Paper · 2021 · International Journal of Farm Sciences

Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L) yield and quality in relation to planting methods, spacing and intercropping

Vishakha D Chaudhari; HM Virdia; Naresh Chaudhari

15
claims
25
verbatim quotes
1
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

The study was carried out in south Gujarat at the Navsari Agricultural University, Navsari, Gujarat during 2015–16 and 2016–17. Different planting methods with plant spacing and intercropping system were evaluated on sugarcane crop. Different planting methods including seedlings raised in nursery tray and sprouted one-budded eye with two different plant spacings of 90 x 30 cm and 120 x 30 cm along with four intercrops namely onion, cabbage, greengram and control (sole cane) were tested. The results indicated that significantly higher cane yield (112.98 tonnes/ha) was recorded under the treatment having seedlings raised in nursery tray due to higher number of internodes (22.76), cane girth (10.46 cm) and number of millable canes (1,05,809/ha). The wider row spacing of 120 cm recorded significantly higher cane yield (112.27 tonnes/ha) and yield attributes. Significantly higher cane yield (112.75 tonnes/ha) was observed with sole crop of sugarcane; higher brix (20.43%), pol per cent cane (14.18%) and commercial cane sugar yield (14.44 tonnes/ha) with seedlings raised in nursery tray; higher commercial cane sugar yield (14.21 tonnes/ha) under spacing 120 x 30 cm and higher pol per cent juice (18.38%), pol per cent cane (14.22%) and commercial cane sugar (12.84%) were recorded with sugarcane + greengram which was at par with treatments sugarcane + onion and sugarcane + cabbage. Significantly higher commercial cane sugar yield (14.33 tonnes/ha) was recorded with treatment sugarcane + onion and it was at par with sugarcane + greengram (13.91 tonnes/ha) and control (13.48 tonnes/ha).

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 15

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Nursery-tray seedlings gave higher cane yield.

Taxon
sugarcanet0
Treatment
seedlings raised in nursery traye0
Outcome
cane yielde0
Direction
highere0
Value
112.98 tonnes/hae0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“significantly higher cane yield (112.98 tonnes/ha) was recorded under the treatment having seedlings raised in nursery tray”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 519–642 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–35 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nursery-tray seedlings had more internodes.

Taxon
sugarcanet0
Treatment
seedlings raised in nursery traye0
Outcome
number of internodese0
Direction
highere0
Value
22.76e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“seedlings raised in nursery tray due to higher number of internodes (22.76)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 610–685 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–35 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nursery-tray seedlings had greater cane girth.

Taxon
sugarcanet0
Treatment
seedlings raised in nursery traye0
Outcome
cane girthe0
Direction
highere0
Value
10.46 cme0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“seedlings raised in nursery tray due to higher number of internodes (22.76), cane girth (10.46 cm)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 610–708 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–35 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nursery-tray seedlings had more millable canes.

Taxon
sugarcanet0
Treatment
seedlings raised in nursery traye0
Outcome
number of millable canese0
Direction
highere0
Value
1,05,809/hae0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“seedlings raised in nursery tray due to higher number of internodes (22.76), cane girth (10.46 cm) and number of millable canes (1,05,809/ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 610–751 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–35 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Wider 120 cm rows increased cane yield.

Taxon
sugarcanet0
Treatment
row spacing of 120 cme0
Outcome
cane yielde0
Direction
highere0
Value
112.27 tonnes/hae0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“The wider row spacing of 120 cm recorded significantly higher cane yield (112.27 tonnes/ha) and yield attributes”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 753–865 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–35 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Wider 120 cm rows increased yield attributes.

Taxon
sugarcanet0
Treatment
row spacing of 120 cme0
Outcome
yield attributese0
Direction
highere0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“The wider row spacing of 120 cm recorded significantly higher cane yield (112.27 tonnes/ha) and yield attributes”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 753–865 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–35 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Sole sugarcane had higher cane yield.

Taxon
sugarcanee0
Treatment
sole crop of sugarcanee0
Outcome
cane yielde0
Direction
highere0
Value
112.75 tonnes/hae0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Significantly higher cane yield (112.75 tonnes/ha) was observed with sole crop of sugarcane”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 867–958 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nursery-tray seedlings gave higher brix.

