Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Plant Science Today (PST)

Research Articles

Vol. 13 No. sp1 (2026): Recent Advances in Agriculture

Integrated management of genotype, row spacing and fertiliser application can lead to sustainable sugarcane production in the Indo-Gangetic Plains of India

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.11340
Submitted
19 August 2025
Published
17-02-2026

Abstract

A poor nutrient management strategy leads to an imbalance in the soil nutrient status, which could have a long-term negative influence on crop output. Keeping this in view, a field experiment was conducted at Sugarcane Research Institute, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Central Agriculture University, Pusa, Samastipur Bihar, to assess performance of early maturing sugarcane genotypes with two row configurations (90 and 120 cm) under two levels of macronutrients (NPK) i.e. N150 + P37.1 + K49.8 and N187.5 + P46.4 + K62.3 kg/ha on soil nutrient equilibrium sugarcane crop during 2018–19. Genotype CoP 13437 recorded a significantly higher tiller population and number of millable canes (169.7 and 114.9 × 103/ha) while genotype CoSe 95422 showed the highest B:C ratio (2.33). Maximum cane yield was observed in 90 cm row spacing with the increased NPK level and the increase in cane yield under N187.5 + P46.4 + K62.3 kg/ha was to the tune of 27.5 %. Genotype CoSe 95422 produces a higher cane yield (102.6 t/ha) of sugarcane, followed by CoP 13437 (101.5 t/ha). The uptake of macronutrients increased when more fertiliser was applied (280, 27.3 and 318.2 NPK kg/ha). With increasing fertility levels (N187.5 + P46.4 + K62.3 kg/ha), a net gain of NPK was observed. Therefore, balanced nutrient management combined with appropriate genotype selection and row spacing significantly enhanced sugarcane productivity and improved soil nutrient status for sustainable cultivation.

