Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1694824978021.pdf (Fiji)
FOREWORD Page 1 2018 Annual Report PARLIAMENT OF FIJI PARLIAMENTARY PAPER NO.

171 OF 2019 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 2 FOREWORD 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT FOREWORD Page 3 TABLE OF CONTENT 4→ FOREWORD MISSION STATEMENT ←5 6→ RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT 54→ CROP PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER ←69 89→ APPROVED VARIETIES 87→ SRIF ESTATE ABBREVIATIONS ←93 MEDIA & PUBLICATION ←88 94→ GLOSSARY FINANCIAL REPORT ←96 PARLIAMENT OF FIJI PARLIAMENTARY PAPER NO.
171 OF 2019 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 4 FOREWORD FOREWORD Three tropical cyclones in successive months (February, March and April) with heavy rainfalls affected cane growth.

There was a slight increase in 2018 cane production compared to 2017.

Drier conditions prevailed from June to December and the month of December was exceptionally hot.
The breeding program suffered a setback in 2018 due to the after effects of the cyclones that caused heavy lodging of the cane in the flowering beds thus reducing the availability of parent materials.

In 2018, 135 poly crosses were made using 50 female and 55 male parents.

The low number of crosses made was due to severe lodging of the varieties in the flowering beds.

Fuzz sowing was delayed as there was no packets of fuzz in stock from previous years.
135 packets of fuzz from 2018 crossing season were sown that had good germination producing 2,750 seedlings.

408 varieties were selected from stage 2 and advanced to stage 3, and 15 varieties were selected from stage 3 and progressed to stage 4.

In an effort to develop better improved cane varieties, the germplasm collection of 640 varieties was evaluated to identify promising parent varieties.
A total of one thousand seventy- six soil and three hundred fifteen foliar samples were analysed for fertilizer recommendations and research trials.

A project was initiated to study the nutrient status of the sugarcane crop and another project was conducted to develop a nutrient budget for the sugar industry.

Post- harvest cane deterioration studies were carried out to ascertain losses in sugarcane due to field practices.
Under the SRIF Act, one of the functions of the institute is to protect the industry against diseases and pest incursions.

Routine screening of Fiji leaf gall (FLG) disease continued during the year.

A study was carried out to classify sugarcane cultivars of Fiji to their host response to plant parasitic nematodes in treated and untreated soil.

Fifteen farms affected by the Asian Subterranean Termites infestation was monitored during the year and Termidore powder was applied to these farms.
As part of the integrated pest management of the major pest Cane Weevil Borer (CWB), split bait traps were placed in 10 farms to monitor CWB population density.

The Disease Control unit inspected 1606 farms covering an area of 5770 hectares and removed 1524 diseased FLG stools.

Fiji is the only country in the world that has not been affected by SMUT disease.

An incursion plan in collaboration with the Biosecurity has been put in place to encounter this disease.
Smut spore traps were placed at points of entry and no spores were trapped.

A nitrogen fixing bacteria was successfully isolated, then mass propagated and added to a sterile compost to conduct pot trials.

The bacteria were also used for inoculating black gram seeds for green manuring project.

The production of hot water treatment seed cane continued during the year and 25 hectares was planted.
Single eye bud nursery was also established at some sectors and few farmers tried using these seedlings to fill the gaps in ratoon crops on their farms.

A major achievement for the institute was the revival of the tissue culture laboratory.

This lab is now operational, and production of seedlings is under way.

The Institute remains the centre for disseminating information through the technology transfer program.
Under this program on field demonstrations on key issues that will improve production are conducted.

In 2018, 17 grower demonstration trials were conducted.

Improving soil health was part of the technology transfer program and in 2018 three green manuring trials were established.

The crop used in these trials was black gram.

After vegetative growth of the green manure, it is ploughed into the soil and allowed to decompose.
The decomposing plants help to improve the organic matter content of the soil that later helps in improving fertilizer uptake.

My sincere appreciation to all the staff for their valuable contribution towards the progress of the Institute and I also thank the Chairman and board members for their guidance and support.
Acting Chief Executive Officer Prem N Naidu 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT Cover Page: Aftermath of Cyclone Josie MISSION STATEMENT Page 5 MISSION STATEMENT To advance the industry by excellence in technology transfer emanating from research results through science that supports innovative activities in sugar related industries and to make the Fiji Sugar Industry productive and sustainable.
BOARD MEMBERS Professor Rajesh Chandra - Chairman (re-appointed 2 March 2018) Dr K.S Shanmugha Sundaram (term expired on 1 March 2018) Mr Daniel Elisha (term expired on 1 March 2018) Mr Sundresh Chetty (term expired on 1 March 2018) Mr Graham Clark Ms Reshmi Kumari Dr Sanjay Anand Mr Raj Sharma (appointed on 12 June 2018) Mr Ashween Nischal Ram (appointed on 18 June 2018) Professor Ravendra Naidu (appointed on 13 March 2018) SCIENCE AUDIT COMMITTEE MEMBERS Professor Ravendra Naidu - Chairman Dr K.S Shanmugha Sundaram Dr Sanjay Anand Mr Ashween Nischal Ram Mr Graham Clark Mr Sundresh Chetty SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 6 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT 7 METEOROLOGY CROP IMPROVEMENT 24 32 CROP MANAGEMENT CROP PROTECTION 48 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Page 7 1.1 METEOROLOGY HIGHLIGHTS 1.
February – category 4 severe Tropical Cyclone Gita affected the westward Fiji group.

