environments of production and agronomic management
DESCRIPTION
Event / Evento: II Workshop on Sugarcane Physiology for Agronomic Applications Speaker / Palestrante: Jorge Donzeli (Sugarcane Research Center - CTC) Date / Data: Oct, 29-30th 2013 / 29 e 30 de outubro de 2013 Place / Local: CTBE/CNPEM Campus, Campinas, Brazil Event Website / Website do evento: www.bioetanol.org.br/sugarcanephysiologyTRANSCRIPT
Environments of Produc1on and Agronomic Management
Campinas, October, 29, 2013
JORGE LUIS DONZELLI R&D Manager CTC Sugarcane Breeding Program [email protected]
2nd Sugarcane Physiology for Agronomic Applica7on Workshop
Yield Poten1al -‐The pillars of agronomic produc1on
Agronomic management -‐ Varie1es
Agronomic management – Best Prac1ces
Defini1on of Environments of Produc1on
Final comments
Presenta1on schedule
Yield: where we are?
YIELD POTENTIAL (Yp)*
“the yield of a cul7var when grown in environments to which it is adapted, with nutrients and water non-‐limi7ng, and with pests, diseases, weeds, lodging and other stresses effec7vely controlled” (Evans and Fisher 1999)
* Quoted by Paul H. Moore, Physiological Constraints of Sugarcane Yield Poten7al, Centro de Tecnologia Canavieira, Piracicaba, 2013
The pillars of agronomic produc1on
CLIMA -50
-25
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
J F M A M J J A S O N D
M I
L Í
M E
T R
O S
DEF.HÍDR.
EXC.HÍDR.
CHUVA
EVAP.POT.
Management AGRONOMIC SOIL CLIMATE
CROP YIELD
Divided in 5 categories A-‐B-‐C-‐D-‐E
Divided in 5 categories I-‐II-‐III-‐IV-‐V
Divided in 2 categories Varie1es +Best
prac1ces
Objec7ve: the problems of applica7on of best prac7ces in agronomic management
The Pillars of Agronomic Produc1on -‐ Defini1on of Environments of Produc1on
CLIMA
TCH MÉDIA DE 4 CORTES
65,0
70,0
75,0
80,0
85,0
90,0
95,0
100,0
105,0
88/89 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 Média
SAFRAS
tcan
a/ha
ABCDE
-50
-25
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
J F M A M J J A S O N D
M I
L Í
M E
T R
O S
DEF.HÍDR.
EXC.HÍDR.
CHUVA
EVAP.POT.
Management AGRONOMIC SOIL CLIMATE
TCH Average of 4 cuts
Harvest Season
Yield Poten1al Decrease from A to E
“EDAPHOCLIMATIC” ENVIRONMENTS OF PRODUCTION (EEP)
I II III IV VA A-‐I A-‐II A-‐III A-‐IV A-‐VB B-‐I B-‐II B-‐III B-‐VI B-‐VC C-‐I C-‐II C-‐III C-‐VI C-‐VD D-‐I D-‐II D-‐III D-‐VI D-‐VE E-‐I E-‐II E-‐III E-‐IV E-‐V
SOLO
S
REGIÕES CLIMÁTICASAMBIENTES EDAFOCLIMATICOS
-50
-25
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
J F M A M J J A S O N D
M I
L Í
M E
T R
O S
DEF.HÍDR.
EXC.HÍDR.
CHUVA
EVAP.POT.
Management AGRONOMIC SOIL CLIMATE
The Pillars of Agronomic Produc1on -‐ Defini1on of Environments of Produc1on
Clima7c Regions EEP
SOILS
CTC data bank • 24 years of sugarcane yield • 20-‐40 years of climate data
Yield Poten1al Decrease from A–I to E-‐V
Toneladas de Pol por Hectare (TPH), média de 5 cortes.
8,08,59,09,5
10,010,511,011,512,012,513,013,514,014,515,0
A-IB-IC-ID-I E-I
A-II
B-II
C-II
D-II
E-II
A-III
B-III
C-III
D-III
E-III
A-IV
B-IV
C-IV
D-IV
E-IV
A-VB-VC-VD-V E-V
Ambientes de Produção Edafoclimáticos
tpol
/ha
61% 27%
-50
-25
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
J F M A M J J A S O N D
M I
L Í M
E T
R O
S
DEF.HÍDR.
EXC.HÍDR.
CHUVA
EVAP.POT.CLIMATE SOIL AGRONOMIC
27%
Management
The Pillars of Agronomic Produc1on -‐ Defini1on of Environments of Produc1on
Tones pol/ha – Average of 5 cuts
Edaphoclima7c Environments of Produc7on
-50
-25
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
J F M A M J J A S O N D
M I
L Í
M E
T R
O S
DEF.HÍDR.
EXC.HÍDR.
