Advertisement

Precision Agriculture

, Volume 11, Issue 5, pp 464–474 | Cite as

Variable-rate lime application in Louisiana sugarcane production systems

  • R. M. Johnson
  • E. P. RichardJr.
Article

Abstract

Precision agriculture may offer sugarcane growers a management system that decreases costs and maximizes profits, while minimizing any potential negative environmental impact. The utility of variable-rate (VR) lime application in the initial production year (plant cane) of a 3-year sugarcane crop cycle was investigated at three locations planted to the cultivar LCP 85–384 for a total of nine site-years. A conventional, uniform-rate (UR) lime application method was compared to a VR application method and a no-lime control. Prior to lime application, soil samples (0–200 mm) were taken on a 0.4 ha grid to produce VR application maps. Soil samples were also taken after each crop of the 3-year production cycle to determine effects of lime application on soil properties. The combined results showed that neither the UR nor VR lime application method consistently improved cane or sugar yields over the no-lime control. Cane and sugar yields at Naquin Farms (NF) were increased with both the UR and VR methods, with the UR method having a slight advantage. At St. Louis Plantation (SLP), only the VR method in the first-ratoon crop increased cane and sugar yields and there were no yield differences due to lime application at Ellendale Plantation (EP). At NF and SLP, application of lime in the plant-cane crop increased soil pH and available phosphorus over the 3-year production cycle. At EP, lime application did not influence any of the soil properties measured. The failure to get a yield response from lime application at SLP and EP may have been due to the fact that fertility levels at planting were already greater than those at NF and the nitrogen fertilizer rates used by the grower at EP were higher than those at either SLP or NF. This may have obscured any positive yield effects that would be realized from increased nutrient availability. It is also possible that multiple VR lime applications will be required over a number of crop cycles to stabilize soil pH levels before a consistent positive effect on cane and sugar yields is observed with VR application. This possibility will be investigated in future studies.

Keywords

Soil pH Spatial variability 

References

  1. Bianchini, A. A., & Mallarino, A. P. (2002). Soil-sampling alternatives and variable-rate liming for soybean-corn rotation. Agronomy Journal, 94, 1355–1366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bongiovanni, R., & Lowenberg-Deboer, J. (2000). Economics of variable rate lime in Indiana. Precision Agriculture, 2, 55–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bongiovanni, R., & Lowenberg-DeBoer, J. (2004). Precision agriculture and sustainability. Precision Agriculture, 5, 359–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bramley, R. (1999). Yield mapping: Towards better control of sugarcane production. Australian Sugarcane, 3, 8–12.Google Scholar
  5. Cora, J. E., & Beraldo, J. M. G. (2006). Spatial variability of soil properties before and after lime and phosphorus fertilizer application at variable rates in sugarcane. Engineering in Agriculture, 26, 374–387.Google Scholar
  6. Cora, J. E. & Marques, J. (2001). The potential for precision agriculture for soil and sugarcane yield variability in Brazil. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Precision Agriculture 2000, ASA-CSSA-SSSA, Madison, WI, USA, CD-ROM.Google Scholar
  7. Johnson, R. M., & Richard, E. P. Jr. (2005). Variability in sugar yield, sugar quality and soil properties in Louisiana sugarcane production systems. Agronomy Journal, 97, 760–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Johnson, R. M., Viator, H. P., & Legendre, B. L. (2008). Sugarcane fertilizer recommendations for the 2008 crop year. Sugar Bulletin, 86, 11–13.Google Scholar
  9. Legendre, B. L. (1992). The core/press method of predicting the sugar yield from cane for use in payment. Sugar Journal, 54(9), 2–7.Google Scholar
  10. Legendre, B. L. (2001). Sugarcane production handbook. LA: Louisiana State University Agricultural Center.Google Scholar
  11. Muchow, R. C., Robertson, M. J., Wood, A. W., & Keating, B. A. (1996). Effect of nitrogen on the time-course of sucrose accumulation in sugarcane. Field Crops Research, 47, 143–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Nelson, D. W., & Sommers, L. E. (1996). Total carbon, organic carbon and organic matter. In: Methods of soil analysis. Part 3, chemical methods. SSSA No. 5. Madison, WI: American Society of Agronomy.Google Scholar
  13. SAS Institute Inc. (2009). SAS OnlineDoc® 9.2. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc. http://support.sas.com/documentation/cdl_main/index.html. Accessed September 14, 2009.
  14. Saxton, A. M. (1998). A macro for converting mean separation output to letter groupings in Proc Mixed. In: Proceedings 23rd SAS Users Group International (pp. 1243–1246). Cary, NC: SAS Institute.Google Scholar
  15. Shoemaker, H. E., McLean, E. O., & Pratt, P. F. (1961). Buffer methods of determining lime requirements of soils with appreciable amounts of extractable aluminium. Proceedings of the Soil Science Society of America, 25, 274–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Thomas, G. (1996). Soil pH and soil acidity. In: Methods of soil analysis. Part 3, chemical methods. SSSA No. 5. Madison, WI: American Society of Agronomy.Google Scholar
  17. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2001). Trace elements in water, solids, and biosolids by inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry. Method 200.7, January 2001. EPA-821-R-01-010.Google Scholar
  18. Wang, D., Prato, T., Qiu, Z., Kitchen, N. R., & Sudduth, K. A. (2003). Economic and environmental evaluation of variable rate nitrogen and lime application for claypan soil fields. Precision Agriculture, 4, 35–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Weisz, R., Heiniger, R., White, J. G., Knox, B., & Reed, L. (2003). Long-term variable rate lime and phosphorus application for Piedmont no-till field crops. Precision Agriculture, 4, 311–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Wittry, D. J., & Mallarino, A. P. (2004). Comparison of uniform and variable-rate phosphorus fertilization for corn-soybean rotations. Agronomy Journal, 96, 26–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Wood, R. A. (1990). The roles of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium on the production of sugarcane in South Africa. Fertilizer Research, 26, 89–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© US Government 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.USDA-ARS, Sugarcane Research LaboratoryHoumaUSA

Personalised recommendations