Heavy rainfall was experienced and recorded average to well above average rainfall.

2.

March – Tropical Cyclone Josie developed and resulted in heavy rain bands with strong and gusty winds.

This resulted in flooding with the western side of Fiji recording generally average to above average rainfall during the month.

3.

April – Tropical Cyclone Keni affected Fiji from the 8th to the 11th of the month.
Hurricane force winds and damaging gale force winds were experienced over the Fiji Group with heavy rain, contributing to heavy flooding in various parts of the country, damaging sugarcane, agricultural crops and infrastructures.

4.

June – Exceptionally drier than normal conditions were experienced in the Western Division with all sites from Sigatoka to Rakiraki areas recording well below normal rainfall.

5.
5.

August – it was significantly a dry month with Lautoka Mill to Yaqara corridor recording well below average rainfall.

According to a bulletin released by FMS, due to the very low rainfall, majority of the stations across the country entered into some form of meteorological drought alert affecting grasslands, shallow rooted plants and small water bodies (e.g.

small water tanks, creeks and streams) by the end of August 2018.

6.
6.

December – majority of the Western Division experienced drier than normal rainfall conditions.

Significantly hot condition was experienced in the Western Division on the Christmas Day.

SUMMARY • Daily meteorological readings recorded at 9am and sent to Fiji Meteorological Service (FMS).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The Meteorological Station at Sugar Research Institute of Fiji (SRIF) is equipped with a range of meteorological instruments and maintained with the help of the Fiji Meteorological Service (FMS) at its head office in Lautoka and three other daily Climatological recording centres.
Climatological station is manned by observers who take climate readings of temperatures (dry bulb, wet bulb, maximum and minimum), earth temperatures situated at depths of 5cm, 10cm and 30cm, 24 hours rainfall, amount of cloud, visibility, wind force and wind direction at 9am daily.

At the end of each month, data is compiled in a designated F211 form and forwarded to The Regional Specialized Meteorological Centre Nadi.
Similarly, rainfall figures from each sector from the eight districts are compiled and kept for our records.

The climatic data is used to produce climate summary and prediction of weather forecasts for the country.

The Research Institute provides a summary statement towards the Fiji Sugar Cane Rainfall Outlook (FSCRO) which becomes an advice to farmers on possible farm activities such as land preparation, cultivation, fertilizer application, weedicide application and harvesting from sugarcane belt areas.
El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO) ENSO is an irregular cycle of persistent warming and cooling of Sea surface temperatures in the tropical Pacific Ocean.

The warm extreme is known is El Niño and the cold extreme, La Niña.

Scientists now refer to an El Niño event as sustained warming over a large part of central and eastern equatorial Pacific Ocean.
This warming is usually accompanied by persistent negative values of Southern Oscillation Index (SOI), a decrease in the strength or reversal of the trade winds, increase in cloudiness in the Pacific and a reduction in rainfall over most of SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 8 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Fiji which can, especially during moderate to strong events, lead to drought.

La Niña is a sustained cooling of the Pacific Ocean.
The cooling is usually accompanied by persistent positive values of SOI, and increase in strength of the trade winds, decrease in cloudiness and higher than average rainfall for most of Fiji with frequent and sometimes severe flooding, especially during the wet season (November to April).

Rainfall Fiji enjoys a tropical maritime climate without extremes of heat or cold.

The peak period for cyclones in the region is usually from November to April.
The annual average rainfall is usually between the ranges 2000mm to 3000mm.

From the table below, it can be seen that the total rainfall for all mills was in the annual average rainfall range.
Table 1.1.1: Rainfall (mm) figures for All Mills MONTH January February March April May June July August September October November December Total Average LAUTOKA MILL Rainfall (mm) 370 350 502 329 84 67 1 0 26 209 80 112 2129 177 Rain Days 18 23 16 12 5 4 1 0 1 10 4 8 102 9 RARAWAI MILL Rainfall (mm) 489 308 402 463 105 55 0 0 17 171 83 135 2228 186 Rain Days 13 21 19 4 4 5 0 0 1 14 6 7 94 8 LABASA MILL PENANG MILL Rainfall (mm) 319 663 475 898 92 26 25 0 74 283 31 86 2971 248 Rain Days 13 20 24 13 12 5 4 0 8 17 2 11 129 11 Rainfall (mm) 394 321 507 475 60 459 9 199 35 340 70 72 2940 245 Rain Days 26 27 26 18 16 8 11 15 10 24 8 15 204 17 Table 1.1.2: Monthly Rainfall figures for Lautoka mill with the Long-Term Averages Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total Avg % of avg 102 106 155 170 Table 1.1.3: Monthly Rainfall figures for Rarawai mill with the Long-Term Averages Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total Avg Monthly rainfall No.
of rain days 48 yrs.

avg (1970-2017) Monthly rainfall No.

of rain days 48 yrs.

avg (1970-2017) % of avg 128 86 112 229 114 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Page 9 Table 1.1.4 - Monthly Rainfall figures for Penang mill with the Long-Term Averages Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total Avg Monthly rainfall No.
of rain days 48 yrs.

avg (1970-2017) % of avg 95 89 139 185 40 455 18 283 42 301 46 28 124 124 Table 1.1.5 - Monthly Rainfall figures for Labasa mill with the Long-Term Averages Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total Monthly rainfall No.

