatment, but not enough to account for the

reduced germination; this rate of ethiprole may have been phytotoxic to CP84-1 198 . No damageto eyes occurred under any of the three bifenthrin treatments, but some young shoots were killed.

A low percentage of eyes were damaged among billets dipped into a ppm solution of

thiamethoxam 25WG but not a ppm solution. No young shoots were injured under either

of the thiamethoxam treatments .

A small but significant reduction in wireworm survival occurred in containers of billetsdipped into a ppm solution Of thiamethoxam 25WG in the fourth trial (Table NO

significant mortality Ofwireworms occurred in containers of billets dipped into or

ppm solutions of thiamethoxam 25WG nor into or ppm solutions Ofethiprole (Table In spite of wireworm survival under the thiamethoxam treatments, goodlevels of germination occurred with no damage to either eyes or young shoots . NO germinationof CL77-797 occurred among billets dipped into the ethiprole treatments . The ethiprole

treatments did not prevent wireworrrrs from attacking eyes, although the percentages attackedwere lower than under the infested-check treatment.

In the fifth trial, no significant wireworm mortality occurred in containers with billetstreated with zeta-cypermethrin (Table Significant percentages Of eyes were damaged bywireworms before germination among billets treated with this material, and significantpercentages of germinated shoots were injured by wireworms in spite Of the zeta-cypermethrintreatments . For unknown reasons, damage by wireworms in

“

containers of billets treated with 75

ppm zeta-cypermethrin was generally less than when billets were treated with 100 or 125 ppm.

NO significant wireworm mortality occurred among containers in which billets wereprotected with tefluthrin 3G in the sixth trial (Table A rate of 330 mg ai/m

2 providedgood

protection from wireworm injury to eyes before germination, but rates of 165 or 83 mg ai/m didnot. Wireworms tended to cause less damage to young shoots in containers treated with theserates Of tefluthri n than in containers not treated.

Treating the soil around billets with thiamethoxam 2G at rates Of 55 , 1 10 or 220 mg ai/m2

resulted in no significant wireworm mortality during the seventh tri al (Table However,

wireworms caused significantly less damage to eyes before germination under these treatments .The treatments did not prevent damage to shoots after germination .

Because ethiprole appeared phytotoxic in a number Of tri als, especially to CL77-797, aseparate trial was conducted in which single-eye billets were dipped into five ethiprole solutionsranging from 100 to ppm (two replications of five containers per ethiprole concentration,

CL77-797, March These billets were planted in containers filled with organic soil andmaintained with an airtight lid for 4 wk (no wireworms were introduced) . Good germ ination of

15

Hal l : Laboratory Screening of Insecticides for Preventing Injury by the WirewormMelanotus Commum’

s (Coleoptera Elateridae) toGerminating Sugarcane

Table 4. Efficacy of different granular treatments for preventing wireworm damage under theassay conditions.

al

Mean

Material

Trial 6 : cultivar CL77-797

tefluthrin 3G

tefluthrin 3G

tefluthrin“

3G

infested checknon-infestedcheck

Trial 7: cultivar CL77 797

thiamethoxam 2G

thiamethoxam 2G

thiamethoxam 2G

infested checknon-infestedcheckaFor each tri al, means in the same column followed by the same letter not significantly

di"erent Duncan’s test.

root primordia and eyes occurred on billets dipped into solutions of ppmor less but not at

higher doses (Table

Tab le 5 . Germination Of single-eye billets treated with ethiprole and planted in organic soil with

airtight plastic containers, 232°C (SEM

Seed pieces with

Ethiprole germinated rootconcentration primordia Germination Of buds

(rpm)0 100 .0a 100 .0a

100 100.0a 100 .0a

100.0a 90 .0a

10 .0b 0 .0b

0 .0b 0 .0b

0 .0b

aMeans in the same column followed by the same letter are not significantly different

Duncan’s test.

16

Hall : la boratory Screening of hrsecticides for Preventing Injury by theWirewormMelanotus Commum’

s (Coleoptera . Elateridae) toGerminating Sugarcane

nontoxicmaterial which repels wireworms from germ inating eyes of sugarcane could be usefulfor reducing damage before germ ination, but developing shoots might still be subj ect to attack.

At the rates studied, bifenthri n, thiamethoxam 25WG, thiamethoxam 2G, and tefluthri n

3G each appeared to have value as materials for reducing damage by wireworm s to germinatingeyes. Of seed cane planted in organic soils . However, germinated shoots of billets treated withthese materials were sometimes injured by wireworm s, usually some distance away from thebillet itself. Some seed—piece treatments may protect eyes from wireworm injury duringgermination but not young shoots . Overall, the most promising material based on these limiteddata appeared to be thiamethoxam 25WG with respect to reducing damage to both germinatingeyes and young shoots . Ethiprole was phytotoxic to CL77-797, at least at concentrations above

ppm, andmay have been somewhat phytotoxic to CL6 1-620 and CPS4- 1 198 . A granular

formulation of ethiprole might be less toxic to cultivars such as CL77-797. Little wireworm

mortality occurred in containers of billets treated with ethiprole at any rate, but survivingwireworm s frequently caused injury to the billets . Zeta—cypermethrin appeared to have littlevalue as a wireworm control materi al at the rates studied, which were comparatively much

smaller than the rates tested of the other liquid materials . Higher rates Of zeta-cypermethrin

might bemore effective.

Since the Flori dasugar industry currently uses granular formulations of either ethoprop20G or phorate ZOG forwireworm control, alternative pesticides in granular formulations wouldbe more convenient substitutes than liquid pesticides . The recommended application rate ofphorate ZOG,

1 kg per 300 row meters, equates to approximately g product/m2or 2 .2 g ai/m

2

when applied ln a 30 cm band. The recommended aa

pplication rate of ethoprop 20G, 0 .6 to l .3

kg per 300 row meters, equates tz

o 6 .8 to 13 .7 g perm or 1 .4 to 2 .7 g ai/m2when applied 1n

2

a 30

cm band. With respect to g ai/m2, my test rates Of thiamethoxam 2G (0 .055 to 0.220 g ai/m

2and

tefluthrin 3G (0 .083 to 0.330 g ai/m2 were much lower than the recommended rates of phorate20G and ethoprop 20G; higher rates of the two candidate alternatives might have been moreeffective for killing wireworms in organic soil . Other granular pesticides which could beinvestigated for wireworm control include Deltagard O.1%G,

Talstar PL-GR and Aztec

2 .1%G (Cherry The Florida industry could consider liquid alternatives to ethoprop 20G

and phorate 20G. Ethoprop EC (6 lb per gal) was once registered for wirewonrr control in

Florida sugarcane, with recommended application rates Of 100 to 250 g ai/300 row meters (at

spray volumes of 4 to 6 1per 300 row meters, solutions of around to ppm) .

The bioassay could be standardized using ini tial screening rates of 10,000

2

and

50,000 ppm solutions Of liquid materials, or rates of 2 ,000 and mg ai/m2for

granularmaterials, with 20 containers per rate and 3 wireworms per container. Larger numbers

of containers per rate would be advantageous for statistical comparisons .

ACKNOWL EDGMENTS

Sherry Little (Research Department, United States Sugar Corporation) providedinvaluable assistance throughout these experiments . The materials studied were graciouslyprovided by H. Gary Hancock (FMC Corporation) , Jairo Melgarejo (Aventis), Henry Yonce

(Zeneca) and John Taylor (Syngenta) .

18


REFERENCES

Cherry, R. H. 2001 . Efficacy of soil insecticides for wireworm control in Flori dasugarcane . J.American Soc. Sugar Cane Technol. 2 1 : 15 1- 152 .

Hall, D . G. 2001 . The wireworm problem in Florida sugarcane. Proc . Int. Soc . Sugar CaneTechnol. 24 378-38 1 .

Hall, D . G. and R. H. Cherry. 1985 . Contact toxicities of eight insecticides to thewirewormMelanotus communis (Coleoptera: Elateridae) . Fla. Entomol . 68 : 350-352 .

Silverman, J . and D . Liang. 1999 . EffectOf fipronil on bait forrnulation-based aversion inthe German cockroach (Dictyoptera: B lattellidae) . J. Econ. Entomol . 92 : 886-889 .

Villani , M. and F.

_

Gould. 1985 . Screening of crude plant extracts as feeding deterrents ofthe wirewormMelanotus communis . Entomol. Exp . Appl . 37: 69-75 .

19

Kimbeng andCox: Early Generation Selection of Sugarcane Fami lies and C lones in Australia: A Review

EARLY GENERATION SEL ECTION OF SUGARCANE FAMILIES AND CLONES INAUSTRAL IA : A REVIEW

Collins A. KimbengDepartment ofAgronomy

Louisiana Agri cultural Experiment Station, LSU Ag CenterBaton Rouge, Louisiana 70803

USA

Mike C . Cox

Bureau Of SugarExperiment StationsP 0 Box 65 1

Bundaberg, Queensland 4670Australia

ABSTRACT

Sugarcane breeding programs typically commence by evaluating a large number of

seedlings derived from true seed. Individual clone (mass) selection applied at this stage of theprogram has been shown to be inefficient because of lack Of replication and the associatedconfounding effects Of the environment. In Australia, the introduction Of mobile weighingmachines made it possible to implement family selection. Several research projectsdemonstrated that family selection, when followed by individual clone selection, was superior interms of genetic gain and more cost effective than either fami ly or individual clone selectionalone. This combination of fami ly and individual clone selection is now used routinely in all theAustralian programs . Fami lies are evaluated using replicated plots for cane yield (mechanicallyharvested and weighed) and sucrose content in the plant crop . Individual clones are selected

,

based mainly on visual appraisal for cane yield, from selected families in the first ratoon crop .

Family selection is usually liberal with about 30 40 of families selected. More clones areselected from the best fami lies with progressively fewer clones being selected from the moderateto average families . The availability

'

of objective family data makes it possible to estimate thebreeding value of parents using the Best Linear Unbiased Predictors (BLUP) . This informationis used to retain or drop parents from the crossing program and to plan better cross combinations .

Approved for publication by the Director of the Loui siana Agri cultural Experiment Station as

manuscript number 02- 14-0563 .

INTRODUCTION

Although sugarcane is grown commercially as a clone, sugarcane breeding programstypically commence by evaluating large numbers Of seedlings deri ved from true seed. Sugarcanebreeders have traditionally employed intensive selection of individual seedlings or seedlingbunches to select clones at this stage . Selection is usually subjective, based on visual appraisal

for cane yield. Some programs also consider sucrose content, which is indirectly measured as

20

Kimbeng and Cox: Early Generation Selection of Sugarcane Families and Clones in Australia: A Review

stagesof all the programs (Table The number of seedlings and clones planted and selected ateach stage, varies in the different programs .

Several fam ily selection experiments have been carried out under different geographicaland environmental conditions in Australia (Jackson et al ., 1995a, b ; McRae and Jackson, 1995 ;

McRae et al., 1993 ; Cox et al ., 1996 ; Hogarth et al. , 1990; Hogarth, But, the best set ofexperiments to use in illustrating the benefits Of family selectionwas carried out in the Burdekinregion (Ayr, Figure 1) where the growing conditions have been described as unfavorable toselection (Jackson et al ., 1992 ; Pollock, In this region, sugarcane is grown underirrigation,

whi ch results in large and frequently lodgedx

crops. Because individual clone selectionis impractical under such conditions, the practice was to restri ct crop growth by minimizingirri gation and fertilizers to prevent lodging and enable individual clone selection . However

,

because the crop growth potential was not realized under such conditions, this probably had a

negative impact on selection response because visual estimation of cane yield was poorlycorrelated with actual cane yield in heavily lodged crops (Jackson et al . , 1992 ; Pollock,Indeed, in an experiment conducted by Hogarth et~al . neither family selection nor massselection was effective under conditions that restri cted crop growth. The selection conditions

(environments) were probably atypical of the target environment. Furthermore, under conditions

of restri cted crop growth, misleading information on family performance would probably lead toinappropriate parents being selected for crossing, thereby, impeding future selection progress

(Kimbeng et al . ,

An experiment was conducted in which lodging was experienced as a result of letting itgrow to its full potential (Kimbeng et al., One hundred full-sib families were evaluated in

single-row plots, replicated four times with 20 seedlings per family plot . Family plot data werecollected in the lodged plant crop using mobile weighing machines as described for a Stage 1

trial (see Table In the young first ratoon crop , prior to lodging, three clones were visuallyselected

,and another three clones were taken at random from each family plot. These clones

were each planted to a single-row, 10-m plot in a split-plot arrangement and replicated into four

randomized complete blocks . Whole plots were assigned to families and sub-plots to selection

methods (random vs . selected) for a total of six clones per plot . First clonal stage data w erecollected in the plant and first ratoon crops as described for a Stage 2 tri al (Table

Figure 2 shows the percentage of elite clones (clones with Net Merit Grades, NMG

see Table 1 for description ofNMG) in Stage 2 with respect to the selection strategy used in

Stage 1 for the top 40% of families . Essentially, the results showed-that family selection could

be effective even under lodged conditions . This is evident from the performance among random

clones, which was generally hi gher among the top NMG families and decreased progressively

in the poorerNMG families . Visual selection in the young first ratoon crop was also effective

in identifying elite clones within families, as evident from Figure 2 and the significant effect Of

selection method (random vs. selected, l df) in the ANOVA (data not shown) . Also, theeffectiveness of visual selection was consistent across families as indicated by the lack of

significant family by selection method interaction in the ANOVA (data not shown) . Familyselection in the plant crop followed by individual clone selection in the first ratoon crop was

superior to either family or individual clone selection. Similar results were found in a

simulation study that modeled family by environment interactions, genotypic correlations

22

Journal Ameri can Society of Sugarcane Techno logists , Vol. 23, 2003

between the selected trait and sugar yield, among family variance, total variance and cost ofselection (Jackson et al., 1995b) . The authors reported superior genetic gain and costeffectiveness for combined farrrily and individual clone selection compared to either family orindividual clone selection in most cases . Family selection was also superior to individual cloneselection in most cases . Individual clone selection was superior only in cases where there wasboth a small proportion Of among-family variance and a high genetic correlation between theselected trait and sugar yield.

Any form Of family selection, however, would have to be liberal because some cloneshave been found to perform better than expected on the basis Of their fami ly performance inseedling trials (Kimbeng et al., 2000; Hogarth ,et al ., Furthermore, although an overallincrease in family mean is desirable, the ultimate goal for sugarcane breeders is to select thebest-yielding clone(s) . Cox et al. (1996) suggested that only the top 30 to 40% Of families betargeted for routine individual clone selection. He contends that after intentionally selectingclones fiom the moderate NMG fami lies (50 70 for a number of years, not a single clonefrom this category progressed to the advanced stages (Cox ,

Personal Communication) .Kimbeng et al . (2000) also found the highest percentage Of elite clones within the top 30 to 40%of families (and see Figure Kimbeng et al . (2001a, b ; however, found evidence thatelite clones could be selected from the moderate to low NMG families . They found someoutstanding clones among moderate NMG fami lies, especially those that had hi gh CCS but lowTCH and vice versa. According to Kimbeng et al . (2001b), the time required to selectindividual clones from these relatively poor families should not be a limiting factor in a fieldoperation,

because these plots can be predetermined using the plant crop family data. In centralQueensland, each row is harvested immediately after individual clone selection, giving theselecting crew equal access to all rows and clones during selection.

A major practical benefit Of family selection is that it allows genetic material to beevaluated across locations and years, which aids in the identification Of stable fami lies (Jacksonand McRae, Thi s is particularly usefii l in situations where family by environmentinteraction is important. In the Burdekin region (Ayr, Figure McRae and Jackson (1995) didnot find significant interactions between family and any of the environmental factors, namelysoil types, management practices and crop cycle that they evaluated. Based on these findings, inthis region, fam ilies are evaluated only in the plant crop and at one location (the breeding station)as described in Table 1 . Significant fami ly by environment interactions were found in theHerbert region (Ingham, Figure 1) (Jackson et al ., However, Jackson et al . (1995a) andJackson and Galvez (1996) later found that soil nutri ent status was the principal cause of theinteractions . Soil nutri ent status is a predictable and repeatable source Of genotype byenvironment interaction (Allard and Bradshaw, 1964) that was easily corrected. In southernQueensland, Bull et al . (1992) reported significant fami ly by location interaction. Whenresources are not a constraining factor, families are evaluated at more than one location in thi sregi on.

Competition among seedlings in a plot can affect selection response adversely if theappropri ate intra-row spacing between seedlings is not used. Research under Loui siana growingconditions showed that genetic response was larger at a wider intra-row spacing of 82 cm

compared to a narrower spacing Of 41 cm (De Sousa-Vieira and Milligan, Intra-row

23

Kimbeng andCox : Early Generation Selection of Sugarcane Families and Clones in Australia: A Review

spacing varies among the Australian programs and is probably influenced by land availabilityand the size Of the crop . For example, an intra-row spacing Of 50 cm is used in centralQueensland (Mackay, Figure but in the Burdekin (Ayr, Figure where they have access toirrigation and tend to grow bigger crops, the spacing is 60 cm.

App ra isal offamily selection us ing data generatedfi'

om routine selection activities

Any crop improvement program needs to be constantly monitored to ensure that thebreeding and selection methods are Operating at Optimal levels . Retrospective analyses usingdata generated from routine selection activities can be particularly helpful in this effort becausethese data serve as footprints of the program’s activities . Cox and Stringer (1998) analyzed theefficacy Of early generation selection for the southern Queensland program (Bundaberg, Figure1) using data from the selection database. In thi s analysis, all the clones that were advanced toStage 3, based on their performance in Stage 2 , were categorized according to the families fromwhich they were derived in Stage 1 (see Table 1 for a detailed explanation Of Stages) . The

results showed that selection rates for clones derived from Stage 1 fam ilies were low for

low NMG families were simi lar for families with NMG 10 to 13 7 and

were quite high for the highest NMG category (Table It appears, during selection of

clones in the first ratoon crop , selection intensity, which is normally hi gher for the poorerNMGfamilies, more than compensated for the poor family performance . This explains the simi larselection rates of clones from Stage 2 to Stage 3 for families with NMG 10 to 13

7 Thus, selection intensity can be a major driving force to increase genetic gain. The

authors suggested that genetic gain could be improved by planting larger numbers of clones (in

extra plots) Of the better families and increasing individual selection intensity for these families .

In this case, the extra plots would be selected in the plant crop without having to wait formoredata. This strategy combines the strengths Of the family selection and proven cross methods .

An analysis similar to that Of Cox and Stringer (1998) was perform ed for the centralQueensland program (Mackay, Figure 1) using a much larger data set (Kimbeng et al. , 2o01a) .

The results, with respect to selection among families, were similar to those reported by Cox and

Stri nger selection rates were higher for the top NMG families and comparatively lowerfor the poor NMG families . However, a bias with this type of analysis is that the high NMG

families were originally represented by more clones in Stage 2 compared to the poor NMG

families . Therefore, no conclusion could be drawn with respect to the selection of clones within

families . In an attempt to overcome thi s bias , Kimbeng et al . (2001a) divided the selection rate

(Stage 2 to 3) by the percent of clones evaluated in Stage 2 for each NMG category. In this

analysis, the selection rate was taken to represent the realized response and the percent of clonesevaluated in Stage 2 represented the potential response. The results from this analysis revealedthat although family selection was effective in identifying those families that harbor a greater

proportion of elite clones, selection of clones within families Was not efficient, especially for the

hi ghNMG families . Kimbeng et al. (2001a) Observed that in central Queensland, the top NMG

families did not undergo the stri ct appraisal process used for the lowerNMG families and as a

result more clones are advanced than is actually necessary. More clones are usually earmarked

for selection from the high NMG families . Because the NMG formula awards a bonus for high

sucrose content, there is a tendency not to Brix clones within the top NMG families because of

the perception thatmost Of the clones are high rn sucrose content. The reverse is true for the low

NMG families, where almost every clone 1s subj ected to a Brix test before selecting a few . The

24

Kimbeng andCox : Early Generation Selection of Sugarcane Fami lies and Clones in Australia: A Review

narrow genetrc diversity or low among-family variance in the Louisiana program . Duringthe study period, only about 80 parents were used to make an average of about 300 biparentalcrosses in Louisiana, compared to 800 -1000 parents used to make about crosses inAustralia each year. The number Of parents used in the Louisiana crossing program has

increased to about 160, largely because Of increased efficiency of floral ini tiation using thephotoperiod facility.