Taxon
sugarcanet0
Treatment
seedlings raised in nursery traye0
Outcome
brixe0
Direction
highere0
Value
20.43%e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“higher brix (20.43%), pol per cent cane (14.18%) and commercial cane sugar yield (14.44 tonnes/ha) with seedlings raised in nursery tray”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 960–1096 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–35 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nursery-tray seedlings gave higher pol per cent cane.

Taxon
sugarcanet0
Treatment
seedlings raised in nursery traye0
Outcome
pol per cent canee0
Direction
highere0
Value
14.18%e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“higher brix (20.43%), pol per cent cane (14.18%) and commercial cane sugar yield (14.44 tonnes/ha) with seedlings raised in nursery tray”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 960–1096 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–35 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nursery-tray seedlings gave higher commercial cane sugar yield.

Taxon
sugarcanet0
Treatment
seedlings raised in nursery traye0
Outcome
commercial cane sugar yielde0
Direction
highere0
Value
14.44 tonnes/hae0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“higher brix (20.43%), pol per cent cane (14.18%) and commercial cane sugar yield (14.44 tonnes/ha) with seedlings raised in nursery tray”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 960–1096 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–35 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Spacing of 120 x 30 cm gave higher commercial cane sugar yield.

Taxon
sugarcanet0
Treatment
spacing 120 x 30 cme0
Outcome
commercial cane sugar yielde0
Direction
highere0
Value
14.21 tonnes/hae0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“higher commercial cane sugar yield (14.21 tonnes/ha) under spacing 120 x 30 cm”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1098–1176 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–35 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sugarcane with greengram gave higher pol per cent juice.

Taxon
sugarcanee0
Treatment
sugarcane + greengrame0
Interactor
greengramVigna radiata var. radiatae0other
Outcome
pol per cent juicee0
Direction
highere0
Value
18.38%e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Interactor · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“higher pol per cent juice (18.38%), pol per cent cane (14.22%) and commercial cane sugar (12.84%) were recorded with sugarcane + greengram”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1181–1319 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sugarcane with greengram gave higher pol per cent cane.

Taxon
sugarcanee0
Treatment
sugarcane + greengrame0
Interactor
greengramVigna radiata var. radiatae0other
Outcome
pol per cent canee0
Direction
highere0
Value
14.22%e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Interactor · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“higher pol per cent juice (18.38%), pol per cent cane (14.22%) and commercial cane sugar (12.84%) were recorded with sugarcane + greengram”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1181–1319 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sugarcane with greengram gave higher commercial cane sugar.

Taxon
sugarcanee0
Treatment
sugarcane + greengrame0
Interactor
greengramVigna radiata var. radiatae0other
Outcome
commercial cane sugare0
Direction
highere0
Value
12.84%e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Interactor · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“higher pol per cent juice (18.38%), pol per cent cane (14.22%) and commercial cane sugar (12.84%) were recorded with sugarcane + greengram”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1181–1319 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Sugarcane with onion had higher commercial cane sugar yield and was comparable with greengram and control.

Taxon
sugarcanee0
Treatment
sugarcane + onione0
Interactor
onionAllium cepae0other
Outcome
commercial cane sugar yielde0
Direction
highere0
Value
14.33 tonnes/hae0
Comparator
sugarcane + greengrame0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Allium cepa
Allium cepa · InteractorMehdi · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Significantly higher commercial cane sugar yield (14.33 tonnes/ha) was recorded with treatment sugarcane + onion and it was at par with sugarcane + greengram (13.91 tonnes/ha) and control (13.48 tonnes/ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1396–1601 · show in text ↑

intercropping · yield · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Results differ

88 papers: 67 positive, 21 negative or no effect

66 papers in the same direction as this paper · 20 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

84 papers more in this group

See all 88 papers →

transplanting · quality: sugar starch · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Positive and negative results

3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

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

7 papers: 5 positive, 2 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. positive

3 papers more in this group

See all 7 papers →

transplanting · yield · 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 · 2 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. no effect

14 papers more in this group

See all 18 papers →

density · quality: sugar starch · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Positive and negative results

20 papers: 16 positive, 4 negative or no effect

15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction

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

16 papers more in this group

See all 20 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 →

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.