The effect of genotype,environment and time of harvest on sugarcane yields in Florida,USA |
| |
| Institution: | 1. University of Florida, EREC, 3200 E. Palm Beach Road, Belle Glade, FL 33430, USA;2. Sugar Cane Growers Cooperative of Florida, P.O. Box 666, Belle Glade, FL 33430, USA;3. USDA-ARS, Sugarcane Field Station, 12990 US Hwy. 441, Canal Point, FL 33438, USA;1. FCAV-UNESP, Departamento de Ciências Exatas, Via de acesso Prof. Paulo Donato Castellane s/n, 14884-900 Jaboticabal, SP, Brazil;2. Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais (INPE), Divisão de Sensoriamento Remoto (DSR), Avenida dos Astronautas 1758, 12227-010 São José dos Campos, SP, Brazil;1. Laboratory of Biotechnology (Labio), Metrology Applied to Life Science Division—National Institute of Metrology, Quality and Technology (Inmetro), Duque de Caxias, RJ, Brazil;2. Laboratory of Biomass Characterization, Bioenergy Research Institute (IPBEN), São Paulo State University (UNESP), Rio Claro, SP, Brazil;3. Laboratory of Biocatalysis, National Institute of Technology (INT), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil;4. Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Chemistry Institute, Department of Biochemistry, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil;5. Laboratory of Cell Structure, Institute of Biophysics Carlos Chagas Filho, Rio de Janeiro Federal University, National Science and Technology Institute in Structural Biology and Bioimaging, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil;6. The National Institute of Science and Technology for Structural Biology and Bioimaging, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil;7. Federal University of Rio de Janeiro—UFRJ, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil;1. Luiz de Queiroz College of Agriculture, University of São Paulo, Brazil;2. Brazil Business Outreach, Brazil;3. São Carlos School of Engineering, University of São Paulo, Brazil;1. State Key Laboratory of Soil and Sustainable Agriculture, Institute of Soil Science, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Nanjing 210008, China;2. Graduate School of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100081, China;3. Development of Agricultural Ecological Environment, Jiaxing Academy of Agricultural Science, Jiaxing 314016, China;4. College of Forest Resources and Environment, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China;5. College of Biological, Chemical Sciences and Engineering, Jiaxing University, Jiaxing 314001, China;6. Institute of Food Crops, Jiangsu High Quality Rice R & D Center, Jiangsu Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Nanjing 210014, China;7. Department of Plant and Soil Science, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK 74078, USA;1. Cátedra de Mejoramiento Vegetal y Producción de Semillas, IICAR-CONICET, Campo Experimental J.F. Villarino CCNo. 14, S2125ZAA Zavalla, SF, Argentina;2. Cátedra de Genética, IICAR-CONICET, Campo Exp. J.F. Villarino CCNo. 14, S2125ZAA Zavalla, SF, Argentina;1. Division of Energy and Climate Studies, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Brinellvägen 68, SE-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden;2. Ecosystems Services and Management (ESM) Program, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Schlossplatz 1, A-2361 Laxenburg, Austria |
| |
| Abstract: | Sugarcane (Saccharum spp.) is grown across different production environments and is harvested over a 5-month (mid-October–mid-March) period in Florida. While many studies have examined genotype × environment interactions and their implications for breeding program design, knowledge is limited regarding interactions of genotype, environment and time of harvest and their implications for growers. Three non-confounded data sets (“case studies”) were analyzed to determine the effects of these three factors on kilograms of sugar per ton (KST), tons of cane per hectare (TCH) and tons of sugar per hectare (TSH) for recently released cultivars in south Florida. Cultivar (genotype), environment, time of harvest and their interactions had significant effects on KST, TCH and TSH. Sugarcane KST and TSH were reduced by 28 and 29%, respectively, when harvested in mid-October compared to optimum harvest dates in February. TSH varied from 2 to 46% across environments. The Lakeview “warmland” site near Lake Okeechobee recorded significantly higher TCH and TSH than other sites, and cultivars CP88-1508 and CP88-1834 recorded higher relative yields at Lakeview. Cultivar TSH varied up to 51% across the case studies. CP89-2143 had significantly higher KST than other cultivars in all 21 pairwise comparisons in the three case studies, and a remarkably high, stable KST ranking across environments. Growers in the Everglades Agricultural Area interested in improving sugarcane crop sucrose concentration should plant CP89-2143. However, significant genotype × environment interactions for other cultivars support continued multi-locational evaluation of sugarcane germplasm both during the breeding program and following cultivar release. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
