36
United States Department of Agriculture Agricultural Research Service ARS–170 July 2009 Evaluation of New Canal Point Sugarcane Clones 2007–2008 Harvest Season
i
United States Department of Agriculture
AgriculturalResearchService
ARS–170
July 2009
Evaluation of New Canal Point Sugarcane Clones
2007–2008 Harvest Season
ii
Abstract
Glaz, B., S.J. Edmé, J.C. Comstock, R.W. Davidson, N.C. Glynn, R.A. Gilbert, S. Sood, and I.A. del Blanco. 2009. Evaluation of New Canal Point Sugarcane Clones: 2007–2008 Harvest Season, ARS-170. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Washington, D.C., 36 pp.
Twenty-eight replicated experiments were conducted on 9 farms (representing 4 muck and 2 sand soils) to evaluate 44 new Canal Point (CP) and 11 new Canal Point and Clewiston (CPCL) clones of sugarcane from the CP 03, CP 02, CP 01, CP 00, CPCL 01, CPCL 00, and CPCL 99 series. Experiments compared the cane and sugar yields of the new clones, complex hybrids of Saccharum spp., primarily with yields of CP 89-2143, and to a lesser extent with CP 72-2086 and CP 78-1628. All three were major sugarcane cultivars in Florida. Each clone was rated for its tolerance to diseases and cold temperatures. Based on results of these and previous years’ tests, two new clones—CP 01-1372 and CPCL 97-2730—were released for commercial production in Florida.
The audience for this publication includes growers, geneticists and other researchers, extension agents, and individuals who are interested in sugarcane cultivar development.
Keywords: Brown rust, histosol, muck soil, orange rust, organic soil, Puccinia kuehnii, Puccinia melanocephala, Saccharum spp., Sporisorium scitaminea, sugarcane cultivars, sugarcane smut, sugarcane yields, sugar yields.
Mention of trade names or commercial products in this publication is solely for the purpose of providing specific information and does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the University of Florida, or the Florida Sugar Cane League, Inc., over others not mentioned.
While supplies last, single copies of this publication can be obtained at no cost from Barry Glaz, USDA-ARS-SAA, U.S. Sugarcane Field Station, 12990 U.S. Highway 441 N, Canal Point, FL 33438; or by e-mail at [email protected].
Copies of this publication may be purchased in various formats (microfiche, photocopy, CD, print on demand) from the National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161, (800) 553-6847, www.ntis.gov.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge the assistance of Velton Banks, Matthew Paige, Johnnie Tejeda, and Juan Tejeda of the Florida Sugar Cane League, Inc., in conducting the fieldwork described herein; and of Philip Aria and Iwona Pajak of USDA-ARS for conducting laboratory work and data input for this report. The authors also express their appreciation to the growers who provided land, labor, cultivation, and other support for these experiments.
July 2009
iii
Contents
Abbreviations ............................................................................................................................................. iv
Test procedures ...........................................................................................................................................3
Results and discussion ................................................................................................................................6
Plant-cane crop, CP 03, CPCL 00, and CPCL 01 series on muck soils ................................................6
Plant-cane crop, CP 03, CPCL 00, and CPCL 01 series on sand soils ..................................................7
Plant-cane crop, CP 02 and CPCL 99 series .........................................................................................7
First-ratoon crop, CP 02 and CPCL 99 series .......................................................................................7
First-ratoon crop, CP 01 series ..............................................................................................................8
Second-ratoon crop, CP 01 series ..........................................................................................................8
Second-ratoon crop, CP 00 series ..........................................................................................................8
Summary .....................................................................................................................................................8
References ...................................................................................................................................................9
Tables ........................................................................................................................................................12
iv
Abbreviations
CP Canal Point
CPCL Canal Point and Clewiston
CV Coefficient of variation
KS/T Theoretical recoverable yield of kg 96o sugar in kg per metric ton of cane
LSD Least significant difference
NIRS Near infrared reflectance spectroscopy
TC/H Cane yields in metric tons per hectare
TS/H Theoretical yields of sugar in metric tons per hectare
USSC United States Sugar Corporation
1
Evaluation of New Canal Point Sugarcane Clones
2007–2008 Harvest Season
B. Glaz, S.J. Edmé, J.C. Comstock, R.W. Davidson, N.C. Glynn, R.A. Gilbert, S. Sood, and I.A. del Blanco
Breeding and selection for clones that can be used for commercial production of sugarcane, complex hybrids of Saccharum spp., support the continued success of this crop in Florida. Though produc-tion of sugar per unit area is a principal selection characteristic, it is not the only factor on which sugarcane is evaluated. In addition, analyses are made on the concentration of sugar and on the fiber content of the cane. The economic value of each clone integrates its harvesting, transportation, and milling costs with its expected returns from sugar production. Deren et al. (1995) developed an economic index for clonal evaluation in Florida. Evaluation of clonal suitability also includes its reactions to endemic pathogens.
This report summarizes the cane production and sugar yields of the clones in the plant-cane, first-ratoon, and second-ratoon stage IV experiments sampled in Florida’s 2007–2008 sugarcane harvest season. This information is used to identify com-mercial cultivars in Florida and identify clones with useful characteristics for the Canal Point program. The information is also used by represen-tatives of other sugar industries to request Canal Point clones.
The time of year and the duration that a clone yields its highest quantity of sugar per unit area is important because the Florida sugarcane harvest season extends from October to April. Because sugarcane is commercially grown in plant and ratoon crops, clones are evaluated accordingly. Adaptability to mechanical harvesters is an impor-tant trait in Florida. All sugarcane sent to Florida mills and much of the sugarcane used for planting is mechanically harvested. Before a new clone is released, Florida growers judge its acceptability for mechanical operations.
Clones with desired agronomic characteristics also must be productive in the presence of harm-ful diseases, insects, and weeds. Some pathogens rapidly develop new, virulent races or strains. Because of these changes in pathogen populations, clonal resistance is not considered permanent. The selection team must try not to discard clones that have sufficient resistance or tolerance to pests, but it also must discard clones that are too susceptible to pests to be grown commercially.
The disease that has caused the most difficulty in Florida in selecting resistant sugarcane cultivars has been brown rust, caused by Puccinia melano-cephala Syd & P. Syd. From 2000 to 2005, this program discarded 15 clones that were within 1 year of commercial release due to new infections of brown rust. During the summer of 2007, com-mercial sugarcane fields in Florida were infected with orange rust, caused by Puccinia kuehnii E.J. Butler (Comstock et al. 2008). This program has had the most success in selecting resistant culti-vars for sugarcane smut, caused by Sporisorium scitaminea (Syd.) M. Piepenbring, M. Stoll, & F. Oberwinkler. Other diseases the Canal Point pro-gram must contend with are leaf scald, caused by Xanthomonas albilineans (Ashby) Dow; sugarcane yellow leaf virus, a disease caused by a luteovirus (Lockhart et al. 1996); sugarcane mosaic strain E., and ratoon stunting, caused by Leifsonia xyli subsp. xyli Evtsuhenko et al. Ratoon stunting has probably been the most damaging, though the least visible, sugarcane disease in Florida. A program to improve resistance of CP clones to ratoon stunting is underway (Comstock et al. 2001). In addition to
Glaz is a research agronomist; Edmé is a research geneticist; Comstock is a research plant pathologist; Glynn is a research biologist; Sood is a plant pathologist; and del Blanco is a research geneticist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricul-tural Research Service, U.S. Sugarcane Field Station, Canal Point, FL. Davidson is an agronomist, Florida Sugar Cane League, Inc., Clewiston, FL. Gilbert is an associate professor in agronomy, Everglades Research and Education Center, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Belle Glade, FL.
2
improved resistance, growers have the options to minimize losses by planting stalks that do not con-tain the bacteria that cause ratoon stunting. This can be accomplished either by planting stalks that have been treated with hot-water therapy that kills the ratoon stunting bacteria or by using disease-free stalks derived from meristem tissue culture.
Scientists at Canal Point screen clones in their selection program for resistance to brown rust, orange rust, smut, leaf scald, sugarcane yellow leaf virus, mosaic, ratoon stunting, and eye spot caused by Bipolaris sacchari (E.J. Butler) Shoemaker. Eye spot is not currently a commercial problem in Florida.
Sugarcane growers in Florida depend more on tolerance to sugarcane diseases than on resistance because of the difficulty of developing high-yielding cultivars that are resistant to all diseases. In the 2007 growing season, 6 cultivars comprised 89.9 percent of Florida’s sugarcane (Glaz 2008). All eight of these six cultivars—CP 72-2086, CP 78-1628, CP 80-1743, CP 84-1198, CP 88-1762, and CP 89-2143—were at least moderately sus-ceptible to one or more of the following sugarcane diseases: brown rust, orange rust, mosaic, leaf scald, smut, and ratoon stunting. Glaz et al. (1986) presented a formula and procedure to help growers distribute their available sugarcane cultivars while considering possible attacks of new pests.
Damaging insects in Florida are the sugarcane borer, Diatraea saccharalis (F.); the sugarcane lace bug, Leptodictya tabida; the sugarcane wireworm, Melanotus communis; the sugarcane grub, Ligyrus subtropicus; and the West Indian cane weevil, Metamasius hemipterus (L.).
Winter freezes are common in the region of Flori-da where much of the sugarcane is produced. The severity and duration of a freeze and the toler-ance of specific sugarcane cultivars are the major factors that determine how much damage occurs. The damage caused by such freezes ranges from no damage to death of the mature sugarcane plant. The rate of deterioration of juice quality after a
freeze depends on the ambient air temperature: Warmer post-freeze temperatures result in more rapid deterioration of juice quality. Freezes also damage young sugarcane plants. Stalk populations may decline after severe freezes kill aboveground parts of recently emerged plants. The most severe damage occurs when the growing point is frozen, which is more likely if the plant has emerged from the soil. Tai and Miller (1996) reported that resis-tance to a light freeze (1.7 ºC to -2.8 ºC) was not significantly correlated to fiber content, but resis-tance to a moderate freeze (-5.0 ºC) was.
Each year at Canal Point, 50,000 to 100,000 seedlings are evaluated from crosses derived from a diverse germplasm collection. However, Deren (1995) suggested that the genetic base of U.S. sug-arcane breeding programs was too narrow. About 80 percent of the cytoplasm in commercial sugar-cane is Saccharum officinarum. This year, about half of the parental clones in our program origi-nated from Canal Point, while the other half were developed by the United States Sugar Corporation (USSC) (CL clones). Additional parents originate from Louisiana or Texas breeding programs.
The USSC, based in Clewiston, Florida, discontin-ued its breeding program in 2004. Approximately the top 25 percent of clones in all selection stages from the USSC program were donated to the Canal Point program. Clones from the USSC program have traditionally been designated with a CL (Clewiston) prefix. Donated clones in this report that were evaluated in CP trials will have a CPCL (Canal Point and Clewiston) designation and retain their USSC numbers.
The seedling stage planted in 2008 contained approximately 63,000 new clones that originated from true seeds planted in the greenhouse and was then transplanted to the field. Once selected as seedlings, clones are vegetatively propagated. Because of this vegetative propagation, from this stage (seedling stage) on in the selection program, each plant (clone) is genetically identical to its precursor, assuming no mutations. The stage I trial, selected from approximately 51,000 seedlings and
3
planted in December 2007, contained approxi-mately 14,000 new clones. The stage II trial, plant-ed in January 2008, had 1,319 new clones. The 2007 plant-cane stage III trial had 135 new clones (101 CP clones and 34 CPCL clones) that were tested in replicated experiments on 4 grower farms. Each of the first three stages (seedling, stage I, and stage II) was evaluated for 1 year in the plant-cane crop at Canal Point. Selection is visual in the seed-ling phase. In stage 1, the first selection process is visual. The clones that are selected visually are then analyzed with a hand-punch Brix, and heavy emphasis is placed on Brix results. The primary selection criteria for stage II and all subsequent stages are sugar yield (in metric tons of sugar per hectare), theoretical recoverable sucrose, cane tonnage, and disease resistance.
The 135 stage III clones are evaluated for 2 years, in the plant-cane and first-ratoon crops, in com-mercial sugarcane fields at four locations—three with organic soils and one with a sand soil. The 13 to 14 most promising clones identified in stage III receive continued testing for 4 more years in the stage IV experiments where they are planted in successive years and evaluated in the plant-cane, first-ratoon, and second-ratoon crops. Clones that successfully complete these experimental phases undergo 2 to 4 years of evaluation and expansion by the Florida Sugar Cane League, Inc., before commercial release. Some of the League’s evalua-tion occurs concurrently with the stage IV evalua-tions. The Canal Point selection program is sum-marized in appendix 1.
Edmé et al. (2005) found that the CP program has been responsible for substantial sugarcane yield improvements in Florida. However, these yield improvements occurred on the muck soils on which sugarcane is grown in Florida (about 80% of Florida’s sugarcane) and not on the 20 percent of Florida’s sugarcane that is grown on sand soils. Based on this finding, scientists are conducting a comprehensive review of the CP program to iden-tify changes that can improve results for sand soils without compromising successes on muck soils. Based on the recommendation of Glaz and Kang
(2008), one location with a muck soil was dropped from stage IV and one with a sand soil was added. Thus, this program now plants at three, rather than at two locations in stage IV on sand soils, but it has not increased the total number of locations in stage IV.
Clones with characteristics that may be valuable for sugarcane breeding programs are identified throughout the selection process. Even though the Canal Point program breeds and selects sugarcane in Florida, some CP clones have been productive commercial cultivars in Texas and outside of the United States. Sugarcane geneticists in other pro-grams often request clones from Canal Point. From May 2007 to April 2008, clones or seeds from the Canal Point program were requested from and sent to Costa Rica, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Pakistan, the People’s Republic of China, and Senegal.
Test Procedures
In 26 experiments, 44 new CP and CPCL clones were evaluated. Three clones of the CP 03 series, eight clones of the CPCL 00 series, and two clones of the CPCL 01 series were evaluated at five farms with muck soils in the plant-cane crop. Seven clones of the CP 03 series, three clones of the CPCL 00 series, and three clones of the CPCL 01 series were evaluated at two farms with sand soils in the plant-cane crop. Eight clones (CP 03-1160, CP 03-1491, CP 03-2188, CPCL 00-1373, CPCL 00-4027, CPCL 00-6131, CPCL 01-0271, and CPCL 01-0571) were evaluated at all seven loca-tions (muck and sand soils), five were evaluated on muck soils only, and five were evaluated on sand soils only. Six clones of the CP 02 series and seven clones of the CPCL 99 series were evaluated at two farms in the plant-cane crop and at eight farms in the first-ratoon crop. Thirteen clones of the CP 01 series were evaluated at two farms in the first-ratoon crop and at seven farms in the second-ratoon crop. Fourteen clones of the CP 00 series were evaluated at two farms in the second-ratoon crop.
CP 89-2143 was the primary reference clone. For experiments of new CP and CPCL clones on sand
4
soils, CP 78-1628 was an important secondary reference clone. In 2007, CP 89-2143 was the most widely grown cultivar in Florida and CP 78-1628 the most widely grown cultivar on sand soils in Florida (Glaz 2008). CP 72-2086 was sometimes used as a reference clone for KS/T. CP 72-2086 was the sixth most widely grown cultivar in Flori-da in 2007 (Glaz 2008).
Agronomic practices, such as fertilization, pest and water control, and cultivation were conducted by the farmer or farm manager responsible for the field in which each experiment was planted.
Both second-ratoon experiments and the first-ratoon experiment of the CP 01 series planted at Okeelanta Corporation (Okeelanta) south of South Bay were conducted on Dania muck soil. Also, the plant-cane and first-ratoon experiments at A. Duda and Sons’, Inc. (Duda), southeast of Belle Glade, was conducted on Dania muck. As described by Rice et al. (2002), Dania muck is the shallowest of the histosols (organic soils) comprised primar-ily of decomposed sawgrass (Cladium jamaicense Crantz) in the Everglades Agricultural Area. The maximum depth to the bedrock of Dania muck is 51 cm. The other organic soils similar to Dania muck are Lauderhill muck (51 to 91 cm depth to bedrock), Pahokee muck (91 to 130 cm to bed-rock), and Terra Ceia muck (more than 130 cm to bedrock).
All experiments at Knight Management, Inc. (Knight) southwest of 20-Mile Bend, Sugar Farms Cooperative North—SFI Region S05 (SFI) near 20-Mile Bend in Palm Beach County, and Wedg-worth Farms, Inc. (Wedgworth) east of Belle Glade, were conducted on Lauderhill muck. In addition, the plant-cane experiment at Duda, both plant-cane experiments at Okeelanta, and the CP 02 first-ratoon experiment at Okeelanta were con-ducted on Lauderhill muck.
All three experiments at Sugar Farms Coopera-tive North—Osceola Region S03 (Osceola) were conducted on Pahokee muck. The three experi-ments at Eastgate Farms, Inc. (Eastgate) north of
Belle Glade were conducted on Torry muck. The three experiments at Hilliard Brothers of Florida, Ltd. (Hilliard) west of Clewiston were on Malabar sand. The three experiments at Lykes Brothers, Inc. (Lykes) near Moore Haven in Glades County were on Pompano fine sand.
