Life Sci. Int. J.

, Vol: 6, Issue-4, October 2012, Page: 2632-2636

INFLUENCE OF SOIL AND FOLIAR APPLIED FERTILIZERS ON SUGARCANE IN LOAMY SOIL

Muhammad Aleem Sarwar1, Shafiq Ahmad1, Naeem Fiaz1, Muhammd Asif Ali2, Farhan Saleem 3 Syed Aftab Hussain Bukhari1 and Arshad Ali Chattha 1
1Sugarcane 2

Research Institute, AARI, Faisalabad, Pakistan Soil and Water Testing laboratory for Research, AARI, Faisalabad, Pakistan 3Department of Environmental Sciences, Government College University, Faisalabad, Pakistan ABSTRACT Owing the heavy feeder of soil nutrients, a field experiment was conducted in sugarcane to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of some newly introduced fertilizers. Six different kinds of fertilizers, available in solid and liquid form, were applied through foliar, fertigation and broadcast methods. Observations concluded non significant impact of these fertilizers on germination, tillering, cane count, cane yield and juice purity. However, sugar yield, sugar recovery, CCS and pol of juice were significantly affected. Maximum sugar yield (8.30 t/ha), CCS (10.93%), sugar recovery (10.27%), pol (15.03%) and purity (82.79%) were observed in the treatments, where Zeneca was applied through fertigation. It was concluded that different fertilizers significantly affected the crop quality but non significantly influenced quantitatively. KEYWORDS: Fertilizers, cane yield, sugar recovery

INTRODUCTION Sugarcane is a highly nutrition requiring crop (Paul, 2005). A cane crop of 100 tonnes per hectare removes NPK @ 208, 53 and 280 kg per hectare respectively (Yadav et al., 2000). Similarly one tonnes of cane absorb NPK @ 1.83, 0.7 and 2.12 kg respectively (Naidu et al., 1999). Under intensive farming system, neither inorganic nor organic source of fertilizers alone cane achieve sustainability (Khandagave, 2003). So higher yields are obtained when organic manure are supplemented with NPK fertilizers (Kumar and Verma, 2002). Each fertilizer element performs its role in development and production of cane crop (Ayaz et al., 1997). Rai et al., (1990) found an improvement in nutrient availability by using organic amendments but juice quality remained unaffected. Inorganic fertilizers are applied to sugarcane in various forms like solid and liquid and mode of application as soil applied, fertigation and foliar spray. Boynton et al., (1954) found that 60-80% of foliar applied nutrients are absorbed by plants in four days. Sarwar et al., (2009) applied different solid and liquid fertilizers in broadcast and foliar forms and found non significant effect on germination and CCS but significant affected the tillering, cane count, cane yield and sugar yield. In another experiment Sarwar et al., (2011) observed non significant effect of various solid and liquid fertilizers on qualitative characteristics of cane juice like brix, pol, purity, CCS and sugar recovery. Sarwar et al., (2009) stressed upon the balanced usage of fertilizers in sugarcane due increasing per hectare yield. The present studies were conducted to investigate the effect of different solid and liquid fertilizers on yield and quality of sugarcane. MATERIALS AND METHODS Studies reported here, were conducted at Sugarcane Research Institute, Faisalabad where a field experiment was executed in loamy soil. Sugarcane variety HSF 240 was planted in fall sowing (in September) and harvested in January after fifteen months. The crop was planted in deep trenches @ 50,000 TBS/ha in RCBD arrangements in which each treatments had three replications. All agronomic practices including ploughing, weeding, earthing up and irrigation etc. were applied according to approved production technology. Fertilizers were applied as when required according to treatments. The data regarding germination and tillering were collected 45 and 90 DAP, while cane count and cane yield data at harvest. Similarly qualitative analysis (brix, pol, purity, CCS and sugar recovery) of cane juice was performed at Sugarcane Technology Laboratory according to standard procedure (Spencer and Meade, 1963). Soil sampling was done at three different depths i.e. 0-6, 6-12 and 12-18 for its physical and chemical properties described in table-1.

