Development of tillering pattern under transplanting and direct sowing methods in spring planted sugarcane M. O. A. Galal *, A. M. Abou-Salama **, E. A. Teama **, and A. Z. Ahmed * * Sugar Crops Research Institute, ARC, Giza ** Agronomy Dept., College of Agriculture, Assiut University, Egypt

Facts and assumptions Egypt's liberalization of its agricultural economic system led to major changes in farmers' behavior. Due to limited water resources, the available area for farming is used in a rotation including more than one crop per year. The case is different in sugarcane growing area where the crop remains in soil for the whole year.

A newly emerged problem is currently affecting spring planted crop. The growers intentionally delay cane spring planting till the harvest of the preceding crop (wheat) instead of growing temporary cover crop that can be cleared off the field in late February to plant the cane in March. As sugarcane growers are bound with contracts with the cane sugar company, they should start harvest of spring planted cane in a schedule that is prepared by the company. This causes a severe reduction in yield because of the decrease in crop age by about three months

Many workers investigated the effect of decreasing growing season length on cane yield including Duhra et al. (1993), Tripathi and Pandey (1993), Shiv-Kumar and Srivastava (1993), Jhansi and Rao (1996),and Dilip et al. (1998). All of them agreed that shorter growing season due to late planting reduces cane yield. Similar findings were also reported in Egypt by ElGergawy and El-Shafai (2000), Mohamed and El-Taib (2007a and b). Review of literature

Transplanting was tested as a measure to overcome the negative effects of delayed planting by many workers. Basher et al. (1993),Rahman et al. (1993), Ishimine et al. (1994) repoted that the highest yield of transplanted cane was obtained through higher yield attributes such as higher tillers and millable canes. Hiyane et al. (2006) suggested that settling transplanting is one of the important agronomic practices that could enable weed control and better yield of sugarcane.

Materials and Methods The present study was carried out at El-Mattana Research Station, Luxor Governorate, Agricultural Research Center, Egypt (Latitude 25 o 18 N). Soil type of the experimental location was sandy loam with an average pH of 8.1, available N of 20 ppm, Available P of 11 ppm, and available K of 516 ppm. The work was conducted during the two plant crop seasons of 2010/2011 and 2011/2012 to examine tillering pattern of three sugarcane varieties planted using direct sets planting (DS) vs. seedling transplanting (ST) under different spring planting dates.

The tested varieties were G.T. 54/9, G. 98/28 and G. 84/47. five planting methods namely; direct sowing on mid-March, mid-April & mid-May along with two transplanting dates on mid-April and mid-May. Cuttings for transplants were sown on the 1 st of March in both seasons. A split plot with four replications was used for the experiment. – The three varieties were randomly distributed to the main plot. – The five planting methods (3dirct sowing and 2 transplanting methods) were assigned to sub-plot. Duncan multiple rang test at 5% was used for means comparisons.

One meter segment in each experimental plot (42 m 2 6 rows, 1 m wide and 7 m length)was marked to count the number of tillers on bi- weekly basis starting after full germination for 18 weeks and at harvest. In addition, regression equations were calculated for each variety and planting methods in each season.

Table 1: Average weekly recorded temperature data period season season highlow average highlow average Mar Mar M ar 28-Apr Apr Apr Apr Apr 25-May May May May May May 30-Jun Jun Jun Jun Jun 27-Jul Jul Jul

Table 2: Mean squares for tiller numbers per meter as affected by varieties and planting methods in Season. SOV 4 weeks 6 weeks 8 weeks 10 weeks 12 weeks 14 weeks 16 weeks 18 weeks At harvest Rep Ns 1.52 Ns 6.01 Ns 6.17 Ns Ns 5.48 Ns 6.40 Ns Ns * Var Ns 2.81 Ns Ns 7.85 Ns Ns Ns * * * Error a Planting method ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** * Var. * pl * 6.25 * Ns * 8.60 Ns 8.12 Ns 8.25 Ns 2.64 Ns 2.12 Ns Error b

Table 3: Mean squares for tiller numbers per meter as affected by varieties and planting methods in Season. SOV 4 weeks 6 weeks 8 weeks 10 weeks 12 weeks 14 weeks 16 weeks 18 weeks At harvest Rep Ns Ns Ns Ns Ns Ns Ns Ns 9.97 Ns Var Ns Ns Ns Ns Ns * Ns Ns * Error a Planting method ** ** ** ** ** Ns Ns ** Ns Var. * pl * Ns Ns Ns Ns Ns Ns Ns * Error b

Table 4: Average tiller numbers per meter for the tested varieties in Season. Variety 4 weeks 6 weeks 8 weeks 10 weeks 12 weeks 14 weeks 16 weeks 18 weeks At harvest G.T.54/ a a a a a a a a a G.84/ a a a a a a b ab b G.98/ a a a a a a b b b Table 5: Average tiller numbers per meter for the tested varieties in Season Variety4 weeks 6 weeks 8 weeks 10 weeks 12 weeks 14 weeks 16 weeks 18 weeks At harvest G.T.54/ a a a a a a a a a G.84/ a ab a a 19.45b a a a a ab G.98/ a 8.55 b 9.95 a a b b a a b

Fig.1: Graphical presentation of the development of actual number of tillers per meter for the three examined varieties during and seasons (A&B). A B

variety G.T.54/9Y= XY= X G.84/47Y= XY= X G.98/28Y= XY= X Table 6: Regression equation of tiller number per meter as affected by age of the three tested varieties in and seasons. Fig. 2: Graphical presentation of the regression line of number of tillers per meter and age in field for the three examined varieties during and seasons (C&D). C D

Table 7: Average tiller numbers per meter as affected by planting methods in Season. Planting method 4 weeks 6 weeks 8 weeks 10 weeks 12 weeks 14 weeks 16 weeks 18 weeks At harvest DS. March 3.58 e 6.75 d c d c ab a a ab DS. April 6.91 d 9.16 c c d c c b b b ST. April a a a a a a a a a DS. May b b b c bc c b b b ST. May 9.25 c b b b b b a a ab

Table 8: Average tiller numbers per meter as affected by planting methods in Season. Planting method 4 weeks 6 weeks 8 weeks 10 weeks 12 weeks 14 weeks 16 weeks 18 weeks At harvest DS. March 5.25 c 7.83 c b b b a ab ab b DS. April a a a a a a a a a ST. April 7.25 b 8.58 c b b b a ab a ab DS. May a b b b b a b b ab ST. May 8.25 b 8.83 c 9.75 b 13,75 b b a b b ab

Fig.3 : Graphical presentation of the development of actual number of tillers per meter for the five planting methods during and seasons (A&B). A B

Table 9: Regression equation of tiller number per meter as affected by age for the five tested planting methods in and seasons. Planting method DS. MarchY= XY= X DS. AprilY= XY= X ST. AprilY= XY= X DS. MayY= XY= X ST. MayY= XY= X C D

Conclusion under the conditions of this work, it is clear that transplanting of sugarcane can be a measure to compensate for delayed planting of spring sugarcane without adverse effect on tillering pattern or the final number of millable stalks. The slight decrease in number of millable stalks can be acceptable by farmers due to the economic return of the preceding crop.