The CP 02 and CPCL 99 series experiment in the plant-cane crop at Okeelanta, as well as the CP 01 series in the first-ratoon crop and the CP 00 se-ries second-ratoon experiment at Okeelanta, were planted on fields in successive sugarcane rotations. In this rotation in Florida, a new crop of sugarcane is planted within about 2 months of the previous sugarcane harvest, a practice that increases the number of harvests per year but decreases yields per hectare (Glaz and Ulloa 1995). All other ex-periments were planted in fields that had not been cropped to sugarcane for approximately 1 year. In all experiments, plots were arranged in random-ized-complete-block designs with six replications.
In all experiments of CP and CPCL clones, all plots had three rows, a border row, and two inside rows used for yield determination. These two rows were 10.7 m long and 3.0 m wide (0.0032 ha). The distance between rows was l.5 m, and 1.5-m alleys separated the front and back ends of the plots. The outside row of each plot was a border row and it was usually planted with the same clone as the inside two rows. All inside rows of each plot in all replications and the border row of each plot in three replications were planted with two lines of stalks. The border row of each plot in the remain-ing three replications was planted with one line of stalks. Experiments were two clones (6 rows) wide, and each replication was 16 plots long. An extra 1.5 m of sugarcane protected each row at the front and back of each test.
Samples of 10 stalks were cut from unburned cane from a middle row of each plot in each experi-ment between October 15, 2007, and February 4, 2008. In addition, preharvest samples of 10 stalks were cut from 2 replications of all plant-cane experiments between October 10 and October 12, 2007. Once a stool of sugarcane was chosen for
5
cutting, the next 10 stalks in the row were cut as the 10-stalk sample. The range of sample dates for each crop was as follows:
Plant-cane crop January 3, 2008 to February 4, 2008
First-ratoon crop October 26, 2007 to January 28, 2008
Second-ratoon crop October 15, 2007 to October 25, 2007
After each stalk sample was transported to the Agricultural Research Service’s Sugarcane Field Station at Canal Point, FL, for weighing and mill-ing, crusher juice from the milled stalks was ana-lyzed for Brix and pol, and theoretical recoverable yield of kg 96º sugar (in kg per metric ton of cane: KS/T) was determined as a measure of sugar con-tent. The fiber percentage of each clone was used to calculate theoretical recoverable yield (Leg-endre 1992). The values of theoretical recoverable yield determined by the Legendre (1992) method were multiplied by 0.86 to better predict recover-able yield in a Florida sugarcane mill. Brix and pol were usually estimated by near infrared reflectance spectroscopy (NIRS); Brix and pol were measured for samples with unacceptable NIRS calibrations by refractometer and polarimeter, respectively.
Using 3-stalk samples collected from border rows, an average of 16, 11, 10, 8, 10, 9, and 8 fiber samples were calculated for the clones of the CP 00, CP 01, CP 02, CP 03, CPCL 99, CPCL 00, and CPCL 01 series, respectively. Leaves were stripped from these stalks, which were then pro-cessed through a Jeffco1 cutter-grinder (Jeffries Brothers, Ltd., Brisbane Queensland, Australia). About 150 g of material (fresh bagasse) processed through the cutter-grinder were collected and weighed. The fresh bagasse was then placed in cloth bags, washed twice in a washing machine, and dried at 49º C until its weight did not decline (about 3 days). The fiber percentage of a clone was calculated by dividing its dry bagasse weight by its fresh bagasse weight. Samples of a reference clone were processed on all dates that fiber samples of new clones were processed. All fiber percentages
calculated on a given day were corrected to the historical fiber percentage of the reference clone.
Total millable stalks per plot were counted be-tween May 24 and August 28, 2007. Cane yields (in metric tons per hectare: TC/H) were calculated by multiplying stalk weights by number of stalks. Theoretical yields of sugar (in metric tons per hectare: TS/H) were calculated by multiplying TC/H by KS/T and dividing by 1,000.
To assess cold tolerance, stage IV clones were subjected to freezing temperatures in three field experiments established at the Hague Farm of the Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Scienc-es, University of Florida, in Hague, near Gaines-ville, FL. Air temperatures usually go down to -2 to -4 ºC at the testing site during winter months, which guarantees exposure of the clones to harsher freeze temperatures than normally found in south Florida. Clones of the CP 00 series, along with two reference cultivars (CP 72-2086 and CP 89-2143), were planted on February 22, 2005, as two randomized-complete-block experiments with four replications in single-row plots 1.5 m long and 2.4 m apart and with 2.4 m breaks between replica-tions. Five-stalk samples were cut for analyses of sucrose content on January 13, January 27, and March 15, 2006. Some clones were not sampled on all three dates because of insufficient stalk numbers. Clones of the CP 01, CP 02, and CPCL 99 series were planted on March 16, 2006, using the same plot configurations and compared with the same two reference cultivars as well as CP 78-1628. Five stalks were sampled from each plot on January 13, February 6, and March 5, 2007. Clones of the CP 03, CPCL 00, and CPCL 01 se-ries were planted similarly to the previous tests on March 5, 2007. Five-stalk samples were collected from the plant-cane crop on December 6, 2007 and February 6, 2008 and from the first-ratoon crop on December 4, 2008 and January 12, 2009. Cold-tolerance rankings for all three experiments were based on temporal deterioration of juice quality in mature stalks after exposure to freezing tempera-tures.
6
Prior to their advancement to stage IV, CP clones were evaluated in separate tests by artificial in-oculation for susceptibility to sugarcane smut, sugarcane mosaic virus, leaf scald, and ratoon stunting. CP clones were inoculated in stage II plots to determine eye spot susceptibility. Since being advanced to stage IV, separate artificial-inoculation tests were repeated on clones for smut, ratoon stunting, mosaic, and leaf scald. Each clone was also field rated for its emergence, early plant height, tillering, and shading, as well as for its reactions to natural infection by sugarcane smut, sugarcane brown rust, sugarcane orange rust, sug-arcane mosaic virus, and leaf scald in stage IV.
Statistical analyses of the stage IV experiments were based on a mixed model using SAS software (SAS version 9.1, 2003; SAS Institute, Inc. Cary, NC) with clones as fixed effects and locations and replications as random effects. Least squares means were calculated for clones. Means of locations were estimated by empirical best linear unbiased predictors. Significant differences were sought at the 10 percent probability level. Differ-ences among clones were tested by the least sig-nificant difference (LSD), which was used regard-less of significance of F-ratios to protect against high type-II error rates (Glaz and Dean 1988). The mean square error of the clone × location interac-tion was the error term used to calculate this LSD. Clones that had significantly higher yields than the reference clone were also identified by individual t tests calculated by SAS. Values of LSD were also calculated to approximate significant differences among locations using the mean square error of replications within locations as the error term.
Results and Discussion
Table 1 lists the parentage, percentage of fiber, and reactions to smut, brown rust, orange rust, leaf scald, mosaic, and ratoon stunting for each clone included in these experiments. Tables 2–5 contain the results of clones from the CP 03, CPCL 00, and CPCL 01 series in plant-cane experiments at locations with muck soils, and tables 6–7 contain the results for plant-cane experiments of clones
from these three series planted at locations with sand soils. Tables 8–9 contain the results of plant-cane experiments of clones from the CP 02 and CPCL 99 series, and tables 10–12 contain results of clones from these two series in first-ratoon experiments. Table 13 contains the results of the CP 01 first-ratoon experiments and tables 14–16 contain the results of the CP 01 second-ratoon experiments. Table 17 contains the results of the CP 00 second-ratoon experiments. Table 18 gives cold-tolerance ratings for clones of the CP 00, CP 01, CP 02, CP 03, CPCL 99, CPCL 00, and CPCL 01 series. Table 19 gives the dates that stalks were counted in each experiment.
Plant-Cane Crop, CP 03, CPCL 00, and CPCL 01 Series on Muck Soils
When averaged across all five locations, two new clones—CPCL 00-4111 and CP 03-2188—yielded significantly more TC/H (metric tons of cane per hectare) and TS/H (metric tons of sugar per hect-are) than CP 89-2143 (tables 2 and 5). The TS/H yield of CPCL 00-4111 was also significantly higher than that of any other clone except CP 03-2188. The preharvest and harvest KS/T (theoretical recoverable yield of 96º sugar in kg per metric ton of cane) values of CPCL 00-4111 and CP 89-2143 were similar (tables 3–4). The preharvest and har-vest KS/T values of CP 03-2188 were significantly less than those of CP 89-2143.
Sugarcane in Florida is propagated by plant-ing stem sections (referred to as seed cane) from which axillary buds emerge. The Florida Sugar Cane League, Inc., has begun increasing seed cane of CPCL 00-4111 at all stage IV locations (table 1). As its seed cane is increased, more disease test-ing will be conducted. There is particular concern regarding the undetermined susceptibility of CPCL 00-4111 to orange rust and leaf scald. CPCL 00-4111 is also susceptible to ratoon stunting, but growers can control that disease by planting disease-free seed cane. CP 89-2143 is considered as a commercial cultivar in Florida with excellent freeze tolerance because it sustains its juice quality well after exposure to moderate freezes. CPCL 00-4111 ranked 9th in freeze tolerance compared with
7
CP 78-1628, CP 89-2143, and CP 72-2086, which ranked 7th, 11th, and 21st, respectively (table 18). The fiber content of CPCL 00-4111 was 11.29 per-cent (table 1). Seed cane of CP 03-2188 was not increased due to its low KS/T.
Plant-Cane Crop, CP 03, CPCL 00, and CPCL 01 Series on Sand Soils
When averaged across both locations with sand soils, CP 03-1912 was the only new clone that yielded significantly more TS/H than CP 78-1628 (table 7). Its TC/H yield was also greater than that of CP 78-1628 and was greater than the TC/H yield of each clone in this test except CP 03-1160. The harvest KS/T values of CP 03-1912, CP 78-1628, and CP 89-2143 were similar, but the preharvest KS/T of CP 03-1912 was significantly less than the preharvest KS/T values of CP 78-1628 and CP 89-2143 (table 6).
The Florida Sugar Cane League, Inc., has begun increasing seed cane of CP 03-1912 at all stage IV locations (table 1). Currently there are no disease concerns for CP 03-1912. CP 03-1912 had good cold tolerance; it ranked 6th compared with CP 78-1628, CP 89-2143, and CP 72-2086, which ranked 7th, 11th, and 21st, respectively (table 18). The fiber content of CP 03-1912 was 9.61 percent (table 1).
Plant-Cane Crop, CP 02 and CPCL 99 Series
Last year’s report contained the results from eight locations of the CP 02 and CPCL 99 series plant-cane crop (Glaz et al. 2008). This year, plant-cane results are available from two additional locations (tables 8–9). No new clone had significantly higher mean yields of TC/H, preharvest KS/T, or TS/H, than CP 89-2143. CPCL 99-4455 had a higher har-vest KS/T than CP 89-2143 (table 8). However, the TC/H yield of CP 89-2143 was significantly higher than that of CPCL 99-4455 and although the TS/H yields of these two clones were similar, both CP 78-1628 and CP 72-2086 had significantly higher TS/H yields than CPCL 99-4455 (table 9).
First-Ratoon Crop, CP 02 and CPCL 99 Series
When averaged across all eight farms, four new clones—CP 02-1564, CPCL 99-2206, CPCL 99-1401, and CPCL 99-2103—yielded significantly more TC/H and TS/H than CP 89-2143 (tables 10 and 12). The KS/T yields of CPCL 99-2103, CP 02-1564, CPCL 99-1401, and CP 89-2143 were similar (table 11). However, the KS/T yield of CPCL 99-2206 was significantly lower than that of CP 89-2143 (table 11). These four new clones are not candidates for release due to disease susceptibilities. CP 02-1564 and CPCL 99-2206 are susceptible to brown rust, CPCL 99-1401 is susceptible to leaf scald and also has undetermined susceptibility to brown and orange rust, and CPCL 99-2103 is susceptible to smut, brown rust, orange rust, mosaic, and ratoon stunting (table 1).
Seed cane of CPCL 99-2574 and CPCL 99-4455 is being increased at all stage IV locations (table 1) based on promising results from last year’s tests as plant cane (Glaz et al. 2008). Both new clones had low yields of TC/H (table 10). The TC/H of each new clone was similar to that of CP 89-2143. However, the TC/H yield of CPCL 99-4455 was nearly significantly lower than that of CPCL 99-2574 and four new clones had significantly higher TC/H yields than CPCL 99-2574 (table 10). The strongest attribute of each new clone is its KS/T. CPCL 99-4455 was the only new clone with a significantly higher KS/T yield than that of CP 89-2143 (table 11). The KS/T of CPCL 99-4455 was also significantly higher than that of CPCL 99-2574, but the KS/T values of CPCL 99-2574 and CP 89-2143 were similar. CPCL 99-2574, CPCL 99-4455, and CP 89-2143 had similar yields of TS/H (table 12). However, the TS/H yields of CPCL 99-2574 and CPCL 99-4455 were sig-nificantly less than the TS/H yields of three and four new clones, respectively. CPCL 99-2574 has no disease concerns, whereas CPCL 99-4455 is susceptible to smut and ratoon stunting (table 1). CPCL 99-2574 had excellent freeze tolerance; it ranked 3rd compared with CP 78-1628, CP 89-2143, and CP 72-2086, which ranked 1st, 5th, and 14th, respectively (table 18). The freeze tolerance
8
of CPCL 99-4455 has not been tested. CPCL 99-2574 has a moderately high fiber content (11.99%) and the fiber content of CPCL 99-4455 (10.37%) is similar to that of CP 89-2143 (9.85%) and CP 78-1628 (10.37%).
First-Ratoon Crop, CP 01 Series
Last year’s report contained information for the CP 01 series in the first-ratoon crop at seven loca-tions and in the plant-cane crop at Eastgate and Okeelanta (Glaz et al. 2008). In addition, Glaz et al. (2007a) reported on results of these clones from eight locations in the plant-cane crop. This year, in the first-ratoon crop at Okeelanta and Eastgate, four new clones—CP 01-1378, CP 01-1372, CP 01-2390, and CP 01-1564—yielded significantly more TC/H and TS/H than CP 89-2143. The KS/T values of all four new clones were similar to each other and were similar to the KS/T of CP 89-2143. CP 01-1378 (brown rust, orange rust, leaf scald, and mosaic) and CP 01-2390 (smut and ratoon stunting) are not candidates for release due to disease susceptibilities (table 1). Previous yields of CP 01-1564 as plant cane and first ratoon did not warrant consideration for release. CP 01-1372 has been released for commercial production and will be discussed more fully in the following section.
Second-Ratoon Crop, CP 01 Series
When averaged across all seven locations, CP 01-1372 and CP 01-1378 yielded significantly more TC/H and TS/H than CP 89-2143 (tables 14 and 16). Both new clones and CP 89-2143 had similar yields of KS/T (table 15). As noted in the previous section, CP 01-1378 is not being considered for commercial release due to disease susceptibilities. However, CP 01-1372 was released for commer-cial production in Florida in October 2008. This year as second ratoon, CP 01-1372 had excellent plant-cane and first-ratoon yields of cane and sugar on all soils (Glaz et al. 2007a and Glaz et al. 2008). CP 01-1372 had excellent freeze toler-ance; it ranked 3rd, compared with CP 78-1628, CP 89-2143, and CP 72-2086, which ranked 1st, 5th, and 14th, respectively (table 18). CP 01-1372 was resistant to all major diseases and had a fiber content of 9.45 percent.
Second-Ratoon Crop, CP 00 Series
When combined across Okeelanta and Eastgate in the second-ratoon crop, no new clone of the CP 00 series had significantly higher yields than CP 89-2143 (table 17). Last year, CP 00-1101, CP 00-1446, and CP 00-2180 were released for commercial production in Florida (table 1). Based on yields the previous 3 years, CP 00-1101 was recommended for all soil types, but CP 00-1446 and CP 00-2180 were recommended only for growers with sand soils (Glaz et al. 2007a, Glaz et al. 2007b, and Glaz et al. 2008). This year as second ratoon, CP 00-1101 and CP 89-2143 had similar yields of TC/H, KS/T, and TS/H (table 17). CP 00-1446, CP 00-2180, and CP 89-2143 had similar yields of TC/H and TS/H. However, the KS/T of each new cultivar was lower than that of CP 89-2143. One reason that CP 00-1446 and CP 00-2180 were not recommended for muck soils was the low value of KS/T on muck soils of each new cultivar in previous tests. The fiber contents of CP 00-1101, CP 00-1446, and CP 00-2180 were 10.15, 8.86, and 9.46 percent, respectively (table 1). Freeze rankings for CP 72-2086, CP 89-2143, CP 00-1101, CP 00-1446, and CP 00-2180 were 12th, 3rd, 2nd, 11th, and 16th, respectively (table 18).
Summary
In the past, this program generally advanced the same clones to stage IV on the muck and sand soils. This year, stage IV clones were advanced to muck and sand independently. This resulted in eight genotypes being planted in all tests, five genotypes being planted only at locations with muck soils, and five genotypes being planted only at locations with sand soils.
The CP 03, CPCL 00, and CPCL 01 series were tested at five locations with muck soil this year for the first time in stage IV. CPCL 00-4111 had high TC/H and TS/H yields and it had acceptable yields of KS/T. Seed cane of CPCL 00-4111 is being expanded by the Florida Sugar Cane League, Inc., for potential commercial release in Florida, but its susceptibilities to brown rust and orange rust are
9
being monitored. CP 03-2188 had high yields of TC/H and TS/H, but it is not being expanded for potential release due to its low KS/T yields.
