2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.fcr.2015.05.019
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Negative effects of lodging on irrigated sugarcane productivity—An experimental and crop modelling assessment

Abstract: Lodging lowers the productivity of sugarcane through a reduction in radiation use efficiency and stalk damage. However, there are few reports of experiments specifically designed to quantify effects of lodging in sugarcane. Efforts to model onset and progression of lodging, and the impact on crop productivity, have not been attempted. The objectives of this paper were to quantify effects of lodging on sugarcane and to develop modeling capability in terms of predicting lodging onset, progression and impact. Fie… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
17
0
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
17
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Due to lodging, the decline in RUE ranged from 30% to 50% in studies using APSIM-Sugar in Australia (Biggs et al, 2013;Inman-Bamber et al, 2006, 2004Meier and Thorburn, 2016;Thorburn et al, 2011) and Brazil (Oliveira et al, 2016), where our maximum decline due to RGP in general was about 50%, consistent with the results reported above. Dias, et al Field Crops Research 235 (2019) 38-53 The statistical indices for yields simulated with APSIM-Sugar for Gualadupe, using the RGP effect, cannot be compared directly to other studies in literature where lodging rules were applied in APSIM-Sugar (Biggs et al, 2013;Inman-Bamber et al, 2004;Meier and Thorburn, 2016;Oliveira et al, 2016;Thorburn et al, 2011) and in CANEGRO/ CANESIM (Singels et al, 2008;Van Heerden et al, 2015) due to many reasons. First, the statistical indices for yields were not available (Biggs et al, 2013;Inman-Bamber et al, 2004;Van Heerden et al, 2015) or were not available for data where lodging played a role (Singels et al, 2008).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Due to lodging, the decline in RUE ranged from 30% to 50% in studies using APSIM-Sugar in Australia (Biggs et al, 2013;Inman-Bamber et al, 2006, 2004Meier and Thorburn, 2016;Thorburn et al, 2011) and Brazil (Oliveira et al, 2016), where our maximum decline due to RGP in general was about 50%, consistent with the results reported above. Dias, et al Field Crops Research 235 (2019) 38-53 The statistical indices for yields simulated with APSIM-Sugar for Gualadupe, using the RGP effect, cannot be compared directly to other studies in literature where lodging rules were applied in APSIM-Sugar (Biggs et al, 2013;Inman-Bamber et al, 2004;Meier and Thorburn, 2016;Oliveira et al, 2016;Thorburn et al, 2011) and in CANEGRO/ CANESIM (Singels et al, 2008;Van Heerden et al, 2015) due to many reasons. First, the statistical indices for yields were not available (Biggs et al, 2013;Inman-Bamber et al, 2004;Van Heerden et al, 2015) or were not available for data where lodging played a role (Singels et al, 2008).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Dias, et al Field Crops Research 235 (2019) 38-53 The statistical indices for yields simulated with APSIM-Sugar for Gualadupe, using the RGP effect, cannot be compared directly to other studies in literature where lodging rules were applied in APSIM-Sugar (Biggs et al, 2013;Inman-Bamber et al, 2004;Meier and Thorburn, 2016;Oliveira et al, 2016;Thorburn et al, 2011) and in CANEGRO/ CANESIM (Singels et al, 2008;Van Heerden et al, 2015) due to many reasons. First, the statistical indices for yields were not available (Biggs et al, 2013;Inman-Bamber et al, 2004;Van Heerden et al, 2015) or were not available for data where lodging played a role (Singels et al, 2008). Second, other site-specific changes in the models for reducing RUE were applied together with lodging, for instance waterlogging (Meier and Thorburn, 2016), making it difficult for comparisons.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Lodging had a consistently negative effect on crop growth [17], sugar accumulation [11] and seed yield [18]. In the present paper, for the first time, the effect of lodging on the plant growth, sugar accumulation and photosynthetic parameter of sweet sorghum when cultivated in the saline-alkali soil was investigated.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…When lodging occurs, the absorptive capacity of plants would be destroyed, water and minerals transportation was blocked, as while as the capacity of photosynthetic rate and the dry mass were reduced, thus leading to a decline in the yield and quality of plants [10]. For example, lodging reduced the biomass production and cane quality in sugarcane, so lowered the productivity of sugarcane [11]. In rice, lodging at one day before the grain-filling stage reduced the yield, decreased the seed-setting percentage, reduced the 1000-grain weight, subsequently lower the eating quality [12].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…During the production year, the plant can be around 2 meters high. It is not surprising, that under climatic effects (mainly strong winds and/or dry weather), the sugarcane can lose its erectness (Singh et al, 2002;Van Heerden et al, 2015).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%