of rain days 48 yrs.
avg (1970-2017) 319 663 475 898 13 20 24 13 92 12 387 371 366 251 106 % of avg 82 179 130 358 86 26 25 5 74 35 4 49 52 0 0 74 283 31 86 2972 8 17 2 11 129 11 Avg 248 53 76 123 180 254 2289 325 0 98 231 17 34 130 76 ) m m ( l l a f n a R i 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Figure 1.1.1: Total and monthly average rainfall for each mill 2941 2972 2228 2130 177 186 245 248 Lautoka Rarawai Penang Labasa Mill Total Average The tables and graph above represent the total and the monthly average rainfall figures for all the sugar mills across the sugarcane belt areas.
All mills recorded above average rainfall, with Labasa recording the highest and Lautoka recording the lowest.

The highest rainfall of 898mm was recorded for the month of April at Labasa mill while the least rainfall was recorded for the months of July and August at Lautoka, Rarawai and Labasa mill.
SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 10 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Annual rainfall - 2972 Annual rainfall - 2228 Annual rainfall - 2941 Annual rainfall - 2130 Figure 1.1.2: Annual rainfall received per mill Lautoka Mill Figure 1.1.3: Monthly Rainfall for Lautoka Mill 502 370 350 329 ) m m ( l l a f n a R i 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 209 84 67 80 112 1 0 25.526 Month 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Page 11 Table 1.1.6: Rainfall (mm) figures for each Sector of the Lautoka Mill Sector Drasa Saweni Natova Legalega Meigunyah Yako Malolo Nawaicoba Lomawai Cuvu Olosara May 153 145 97 100 114 41 148 104 163 186 139 Mar 781 826 427 382 423 400 739 568 340 298 234 Feb 545 769 494 508 476 490 818 616 471 343 384 Apr 719 742 409 356 372 287 450 446 305 207 227 Jan 518 351 329 445 340 369 544 332 237 57 76 Jun 117 89 67 64 71 32 85 26 38 28 14 Jul 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 18 8 15 Aug 0 0 0 0 0 15 10 20 13 2 0 Table 1.1.6: Cont’d Sector Sep Drasa Saweni Natova Legalega Meigunyah Yako Malolo Nawaicoba Lomawai Cuvu Olosara 13 24 41 48 38 25 72 14 30 80 38 Oct 215 215 208 204 181 204 232 368 98 249 215 Nov Dec Total Sector avg 276 276 189 194 181 159 277 226 155 146 126 Mill avg 200 Figure 1.1.4: Total Rainfall received for each sector under Lautoka Mill 3312 3309 3322 2273 2329 2168 1906 1863 2706 1749 1517 ) m m ( l l a f n a R i 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Sector The graph above shows that Malolo recorded the highest rainfall of 3322mm of rainfall followed by Drasa with 3312mm while Olosara recorded the least amount of rainfall of 1517mm.
SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 12 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Figure 1.1.5: Monthly average rainfall received for each sector under Lautoka Mill 276 276 189 194 181 277 226 159 155 146 126 ) m m ( l l i a f n a R e g a r e v A 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Sector Sector Avg Mill avg The graph above shows that only 4 sectors, i.e.

Drasa, Saweni, Malolo and Nawaicoba exceeded the mill average of 200mm of rainfall while all the other sectors recorded below mill average rainfall.
Rarawai Mill ) m m ( l l a f n a R i 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Figure 1.1.6: Monthly Rainfall for Rarawai Mill 490 463 402 308 171 135 83 0 0 17 105 55 Month Table 1.1.7: Rainfall (mm) figures for each sector of the Rarawai Mill Sector Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total Varoko Mota Koronubu Rarawai Veisaru Varavu Mill avg 238 Sec.
Avg 193 297 237 186 244 170 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Page 13 Table 1.1.7: Cont’d Sector Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total Naloto Tagitagi Drumasi Yaladro Mill avg 238 Sec.
Avg 300 227 297 229 Figure 1.1.7: Total Rainfall received for each sector under Rarawai Mill 3559 3600 3568 2845 2931 2722 2747 2318 2228 2037 ) m m ( l l a f n a R i 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Varoko Mota Koronubu Rarawai Veisaru Varavu Naloto Tagitagi Drumasi Yaladro Sector The graph above shows that Naloto recorded the highest rainfall of 3600mm of rainfall followed by Drumasi of 3568mm and Mota of 3559mm while Varavu recorded the least amount of rainfall of 2037mm.
Figure 1.1.8: Monthly average rainfall received for each sector under Rarawai Mill 297 300 297 237 244 227 229 193 186 170 ) m m ( l l a f n a R i 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Sector Sect Avg Mill avg The graph above shows that only 3 sectors, i.e.

Mota, Naloto and Drumasi exceeded the mill average of 238mm of rainfall while all the other sectors recorded below mill average rainfall.
SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 14 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Penang Mill Figure 1.1.9: Monthly Rainfall for Penang Mill ) m m ( l l a f n a R i 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 507 472 459 394 321 340 199 60 9 35 70 72 Month Table 1.1.8: Rainfall (mm) figures for each sector of the Penang Mill Sector Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total Ellington I Malau Nanuku Ellington II ND 70 ND ND 7 72 53 255 854 2527 2061 3412 Mill Avg 196 Sec.
Avg 78 211 187 310 Figure 1.1.10: Total Rainfall received for each sector under Penang Mill 3412 2527 2061 ) m m ( l l a f n a R i 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 854 Ellington I Malau Nanuku Ellington II Month The graph above shows that Ellington II recorded the highest rainfall of 3412mm of rainfall while Ellington I recorded the least amount of rainfall of 854mm.
2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Page 15 Figure 1.1.11: Monthly average rainfall received for each sector under Penang Mill 310 211 187 ) m m ( l l i a f n a r e g a r e v A 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 78 Ellington I Malau Nanuku Ellington II Sector Sect Avg Mill avg The graph above shows that only 2 sectors, i.e.