A second group of CP 03, CPCL 00, and CPCL 01 clones was tested at two locations with sand soils this year for the first time in stage IV. CP 03-1912 had no disease concerns, high yields of TC/H and TS/H, and acceptable yields of KS/T. The Florida Sugar Cane League, Inc., has begun expanding seed cane of CP 03-1912 for potential commercial release in Florida.
The CP 02 and CPCL 99 series were tested at two locations in the plant-cane crop and eight locations in the first-ratoon crop this year and at eight loca-tions in the plant-cane crop last year. The Florida Sugar Cane League, Inc., is increasing seed cane of CPCL 99-2574 and CPCL 99-4455 for poten-tial release. Both new clones have had high KS/T yields in both years of testing; however, their yields of TC/H and TS/H were mediocre this year as plant cane and first ratoon. CP 02-1564 had high yields of TC/H and TS/H for both years but its seed cane is not being expanded due to its suscep-tibility to brown rust.
The CP 01 series was tested as plant cane at eight locations 2 years ago and at two additional loca-tions last year. It was also tested at eight locations in the first-ratoon crop last year and at two ad-ditional locations this year. Also, the CP 01 series was tested at seven locations in the second-ratoon crop. CP 01-1372 has had high TS/H, TC/H, and harvest KS/T yields throughout the three-crop cycle and was released for commercial production in Florida in September 2008. In addition to its high yields, there were no disease susceptibilities associated with CP 01-1372 and it had excellent tolerance to freezing temperatures.
Stage IV testing of the CP 00 series was completed this year with two second-ratoon experiments. Previous testing of these clones included 2 years and 11 locations as plant cane, 2 years and 10 locations as first ratoon, and 9 locations as second ratoon last year. No new clones were released from
this group. The CP 00 series was tested at one location in the first-ratoon crop and nine locations in the second-ratoon crop this year, at two loca-tions in the plant-cane crop and nine locations in the first-ratoon crop last year, and at nine loca-tions in the plant-cane crop 2 years ago. Based on results reported here and the previous two reports of this series, CP 00-1101 was released and rec-ommended for all soils on which sugarcane is grown in Florida, and CP 00-1446 and CP 00-2180 were released and recommended for sand soils in Florida. High yielding clones not released due to disease concerns were CP 00-1100, CP 00-1748, and CP 00-1751.
References
Comstock, J.C., J.M. Shine, Jr., P.Y.P. Tai, and J.D. Miller. 2001. Breeding for ratoon stunting disease resistance: Is it both possible and effective? In International Society of Sugar Cane Technolo-gists: Proceedings of the XXIV Congress, vol. 2, September 17–21, 2001, pp. 471–476. Brisbane, Australia.
Comstock, J.C., S.G. Sood, et al. 2008. First report of Puccinia kuehnii, causal agent of orange rust of sugarcane, in the United States and in the Western Hemisphere. Plant Disease 92:175.
Deren, C.W. 1995. Genetic base of U.S. mainland sugarcane. Crop Science 35:1195–1199.
Deren, C.W., J. Alvarez, and B. Glaz. 1995. Use of economic criteria for selecting clones in a sugarcane breeding program. Proceedings of the International Society of Sugar Cane Technologists 21:2, March 5–14, 1992, pp. 437–447. Bangkok, Thailand.
Edme, S.J., J.D. Miller, et al. 2005. Genetic con-tributions to yield gains in the Florida sugarcane industry across 33 years. Crop Science 45:92–97.
Glaz, B. 2008. Sugarcane variety census: Florida 2007. Sugar Journal 71(2):6–11.
10
Glaz, B., J. Alvarez, and J.D. Miller. 1986. Analy-sis of cultivar-use options with sugarcane as influ-enced by threats of new pests. Agronomy Journal 78:503–506.
Glaz, B., J.C. Comstock, et al. 2008. Evaluation of new Canal Point sugarcane clones: 2006–2007 harvest season. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, ARS-169.
Glaz, B., R.W. Davidson, et al. 2007a. Evaluation of new Canal Point sugarcane clones: 2005–2006 harvest season. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, ARS-167.
Glaz, B., and J.L. Dean. 1988. Statistical error rates and their implications in sugarcane clone tri-als. Agronomy Journal 80:560–562.
Glaz, B., and M.S. Kang. 2008. Location contribu-tions determined via GGE biplot analysis of mul-tienvironment sugarcane genotype-performance trials. Crop Science 48:941–950.
Glaz, B., S.B. Milligan, et al. 2007b. Evaluation of new Canal Point sugarcane clones: 2004–2005 harvest season. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, ARS-166.
Glaz, B., and M.F. Ulloa. 1995. Fallow and succes-sive planting effects on sugarcane yields in Flori-da. The Journal of the American Society of Sugar Cane Technologists 15:41–53.
Legendre, B.L. 1992. The core/press method for predicting the sugar yield from cane for use in cane payment. Sugar Journal 54(9):2–7.
Lockhart, B.E.L., M.J. Irey, and J.C. Comstock. 1996. Sugarcane bacilliform virus, sugarcane mild mosaic virus and sugarcane yellow leaf syndrome. In B.J. Croft, C.M. Piggin, E.S. Wallis, and D.M. Hogarth, eds., Sugarcane Germplasm Conserva-tion and Exchange, pp. 108–112. Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research, Canberra, Australia, Proceedings No. 67.
Rice, R.W., R.A. Gilbert, and S.H. Daroub. 2002. Application of the soil taxonomy key to the or-ganic soils of the Everglades Agricultural Area. Agronomy Department, Florida Cooperative Ex-tension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, SS-AGR-246. Available online at http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/AG151 (May 2002, verified Sept. 9, 2002).
Tai, P.Y.P., and J.D. Miller. 1996. Selection for frost resistance in sugarcane. Sugar Cane 1996(3):13–18.
11
Tables
Notes (tables 2–17):
1. Clonal yields approximated by least squares (p = 0.10) within and across locations.
2. Location yields approximated by empirical linear unbiased predictors.
3. LSD = least significant difference.
4. CV = coefficient of variation.
Ta
ble
1.
Pa
ren
tag
e,
fib
er
co
nte
nt,
in
cre
as
e s
tatu
s,
an
d r
ati
ng
s o
f s
us
ce
pti
bil
ity
to
sm
ut,
bro
wn
ru
st,
ora
ng
e r
us
t, l
ea
f s
ca
ld,
mo
sa
ic,
an
d
rato
on
stu
nti
ng
fo
r C
P 7
2-2
08
6,
CP
78
-16
28
, C
P 8
9-2
14
3,
an
d 8
0 n
ew
su
ga
rca
ne
clo
ne
s
Ra
tin
g
P
are
nta
ge
Ru
st
Clo
ne
F
em
ale
M
ale
In
cre
as
e
sta
tusH
P
erc
en
t
f
ibe
r S
mu
t
B
row
n
O
ran
ge
L
ea
f s
ca
ld
Mo
sa
ic
Ra
too
n
stu
nti
ngI
C
P 7
2-2
08
6
CP
62
-37
4
CP
63
-58
8
Co
mm
erc
ial
8
.97
R
R
L
R
S
R
C
P 7
8-1
62
8
CP
65
-03
57
CP
68
-10
26
C
om
me
rcia
l
10
.39
S
S
-
L
R
R
CP
89
-21
43
C
P 8
1-1
25
4
C
P 7
2-2
08
6
Co
mm
erc
ial
9
.85
R
R
S
L
L
L
C
P 0
0-1
07
4
CP
89
-21
43
98
P0
7'
No
ne
9.6
2
R
L
- R
S
L
CP
00
-11
00
C
P 8
9-2
14
3
U
nkn
ow
n
No
ne
8.5
4
R
R
R
R
S
R
CP
00
-11
01
C
P 8
9-2
14
3
C
P 8
9-2
14
3
Co
mm
erc
ial
1
0.1
5
R
R
R
R
R
R
CP
00
-12
52
C
P 9
0-1
42
4
C
P 9
2-1
16
7
No
ne
9.7
6
R
S
- U
R
R
C
P 0
0-1
30
1
CP
75
-16
32
CP
89
-21
43
N
on
e
1
0.7
4
R
S
R
U
U
S
CP
00
-13
02
C
P 7
5-1
63
2
C
P 8
9-2
14
3
No
ne
10
.52
R
L
-
L
R
R
CP
00
-14
46
C
P 9
3-1
60
7
C
P 9
1-1
15
0
Co
mm
erc
ial
8
.86
U
U
L
U
L
R
C
P 0
0-1
52
7
CP
80
-18
27
CP
92
-13
20
N
on
e
8
.96
R
L
-
R
S
S
CP
00
-16
30
C
P 9
2-1
16
7
C
P 9
2-1
32
0
No
ne
10
.19
R
L
R
U
U
S
C
P 0
0-1
74
8
CP
81
-12
38
CP
89
-15
09
N
on
e
9
.73
R
S
-
R
S
R
CP
00
-17
51
C
P 8
1-1
23
8
C
P 8
9-1
50
9
No
ne
8.9
2
R
S
- L
L
R
C
P 0
0-2
16
4
US
95
-10
63
US
95
-11
27
N
on
e
9
.29
R
L
-
R
L
R
CP
00
-21
80
H
oC
P 9
1-5
5
H
oC
P 9
1-5
52
C
om
me
rcia
l
9.4
6
R
L
R
L
R
R
CP
00
-21
88
C
P 9
0-1
54
9
U
nkn
ow
n
No
ne
8
.68
R
L
-
R
R
R
CP
01
-11
78
C
P 8
4-1
19
8
C
P 8
2-1
17
2
No
ne
9
.97
R
U
R
L
L
R
C
P 0
1-1
18
1
CP
84
-11
98
CP
82
-11
72
N
on
e
8.0
1
R
L
- L
R
L
C
P 0
1-1
20
5
CP
94
-20
95
CP
89
-21
43
N
on
e
8.4
5
L
L
- L
S
S
C
P 0
1-1
32
1
CP
82
-11
72
CP
89
-21
43
N
on
e
9.3
9
L
S
- S
S
R
C
P 0
1-1
33
8
CP
94
-12
00
CP
89
-21
43
N
on
e
9.0
0
R
L
- S
L
R
C
P 0
1-1
37
2
CP
94
-12
00
CP
89
-21
43
C
om
me
rcia
l 9
.45
L
R
R
L
L
R
C
P 0
1-1
37
8
CP
94
-12
00
CP
89
-21
43
N
on
e
10
.48
R
S
S
S
S
S
C
P 0
1-1
39
1
CP
81
-13
84
CP
94
-15
28
N
on
e
8.6
2
R
R
R
S
S
R
CP
01
-15
64
C
P 9
3-1
63
4
C
P 8
9-2
14
3
No
ne
1
0.6
4
R
L
R
L
U
R
CP
01
-19
57
C
P 8
8-1
76
2
U
nkn
ow
n
No
ne
1
2.4
7
R
R
- S
R
S
C
P 0
1-2
05
6
CP
89
-21
43
Un
kn
ow
n
No
ne
1
0.5
5
L
R
- R
S
R
C
P 0
1-2
39
0
CP
95
-32
18
CP
94
-15
28
N
on
e
9.7
7
S
L
- L
R
S
C
P 0
1-2
45
9
US
95
-10
23
CP
85
-13
08
N
on
e
11
.32
L
L
R
S
S
L
C
P 0
2-1
14
3
CP
93
-13
82
CP
92
-16
66
N
on
e
10
.80
R
L
L
L
S
R
C
P 0
2-1
45
8
CP
85
-13
82
CP
80
-17
43
N
on
e
11
.90
R
L
L
L
R
R
C
P 0
2-1
55
4
CP
92
-15
61
CP
94
-20
59
N
on
e
12
.13
R
L
L
R
L
R
CP
02
-15
64
C
P 9
4-1
52
8
C
P 7
2-2
08
6
No
ne
9.7
0
R
S
L
L
L
S
CP
02
-20
15
C
P 8
5-1
49
1
C
P 8
0-1
74
3
No
ne
1
1.8
4
R
L
L
L
L
U
12
Ta
ble
1.—
co
nti
nu
ed
. P
are
nta
ge
, fi
be
r c
on
ten
t, i
nc
rea
se
sta
tus
, a
nd
ra
tin
gs
of
su
sc
ep
tib
ilit
y t
o s
mu
t, r
us
t, l
ea
f s
ca
ld,
mo
sa
ic,
an
d r
ato
on
s
tun
tin
g f
or
CL
77
-07
97
, C
P 7
2-2
08
6,
CP
78
-16
28
, C
P 8
9-2
14
3,
an
d 8
0 n
ew
su
ga
rca
ne
clo
ne
s
Ra
tin
g
P
are
nta
ge
Ru
st
Clo
ne
F
em
ale
Ma
le
Inc
rea
se
sta
tusH
Pe
rce
nt
fib
er
Sm
ut
B
row
n
Ora
ng
e
Le
af
sc
ald
M
os
aic
Ra
too
n
stu
nti
ngI
C
P 0
2-2
28
1
CP
94
-12
00
CP
92
-11
67
N
on
e
11
.93
R
L
R
L
S
R
C
P 0
3-1
16
0
CP
92
-14
35
CP
92
-14
35
N
on
e
10
.57
U
S
S
U
U
L
C
P 0
3-1
17
3
Ho
CP
85
-84
5
Ho
CP
85
-84
5
No
ne
1
0.4
8
R
S
R
L
S
S
CP
03
-14
01
C
P 9
0-1
42
4
C
P 9
2-1
16
7
No
ne
1
1.6
1
L
S
R
R
R
L
CP
03
-14
91
C
P 9
2-1
56
1
C
P 9
2-1
16
7
No
ne
1
0.5
5
R
S
S
R
R
R
CP
03
-19
12
C
P 9
2-1
16
7
C
P 9
5-1
03
9
All
9.6
1
R
R
R
L
R
L
CP
03
-19
39
C
P 8
2-1
17
2
C
P 9
5-1
03
9
No
ne
9
.76
S
R
R
U
R
R
C
P 0
3-2
18
8
CP
95
-15
69
CP
97
-13
62
N
on
e
11
.36
R
L
R
L
R
L
C
PC
L 9
6-0
86
0
CL
75
-08
53
C
L 7
8-1
60
0
No
ne
1
1.4
8
R
S
S
S
R
- C
PC
L 9
6-2
06
1
CL
83
-35
76
M
ix 9
1V
No
ne
1
0.3
3
R
R
R
R
R
- C
PC
L 9
7-0
39
3
CL
89
-42
94
U
S 8
7-1
00
6
No
ne
1
1.9
9
L
L
R
R
S
- C
PC
L 9
7-2
73
0
CL
75
-08
53
C
L 8
8-4
73
0
Co
mm
erc
ial
9.5
2
R
R
R
L
R
- C
PC
L 9
9-1
22
5
CL
87
-26
08
C
P 8
0-1
74
3
No
ne
1
1.5
2
S
S
S
R
R
L
CP
CL
99
-14
01
C
L 7
4-0
25
9
C
P 8
1-1
23
8
No
ne
1
0.6
7
R
U
U
S
R
R
C
PC
L 9
9-1
77
7
CL
83
-35
86
C
L 8
4-4
23
4
No
ne
1
1.0
5
R
S
S
R
R
R
C
PC
L 9
9-2
10
3
CL
86
-40
47
C
L 8
4-3
15
2
No
ne
1
1.9
9
S
S
S
R
S
S
C
PC
L 9
9-2
20
6
CL
87
-16
30
C
P 8
0-1
74
3
No
ne
9
.66
R
S
S
S
R
S
CP
CL
99
-25
74
C
L 8
3-3
43
1
M
ix 9
8C
A
ll 1
1.9
9
R
L
L
L
R
R
C
PC
L 9
9-4
45
5
CL
90
-46
43
C
P 8
4-1
19
8
All
10
.37
S
R
R
L
R
S
CP
CL
00
-01
29
C
L 8
4-3
87
8
M
ix 9
1V
A
ll 9
.98
R
R
R
R
R
R
CP
CL
00
-04
58
C
L 8
7-2
88
2
C
L 8
9-5
18
9
No
ne
1
0.2
0
U
U
U
R
R
U
C
PC
L 0
0-1
37
3
CL
83
-19
00
C
L 8
8-4
73
0
No
ne
1
2.2
7
R
U
R
R
R
U
C
PC
L 0
0-4
02
7
CL
83
-13
64
C
L 8
6-4
59
0
No
ne
1
1.2
9
R
U
U
R
R
U
C
PC
L 0
0-4
11
1
CL
83
-34
31
C
L 8
9-5
18
9
All
11
.29
R
R
U
U
R
S
CP
CL
00
-46
11
C
L 8
0-1
57
5
C
P 8
5-1
49
1
No
ne
1
2.4
5
U
U
R
R
R
R
C
PC
L 0
0-6
13
1
CL
87
-16
30
C
P 8
4-1
19
8
No
ne
1
1.4
4
S
U
U
R
S
R
C
PC
L 0
0-6
75
6
CL
83
-13
64
C
L 9
2-5
43
1
No
ne
1
2.1
9
R
S
S
R
R
R
C
PC
L 0
1-0
27
1
CL
86
-43
40
P
oly
00
-3
No
ne
1
0.8
1
R
S
S
R
U
S
C
PC
L 0
1-0
57
1
CL
87
-29
44
C
L 8
6-4
59
0
No
ne
1
1.0
1
U
S
S
U
S
R
C
PC
L 0
1-0
87
7
CL
90
-47
25
C
L 8
8-4
73
0
No
ne
1
0.8
7
R
S
R
R
R
R
R =
re
sis
tan
t e
no
ug
h f
or
co
mm
erc
ial p
rod
uctio
n;
L =
lo
w le
ve
ls o
f d
ise
ase
su
sce
ptib
ility
; S
= t
oo
su
sce
ptib
le f
or
pro
du
ctio
n;
U =
un
de
term
ine
d s
usce
ptib
ility
(a
va
ilab
le d
ata
no
t su
ffic
ien
t
t
o d
ete
rmin
e t
he
le
ve
l o
f su
sce
ptib
ility
).