Impact of family selection on other aspects of the breeding program

Selection ofp arents , crosses andp op ulation imp rovementA selection cycle in sugarcane usually involves a sequence of about four to six stages

(Skinner et al., A selection cycle typically takes about 12- 15 years to complete. The firststage is the only stage, after hybridization, to be planted with true seed. Subsequent stages areplanted using vegetative propagation, and progressively fewer clones are selected and evaluatedin the more advanced stages . During this 12 to 15 year period, no opportunities exist for sexualrecombination or the creation of new genetic variation that the breeder can exploit . The breederhas to rely on the ini tial variation created during hybridization . Research that can predict theoutcome of a cross would help the breeder to concentrate effort on the most profitable crosses

,

whi ch in turn would substantially increase the chances Of selecting elite clones . The selection of

genotypes to use as parents, or crosses to plant, is one of the most cri tical decisions the sugarcanebreeder has to make .

At the BSES , Hogarth and Skinner (1986) developed an algorithm for assessing thebreeding value of parental clones that combined breeding information, agronomic data and

disease ratings into a single index . The breeding information relied heavily on the percent ofclones fiom a cross that are advanced to later stages. Crosses with high advancement rates

(proven crosses), were usually replanted to large numbers of progenies, unduly increasing theirOdds of producing advanced clones to the detriment of experimental crosses . Furtherm ore,although the agronomic data and di sease ratings combined information from both the parent andprogenies, the method required several years to reliably estimate breeding value, and it is nowknown that individual clone selection in the early stages was not efficient .

BSES breeders recognized the limitations of this empirical approach and sought moreefficient methods of estimating breeding value. But thi s effort was hampered by the lack of

objective data on family or clonal performance, as early stage data were based on indirect

measurements ; that is, visual assessment to estimate cane yield and Bri x to estimate sucrosecontent . Therefore, the avai lability Of Objective family data on both cane yield and sucrosecontent presented a unique opportuni ty to apply statistical approaches to the problem . However,the highly unbalanced nature of data sets generated from routine progeny evaluation tri alsprecluded the use of statisticalmethods such as factorial (orNorth Carolina design 11) (Comstock

et al ., 1949 , Comstock andRobinson, 1948) and Diallel (Griffing, 1956 ; Hayman, 1954) mating

designs.

The Best Linear Unbiased Predictor (BLUP) , which was developed to estimate breedingvalue in animal breeding (Henderson can handle large, highly unbalanced data sets such

as those generated in routine sugarcane progeny evaluation tri als . The BLUP allows data from a

diverse range Ofmating designs, relatives, and precisions to be combined into a single breeding

Journal American Society of Sugarcane Techno logists , Vol. 23, 2003

value for each trait and genotype (Balzarini, Chang andMilligan (1992a, 1992b) were thefirst to report that the BLUP was reliable in predicting the potential of a cross to produce eliteprogeny in sugarcane . They also found that the potential Of a cross to produce elite progenycould be accurately predicted from the cross mean of that trait, and the cross mean was more

readily Obtained than the BLUP (Chang andMilligan, 1992b) . These latter results were obtainedusing a balanced data set and were restri cted to one stage Of the breeding program . The real

advantage Of the BLUP over other statistical methods arises when highly unbalanced data sets,such as those generated from routine sugarcane selection trials, are analyzed across differentstages of the program and include information about relatives (Balzarini , 2000; Stri nger et al .,1996)

Using routine fami ly appraisal data from the southern Queensland (Bundaburg, Figure 1)breeding program, Stri nger et al . (1996) and Cox and Stri nger (1998) compared the utility of theBLUP wi th that of an empirical method (Hogarth and Skinner, 1986) in predicting crossperformance . The predictions were made by correlating the mean BLUP values obtained usingdata accumulated over several years up to a certain year, with the actual fami ly mean valuesObtained in the following year. In other words, family mean plant crop data, in say 1995 , werecorrelated with the corresponding mean BLUP values estimated using family dataaccumulatedfrom, say 1992

- 1994 . The empirical values were derived from at least ten years of data. Theseresults showed that the BLUP method was superior to the empirical method in predicting crossperform ance (Table Generally, the BLUP method requires less information (at least 1 year)compared to the empirical method (at least 10 years) and its power to predict cross performanceincreases as more data become avai lable and is expected to increase even further wheninformation on relatives is included in the model (Stri nger et al ., The robustness Of theBLUP estimates depends largely on the availability of objective family appraisal data, albeithighly unbalanced.

Encouraged by the high predictive power of the BLUP analytical method, BSES breedersbegan to change their philosophy with respect to choice of parents and crosses. The BLUP wasincreasingly used to select parents and crosses, and to design new crosses . Thi s led to a gradualincrease in crosses involving newer parents . Use of historical parents began to decline

,even

when they were involved in ‘proven crosses’ (Cox and Hogarth, The new philosophysought to achieve a much-needed balance between the short-terrn goals of producing elitesugarcane clones with the long-term need to continuously improve the base population . Theseissues needed to be considered simultaneously, because the repetitious nature of breeding forshort-term needs was un likely to provide the best results to accomplish long-term goals . For

example, the hitherto strong emphasis on proven crosses in the BSES breeding program servedthe short-terrn need of producing elite varieties . However, it hampered efforts to broaden thegenetic base of the breeding population, because only limited chances were available to evaluateexperimental parents and crosses. Furthermore, it is well known among sugarcane breeders thatthe genetic base of cultivated sugarcane is very narrow, so concerted efforts had to be made tobroaden the base population (Berding andRoach, 1987;Mangelsdorf,

Population improvement and base broadening efforts at the BSES encompass the rapidintroduction of superior clones from advanced stages of the selection program as well as superiorgermplasm from exotic crosses, and international and national programs (inter-station exchange),

27

Kimbeng and Cox: Early Generation Selection of Sugarcane Families andClones in Australia: A Review

into the crossrng program (Cox andHogarth, In other instances,population improvement

involved recurrent selection for specific traits, for example high early sucrose content (Cox et al.,1994; Cox et al ., 1990) to provide suitable parents for the variety development crossing program .

The availability of sound, objective data on family performance coupled with robust estimates Ofthe BLUP , are crucial to the success ofpopulation improvement efforts .

The implementation of this new effort was assessed for the southern BSES program byevaluating the relative performance of families derived from crossing new versus Old parents .The analysis used four years of routine family appraisal data in which parents were arbitrarilycategorized as Old medium (M), or new (N) if the seedling parent had a year prefix 65 , 65

74, or 74, respectively (Cox and Hogarth, The crosses were designated Oxo, OxM,

OxN, MxM, MxN, or NxN (Table Although the small sample size of the NxN crossesprecluded a reasonable assessment of this group of crosses, the overall results point to theinferior performance of O ld parents compared to the relatively new ones . Old parents perform edpoorly even when used in combination with relatively new parents

,compared to crosses between

relatively new parents . These results justify'

the continuous use and rapid recycling of parents inthe breeding program . Again, data accumulated from fami ly evaluation tri als .are crucial to thesuccessful implementation of this policy.

Apart from evaluating parental performance, the population from which families andclones are selected (Stage 1 , see Table 1) and the population of clones immediately followingfamily and clonal selection (Stage 2, see Table 2) are also constantly monitored. This is toensure that these populations are not adversely affected as a result of adopting family selectionmeasures (for example, the BLUPs to select parents ; the rapid recycling Of newer parentsincluding overseas clones) . The perform ance of seedling populations (Stage 1) from 1993 to

2000 in southern Queensland depicts an overall gradual improvement in NMG at the rate Ofunits per year. Cane yield was a major driving force Of this improvement [TCH 0 .02Year

R2 compared to sucrose content [CCS -0 .002Year R

2

Heritability, estimated on an entry-mean basis using replicated family plots (Stage l ), was higherfor cane yield, compared to sucrose content, 48% (Kimbeng and McRae, Caneyield may, therefore, be more influential in determining among—fami ly differences in seedlingpopulations (Stage 1 tri als) compared to sucrose content .

Within the same period, the NMG of clones (Stage 2) immediately following family andclonal selection improved on average by units per year (Figure The NMG of the top10% of the mean,

which constitutes most Of the clones advanced to the next stage, improved on

average by units per year. Contrary to the seedlings, population improvement in the cloneswas driven more by improvements in sucrose content [CCS 1 .0Year R

2than

by cane yield [TCH 0 .1 1Year R2 which is consistent with well-established

expectations . In Stage 2 tri als, large numbers of clones are evaluated in unreplicated, single-row

plots . Cane yield is more adversely affected by the lack Of replication and competition effects

among clones in small plots compared to sucrose content (Jackson and McRae,2001 ; McRae

and Jackson, 1998 ; Hogarth, Kimbeng et al . (2001a) reported correlation coefficients thatwere always higher in magnitude for sucrose content compared to cane yield between clones in

Stage 2 (single-row,unreplicated) and Stage 3 (2 replicates, multiple locations, 4-row plots)

trials . Even in replicated clonal plots, the degree Of genetic determination was five fold higher

28

10.

l l .

12 .

13 .

14.

15 .

16 .

Kimbeng andCox: Early Generation Selection of Sugarcane Fami lies andClones in Australia: A Review

Bull, J K .,D . M. Hogarth, and K . E. Basford. 1992 . Impact of genotype x environment

interaction on response to selection in sugarcane . Australian Journal of Agri culturalResearch -737.

Chang, Y. S ., and S . B . Milligan. l 992a. Estimating the potential Of sugarcane families toproduce elite genotypes using bivariate methods. Theoretical and Applied Genetics

-639 .

Chang, Y. S ., and S . B . Milligan . 1992b . Estimating the potential of sugarcane families toproduce elite genotypes usrng umvarrate cross prediction methods . Theoretical andApplied Genetics -671 .

Comstock, R. E., and H. F. Robinson. 1948 ..The components Of genetic variance in

populations Of biparental progenies and their use in estimating the average degree of

dominance . Biometri cs -266

Comstock, R. E., H. F. Robinson, and P . H. Harvey. 1949 . A breeding procedure designedto make max imum use Of both general and specific combining ability. Agronomy Journal41 :360-367.

COX,M. C ., and J. K. Stringer. 1998 . Efficacy of early generation selection in a sugarcane

improvement program . Proceedings Australian Society Sugarcane Technologists 20 : 148153 .

Cox,M. C ., T. A.McRae, J. K. Bull, andD .M. Hogarth. 1996 . Family selection improvesthe efficiency and effectiveness of a sugarcane improvement program . In Wilson,

J. R.,

Hogarth, D . M.,Campbell, J . A. and Garside, A. L. (eds) . Sugarcane : Research towardsEfficient and Sustainable Production, Pp 42

-43 . CSIRO Div . Tropical Crops and Pastures,Brisbane .

Cox,M. C ., Hogarth, D .M., and P . B . Hansen. 1994. Breeding and selection for high earlyseason sugar content in a sugarcane (Saccharum spp . hybrids) improvement program .

Australian Journal Agri cultural Research 45 1569 1575 .

Cox,M. C ., and D . M. Hogarth. 1993 . Progress and changes in the South Queensland

Variety Development Program. Proceedings International Society Sugarcane Technologi sts-255 .

Cox , M. C ., D . M. Hogarth, and R. T. Mullins . 1990. Clonal evaluation of early sugarcontent. Proceedings Australian Society Sugarcane Technologi sts 12 : 90-98 .

De Sousa-Vieira, O., and S . B .Milligan . 1999. Irrtrarow spacings and family x environmenteffects on sugarcane fami ly evaluation. Crop Science -364.

Falconer, D . S ., and T. F. C .Mackay. 1996 . Introduction to quantitative genetics . Fourth

Edition. L ongrnan Group Ltd., UK .

30

17.

18 .

19 .

20.

2 1 .

22 .

23.

24.

25 .

26 .

27.

28 .

29 .

30.


Griffing, B . 1956 . Concept of general and specific combining ability in relation to diallelcrossing systems . Australian Journal Biological Science -493 .

Hayman,B . I. 1954. The theory and analysis of diallel crosses. Genetics -809 .

Henderson,C . R. 1975 . Best linear unbiased estimation and prediction under a selection

model. B iometri c 3 1 :423-477.

Hogarth, D .M.,M. C. Cox, andJ. K. Bull. 1997. Sugarcane improvement : Past achievements

and future prospects . In : Kang,M.S . (ed.) Crop Improvement for the 21St century, pp 29-56.

Hogarth, D . M., M. J. Braithwaite, and T. C . Skinner. 1990 . Selection Of sugarcane

families in the Burdekin distri ct. Proceedings Australian Society Sugarcane Technologists-104.

H ogarth, D . M.,and R. T. Mullins . 1989 . Changes in the BSES plant improvementprogram. Proceedings International Society Sugarcane Technologists 20 : 956-96 1 .

Hogarth, D . M., and J. C . Skinner. 1986 . Computerisation Of cane breeding records.Proceedings International Society Sugarcane Technologists -49 1 .

Hogarth, D . M. 1977. Quantitative inheritance studies in sugarcane. III. The effect Ofcompetition and violation Of genetic assumptions on estimation of genetic variancecomponents . Australian Journal Agri cultural Research 28 : 257-268 .

Hogarth, D . M. 1971 . Quantitative inheritance studies in sugarcane . II . Correlations andpredicted responses to selection. Australian Journal Agricultural Research 22 : 103-109 .

Jackson, P . A., and T. A. McRae. 2001 . Selection of sugarcane clones in small plots :effects Ofplot size and selection criteria. Crop Science 41 : 3 15-322 .

Jackson,P . A., and T. A. McRae . 1998 . Gains from selection of broadly adapted and

specifically adapted sugarcane families . Field Crops Research 59 : 15 1-162 .

Jackson,P . A., and G. Galvez . 1996 . Role of variable soil nutri ent levels in causing

genotype x environment interaction in sugarcane . In Wilson, J . R.,Hogarth, D . M.

,

Campbell, J . A. and Garside, A. L. (ed) . Sugarcane : Research towards Efficient andSustainable Production, Pp 52

-54. CSIRO Div . Tropical Crops and Pastures,Bri sbane .

Jackson, P . A., T. A. McRae, and D . M. Hogarth. 1995a. Selection of sugarcane familiesacross variable environments . II. Patterns of response and association with environmentalfactors . Field Crop Research 43 : 109- 1 18 .

Jackson,P . A., T. A. McRae, and J. K . Bull . 1995b . The role of family selection in

sugarcane breeding programs and the effect of genotype x environment interactions .Proceedings International Society of Sugarcane Technologists -269 .

31

3 1 .

32 .

33 .

34.

35 .

36 .

37.

38 .

39 .

40 .

41 .

42 .

Kimbeng andCox: Early Generation Selection of Sugarcane Families andClones in Australia: A Review

Jackson,P . A., W. M. Symington, T. E. Morgan, and A. W. Wo

'

od. 1992 . The GSR

sugarcane breeding program Future direction and strategies . Proceedings AustralianSociety Of Sugarcane Technologists 14 : 123- 129 .

Jackson,P . A., T. A. McRae, and D . M. Hogarth. 1994. Selecting superi or sugarcane

crosses for the Herbert River distri ct. Proceedings Australian Society SugarcaneTechnologists -54.

Kimbeng, C.A., D . Froyland, D . Appo, A. Corcoran, and M. Hetherington . 2001a. An

appraisal Of early generation selection in the central Queensland sugarcane improvementprogram. Proceedings Australian Society Sugarcane Technologists -135 .

Kimbeng, C . A.,T. A. McRae, and M. C . COx . 2001b

'

. Optimising early generationselection in sugarcane breeding. Proceedings International Society Sugarcane Technologists24 488-493 .

Kimbeng, C . A., T. A. McRae, and J. K . Stringer. 2000 . Gains from family and visualselection in sugarcane, particularly for heavily lodged crops in the Burdekin region .

Proceedings Australian Society Sugarcane Technologists 22 : 163-169 .

Kimbeng, C . A., and T. A. McRae . 1999 . Optimum selection strategies in originalseedlings particularly for heavi ly lodged crops . Sugar Research and Development FinalReport. Bureau Of Sugar Experiment Stations : Brisbane, Australia.

Mangelsdorf, A. J. 1983 . Cytoplasmic diversity in relation to pests and pathogens.

International Society of Sugarcane Technologists Newsletter -49

McRae, T. A., and P . A. Jackson. 1998 . Competition effects in selection tri als .

Proceedings Australian Society Sugarcane Technologists -161 .

McRae, T. A., and P . A. Jackson. 1995 . Selection Of sugarcane families for the Burdekin

river irrigation area. Proceedings Australian Society of Sugarcane Technologists141 .

McRae, T. A.,D . M. Hogarth, J . W. Foreman, andM. J . Braithwaite. 1993 . Selection of

sugarcane seedling families in the Burdekin distri ct. In‘

Focused P lant Irnprovement’

Proceedings Of the Tenth Australian P lant Breeding Conference . 77-82 .

Pollock, J . S . 1982 . Variety selection in the Burdekin. Proceedings Australian Society of

Sugar Cane Technologists 4 : 12 1- 129 .

Skinner, J . C ., D .M. Hogart, and K . K .Wu. 1987. Selection methods, criteria, and indices .

Developments in crop science 1 1 : Sugarcane improvement through breeding DJ Heinz

(cd.) ElsevierAmsterdam .

32

Kimbeng and Cox: Early Generation Selection of Sugarcane Families and Clones in Australia: A Review

Stage/Crop Operation,

r

Seedling stage planted : Full-sib families x 5 replicates x 20 seedlings/replicate .

Fami ly performance data collected : Sucrose content (CCS) is estimatedusing eight stalks, one from each

'

of eight randomly chosen stools in a

plot . Cane yield (TCH) is estimated On a family-plot basis using

mechani cal harvester and mobile weighing tipper. The selection index,net merit grade (NMG), is calculated using CCS , and TCH -data. NMGexpresses family performance relative to that of standard families or

proven crosses, whi ch are adjusted to amean of ten. The NMG formulapenalizes families with poor appearance grade and awards a bonus for

high sucrose content.

Clones selected from b est families: Individual clone selection is based

on visual appraisal for yield and appearance grade and on Brix solublesolids w w in the juice) measured using hand held refractometers .

Stage 2 First clonal stage planted : Single-row, single replicate, 10-m-plots .

First clonal stage data collected and top 30% of clones selected as

“tentatives”: CCS is estimated using two random stalks in a plot . TCH is

estimated for each clone using mechanical harvester andmobile weighingtipper. The selection index , NMG, is calculated using CCS and TCH

data.

Data collected on tentatives and th e top 20% selected : CCSestimated using two random stalks in a plot . TCH is estimated for eachclone using mechanical harvester and mobile weighing tipper. NMG iscalculated using CCS and TCH.

estimate CCS is outlined in a BSES (1984) publication.

34


No . of NO. Of of NO. of

families clones clones clonesselected selected selected selectedin Stage 1 Stage 1 to 2 Stage 1 to 2 Stage 2 to 3

Table 3. Gain from different selection strategies in Stage 1 asmeasured by performance in

Selection strategy 1Apprai sed Evaluated WithNMG

Gain ,

Individual clone 2444 340

Family (F) 944 944

F Visual grade 944 360

F Visual 944 240

See Table 1 for explanation on Stages of selection andNMG.