Malau and Ellington II exceeded the mill average of 196mm of rainfall while the other 2 sectors recorded below mill average rainfall.
Labasa Mill ) m m ( l l a f n a R i 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Figure 1.1.12: Monthly Rainfall for Labasa Mill 898 663 475 319 283 92 26 25 0 74 86 31 Month Table 1.1.9: Rainfall (mm) figures for each sector of the Labasa Mill Sector Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total 333 Waiqele 264 Wailevu 290 Vunimoli 319 Labasa Bucaisau 339 Wainikoro 343 344 Seaqaqa Mill avg 263 Sec.
Avg 277 227 281 248 262 267 283 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 16 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Figure 1.1.13: Total Rainfall received for each sector under Labasa Mill 3318 3367 2725 2971 3148 3202 3395 ) m m ( l l a f n a R i 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Waiqele Wailevu Vunimoli Labasa Sector Bucaisau Wainikoro Seaqaqa The graph above shows that Seaqaqa recorded the highest rainfall of 3395mm of rainfall while Wailevu recorded the least amount of rainfall of 2725mm.
Figure 1.1.14: Monthly average rainfall received for each sector under Labasa Mill 277 281 248 262 267 283 227 ) m m ( l l i a f n a r e g a r e v A 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Waiqele Wailevu Vunimoli Labasa Bucaisau Wainikoro Seaqaqa Sector Sect Avg Mill avg The graph above shows that only 3 sectors, i.e.

Waiqele, Vunimoli and Seaqaqa exceeded the mill average of 263mm of rainfall while all the other sectors recorded below mill average rainfall with Wailevu recording least.
Lautoka Mill Table 1.1.10: Past 23 years met data for the Lautoka Mill Year 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Feb Mar 453 194 323 218 63 117 139 517 421 250 405 356 Jan 417 967 164 1018 408 236 May 234 86 37 26 367 62 Jun 213 25 5 50 40 22 Apr 118 271 82 388 124 170 Jul 90 34 7 115 180 106 Aug 20 233 1 136 147 123 Sep 60 59 23 92 97 19 Oct 11 40 38 149 142 259 Nov 102 3 481 354 167 96 Dec 334 72 196 473 667 191 Total 2246 2331 1214 3457 3010 2045 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT Table 1.1.10: Cont’d Year 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Jan 317 136 34 244 718 61 672 1280 95 560 854 106 310 212 169 166 370 Feb Mar RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Page 17 Apr 247 123 180 437 119 224 118 110 144 288 406 84 194 64 434 11 329 May 132 53 22 4 105 42 112 116 24 275 78 127 203 10 7 66 84 Jun 33 82 60 98 40 1 122 72 3 123 210 82 10 9 19 31 67 Jul 64 13 98 52 28 49 26 34 55 122 14 17 7 27 6 10 1 Aug 43 134 277 91 77 22 1 65 7 131 53 33 0 35 210 27 0 Sep 164 6 84 31 52 202 26 223 10 92 296 46 30 43 3 2 26 Oct 39 76 6 103 115 111 103 42 206 112 120 75 53 19 153 25 209 Nov 54 52 38 142 113 268 216 52 299 275 35 354 37 2 87 130 80 Dec 51 185 80 178 115 272 119 237 226 306 24 439 201 82 269 187 112 Total 1706 1458 1490 1580 1845 2365 2301 2877 1300 3116 3563 2438 1541 975 2072 1721 2129 Figure 1.1.15: 23 years total rainfall for Lautoka mill 3457 3010 3563 2877 3116 2246 2331 1214 2045 1706 1458 2365 1845 1580 2301 1490 2438 1541 2072 1721 2129 1300 975 ) m m ( l l a f n a R i 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Year The graph shows the total rainfall received in the past 23 years by Lautoka Mill.
The all-time low of 975mm was recorded in the year 2015 with the all-time high of 3563mm recorded in year 2012.