H C
om
me
rcia
l =
Re
lea
se
d f
or
co
mm
erc
ial p
rod
uctio
n;
No
ne
= N
ot
co
nsid
ere
d a
s p
ote
ntia
l re
lea
se
ca
nd
ida
te;
Oth
erw
ise
, in
cre
asin
g a
cre
ag
e o
f se
ed
ca
ne
at
all
loca
tio
ns,
loca
tio
ns w
ith
s
an
d s
oils
on
ly,
or
loca
tio
ns w
ith
mu
ck s
oils
on
ly.
I R
SD
ca
n b
e c
on
tro
lled
by u
sin
g h
ea
t-tr
ea
ted
or
tissu
e-c
ultu
red
ve
ge
tative
pla
ntin
g m
ate
ria
l.
§ M
ix 7
5b
an
d 9
5 P
8 r
efe
r to
po
lycro
sse
s.
In M
ix 7
5b
, fe
ma
le p
are
nt
(CL
61
-62
0)
exp
ose
d t
o p
olle
n f
rom
ma
ny c
lon
es,
an
d in
95
P 1
6 C
P 9
0-1
53
5 e
xp
ose
d t
o p
olle
n f
rom
ma
ny c
lon
es
in
19
95
cro
ssin
g s
ea
so
n;
the
refo
re,
ma
le p
are
nts
of
CL
77
-07
97
an
d C
P 9
9-1
54
0 u
nkn
ow
n.
Sim
ilar
exp
lan
atio
ns f
or
CP
99
-15
41
, C
P 9
9-1
54
2,
CP
00
-10
74
, C
PC
L 9
6-2
06
1,
an
d C
PC
L 9
9-2
57
4.
13
Ta
ble
2.
Yie
lds
of
ca
ne
in
me
tric
to
ns
pe
r h
ec
tare
(T
C/H
) fr
om
pla
nt
ca
ne
on
Da
nia
mu
ck
, L
au
de
rhil
l m
uc
k,
an
d P
ah
ok
ee
mu
ck
Me
an
yie
ld b
y s
oil
ty
pe
, fa
rm,
an
d s
am
pli
ng
da
te
Da
nia
mu
ck
La
ud
erh
ill
mu
ck
Pa
ho
ke
e m
uc
k
D
ud
a
S
FI
Kn
igh
t O
ke
ela
nta
Os
ce
ola
M
ea
n y
ield
, C
lon
e
1/8
/08
1/3
/08
1
/7/0
8
1/1
7/0
8
1
/17
/08
a
ll f
arm
s
C
PC
L 0
0-4
11
1
20
3.6
2
23
2.5
1
18
1.4
8
18
3.0
6
19
3.6
5
19
8.8
6*
CP
03
-21
88
1
87
.12
2
22
.24
2
03
.59
1
88
.04
1
72
.44
1
94
.69
* C
PC
L 0
0-1
37
3
19
1.9
0
21
1.4
3
17
4.3
0
18
5.6
3
18
0.2
0
18
8.6
9*
CP
CL
00
-46
11
1
88
.68
1
87
.62
1
77
.39
1
90
.86
1
83
.71
1
85
.61
* C
PC
L 0
1-0
57
1
18
7.5
3
19
5.8
2
16
2.5
8
18
0.8
3
16
2.1
3
17
7.7
8*
CP
CL
00
-61
31
1
77
.38
2
07
.85
1
65
.36
1
78
.03
1
46
.47
1
75
.02
* C
P 0
3-1
16
0
12
8.3
0
15
3.9
9
19
5.5
7
20
1.6
9
19
3.5
9
17
4.6
3
CP
CL
01
-02
71
1
93
.02
1
72
.27
1
70
.91
1
54
.70
1
68
.23
1
71
.82
C
PC
L 0
0-0
45
8
17
1.5
2
20
0.6
8
15
2.2
6
16
6.2
6
16
6.2
1
17
1.3
8
CP
78
-16
28
1
83
.53
----
- 1
76
.03
1
51
.28
1
56
.11
1
71
.08
C
PC
L 0
0-6
75
6
17
6.0
0
18
4.7
6
14
1.7
7
16
4.7
4
16
0.9
9
16
5.6
5
CP
CL
00
-40
27
1
76
.77
1
77
.58
1
69
.88
1
62
.74
1
39
.66
1
65
.15
C
P 8
9-2
14
3
14
3.6
3
18
4.5
1
---
--
16
0.4
3
14
8.6
6
15
8.0
3
CP
72
-20
86
1
74
.28
1
65
.71
1
54
.96
1
39
.48
1
43
.51
1
55
.59
C
PC
L 0
0-0
12
9
16
9.6
7
18
8.7
9
14
9.1
8
14
4.4
8
12
3.5
2
15
5.0
6
CP
03
-14
91
1
36
.38
1
77
.27
1
23
.03
1
21
.41
1
02
.91
1
32
.31
M
ea
n
17
4.3
3
19
0.8
7
16
6.5
5
16
7.1
0
15
8.8
7
17
1.3
3
LS
D (
p =
0.1
)†
20
.43
2
3.5
0
22
.03
1
5.1
6
18
.08
1
6.6
2
CV
(%
) 1
2.1
9
12
.79
1
3.7
3
9.4
4
8.3
1
12
.11
* Sig
nific
an
tly g
rea
ter
tha
n C
P 8
9-2
14
3 a
t p
= 0
.10
ba
se
d o
n t
te
st.
†
LS
D f
or
loca
tio
n m
ea
ns o
f ca
ne
yie
ld =
9.4
3 T
C/H
at
p =
0.1
0.
14
Ta
ble
3.
Pre
ha
rve
st
yie
lds
of
the
ore
tic
al
rec
ov
era
ble
96
o s
ug
ar
in k
g p
er
me
tric
to
n o
f c
an
e (
KS
/T)
fro
m p
lan
t c
an
e o
n D
an
ia m
uc
k,
La
ud
erh
ill
mu
ck
, a
nd
Pa
ho
ke
e m
uc
k
Me
an
yie
ld b
y s
oil
ty
pe
, fa
rm,
an
d s
am
pli
ng
da
te
Da
nia
mu
ck
La
ud
erh
ill
mu
ck
Pa
ho
ke
e m
uc
k
D
ud
a
O
ke
ela
nta
K
nig
ht
SF
I
Os
ce
ola
M
ea
n y
ield
, C
lon
e
10
/9/0
7
1
0/1
1/0
7
10
/12
/07
1
0/1
2/0
7
1
0/1
2/0
7
all
fa
rms
C
PC
L 0
0-4
11
1
89
.7
10
1.3
1
07
.1
10
2.4
1
04
.6
99
.6
CP
CL
01
-02
71
1
01
.3
10
2.9
9
7.8
1
05
.3
91
.7
99
.3
CP
89
-21
43
9
7.1
1
09
.8
--
---
92
.2
93
.9
97
.4
CP
CL
00
-04
58
9
2.1
1
07
.0
94
.8
97
.6
98
.8
95
.8
CP
CL
00
-01
29
9
3.1
9
2.5
1
02
.3
97
.5
92
.5
95
.2
CP
72
-20
86
8
8.1
9
9.9
1
03
.8
89
.8
99
.0
94
.3
CP
03
-11
60
9
7.1
9
7.7
8
6.7
1
02
.8
86
.6
93
.9
CP
CL
00
-13
73
9
3.0
9
3.5
8
9.1
8
9.9
9
5.7
9
3.0
C
P 0
3-1
49
1
91
.5
10
4.9
8
4.1
7
7.2
9
9.3
9
2.2
C
PC
L 0
0-6
75
6
94
.4
10
5.3
8
8.1
8
2.4
8
8.5
9
1.8
C
PC
L 0
0-4
61
1
85
.7
10
0.2
9
1.7
8
9.9
8
9.4
9
0.4
C
PC
L 0
0-4
02
7
89
.3
89
.6
88
.2
93
.3
99
.0
90
.1
CP
03
-21
88
8
8.2
7
8.9
8
8.7
1
01
.0
87
.0
89
.2
CP
CL
01
-05
71
9
4.8
8
3.2
8
9.7
8
6.1
9
2.8
8
7.2
C
P 7
8-1
62
8
90
.7
81
.5
89
.1
--
---
86
.8
86
.6
CP
CL
00
-61
31
8
2.5
9
2.8
9
1.2
7
4.4
8
2.1
8
4.3
M
ea
n
91
.8
96
.3
92
.8
92
.1
93
.0
92
.5
LS
D (
p =
0.1
)†
9.5
1
9.0
1
2.9
1
6.4
3
3.0
4
.7
CV
(%
) 5
.9
8.6
7
.8
10
.1
6.8
7
.9
†
LS
D f
or
loca
tio
n m
ea
ns o
f su
ga
r yie
ld =
2.6
KS
/T a
t p
= 0
.10
.
15
Ta
ble
4.
Yie
lds
of
the
ore
tic
al
rec
ov
era
ble
96
o s
ug
ar
in k
g p
er
me
tric
to
n o
f c
an
e (
KS
/T)
fro
m p
lan
t c
an
e o
n D
an
ia m
uc
k,
La
ud
erh
ill
mu
ck
, a
nd
Pa
ho
ke
e m
uc
k
Me
an
yie
ld b
y s
oil
ty
pe
, fa
rm,
an
d s
am
pli
ng
da
te
Da
nia
mu
ck
La
ud
erh
ill
mu
ck
Pa
ho
ke
e m
uc
k
D
ud
a
S
FI
Kn
igh
t O
ke
ela
nta
Os
ce
ola
M
ea
n y
ield
, C
lon
e
1/8
/08
1/3
/08
1
/7/0
8
1/1
7/0
8
1
/17
/08
a
ll f
arm
s
C
PC
L 0
0-4
02
7
12
5.0
12
0.3
1
19
.7
----
-
12
9.6
1
24
.0
CP
CL
00
-01
29
1
20
.8
1
19
.7
12
4.6
1
20
.6
1
28
.7
12
2.8
C
P 8
9-2
14
3
11
9.9
12
2.5
----
- 1
23
.8
1
23
.9
12
1.2
C
PC
L 0
1-0
27
1
11
4.6
11
8.1
1
11
.6
12
2.1
12
3.6
1
18
.0
CP
72
-20
86
1
16
.5
1
18
.7
11
3.5
1
20
.0
1
20
.3
11
7.8
C
PC
L 0
0-4
11
1
11
3.6
12
0.9
1
08
.8
11
7.8
12
2.3
1
16
.7
CP
CL
01
-05
71
1
16
.5
1
19
.9
11
6.1
1
08
.3
1
21
.9
11
6.5
C
P 7
8-1
62
8
11
3.8
----
- 1
10
.3
12
0.4
11
9.5
1
16
.2
CP
CL
00
-67
56
1
13
.2
1
18
.3
11
0.3
1
22
.9
1
14
.7
11
5.9
C
P 0
3-1
49
1
11
5.5
11
4.8
1
05
.5
12
0.3
12
1.9
1
15
.6
CP
03
-21
88
1
16
.0
1
22
.6
11
2.2
8
9.4
12
5.1
1
13
.1
CP
03
-11
60
1
09
.8
1
10
.6
10
5.7
1
18
.9
1
19
.9
11
3.0
C
PC
L 0
0-6
13
1
11
3.3
11
0.6
1
00
.0
12
1.8
11
9.5
1
13
.0
CP
CL
00
-46
11
1
06
.2
1
15
.0
10
3.3
1
17
.1
1
12
.6
11
0.8
C
PC
L 0
0-0
45
8
10
8.7
11
1.5
1
02
.9
11
6.0
11
3.6
1
10
.5
CP
CL
00
-13
73
1
06
.7
1
11
.0
10
2.9
1
14
.5
1
14
.8
11
0.0
M
ea
n
11
4.4
1
17
.0
10
9.8
1
17
.5
12
0.7
1
15
.9
LS
D (
p =
0.1
)†
4.1
5
.5
5.8
4
.4
3.6
5
.3
CV
(%
) 3
.8
4.9
5
.5
3.9
3
.1
4.3
† L
SD
fo
r lo
ca
tio
n m
ea
ns o
f su
ga
r yie
ld =
2.0
KS
/T a
t p
= 0
.10
.
16
Ta
ble
5.
Yie
lds
of
the
ore
tic
al
rec
ov
era
ble
96
o s
ug
ar
in m
etr
ic t
on
s p
er
he
cta
re (
TS
/H)
fro
m p
lan
t c
an
e o
n D
an
ia m
uc
k,
La
ud
erh
ill
mu
ck
, a
nd
Pa
ho
ke
e m
uc
k
M
ea
n y
ield
by
so
il t
yp
e,
farm
, a
nd
sa
mp
lin
g d
ate
Da
nia
mu
ck
La
ud
erh
ill
mu
ck
Pa
ho
ke
e m
uc
k
D
ud
a
S
FI
Kn
igh
t O
ke
ela
nta
Os
ce
ola
M
ea
n y
ield
, C
lon
e
1/8
/08
1/3
/08
1
/7/0
8
1/1
7/0
8
1
/17
/08
a
ll f
arm
s
C
PC
L 0
0-4
11
1
23
.16
1
2
8.1
07
1
9.5
77
2
1.5
89
23
.71
4
23
.22
9*
CP
03
-21
88
2
1.7
34
27
.25
6
22
.74
4
16
.94
0
2
1.5
66
2
2.0
48
* C
PC
L 0
0-1
37
3
20
.46
5
2
3.5
60
1
7.8
50
2
1.2
62
20
.66
9
20
.76
1
CP
CL
01
-05
71
2
1.8
02
23
.51
4
18
.94
9
19
.62
5
1
9.7
63
2
0.7
31
C
PC
L 0
0-4
61
1
20
.03
5
2
1.5
88
1
7.7
33
2
2.3
51
20
.70
1
20
.49
3
CP
CL
00
-40
27
2
2.1
43
21
.39
7
20
.20
8
20
.41
2
1
8.0
96
2
0.4
37
C
PC
L 0
1-0
27
1
22
.13
5
2
0.5
28
1
9.0
82
1
8.9
30
20
.85
3
20
.30
6
CP
78
-16
28
2
0.9
17
----
- 1
9.4
33
1
8.2
19
18
.65
5
19
.86
4
CP
03
-11
60
1
4.1
09
17
.16
7
20
.58
0
23
.97
9
2
3.2
49
1
9.8
17
C
PC
L 0
0-6
13
1
20
.09
5
2
2.8
24
1
6.6
07
2
1.6
69
17
.51
7
19
.74
2
CP
CL
00
-67
56
1
9.9
25
21
.82
4
15
.65
7
20
.24
7
1
8.3
60
1
9.2
06
C
P 8
9-2
14
3
17
.23
6
2
2.6
13
--
---
19
.86
3
1
8.4
38
1
9.1
70
C
PC
L 0
0-0
12
9
20
.46
5
2
2.6
01
1
8.5
11
1
7.4
52
15
.88
6
18
.97
1
CP
CL
00
-04
58
1
8.6
06
22
.36
2
15
.66
1
19
.30
4
1
8.8
48
1
8.9
56
C
P 7
2-2
08
6
20
.29
6
1
9.6
71
1
7.6
11
1
6.7
49
17
.26
7
18
.31
9
CP
03
-14
91
1
5.7
28
20
.39
6
12
.98
3
14
.61
2
1
2.5
28
1
5.2
59
M
ea
n
19
.92
8
22
.36
1
18
.21
2
19
.57
5
19
.13
2
19
.83
2
LS
D (
p =
0.1
)†
2.4
47
3
.05
2
2.6
40
2
.09
4
2.3
14
2
.18
9
CV
(%
) 1
2.7
72
1
4.1
81
1
5.0
50
1
1.1
25
1
2.5
78
1
3.2
07
* Sig
nific
an
tly g
rea
ter
tha
n C
P 8
9-2
14
3 a
t p
= 0
.10
ba
se
d o
n t
te
st.
†
LS
D f
or
loca
tio
n m
ea
ns o
f su
ga
r yie
ld =
1.1
26
TS
/H a
t p
= 0
.10
.
17
Ta
ble
6.