IOnly the top 40% Of fami lies are shown here.Clones withNMG are considered to be elite clones and selected

Kimbeng and Cox: Early Generation Selection of Sugarcane Families andC lones in Australia: A Review

Table 4. Correlation coefficients (r) between netmerit grade (NMG) and Best LinearUnbiased Predictor (BLUP), and between NMG and empiri cal method among crosses in

Year(s) of data Year of data usedused to estimate to estimate NMG .

NO . Of families BLUP values

1992-93 (2) 1994

97 1992-94 (3) 1995

173 1992-95 (4) 1996r See Table 1 for explanation onNMG.

IAt least 10 years of data used to estimate empiricalmean values .

Table 5 . Mean netmerit grade and standard deviation for families derived from parents

i c

a

ziz a

:t abc

Parents were arbitrarily categorized as Old medium (M), or new (N) if theseedling parent had a year prefix 65 , 65-74, or 74, respectively; data averaged

over four years .I See Table 1 for explanation onNMG. NMGwas calculated relative to standardclones in the tri al. Usually, proven crosses are used as standard fami lies .

Means followed by different letters are significantly different (P the NxN

group had too few fami lies to permit any reasonable comparison.

4

36

Kimbeng andCox : Early Generation Selection of Sugarcane Fami lies and Clones in Australia: A Review

Figure 2 . Percentage of elite Stage 2 clones resulting from different selection strategies in Stage1 . See Table 1 for explanation of selection stages andNMG.

Fam ily selection rate for NMG in S tage 1 ,

Figure 3 . Population improvement in sugarcane : performance (NMG) Of seedlings (Stage 1)relative to the cultivarQIS I from 1993 to 2000. See Table 1 for explanation Of Stage 1 tri als

andNMG.

NMG Year

R2

38

Journal American Society of Sugarcane Technologists,"vol. 23, 2003Figure 4. Population improvement in sugarcane : performance (NMG) Of clones in Stage 2relative to the cultivars Ql 4l andQIS I from 1994 to 2000. See Table 1 for explanation of Stage2 tri al s andNMG.

39

Bressiani et al Repeatabil tywithin and between selectim stages in a sugarcane breedingprogram.

REPEATABIL ITYWITHINAND BETWEEN SEL ECTION STAGES INA SUGARCANEBREEDING PROGRAM

Jose A. Bressiani‘ ; Roland Vencovsky2and Jorge A. G. da Silva’.

Centro de Tecnologia Copersucar, Secao deMelhoramento, CP 162 , CEP 13400-970,Piracicaba, $ 50 Paulo , Brasil, [email protected] .br

2 Escola Superior de Agri cultura"Luiz de Queiroz", Departamento de Genética, CP 83, CEP

13400-970, Piracicaba, $ 50 Paulo , Brazil, rvencovs@esalq .pusp.br

3 Texas Agri cultural Experiment Station,Texas A&MUniversity

,2415 E. Hwy 83, 78596

Weslaco , TX, USA,

ABSTRACT

Aiming to obtain repeatability estimates (rm) to help in the identification Of superiorclones, six full-sib sugarcane families were evaluated in the first three of six clonal selectionstages . The traits evaluated were : stalk length and diameter, stalk weight and number and Brixcane juice . Results showed that, for stalk length and Brix, rpmestimates weren’t significantly

different between stages I and III and between II and HI. For stalk diameter,stalk number and

weight of stalks,there was a clear difference of r

pmvalues between stages I and III and betweenI] and I . These results indicate that, for phenotypic selection ln stage I

,priority should be given

to Brix cane juice and to stalk length in the first place, whereas from stage II forward,additional emphasis should be given to stalk diameter, number of stalks and weight of stalks .When the same selection stage is considered, repeatability estimates for each trait were alsosimilar from plan t to first ratoon, which indicates that selection for ratooning ability is not

effective in the first two selection stages .

Keywords : sugarcane, repeatability, early selection

INTRODUCTION

New sugarcane cultivars are Obtained through the selection Of vegetatively propagatedgenotypes Obtained from true seed, which is derived from the hybridization of superi or parents .Selection is applied in all breeding stages : the choice Of parents, cross combinations and theplant population originating fiom the crosses made (Skinner et al., Individual seedlingselection during the initial stage is Of low efficiency given the low broad sense heritability forthe majority of traits (Skinner, It has been common practice in breeding programs toobtain phenotypic estimates for the traits under selection during the initial breeding stages .

(Dudley andM0 11, 1969 ; Skinner et al .,

Repeatability estimates are utilized to measure the association Of the same trait betweendifferent initial selection stages and crop cycles (plant cane and ratoons) . Knowing theseestimates helps to set up selection criteria for visual evaluation, which increases selectionefficiency and reduces the risk of losing superi or genotypes .

Studies with estimates of repeatability have been report ed by Mariotti ( 1973) in

Argentina, Miller and James (1975) andMilligan et al . (1996) in USA, Nageswara and Etlrirajan

40

Bressiani et al Repeatabii tywithin and between selectim stages in a sugarcane breedingprogram.

would appear in the next stage among the clones (Skinner, In thi s situation, repeatabilityamong stages of selection has been used in sugarcane breeding.

The estimates of repeatability in each Of the experiments, from the analysis Of variance

(Steel and Toni c, considered that seedlings or clones gave rise to two data sets (plant andratoon stages) andwas calculated as follows :

where is the estimate of the variance among seedlings or clones and contains the geneticvariance among them plus the variance due to permanent environmental effects expressed in thetwo crop cycles (plant and ratoon) . The term measures the enviromnental variance, at thesub-plot level, due to interaction between seedlings or clones with the crop cycles.

Estimates of repeatability between the experiments 1 to 3 (stage I to III) were Obtainedthrough covariance analysis (Steel and Torrie, as it involved data from di fferentexperiments, as Opposed to the case with crop cycles. Thus, these repeatabilities correspond tothe phenotypic correlation of trait (x) on a given stage and this same trait in other selectionstages and cycles andwere estimated as follows :

where C6v .

)is the phenotypic covari ance of trait x between experiments(stages),

is the mean phenotypic variance of trait x and is the mean phenotypic vari ance of trait9

X

These analyses were first calculated for each cross and then after pooling for all crosses .

For pooled data, a test for homogeneity among the estimates Of repeatability between crosseswas made and a 3

8 test was used to accept or reject it (Steel andToni c ,

RESUL TS AND DISCUS SION

Estimates Of repeatability in sugarcane are presented in Tables 1 to 5 . Individualestimates for each cross are not presented separately since the differences for thi s group of

crosses were not significant based on 78 test for homogeneity. Table 1 shows that the

highest values for repeatability of stalk length were Observed between stage III-plant and stage I

ratoon and also between stage II-ratoon and stage I-ratoon. These estimates are similar to thosepresented byMari otti (1973) in Argentina, who found rm) formean stalk length between

stages I and II on first ratoon crop . On the other hand, Bakshi Ram and Chaudhary (2000) foundestimates that varied from to between stage I and II plant cane for three open crosses .

42


Under these same conditions, Rodri gues (1986) Observed estimates between and for rpm

in the plant crop, whi le Randoyal using family means, found values Of and for

repeatability among plant cane and ratoon in stage I.

Crop Cycle Stage II

Ratoon

Stage I

Ratoon

Stage H O.49* *

Ratoon

significant at the level

The absence of significant differences of repeatability between plant-cane and first

ratoon crops in stages I and 11 indicates that selecting for stalk length could be done in the plantcane crop , which results in a hi gher selection gain per uni t of time, given that the genotypesunder selection will reach stage III two years after planting stage I. However, selecting for stalklength

“

must be liberal, given that the correlation values between stages .I and III and betweenstages II and III did not exceed

Table 2 presents repeatability values Observed for stalk diameter. Repeatabilities wereslightly higher than those obtained for stalk length, with no difference between plant and firstratoon crops . The repeatability Observed between stages I and III were inferior to those Observedbetween stages II and III, indicating that selection for thi s trait on stage I has low efficiency,particularly on ratoon crops . Our recommendation is that selection for stalk diameter on stage Ishould be very liberal, and more intense on stage II, where repeatability is higher. Therepeatability values Obtained in this study are close to those obtained by Rodri gues (1986) butinferior to those reported by Bakshi Ram and Chaudhary who found estimates between

and We recommend that selection for stalk diameter should be made on plant cane instages I and II

Crop Cycle Stage 1]

P lant Ratoon

Ratoon

Stage II

Ratoon


43

Bressiani et al.zRepeatabii tywithinand between selectim stay s in a sugarcane breedingprogram.

For stalk number (Table the highest repeatability occurred in stage II between plantcane and first ratoon

,with r

pm Repeatabilities between stage I and Hwere low,close to

those Obtained for stalk length and inferior to those Obtained for stalk diameter. However,

between stages I and III and between stages H and IH, repeatabili ty values were higher thanthose Obtained for stalk length and close to those obtained for stalk diameter. In this case ourresults are different from those ofRodrigues (1986) and Bakshi Ram and Chaudhary butsimilar to those OfMiller and James (197 who found repeatability values between stages I

, H

andHI similar to those for stalk diameter

Crop Cycle

Ratoon

Ratoon

Stage H

Ratoon


Table 4 shows repeatabilities for Bri x cane juice. Here the rpmvalues Obtained among

all stages and crosses were uniform and high, with values greater than inmost cases,which

indicates that Brix cane juice is the characterwith highest repeatability in the initial stages Ofselection. The plant-cane crop had the most uniform results when compared to those obtainedfor the ratoon crop, with the hi ghest values occurring between stages I and H,

in plant cane.These values are higher than those reported in the literature (Mariotti, 1973 ; Miller and James,1975 ; Nageswara and Ethirajan, 1985 ; Rodrigues, 1986 ; Bakshi Ram and Chaudhary,

Crop Cycle

Ratoon

Ratoon

Stage H

Ratoon


As a quantitative trait, resulting from other yield components (stalk length, stalk diameter

and number of stalks), the weight of stalks had low repeatability values (Table These values

were small between stages I andH and between stages I and IH, both for plant and ratoon crops .

44

sta]

staf

Bressiani et al Repeatabii tywithin and between selection stages in a sugarcane breedingprogram.

It diameter in this study. As a recommendation,individual selection based on weight of

ks should be avoided in stage I, being applied only from stage Hforward.

Regarding the plant and ratoon crop cycles, the values found for repeatability indicatedthat the individual selection could be applied on plant cane for both stages I and H

,since the r

pmvalues obtainedwere similar for plant cane and ratoon cane.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We are grateful to COPERSUCAR and their breeders and technicians for their supportand help along with these experiments . We would like to thank Dr. James Irvine for fi'

uitful

discussion and suggestions .

REFERENCES

Bakshi Ram and B . S . Chaudhary. 2000. Individual and simultaneous selection for Brixyield in seedling populations of sugarcane . Sugar Cane International, Jun ,

12-19 .

Dudley, J . W. and R. H . M0 11. 1969 . Interpretation and use of estimates of heritabilityand genetic variances in plant breeding . Crop Science , -Madison,

-262 .

Falconer, B S and T. F. C . Mackay. 1996 . Introduction to Quantitative Genetics . 4‘h ed .

London : Longman,464p .

Mariotti , J . A. 1973 . Experi encias de seleccion clonal en cana de azr’

rcar en la provinciade Jujuy. II Repetibilidad y Heredabilidad de caracteres de interese agronémico .

RevistaAgrondmicaNorte Argentina, 10 ( 1 -73 .

Mi ller, J . D . And N . 1. James . 1975 . Selection in six crops Of sugarcane .

Repeatability of three characters . Crop Science, -25 .

Mi lligan, S .B . , K . A. Gravois , and F. A. Mart in . 1996 . Inheritance Of sugarcaneratooning ability and the relationship of younger crop traits to O lder crop traits . CropScience, -50 .

Nageswara, R. A. O . and A . S . Eth irajan . 1985 . Repeatability and predictability inprogenies Of crosses of high and low sugar cultivars of sugarcane . Indian Journal of

Agricultural Science, -250 .

Randoyal, K . 1999 . Genetic correlation and repeatability for agronomic characters insugar cane populations in contrasting environments and different crop years . SugarCane, Apr, 4-12 .

Rodrigues, I. A. 1986 . Influencia del sistema de cruzamiento en las poblacionesObtenidas de cana-azr

'

rcar. H Repetibilidad de los principales caracteres . Boletin

INICA,- 10 .

46


10 . Skinner, J . C . 1962 . Sugarcane selection experiments . In : International Society of SugarCane Technologists Congress , 1 1 . Jakarta. Proceedings . Jakarta: The OrganizingCommittee, p . 56 1-567.

1 1 . Skinner, J . C . 1982 . Efficiency Of bunch planted and single planted seedlings for

selection Of superior fami lies in sugarcane . Euphytica, -37.

12 . Skinner, J . C ., D . M. Hogarth, and K . K . Wu . 1987. Selection methods , criteria and

indices . In : Heinz, D .J. Sugarcane Improvement through Breeding . Amsterdam :

Elsevier, p . 409-453 .

13 . Steel, R. G. D . And J . H. Torrie . 1980 . Principles and Procedures Of Stati stics . A

B iometric Approach. 2“Ed. McGraw Hi ll . USA, 633p .

47


ENHANCEDS UGARCANE ESTABL ISHIVIENT

US ING PLANT GROWTH REGUL ATORS

Bob WiedenfeldTexas Agri cultural Experiment Station

Texas A&MUniversityResearch Extension Center2415 E. Highway 83,Weslaco, TX 78596-8399

ABSTRACT

Since sugarcane is vegetatively propagated, large amounts of seed cane are used in order toinsure a good stand. P lant growth regulator compounds, Often used as rrpemng agents, can causesprouting at lowernodes . This response to growthregulators could lead to better stands at plantingwhi le possibly using less seed. Field studies were conducted over three years to determine the

effectiveness of different plant growth regulator compounds and methods of application on

emergence enhancement for several different sugarcane cultivars . In the first test, application Of

ethephon -ch loroethyl) phosphonic acid] or glyphosate [isopropylamine salt Of N

(phosphonomethyl) glycine] to standing cane three weeks pri orto cutting as seed had no effect, ordecreased shoot counts in the sugarcane stand planted with this seed source . Ethephon applicationto the seed pieces in-firrrow at planting at the standard seed cane planting rate tended to increase

shoot counts in the new planting for the first fourmonths, and stafk heights for five months afterplanting on some cultivars . In the second test, ethephon application in-furrow atplanting at reducedseed cane planting rates increased shoot counts forup toninemonths following planting but hadverylittle effect on stalk heights , again only on some cultivars . In the third test in two commercialplantings, ethephon application had very little effect on shoot counts or stalk heights, but seed caneplanting rates used by planting crews turned out to exceed recommended levels . Also , the twocultivars in these plantingsmayhave been less responsive to ethephon than others used in the earlier

tests . Even when seed cane planting rates in the commercial plantings were reduced by no

differences in final shoot populations were found indicating that the planting rates used weremuch

higher than necessary. Ethephon application to seed cane in-furrow at planting was effective in

increasing tillering, but natural declines in shoot population when stalk growth rates were highest

eliminated any benefit except where very low seed cane planting rates were used.

INTRODUCTION

Sugarcane is vegetatively propagated,therefore large amounts of seed cane are required for a newplanting. The recommended planting rate is around 9 to 10Mg ha

", but higherrates are often used.

Fields used as a source Of seed cane are lost for production that year, which takes out about 3% of

all fields each year in Texas . Whi le some sugarcane is plantedmechanically, most is still plantedby hand in Texas . Since a sugarcane crop will generally be grown for several years, it is important

to insure a good stand. Therefore growers Often plant very high rates Of seed cane tomake sure they

have enough viable seed pieces for good field establishment.

P lant growth regulators (PGRs) act on sugarcane bymodifying or retarding some aspect of

cane growth (Alexander, PGRs are used to stimulate sugar accumulation in the stalk on

48


consisted of an untreated check or ethephon application at the above rate applied to the normal rateof seed cane being planted by the commercial crews

, or to a reduced cane planting rate (TableThe reduced rate was achieved by asking the commercial planting crews to plant at half of thenormal rate . Treatments were applied in plots mwide (1 row) by m in length in randomizedblock designs with 3 replications at both locations . The third year, all seed cane planted wasweighed in two 3 m sections of row in each plot.

Tests were furrow irrigated as required, and received herbicide application andmechanical

cultivation forweed control each year. Shoot population counts weremade by counting all shootsin two 3m sections Ofrow in each plot. Counts were ini tiated about 8 weeks following planting andcontinued periodically for a total of 10 to 16 counts unti l mid-August each year. Stalk height wasmeasured on 3 stalks per plot in the first and second years, and on 2 stalks per plot in the twocommercial tests the 3rdyear. Stalkmeasurements were taken between 5 and 13 times in each studydepending on the year. All datawere analyzed statistically by cultivar using Analysis OfVarianceandDuncan’s multiple range test.

RESULTS AND DISCUS S ION

Duri ng each growing season shoot counts generally increased until a peak was reached,

typicallywhenmaximum stalk growth rates were occurring, then tended to decline thereafter (Figs .1 Highest average stalk growth rates approached cm per day. Some differences in shootcounts and growth rates between cultivars were Observed.

Ethephon application in-furrow tended to be themost effective at increasing shoot counts andheights in 1998 (Fig . Wh en a significant treatment effect occurred on shoot counts (20 out of65cultivar x date combinations) and plant heights (6 out Of25 cultivar x date combinations, Tablein-furrow ethephon application increased shoot counts 25% of the time

, and increased stalk heights

67% of the time . Glyphosate application to standing cane appeared to have a detrimental effect onshoot counts at some dates . Where statistically significant treatment effects are indicated in Table2, glyphosate application caused a reduction in shoot counts 95% of the time, and a reduction instalk heights 50% of the time. Ethephon application to standing cane appeared to have very littleeffect. Treatment effects on shoot counts tended to disappear after about 4 months followingplanting. Treatments effects in this first test weremost pronounced on cultivars CP70-32 1 , CP7O

1240 and CP72- 12 10 ; and were less evident or nonexistent on CP80-1827 and TCP87-3388 .

Amount of seed cane used in the first experimentwas notmeasured, but planting ratewas based onthe “ standar recommendationwhich results in about 9Mg/habeing planted. Itwas concluded thatethephon application in-furrow at planting was the treatment that showed the most promise based

on the results Obtained this first year. Itwas also Observed that shootnumbers rose and then declinedto an equilibrium level later in the season, indicating that the beneficial effects Of ethephon on shootemergencemight be maximized at reduced planting rates .

Therefore, a standard double stalk overlap and a reduced single stalk overlap planting ratewere used in the second test (Table 3) with and without in-furrow ethephon application. The

beneficial effects Of ethephon application occurredmost dramatically at the reduced planting rate,increasing shoot counts in some cases up to the levels Obtained at the higher planting rate withoutethephon application in this study (Fig . Where treatment effects were statistically significant on

50

Wiedenfeld : Enhanced Sugarcane Establishment Using PlantOrt Regulators

shoot population (32 of 50 cultivar x date combinations, Table 41% Of those were due toethephon application . Stalk heights were affected by treatment on only 6 of the possible 35 cultivarx date combinations, but on 5 of those 6 occasions the effect was due to ethephon application.

Wh ere significant treatment effects occurred on the parametersmeasurednotattri butable to ethephon

application,the effect was due to differences in the amount of seed cane planted. Also

,treatment

effects on shoot counts persisted for 9 months after planting (Table Cultivars CP71-1240 and

CP72-1210 showed the greatest response to the ethephon treatment, as in the previous tri al. TCP87

3388 shoot counts were affected by treatments applied in the second experiment, but the effectwasahnost entirely due to amount of seed cane planted. D ifferences between sugarcane cultivars in

responses to PGR’s has been routinely observed,making it necessary to calibrate PGRapplications

based on the response desired for each cultivar.

The rate of seed cane planted turned out to be higher than “

recommended rates in bothcommercial fields used in the 3rd experiment (Table Some treatment effects on shoot counts were

Observed (Fig . 3) at one of the two locations up to ahnost 4 months after planting, but none were

Observed thereafter (Table The cultivar TCP87-3388 used at the Hiler location showed little

response to ethephon application in the prior tests whi le cultivarCP7O-1 133 used at the Beckwithlocation had not been tested in the first two years of this study.