This year also marked the occurrence of Cyclone Evan.
Table 1.1.11: Past 23 years met data for the Rarawai mill Year 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Jan 678 1029 155 1033 712 306 242 103 52 368 607 Feb 424 280 55 558 324 242 347 207 481 66 270 Mar 452 442 49 302 478 212 439 590 427 140 213 Apr 81 311 54 360 134 332 83 218 157 381 169 May 346 116 13 25 278 35 122 128 54 1 95 Jun 233 4 4 56 124 26 45 41 100 96 53 Jul 75 26 1 95 211 59 77 6 128 53 19 Aug 24 202 1 108 84 79 44 72 378 63 91 Sep Oct 8 82 46 138 177 224 49 63 21 72 120 43 55 82 67 92 22 145 2 63 40 57 Nov 110 9 498 226 153 85 38 64 3 237 143 Dec 231 85 336 373 646 200 47 427 97 229 325 Total 2705 2641 1294 3341 3413 1822 1678 1921 1961 1746 2162 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 18 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Table 1.1.11: Cont’d Year 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Jan 110 827 944 123 738 825 218 322 196 196 347 489 Feb 583 605 358 141 393 710 355 256 246 412 631 308 Mar 904 372 353 166 421 275 468 186 143 134 374 402 Apr 161 271 91 167 218 4 111 85 82 487 89 463 May 14 173 150 57 149 80 159 145 13 14 43 105 Jun 7 55 77 1 124 173 88 4 8 29 14 55 Jul 42 52 28 53 92 0 9 5 5 6 0 0 Aug 14 9 27 24 114 46 30 0 22 148 40 0 Sep Oct 140 239 81 21 57 237 141 32 268 41 173 238 96 31 46 6 43 53 128 10 17 9 171 17 Nov 305 375 48 485 299 100 277 57 7 17 186 83 Dec 285 180 223 267 176 16 426 138 283 327 244 135 Total 2804 3021 2593 1657 3033 2640 2268 1250 1101 1908 1993 2228 Figure 1.1.16: 23 Years Total Rainfall for Rarawai Mill 2705 2641 3341 3413 1822 1921 1294 1678 3033 2804 3021 2593 1746 2162 1961 1657 2268 2640 2228 1908 1250 1993 1101 ) m m ( l l a f n a R i 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Year The graph shows the total rainfall received in the past 23 years by Rarawai Mill.
The all-time low of 1101mm was recorded in the year 2015 with the all-time high of 6795mm recorded in year 1996.
Penang Mill Table 1.1.12: Past 23 years met data for the Penang Mill Year 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Jan 340 911 179 730 447 315 378 163 54 264 481 Feb 343 382 112 409 307 295 396 63 371 78 405 Mar 450 695 199 274 565 233 301 537 292 72 149 Apr 144 345 121 318 303 182 130 471 254 556 172 May 224 440 46 437 582 111 164 129 11 8 65 Jun 237 22 37 72 263 51 17 29 149 101 59 Jul 85 37 12 102 148 82 163 25 95 31 24 Aug 40 135 13 55 67 109 70 41 196 36 83 Sep Oct 53 71 22 379 203 323 50 46 1 54 108 78 59 170 324 71 38 100 6 79 113 81 Nov 216 9 125 287 187 119 27 82 30 96 34 Dec 193 67 239 462 606 256 66 297 41 108 164 Total 2403 3173 1275 3849 3749 2114 1862 1889 1573 1517 1825 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Page 19 Table 1.1.12: Cont’d Year 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Jan 64 1241 1255 59 695 990 311 354 150 84 171 394 Feb 343 570 305 307 592 477 462 483 364 634 540 321 Mar 716 200 184 84 322 235 414 242 143 120 440 507 Apr 186 222 188 154 278 576 290 124 102 370 32 475 May 80 271 276 62 385 41 140 207 72 58 167 60 Jun 25 104 79 40 75 165 103 42 15 57 11 459 Jul 36 19 68 23 39 19 62 24 5 13 1 9 Aug 30 75 52 14 99 75 31 16 53 - 49 199 Sep Oct 45 204 21 38 22 114 249 57 185 44 147 215 122 37 99 0 124 59 73 1 8 61 340 35 Nov 330 381 28 430 388 60 116 65 28 126 187 70 Dec 558 242 493 165 171 430 254 520 196 550 133 72 Total 2617 3384 3064 1644 3273 3430 2342 2176 1311 2086 1799 2940 Figure 1.1.17: 23 Years Total Rainfall for Penang Mill 3849 3749 3384 3064 3430 3273 2940 2617 2114 1889 1573 1825 1644 1275 1862 1517 2342 2176 2086 1799 1311 3173 2403 ) m m ( l l a f n a R i 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Labasa Mill Table 1.1.12: Past 23 years met data for the Labasa Mill Year 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Jan 500 686 422 897 670 337 438 484 40 287 550 100 655 805 Feb 356 367 13 452 451 339 814 92 312 113 677 458 333 454 Mar 557 512 91 154 617 246 292 351 392 213 91 619 305 259 Apr 82 443 32
 182 643 336 223 334 167 275 310 167 256 211 May 185 306 31 125 223 54 77 134 31 20 46 101 232 94 Jun 258 4 67 99 51 59 16 16 163 107 47 56 97 111 Year Jul 86 38 1 119 122 68 103 19 92 111 17 30 10 93 Aug 4 100 3 81 10 55 62 16 113 18 50 49 3 16 Sep Oct 186 140 84 271 100 162 109 25 47 85 69 131 47 14 72 50 85 89 73 21 74 15 48 51 64 327 45 153 Nov 140 34 182 435 176 140 118 86 53 262 46 310 168 106 Dec 288 55 545 239 519 331 94 261 109 254 186 439 299 163 Total 2714 2735 1556 3143 3655 2148 2420 1833 1567 1796 2153 2787 2450 2479 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 20 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Table 1.1.12: Cont’d Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Jan 213 698 567 329 293 185 4 122 319 Feb 73 476 754 334 405 404 0 779 663 Mar 314 362 411 937 183 175 257 361 475 Apr 325 84 229 40 125 105 560 16 898 May 108 198 37 83 88 59 1 125 92 Jun 104 89 99 96 14 2 22 83 26 Jul 88 100 12 27 18 0 1 2 25 Aug 42 81 38 115 2 82 203 93 0 Sep Oct 165 161 189 216 275 7 104 29 283 17 60 175 105 6 36 0 130 74 Nov 425 314 167 227 116 27 111 261 31 Dec 401 244 276 246 154 86 510 120 86 Total 2275 2867 2954 2755 1679 1168 1773 2122 2971 Figure 1.1.18: 23 Years Total Rainfall for Labasa Mill 3655 3143 2714 2735 1556 2420 2148 1833 1796 1567 2787 2450 2153 2479 2867 2755 2275 2954 ) m m ( l l a f n a R i 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 2971 2122 1679 1773 1168 Penang 2403 3173 1275 3849 3749 2114 1862 1889 1573 1517 1825 2617 3384 3064 1644 3273 3430 2342 2176 1311 Labasa 2714 2735 1556 3143 3655 2148 2420 1833 1567 1796 2153 2787 2450 2479 2275 2867 2954 2755 1679 1168 Year Table 1.1.13: Total Rainfall Figures for all the Four Mills for the past 23 years Years 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Lautoka 2246 2331 1214 3457 3010 2045 1706 1458 1490 1580 1845 2365 2301 2877 1300 3116 3563 2438 1541 975 Rarawai 2705 2641 1294 3341 3413 1822 1678 1921 1961 1746 2162 2804 3021 2593 1657 3033 2640 2268 1250 1101
 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Page 21 Table 1.1.13: Cont’d Years 2016 2017 2018 Lautoka 2072 1721 2129 Rarawai 1908 1993 2228 Penang 2086 1799 2940 Labasa 1773 2122 2971 Figure 1.1.19: Past 23 Years Total Rainfall Figures for All Mills ) m m ( l l a f n a R i 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 Year Table 1.1.14: Meteorological data for Sugar Research Institute of Fiji, Lautoka 2018 Lautoka Rarawai Penang Labasa Jan 71 75 32 32 23 24 28 35 23 Relative Humidity (%) 49 yrs.
avg Air Temperature Mean Maximum 49 yrs.