Yie
lds
of
pre
ha
rve
st
an
d h
arv
es
t th
eo
reti
ca
l re
co
ve
rab
le 9
6o s
ug
ar
in k
g p
er
me
tric
to
n o
f c
an
e (
KS
/T)
fro
m p
lan
t c
an
e o
n
Ma
lab
ar
sa
nd
an
d P
om
pa
no
fin
e s
an
d
P
reh
arv
es
t y
ield
by
so
il t
yp
e,
farm
,
Ha
rve
st
yie
ld b
y s
oil
ty
pe
, fa
rm,
an
d s
am
pli
ng
da
te
a
nd
sa
mp
lin
g d
ate
Po
mp
an
o
P
om
pa
no
Ma
lab
ar
fi
ne
M
ala
ba
r
fin
e
sa
nd
s
an
d
sa
nd
s
an
d
Hil
lia
rd
Ly
ke
s
Me
an
yie
ld,
Hil
lia
rd
Ly
ke
s
Me
an
yie
ld,
Clo
ne
1
0/1
0/0
7
10
/10
/07
b
oth
fa
rms
1
/14
/08
1
/15
/08
b
oth
fa
rms
C
PC
L 0
1-0
57
1
11
6.2
1
06
.4
11
1.3
1
31
.3
13
9.3
1
35
.3
CP
89
-21
43
1
10
.7
---
--
10
8.8
1
27
.5
-
----
1
31
.8
CP
CL
00
-40
27
1
07
.1
92
.7
99
.9
13
2.0
1
30
.2
13
1.1
C
P 0
3-1
40
1
11
0.3
1
06
.8
10
8.5
1
24
.8
13
7.2
1
31
.0
CP
CL
00
-61
31
1
09
.0
96
.3
10
2.7
1
24
.8
13
4.3
1
29
.6
CP
03
-11
60
1
06
.4
93
.8
10
0.1
1
27
.7
12
9.1
1
28
.4
CP
03
-21
88
1
12
.7
10
6.4
1
09
.5
13
1.4
1
25
.4
12
8.4
C
P 7
2-2
08
6
10
9.9
9
1.9
9
9.9
1
26
.3
13
0.1
1
28
.3
CP
CL
01
-08
77
1
08
.1
85
.5
96
.8
13
2.7
1
23
.1
12
7.9
C
P 7
8-1
62
8
10
7.0
1
11
.9
10
9.4
1
25
.5
12
8.7
1
27
.1
CP
03
-14
91
1
13
.0
10
0.3
1
06
.6
12
7.2
1
25
.3
12
6.2
C
P 0
3-1
17
3
93
.2
88
.3
91
.6
12
3.5
1
27
.7
12
5.7
C
P 0
3-1
91
2
97
.3
96
.0
96
.6
12
3.6
1
24
.1
12
3.9
C
PC
L 0
0-1
37
3
10
9.0
9
4.4
1
01
.7
11
8.7
1
24
.1
12
1.4
C
PC
L 0
1-0
27
1
10
8.4
7
3.4
9
0.9
1
26
.1
11
3.5
1
19
.8
CP
03
-19
39
1
02
.1
94
.4
98
.2
11
7.3
1
16
.8
11
7.1
M
ea
n
10
7.5
9
5.9
1
02
.0
12
6.3
1
27
.2
12
7.0
L
SD
(p
= 0
.1)†
9
.6
17
.3
11
.6
3.7
7
.1
8.4
C
V (
%)
5.1
1
0.2
7
.9
3.1
5
.8
4.6
† L
SD
fo
r lo
ca
tio
n m
ea
ns o
f p
reh
arv
est
su
ga
r yie
ld =
22
.2 K
S/T
an
d o
f h
arv
est
su
ga
r yie
ld =
1.5
KS
/T a
t p
= 0
.10
.
18
Ta
ble
7.
Yie
lds
of
ca
ne
an
d t
he
ore
tic
al
rec
ov
era
ble
96
o s
ug
ar
in m
etr
ic t
on
s p
er
he
cta
re (
TC
/H a
nd
TS
/H)
fro
m p
lan
t c
an
e o
n M
ala
ba
r s
an
d a
nd
Po
mp
an
o f
ine
sa
nd
Ca
ne
yie
ld b
y s
oil
ty
pe
, fa
rm,
S
ug
ar
yie
ld b
y s
oil
ty
pe
, fa
rm,
an
d s
am
pli
ng
da
te
a
nd
sa
mp
lin
g d
ate
P
om
pa
no
Po
mp
an
o
Ma
lab
ar
fi
ne
M
ala
ba
r
fin
e
sa
nd
s
an
d
sa
nd
s
an
d
Hil
lia
rd
Ly
ke
s
Me
an
yie
ld,
Hil
lia
rd
Ly
ke
s
Me
an
yie
ld,
Clo
ne
1
0/1
0/0
7
10
/10
/07
b
oth
fa
rms
1
/14
/08
1
/15
/08
b
oth
fa
rms
C
P 0
3-1
91
2
20
1.2
5
52
.86
1
27
.06
* 2
4.8
90
6
.42
9
15
.66
0*
CP
03
-11
60
1
51
.91
5
7.0
7
10
4.4
9
19
.38
0
7.3
11
1
3.3
46
C
PC
L 0
1-0
87
7
15
6.6
5
37
.39
9
7.0
2
20
.77
7
4.6
47
1
2.7
12
C
P 0
3-2
18
8
14
1.8
6
40
.19
9
1.0
2
18
.58
2
5.1
89
1
1.8
85
C
P 8
9-2
14
3
13
5.5
2
----
- 9
1.3
2
17
.32
0
---
--
11
.88
0
CP
03
-11
73
1
35
.83
4
4.7
9
90
.60
1
6.7
46
5
.70
3
11
.27
0
CP
CL
00
-40
27
1
31
.76
3
9.6
0
85
.68
1
7.4
06
5
.12
0
11
.26
3
CP
CL
00
-61
31
1
44
.78
3
0.9
0
87
.84
1
8.0
69
4
.06
2
11
.06
5
CP
CL
00
-13
73
1
43
.03
4
0.5
7
91
.80
1
6.9
52
4
.98
6
10
.96
9
CP
CL
01
-05
71
1
31
.17
3
0.1
6
80
.66
1
7.1
86
4
.25
7
10
.72
1
CP
CL
01
-02
71
1
35
.93
2
2.4
8
79
.20
1
7.1
38
2
.55
3
9.8
46
C
P 7
8-1
62
8
12
0.8
7
31
.87
7
6.3
7
15
.23
9
4.1
81
9
.71
0
CP
72
-20
86
1
16
.05
3
4.7
6
76
.12
1
4.6
07
4
.56
2
9.6
89
C
P 0
3-1
49
1
10
9.9
8
38
.12
7
4.0
5
13
.99
9
4.9
04
9
.45
2
CP
03
-14
01
1
01
.83
3
5.8
7
68
.85
1
2.7
07
4
.80
2
8.7
54
C
P 0
3-1
93
9
97
.02
4
6.5
6
71
.79
1
1.3
65
5
.59
1
8.4
78
M
ea
n
13
4.7
1
38
.88
8
7.1
2
17
.02
3
4.9
53
1
1.0
44
L
SD
(p
= 0
.1)†
1
7.8
6
16
.14
2
8.4
7
3.9
69
2
.00
7
3.8
26
C
V (
%)
13
.78
4
3.1
3
20
.00
1
4.4
29
4
2.1
11
2
0.3
25
* Sig
nific
an
tly g
rea
ter
tha
n C
P 7
8-1
62
8 a
t p
= 0
.10
ba
se
d o
n t
te
st.
† L
SD
fo
r lo
ca
tio
n m
ea
ns o
f ca
ne
yie
ld =
27
.16
TC
/H a
nd
of
su
ga
r yie
ld =
3.4
55
TS
/H a
t p
= 0
.10
.
19
Ta
ble
8.
Yie
lds
of
pre
ha
rve
st
an
d h
arv
es
t th
eo
reti
ca
l re
co
ve
rab
le 9
6o s
ug
ar
in k
g p
er
me
tric
to
n o
f c
an
e (
KS
/T)
fro
m p
lan
t c
an
e o
n
La
ud
erh
ill
mu
ck
an
d T
orr
y m
uc
k
P
reh
arv
es
t y
ield
by
so
il t
yp
e,
farm
,
Ha
rve
st
yie
ld b
y s
oil
ty
pe
, fa
rm,
an
d s
am
pli
ng
da
te
a
nd
sa
mp
lin
g d
ate
L
au
de
rhil
l
T
orr
y
La
ud
erh
ill
T
orr
y
m
uc
k
mu
ck
mu
ck
m
uc
k
Ok
ee
lan
ta
Ea
stg
ate
M
ea
n y
ield
, O
ke
ela
nta
E
as
tga
te
Me
an
yie
ld,
Clo
ne
1
0/1
1/0
7
10
/9/0
7
bo
th f
arm
s
1/2
4/0
8
2/4
/08
b
oth
fa
rms
C
PC
L 9
9-4
45
5
11
8.2
1
20
.7
11
9.5
1
35
.1
13
4.4
1
34
.7*
CP
CL
99
-14
01
1
03
.9
11
6.0
1
09
.9
13
5.2
1
29
.3
13
2.3
C
PC
L 9
9-2
57
4
97
.9
12
2.6
1
10
.2
13
4.5
1
29
.7
13
2.1
C
P 8
9-2
14
3
10
0.6
1
17
.5
10
9.1
1
31
.0
12
8.4
1
29
.7
CP
72
-20
86
1
03
.5
11
6.2
1
09
.9
12
6.1
1
31
.9
12
9.0
C
PC
L 9
9-2
10
3
86
.6
10
8.8
9
7.7
1
28
.7
12
8.0
1
28
.4
CP
78
-16
28
9
2.0
1
17
.6
10
4.8
1
30
.2
12
6.2
1
28
.2
CP
CL
99
-12
25
9
4.5
1
14
.6
10
4.5
1
27
.1
12
5.6
1
26
.4
CP
02
-20
15
1
04
.6
97
.2
10
0.9
1
26
.1
12
1.2
1
23
.7
CP
CL
99
-22
06
9
3.7
1
12
.0
10
2.8
1
23
.3
12
1.4
1
22
.3
CP
02
-11
43
9
7.1
1
08
.0
10
2.6
1
23
.3
11
8.9
1
21
.1
CP
CL
99
-17
77
9
2.6
1
16
.9
10
4.8
1
21
.9
12
0.3
1
21
.1
CP
02
-15
54
9
7.2
1
07
.2
10
2.2
1
20
.7
12
1.2
1
21
.0
CP
02
-22
81
9
4.8
1
18
.6
10
6.7
1
18
.1
12
2.9
1
20
.5
CP
02
-15
64
9
5.9
1
29
.5
11
2.7
1
24
.2
11
6.2
1
20
.2
CP
02
-14
58
9
9.7
1
01
.9
10
0.8
1
16
.7
12
0.5
1
18
.6
M
ea
n
98
.3
11
4.1
1
06
.2
12
6.4
1
24
.7
12
5.8
L
SD
(p
= 0
.1)†
1
2.7
1
2.8
1
3.1
3
.5
4.1
4
.8
CV
(%
) 7
.4
6.4
1
3.5
2
.9
3.4
3
.2
* S
ign
ific
an
tly g
rea
ter
tha
n C
P 8
9-2
14
3 a
t p
= 0
.10
ba
se
d o
n t
te
st.
† L
SD
fo
r lo
ca
tio
n m
ea
ns o
f p
reh
arv
est
su
ga
r yie
ld =
7.2
KS
/T a
nd
of
ha
rve
st
yie
ld =
1.7
3 K
S/T
at
p =
0.1
0.
20
Ta
ble
9.
Yie
lds
of
ca
ne
an
d o
f th
eo
reti
ca
l re
co
ve
rab
le 9
6o s
ug
ar
in m
etr
ic t
on
s p
er
he
cta
re (
TC
/H a
nd
TS
/H)
fro
m p
lan
t c
an
e o
n L
au
de
rhil
l m
uc
k a
nd
To
rry
mu
ck
Ca
ne
yie
ld b
y s
oil
ty
pe
, fa
rm,
S
ug
ar
yie
ld b
y s
oil
ty
pe
, fa
rm,
an
d s
am
pli
ng
da
te
a
nd
sa
mp
lin
g d
ate
L
au
de
rhil
l
To
rry
L
au
de
rhil
l
To
rry
mu
ck
mu
ck
mu
ck
m
uc
k
O
ke
ela
nta
Ea
stg
ate
Me
an
yie
ld,
O
ke
ela
nta
Ea
stg
ate
Me
an
yie
ld,
Clo
ne
1/2
4/0
8
2
/4/0
8
b
oth
fa
rms
1/2
4/0
8
2
/4/0
8
b
oth
fa
rms
C
P 0
2-1
14
3
11
6.5
0
27
6.8
7
19
6.6
8
14
.77
9
34
.75
5
24
.76
7
CP
02
-14
58
1
10
.02
2
63
.04
1
86
.53
1
4.7
23
3
4.0
25
2
4.3
74
C
P 0
2-1
55
4
14
1.9
4
21
8.9
0
18
0.4
2
19
.13
9
28
.29
0
23
.71
5
CP
02
-15
64
1
01
.87
2
71
.98
1
86
.92
1
2.2
55
3
3.0
28
2
2.6
42
C
P 0
2-2
01
5
11
1.9
4
26
4.7
2
18
8.3
3
13
.78
5
31
.46
5
22
.62
5
CP
02
-22
81
9
0.9
7
25
3.8
3
17
2.4
0
11
.41
6
33
.44
1
22
.42
9
CP
72
-20
86
6
8.1
1
27
8.0
6
17
3.0
9
8.8
01
3
5.5
56
2
2.1
78
C
P 7
8-1
62
8
93
.32
2
68
.49
1
80
.90
1
1.4
94
3
2.5
74
2
2.0
34
C
P 8
9-2
14
3
11
7.9
3
24
6.9
4
18
2.4
3
14
.61
7
28
.67
3
21
.64
5
CP
CL
99
-12
25
1
19
.08
2
09
.36
1
64
.22
1
5.4
49
2
6.4
16
2
0.9
32
C
PC
L 9
9-1
40
1
10
7.6
0
22
5.2
0
16
6.4
0
12
.69
4
27
.72
4
20
.20
9
CP
CL
99
-17
77
8
9.0
4
24
2.8
6
16
5.9
5
10
.82
9
29
.30
2
20
.06
5
CP
CL
99
-21
03
7
5.0
7
22
2.2
9
14
8.6
8
10
.18
3
29
.86
8
20
.02
5
CP
CL
99
-22
06
1
00
.86
2
14
.63
1
57
.75
1
2.6
67
2
5.8
38
1
9.2
52
C
PC
L 9
9-2
57
4
68
.58
2
23
.31
1
45
.94
9
.03
6
28
.76
1
18
.89
8
CP
CL
99
-44
55
8
1.9
6
18
6.3
4
13
4.1
5
9.6
95
2
2.4
51
1
6.0
73
M
ea
n
99
.67
2
41
.68
1
70
.67
1
2.5
98
3
0.1
35
2
1.3
66
L
SD
(p
= 0
.1)†
2
4.6
3
36
.38
4
2.6
2
3.1
22
4
.65
5
5.7
37
C
V (
%)
25
.70
1
5.6
6
18
.93
2
5.7
74
1
6.0
63
1
9.2
90
† L
SD
fo
r lo
ca
tio
n m
ea
ns o
f ca
ne
yie
ld =
21
.52
TC
/H a
nd
of
su
ga
r yie
ld =
2.6
48
TS
/H a
t p
= 0
.10
. 21
Ta
ble
10
. Y
ield
s o
f c
an
e i
n m
etr
ic t
on
s p
er
he
cta
re (
TC
/H)
fro
m f
irs
t-ra
too
n c
an
e o
n D
an
ia m
uc
k,
La
ud
erh
ill
mu
ck
, P
ah
ok
ee
mu
ck
, M
ala
ba
r s
an
d,
an
d P
om
pa
no
fin
e s
an
d
Po
mp
an
o
Da
nia
Pa
ho
ke
e
M
ala
ba
r
fin
e
mu
ck
La
ud
erh
ill
mu
ck
mu
ck
sa
nd
sa
nd
E
sti
ma
ted
D
ud
a
O
ke
ela
nta
K
nig
ht
We
dg
wo
rth
S
FI
O
sc
eo
la
H
illi
ard
Ly
ke
s
y
ield
, C
lon
e
1
2/1
0/0
7
1
0/2
6/0
7
12
/3/0
7
12
/11
/07
1
2/1
5/0
7
1
2/1
8/0
7
1
/14
/08
12
/19
/07
all
fa
rms
CP
02
-15
64
17
9.7
0
1
69
.39
1
36
.56
2
09
.76
1
87
.27
17
2.5
4
7
6.8
6
8
9.7
7
1
52
.28
* C
PC
L 9
9-2
20
6
1
77
.45
14
8.5
4
10
2.6
3
17
4.6
5
15
8.6
0
1
68
.92
13
9.3
9
9
9.2
8
1
46
.47
* C
PC
L 9
9-1
40
1
1
41
.74
15
4.9
7
10
9.8
3
17
3.2
4
15
8.4
8
1
54
.19
92
.85
95
.66
13
4.7
1*
CP
02
-11
43
14
3.8
7
1
56
.17
8
8.0
5
14
5.4
0
19
2.6
9
1
57
.80
65
.83
97
.85
13
1.2
2*
CP
CL
99
-21
03
15
0.3
6
1
55
.73
1
23
.29
1
42
.66
1
64
.17
15
4.3
8
5
0.4
8
8
5.6
7
1
27
.59
* C
P 7
8-1
62
8
1
35
.39
14
1.2
6
-
----
-
----
---
--
1
46
.78
82
.04
98
.97
12
7.3
5*
CP
02
-15
54
13
5.9
4
1
54
.42
8
7.9
2
14
8.9
7
16
2.0
0
1
41
.07
73
.86
10
0.4
7
1
25
.70
C
PC
L 9
9-1
77
7
1
47
.60
14
7.7
8
83
.37
1
39
.23
1
70
.91
14
2.4
5
7
7.1
9
9
4.1
5
1
25
.58
C
P 0
2-2
01
5
1
50
.73
16
1.3
1
80
.40
1
60
.65
1
77
.75
13
5.9
7
6
2.0
8
6
5.5
9
1
24
.60
C
P 0
2-2
28
1
1
52
.54
13
6.6
6
87
.42
1
54
.75
1
68
.26
13
8.9
0
5
9.7
8
8
1.6
7
1
22
.55
C
PC
L 9
9-1
22
5
1
50
.39
14
6.9
5
93
.24
1
46
.87
1
57
.45
14
0.4
3
5
7.4
7
5
5.7
9
1
18
.64
C
PC
L 9
9-2
57
4
1
48
.15
13
5.5
5
74
.76
1
45
.32
1
70
.39
14
2.4
7
6
2.9
3
5
3.8
3
1
17
.02
C
P 8
9-2
14
3
---
--
1
30
.30
--
---
---
--
15
0.4
7
1
27
.78
75
.22
80
.21
11
5.2
8
CP
CL
99
-44
55
14
1.0
1
1
38
.23
5
9.1
3
12
6.6
8
14
3.5
5
1
35
.84
55
.98
51
.07
10
6.8
2
CP
02
-14
58
11
3.5
3
1
13
.86
6
0.5
8
13
0.7
4
16
6.4
9
1
34
.97
53
.84
58
.30
10
4.3
9
CP
72
-20
86
12
3.8
8
1
39
.13
5
8.7
4
92
.59
1
52
.01
11
1.5
8
-
----
67
.33
99
.27
M
ea
n
14
6.0
1
1
46
.26
8
8.9
3
14
9.1
3
16
7.0
7
1
44
.93
71
.98
8
0.7
9
12
3.7
2
LS
D (
p =
0.1
)†
21
.12
17
.96
2
5.4
7
19
.31
2
2.4
9
1
8.7
4
3
7.6
0
16
.88
1
0.9
8
CV
(%
) 1
5.0
3
1
2.7
7
23
.99
1
3.4
4
13
.98
13
.45
54
.27
2
1.7
2
19
.09
* S
ign
ific
an
tly g
rea
ter
tha
n C
P 8
9-2
14
3 a
t p
= 0
.10
ba
se
d o
n t
te
st.