CONCLUS IONS

This study indi cates that ethephon application in-furrow atplanting on sugarcane seed piecesdoes increase shoot counts and stalk heights on some cultivars, in particular CP71- 1240 andCP721210. However, since shoot numbers in sugarcane tend to increase rapidly early during growth butthen decline to an equilibrium level later in the seasonwhen themost rapid growth rates occur, thebeneficial effects of the increased shoot counts that were caused early in the season tend to disappear.

Only where substantially reduced planting rates are used does the benefit Of the increased shootcounts persist through the entire growing season.

Anotherpossible benefit Of increased early season shoot counts and stalk heights would beto cause quicker canopy cover providing better competition overweeds. While glyphosate wouldnot work for thi s purpose, ethephon may be a viable candidate for thi s use, although it would benecessary to determine whether the magnitude of the response would be adequate to provide thedesired benefit.

Where reduced planting rates were used in the commercial sugarcane fields, no reduction infinal shoot counts were Obtained compared to the growers

’ standard planting rates regardless ofethephon treatment, indicating that these growers were using substantiallymore seed cane than isnecessary to obtainmaximum stands .

5 1

Journal Ameri can Society of SugarcaneTechnologists , Vol. 23 , 2003

REFERENCES

Alexander, A.G. 1973 . Sugarcane Physiology. A comprehensive study of the Saccharumsource-to-sink sy stem. pp . 443-464. Elsevier Scientific Publish ing Co .,

Amsterdam.

Bischoff,K .P . andRA.Martin. 1986 . The response of saccharum species to growth regulators

used as tillering agents . LSU Sugarcane Research Annual Progress Report, p . 54 .

Eastwood, D . and H. B . Davis . 1997. Chemical ripening in Guyana progress and prospects .Sugar Cane. -17.

Eiland, B . R. and J. L. Dean. 1985 . Growth regulator effects on sugar cane germination and

tillering. J . Amer Soc . Sugar Cane Tech. (abstract)

Rozeff,N. 1998 . Preplant fertilization, seed cane andplanting of sugarcane . In : N.Rozeff, J .

M. Amador and J .E. Irvine. South Texas Sugarcane Production Handbook. Texas A&MUniversityResearch Extension Center atWeslaco andRio Grande Valley SugarGrowers,Inc .,

SantaRosa.

Wiedenfeld,RP . 1988 . Effects of growth regulators on tillering, flower control and ripening

of sugarcane in the LowerRio GrandeValley ofTexas . J . Amer. Soc . SugarCane Tech.

74.

Wong-Chong, J andRA.Martin. 1983 . Greenhouse studies on the interaction ofgenotype and

plant growth regulators with regard to early tillering in sugar cane . J. Amer. Soc Sugar Cane

Tech. (abstract)

52

HS

5

Mar

2

Weidenfeld : Enhanced Sugarcane Establishment Using Plant Growth Regulators

w w w m wcr e a s e

m w w m m w m w m wc a n:

8 8 8 2 8 8 8 8 8 8 8

w * 8 8 8 8 8

m me m i t

8 8 8 8 - 8 8 8

a a a a

OO N B

C O "“ W OO N OO O M ONm N N N u— a

a a 3<1:

Wiedenfeld : Enhanced Sugarcane Establishment Using Plant Growth Regulators

Table 3 . Seed cane planting rate for the different planting densities in the 2Irld and 3rd years of the

study.

Seed piece densityI

Season Location Cultivar

2000 01

‘P lanting densities used in the 1999 crop were single (low) and double (high) overlap ; and in the

2000-01 crop were a reduced (low) and a commercial (high) rate.

55

ns

Feb

9

Weidenfeld : Enhanced Sugarcane Establishment Using Plant Growth Regulators

w w w w w wcr e a s e s

w m m m w ma c c e s s:

(0 m m w w mc a n c a n:

w w wc a n

U)

m mg a g g g a c

8 8 3 3 3 3

00 O Wm g

ovci g oo g

bm oo

N N N N

b m v o e B N fl- ooN

N N N N OO N

a a

Wiedenfeld : Enhanced Sugarcane Esteblishment Using Plant Growth Regulators

shoot count stalk he ight

Mar Apr

Figure 1 .Sugarcane shoot counts and heights over time for different cultivars showing the effect

of ethephon and glyphosate on standing cane and ethephon application in-furrow vs . a check in the

1 year of the study.

58

Journal American Society of Sugarcane Techno logists , Vol. 23, 2003

s hoo t co unt s ta lk h e ig h t

Feb Mar Apr May Aug S e p

Figure 2 . Sugarcane shoot counts and heights over time for different cultivars showing the effect

of ethephon vs . untreated at single and double overlap planting rates in the 2‘“d year of the study.

59

Wiedenfeld : Enhanced Sugarcane Esteblishment Using Plant Growth Regulators

shoot count stalk he ight

Oct Nov Dec Jan Mar Apr May Jun Jan Feb Mar Apr

Figure 3 . Sugarcane shoot counts and heights over time for two different locations and cultivars

showing the effect of ethephon vs . untreated at reduced and standard planting rates in the 3rd year of

the study.

60

Tai et al.zEstimating the Fami ly Perfomrance of Sugarcane Crosses Using Small Progeny Test

for high sugar in these early ages. Tai et al . (1980) reported that stalk number, stalk weight, Brix,sucrose percent, and sugarper ton of cane were highly repeatable between selection stages (StagesII and III), but tons of cane per hectare, and tons of sugarperhectare, were not repeatable betweenthese two selection stages . In addition to selection for a single character, the selection index canbe used by combiningmany important characters into a singlemeasure (Hogarth Miller etal . (1978) used stalk length, stalk diameter, stalk number, andBrix to construct a selection index fortonnes of sugarperhectare. D irectmeasurement ofmany important characters of sugarcane is time

consuming and expensive. Sugarcane breeders have used grading systems (visual rating) to evaluatethe potential commercial value ofclones (Skinner, 1967 Grading is less accurate but less expensivethan the selection index .

Several methods have been proposed for estimating the potential of sugarcane families toproduce superior seedlings (elite genotypes), including factors for superior performance (FSP) byArceneaux et al . the probability ofexceeding a target value (PROB) (Milligan andLegendre,

and a tmivariate cross prediction method (Chang andMilligan, The factors forsuperior performance (FSP) method is easy to use, but a PSF value can only be obtained after theori ginal seedlings have been carri ed through all stages of selections . The univariate cross predictionmethod described by Chang andMilligan (1992) requires extensive data collection.

The selection percentage is ameasure of the overallmerit of the cross which represents allthe aspects of desirability considered in these stages and the weight given to each componentcharacterby the selector (Walker, A high selection percentage indicates that the populationhad ahighmean and/orvariance for someorall desirable characters . Tai andMiller (1989) reportedthat selection rate between early stages of selectionwas highly correlated.

A progeny test with small number of individuals is routinely used to estimate the selectionrate for the evaluation of proven crosses in sugarcane breeding programs in Australia (Hogarth,

The progeny assessment tri als also have been routinely used to identify the best families andselect the superior clones from these families (Cox et al. Wu et al. (1978) studied the

minimum sample size as theminimum numberof individual sugarcane seedlings or stools necessary

to estimate, with reasonable precision,mean and variance of a tri al in a population and found fortyindividuals from a population to be the minimum sample size required to estimate the mean and

variance for refractometer solids (Brix), stalk number, stafk diameter, or stalk length.

The obj ective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of using small numbers of

seedlings per cross to estimate the progeny performance of families based on the selection rate .


Progeny tests were established in eachMay of 1988, 1989 , and 1990 by planting 70 to 100seedlings per cross from the regular seed germination tests for 1987 (33 entri es), 1988 (44 entri es),and 1989 (29 entri es) cross series, respectively. Those seedlings were transplanted to the field in two

rows m apart with m between seedlings within a row . A vi sual rating (RI) (poor 1 , fair

3, and good 5) was made on each cross in early December of the same year. Data on stalkdiameter (D1) were collected from up to five stalks for each of those 40 seedlings picked at random

62


in lateDecember. Stalkdiameterwasmeasured nearthemid-intemode at m above ground level

and the numberofmillable stalks for each seedlingwas recorded. Stool weight (K 1)was calculatedbymultiplying the stalk weight (W1) by the stalk number (N1) . Data on stool weight were obtainedfrom both the 1988 and the 1989 cross series . One stalk was cut from each of 40 seedling stools .

The resulting 40-sta1k bundle per crosswas weighed and divided at random into two sub-samples,20 stalks each, forjuice analysis. The average Bri x or sucrose from the two sub-samples was used

for all statistical analyses .

Selection using the same criteria as the regular seedling program (Tai andMiller, 1989)wasconducted in early January. Selection rate from the progeny test (SRl ) was computed as :

(selected seedlings/number of seedlings of each progeny sample) X 100. Approximately 600 toseedlings for each of those same crosses used in the progeny test were planted in the regular

seedling program in the following year (CP 90, CP 9 1 and CP 92 clones selected from 1987, 1988 ,

and 1989 cross series, respectively) Selection rates for the regular seedling stage (SR2) were

computed as : (selected seedlings/number of regular seedlings per cross) X 100. One stalk

(approximately 1 m long) from each of those selected seedlings was cut in January each year andplanted as Stage I in a single-row plot in m between rows and m apart between plots . P lant

cane selection of StageI clones was conducted in Septemberof each year. Selection rate for Stage

I (SR3) was computed as (selected Stage I clones/original seedlings per cross) X 100. Each

selected Stage I clones was advanced to Stage II (Tai andMiller, An eight-stalk seed cane

samplewas cut from each'

selected clone in Stage Iandused to establish a2-row plot m long andmwide in Stage II

‘

in October each year. Juice quality datawere based on the Stage II samplesharvested the following October. Juice qualitywas notmeasured on selectionsmade in Stage I, theaverage of juice qualitymeasurements from Stage II clones in each crosswas used forall statisticalanalyses .

Predi cting the selection rate forprogeny sample (SRl regular seedling (SR2 ), and Stage

I (SR3) was made by regression analysis (SAS , 1988) using the progeny assessment data on stafk

diameter, stalk weight, and visual rating. Themultiple regression ofdependent variables, selectionrates (SRl , SR2 , and SR3), on stalk diameter (D 1), stalk weight (W1), stalk number (N stoolweight (K1), and visual rating (RI) based on the progeny test for each cross seri es were analyzed.

The GLM procedure (SAS , 1988) was used to select the best predictive models for SRl , SR2 orSR3 .

RESULTS AND DISCUS S ION

The seedlings ofthe regularSeedling Stage generallyhad lower stalkweight andjuice qualitythan the selected Stage I clones tested in Stage II (Table Visual rating of three cross series rangedfrom to and their selection rates exceeded The results also indicate that the plantmeasurements for stalk characters andjuice quality factors in Seedling Stagewere smallerthan thosein Stage II. Those differences could be due to the plant development stage and the growthenvironment. The seedlings were developed from the true seed with a limited food supply whi leStage II clones developed from buds with adequate food supply from the cane stalks . DeSousaVieira and Milligan (1999) showed that the plant spacing greatly affects stalk number and itsvariances .

63

Tai et ai Estimating the Family Performance of Sugarcane Crosses Using Small Progeny Test

Progeny tests suggest that avisual rating (RI)was closelyassociatedwith stalk diameter (D 1)(r for 1987 cross series, r for 1988 cross series, and r for 1989 crossseri es), whi leRI was not consistently associated with stalk weight (W1) (r for 1987cross

series and r 1989 cross series were significant, but r for 1988 cross series was notsignificant, Table D1 andW1 were positively correlated . Both the selection rate for progenysample (SRl ) and the selection rate for the regular seedling (SR2)were closely correlatedwith eitherD1 orW] in both the 1987and 1989 cross series . Both selection rates, SR] and SR2, were stronglyaffected by both D1 andW1 as shown in both the 1988 and 1989 cross series

,while the selection

rate for the Stage I clones (SR3) was affected by neither trait. In most crosses, RI was not

significantly correlated with SRl , SR2, or SR3 . SR2 was positively associated with SR3 in threecross sen es .

Correlations of juice quality between the progeny tests and selected Stage I clones wereinconsistent. The 1987 crosses gave significant correlations while 1988 and 1989 cross series werenot significant (Table The inconsistency could be due to both plant grt stages and field

environment (Desousa-VieiraandMilligan, The seedlings andStage IIwere planted at averydifferent intra-row spacing. Thismay explain why the selection rate from Seedling Stage to StageIwas notwell correlated to stalk weight. The stalk diameter varied considerably among individual

seedlings within a cross . Also the composite stalk sample,which consisted ofone stalk per seedlingstool, would not have an equal amount of cane juice or cane stalk weight representing each stool.The measurement may not closely represent the juice quality of seedlings . Maturity, whi ch also

varied considerably among seedlings and between crosses, would affect the quality of cane juice .Correlations between traits shows theywere changing rather than static and would be affected bycane growth andmaturi ty (Dodonov et al . 1987; Tai et ai . Fami ly selection based on themean of some traits may not be very effective in the early stages of selection. The selection rate

between Seedling Stage and Stage I was significantly correlated in all three series of crosses asreported earlier by Tai andMiller The results suggest that family selection based on theselection rate should be effective. The larger the number of superior families included in theSeedling Stage, the higherpercentage of superior individual clones will be potentially selected forthe Stage I and the subsequent selection stages .

The multiple regressions for SRl , SR2, and SR3 are summarized in Table 4. The best

regressionmodels vari ed among the progeny test, Seedling Stage, and Stage 1. Results indicate that

the selection rate would be heavily dependent on stalk diameterD 1 and (D in the Seedling Stage.

Other predictor vari ables were not chosen for the model for SR2 in any of the three cross series .

Both the 1987and 1989 crosses had very similarregressionmodels for SR2 , but they differed fromthat ofthe 1988 crosses . The quadratic regressionmodel suggests that seedlings with eithervery thin

or very thick stalks would drastically reduce the selection rate (Fig . l ) . Seedling populations with

an average stalk diameterbetween 21 and25mmwould produce the highest selection rate. Predictor

variables, stalk diameter (D1) and stalk number (N 1 were chosen for themodel for SR3 in the 1988

cross series and was chosen. for the model in the 1989 cross series, but no predictor

variable was chosen for the model for SR3 in 1987 cross series . The difference in the prediction

models for SR2 and SR3 could be due to many factors . Stalk size of Stage I clones is generally

much larger than that of the Seedling Stage due to selection for larger stalk diameter in the SeedlingStage (Tai andMiller, The selection criteria in Stages I and II emphasize other characters,such as stalk number, stalk shape, growth habit, solidness, plant height, etc, versus stalk diameter.

64

10.

1 1 .

12 .

13 .

14.

15 .

16 .

17.

18 .

19 .

Tai et al.zEstimating the Family Performance of Sugarcane Crosses Using Small Progeny Test

Hogarth, D .M., 1971 . Quantitative inheritance studies . II. Correlation andpredicted responseto selection. Aust. J. agri c. Res.

- 109 .

Hogarth, D .M. 1987. Genetics of sugarcane. In D . J. Heinz (editor), Sugarcane ImprovementThrough Breeding. Elsvier, New York. Pp . 255-272.

Miller, J . D ., N. I. James, and P . M. Lyt ene. 1978 . Selection indices in sugarcane. Crop Sci .-372 .

Miller, J.D ., andN. I. James. 1975 . Selection in six crops of sugarcane . I.Repeatability ofthree

characters . Crop Sci .15 :23-25 .

Milligan, S . B ., and B . L. Legendre. 199 1 . Development of a practical method for sugarcanecross appraisal . J.Am. Soc. Sugarcane Technol . -68 .

SAS Institute. 1988 . SAS/SATUser’s Guide 6 .o3ed. SAS Inst. Inc ., Cary, NC .

Skinner, J -C . 1967. Grading vari eties for selection. Proc . ISSCT -949 .

Tai , P . Y. P .,J. D .Mi ller, B . S . Gill, and V . Chew . 1980. Correlations among characters of

sugarcane in two intermediate selection stages . Proc . ISSCT - 1 126 .

Tai, P . Y. P ., and J. D . Miller. 1989 . Fami ly performance at early stages of selection and

frequency of superior clones from crosses among Canal Point cultivars of sugarcane. J. Am.

Soc . Sugarcane Technol. -70.

Tai , P . Y. P .,G. Powell, R. Perdomo, and B . R. Eiland 1996 . Changes in sucrose and fiber

contents during sugarcanematuration. Sugar Cane -23 .

Walker, D . I. T. 1963 . Family performance at early selection stages as a guide to the breeding

programme. Proc. ISSCT -483 .

Walker, D . I. T. 1965 . S ome correlations in sugarcane selection in Barbados . Proc . ISSCT-655 .

Wu, K. K., D . J . Heinz, H. K. Meyer, and S . L. Ladd. 1978 . Minimum sample size for

estimating progenymean and variance . Crop Sci .18 :57-61 .

66

Tai et ai Estimating the Family Performance of Sugarcane Crosses Using Small Progeny Test

F ‘ A A

68

Tai et al.zEstimating the Fami ly Performance of Sugarcane Crosses Using Small Progeny Test

8 8 8 6 6

SR

SR2

SR3


INCIDENCE AND S PREAD OF SUGARCANE YELLOW LEAF VIRUS INSUGARCANE CL ONES IN THE CP-CUL TIVARDEVEL OPNIENT PROGRAMAT

CANAL POINT

J. C . Comstock and J. D.MillerSugarcane Field Station, USDA-ARS , Canal Point, FL 33438

ABSTRACT

The incidence of sugarcane yellow leaf virus (SCYLV) in sugarcane c lones increased thelonger the clones were in the CP-cultivar development program and exposed to natural infection.

During 1998 to 2002, the average incidence of SCYLV in Stage II clones was whi le

SCYLV incidence in Stage IV clones, in the program 3 years longer, was A few cloneshad an incidence of SCYLV below 25 by the time they were advanced to Stage IV . Theseclones may have partial resistance to the virus . The results have implications for breeding andselecting for resistance to the virus .

INTRODUCTION

Sugarcane yellow leaf syndrome was recognized in Hawaii in the 19808 and was

subsequently observed in numerous countri es (Comstock et al., 2002b ; Izaguirre-Mayoral et al .,2002 ; Io ckhart et al ., 1996 ; Lo ckhart and Cronje, 2000; Vega et al., 1997; Viswanathan,

Two different pathogens , sugarcane yellow leaf phytoplasma and sugarcane yellow leaf virus

(SCYLV) have been associated with the sugarcane yellow leaf syndrome symptoms (Cronje et

al., 1998 ; Lockhart et al ., 2000; Scagliusi and Lockhart, In Flori da, only SCYLV hasbeen reported (Comstock et al., Disease losses of 25 in B razil in SP 71-6 163 havebeen attri buted to SCYLV (Vega et al., Yield losses of 15 to 20 also have beenreported due to yellow leaf virus in Louisiana (Grisharn et al ; , Elevated Bri x readings ofjuice extracted from the midribs of symptomatic leaves have been reported (Comstock et al .,

Differences in leaf area, total reducing sugars, chlorophyll content, and sugar transportwere observed between symptomatic and asymptomatic plants infected with SCYLV (IzaguirreMayoral et al ., 2002 ; Viswanathan, All reported changes negatively impact sugar yield.

Symptoms of SCYLV are more evident in mature and stressed plants (Lockhart andCronje, Only isolated plants exhibit symptoms in Florida before the start of the harvestseason that begins in mid-October. Symptoms start as the weather turns cooler in OctoberNovember, ini tially with the lower midrib of leaves 3 to 6 (counting from the top expandingleave downward) becoming yellow . The yellowing then expands into the leaf blade withnecrosis starting from the leaf tip and progressing down the leaf blade becoming most evident inDecember until the end of the harvest season in March. During January through March

,entire

fields may appear yellowish.

