2020
DOI: 10.1590/0103-8478cr20190408
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: Assessing sugarcane (Saccharum spp.) stalk growth helps to adequately manage the phenological stages of the crop. The aim of this study was to describe the height-growth curve of four sugarcane varieties (RB92579, RB93509, RB931530 and SP79-1011), in irrigated plant-cane and ratoon cane plantations, using the Logistic and Gompertz nonlinear models, while considering all deviations from assumptions. The model parameters were estimated based on the least squares method using the Gauss-Newton algorithm. To select… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
5
0
2

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
(23 reference statements)
2
5
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…When IP is reached, the curve changes in the concavity and the growth rate starts to decrease (FERNANDES et al, 2014;JANE et al, 2020). In this study, the height values for the IP were 98.679 cm, 96.029 cm and 101.433 cm with687.964 °C, 677.780 °C and 749.283 °C accumulated for the first, second and third trials, respectively.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 46%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…When IP is reached, the curve changes in the concavity and the growth rate starts to decrease (FERNANDES et al, 2014;JANE et al, 2020). In this study, the height values for the IP were 98.679 cm, 96.029 cm and 101.433 cm with687.964 °C, 677.780 °C and 749.283 °C accumulated for the first, second and third trials, respectively.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 46%
“…The logistic model presented the lowest values of AIC, BIC, IN and PE for the three trials and also for the fourth situation in which all data are used. Models that present higher values of R 2 a and lower values of AIC, BIC, IN and PE, should be preferable for growth description (ZEVIANI, 2012;FERNANDES et al, 2014;JANE et al, 2020). The R 2 a , AIC and BIC estimators cannot be compared between trials of the same model because they depended on the number of parameters and observations made (AKAIKE, 1974;SCHWARZ, 1978;SEBER, 2003), and as already mentioned, both models have three parameters, but 14, 12 and 10 evaluations were performed for the first, second and third trials, respectively.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…With another extremely important aspect and corroborating adjustment quality evaluators, the Logistic model can be considered the most suitable to describe the relationship proposed in this work, and this model was also chosen as the most adequate in the works of Prado, Savian and Muniz (2013), Prado et al (2020), Muianga et al (2016), Jane et al (2020a) and Jane et al (2020b). Table 4 shows the estimates and confidence intervals for parameters of the external longitudinal diameter of harvested fruits (LED) and external longitudinal diameter of fruits kept on plants (LEDKP) and the critical points of the four derivatives of the Logistic model.…”
Section: Featurementioning
confidence: 98%