Paper · 2012 · Nanfang nongye xuebao

Effects of fertilizer rate and planting density on yield and its components of GT29

Duan Wei

7
claims
14
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

【Objective】The present research was conducted to determine the optimal fertilizer rate and planting densi- ty of a new sugarcane variety GT29 to provide references for extending this variety in sugarcane production. 【Method】 Split-plot experiment with two factors (fertilizer rate and planting density) was designed to investigate sugarcane agronomic traits, such as total number of seedlings, number of millable stalks, plant height, stalk diameter, sucrose content, yield, at etc., for analyzing the effects of 3 fertilizer rates (2250, 3750 and 5250 kg/ha) and 4 planting densities (7.5×10 4 , 9.0×10 4 , 10.5×10 4 and 12×10 4 buds/ha) on sugarcane yield and its components. 【Result】Sugarcane yield reached the highest (95.34 t/ha) at the fertilizer rate of 2250 kg/ha and planting density of 90,000 buds/ha; plant height was the tallest (209 cm) at the fertilizer rate of 3750 kg/ha and plant density of 75000 buds/ha, which was significantly higher than that at the fertilizer rate of 5250 kg/ha and plant density of 105000 buds/ha (193 cm). No significant difference in yield, tillering rate, stalk diameter, and sucrose content was found among different treatments, while sugarcane yield was positively correlated with number of millable stalks per unit area. 【Conclusion】For GT29, the optimum fertilizer rate was N 260 kg/ha,P 2 O 5 130 kg/ha,K 2 O 150 kg/ha (N∶P 2 O 5 ∶K 2 O=12∶6∶7), and the optimum planting density was 90000 buds/ha.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 7

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sugarcane yield peaked at 95.34 t/ha with 2250 kg/ha fertilizer and 90,000 buds/ha.

Taxon
Sugarcanee0
Material
GT29t0
Treatment
fertilizer rate of 2250 kg/ha and planting density of 90,000 buds/hae0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
higheste0
Value
95.34 t/hae0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Sugarcane yield reached the highest (95.34 t/ha) at the fertilizer rate of 2250 kg/ha and planting density of 90,000 buds/ha”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 686–810 · show in text ↑
t0

“GT29”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–83 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Plant height peaked at 209 cm under 3750 kg/ha fertilizer and 75000 buds/ha, significantly above the 5250 kg/ha and 105000 buds/ha treatment.

Taxon
sugarcanee1
Material
GT29t0
Treatment
fertilizer rate of 3750 kg/ha and plant density of 75000 buds/hae0
Outcome
plant heighte0
Direction
significantly highere0
Value
209 cme0
Qualifier
193 cme0
Comparator
fertilizer rate of 5250 kg/ha and plant density of 105000 buds/hae0

Verbatim

e0

“plant height was the tallest (209 cm) at the fertilizer rate of 3750 kg/ha and plant density of 75000 buds/ha, which was significantly higher than that at the fertilizer rate of 5250 kg/ha and plant density of 105000 buds/ha (193 cm)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 812–1045 · show in text ↑
t0

“GT29”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–83 · show in text ↑
e1

“sugarcane yield and its components”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 642–676 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Yield and tillering rate did not differ significantly among treatments.

Taxon
sugarcanee1
Treatment
different treatmentse0
Outcome
yield, tillering ratee0
Direction
No significant differencee0

Not reportedMaterialComparator

Verbatim

e0

“No significant difference in yield, tillering rate, stalk diameter, and sucrose content was found among different treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1047–1171 · show in text ↑
e1

“new sugarcane variety GT29”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 115–141 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Stalk diameter and sucrose content did not differ significantly among treatments.

Taxon
sugarcanee1
Treatment
different treatmentse0
Outcome
stalk diameter, and sucrose contente0
Direction
No significant differencee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“No significant difference in yield, tillering rate, stalk diameter, and sucrose content was found among different treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1047–1171 · show in text ↑
e1

“new sugarcane variety GT29”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 115–141 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sugarcane yield was positively correlated with millable stalk number per unit area.

Taxon
sugarcanee0
Organ / stage
millable stalkse0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
positively correlatede0

Verbatim

e0

“sugarcane yield was positively correlated with number of millable stalks per unit area”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1179–1265 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend N 260 kg/ha, P 2 O 5 130 kg/ha and K 2 O 150 kg/ha for GT29.

Taxon
sugarcanee1
Material
GT29e0
Outcome
optimum fertilizer ratee0
Value
N 260 kg/ha,P 2 O 5 130 kg/ha,K 2 O 150 kg/hae0

Verbatim

e0

“For GT29, the optimum fertilizer rate was N 260 kg/ha,P 2 O 5 130 kg/ha,K 2 O 150 kg/ha”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1279–1366 · show in text ↑
e1

“new sugarcane variety GT29”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 115–141 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend 90000 buds/ha planting density for GT29.

Taxon
sugarcanee1
Material
GT29e1
Outcome
optimum planting densitye0
Value
90000 buds/hae0

Verbatim

e0

“the optimum planting density was 90000 buds/ha”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1398–1444 · show in text ↑
e1

“new sugarcane variety GT29”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 115–141 · show in text ↑

density · growth · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Positive and negative results

18 papers: 15 positive, 3 negative or no effect

14 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

14 papers more in this group

See all 18 papers →

density · yield · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Positive and negative results

49 papers: 38 positive, 11 negative or no effect

37 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

45 papers more in this group

See all 49 papers →

fertilization · growth · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Positive and negative results

147 papers: 129 positive, 18 negative or no effect

128 papers in the same direction as this paper · 14 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. no effect

143 papers more in this group

See all 147 papers →

fertilization · yield · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Positive and negative results

346 papers: 312 positive, 34 negative or no effect

311 papers in the same direction as this paper · 28 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

342 papers more in this group

See all 346 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.