References

  1. 1. Kumar N, Sow S, Rana L, Ranjan S, Singh AK. Trash amended with Trichoderma effects on cane yield, soil carbon dynamics and enzymatic activities under plant–ratoon system of sugarcane in calcareous soil. Sugar Tech. 2025;27:134-47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12355-024-01467-0
  2. 2. Coto Arbelo O, Sandhu H, Momotaz A, Davidson W, Sandoya G, Baltazar M, et al. Selection via cane yield and ratooning ability of sugarcane genotypes in sandy soils in Florida. Sugar Tech. 2021;23:986-98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12355-021-00973-9
  3. 3. Sow S, Kumar N, Rana L, Singh H, Kumar V, Kavita, et al. Soil test crop response-based integrated nutrient management for enhancing agronomic performance of sugarcane with different planting materials. Not Bot Horti Agrobo. 2024;52(3):13934. https://doi.org/10.15835/nbha52313934
  4. 4. Vennila A, Palaniswami C, Durai AA, Shanthi RM, Radhika K. Partitioning of major nutrients and nutrient use efficiency of sugarcane genotypes. Sugar Tech. 2021;23:741-6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12355-020-00948-2
  5. 5. Chattha AA, Rafique M, Afzal M, Ahmed F, Bilal M. Prospects of sugar industry and sugarcane cultivation in Punjab. In: Proc 41st Annu Conv Pak Soc Sugar Technol; 2006 Aug 21-22; Rawalpindi. p. 173-81.
  6. 6. Barnabas L, Ramadass A, Amalraj RS, Palaniyandi M, Rasappa V. Sugarcane proteomics: Current status, challenges and future prospects. Proteomics. 2015;15(10):1658-70. https://doi.org/10.1002/pmic.201400463
  7. 7. Akhtar K, Ain NU, Prasad PV, Naz M, Aslam MM, Djalovic I, et al. Physiological, molecular and environmental insights into plant nitrogen uptake and metabolism under abiotic stresses. Plant Genome. 2024;17(2):e20461. https://doi.org/10.1002/tpg2.20461
  8. 8. Khan F, Siddique AB, Shabala S, Zhou M, Zhao C. Phosphorus plays key roles in regulating plant physiological responses to abiotic stresses. Plants. 2023;12(15):2861. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12152861
  9. 9. Ellsworth PZ, White PM Jr. Row spacing and use of plant-available water in sugarcane cultivation in water-abundant Louisiana. Agronomy. 2022;12(7):1586. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12071586
  10. 10. Martins TS, Magalhães Filho JR, Cruz LP, Almeida RL, Marchiori PE, Silva AL, et al. Light interception, conversion efficiencies and biomass partitioning in sugarcane varieties with varying canopy architecture under subtropical conditions. Field Crops Res. 2025;322:109724. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2024.109724
  11. 11. Sinha UP, Singh H, Singh BK. Effect of genotypes and fertility levels on growth, yield and quality of sugarcane under rainfed condition. Indian Sugar. 2005;55(7):23-6.
  12. 12. Kandel R, Yang X, Song J, Wang J. Potentials, challenges and genetic and genomic resources for sugarcane biomass improvement. Front Plant Sci. 2018;9:151. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2018.00151
  13. 13. Sow S, Kumar N, Rana L, Singh AK, Kumar V, Singh H, et al. Suitable planting material with integrated nutrient management enhances productivity, nutrient use efficiency and profitability of sugarcane. J Soil Sci Plant Nutr. 2025;1-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42729-025-02358-3
  14. 14. Spencer GL, Meade GP. Sugarcane handbook. London: John Wiley & Sons; 1955.
  15. 15. Nelson DW, Sommers LE. Total nitrogen analysis of soil and plant tissues. J Assoc Off Anal Chem. 1980;63:770-8. https://doi.org/10.1093/jaoac/63.4.770
  16. 16. Page AL, Miller RH, Keeney DR. Methods of soil analysis. Part 2. Madison (WI): ASA & SSSA; 1982.
  17. 17. Subbiah BV, Asija GL. A rapid procedure for estimation of available nitrogen in soils. Curr Sci. 1956;25:259-60.
  18. 18. Olsen SR, Cole CV, Watanabe FS. Estimation of available phosphorus in soils by extraction with sodium bicarbonate. USDA Circ No. 939. Washington (DC): US Gov Print Off; 1954.
  19. 19. Jackson ML. Soil chemical analysis. New Delhi: Prentice Hall of India Pvt Ltd; 1973. p. 183-408.
  20. 20. Gomez KA, Gomez AA. Statistical procedures for agricultural research. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1984.
  21. 21. Raza MA, Feng LY, van der Werf W, Cai GR, Khalid MHB, Iqbal N, et al. Narrow–wide-row planting increases radiation use efficiency and seed yield of intercrops in relay intercropping. Food Energy Secur. 2019;8(3):e170. https://doi.org/10.1002/fes3.170
  22. 22. Kumar N. Productivity, quality and nutrient balance in spring sugarcane (Saccharum spp. hybrid complex) under organic and inorganic nutrition. Indian J Agron. 2012;57(1):68-73. https://doi.org/10.59797/ija.v57i1.4601
  23. 23. Singh AK, Lal M, Singh SN. Agronomic performance of new sugarcane genotypes under different planting geometry and nitrogen levels. Indian J Sugarcane Technol. 2014;26(1):6-9.
  24. 24. Anas M, Verma KK, Riaz M, Qiang L, Liao F, Liu Y, et al. Physio-morphological and biochemical mechanisms of nitrogen use efficiency in sugarcane (Saccharum spp.). J Plant Interact. 2021;16(1):332-43. https://doi.org/10.1080/17429145.2021.1933224
  25. 25. Castro SGQD, Coelho AP, Castro SAQD, Souza Chiachia TRD, Castro RAD, Lemos LB, et al. Fertiliser source and application method influence sugarcane production and nutritional status. Front Plant Sci. 2023;14:1099589. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2023.1099589
  26. 26. Zhong N, Huang J, Wang J, Li W, Zhang Y, Zeng X, et al. Effects of fertilization depth on sugarcane quality and soil fertility. Sci Rep. 2025;15(1):36536. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-17804-6
  27. 27. Appunu C, Hemaprabha G, Sreenivasa V, Durai AA, Mohanraj K, Elayaraja K, et al. Evaluation of sugarcane genotypes (Saccharum sp. hybrid) for multi-trait stability across environments. Ind Crops Prod. 2024;219:118993. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2024.118993
  28. 28. Kumar N, Singh H, Kumar R, Kumari G. Nutrient uptake, yield and economics of high-sugar early sugarcane genotypes under different planting seasons and fertility levels. Indian J Agric Sci. 2014;84(4):444-51. https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v84i4.39452
  29. 29. Kumar N, Singh H, Kumar R, Singh VP. Productivity and profitability of sugarcane genotypes as affected by fertility levels and planting seasons. Indian J Agron. 2012;57(2):180-5. https://doi.org/10.59797/ija.v57i2.4619
  30. 30. de Souza FG, Alvarez RdF, Teodoro LPR, Sales AC, Campos CNS, Teodoro PE. Planting arrangement and seedling type influence yield and quality of ratoon sugarcane. Sugar Tech. 2022;24:1590-6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12355-021-01086-z
  31. 31. Yadav SP, Singh SC, Ram B. Effect of plant nutrients on yield and quality of sugarcane. In: Natl Symp Bio-energy Sustain Dev; 2014; Coimbatore (TN), India. p. 170.
  32. 32. Kumar N, Kumar V. Production potential and nitrogen fractionation of sugarcane-based cropping system as influenced by planting materials and nitrogen nutrition. Sugar Tech. 2020;22(4):622-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12355-020-00809-y
  33. 33. Watanabe K, Nakabaru M, Taira E, Ueno M, Kawamitsu Y. Relationships between nutrients and sucrose concentration in sugarcane juice and its use for nutrient diagnosis in Japan. Plant Prod Sci. 2016;19(2):215-22. https://doi.org/10.1080/1343943X.2015.1128106

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.