Tr is paper addresses SCYLV in the CP-cultivar development program in Flori da.

Symptoms of the syndrome were observed in 1994 in clones that were used in crossing at theUSDA Sugarcane Field Station at Canal Point, Flori da (Comstock et al ., The presence ofSCYLV was confirmed by a serological tissue blot assay using a SCYLV specific antibody

(Comstock et al ., 2002a; Comstock et al., 1999) and a reverse transcriptase polymerase chain

71

Comstock andMiller: Incidence and Spread of Sugarcane Yellow LeafVirus in Sugarcane Clones in the CP-Cultivar Development Program at

Canal Pointreaction assay using primers to detect the virus (Comstock et al ., There are no reports ofthe sugarcane yellow leaf phytoplasma in Florida.

The objectives of this paper are : 1) to determ ine the variability of incidence of SCYLV inclones in the CP-cultivar development program at Canal Point, Florida, 2) to determine if theincidence of SCYLV increases in the clones with time, 3) to determine if resistance exists in thecurrent selection program and 4) to determine if natural infection can be used to select clonesresistant to the virus .

MATERIAL S ANDMETHODS

Surveys

P lants of sugarcane clones in Stages 11 through IV (four sequential years) of the CPcultivar development program (USDA-ARS Sugarcane Field Station

,Canal Point, Florida) were

surveyed for the presence of SCYLV for 5 years, during 1998 through 2002 . The number ofclones, plants sampled, and locations of plots in the cultivar development program that weresampled during 1998 to 2002 are presented in Table 1 . The incidence of SCYLV infection of theclones in each CP Series was an average of the incidence of all the clones based on the numberof infected leaf samples divided by the total number of leaves sampled and assayed in that yearand selection stage.

Tissue Blot Immunoassays

SCYLV infection was determined by assaying for the presence of the virus in theyoungest fully emerged leaf by a tissue blot immunoassay using antibodies specific for the virus .Briefly, the leaf was removed from a plant and the leaf blade tissue was removed from themidrib . The basal portion of the midrib was cut with a sharp , razor-blade scalpel, and the freshlycut midrib was firmly pressed on a ni trocellulose membrane,

’

leaving a clear impression of theleafmidrib on the membrane . One impression per leaf midrib was made . Themembrane wasserologically developed using SCYLV specific antibodies developed by B . E. Lockhart ,University of

'

Minnesota (Minneapolis) according to Schenck et al. (1997) except that Fast B luewas used as the enzyme substrate (Comstock et a l ., A stereo-microscope was used toexamine the leaf prints. Because SCYLV is located in the phloem, a sample was positive for thepresence of the virus when the phloem bundles within the leafprint stained blue .

RESULTS AND DISCUS SION

The incidence of SCYLV infection among clones for each CP Series in Stage II through

IV for years 1998 through 2002 is shown in Table 1 . For each GP Series, the incidence ofsamples with SCYLV generally increased the longer the series was in the cultivar developmentprogram . The average yearly incidence of SCYLV infected clones in Stage H ranged from

to during the five years that they were sampled. The incidence of SCYLV infection

among all clones that were advanced to Stage IV during the same period ranged from to

(Table The average incidence of SCYLV in Stage II was for years 1998

2002 and increased to in Stage IV. These results plus the fact that the incidence of

SCYLV among plants in grower’s fields in Florida exceeds 85% clearly indicates a possible

72

Comstock andMi ller: Incidence and Spread of SugarcaneYellow LeafVirus in Sugarcane Clones in the CP-Cultivar Development Program at

Canal PointMethodology to inoculate massive numbers of plants using insectary aphids is needed butprobably not feasible since the numbers of clones that can be evaluated will still be limited.

Once the plants are inoculated, virus detection in plants is not a limitation since the tissue blotimmunoassay allows the rapid determination of the presence of SCYLV in thousands ofplants.

As an alternative to detecting resistant plants, a projcot . to associate molecular markerswith the resistance is in progress . If marker assisted selection can be developed for SCYLVresistance, the process for the development of resistant cultivars would be greatly enhanced.

REFERENCES

Comstock, J. C ., J. E. Irvine, and J. D . Miller, 1994. Yellow leaf syndrome appears on theUnited States main land. Sugar J. -35 .

Comstock, J. C . , J. D . Mi ller, andR. J. Schnell, 2002a. Incidence of sugarcane yellow leafvirus in clones maintained in the world collection of sugarcane and related grasses at theUni ted States National Repository inMiami, Florida. Sugar Tech 3 : 128- 133 .

Comstock, J. C ., J. D . Miller, P . Y. P . Tai, and J. E. Follis, 1999 . Incidence of and

resistance to sugarcane yellow leaf virus in Florida. Proceedings International Soc . SugarCane Technol . -372 .

4. Comstock, J. C ., M. Pena, J. Vega, A. Fors, and B.E. L. Lockhart, 2000b . Report ofSugarcane Yellow Leaf Virus (SCYLV) in Ecuador, Guatemala and Nicaragua. P lant Dis.

Comstock, J. C .,M. S . Irey, B . E. L. Lockhart, and Z. K.Wang, 1998 . Incidence of yellowleaf syndrome in GP cultivars based on polymerase chain reaction and serologicaltechniques . Sugar Cane -24.

6 . Cronje, C . P . R.,A. M. Timon, P . Jones, and R. A. Bai ley, 1998 . Association of a

phytoplasmawith yellow leaf syndrome of sugarcane in Afri ca. Ann. Appl . Biol .

186 .

Grisham,M. P ., Y-B . Pan, B . L. Legendre,M. A. Godshall, and G. Eggleston,2002 . Effect

of sugarcane yellow leaf virus on sugarcane yield and juice quality. Proc . Int. Soc . Sugar

Cane Technol . -438 .

Izaguirre-Mayoral, M. L ., O. Carballo, C . Aleste, M. Romano, and H. A. Nass, 2002 .

Physiological performance of asymptomatic and yellow leaf syndrome-affected sugarcane

in Venezuela. J . Phytopathol. - 19 .

Lockhart, B . E. L ., M. S . Irey, and J . C . Comstock, 1996 . Sugarcane bacilliforrn virus,sugarcane mi ld mosaic virus, and sugarcane yellow leaf syndrome. Pages 108- 1 12 in :

Sugarcane germplasm conservation and exchange. B . J . Croft, C . T. Piggin, E. S . Wallis,andD .M.Hogarth, editors . Australian Centre for International Agri culturalResearch.

74

10 .

1 1 .

12 .

13 .

14.

15 .


Lockhart, B . E. and C . P . R. Cronje, 2000 . Yellow leaf syndrome. Pages 29 1-295 in : Rott,P ., Bailey, R. A., Comstock, J. C., Croft, B . J. and Saumtally, A. S . (eds) A guide tosugarcane diseases . Centre de cooperation intemationale en recherche agronornique pour ledeveloppment (CIRAD) and International Society of Sugar Cane Technologists (ISSCT)Montpellier, France. 339 pp .

Miller, J. D ., B . L Legendre, M. P . Grisham, J. C . Comstock, W. H. Whi te, and D . M.

Burner, 1994. Impact of leaf scald and yellow leaf syndrome on parental clones for use in1994- 1995 crossing season at Canal Point . Sugar Bulletin 72 : 6 , 19-22, 24-26, 28-29 .

Scagliusi, S .M., and B . E. L. Lockhart, 2000 . Transmission, characterization, and serologyof a luteovirus associated with yellow leaf syndrome of sugarcane . Phytopathology124 .

Schenck, S ., B . E. Lockhart, and J . S . Hu, 1997. Use of a tissue blot immunoassay todetermine the distribution of sugarcane yellow leaf virus inHawaii . Sugar Cane -8 .

Vega, J S . M. Scagliusi, and E. C . Ulian. 1997. Sugarcane yellow leaf di sease in Brazilevidence of association with a luteovirus . P lant Dis. 8 1 :2 1-26.

Viswanathan, R. 2002 . Sugarcane yellow leaf syndrome in India: Incidence and effect onyield parameters . Sugar Cane Int. September/October pp . 17-23 .

75

Comstock andMiller: Incidence and Spread of Sugarcane Yellow LeafVirus in Sugarcane Clones in the CP-Cultivar Development Program at

Canal Point

CP 97 CP 98 CP 99 CP 00 CP 01

1008 957 854 463 1423

1 (2 dates) 1 1 3 1

CP Station CP Station CP Station CP Station CP Station

Stage 111Series CP 96 CP 97

No . clones 130 130

L eaves/clone 20 10

Location Sugar SugarFarms Farms

Duda

Stage 111 Inc .

Series CP 95

No . clones 40

L eaves/clone 20

Location SugarFarms

Positivea

Stage IVSeries CP 94

No. clones 1 1

L eaves/clone 80

Location Sugar

Positivea

Farms

3 positive is the number of leaves tested positive divided by the total number of leaves tested.

76

Comstock andMil ler: Incidence and Spread of Sugarcane Yellow LeafVirus in Sugarcane C lones in the CP-Cultivar Development Program at

Canal Point

Clone Stage HI/1999 Stage IV/200 1

indicates the number sampled per clone :

Table 5 . Incidence of SCYLV in CF 98 Series clones during their advancement to Stage IV .

Clone Stage II/ 1999 Stage III] 2000 Stage IV/2002

CP 98-1029

CP 98-1 107

CP 98-1 1 18

CP 98-1 139

CP 98-1325

CP 98-1335

CP 98- 1417

CP 98-1457

CP 98-148 1

CP 98-1497

CP 98-15 13

CP 98-1569

CP 98-1725

CP 98-2047

A single leaf assayed per clone : positive and negative . ND

78

PEER

REFEREED

JOURNAL

ARTICL ES

SECTION

79

Madsen et al.zEvaluation ofaNear Infrared Spectrometer for the DirectAnalysis of SugarCane

EVAL UATION OF A NEAR INFRARED SPECTROMETERFORTHE DIRECTANAL YS IS OF SUGAR CANE

L.R.Madsen II, B .E.Wh ite, and P .W.Rein

Audubon Sugar InstituteLouisiana State University Agri cultural Center

BatonRouge, LA 70803

ABSTRACT

A FOSS InfraCanaNear Infiared (NIR) spectrometerwas instal led at a Louisianamill forthe crushing season to assess its suitability for direct analysis of cane delivered to themill. Analysis of cane by both wet disintegration and core press methods were used as theprimary measurements . Calibration equations for pol, brix, fiber, moisture and ash in cane wereproduced. Values of standard error were excellent, and the prospects for the use of such an

instrument for the accurate direct analysis of cane look promising.

INTRODUCTION

Currently, the core-press method (CPM) of analysis is used in Louisiana for

determination of sugar cane quality. The results of these determinations are used to calculate thetheoretical recoverable sugar (TRS), in lbs sugar per ton of cane. TRS is used to determine howmuch a given grower will be paid for a consignment of cane . Methods similar to core press arecurrently used in many other cane-growing regions such as Colombia, Trinidad, and thePhilippines (Edye and Clark, Core press analysis requires a team of at least three analysts

per shift, for two eight-hour shifts. The time required for sample tum-around is roughly fourhours . Since thi s method is intensive both in terms of time and labor, sampling every load isimpossible. Usually, moisture residue figures are not finally generated until the end of theshift; this means that the nature of the cane is not known until well after it has entered the mill.The goal of this investigation is to improve the quality of cane analysis whi lst decreasing overallseasonal cost.

The cost of cane analysis consists of personnel, supplies, and utilities . Supply costsinclude Octapol and/orABC juice Clarifier, glassware, and utilities . Loss of profit can result frominaccuracies in cane quality data and losses caused by mi ll stoppage . Increased rate of sampling

and quicker analysis would not only result in a greater likelihood of achieving representativesampling, but may decrease down times caused by foreign material entering the mill. Whileexamining new methodology, modern technology and high-speed computing has rendered near

infiared reflectance spectroscopy (NIRS) worthy of inspection . The Infi'

aCana uses large samples

(5 to 15kg) so that sub-sampling for increased precision is unnecessary (Berding and Brotherton,

It is necessary to point out that NIR spectroscopy and chemometri cs can provide a result

that is only as good as the data put into it. Wh en calibrated using quality data, these new

80

Madsen et al Evaluation of aNearInfrared Spectrometerfor the Direct Analysis of Sugar Cane

Acqu isition of Laboratory Data

Samples of billeted cane were acquired using an inclined coring machine . A core sampleconsists of billets up to twelve centimeters in length, a sample weighing between five and twelvekilograms . Two core samples per truck were taken. One core sample was fibrated using theexisting hydraulic shredder. The material prepared this way has approximately 65% open-cells

,

and is referred to as Core Shredded Material (CSM) (Figure Thi s sample was subject toanalysis v ia CPM. The second sample was shredded using the Jeffco shredder built into theNIRS . Material thus prepared has approximately 95% open-cells ; it is referred to as Jeffco

Shredded Material (JSM) (Figure This sample was automatically transferred to a secondconveyor where the NIR spectra were observed, and the data were saved to hard drive . The

sample was conveyed out of the instrument, where it was collected and subject toDAC .

Figure 2 . Core ShreddedMaterial .

Figure 3 . Jeffco ShreddedMaterial .

82

Journal American Society of Sugarcane Technologists , Vol 23, 2003

Sample Analysis

Figure 4. Flowchart ofAnalytical Protocol.

A flowchart describing analytical operations is included (Figure A one-kilogramsample of JSMwas weighed into a water-jacketed wet disintegrator pot. To this was added twokilograms of water. Thi s deviation from ICUMSA DAC was necessary as Jeffco shreddedmaterial tends to absorb extraction water forming a sticky ball that does not macerate well ; ourwet disintegrator pot would not hold 6L . The samme was disintegrated for eight minutes at 7200rpm. A l og sample of the resulting extract was transferred into a 15mL conical centri fuge tube .This sample was centri fuged at 4000 rpm for tenminutes and analyzed for brix by refractometer.

100ppm Sodium azide was added as a preservative and sample was frozen. A 150mL sample ofthe extract was transferred into a glass jar. To the 150mL sample was added 19 grams ofOctapolflocculent. The sample was shaken then filtered, whilst discarding the first 25mL of filtrate. Theclarified filtrate was analyzed for polarimetric sucrose using an automatic saccharimeter. Thefrozen sample Was taken back to the lab for sugar analysis (sucrose, glucose, and fructose) byHPLC . 500 grams of JSM were dried to constant weight, not to exceed -2g in 30 minutes

(ICUMSA), at 105°

C using a DeitertMoisture Teller forced draught air drier. The sample, oncedried to constant weight, was placed into a plastic bag for storage and transport.

The results were used to calculate pol, brix, fiber, and moisture cane . Th ese figureswere used to calculate TRS .

After the season,the stored drymatterwas subjected to analysis for carbonated ash . All

samples were analyzed in duplicate . The sample was placed into a tared dish, and a screen wasplaced over the top . The sample was incinerated at 6SO

°

C for 45 minutes . The sample wasremoved from the furnace, and allowed to cool to ~150

°

C . The screen was removed, and the dishcontaining the ash was weighed. The sample was carefirlly stirred and further incinerated at

83

Madsen et ai Evaluation ofaNear Infrared Spectrometer for the Direct Analysis of Sugar Cane

6SO°

C for ten minutes . The sample was removed from the furnace and allowed to cool . Thesample was weighed, and transferred into a plastic bag for storage.

These data were used to calculate ash cane. This numberwas subtracted from the fibercane to produce a figure for corrected fiber cane .

The results from the core press analysis were provided by the mill administration. The

given data provide pol and brix juice, residue weight (from 1 .0kg), and volumetri c sediment.From these datawere calculated pol, brix , fiber, andmoisture Cane . These figures were used tocalculate the TRS .

Calibrating th e NIRS

Both of the data sets were entered into the WinISI software package . Here, the spectralresults were matched to the laboratory data. Constituents for pol, brix, fiber, moisture cane,and TRS were entered . The first derivatives of the spectral .data were taken,

and it was to thesethat the laboratory data is assigned. The data sets were regressed using a modified Partial LeastSquares (PL S) algorithm .

“

Outliers”with a Global H value (distance from the global average) of

more than three were re-evaluatei

d. If the outlier was determined to result from anomalousspectral data, it was removed from the data set . For each constituent an equation was generated,and standard error of calibration (SEC) was calculated.

Ash cane exhibits a logarithmic trend. To generate an equation that is not heavilybiased by the average, this constituent was calibrated using the logro of the laboratory data. The

instrument then predicts ash cane as a logarithm. The anti-log is taken, and the result

subsequently produced. SEC and 12are produced for the log loresult.

The equations were used to evaluate a sample of the spectra. Here, lab results werecompared with the NIR predicted values . This cross-validation is the final verification needed to

determine if the equation produces representative predictions. The standard error of crossvalidation (SECV) was used to determine the equation accuracy.

RESULTS

Laboratory results for DAC and CPM compared well . However, the pol cane for CPM

was always higher than that for DAC ,as seen in Figure 5 . This was attributed to extraction

efficiency. DAC analysis used added water and provided more complete extraction . Fiber

cane for CPM values. were, on average, between 10 and The DAC results displayedunusual spikes, ranging from 20 to as seen in Figure 6 . Fiber cane is a figure derived bydifference from moisture and brix . As a result, any component other than water or brix will beseen as fiber cane. Other components can include mud and/or trash. The spikes seen in the

DAC-derived fiber cane reflected the presence ofmud, trash; or both.

84

Madsen et al.zEvaluation ofaNear Inflated Spectrometer for the Direct Analysis of Sugar Cane

After calibration, the software calculated the standard error of calibration (SEC), and thesquare of the linear correlation coefficient r2 (RSQ) . The standard error of cross validation(SEGV) refers to the compound error relating the differences between actual and predictedresults . The constituent results for the calibration derived from DAC (Table 1) and CPM (Table2) data sets demonstrated the effects ofnon-representative sampling. Both sets were based on thesame spectra. Although laboratory data correlates reasonably well, SEC and RSQ demonstratethat the CPM results do not correlate well to the spectra.

The statistics for the DAC based NIR equation closely paralleled those found in literature

(Table A compari son ofDAC results for SECV is given in Table 4.

The samples that were frozen were analyzed by I-IPLC for sucrose, glucose, and fructose .The results did not correlate with the pol sucrose. Thi s effect was attri buted to a lack of biocidal

(NaN3, 100ppm) efficacy; the samples biologically degraded during processing, storage andtransport.

Table 1 . NIR equation based upon DAC analytical data. N is the number of samples used, SEC

is the standard error of calibration, RSQ is the linear correlation coefficient, SECV is thestandard error on cross validation; l -VRrelates to the correlation on population variance.

Table 2. NIR equation based upon CPM analytical data.

86


Table 3. Results for DAC derived NIR equation and the average literature values (Bentley,Staunton,

Atherton, and Henderson, 2001 ; Berding and Brotherton, 1999 ; Edye and Clarke,1996 ; L arrahondo,

Palau, Navarrete, and Ramirez ; Johnson, 2000; Schaffler, Staunton,

Lethbri dge, Grim ley, Streamer, Rogers, andMackintosh, 1999)

Table 4. Results forDAC derivedNIR equation and the average literature value of SEGV.

DISCUSSION

As seen in Tables 1 and 2, NIR equations calibrated on DAC and CPM analytical datasets agreed poorly. We believe that this results from the sample-to-sample variation that occursbetween two different core samples taken from the same load. The inclined core sampler wasdesigned for use with whole cane, whereby a 23kg sample may be achieved. Wh en this methodis used for billets, the cutting head scatters some of the cane, whi le achieving a sample of only 515kg . The small sample size resulted in increased sample heterogeneity; in effect, the DAC and

CPM analyses were performed on two different samples, albeit from the same truckload. NIRS isfast enough to compensate for small sample sizes by analyzing a larger number of samples .