avg Mean minimum 49 yrs.

avg Mean Highest maximum Lowest minimum Evaporation Raised pan Earth thermometers 29 5cm 28 49 yrs.

avg 28 10cm 29 49 yrs.

avg 29 30cm 30 3 yrs.
avg Note: NR – not recorded 1590 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Avg NR SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 22 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Earth Thermometers The earth thermometers at SRIF are at depths of 5cm, 10cm and 30cm.
The 49 years average of thermometers at depths 5cm and 10cm were calculated to be 26.8°C and 26.4°C respectively.

The 30cm thermometer was newly installed in 2016, thus, the 3 years average calculated was 21cm.
FIGURE 1.1.20: 49 YEARS AVERAGE EARTH TEMP AT 5CM DEPTH FOR EACH MONTH 29.0 29.0 27.4 29.0 29.0 27.0 26.0 27.1 26.0 24.0 24.0 24. Month FIGURE 1.1.21: 49 YEARS AVERAGE EARTH TEMP AT 10CM DEPTH FOR EACH MONTH 29.0 28.0 27.0 26.4 28.0 28.0 28.0 27.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 ) C ᵒ ( e r u t a r e p m e T 30.0 29.0 28.0 27.0 26.0 25.0 24.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 20.0 ) C ᵒ ( e r u t a r e p m e T 30.0 29.0 28.0 27.0 26.0 25.0 24.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 20. Month Evaporation The 49 years average was calculated to be 1685mm.
Relative Humidity This year’s average humidity is calculated to be 73.3% but the 49 years average has been calculated to be 71.7%; thus, making this year’s reading as above average.
2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Page 23 FIGURE 1.1.22:PERCENT RELATIVE HUMIDITY PER MONTH H R % 85.0 80.0 75.0 71.0 70.0 65.0 60.0 81.0 79.0 77.0 74.0 78.0 76.0 75.0 72.0 69.0 66.0 61. Month Sunshine There is no sunshine recorder installed at the Drasa station (V77555).
Figure 1.1.23: Climate Outlook Forum (left) & evaporation reading (right) at SRIF Lautoka Figure 1.1.24: SRIF Lautoka meteorological station (left) & temperature reading (right) SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 24 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT 1.2 CROP IMPROVEMENT 1.2.1 PLANT BREEDING & EARLY STAGE SELECTION HIGHLIGHTS 1.

Second year of crossing without crossing shed and all crosses set were poly crosses.

2.

Evaluation of new germplasm have begun.


SUMMARY • Two new arrowing bed was established during the year to provide a broader base for crossing in the next few years.

Four old beds were maintained and one abandoned.

• 135 crosses were set (all poly crosses).

• 2750 seedlings of LF2017 series were transplanted as single stool stage 1 at Rarawai estate field 6.

• 292 cultivars of LF2016 series were advanced to stage 2 but it was ploughed out due poor germination.
• 408 varieties of LF2014 series selected from stage 2 and advanced to stage 3.

• 15 varieties of LF2015 series selected from stage 3 trial and advanced to stage 4 seedbed.

• The table below presents the number of clones of the different series and respective stages.
Table 1.2.1: Summary of series by stages Stage I II III IV LF2014 11500 408 65 - Series LF2015 10000 599 92 15 LF2016 4800 292 - - LF2017 2750 - - - Germplasm Collection The number of varieties in our new germplasm collection is approximately 640.