† L
SD
fo
r lo
ca
tio
n m
ea
ns o
f ca
ne
yie
ld =
13
.75
TC
/H a
t p
= 0
.10
.
22
Ta
ble
11
. Y
ield
s o
f th
eo
reti
ca
l re
co
ve
rab
le 9
6o s
ug
ar
in k
g p
er
me
tric
to
n o
f c
an
e (
KS
/T)
fro
m f
irs
t-ra
too
n c
an
e o
n D
an
ia m
uc
k,
La
ud
erh
ill
mu
ck
, P
ah
ok
ee
mu
ck
, M
ala
ba
r s
an
d,
an
d P
om
pa
no
fin
e s
an
d
Po
mp
an
o
Da
nia
Pa
ho
ke
e
M
ala
ba
r
fin
e
mu
ck
La
ud
erh
ill
mu
ck
mu
ck
sa
nd
sa
nd
E
sti
ma
ted
Du
da
Ok
ee
lan
ta
Kn
igh
t W
ed
gw
ort
h
SF
I
Os
ce
ola
Hil
lia
rd
L
yk
es
yie
ld,
Clo
ne
12
/10
/07
10
/26
/07
1
2/3
/07
1
2/1
1/0
7
12
/15
/07
12
/18
/07
1/1
4/0
8
1
2/1
9/0
7
a
ll f
arm
s
CP
CL
99
-44
55
12
9.1
12
4.7
1
23
.7
12
8.6
1
28
.0
1
31
.3
1
39
.8
1
33
.6
1
29
.9*
CP
CL
99
-21
03
12
1.8
10
8.5
1
24
.4
11
9.8
1
18
.4
1
26
.8
1
37
.7
1
32
.6
1
23
.7
CP
CL
99
-25
74
12
2.6
11
2.9
1
17
.8
11
9.2
1
20
.7
1
24
.6
1
38
.7
1
30
.2
1
23
.4
CP
89
-21
43
----
-
10
9.8
--
---
---
--
11
9.4
12
1.9
13
4.2
13
1.4
12
1.7
C
P 0
2-1
56
4
1
18
.8
1
11
.4
11
6.9
1
20
.6
11
8.7
12
1.1
13
5.3
12
8.4
12
1.4
C
P 7
2-2
08
6
1
18
.6
1
11
.0
11
7.7
1
16
.4
11
7.7
12
2.9
----
-
12
6.6
12
0.8
C
P 7
8-1
62
8
1
19
.0
1
07
.5
----
-
-
----
---
--
1
22
.4
1
38
.5
1
23
.5
1
20
.1
CP
CL
99
-14
01
12
5.0
93
.6
12
0.8
1
17
.6
11
4.7
12
2.1
13
7.1
13
0.5
12
0.0
C
P 0
2-1
14
3
1
16
.6
1
01
.8
11
2.6
1
09
.9
11
7.1
11
7.0
13
3.0
12
6.4
11
6.8
C
P 0
2-2
01
5
1
17
.3
1
05
.6
11
5.0
1
12
.6
11
9.0
11
4.8
12
7.5
11
7.5
11
6.1
C
P 0
2-1
55
4
1
13
.0
1
05
.0
11
4.0
1
04
.4
11
0.1
11
9.0
13
2.4
12
7.3
11
5.6
C
P 0
2-2
28
1
1
22
.0
1
06
.1
10
7.9
1
10
.0
11
4.6
12
1.1
11
4.5
12
4.7
11
5.2
C
PC
L 9
9-1
22
5
1
14
.0
1
01
.9
10
5.7
1
11
.5
11
0.2
11
1.5
13
1.5
12
1.4
11
3.6
C
PC
L 9
9-2
20
6
1
11
.7
9
5.4
1
13
.1
10
8.6
1
07
.9
1
13
.8
1
34
.6
1
23
.5
1
13
.5
CP
02
-14
58
10
9.8
10
0.0
1
09
.5
10
5.9
1
12
.7
1
07
.7
1
31
.8
1
23
.4
1
12
.5
CP
CL
99
-17
77
11
2.2
95
.1
10
0.8
1
09
.1
11
7.0
10
9.3
13
0.3
12
3.2
11
2.3
M
ea
n
11
8.1
10
5.6
1
14
.3
11
3.9
1
16
.4
1
19
.2
1
33
.1
12
6.5
1
18
.5
LS
D (
p =
0.1
)†
5.2
6.3
5
.5
4.9
5
.8
4
.7
1
1.5
3
.3
3.2
C
V (
%)
4.5
6.2
4
.1
4.5
5
.2
4
.1
9
.0
2.7
5
.5
*
Sig
nific
an
tly g
rea
ter
tha
n C
P 8
9-2
14
3 a
t p
= 0
.10
ba
se
d o
n t
te
st.
† L
SD
fo
r lo
ca
tio
n m
ea
ns o
f ca
ne
yie
ld =
2.6
KS
/T a
t p
= 0
.10
.
23
Ta
ble
12
. Y
ield
s o
f th
eo
reti
ca
l re
co
ve
rab
le 9
6o s
ug
ar
in m
etr
ic t
on
s p
er
he
cta
re (
TS
/H)
fro
m f
irs
t-ra
too
n c
an
e o
n D
an
ia m
uc
k,
La
ud
erh
ill
mu
ck
, P
ah
ok
ee
mu
ck
, M
ala
ba
r s
an
d,
an
d P
om
pa
no
fin
e s
an
d
Po
mp
an
o
Da
nia
Pa
ho
ke
e
M
ala
ba
r
fin
e
mu
ck
La
ud
erh
ill
mu
ck
m
uc
k
s
an
d
s
an
d
E
sti
ma
ted
D
ud
a
O
ke
ela
nta
K
nig
ht
We
dg
wo
rth
S
FI
O
sc
eo
la
H
illi
ard
Ly
ke
s
y
ield
, C
lon
e
1
2/1
0/0
7
1
0/2
6/0
7
12
/3/0
7
12
/11
/07
1
2/1
5/0
7
1
2/1
8/0
7
1
/14
/08
12
/19
/07
all
fa
rms
CP
02
-15
64
21
.37
7
1
8.8
57
1
5.9
22
2
5.2
33
2
2.2
66
20
.90
8
1
0.4
27
11
.53
4
1
8.2
78
* C
PC
L 9
9-2
20
6
1
9.8
11
14
.24
8
11
.63
7
18
.97
6
17
.23
0
1
9.2
11
18
.69
3
1
2.2
72
16
.53
4*
CP
CL
99
-14
01
17
.73
3
---
--
13
.17
2
20
.42
9
18
.42
3
1
8.7
57
12
.77
8
1
2.5
38
16
.00
0*
CP
CL
99
-21
03
18
.36
3
1
6.9
36
1
5.3
25
1
7.1
48
1
9.7
10
19
.63
3
7
.03
2
1
1.3
49
15
.60
0*
CP
78
-16
28
16
.23
6
1
5.1
92
----
-
-
----
---
--
1
7.9
89
11
.40
0
1
2.1
65
15
.21
3
CP
02
-11
43
16
.70
2
1
5.8
72
9
.96
1
16
.00
8
22
.67
8
1
8.4
66
8.7
92
12
.60
0
1
5.1
38
C
PC
L 9
9-2
57
4
1
8.1
16
15
.36
1
8.9
09
1
7.2
65
2
0.6
16
17
.75
8
8
.73
8
7
.60
5
1
4.4
06
C
P 0
2-2
01
5
1
7.7
41
17
.05
1
9.2
86
1
8.0
66
2
1.1
62
15
.66
4
7
.91
7
7
.67
7
1
4.3
49
C
P 0
2-1
55
4
1
5.2
30
16
.27
3
9.9
91
1
5.5
34
1
7.9
32
16
.80
8
9
.83
6
1
2.8
11
14
.31
2
CP
02
-22
81
18
.61
4
1
4.5
00
9
.46
1
16
.97
9
19
.27
6
1
6.8
14
7.3
99
10
.13
9
1
4.1
67
C
PC
L 9
9-1
77
7
1
6.5
73
14
.11
1
8.4
37
1
5.1
54
2
0.0
67
15
.50
0
1
0.0
33
11
.60
9
1
3.9
75
C
P 8
9-2
14
3
--
---
1
4.3
23
--
---
---
--
17
.99
0
1
5.4
80
10
.16
1
1
0.5
30
13
.88
2
CP
CL
99
-44
55
18
.16
9
1
7.2
15
7
.26
5
16
.28
3
18
.51
4
1
7.8
41
7.8
23
6.9
04
13
.81
6
CP
CL
99
-12
25
17
.17
7
1
4.9
84
9
.86
3
16
.36
5
17
.36
8
1
5.5
86
7.5
53
6.7
46
13
.22
0
CP
72
-20
86
14
.39
5
1
5.4
75
6
.89
8
10
.81
7
17
.92
1
1
3.6
86
----
-
8.5
30
11
.86
6
CP
02
-14
58
12
.42
9
1
1.3
97
6
.68
3
13
.88
8
18
.98
7
1
4.5
40
7.1
20
7.1
89
11
.55
8
Me
an
17
.24
4
1
5.4
53
1
0.2
01
1
7.0
10
1
9.3
43
1
7.1
65
9
.71
3
1
0.1
37
14
.52
0
LS
D (
p =
0.1
)†
2
.68
3
2
.29
4
2.9
64
2
.31
8
3.1
75
2
.41
6
5.0
70
2.1
78
1
.51
9
CV
(%
)
16
.16
2
1
5.4
40
2
4.3
41
1
4.1
42
1
7.0
51
1
4.6
50
5
4.2
40
22
.32
1
21
.34
9
* S
ign
ific
an
tly g
rea
ter
tha
n C
P 8
9-2
14
3 a
t p
= 0
.10
ba
se
d o
n t
te
st.
† L
SD
fo
r lo
ca
tio
n m
ea
ns o
f ca
ne
yie
ld =
1.8
12
TS
/H a
t p
= 0
.10
.
24
Ta
ble
13
. Y
ield
s o
f c
an
e i
n m
etr
ic t
on
s p
er
he
cta
re (
TC
/H)
an
d t
he
ore
tic
al
rec
ov
era
ble
96
o s
ug
ar
in k
g p
er
me
tric
to
n (
KS
/T)
an
d i
n m
etr
ic
ton
s p
er
he
cta
re (
TS
/H)
fro
m f
irs
t-ra
too
n c
an
e o
n D
an
ia m
uc
k a
nd
To
rry
mu
ck
C
an
e y
ield
(T
C/H
)
Su
ga
r y
ield
(K
S/T
)
Su
ga
r y
ield
(T
S/H
)
b
y s
oil
ty
pe
, fa
rm,
b
y s
oil
ty
pe
, fa
rm,
b
y s
oil
ty
pe
, fa
rm,
an
d s
am
pli
ng
da
te
a
nd
sa
mp
lin
g d
ate
an
d s
am
pli
ng
da
te
Da
nia
T
orr
y
D
an
ia
To
rry
Da
nia
T
orr
y
mu
ck
m
uc
k
m
uc
k
mu
ck
mu
ck
m
uc
k
Ok
ee
lan
ta
Ea
stg
ate
M
ea
n y
ield
, O
ke
ela
nta
E
as
tga
te
Me
an
yie
ld,
Ok
ee
lan
ta
Ea
stg
ate
M
ea
n y
ield
, C
lon
e
12
/27
/07
1
/28
/08
b
oth
fa
rms
1
2/2
7/0
7
1/2
8/0
8
bo
th f
arm
s
12
/27
/07
1
/28
/08
b
oth
fa
rms
CP
01
-13
78
1
25
.91
2
73
.27
2
28
.20
* 1
26
.5
12
2.2
1
23
.6
15
.95
5
33
.26
0
27
.94
1*
CP
01
-13
72
1
59
.01
2
42
.42
2
06
.58
* 1
35
.6
12
3.2
1
28
.8
21
.56
9
29
.91
8
26
.32
7*
CP
01
-23
90
1
59
.79
2
44
.45
2
08
.04
* 1
23
.5
11
9.7
1
21
.4
19
.78
2
29
.26
6
25
.15
9*
CP
01
-15
64
1
31
.65
2
61
.20
1
98
.24
* 1
22
.0
12
1.0
1
21
.6
16
.05
7
31
.57
5
24
.00
8*
CP
78
-16
28
1
43
.67
2
32
.51
1
94
.20
* 1
20
.6
12
1.7
1
21
.2
17
.19
4
28
.26
3
23
.43
6
CP
01
-13
38
1
43
.98
2
30
.04
1
93
.00
* 1
10
.2
12
4.0
1
17
.7
15
.88
6
28
.58
1
23
.01
4
CP
01
-12
05
1
28
.38
1
97
.53
1
68
.17
1
31
.8
13
2.1
1
31
.9
16
.91
4
26
.08
6
22
.12
1
CP
01
-19
57
1
23
.37
2
34
.32
1
85
.97
1
08
.1
12
2.2
1
15
.8
13
.35
7
28
.72
0
21
.94
1
CP
01
-24
59
1
23
.30
2
09
.18
1
72
.22
1
20
.7
12
0.8
1
20
.8
14
.88
0
25
.28
0
20
.75
7
CP
89
-21
43
1
10
.23
1
95
.40
1
58
.76
1
25
.5
12
6.2
1
25
.9
13
.83
8
24
.63
5
19
.93
1
CP
01
-20
56
1
17
.28
2
05
.97
1
67
.73
1
20
.1
11
6.7
1
18
.2
14
.08
2
24
.03
4
19
.71
4
CP
01
-13
91
1
10
.99
2
05
.10
1
64
.40
1
14
.0
11
5.1
1
14
.6
12
.67
2
23
.83
1
18
.96
2
CP
01
-11
78
1
15
.77
1
64
.17
1
47
.90
1
28
.5
12
6.5
1
27
.3
14
.93
3
20
.72
7
18
.73
3
CP
72
-20
86
8
1.2
8
18
8.7
7
14
1.9
9
12
0.9
1
28
.9
12
5.3
9
.83
5
24
.36
0
17
.96
1
CP
01
-13
21
1
19
.89
1
59
.43
1
43
.54
1
18
.9
12
7.2
1
23
.4
14
.26
0
20
.18
1
17
.69
3
CP
01
-11
81
9
0.4
9
16
4.0
3
13
2.6
8
12
5.1
1
26
.7
12
6.0
1
1.3
73
2
0.7
82
1
6.7
09
Me
an
1
24
.06
2
12
.99
1
75
.73
1
22
.0
12
3.4
1
22
.7
15
.16
2
26
.21
9
21
.52
5
LS
D (
p =
0.1
)†
18
.07
3
5.8
2
31
.09
3
.9
4.6
8
.3
2.2
30
4
.69
1
3.9
02
C
V (
%)
15
.09
1
7.4
9
17
.45
3
.3
3.9
3
.7
15
.23
4
26
.47
7
17
.93
4
* S
ign
ific
an
tly g
rea
ter
tha
n C
P 8
9-2
14
3 a
t p
= 0
.10
ba
se
d o
n t
te
st.