For each constituent, a range of cited values was given; see Tables 3 and 4. Whencompared, the DAC derived SEC, RSQ, and SECV for each constituent were within the rangesseen in the literature . The DAC of L IT refers to the result of our calibration relative to the

87

Madsen et al. : Evaluation of aNear Infrared Spectrometerfor the Direct Analysis of SugarCane

average of the cited range for a particular constituent. Based upon analysis of these figures, theDAC based NIR equation performed at least as well as the literature cited. The SECV achievedfor DAC calibrations were within the ranges found in the literature . These equations providedaccurate as well as precise predictions relative to the laboratory results

, as seen in Figures 7 9 .

Pol Cane

Figure 7. Pol cane,DAC lab result vs .NIRprediction.

Figure 8 . Brix cane, DAC lab result vs .NIRprediction.

Madsen et ai Evaluation ofaNear Infrared Spectrometer for the Direct Analysis of SugarCane

Analysis of the lab data has clarified several questions . The fiber cane includes the ashand soil present in the sample . It became obvious that CPM does not reflect thi s since mud foulsthe press ; juice cannot be expressed from mud without added extraction water.

_

In addition tothi s, the mud must then be cleaned out of the press whi le accumulating a sample backlog. An

NIRS instrument calibrated by DAC will be able to measure samples containing large amountsof soil. A more accurate fiber result is achi eved by difference (Figure Thi s figure has beencalled “ corrected fiber”(CRFiber, Figure 12) and has been added as a constituent to the DACderivedNIR equation set.

Sample “amber

Figure 1 1 .

Figure 12 .Corrected Fiber Cane, taken by difference from the DAC results for fiber and ash

90


Actual data from a Louisiana core lab showed costs of per season on

employees and supplies . The same lab, using the NIRS might have spent per season. A

net saving of per season may be achieved. At an initial cost of dollars, aNIRS system of this type could be paid for in less than 3 years. Savings resulting from accuratedata have not been assessed, but are likely to be evenmore significant.

If NIRS is installed, a qualified technician may manage continuing calibrationverification (CCV), once per week. This technician should serve to monitor the instrument,update calibration, and to serve as liaison for support in the event of technical difficulty. For

Louisiana, serving 15 mills, only one liaison technician should be required, and could besubcontracted as an independent body.

CONCL US IONS

The instrument was able to meet or exceed calibration values found in the literature forfibrated cane. Analysis of core-sampled cane can be completed within 120 seconds, whileproviding accurate results for pol, brix, fiber, moisture, ash cane, and TRS . The possibility ofdiscriminating and quantitating “ trash”frommud has been realized, andmay be exploited in thefuture . Increased throughput will allow for more comprehensive sampling. Improvement insample representation will result in accurate payments . Immediate knowledge of excessive mudor

“

trash”at the weighbridge might be used to decrease the amount of foreign material enteringthemill, reducingmi ll stoppage.

The instrument needed no mechani cal maintenance (other than routine cleaning) duringthe course of thi s tri al, even under the most hostile ambient conditions . Use of the InfraCanawillrequire only one operator per shift, rather than 3-5 per shift as at present, and is not subject toexperimental error. In light of these developments , it can be concluded that the InfraCanaNIRSmay be proven a viable alternative to current core press method of cane analysis .

ACKNOWL EDGMENTS

The authors would like to thank the following, for without their mutual investment oftime, patience, and knowledge, thi s proj ectmay not have reached fruition :

The American Sugar Cane League contri buted the firnds required for this research.

Julio Petersen ofFoss NIRSystems was constantly available; his help allowed us to successfullynegotiate the WinISI software to generate a useful set ofNIRS equations. Torsten Hansen of

Foss/Tecator provided expeditious solutions to complex software issues . Colin Jeffress of JeffcoEngineering engineered the InfraCana and provided technical support and firmware upgrades .Barry Forse accommodated us warm ly at Cinclare Sugar Mill, and provided an excellentprepared site for the instrument. From fabrication and maintenance to negotiation of siteresources, Joe Bell, L amar Aillet, and S cott Barrow from the Audubon Sugar factory werealways at the ready.

9 1

10.

Madsen et ai Evaluation ofaNear Infrared Spectrometer for the DirectAnalysis of SugarCane

REFERENCES

Bentley, 5 . Staunton, P . G. Atherton, and C . Henderson. 2001 . Application ofNIR caneanalysis technology to small consignments of cane in Fij i . Sugar Cane Technol. 24 : 59-65 .

Berding, Ni ls, and G. A. Brotherton. 1999 . Analysis offibrated sugarcane byNTS : Thelaboratory solution. 2

“dAnnual NIRUsersMeeting for the Sugar andAlcohol Industri es

,

Sao Paulo, Brazil. pp . 6-7.

Berding, Nils, and G. A. Brotherton. 1996 . Grabbing the BIG picture : a novel approach tobeating within-sample material heterogeneity. NIRNews 7 14.

Edye,L .A., andM. A. Clarke. 1996 . Sugarcane quality analysis by near infraredspectroscopy. Proc . S . Afr. Sug. Technol . Assoc . 7: 127.

ICUMSAMethod GSS/7- l . 1994. The determination ofpol (polarisation), Brix and fiber incane and bagasse by the wet disintegratormethod Official .

L arrahondo, J . E., F. Palau, A. Navarrete, and C .Ramirez . 2000. Applications ofnearinfrared spectroscopy in the sugarcane industry of Colombia. Centro de Investigacion de laCana de Azucar de Colombia, Cenicana

'

, Cali, Colombia 163- 164

Johnson,T. P . 2000. Cane juice analysis by near infrared (NIR) to determine grower

payment. SPRI AnnualMeeting. 9-12 .

Peterson, J. C . 1999 . Near Infrared (NIR) Technology in the Sugar and Alcohol Industries .FOSS-NIRSystems, 12 101 TechRd., Silver Spring,Md. 10904, USA. 3 pp .

Schaffler, K . J and J . H.Meyer. 1996 . Near infrared analysis of shredded cane : a potentialrep lacement for direct analysis of cane . Proc . S . Afr. Sug. Technol . Assoc . 70 : 134 .

Staunton,S . P ., P . J. Lethbridge, S . C . Grimley, R.W. Streamer, J . Rogers, andD . L.

Mackintosh. 1999 . Analysis offibrated sugarcane byNIS : The ou-line solution . Proc Aust .

Soc . Sugar Cane Technol . 2 1 :20-27

92


in the experiment throughout the 2001 harvest season. Weekly samplingwas conducted using thesame operator and a 2000model 7700 Case CombineHarvester. The extractor fan speed was 900to 950 rpm in burned cane and 1 100 rpm in green cane. The treatments (speeds) wereand mph andweremonitored with a handheld radar unit to ensure accurate ground speed. For

12 consecutive weeks, one truckloadwas cut at each speed and delivered to themill to be weighedand sampled using the mi ll

’s core sampler. Whi le the delivered tons of cane per acre was

significantly less when the combine was slowed down to and mph , the pounds of sugarperton of cane was only higher in the mph treatment as compared to and mph (PThere was no significant difference in the resulting yield of pounds of sugar per acre between thetreatments. The mph treatment had the highest fiber cane, but sediment readings were notsignificantly different among treatments . When themi ll’s incentive formulawas applied to the yieldresults, the mph treatment received a bonus of pounds of sugarper ton of cane whichwasonly significantly greater than the - l .57pounds of sugarper ton of cane for the mph treatment.The data demonstrates that forward speed of the combine harvester has a significant influence ondelivered cane yield andquality. Practical applicationofthi s information could be used to determineother optimal combine settings to improve cane quality from combine-harvested sugarcane inLouisiana.

Use ofCover Crops in Rotation with Sugarcane in a S outh FloridaMineral Soil

R.M.Muchovej , J. J.Mullahey, T. A. Obreza, and P .R. NewmanUniversity ofFlorida, Southwest FloridaResearch and Education Center

Irnmokalee, FL

The establishment of cover crops (grasses or legumes) prior to planting sugarcane

(interspecific hybrids ofSaccharum spp .) offersmany potential agri cultural and ecological benefits

to the grower. These benefits include organic matter production to enrich the soil, ground cover to

reduce windblown soil erosion,weed control (including less herbicide use), reduced runoff,

improved infiltration,soil moisture retention, and soil tilth, nutri ent enhancement, and food for

wildlife. By improving soil organic matter, cover crops directly influence the soil water holdingcapacity by increasing water retention and lateral water movement within the soil. Rotation of

susceptible agronomic crops with crops that are not nematode pest hosts or are resistant to certain

nematodes has been a successful nematode management strategy. The objective of this studywas

to evaluate the impact of eight cover crops on sugarcane grown on sandy soils . Cowpeas,Aeschynomene, Hairy indigo, Sorghum sudangrass, Sterile sorghum , Sorghum sudan/cowpeas

mixture, Japanesemillet, andTifleafmilletwere planted inApril 1992-1994 in to 1 .2 acre (0 .10

to ha) plots . Cover crop biomasswasmeasured inAugust of each year, followed by sugarcaneplanting in September,whichwas subsequently harvested inNovemberof the following year (1993

Cover crop yield was significantly higher for the grasses than for the legumes in 1993 and

1994.Cool temperatures and flooded fields during the establishment period resulted in thin stands

and low yields ofthe covercrops.Aeschynomene had the best ground cover ofall covercrops .

Cowpeas did not tolerate periods of standing water, indicating that this crop should be planted on

94


drier sites . Japanese mi llet, which tolerates wet field conditions, should not be planted until lateApri l or earlymay to prevent early (within 21 days ofplanting) seedhead emergence . The optimumtime to plant warm-season cover crops may be earlyMay, so that at least 4 months of growth areobtained before sugarcane is planted. In the 1993-1995 crop, sugarcane yield (tonnage and sucrosecontent) obtained forAeschynomenewas numericallyhigherthan forall othercover crops treatments

and the control treatment (fallow field with no cover crop planted with sugarcane) . However,significant differences (Fisher

’s protected L .S .D . test P=0 .05) for sugarcane yields were onlyobtained between the Aeschynomene treatment and the Sorghum sudangrass and the Sorghum

sudangrass/cowpeas mixture.

Evaluation of Sorghum-Sudangrass Hybrids for Biomass Potential in Southern Louisiana

T.L . Tew

USDA-ARS , SouthernRegionalResearch Center, SugarcaneResearch UnitHouma, LA

As close relatives of sugarcane, sorghum-sudangrass hybri ds are easy to establish (seedpropagated), could be used as an interim crop (April July) during the fallow season, andmayhave

potential as an complimentary bioenergy crop . Ten sorghum-sudangrass (Sorghum bicolor x S .

bicolor var. sudanese) hybrids were evaluated for biomass potential at the site of the USDA-ARS

Sugarcane Research Uni t in Houma, Louisiana. The experiment was designed to be largelyobservational with single-row unreplicated plantings . Beginning 14May and continuing weeklythrough 10 July (nine weeks), 10-stalk samples ofeach hybrid were collected and analyzed to obtainfresh weight, dryweight, andBrix estimates . One of the hybrids known to be photoperiod sensitive,was non-flowering, and therefore expressed an indeterminate growth habit, continuing to increasein weekly cumulative drymatter content through the end of thi s experiment. At 97days followingplanting (4Apr2001 10 Jul 2001) the nine hybridswith determinate grt habit, averaged 3 tonsgreenmatter/acre, tons drymatter/acre, Brix, andjust over7ftheight. By contrast the nonflowering hybri d achi eved 8 tons GM/acre, tons DM/acre, Brix , and reached 12 ft height.During 2002, the bioenergypotential of thi s non-flowering hybridwill be entered into a sorghum testat Houma and directly compared with sorghum varieties considered for commercial bioenergyproduction in sugarcane-growing areas of Southwestern Louisiana.

95


ENVOKE : A New Herbicide forWeed Control in US . Sugarcane

E.K. Rawls‘,M. Johnson‘, S .Martin‘

, L. Glasgow‘, J. Sh ine

’, J. Powell’, B.Watson

A. Bennett5

‘Syngenta Crop Protection, Vero Beach, FL2Sugarcane Growers Coop ., Belle Glade, FL

3Okeelanta Corp ., South Bay, FL

4U . 8 . Sugar Corp ., Clewiston, FL

5University ofFlorida, IFAS , Belle Glade, FL

Envoke® [N -Dimethoxy-2-pyrimidinyl)carbamoyl)-3 -t1ifluoroethoxy)-pyridin-2

sulfonamide sodium salt] is a new broad-spectrum, post-emergence herbicide that Syngenta Crop

Protection is developing foruse in sugarcane, cotton, citrus and almonds. It has been field tested as

a75 waterdispersible granule for several years inNorthAmerica, SouthAmerica,Afii ca, andAsia

under the code name CGA-362622 . The proposed common name is tri floxysulfirron—sodium .

Envoke®will offer control ofcertain broadleaf, sedge, and grass weeds in cotton, sugarcane, citrus,andahnonds including yellownutsedge, purplenutsedge,flatsedge, redroot pigweed, spinypigweed,pitted momingglory, ivyleaf momingglory, scarlet momingglory, hemp sesbania, cocklebur,sicklepod

,broadleafpani cum, spurge, spanish needles, and horseweed.

In sugarcane, ounces product/A g ai/ha) ofEnvoke® can be applied

post-emergence, depending on cultivar,with excellent crop tolerance. Foroptimum post-emergence

activity, the addition ofNIS is recommended at v/v . The very low use rate of to ozs/A

together with its favorable toxicological, ecotoxicological and environmental properties make

Envoke® an excellent tool for sugarcane farmers . Envoke® is readily absorbed by shoots androots

and is readily translocated in weeds . Susceptible weeds are inhibited following an application of

Envoke® with complete death occurring within 1 to 2 weeks after application .

Envoke® is compatible with otherherbicides includingAAtrex® andEvik® which can beused to increase the weed spectrum andduration ofcontrol . Envoke® canbe applied in combination

with Evik® ,post-directed only, to increase speed of activity and weed spectrum, especially the

grasses .

Experimental Products forWeed Control in Florida Sugarcane

A.C . Bennett

University ofFlorida, Everglades Research and Education Center,Belle Glade, FL

Several new herbicides are being evaluated forweed control inFlorida sugarcane. Both pre

emergence (PRE) and post-emergence (POST) herbicides are being evaluated. Control of a wide

range ofcommonweeds, including fall panicum,broadleafpanicurn , alligatorweed, purplenutsedge,

96


to relate optimum leafP tissue content andyield.A 3-yearfield studywas conducted on four organicsoil locations in south Florida. An 8 by 3 factorial experimental design with four replications wasused at each location wi th eight sugarcane (interspecific hybrids of Saccharum sp .) genotypes incombinationwith three fertilizerP rates (0, 24, and48 kg P Fertilizerrates were based on soiltest analysis with 24 kg ha“ being the recommended rate . Upper-most fully expanded leaves were

sampled in early,mid, and late summerprior to three harvests (plant cane, first ratoon, and secondratoon) . Two locations had optimum cane and sugaryields at 24 kg P ha

"forall harvests . Therewas

no response to P fertilizer at one location for any harvest year, while the other location had thehighest cane yields at 48 kg P ha“ for all harvests . Analysis of variance for leaf P content showedsignificant interactions for location by P rate by harvest and for location by P rate by leaf-sampletime . LeafP content did not always correspond to yield data.Within each location

,sometimes the

leaf P content increased with increasing P. rate as did yield, and sometimes yields did not show a

response to P fert ilizer even though leaf P increased. Consistent patterns in time‘

of leaf sampling

within locations could also not be obtained. Correlation analysis of ,yield vs . leafP content across

all treatment in early andmid summerwere statistically significant but coefficients were

very low (r=0. 14 and respectively) . Correlations ofharvests within location at each leaf sampletime were occasionally significant with the highest correlation of r=0.79 . But

,there was

no consistent pattern relating leafP tissue content with yields . Optimum leafP tissue content shouldbe calibrated for each field, harvest, and sampling date for precision agri culture applications .

Wireworm Effects on Sugarcane Emergence After Short-Duration Flood Applied atPlanting

B. Glaz‘and R.C herry

2

‘USDA-ARS , Canal Point, FL2University ofFlorida, Belle Glade, FL

Sugarcane (interspecific hybrids of Saccharum spp .) growers in Florida normally apply a soilinsecticide at planting to limit

“wireworm (Melanotus communis Gyll .) damage to planted stalk

sections . Long-duration floods prior to planting sugarcane are also used to control wireworms . Arecent study found that sugarcane emergence was improved by floods of 2- 12 days applied atplanting. The purpose of thi s studywas to analyze sugarcane emergence after floods of 7, 14, and2 1 days applied at planting, as well as following a conventional application of an organophosphateinsecticide at planting wi thout flooding. In three outdoor experiments, wireworms were applied at

the severe rate of 13 larvae permeter ofrow in plastic containers filled with Pahokeemuck soil. In

the first experiment, emergence under the flood treatments was lower than under the insecticidetreatment, probably due to lower than normal air and soil temperatures . Emergence in the 14 and

21-day flood treatinents and the insecticide treatment were similar in the final two experiments .

However, reductions in plant weight were associated with some flood treatments . Previous work

reported that wireworms damaged growing plants in containers,but damage was primari ly limited

to reduced emergence in field studies . The successful wireworm control ofthe 14 and2 1-dayfloods

98


and the negative effects on plant weights reported in thi s study need to be verified in field studies .

Laboratory Screening of Insecticides for Preventing Injury by theWirewormMelanotus

communis (Coleoptera: Elateridae) to Germinating Sugarcane

D. G.Hall

United States Sugar CorporationClewiston, FL

A laboratorybioassaywas investigated for screening candidatematerials forpreventing standlosses bywireworms in germinating plant cane. For liquidmaterials, single-eye billets were dippedinto different concentrations of a material and then planted in plastic containers of organic soil;wireworm s were then introduced, airt ight lids were placed onto the containers, and wirewormsurvival anddamage were assessed 4wk later. Tests with granularmaterialswere simi lar except the

containers were partially filled with untreated soil ; 30ml of soil treated with the granularmaterialwere then added to the container; an untreated single-eye billetwas placed onto thi s treated soil ; anadditional 30ml of treated soil was then placed on and around the billet; and finally untreated soil

was added to fill the container. Conditions inside the bioassay containers appeared suitable forgermination and growth ofmost varieties . Airtight lids were advantageous from the standpoint ofmaintaining soilmoisture. Data indicated itmaybe disadvantageous to hold wireworms fora longperiod of time beforeusing them to screen amaterial .

Bifenthrin, thiamethoxam 25WG, thiamethoxam 2G, and tefluthrin 3G appeared to havevalue asmaterials for reducing damage bywireworms to germinating eyes of seed cane planted inorganic soils. However, germinated shoots ofbillets treated with these materials were sometimesinjured by wireworms. Anothermaterial, ethiprole, was found to inhibit germination ofCL77-797when applied in solutions greater than ppm. Little wireworm mortality occurred incontainers of billets treated with ethiprole at any rates tested, but surviving wireworms frequentlycaused injury to the billets . Anothermaterial, zeta-cyperrnethrin, appeared to have no value as a

wireworm controlmaterial at the rates studied (75 to 125 ppm) . Overall based on limited data, themost promising of thesematerials with respect to reducing wireworm damage to both germinatingeyes and young shoots appeared to be thiamethoxam 25WG at ppm.

Management Th resholds for the Sugarcane Borer on Louisiana Varieties

F.R. Posey, C .D.McAllister, T. E.Reagan, and T. L . BaconDepartment ofEntomology, LSUAgCenter, LouisianaAgri cultural Experiment Station,

BatonRouge, LA

The sugarcane borer (SCB) is responsible for greater than 90% of the total insect damage tosugarcane inLouisiana, and theprocess to decidewhen to spray is determined bymany variables (i .e.

99


infestation levels, weather conditions, economics of the grower, environmental concerns ,Therefore the overall goal of thi s study is to provide key facts that would allow the industry to havea greater flexibility in controlling the SCB on different varieties whi le maintaining a hi gh level ofconfidence that a reduction in sugarper acre and buildup of SCB pest populations can be avoided.