2632

Table 1: Physico-chemical properties of soil Physical and chemical properties of soil N P K pH EC(e) O.M O.C Sand Silt Clay Texture SP Units (%) (ppm) (ppm) (dSm-1) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) Concentration at different soil depths 0-6 6-12 0.040 0.034 6.22 5.11 80 65 7.80 7.70 0.72 0.61 0.79 0.68 0.44 0.39 40 42 36 34 24 24 Loam Loam 38 36 12-18 0.024 4.08 60 7.65 0.57 0.43 0.25 42 34 24 Loam 36

All the fertilizers were applied treatment wise recommendation. However, NPK were applied uniformly in all treatments. Nitrogen was applied in the form of Urea in all treatments in three splits. Phosphate and potash fertilizers were applied in form of single super phospahte (SSP) and sulphate of potash (SOP) repectively. Maxicot, sugran, biocane and agrozinc were applied @ 2.5kg/ha, 1.24 L/ha, 2.50 L/ha and 1.24 L/ha respectively by foliar method. Zeneca was applied by fertigation @ 14.83L/ha. Maz Saver was broadcasted @ 14.83L/ha. Table 2: Treatments Treatments T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 N 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 Fertilizers applied (kg/ha) P K 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 Soil and foliar fertilizers NPK (Standard) Maz Saver Zeneca Maxicot Sugran Biocane Agrozinc

The data were analyzed statistically according to the procedure described by Steel et al., (1997) RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Germination Data given in figure indicated non significant difference among treatments for germination. The highest germination was recorded in T4 (51.30%) while it was followed by T5 (51.25%), T7 (51.15%), T1 (50.98%), T6 (50.90%), T3 (50.80%) and T2 (50.63%) in descending order. These studies coincide with those reported by Chattha (2002) who found non significant effect of fertilizers on germination. It also shows that germination remained unaffected by different fertilizers. Tillers per plant Non significant difference among treatments were recorded for tillers per plant. However, maximum number of tillers per plant were produced in T7 (1.50) while in T3 and T5 the same number of tillers (1.40) were calculated. The minimum number of tillers per plant was recorded in T1 (1.25). These observations are in line with those claimed by Hussain et al., (2010) who reported non significant effect of fertilizers on tillering. Cane count It is envisaged from the figure that highest number of millable cane were counted in T5 (98.05 thousand/ha) while the lowest on in T3 (96.80 thousand/ha). All the treatments showed non significant effect of fertilizers on cane count. On contrary Sarwar et al., (2009) observed significant effect of fertilizers on cane count. Cane yield All the treatments also varied non significantly for cane yield. Maximum cane yield was obtained from T 2 (77.10 tonnes/ha) followed by T5 (77.08 tonnes/ha), T4 (76.84 tonnes/ha), T1 (76.25 tonnes/ha), T6 (75.97 tonnes/ha), T3 (75.96 tonnes/ha) and T7 (75.91 tonnes/ha) respectively. Sarwar et al., (2011) also conducted similar kind of studies and found significant effect on cane yield and which is contrary to present studies.

2633

Sugar yield It is calculated by combination of cane yield and CCS. The data pertaining to this parameter showed significant difference among treatments for various fertilizers. The highest sugar yield was obtained in T1 (8.93 tonnes/ha) and it was statistically at par with T6 (8.92 tonnes/ha), T5 (8.88 tonnes/ha), T2 (8.67 tonnes/ha), T7 (8.63 tonnes/ha) and T4 (8.52 tonnes/ha). The lowest sugar yield was obtained in T3 (8.30 tonnes/ha). These studies are similar to those reported by Hussain et al., (2010). CCS and sugar recovery Both of these parameters are interdependent as sugar recovery as sugar recovery is obtained by multiplying CCS with a constant factor 0.94. Both of these showed a similar trend of lowest and highest values. Maximum CCS (11.74%) and sugar recovery (11.04%) were obtained from T6 while the lowest values of these parameters were obtained in T7. T1 was statistically at par with T2, T5, T7 and T2. Sarwar et al., (2011) conducted a similar experiment but found non significant effect of different fertilizers on CCS and sugar recovery. Pol Statistically significant results were obtained for pol in seven treatments. The highest pol was showed in T 6 (11.04%) and it was statistically at par with T1 (15.80%) and T5 (15.68%). Similarly the lowest pol was observed in T3 (15.03%). Likewise results were obtained by Sarwar et al., (2011). Purity Treatments means varied non significantly for purity. The highest value of purity was recorded in T6 (84.54%) followed by T1 (84.26%), T5 (84.15%), T2 (83.72%), T7 (53.54%), T4 (83.24%) and T3 (82.79%). The maximum value of purity in T6 may be due to maximum value of pol in this treatment. Similar studies were also reported by Sarwar et al., (2011). Table 3: Influence of different fertilizers on yield and quality parameters of sugarcane Treatments GerminTillers Cane Cane Sugar Pol. (%) Purity ation (%) per plant count yield yield (%) (000 (t ha-1) (t ha-1) ha-1) T1 50.98 1.25 97.55 76.25 8.93 a 15.80 a 84.26 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 LSD 50.63 51.80 51.30 51.25 50.90 51.15 N.S 1.28 1.40 1.35 1.39 1.40 1.50 N.S 98.01 96.80 97.40 98.05 96.90 96.99 N.S 77.10 75.96 76.84 77.08 75.97 75.91 N.S 8.67 ab 8.30 b 8.52 ab 8.88 a 8.92 a 8.63 ab 0.519 15.36 cd 15.03 e 15.20 de 15.68 ab 15.93 a 15.49 bc 0.264 83.72 82.79 83.24 84.15 84.54 83.54 N.S