† L
SD
fo
r lo
ca
tio
n m
ea
ns o
f ca
ne
yie
ld =
49
.20
TC
/H o
f su
ga
r yie
ld =
1.2
KS
/T,
an
d o
f su
ga
r yie
ld =
6.1
20
TS
/H a
t p
= 0
.10
.
25
Ta
ble
14
. Y
ield
s o
f c
an
e i
n m
etr
ic t
on
s p
er
he
cta
re (
TC
/H)
fro
m s
ec
on
d-r
ato
on
ca
ne
on
Da
nia
mu
ck
, L
au
de
rhil
l m
uc
k,
Pa
ho
ke
e m
uc
k,
Ma
lab
ar
sa
nd
, a
nd
Po
mp
an
o f
ine
sa
nd
Me
an
yie
ld b
y s
oil
ty
pe
, fa
rm,
an
d s
am
pli
ng
da
te
P
om
pa
no
D
an
ia
P
ah
ok
ee
Ma
lab
ar
fi
ne
m
uc
k
L
au
de
rhil
l m
uc
k
m
uc
k
s
an
d
s
an
d
O
ke
ela
nta
Kn
igh
t W
ed
gw
ort
h
Du
da
Os
ce
ola
Hil
lia
rd
L
yk
es
Me
an
yie
ld,
Clo
ne
10
/15
/07
10
/16
/07
10
/19
/07
1
0/2
2/0
7
1
0/1
7/0
7
1
0/2
5/0
7
1
0/2
4/0
7
a
ll f
arm
s
C
P 0
1-1
37
2
1
29
.35
11
5.8
2
19
6.0
9
17
1.7
6
1
64
.43
15
0.1
5
6
7.2
0
1
41
.94
* C
P 0
1-1
95
7
1
19
.06
15
2.0
2
19
0.5
5
14
0.6
7
1
12
.44
12
4.2
6
3
8.3
7
1
25
.87
* C
P 0
1-1
37
8
9
2.5
2
1
28
.50
1
58
.26
1
51
.46
12
4.6
5
1
20
.83
73
.99
12
1.2
5*
CP
01
-23
90
94
.28
11
3.6
5
14
8.7
2
15
7.6
1
1
09
.97
13
3.6
2
8
1.0
2
1
19
.24
C
P 0
1-1
33
8
1
10
.02
60
.50
1
63
.78
1
58
.72
12
7.6
7
---
--
7
3.9
1
1
16
.52
C
P 0
1-2
05
6
9
8.9
4
1
16
.55
1
46
.44
1
46
.28
11
4.1
1
1
04
.35
54
.45
11
1.3
1
CP
78
-16
28
89
.69
----
-
--
---
15
0.3
8
1
00
.68
98
.76
79
.83
10
8.0
8
CP
01
-15
64
89
.72
98
.82
1
37
.50
1
25
.45
94
.80
13
2.1
1
6
2.2
0
1
05
.92
C
P 8
9-2
14
3
7
5.1
4
--
---
--
---
11
6.7
4
1
22
.30
12
5.8
8
6
4.3
5
1
05
.50
C
P 0
1-2
45
9
6
9.4
6
9
2.2
2
14
6.1
0
11
0.7
7
7
8.2
1
1
03
.36
72
.35
96
.22
C
P 0
1-1
39
1
7
4.8
9
4
6.3
7
13
2.3
7
12
4.0
2
1
15
.11
10
3.7
4
6
0.0
1
9
3.2
0
CP
01
-12
05
83
.81
88
.91
1
17
.61
1
18
.24
83
.42
10
6.8
0
5
5.7
4
9
3.1
0
CP
01
-13
21
74
.49
35
.32
1
48
.63
1
08
.18
86
.30
10
5.8
4
6
8.1
3
8
9.6
2
CP
72
-20
86
68
.16
48
.98
1
15
.27
1
04
.60
-
----
-
----
49
.19
78
.37
C
P 0
1-1
17
8
5
4.8
8
2
1.6
1
98
.31
6
6.8
7
5
4.1
1
5
9.7
9
5
8.5
7
5
9.5
3
CP
01
-11
81
49
.86
24
.19
8
8.0
5
70
.27
59
.01
64
.84
53
.90
58
.13
M
ea
n
8
5.8
9
8
1.6
8
14
1.9
8
12
6.3
8
1
03
.15
10
9.5
9
6
3.3
2
1
01
.49
L
SD
(p
= 0
.1)†
25
.96
23
.00
2
6.2
6
23
.04
27
.87
19
.28
16
.84
15
.19
C
V (
%)
3
1.4
4
2
9.2
5
19
.22
1
8.7
6
2
8.0
7
1
8.1
6
2
7.6
4
2
4.3
1
*
Sig
nific
an
tly g
rea
ter
tha
n C
P 8
9-2
14
3 a
t p
= 0
.10
ba
se
d o
n t
te
st.
† L
SD
fo
r lo
ca
tio
n m
ea
ns o
f su
ga
r yie
ld =
12
.40
TC
/H a
t p
= 0
.10
.
26
Ta
ble
15
. Y
ield
s o
f th
eo
reti
ca
l re
co
ve
rab
le 9
6o s
ug
ar
in k
g p
er
me
tric
to
n (
KS
/T)
fro
m s
ec
on
d-r
ato
on
ca
ne
on
Da
nia
mu
ck
, L
au
de
rhil
l m
uc
k,
Pa
ho
ke
e m
uc
k,
Ma
lab
ar
sa
nd
, a
nd
Po
mp
an
o f
ine
sa
nd
M
ea
n y
ield
by
so
il t
yp
e,
farm
, a
nd
sa
mp
lin
g d
ate
P
om
pa
no
D
an
ia
P
ah
ok
ee
Ma
lab
ar
fi
ne
m
uc
k
L
au
de
rhil
l m
uc
k
m
uc
k
s
an
d
s
an
d
O
ke
ela
nta
Kn
igh
t W
ed
gw
ort
h
Du
da
Os
ce
ola
Hil
lia
rd
L
yk
es
Me
an
yie
ld,
Clo
ne
10
/15
/07
10
/16
/07
1
0/1
9/0
7
10
/22
/07
10
/17
/07
10
/25
/07
10
/24
/07
all
fa
rms
C
P 0
1-1
20
5
1
32
.9
1
10
.5
10
5.6
1
07
.9
1
27
.5
1
36
.4
1
28
.2
1
21
.5
CP
01
-11
81
12
5.5
10
4.7
1
09
.8
11
0.5
12
7.9
13
4.4
12
0.0
11
8.8
C
P 0
1-1
37
2
1
28
.9
1
16
.4
10
9.0
1
01
.2
1
14
.6
1
35
.4
1
21
.7
1
18
.4
CP
01
-13
78
12
6.1
11
4.9
1
02
.3
10
9.5
12
6.0
12
8.0
10
8.2
11
6.3
C
P 8
9-2
14
3
1
24
.1
-
----
---
--
10
8.6
11
6.7
12
7.3
12
0.1
11
6.0
C
P 0
1-1
56
4
1
17
.3
1
08
.2
10
3.6
1
03
.3
1
15
.2
1
45
.8
1
14
.3
1
15
.5
CP
72
-20
86
12
6.7
11
1.0
9
9.9
1
06
.5
----
-
----
-
10
0.6
11
3.3
C
P 0
1-2
39
0
1
17
.3
1
06
.1
10
6.9
1
08
.7
1
19
.9
1
27
.3
1
07
.0
1
13
.1
CP
01
-11
78
12
1.5
98
.9
10
1.9
1
00
.7
1
21
.8
1
29
.6
1
14
.6
1
12
.8
CP
78
-16
28
11
8.4
---
--
-
----
1
05
.1
1
18
.3
1
27
.0
1
06
.6
1
11
.6
CP
01
-20
56
11
8.4
10
8.5
9
5.7
9
8.9
11
0.4
12
7.9
10
6.6
10
9.5
C
P 0
1-2
45
9
1
12
.8
1
02
.3
99
.4
96
.1
1
12
.7
1
22
.0
1
03
.6
1
07
.0
CP
01
-13
21
11
5.8
84
.4
94
.6
10
1.8
12
5.1
11
8.4
10
8.6
10
6.8
C
P 0
1-1
39
1
1
18
.3
9
6.0
1
05
.8
99
.7
1
18
.6
1
21
.0
7
9.4
10
6.1
C
P 0
1-1
33
8
1
11
.8
1
04
.2
95
.1
81
.5
1
08
.5
--
---
1
05
.0
1
03
.9
CP
01
-19
57
10
3.3
97
.1
88
.9
77
.4
8
8.0
10
9.4
10
9.5
96
.5
M
ea
n
1
19
.9
1
04
.5
10
1.3
1
01
.1
1
16
.7
1
27
.8
1
09
.6
1
11
.7
LS
D (
p =
0.1
)†
7
.8
7
.2
7.9
7
.7
6
.3
1
1.3
12
.1
5
.6
CV
(%
)
6.7
7.2
8
.1
7.8
5.6
9.1
11
.5
8
.2
†
LS
D f
or
loca
tio
n m
ea
ns o
f su
ga
r yie
ld =
2.9
KS
/T a
t p
= 0
.10
.
27
Ta
ble
16
. Y
ield
s o
f th
eo
reti
ca
l re
co
ve
rab
le 9
6o s
ug
ar
in m
etr
ic t
on
s p
er
he
cta
re (
TS
/H)
fro
m s
ec
on
d-r
ato
on
ca
ne
on
Da
nia
mu
ck
, L
au
de
rhil
l m
uc
k,
Pa
ho
ke
e m
uc
k,
Ma
lab
ar
sa
nd
, a
nd
Po
mp
an
o f
ine
sa
nd
M
ea
n y
ield
by
so
il t
yp
e,
farm
, a
nd
sa
mp
lin
g d
ate
P
om
pa
no
D
an
ia
P
ah
ok
ee
Ma
lab
ar
fi
ne
m
uc
k
L
au
de
rhil
l m
uc
k
m
uc
k
s
an
d
s
an
d
O
ke
ela
nta
Kn
igh
t W
ed
gw
ort
h
Du
da
Os
ce
ola
Hil
lia
rd
L
yk
es
Me
an
yie
ld,
Clo
ne
10
/15
/07
10
/16
/07
1
0/1
9/0
7
10
/22
/07
10
/17
/07
10
/25
/07
10
/24
/07
all
fa
rms
C
P 0
1-1
37
2
1
6.5
66
13
.49
5
21
.33
7
17
.61
0
1
8.9
78
20
.32
1
7
.90
2
1
6.6
07
* C
P 0
1-1
37
8
1
1.8
53
14
.73
8
16
.23
5
16
.63
7
1
5.6
25
15
.33
4
7
.94
0
1
4.0
09
* C
P 0
1-2
39
0
1
1.1
53
12
.01
9
15
.95
1
17
.17
4
1
3.1
91
16
.94
1
8
.58
1
1
3.4
80
C
P 8
9-2
14
3
9
.34
2
----
-
--
---
12
.73
7
1
4.2
81
16
.00
9
7
.80
1
1
2.2
05
C
P 0
1-1
56
4
1
0.6
07
10
.66
6
14
.33
3
13
.03
4
1
0.7
99
18
.50
3
7
.04
0
1
2.1
57
C
P 0
1-2
05
6
1
1.7
21
12
.64
3
14
.01
0
14
.55
4
1
2.5
41
13
.27
0
5
.77
7
1
2.0
46
C
P 7
8-1
62
8
1
0.6
03
-
----
----
- 1
5.7
33
11
.91
0
1
2.8
97
8.4
13
12
.03
3
CP
01
-19
57
12
.27
1
1
4.8
61
1
6.9
22
1
0.8
62
9.9
13
13
.63
6
3
.99
4
1
1.8
70
C
P 0
1-1
33
8
1
2.4
06
6.3
50
1
5.3
73
1
2.8
98
13
.61
5
---
--
7
.76
3
1
1.8
36
C
P 0
1-1
20
5
1
1.1
07
9.8
62
1
2.3
90
1
2.9
55
10
.78
3
1
4.6
99
6.8
28
11
.16
3
CP
01
-24
59
7.8
60
9.4
53
1
4.5
00
1
0.9
25
8.7
92
12
.68
8
7
.45
9
1
0.2
52
C
P 0
1-1
39
1
8
.97
3
4
.48
0
14
.11
7
12
.39
2
1
3.7
88
12
.79
4
4
.58
3
1
0.1
55
C
P 0
1-1
32
1
8
.40
1
3
.03
4
14
.02
8
11
.03
5
1
0.7
85
12
.49
0
7
.23
9
9
.56
9
CP
72
-20
86
8.6
75
5.4
78
1
1.5
60
1
1.0
39
----
-
----
-
4.9
13
8.9
16
C
P 0
1-1
18
1
6
.25
7
2
.67
9
9.5
67
7
.80
0
7
.58
3
8
.47
9
6
.67
8
6
.95
7
CP
01
-11
78
6.6
94
2.1
83
1
0.0
13
6
.76
7
6
.64
8
7
.90
2
6
.75
2
6
.75
0
M
ea
n
1
0.2
81
8.7
10
1
4.3
10
1
2.7
59
11
.94
9
1
3.9
97
6.8
54
11
.25
0
LS
D (
p =
0.1
)†
3
.13
4
2
.52
8
2.8
50
2
.76
0
3
.35
3
2
.24
5
1
.87
6
1
.70
4
CV
(%
)
31
.69
9
3
0.1
57
2
0.6
92
2
2.2
79
29
.15
3
1
6.5
62
28
.43
8
2
5.3
88
* S
ign
ific
an
tly g
rea
ter
tha
n C
P 8
9-2
14
3 a
t p
= 0
.10
ba
se
d o
n t
te
st.
† L
SD
fo
r lo
ca
tio
n m
ea
ns o
f su
ga
r yie
ld =
1.3
99
TS
/H a
t p
= 0
.10
.
28
Ta
ble
17
. Y
ield
s o
f c
an
e i
n m
etr
ic t
on
s p
er
he
cta
re (
TC
/H)
an
d t
he
ore
tic
al
rec
ov
era
ble
96
o s
ug
ar
in k
g p
er
me
tric
to
n (
KS
/T)
an
d i
n m
etr
ic
ton
s p
er
he
cta
re (
TS
/H)
fro
m f
irs
t-ra
too
n c
an
e o
n D
an
ia m
uc
k a
nd
To
rry
mu
ck
C
an
e y
ield
(T
C/H
)
Su
ga
r y
ield
(K
S/T
)
Su
ga
r y
ield
(T
S/H
)
b
y s
oil
ty
pe
, fa
rm,
b
y s
oil
ty
pe
, fa
rm,
b
y s
oil
ty
pe
, fa
rm,
an
d s
am
pli
ng
da
te
a
nd
sa
mp
lin
g d
ate
an
d s
am
pli
ng
da
te
Da
nia
T
orr
y
D
an
ia
To
rry
Da
nia
T
orr
y
mu
ck
m
uc
k
m
uc
k
mu
ck
mu
ck
m
uc
k
Ok
ee
lan
ta
Ea
stg
ate
M
ea
n y
ield
, O
ke
ela
nta
E
as
tga
te
Me
an
yie
ld,
Ok
ee
lan
ta
Ea
stg
ate
M
ea
n y
ield
, C
lon
e
10
/18
/07
1
0/2
3/0
7
bo
th f
arm
s
10
/18
/07
1
0/2
3/0
7
bo
th f
arm
s
10
/18
/07
1
0/2
3/0
7
bo
th f
arm
s
CP
00
-10
74
1
14
.62
1
74
.33
1
44
.48
1
23
.0
10
1.6
1
12
.3
14
.08
6
17
.74
4
15
.91
5
CP
00
-17
51
9
0.9
1
17
3.9
6
13
2.4
3
12
7.9
1
15
.7
12
1.8
1
1.5
80
2
0.1
13
1
5.8
46
C
P 0
0-1
10
1
92
.15
1
88
.46
1
40
.30
1
20
.4
10
8.8
1
14
.6
11
.05
0
20
.52
8
15
.78
9
CP
00
-13
02
9
9.8
1
18
0.1
9
14
0.0
0
11
6.4
1
06
.5
11
1.5
1
1.6
95
1
9.1
79
1
5.4
37
C
P 0
0-1
10
0
90
.36
1
85
.12
1
37
.74
1
21
.6
10
4.1
1
12
.9
10
.93
7
18
.98
9
14
.96
3
CP
89
-21
43
1
01
.78
1
58
.15
1
29
.96
1
22
.2
10
7.5
1
14
.9
12
.41
9
17
.21
9
14
.81
9
CP
00
-17
48
1
04
.48
1
66
.70
1
35
.59
1
13
.9
10
0.6
1
07
.2
11
.92
4
16
.86
3
14
.39
4
CP
00
-16
30
9
4.6
6
---
--
12
7.4
9
12
0.5
----
- 1
12
.9
11
.54
9
---
--
14
.25
2
CP
00
-12
52
8
3.9
9
16
6.5
3
12
5.2
6
12
2.6
1
07
.4
11
5.0
1
0.3
18
1
7.8
51
1
4.0
85
C
P 0
0-1
30
1
85
.92
1
62
.77
1
24
.34
1
16
.2
11
0.6
1
13
.4
10
.11
4
18
.01
5
14
.06
4
CP
00
-14
46
1
08
.44
1
64
.18
1
36
.31
1
10
.1
93
.7
10
1.9
1
1.9
00
1
5.5
83
1
3.7
41
C
P 7
2-2
08
6
99
.49
1
42
.99
1
21
.24
1
20
.2
10
4.2
1
12
.2
12
.02
2
14
.84
4
13
.43
3
CP
00
-21
80
9
7.9
3
16
2.0
4
12
9.9
8
11
3.9
9
0.7
1
02
.3
11
.06
3
14
.94
5
13
.00
4
CP
00
-15
27
9
1.8
4
12
7.9
5
10
9.8
9
12
7.6
1
03
.0
11
5.3
1
1.7
43
1
3.2
20
1
2.4
81
C
P 0
0-2
18
8
62
.31
1
38
.76
1
00
.53
1
18
.4
93
.6
10
6.0
7
.34
7
13
.05
8
10
.20
3
CP
00
-21
64
6
7.0
2
90
.54
7
8.7
8
11
4.3
1
10
.2
11
2.3
7
.66
4
9.9
56
8
.81
0
Me
an
9
2.8
6
15
8.8
4
12
5.8
9
11
9.3
1
03
.9
11
1.7
1
1.0
88
1
6.5
40
1
3.8
27
L
SD
(p
= 0
.1)†
1
9.1
9
28
.50
2
6.2
2
6.7
7
.8
7.9
2
.30
9
3.1
92
3
.14
3
CV
(%
) 2
1.4
9
18
.65
1
9.9
3
5.9
7
.8
6.8
2
1.6
54
2
0.0
51
2
0.8
25
†
LS
D f
or
loca
tio
n m
ea
ns o
f ca
ne
yie
ld =
19
.55
TC
/H,
of
su
ga
r yie
ld =
3.6
KS
/T,
an
d o
f su
ga
r yie
ld =
2.4
72
TS
/H a
t p
= 0
.10
.