SCB larval infestations were monitored weekly with leaf sheath sampling . The SCB resistantvarieties CP70-32 1 and HoCP85-845 , and the susceptible varieties LCP85-384 and HoCP9 1-555with four regimes ofSCE control were treated with insecticide when the designated threshold levels

were reached.

Results indicated that the vari ety HoCP9 1-555 (highly susceptible) required three

applications of insecticide during the growing season for both the‘

5% SCB infestation threshold

and 5% early and 10% late season threshold In comparison, LCP85-384

(susceptible) required three insecticide applications for the 5%management threshold, but only twoinsecticide applications for the management threshold. The resistant vari etyHoCP85-845required two applications for the 5% threshold and only oneapplication for the threshold.

CP7O-321 required only one applicationunder the 5% and the management regimes . Tri s

study further demonstrates some positive results for the industry’s leading vari ety LCP85-384 (itcurrently represents about 80% ofthe sugarcane grown in Louisiana) in terms of growers being able

to manage this vari ety against the SCE with the use of timely application of insecticides . Thethreshold shows promise and supports the industry’s desire to reduce unneeded insecticide

applications during the season due to increasing economic and environmental concerns .

Yellow Sugarcane Aph id (S ip haflava) Colonization S trategy and its Effect on Developmentand Reproductive Rates on Sugarcane

G. S . Nuessly andM. G. Hentz

University ofFlorida, Everglades Research and Education CenterBelle Glade, FL

Yellow sugarcane aphid (YSA) is an occasional serious pest of sugarcane throughout thesubtropics and tropics . Leaffeeding on susceptible cultivars results in red spots ofvarious sizes and

density usually followed by chlorosis and then necrosis . Prolonged feeding results in fewer new

shoots, reduced stalk diameterandyield. Field samples indicate that winged aphids (alates)normally

stay in one place on favored cultivars once they start reproduction and that alates are frequently

found together in groups on leaves . Thi s aphid also prefers leaves that are about halfwaybetween

the top visible dewlap (TVD) and the youngest senescing leaves . Research was begun to examinewhether group feeding affected development rates, nymph production and development rates of thesubsequent F2 generation . Leaf position relative to the TVD. was also evaluated for its possible

effect on these population parameters . Tests were conducted in a greenhouse using the susceptible

cultivarCP80- 1827inoculatedwithYSAfrom a laboratory colonymaintained on a Sorghurn-Sudan

hybri d. Individual aphids and those in small groups took longer to develop to adults and produced

fewernymphs perday than those that developed within larger groups . The F2 generation reached

100


Molecular IdentificationofVirus Isolates CausingMosaic in L ouisiana Sugarcane

M. P . Grish am and Y.-B . Pan

USDA, ARS , SRRC, Sugarcane Research UnitHouma, LA

Ten strains of sugarcane mosaic virus (SCMV) and three strains sorghum mosaic virus

(SrMV) have been reported to causemosaic inLouisiana; however, only strainsH, I, andMofSrMVwere recovered from commercial fields during surveys conducted between 1973 and 1995 . Annualsurveys werediscontinued because ofthe large amount of laborrequired to identify strains usinghostdifferentials . At the time of these surveys, thi s was the only technique available to identify strains

of these viruses, and results had changed little during the last 10 years . Recent advances intechnology have led to the development of a laboratory procedure capable of distinguishing themosaic virusstrains. A surveywas conducted in 2001 using reverse transcriptase-polymerase chainreaction-based restriction fragment length polymorphism (RT-PCR-RFLP) analysis to determine ifchanges have occurred among the strains ofvirus causingmosaic of sugarcane in Louisiana. StrainI and strain H of SrMV were associated with approximately 65% and 2 1% of the sugarcane plants

with mosaic symptoms, respectively. In the earlier surveys, more than 80% of the plants wereinfected with strainH each year. The remainder of the plants surveyed in 2002 appeared tobe infected by anew strainwith adistinctiveRFLP banding pattern. Nucleotide sequencing is beingconducted to identify the virus strain. Sugarcane plants withmosaic symptoms will be collected in

2002 from a wider geographi cal area of the state and virus strains infecting the plants will be

determined byRT-PCR-RFLP analysis .

Incidence of Sugarcane Yellow L eafVirus in Clones of S accharum spp . in theWorld

Collection atMiami and in the Collection at th e Sugarcane Field Station, Canal Point

J. C . Comstock‘, J.D.Miller‘ and R. J. Schnell2

‘USDA-ARS , Sugarcane Field Station, Canal Point, Florida2USDA-ARS ,

National GermplasmRepository, Subtropical Horticultural Research Station,

Miami , Florida

Sugarcane yellow leafvirus (SCYLV)was detected in clones ofSaccharum spp . in theWorldCollection and in the collection at Canal Point using a leafmid-rib tissue blot immunoassay. The

incidence of infection vari ed by the species ofSaccharum. AtMiami, approximately halfthe clones

in the collection for each Saccharum spp . were sampled and the incidence of SCYLV in the clones

was forS . sp ontaneum,forS . ofiicinarum,

forS . robustum,forS . s inense,

and for S . barberi . At Canal Point, there were only su . Ccient numbers of S oflicinarum, S .

robustum and S . sp ontaneum clones to sample and the incidence of SCYLV was for the 134

clones of S . ofiic inarum sampled, for the 28 clones of S . robus tum and for the 52

clones ofS . sp ontaneum. The results clearly indicate that SCYLV is present in clones present in the

102


World Collection inMiami and that S . sp ontaneum and S . barberi are the twomost resistant of the

five species of Saccharum.

S election of Interspecific Sugarcane Hybrids usingMicrosatellite DNAMarkers

Y. B. Pan, T. Tew,M. P.Grisham, E. P .Richard,W.H.Wh ite and J.Veremis.

USDA-ARS , SouthernRegional Research Center, SugarcaneResearch UnitHouma, LA

Three types of species-specific DNAmarkers, namely, PCR, RAPD , andmicrosatellites,have been recently developed at the USDA-ARS , SRRC, Sugarcane Research Uni t, Houma,Louisiana. Among these, the microsatellite markers are the most polymorphic and can producedistinctive fingerprints (or molecular alleles) among sugarcane varieties as well as their wild

relatives . In 2001 ,‘

1 1 wild x elite biparental crosses were made that involved 10 clones of

Saccharum spontcineum and six commercial-type sugarcane vari eties . The S . spontaneum clones

were used as maternal parents to explore the possible impact of their cytoplasmon our varietaldevelopment program . A problem as sociated with sugarcane breeding is the potential for selfpollination of thematernal wild parents . We have demonstrated in earlierwork that self-pollinationcan occur even after a hot-water treatment to emasculate the maternal tassels . Therefore, some ofthe seeds were selfed progeny. Since S . sp ontaneum is on the Federal noxious weed list, directplanting ofS . sp ontaneum (including selfed progeny) to the field is prohibited. To circumvent the

planting of selfed S . spontaneum, we usedmicrosatellitemarkers to screen the seedlings from these

crosses whi le they were sti ll in the greenhouse. In this presentation, we will show the percentageself-pollination in these crosses where the S . sp ontaneum flowers were hot-water treated . We also

will demonstrate howmicrosatellitemarkers canbe used to eliminate at the seedling stage unwantedselfs from the basic breeding and selection program.

Development ofMicrosatelliteMarkers from SugarcaneResistanceRelated Genes

J.Dasilva

Texas A&MUniversityWeslaco , TX

Microsatellites are arrays of shortDNA sequencemotifs, with 1 to 6 base pairs in length andare characterized by their hyper vari ability, abundance, reproducibility,Mendelian inheritance andco-dominant nature. TheMicrosatellitemarker technique is simple, robust, reliable and suitable fora large throughput system. It is also applicable when the plant material available for analysis islimited in quantity and su

”ciently quick to allow early decisions to be made prior to further

screening. These advantages make the microsatellite technique a suitable tool for molecularselection in large breeding programs .

103


Expressed Sequence Tags (EST) in the sugarcane database were electronically searched formicrosatellites and 402 were identified. Out of 267 (245 disease and 22 pest) resistance-ESTinvestigated, 37 (34 disease and 3 pest) were positive for the presence ofmicrosatellites . PCRprimers flanking these microsatellites were designed and tested as markers on ten sugarcanegenotypes four commercial hybrids and 6 wild genotypes . Polymorphisms were evident both atthe commercial clones, as well as among the Saccharum species. The presence ofmicrosatelliteswithin disease resistance genes could be the flexiblemechanism that sugarcane possesses to ensureresponse to anew pathogen. DNArearrangements, resulting from slippage during replication,

which

is characteristic ofmicrosatellite sequences, would be allowing the cane plant to generate novelresistance to match the changing pattern of pathogen virulence.In humans, a few disease genes carry tri -nucleotide microsatellites . A novel mechanism for the

amplification of these microsatellites sequences seems to be the root cause of these geneticabnormalities . Should the samemechanismwork in plants,mappingmicrosatellitesmarkers fromdisease resistance EST may increase the probability of tagging resistance genes in sugarcane

commercial as well as in wild germplasm.

Microsatellites were also found in other 75 EST coding for proteins not related to diseaseresistance, such as sugarmetabolism, andcanbe used asmolecularmarkers for linkagemapping andtagging of other genes .

The Effect ofTemperature on Flowering and S eed Set in Sugarcane at Canal Point.

J. D.Miller and S . Edme

USDA-ARS

Canal Point, FL

South Florida experiences wide variation in the frequency and intensity of flowering in

sugarcane in different years. The crossing program at Canal Point has maintained about 2000 potcultures ofat least 150 cultivars peryear for each of the past 10 years. The individual cultivars have

varied throughout the period but they are representative of the same genetic background. The

number and time of emergence of tassels based on the number of tassels cut for use in crosses will

be correlated to the minimum temperatures from September through January. The effect of lowtemperature on pollen ferti lity is well documented, but little information is available about the effect

of low temperatures on tassels to be used as females . The plants used to produce themale tasselsused in thesecrosses were protected from low temperatures by beingmoved into the crossing and

photoperiod houses at night. The effect of temperature on flowering and seed set in sugarcane at

Canal Point will be discussed .

104


selected from the best fami lies with progressively fewer clones being selected from themoderate toaverage fami lies. The availability ofobjective family datamakesi tpossible to estimate the breedingvalue ofparents using theBest LinearUnbiasedPredictor(BLUP) . This information is used to retainor drop parents from the crossing program and to plan better cross combinations .“

Assessment ofTrends and Early Sampling Effects on Selection Effi ciency in Sugarcane

S .J. Edme, P .Y.P. Tai, and JD .MillerUSDA-ARS

Canal Point, FL

Quantitative data on agronomic traits are normally affected by field trends or spatialheterogeneity,which oftenmask the genetic potential of the tested varieties . To identify promisingselections from Stage II clones with some degree of confidence, a moving means analysis wasperformed on 754 experimental sugarcane clones (CP 2000 Series) tested along with five check

varieties distributed across three fields with unequal frequencies . The datawere subjected to threedifferent methods (linear, quadratic, and row x column) to remove any potential field trend, asrevealed by the variance of the checks, and to approximate the true genotypic values of the clonesunder selection. The bestmethod was chosen as the one that accounts for the greatest variance oftrends and the least variance of checks . In field A (16 blocks of 43 plots each) , cane (TCA) andsugar tonnage (TSA)weremore efficiently assessed by the quadraticmethod (2 neighbors) . For theclones in fields B (16 blocks of23 plots each) and C (14 blocks of 10 plots each) , a row x columnmethod was more appropriate in analyzing TCA and TSA. The ranking of vari eties changed

significantlywhen comparing the adjusted valueswith the field data.Though positive and significant

(rm=0.44 and rbrix the correlation between early and late sampling revealed that the

former is not indicative and predictive of the latter. Consequently, a lateMarch sampling yielded

32 additional clones for advancement to Stage III, with Brix values ranging from to

Furtheranalyses arewarranted to ascertain the benefit of these approaches as predictionmethods foridentifying themost promising clones .

Selection and Advancement of Sugarcane Clones in the L ouisiana“L”Sugarcane Variety

Development Program

K. P. Bischoff and K. A. GravoisLSUAgCenter SugarResearch Station

St. Gabriel, LA

The primary objective of the Louisiana“L”Sugarcane Variety Development Program is to

efficiently develop improved sugarcane cultivars for the Louisiana sugarcane industry. Each year,300 to 600 crosses aremade at the sugarcane breeding facilities ofLouisiana State University AgCenter’s SugarResearch Station located in St. Gabriel, La. Thi s begins a process of selection,

106


advancement and testing which spans a period of 12 years culminating with the release of newsugarcane varieties to growers of the Louisiana sugar industry. Although the main goal of the

program has never changed, procedures and techniques have evolved and improved over the years

to the extent that this program is operatingmore economically efficient than ever.

This paperwill outline the procedures and techniques used by LSU personnel in the seedlingproduction through infield testing phases of the Variety Development Program. For purposes ofdiscussion,

the numbers of clones moving through the program during the year 200 1 will be used.

107


MANUFACTURING ABSTRACTS

Th e Florida Sugar Industry : Trends and Technologies

J. F.Alvarez and T. P . Johnson

Sugar Cane Growers Cooperative ofFloridaBelle Glade, FL

The Florida Sugar Industry has been consistently improving the operation and efficiency ofseveral sugarmills . The trends in operation and efficiency are first discussed followed by a surveyof technologies and applications that cumulatively have contributed to these improvements inoperation. The Florida Sugar Industry has consistently increased the processing rate whi le at thesame time improving the overall recoveryof sugar.No attempt ismade to formulate cause and effectof the technologies, but general comments aremadeon the experience of someof the technologiesand the possible trends that these technologiesmay take the industry in the future. The technologiescovered are in the areas ofmi lling, processing, and the power plant as well as quality control andinformation technology. The industry has benefited by borrowing and implementing technologies

from other industri es as well as from other sugarcane growing areas such as Australia and South

Afri ca. The technologies involved range from computational fluid dynamics, newmaterials, digital

and electronic devices and equipment, largerand more efficient sugar processing equipment,computerautomation and information technologies .Technologies that are being developed thatmaychange the sugar process are still years away from commercial implementation. The economic

pressure of globalization will continue to force the Florida sugar industry to continue thetechnological trend.

Versatility of the Antibody Dextran TestMeth od

D. F.Day‘, J. Cuddihy

2and J.Rauh 2

‘Audubon Sugar Institute, LAES , BatonRouge, LA2MidlandResearch labs, Inc ., Lenexa, KS

Themonoclonal antibody test (Sucrotestm

,MidlandResearch Labs, Inc .) has proven be a

versatilemeans of determ ining dextran . It can handle any dextran containing liquid sample and

give a value in about oneminute . It correlates very well with the Haze test. Samples ranging fromthe raw factory, to the refinery, . to white sugar can be rapidly analyzed. The source of the sample

is not important, whether it is fromMauritius or Louisiana this test produces reliable

information. The test is being used in both raw factories and refineries world wide.Resultsshowing the scope of uses, and correlations with existingmethods will be presented.

108


this loss to lbs sucrose lost/ton ofcane. More sucrose losses occur at the beginning of theseason. Further recommendations are discussed.

Maximize Throughput in a SugarMilling Operation using a ComputerizedMaintenance

Management System (CMMS )

K. A. Elliott

Maintenance Systems Technology (MST) (Pty) LtdPretoria, South Africa

The sugar industry relies on expensive mechanical plant for sugar production. Loss ofproduction during the crushing season due to downtime means huge revenue losses . Excessive

downtime and high maintenance costs can be avoided if a throughput focused CMMS Softwaresystem is implemented. The CMMS provides valuable information to base decisions on,

but also

enables valuable operational tools to ensure an Optimized availability and sustained throughput.

Th is paper presents a success story about a CMMS implementation at 14 sugar mills inSouthern Afri ca, for a leading, global, low cost sugar producer and a significant manufacturer ofhigh-value downstreamproducts.The group has extensive agri cultural andmanufacturing operations

in Southern Afri ca. Group sugar production ofalmost million tons of sugar deri ves from SouthAfri ca at million tons,Malawi 240 000 tons, Swaziland 220 000 tons, Zambia205 000 tons andTanzania 75 000 tons .

By implementing a focused and effectiveMaintenanceManagement System, theGroupwas

able to e nsure operational reliability during the crushing season, and improved uptirne, withoutsacrificing maintenance expenditure. The paper highlights the challenges that the business faced,provides a roadmap to the implementation, as well as the realized benefits as a result of the

The steps to adopting aphilosophyofScientificMaintenanceManagement andTotal Quality

Management (TQM) for the two distinct phases ofP lantMaintenance namely, Production Season

Off-crop, demand the following key elements that will directMaintenance in the business :

Taking a life cycle long term view.

Defining key performance indicators that are measurable.

Ensuring Quality at the source ofwork execution.

Basing decisions first on factual information and cross checking it with historical information.

Challenge past.maintenance practices .

Focusing on prevention rather than cure.

Allmaintenance work done in both the crushing season and the off-crop, have as its primaryobjective the reduction of Lo st Time Avai lable during season and effective planning and

1 10


management of off-crop maintenance, to reduce maintenance spend. Thi s paper is based on theexperience gained by the author and his associates from CMMS implementations over a period of15 years .

Experiences with the First Full S cale Plate Evaporator in the North American Cane SugarIndustry

N. Swift‘, T. D. Endres

2and F.Mendez

2

‘Alfa Laval, Richmond, VA2RacelandRaw Sugar, Raceland, LA

An Alfa Laval EC 700 plate evaporatorwas installed atRaceland Raw Sugar Corp duringthe 2001 crop . The evaporatorwas installed as a second effect booster. The unit ran for the last 34

days of the 2001 crop with excellent results . On average 1500 TCD more was ground after theevaporatorhadbeen installed compared with the previous period. Steam economy improved by up

to 130 pounds steamperton cane.A heat transfercoefficient ofaround 390BTU/ftZ/F W/mz/C

was achieved on average for the operating period.

Organic Acids in the Sugar Factory Environment

D. F. .Day andW.H.Kampen.

Audubon Sugar Institute, LouisianaAgri cultural Experiment Station,

BatonRouge, LA.

Volatile andnon-volati le organic acids (ranging from acetic, through lactic to higher acids)can be found in raw sugar process streams . They are products both ofmicrobial degradation and

decomposition of cane waxes . The concentrations increase from the primary juice to significantlevels by the endofthe separationprocess .The specific sources of some of these acids are traced andimplications of their presence on corrosion and sugar recovery are highlighted.

Experiences with Unwashed Cane atRaceland

T. D. Endres

RacelandRaw SugarRaceland, LA

Cane washing was stopped on the fifth day of gri nding and remained off for around 70% of

grinding.The performance of the plant in the extraction, steam generation and clarification vari ousareas was monitored in order to assess the impact of this modus operandi . Overall sugar recoverywas enhanced by 13 pounds of sugarperton cane whilst operational difficulties in the extraction and

1 1 1


steam generation areas wereminimal . Clarification ofjuice 1mproved during periods ofnowashingwhilst increased mud quantities experienced during this period could be handled if anticipated ingood time . Attempts have beenmade to estimate the effect on recovery by comparing results duringperiods ofwashing and no washing.Work done by Birkett and Stein during 2000 suggests that thevalue ofadditional sugar to the industry by notwashing cane isU SD 18million orUSD per ton.

This provides suffi cient incentive to both growers andmillers to work together to ensure that this

practice remains sustainable .

1 12


respectively. Acreage scouted where insecticide sprays were recommended went from acresin 1998 to acres in 1999 to 460 acres in 2000, which is a significant decrease in insecticideuse .

Disease Incidence and Yield Comparisons ofKLEENTEK® Seedcane to TraditionalSources in Four Commercial Varieties in South Florida.