CHUVA
EVAP.POT.AGRONOMIC SOIL CLIMATE
WELL KNONW FACTORS OF CROP YIELD
Management
The Pillars of Agronomic Produc1on -‐ Defini1on of Environments of Produc1on
?Varie7es + Best Agronomic prac7ces
VARIETIES
AGRONOMIC MANAGEMENT
HOW WE CHOOSE VARIETIES TO PLANT???
The Pillars of Agronomic Produc1on – VARIETY MANAGEMENT
YEAR 5 to 8 REGIONAL SELECTION
VARIETY TRIALS (18 EXPERIMENTAL
STATIONS)
PHASE 3 TWO CUTS
RIPENING CURVES
Phase 4: CTC variety recommendation to planting in many different sites.(SEEDS & PD)
INITIAL SELECTION (In 18 Experimental
Stations )
YEAR 2 to 5 PHASE 2
DISEASES TRIALS
SEEDLINGS PRODUCTION
(Piracicaba/SP)
YEAR 1
PHASE 1 BREEDING
(Camamu/BA)
YEAR 1
Germoplasm Bank
Trials in different Environments of
Production
CTC’S VARIETIES
BREEDING PROGRAM FLOW CHART
28 RELEASED VARIETIES
15-‐20 % more yield in specific sites
VARIETY RECOMMENDATION
5 SOIL CATEGORIES HARVESTING TIME
5 CLIMATE CATEGORIES
CTC 9001 -‐ EXAMPLE
BEST PRACTICES
AGRONOMIC MANAGEMENT
DEDICATED TO EXPLORE ALL GENETIC POTENTIAL INCORPORATED BY THE BREEDING PROGRAM
The Pillars of Agronomic Produc1on – AGRONOMIC BEST PRACTICES
Environment of Produc1on B-‐II Average Yield (ton Pol) – 5 cuts -‐ Harvest season 06/07 to 10/11
TPH
Fonte : Joaquim, A.C. et al – Projeto Sistemas de Manejo Agronômico, CTC, 2013
The Pillars of Agronomic Produc1on – AGRONOMIC BEST PRACTICES
TPH
Fonte : Joaquim, A.C. et al – Projeto Sistemas de Manejo Agronômico, CTC, 2013
The Pillars of Agronomic Produc1on – AGRONOMIC BEST PRACTICES
Environment of Produc1on C-‐II Average Yield (ton Pol) – 5 cuts -‐ Harvest season 06/07 to 10/11
TPH
Fonte : Joaquim, A.C. et al – Projeto Sistemas de Manejo Agronômico, CTC, 2013
The Pillars of Agronomic Produc1on – AGRONOMIC BEST PRACTICES
Environment of Produc1on D-‐II Average Yield (ton Pol) – 5 cuts -‐ Harvest season 06/07 to 10/11
The Pillars of Agronomic Produc1on – WHERE WE ARE?
Average, maximum and theore1cal sugarcane yields and total dry maeer produc1on
(Australia, Colombia, South Africa)
Type
Cane (f wt)
(t ha-1 yr-1)
Cane (d wt)
(t ha-1 yr-1)
Percent theoretical maximum
Biomass* (RUE)
(t ha-1 yr-1) Biomass (g) per absorbed
irradiance, MJ
Average (actual) 84 25 27 39 0.78
Commercial maximum (attainable)
148 44 48 69 1.30
Experimental maximum (potential)
212 63 69 98 1.86
Maximum (theoretical) 308 92 100 142 2.96
Source: Paul H. Moore, Physiological Constraints of Sugarcane Yield Poten7al, Centro de Tecnologia Canavieira, Piracicaba, 2013
27%
The Pillars of Agronomic Produc1on – WHERE WE ARE?
The Pillars of Agronomic Produc1on – WHERE WE ARE?
The Pillars of Agronomic Produc1on
Final Comments • The environments of produc1on are reliable for variety recommenda1on;
• Un1l now the agronomic recommenda1ons – best prac1ces -‐ are not been used by producers in a proper manner – huge yield differences have been reported in the same soil and climate condi1ons (environments of produc1on);
• Data survey (CTC mutual control and local observa1ons) with producers have shown that these yield differences are due to: • i) lack of use proper plant nutri1on; • ii) pest control and diseases; • iii) use of flowering varie1es; • iv) poor land prepara1on and misuse of soil conserva1on prac1ces; • v) increase of mechanical harves1ng with no traffic control (soil compac1on
and traffic over plant rows – inter row spacement); • vi) use of non suitable varie1es for both mechanical harves1ng and mechanical
plan1ng; eg. RB86-‐7515; SP81-‐3250 • vii) mistakes in 1me of plan1ng and harves1ng varie1es (beginning-‐middle-‐
end).
Jorge Luis Donzelli R&D Manager
CTC Sugarcane Breeding Program [email protected]
Acknowledgment Antonio Celso Joaquim – CTC Researcher Fernando Cesar Bertolani – CTC Researcher