29
Ta
ble
18
. R
an
kin
gs
of
clo
ne
s a
nd
pe
rce
nt
rati
ng
of
CP
89
-21
43
, b
y s
eri
es
, o
f d
am
ag
e t
o j
uic
e q
ua
lity
by
co
ld t
em
pe
ratu
res
CP
03
, C
PC
L 0
0,
an
d
CP
00
se
rie
s
CP
01
se
rie
s
C
P 0
2 a
nd
CP
CL
99
se
rie
s
C
PC
L 0
1 s
eri
es
Clo
ne
Ra
nk
†
% o
f C
P 8
9-
21
43
Clo
ne
Ra
nk
%
of
CP
89
-
21
43
C
lon
e
Ra
nk
%
of
C
P 8
9-
2
14
3
C
lon
e
Ra
nk
%
of
CP
89
- 2
14
3
CP
72
-20
86
12
8
8.0
C
P 7
2-2
08
6
12
9
2.6
CP
72
-20
86
14
9
2.6
CP
72
-20
86
2
1
81
.8
CP
89
-21
43
3
10
0.0
C
P 7
8-1
62
8
1
1
04
.1
C
P 7
8-1
62
8
1
1
04
.1
C
P 7
8-1
62
8
7
1
08
.9
CP
00
-10
74
15
8
5.4
C
P 8
9-2
14
3
4
1
00
.0
C
P 8
9-2
14
3
5
1
00
.0
C
P 8
9-2
14
3
11
1
00
.0
CP
00
-11
00
10
9
3.7
C
P 0
1-1
17
8
7
9
8.7
CP
02
-11
43
13
9
2.7
CP
03
-11
60
1
6
92
.6
CP
00
-11
01
2
10
2.1
C
P 0
1-1
18
1
14
9
0.3
CP
02
-14
58
7
98
.2
C
P 0
3-1
17
3
17
9
1.8
C
P 0
0-1
25
2
4
9
9.6
C
P 0
1-1
20
5
6
9
9.3
CP
02
-15
54
4
10
0.3
CP
03
-14
01
1
2
99
.0
CP
00
-13
01
1
10
2.3
C
P 0
1-1
32
1
11
9
2.7
CP
02
-15
64
6
99
.6
C
P 0
3-1
49
1
14
9
4.5
C
P 0
0-1
30
2
1
3
85
.9
CP
01
-13
38
1
5
87
.3
C
P 0
2-1
58
2
1
5
89
.5
C
P 0
3-1
91
2
6
1
10
.2
CP
00
-14
46
11
8
8.7
C
P 0
1-1
37
2
3
1
00
.3
C
P 0
2-1
73
6
9
9
5.8
CP
03
-19
39
1
9
86
.4
CP
00
-15
27
7
94
.7
CP
01
-13
78
1
0
96
.1
C
P 0
2-2
01
5
1
2
93
.2
C
P 0
3-2
18
8
20
8
5.4
C
P 0
0-1
63
0
6
9
7.0
C
P 0
1-1
39
1
16
8
1.9
CP
02
-22
81
17
8
4.1
CP
CL
00
-04
58
1
12
4.5
C
P 0
0-1
74
8
5
9
8.8
C
P 0
1-1
56
4
9
9
8.3
CP
CL
99
-12
25
10
9
5.4
CP
CL
00
-13
73
5
11
2.2
C
P 0
0-1
75
1
9
9
4.0
C
P 0
1-1
95
7
13
9
1.0
CP
CL
99
-14
01
8
97
.3
C
PC
L 0
0-4
02
7
10
1
03
.2
CP
00
-21
64
14
8
5.6
C
P 0
1-2
05
6
2
1
00
.9
C
PC
L 9
9-1
77
7
1
6
88
.7
C
PC
L 0
0-4
11
1
9
1
04
.3
CP
00
-21
80
16
8
1.3
C
P 0
1-2
39
0
5
9
9.9
CP
CL
99
-21
03
2
10
2.3
CP
CL
00
-46
11
8
10
8.8
C
P 0
0-2
18
8
8
9
4.5
C
P 0
1-2
45
9
8
9
8.7
CP
CL
99
-22
06
11
9
3.6
CP
CL
00
-61
31
4
11
2.9
--
---
----
-
CP
CL
99
-25
74
3
10
1.0
CP
CL
00
-67
56
3
11
5.2
--
---
----
-
----
-
CP
CL
01
-02
71
1
5
94
.3
----
-
--
---
--
---
C
PC
L 0
1-0
57
1
13
9
8.9
--
---
----
-
----
-
CP
CL
01
-08
77
1
8
90
.0
----
-
--
---
--
---
C
PC
L 0
1-1
02
9
2
1
20
.6
† T
he
be
st
co
ld t
ole
ran
ce
is d
en
ote
d b
y t
he
lo
we
st
ratin
g,
an
d t
he
wo
rst
co
ld t
ole
ran
ce
is d
en
ote
d b
y t
he
hig
he
st
ratin
g.
Th
us,
in t
he
CP
00
se
rie
s,
CP
00
-13
01
ha
d t
he
be
st
co
ld t
ole
ran
ce
a
nd
CP
00
-21
80
ha
d t
he
wo
rst
co
ld t
ole
ran
ce
.
30
Ta
ble
19
. D
ate
s o
f s
talk
co
un
ts o
f 1
0 p
lan
t c
an
e,
10
fir
st-
rato
on
, a
nd
9 s
ec
on
d-r
ato
on
ex
pe
rim
en
ts
C
rop
Lo
ca
tio
n
Pla
nt
ca
ne
F
irs
t ra
too
n
Se
co
nd
ra
too
n
Du
da
07
/10
/07
07
/19
/07
0
8/1
3/0
7
Ea
stg
ate
05
/24
/07
08
/02
/07
08
/10
/07
H
illia
rd
0
7/2
5/0
7
0
8/0
3/0
7
0
8/2
7/0
7
Kn
igh
t
07
/12
/07
07
/30
/07
08
/24
/07
L
yke
s
0
7/2
0/0
7
0
8/0
6/0
7
08
/28
/07
O
ke
ela
nta
07
/13
/07
07
/26
/07
08
/17
/07
O
ke
ela
nta
(su
cce
ssiv
e)
0
7/1
7/0
7
0
7/3
1/0
7
0
8/2
3/0
7
Osce
ola
07
/11
/07
07
/23
/07
08
/15
/07
S
FI
0
7/1
6/0
7
0
7/2
7/0
7
---
We
dg
wo
rth
07
/09
/07
07
/24
/07
08
/14
/07
31
32 Ap
pen
dix
1.
Su
garc
an
e F
ield
Sta
tio
n C
ult
ivar
Develo
pm
en
t P
rog
ram
Fie
ld
Cro
p a
ge
Y
ield
and q
ualit
y
Dis
ease a
nd o
ther
Seedcane incre
ase
Tim
elin
e
S
tag
e
Po
pu
latio
n
la
yo
ut
a
t se
lectio
n
se
lectio
n c
rite
ria
s
ele
ctio
n c
rite
ria
sch
em
e
Yea
r 1
Cro
ssin
g
40
0-6
00
cro
sse
s
—
—
Ge
rmin
atio
n t
ests
of
Fie
ld p
rog
en
y t
ests
pla
nte
d
—
p
rod
ucin
g a
bo
ut
s
ee
d (
bu
lk o
f se
ed
b
y f
am
ily
5
00
,00
0 t
rue
se
ed
s
sto
red
in
fre
eze
rs)
Yea
r 2
S
ee
dlin
gs
8
0,0
00
-10
0,0
00
T
ran
sp
lan
ts s
pa
ce
d
8-1
0 m
on
ths
V
isu
al se
lectio
n f
or
pla
nt
Fa
mily
eva
lua
tio
n fo
r
On
e s
talk
cu
t fo
r se
ed
(
sin
gle
sto
ol sta
ge
)
in
div
idu
al p
lan
ts
1
2 in
. a
pa
rt in
pa
ire
d
typ
e,
vig
or, s
talk
g
en
era
l a
gro
no
mic
typ
e
fro
m e
ach
se
lecte
d
S
ee
dlin
gs s
tart
in
th
e
ro
ws o
n 5
-ft.
ce
nte
rs
dia
me
ter, h
eig
ht,
de
nsity,
an
d d
ise
ase
re
sis
tan
ce
se
ed
ling
g
ree
nh
ou
se
fro
m t
rue
an
d p
op
ula
tio
n;
fre
ed
om
a
ga
inst
rust,
le
af
s
ee
d o
f th
e p
revio
us
f
rom
dis
ea
se
s
sca
ld (
LS
)*,
sm
ut,
etc
.
y
ea
r
Yea
r 3
S
tag
e I
1
0,0
00
-15
,00
0
U
nre
plic
ate
d p
lots
,
9
-10
mo
nth
s
Esse
ntia
lly t
he
sa
me
P
erm
an
en
t C
P-s
erie
s
E
igh
t sta
lks p
lan
ted
fo
r
(
First
clo
na
l tr
ial)
c
lon
al p
lots
5 f
t. lo
ng
on
5-f
t.
s
ele
ctio
n c
rite
ria
n
um
be
r a
ssig
nm
en
t m
ad
e
ag
ron
om
ic e
valu
ation.
row
sp
acin
g
as f
or
Se
ed
ling
s
On
e s
talk
pla
nte
d f
or
R
SD
scre
en
ing
(in
ocu
latio
n)
Yea
r 4
S
tag
e I
I
1,0
00
-1,5
00
U
nre
plic
ate
d 2
-ro
w
1
2 m
on
ths
Y
ield
estim
ate
s b
ase
d
Fa
mily
eva
lua
tio
n f
or
dis
ea
se
E
igh
t 8
-sta
lk b
un
dle
s
(
Se
co
nd
clo
na
l tr
ial)
c
lon
es in
clu
din
g
plo
ts,
15
ft.
lo
ng
on
o
n s
talk
nu
mb
er,
resis
tan
ce
ag
ain
st
RS
D*
an
d
cu
t fo
r se
ed
; tw
o
5
ch
ecks
5-f
t. r
ow
sp
acin
g
ave
rag
e s
talk
we
igh
t,
eye
sp
ot
(by in
ocu
latio
n)
an
d
sta
lks u
se
d f
or
RS
D
a
nd
su
cro
se
an
aly
sis
;
L
S*,
ye
llow
le
af
syn
dro
me
scre
en
ing
f
ree
do
m f
rom
(Y
LS
), a
nd
dry
to
p r
ot
d
ise
ase
s
(b
y n
atu
ral in
fectio
n)
Yea
r 5
-6
Sta
ge
III
1
35
clo
ne
s
Fo
ur
2-r
ep
lica
te
10
-11
mo
nth
s
Yie
ld e
stim
ate
s b
ase
d
Dis
ea
se
scre
en
ing
Tw
o 8
-sta
lk b
undle
s
(
Re
plic
ate
d t
est;
in
clu
din
g 2
te
sts
(3
org
an
ic a
nd
Eva
lua
ted
in
on
sta
lk n
um
be
r,
(in
ocu
latio
n)
for
LS
*, s
mu
t,
cu
t fo
r se
ed
at
ea
ch
f
irst
sta
ge
pla
nte
d
c
he
cks
† p
er
1
sa
nd
site)
on
p
lan
t ca
ne
an
d
ave
rag
e s
talk
weig
ht,
m
osa
ic v
iru
s,
an
d R
SD
;
loca
tio
n
in
co
mm
erc
ial
lo
ca
tio
n
gro
we
rs' f
arm
s;
first-
rato
on
an
d s
ucro
se
an
aly
sis
;
a
lso
ra
ted
fo
r o
the
r
f
ield
s)
T
wo
-ro
w p
lots
,
c
rop
s
clo
na
l p
erf
orm
an
ce
d
ise
ase
s (
rust,
etc
.)
1
5 f
t. lo
ng
a
sse
sse
d a
cro
ss lo
ca
tio
ns
Yea
r 7
-9
Sta
ge
IV
1
6 c
lon
es
E
leve
n 6
-re
plic
ate
1
0-1
5 m
on
ths
C
an
e t
on
na
ge
, su
cro
se
D
ise
ase
scre
en
ing
fo
r L
S*,
In
itia
l se
ed
in
cre
ase
(
Fin
al re
plic
ate
d
in
clu
din
g 2
te
sts
(8
org
an
ic a
nd
T
ests
are
an
d f
ibe
r a
na
lyse
s;
yie
ld
sm
ut,
mo
sa
ic,
an
d R
SD
;
for
po
ten
tia
l co
mm
erc
ial
t
est;
pla
nte
d in
ch
ecks
† p
er
3
sa
nd
site
s)
on
a
na
lyzed in p
lan
t
estim
ate
s b
ase
d o
n
als
o r
ate
d f
or
lodg
ing
an
d
re
lea
se
pla
nte
d f
rom
c
om
me
rcia
l fie
lds)
lo
ca
tio
n
gro
we
rs' f
arm
s;
c
an
e,
firs
t-,
an
d
s
talk
nu
mb
er
an
d
su
ita
bili
ty f
or
me
ch
an
ica
l
firs
t-ra
too
n s
ee
d
T
hre
e-r
ow
plo
ts,
se
co
nd
-ra
too
n
a
ve
rag
e s
talk
we
igh
t
h
arv
est
fo
llow
ing
eva
lua
tio
n in
3
5 f
t. lo
ng
on
c
rop
s
the
pla
nt
ca
ne
5
-ft.
ro
w s
pa
cin
g
Yea
r 8
-11
S
ee
dca
ne
in
cre
ase
U
su
ally
6 o
r
P
lots
ra
ng
e f
rom
0.1
—
S
ee
dca
ne
pu
rity
;
P
lots
ch
ecke
d a
nd
ce
rtifie
d
S
ee
dca
ne
is in
cre
ase
d
a
nd
dis
trib
utio
n
fe
we
r clo
ne
s
to
2.0
he
cta
res
f
ree
do
m f
rom
dis
ea
se
s
for
clo
na
l p
urity
an
d
a
t 9
Sta
ge
lV
a
nd
in
se
cts
se
ed
ca
ne
qu
alit
y
loca
tio
ns (
7 m
uck a
nd
2
sa
nd
)
Soil
I
nvestigate
s s
oil
mic
robia
l activitie
s a
nd p
lant
nutr
ient
availa
bili
ties t
hat
influence c
ane a
nd s
ugar
yie
lds
pro
gra
m
*
LS
: le
af
scald
; R
SD
: ra
toon s
tunting d
isease; Y
LS
: yello
w leaf
syndro
me
†
Checks in s
tages I
II a
nd I
V:
CP
72-2
086 (
all
locations),
CP
78-1
628 (
sand s
oils
), a
nd C
P 8
9-2
143 (
org
anic
soils
).