CCS (%)

S. Recovery (%) 10.93 a 10.57abc 10.27 c 10.42 bc 10.83 ab 11.04 a 10.69abc 0.506

11.63 a 11.25abc 10.93 c 11.09 bc 11.52 ab 11.74 a 11.37abc 0.536

Figure: Influence of soil and foliar applied fertilizers on sugarcane in loamy soil

2634

2635

REFERENCES Ayaz, S., M.Akhtar, I.Ahmad and I. Ali.1997. A review of fertilizer application and mannuring of sugarcane fields on District Mardan of NWFP. Pakistan Sugar J. 12 (4):18-20. Boynton D., Margolis and C.R. Gross. 1954. Exploratory studies on nitrogen metabolism by Mclntosh apple leaves spray with urea. Roc. A.M. Soc. Hod. Sci. 62:135-146. Chattha A.A. 20002. Crop yield response of two varieties at different level of seed density. Pakistan Sugar J. 17 (6). Hussain F., M.A. Sarwar, M.A. Ali, N.Fiaz, A.Ghaffar and A.A. Chattha.2010. Impact of balanced fertilization along with time of phosphorous and potassium application on yield and quality of sugarcane. Int. J. Agric. Appl. Sci. 2 (2): 95-100. Khandagave, R.B. 2003. Influence of organic and inorganic manures on sugarcane and sugar yield. Indian Sugar J. 52(12):981-989. Kumar, V. and K.S. Verma. 2002. Influence of use of organic manures in combination with inorganic fertilizers on sugarcane and soil fertility. Indian Sugar J. 52(3):177-181. Naidu, L.G.K., G. Hunsigi and N.G. Rangher Mohan. 1999. Soil test based fertilizer recommendation to sugarcane. Fertilizers News. 44(8):29-36. Paul, G.C., S.M. Bokhtiar, H. Rehman, R.C. Kabiraj and A.B.M.M. Rehman.2005. Efficiencies of some organic fertilizers on sustainable sugarcane production in old Himalayan Pediment Plain soil of Bangladesh. Pakistan Sugar J. 10 (1):2-5. Rai, R.K.,C.P. Sharma, B.K.Dube, M.P.Motiwala and A.B.Singh.1990. Improvement of yield and quality of a ratoon crop of sugarcane variety CoCK 8102 through organic amendments in non-saline sodic soils. Cooperative Sugar. 30(11/12):1047-1054 Sarwar M.A., F. Hussain, A. Ghaffar and M.A. Nadeem.2011. Effect of some newly introduced fertilizers in sugarcane. Pakistan Sugar J. 26 (1): 2-9. Sarwar M.A., F.Hussain, M.Umer, M.Bilal, A. Nadeem and A.A. Chattha.2009. Comparative efficiency of solid and liquid fertilizers in sugarcane. Pakistan Sugar J. 24 (1):6-9. Sarwar, M.A., F. Hussain, A.Ghaffar and M.A. Nadeem. 2011. Effect of some newly introduced fertilizers in sugarcane. Pakistan Sugar J. 26(1):2-9. Spencer, E.F. and G.P. Meade.1963. Cane sugar hand book. John Willey and Sons. 9th Edition. New York. USA Steel, R. G. D., J. H. Torrie and D. A. Dickey. 1997. Principles and procedures of statistics. A biometrical approach. 3rd Ed. McGraw Hill Book Co., Inc. New York, USA. P: 400-428. Yadav, D.V. 2000. Nutrition management in sugarcane and sugarcane based cropping system during 2000-2010. Fertilizer News. 45(4):43-48.

2636