J. L. Flynn‘, K. Quebedeaux‘, L . Baucum’, and R.Waguespack

3

‘Certis USA, BatonRouge, LAZU .S . Sugar Corp ., Clewiston, FL3Certis USA,Moore Haven, FL

Rep licated field plots were planted using seedcane from either Kleentek (KT), a

commerciallyavailable healthy seedcane based onmeristem culture, orprogenyofhot watertreated

material (HT) forvarietiesCPS9-2143,CP 85-1382,CP 80-1827, andCP 70- 1 133 .For the lattertwovarieties, an on-farm field run (FR) source of seed cane was obtained (no recent heat treatment

hi story) . Disease incidence andyield evaluations were performed overa 3-year crop cycle.The FRCP80- 1827hada 100% incidence ofRSD .All other sources tested negatively forRSD in plant cane.HTandFRmaterial forall varieties exceptCP 70- 1 133were virtually 100% infectedwith Sugarcaneyellow leafvirus (SCYLV) .KTplots tested clean in plant cane .By second ratoon, SCYLV incidence

in KT ranged from 10% in CP 70-1 133 to 27% in CP80-1827.

Stalk counts were significantly higher forKT compared to HT for CP 89-2143 and CPSS

1382 with overall advantages of and respectively. Cane tonnage and sugar per acre

yields averaged highest in theKTplots forall vari eties . Significant increases in cane tonnage inKT

overHTwere noted forall varieties except CP 70-1 133 . Percent sugaryields were lower for theKT

vs . HT for CP 85-1382 . KT and HT sugar yields were lower than FR in the CP 80-1827.

Significant advantages in sugarper acre were found forKT vs .HT forCP 89-2 143 andCP 85-1382

and forKTvs . FRforCP 80-1827. Over the crop cycle, sugarperacre yields ofKTwere 25 .3% and

higher thanHT forCP 89-2143 andCP 85-1382, respectively.For the oldervarieties (CP 80

1827 and CP 70-1 133) KT yielded and more sugar per acre than HT and FR,

respectively.

1 14


AMERICAN SOCIETY OF SUGAR CANE TECHNOLOGISTSEDITORIAL POLICY

Nature ofpapers to be published :

Papers submittedmust represent a significant technological or scientific contri bution. Paperswill be limited to the production and processing of sugarcane, or to subjects logically related.

Authorsmay submit papers that represent a review, anew approach to field or factory problems, ornew knowledge gained through experimentation. Papers promoting machinery or commercial

products wi ll not be acceptable.

Frequency ofpublication :

The Journal will appear at least once ayear. At the direction of the Joint ExecutiveCommittee, the Jourrialmayappearmore frequently. Contri buted papers not presented at ameetingmay be reviewed, edited, and publi shed if the editorial criteria aremet.

The Editorial Committee shall be composed of theManaging Editor, Technical Editor forthe Agri cultural Section, and Technical Editor for the Manufacturing Section. The Editorial

Committee shall regulate the Journal content and assure its quality. It is charged with the authoritynecessary to achi eve these goals . TheEditorialCommittee shall determinebroad policy. Each editorwill serve for three years ; andmay at the Joint Executive Committee

’s discretion,serve beyond the

expiration of his or her term.

Handling ofmanuscripts :

Four copies ofeachmanuscript are ini tially submitted to theManaging Editor. Manuscripts

received by theManaging Editorwill be assigned a registration number determined serially by thedate ofreceipt. TheManagingEditorwrites to the onewho subrrritted the paper to inform the authorof the receipt of the paper and the registration numberwhich must be used in all correspondenceregarding it .

TheTechni cal Editors obtain at least two reviews foreach paperfrom qualified persons . Theidentities ofreviewersmustnotbe revealed to each othernorto the authorduring the review process .Instructions sent with the papers emphasize the necessity forpromptness aswell as thoroughness inmaking the review. Page charges will be assessed for the entire manuscript for non-members .Members will be assessed for those pages in excess of ten (10) double spaced Times NewRoman

(TT) 12 pt typed pages of 8 x 1 1"dimension with one (1) inchmargins .

Wh en a paper is returned by reviewers, the Techni cal Editor evaluates the paper and therecommendations ofthe reviewers . Ifmajorrevisions are recommended, theTechnicalEditor sendsthe paper to the author for this purpose, along with anonymous copies of reviewers'

recommendations . When the paper is returned to the Technical Editor, he/she wi ll judge theadequacy of the revision andmay send the paperback to anyreviewer for furtherreview. Wh en the

1 15


paperhas been revised satisfactorily, it is sent to theManaging Editor forpublishing. A paper sentto its author for revi sion and held more than 6 months wi ll be given a new date of receipt whenreturned. This date will determine the priority of publication of the paper.

A paper rejected by one reviewermay be sent to additional reviewers until two reviewerseither accept orreject the paper. If a paper is judged by two ormore reviewers as not acceptable forthe Journal, the Technical Editorreturns

'

it to the author along with a summary of the reasons givenby the revi ewers for the rejection. The registration form for the paper is filled out and returned to

theManaging Editor along with copies of the reviewers' statements and a copy of the Technical

Editor's transmittal letterto the author. The names ofall reviewersmust be shown on the regi strationform transmitted to theManaging Editor.

If the paper as received is recommended by two reviewers for publication in the Journal, itis read by theTechni calEditor to correct typographi cal, grammatical, and style errors andto improvethe writing where this seems possible and appropriate, with special care not to change themeaning.

The paper is then sent by the Technical Editor to’

theManaging Editorwho notifies the authors ofthe acceptance of the paper and of the probable dates of publication. At this time, the Managing

Editor will request a final version in hardcopy and on diskette in WordPerfect format fi'

om the

corresponding author.

Preparation ofpapers forpublication:

Papers sent by the Techni cal Editor to the Managing Editor are prepared for printing

according to their dates oforiginal submittal and final approval and according to the space available

in the next issue of the Journal .

The paper is printed in the proper form for reproduction, and proofs are sent to the authors

for final review . When the proofs are returned, all necessary corrections are made prior to

reproduction. The authorwill be notified at the appropriate time to order reprints at cost.

Any drawings and photographs for the figures in the paper are scaled according to their

dimensions, the size of lettering, and otherfactors . Theyare then sent to the printerfor camerawork.

Proofs of the illustrations are sent to the authors . Any changes requested at this stage would beexpensive and authors will be expected to pay the cost of such changes .

Reprinting in trade journals has the approval of the Editorial Committee provided : a) no

article is reprinted before being accepted by the Journal ; b) credit is given all authors, the author's

institutions, and the ASSCT; and c) perm ission of all authors has been obtained. Summaries,condensations, orportionsmaybe printed in advance of Journal publication provided the approvalof the Editorial Committee has been obtained.

1 16

Journal Ameri can Society of Sugarcane Techno logists , Vol. 23, 2003

Drawings Photographs

Drawings and photographsmust be provided separately from the text of themanuscript andidentified on the back of each. Type figure numbers and legends on separate pieces ofpaperwith

proper identification. Drawings and photographs should be of sufficient quality that they willreproduce legibly.

The heading forthe literature cited should beREFERENCES . References shouldbe arranged

such that the literature cited will be numbered consecutively and placed in alphabetical orderaccording to the surname of the senior author. In the text, references to literature cited should be

made by name ofauthor(s) andyear ofpublication from list ofreferences . Do not use capital letters

in the titles of such articles except in initial words andpropernames, but capitalize words in the titlesof the periodicals or books .

ITCHGRAS S (ROTTBOEL L IA COCHINCHINENS IS) CONTROL

IN SUGARCANEWITH POSTEMERGENCE HERBICIDES

Reed J. L encse and James L. Griffin

Department ofPlant Pathology and Crop PhysiologyLouisianaAgri cultural Experiment Station, LSU Agri cultural Center

BatonRouge, LA 70803

and

Edward P .Richard, Jr.

Sugarcane Research Uni t, USDA-ARS , Houma, LA 70361

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION

MATERIALS AND METHODS

RESUL TS AND DISCUSSION

Table 1 . Visual itchgrass control and sugarcane injury as influenced by over-the-top herbicide

application atMaringouin andThibodaux , LA,1989 .

CONCL US IONS

ACKNOWL EDGMENTS

REFERENCES

1 18


GUIDEL INES FOR PREPARING PAPERS FORJOURNAL OFAS SCT

The following guidelines forWordPerfect software are intended to facilitate the productionofthis journal. Authors are strongly encouraged to prepare theirfinalmanuscriptswithWordPerfect

or a later version forWindows. P lease contact theManaging Editor if you wi ll not use one ofthose software packages .

Paper Margins: Allmaterial (including tables and figures) shall be submitted on X 1 1 inchpaperwith one inchmargins on all sides . To achieve thi s withWordPerfect, set the top, left, andrightmargins at one inch. However, set the bottommargin at inches. This will place the pagenumber at inches and the final line of text at one inch.

Fonts : Submit your document in the Times New Roman (TT) l 2pt font. If you do not have thisfont, contact theManaging Editor.

Alignment: Choose the full alignment option to prepare yourmanuscript. The“

use ofSPACEBARfor alignment is not acceptable . As a general rule SPACE BAR should only be used for spacebetweenwords and limited otheruses. Do not use space bar to indent paragraphs, align and indentcolumns, or create tables .

Do not use hard returns at the end of sentences within a paragraph. Hard returns are to beused when ending paragraphs or producing a short line.

Place tab les and figureswithin th e textwh ere you wish them to appear. Otherwise, alltables and figures will appear after.yourReferences section.

Sg les : Italicize scientific names. Do not use underline.

Tab les : Use Tab stops and the Graph ics line draw option when constructing tables . Avoid thespace bar to separate columns (see alignment) . All lines should begin with the leftmost symbol intheir leftmost column and should end with the right most symbol in their right most column.

C itations : When producing Literature Citations, use the indent feature to produce text as below.

1 . Smith, I.M., H. P . Jones, C .W. Doe, 1991 . The use ofmultidiscipline approaches to controlrodent populations in plants . Journal ofAmerican Society ofP lantManagement . 83

394.

1 19


CONSTITUTION OF THEAMERICAN SOCIETY OF SUGAR CANE TECHNOLOGISTS

As Revised and Approved on June 2 1 , 199 1As Amended on June 23, 1994As Amended on June 15 , 1995

ARTICLE I

Name, Object andDomicile

Section 1 . The name of thi s Society shall be the American Societyof Sugar Cane Technolo-gists .

Section 2 . The object of thi s society shall be the general study of the sugar industry in all itsvarious branches and the dissemination of inform ation to the members of theorganization through meetings and publications .

Section 3 . The domicile ofthe Society shall beat theoffice oftheGeneral Secretary-Treasurer (asdescribed in Article IV, Section

ARTICLE II

D ivisions

The Society shall be composed of two divisions, the Louisiana Division and the FloridaDivision. Each division shall have its separate membership roster and separate officers andcommittees. Voting rights of active and honorarymembers shall be restri cted to their respectivedivisions, except at the general annual and special meetings of the entire Society, hereinafterprovided for, atwhich generalmeetings active and honorarymembers ofboth divisions shall havethe ri ght to vote. Officers and committee members shall be members of and serve the respectivedivisions fromwhich elected or selected, except theGeneral Secretary-Treasurerwho shall serve theentire Society.

ARTICLE III

Membership andDues

Section 1 . There shall be five classes ofmembers : Active, Associate, Honorary, Off-shore orForeign, and Supporting.

Section 2 . Activemembers shall be individuals residing in the continental Uni ted States actuallyengaged in the production of sugar

“

cane or themanufacture of cane sugar, or researchor education pertaining to the industry, including employees of any corporation, firmor other organization which is so engaged.

Section 3. Associatemembers shall be individuals not actively engaged in the production of sugarcane or themanufacture of cane sugar or research pertaining to the industry, but whomay be interested in the objects of the Society.

120

Section 1 .

Section 2 .

Section 1 .

Section 2 .

Section 3 .

Section 4.

Section 5 .

Section 6 .

Section 7.


ARTICLE IV

General Secrem -Treasurer and Joint Executive Committee

The General Secretary-Treasurer shall serve as Chief Administrative Officer of theSociety and shall coordinate the activities of the divisions and the sections. He or shewill serve as ex-officio Chairperson of the Joint Executive Committee and as GeneralChairperson of the General SocietyMeetings, and shall have such other duties asmaybe delegated to him or her by the Joint Executive Committee. The office of theGeneral Secretary-Treasurer shall be the domicile of the Society.

The Joint Executive Committee shall be composed of the electedmembers of the twodrvision Executive Committees, and is vested with full authority to conduct thebusiness and affairs of the Society.

ARTICLE V

The officers ofeach division of the Society shall be : aPresident, aFirst Vice-President,a Second Vice-President, a Secretary-Treasureror a Secretary and aTreasurer, and anExecutive Committee composed of these officers and four othermembers, one fi

'

om

each section of the Division (as described in Section 3 ofArt icle VII) , one elected atlarge, and thePresident of the previousExecutive Committeewho shall serve as anExOfficio member of the Division Executive Committee . The office of the SecretaryTreasurer in this constitution indicates either the Secretary-Treasurer, or the Secretaryand the Treasurer.

These officers, except Secretary-Treasurer, shall be nominated by a nominatingcommittee and voted upon before the annual division meeting. Notices of suchnominations shall bemailed to eachmember at least onemonth before suchmeeting.

Ballots not received before the annually specified date will not be counted.

The Secretary-Treasurer shall be appointed by and serve as anon-votingmemberat thepleasure of theDivisionExecutive Committee. The Secretary-Treasurermaynot holdan elected office on the Executive Committee .

The duties of these officers shall be such as usually pertain to such officers in similarsocieties .

Each section as described in Art icle VII shall be represented in the offices of thePresident andVice-President .

The President,First Vice-President, and Second Vice-President of eachDivision shallnot hold the same office for two consecutive years . Either Section Chairperson (asdescribed in Section 3 of Article VII) may hold the same office for up to twoconsecutive years . The terms of the other officers shall be unlimited.

The President shall be elected each year alternately from the two sections hereinafterprovided for. In any given year, the Presidents ofthe twoDivisions shall be nominatedand elected fiom different sections . The President from the LouisianaDivision for theyearbeginning February, 1970, shall be nominated and elected from the Agri culturalSection. The president from the Florida Division for the year beginning February,

122

Section 8 .

Section 9 .

Section 1 .

Section 2 .

Section 1 .

Section 2 .

Section 3 .

Section 4.

Section 1.


1970, shall be nominated and elected from theManufacturing Section.

Vacancies occurring between meetings shall be filled by the Division ExecutiveCommittee.

The terms year"and consecutive year as used in Articles V and VI shall beconsidered to be comprised of the elapsed time between one annual divisionmeetingof the Society and the following annual divisionmeeting of the Society.

ARTICLE VI

The President of each division shall appoint a committee of three to serve as aMembership Commi ttee . It will be the duty of this committee to pass uponapplications formembership in the division and report to the Secretary-Treasurer.

The President of each division shall appoint each year a committee of three to serve asaNominating Committee . Itwill be the duty of the Secretary-TreasureroftheDivisionto notify all active and honorarymembers of the Division as to the personnel of thi scommittee. Itwi ll be the duty of this committee to receive nominations and to preparea list ofnominees andmai l thi s to eachmember of theDivision at least amonth beforethe annual meeting.

ARTICLE VII

S_ec

_tiw

There shall be two sections of each Division, to be designated as :

Each active member shall designate whether he or she desires to be enrolled in theAgri cultural Section or theManufacturing Section.

There shall be aChairp erson for each section ofeachDivisionwho wi ll be thememberfrom that Section elected to the Executive Committee . It will be the duty of theChairperson of a section to arrange the program for the annual Divisionmeeting.

The Executive Committee of each Division is empowered to elect one of their ownnumber or to appoint another person to handle the detai ls of printing, proof reading,etc ., in connection with these programs and to authorize the Secretary-Treasurer tomake whatever payments may be necessary for same .

ARTICLE V

Meetings

The annual GeneralMeeting of themembers of the Society shall be held in June eachyear on a date and at a place to be determined, from time to time, by the JointExecutive Committee. At allmeetings ofthe twoDivisions oftheSociety, five percentof the activemembers shall constitute a quorum. The program for the annualmeeting

123

Section 2 .

Section 3 .

Section 4.

Section 1 .

Section 2 .

Section 3 .

Section 4.

Section 1 .

Section 2 .


of the Society shall be arranged by the General Secretary-Treasurer in collaborationwi th the Joint Executive Comm ittee .

The annual meeting of the LouisianaDivision shall be held in February of each year,at such time as the Executive Committee of the Division shall decide . The annualmeeting of the FloridaDivision shall be held in SeptemberorOctober of each year

, at

such time as the Executive Comm ittee of thatDivision shall decide. Specialmeetingsof aDivisionmay be called by the Executive Committee of such D ivision.

Specialmeetings ofa Section for the discussion ofmatters ofpart icular interest to thatSectronmay be called by the President upon request from the respective Chairp ersonof a Section.

At Divisionmeetings, 10 percent of the active divisionmembers and the President ora Vice-President shall constitute a quorum .

ARTICLE IX

The conduct and management of the affairs of the Society and of the Divisionsincluding the direction ofwork of its special committees

,shall be in the hands of the

Joint Executive Committee andDivision Executive Committees, respectively.

The Joint Executive Committee shall represent this Society in conferences with theAmerican SugarCaneLeague, theFlorida SugarCaneLeague, oranyotherassociation,

andmaymake anyrules or conduct anybusiness not in conflict with this Constitution.

Fourmembers of the Division Executive Comm ittee shall constitute a quorum . The

President, or in his or her absence one of the Vice-Presidents, shall chair thiscommittee.

Twomembers of eachDivision Executive Committee shall constitute a quorum of all

members of the Joint Executive Committee . Each member of the Joint ExecutiveCommittee, except theGeneral Secretary-Treasurer, shall be entitled to one vote on allmatters voted upon by the Joint Executive Committee . In case of a tie vote, theGeneral Secretary-Treasurer shall cast the deciding vote .

ARTICLE X

The name of the official journal of the Society shall be the Journal of the Ameri canSociety of Sugar Cane Technologists .

"This Journal shall be published at least once

per calendar year. All articles , whether volunteered or invited, shall be subject toreview as described in Section 4 ofArticle X.

The Managing Editor of the Journal of the Ameri can Society of Sugar CaneTechnologists shall be amemberofeither theFloridaorLouisianaDivisions ; however,he or she shall not be a member of both D ivisions . The D ivision affiliation of

Managing Editors shall alternate between the Divisions from term to term with thenormal termbeing three years, unless theDivision responsible fornominating the new

Managing Editor reports that it has no suitable candidate . TheManaging Editor shall

124

Section 1 .

Journal American Society of Sugarcane Techno logists, Vol. 23, 2003

that purpose, by an affirmative vote of two-thirds of the total honorary and activemembers in good standing present at the meeting . Thereupon

,the organization shall

be dissolved by such legal proceedings as are provided by law . Upon dissolution of theJoint Society, its assets will be divided equally between the two Divisions of theSociety. Dissolution of the Joint Society will not be cause for automatic dissolutionof eitherDivision. Upon dissolution of either Division, its assets will be divided inaccordance wi th the wishes of its members and in conformity with existing IRSregulations and other laws applicable at the time of dissolution .

ARTICLE X

Assets

No member shall have any vested right, interest or privilege of, in, or to the assets,functions, affairs orfianchises of the organization ; nor any right, interest or privilegewhi chmay be transferable or inheritable .

126

Komecki, T. S .

Madsen, L.R.

Martin, S .

Matichenkov , V. V.

McAllister, C . D .

Mendez, F.


AUTHOR INDEX

127

6 1 , 71 ,

Viator, BViator, CWaguespack, H.

Waguespack, R.

Watson,B .

White, B . E.

White,W. H.

Wiedenfeld, BobWilliams, G. J.

american society of sugar cane technologists - Forgotten Books

Documents

Transcript of american society of sugar cane technologists - Forgotten Books