These were the results of replanting of clones from the old germplasm that was located in Drasa estate.

Total of 320 varieties planted in Drasa estate and 320 varieties in Rarawai estate which were planted in replicate in 2017.
Verification is a major exercise that was initiated three years ago however it has been found out that multiples of volunteer canes are within the plots which mainly due to the harvesting techniques.

Therefore, a new project is in progress which is to characterize every clone in the germplasm to have individual data which can be used for breeding purposes.

Samples from the plant crop have been send to small mill for biochemical analysis and the plots are harvested and weighed for yield assessment.
The first ratoon crop will be evaluated again in 2019 and data will be used for comparison with plant crop data before selection will be made for varieties to be introduced to the flowering bed.
Table 1.2.2: Summary of Germplasm samples sent for evaluation Number of cultivars 1280 Number of samples send 1264 Discrepancy 60 Number of plots without cane 16 Number of samples data received 1204 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Page 25 Total of 1280 cultivars from the two stations were expected to be harvested and sent to the small mill for analysis.

A total of 1204 samples were sent for biochemical analysis at small mill that included 640 varieties present in germplasm.
The data were analysed based on factors such as brix %, POCS %, pol %, purity % and fibre %.

Exchange of Germplasm Correspondence was made with CIRAD Agriculture Research for Development in France to ascertain the possibility of acquiring some parent materials for crossing.

Total of 21 varieties were received.

The cultivars were treated with fungicides then planted into three buckets per variety and laced in the quarantine facilities in Rarawai.
This was done in the presence of bio- security officers from Biosecurity Authority of Fiji (BAF).

Figure 1.2.1: Twenty varieties germinate out of 21 Flowering Beds Flowers from 10 flowering beds in Dobuilevu with 577 clones were well maintained and used in crossing.

The flowering beds were severely lodged after torrential rainfall that caused massive flooding in the month of April.
Due to lodging a lot of the flowered stalks were crooked, in spite of this set back, the flowers were still used in crossing.

A total of six flowering beds with 577 varieties were used for crossing.

The varieties planted were from stage 4 (LF00series), stage 3 (LF01 series) and stage 2 (LF02series).

Poor germination was observed in stage 3 & 4 due to seed quality.

Single eye bud potted in plastic bags were used for gap-filling in this trial.
Crossing The 2018-crossing season commenced on 22nd May and ended on 11 July.

135 crosses were set-up (All 135 were poly crosses) using 50 female and 55 male parents.

The varieties at SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 26 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Dobuilevu were lodged and there were difficulties in cutting the varieties and setting the crosses.

Figure 1.2.2: LEFT: Female flower (under the makeshift crossing tent) were identified and marked in their respective fields and beds for pollination.
RIGHT: Pollen collected & strained.

Figure 1.2.3: LEFT: Collected pollens sorted and tagged.

RIGHT: Closeup of collected pollen Figure 1.2.4: Pollinating female flowers directly in the field using collected pollens Fuzz Sowing and Raising Seedlings Fuzz sowing was scheduled to start in mid-June but was delayed due to lack of fuzz in stock.

The soil used for fuzz sowing is sterilized using soil sterilizer.

Fuzz sowing commenced on 19th July and ended on 15th August 2018.
2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Page 27 A total of 135 packets of fuzz was sown from 2018 crossing.

The germination of fuzz was good 127 packets germinated (94 %) and produced 5300 seedlings.

Fuzz germination has tremendous improvement compared to previous years.

Fuzz used this year was from poly crosses which has an impact in obtaining such a high germination percentage.

Figure 1.2.5: LEFT: Fuzz sowing for 2018 crosses at Rarawai.
RIGHT: Germinating fuzz Stage 1 Trial Planting Plant breeding program consist of four different stages from fuzz sowing to varietal release.

In the stage one trials, the seedlings from the crosses are planted side by side in the field with the standards in rows of 100 seedlings.

The selection criterion is based on the brix which is a measure of total soluble solids in cane juice.

Physical appeal is also taken into consideration during selection.

The LF2017 series was planted in May, 2018.


2,750 varieties that are 95% of the total potted (2,800) were transplanted in an area of 0.68 acres as single stools.

Due to the dry weather conditions this field was irrigated before and after planting.

Evaluation will be carried out in February 2019.

Stage 1 trial selection - LF2016 single stools to stage 2 single lines A total of 292 cultivars of LF 2016 series were advanced and planted as stage 2 single lines.

This was 16.4% of the total planted (4800).


The selection was done 18 months after planting and was based on brix, vigour and disease incidence.

The selection was carried out in July 2018.

Table 1.2.4: Brix range for selected varieties and standards.
Standard Varieties Kaba Naidiri Qamea Viwa Standards Average Brix Selection Range (Brix) No of varieties Selected 10 32 47 192 11 292 > 24.0 23.0 – 23.9 22.0 – 22.9 20.5 – 21.9 18.0 - 20.5 Total Note: standard brix range 17.1 – 25.0 and selected varieties’ brix range 18.0 – 24.8 24.0 23.0 22.0 20.5 The cane was in the poor status during selection and the brix values of most of the clones was comparatively lower as compared to past years.
There was heavy lodging in the trial and this could have also affected and contributed to the low brix.

The quality of the seed cane was very poor.

SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 28 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Stage 2 trial selection - LF2014 and LF2015 single lines to stage 3 observation plot trial Stage 2 is the second stage of the 4 stages of evaluation of promising varieties that may have the potential to become commercial varieties for the Fiji Sugar Industry.
The plant-breeding program has undergone changes in the past decade and improvements have been made to strengthen the selection criterion that is significant to the success of the program.

In the past four years, selection of clones for advancement to stage 3 was based mainly on the biochemical data but this year an integrated approach focusing on recurrent selection has been applied.
In the integrated approach, data (preliminary brix and bio-chemical) and field visit observations are used in making the final selection.

Field visit observations – recording of information about each clone that would help in deciding to advance or reject clones.

Small Mill Evaluation – total of 408 varieties were evaluated by sending samples to small mill for biochemical analysis.
Final selection – this is the most important phase of selection and it incorporates the small mill biochemical analysis data and field observations.

Selection is based mainly on sucrose content.

In the final selection clones are marked out under three categories advance, consider and consider for crossing.

There are very few clones under the consider category and generally have some good agronomic characteristic and high %fibre but low sucrose content.
The clones marked for crossing are those with high sucrose content that have not been advanced because of the stunted growth but should only be considered after assessment.

LF2014 Stage 2 Trial details - There were 408 clones planted in six metre plots and in two blocks.

This trial was irrigated soon after planting and established well, free of weeds and generally had a good stand of cane.

The cane was 10 months old at the time of selection and was not lodged.

The varieties were easily accessed.


Discussion - Based on the selection criteria described above 57 varieties has been selected and advanced to stage 3 observation plot trial.

The list of varieties selected is presented in Appendix 3.

The sucrose content of the selected varieties ranged between 15.30 – 18.30 % and the standards from 15.27 - 17.46%.
The sucrose content of 7 varieties (clone number: 52, 79, A16, A102, B86, B100 and B105) in descending order was better than the best standard variety Naidiri (17.46%).

The fibre content of the selected varieties ranged between 6.66 – 14.65% and the standards from 9.27 – 13.67%.

There are 7 varieties that have high fibre content.

Major drawback - The trial was accidentally burnt due to fire spread from the neighbouring farm prior to the harvesting of the selected clones.
However, LF2014 Stage 3 will be planted in 2019 from first ratoon crop using the same set of data and another round of field observation.

LF2015 Stage 2 Trial details - There were 599 clones planted in six metre plots in one block.

This trial was well managed after planting in terms of irrigation and husbandry practices.

The cane was 10 months old at the time of selection and was not lodged.

The varieties were easily accessed.


2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Page 29 Discuss - Total of 95 varieties were selected from the 599 varieties after evaluation and planted as stage three.

The sucrose content of the selected varieties ranged between 13.20 – 18.63 % and the standards from 13.15 - 17.60%.

The fibre content of the selected varieties ranged between 6.23 – 17.06% and the standards from 9.27 – 13.67%.
LF2016 Stage 2 Planting - Total of 292 clones were selected from LF2016 Stage 1 after brixing and advanced to stage 2.

The field was irrigated prior to planting.

Drawback - Poor germination of less than 5% was experienced in this trial after planting despite irrigation.

The trial was ploughed out.

Selection will be carried out from the first ratoon in 2019.
Stage 3 trial - LF2015 series to stage 4 seedbed Stage 3 is the third stage of the 4 stages of evaluation of promising varieties that may have the potential to become commercial varieties for the Fiji Sugar Industry.

Improvements have been made to the selection criterion applied to stage 3.

Previously selection was based mainly on the biochemical data but this year additional information such as growth of cane was also considered during selection.
LF2015 Stage 3 Trial Details - There were 95 clones planted as LF2015 Stage 3 observational plot in four rows by four-meter plots and two standard varieties replicated two times each.

This trial was irrigated soon after planting and established well.

Evaluation and selection will be carried out in 2019.
1.2.2 VARIETY ADAPTATION TRIALS SUMMARY In 2018, following series were in Stage 4: LF2011 series (2nd Ratoon): • 10 test clones and 2 standards in 4 replicates • Was planted at all mill locations however Penang trial was abandoned after damages caused by cyclone Winston.
• The trials were analysed between July-October LF2012 series (Plant): • 17 test clones and 3 standards in 4 replicates • Was planted at all mill locations • The trials were analysed between July-October LF2013 series: • 13 test clones with 3 standards has been planted in 4 replicates at all mills • Will be analysed in 2019 Five varieties from LF2009 series was planted in 2 farmers field in Ba district for farmer feel effect whereas 1 variety from LF2011 series was identified and seedcane propagated in the view that this variety is further envisioned for large mill trials.
SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 30 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT ADVANCED STAGE TRIALS LF2011 Series In 2018, the 2nd ratoon crop was evaluated at Drasa, Rarawai and Labasa.

The trial in Penang was abandoned in 2016 after extensive damage sustained from TC Winston.

The following table summarizes the data for all crop cycles being the consolidated average of data from all mills.
Table 1.2.2: Consolidated biochemical data for LF2011 series Varieties LF11 - 118 LF11 - 129 LF11 - 200 LF11 - 21 LF11 - 229 LF11 - 233 LF11 - 266 LF11 - 268 LF11 - 293 LF11 - 96 Mana Naidiri %POCS 1R 13.3 12.6 13.7 12.9 13.9 12.5 12.9 13.0 13.4 14.1 12.2 13.5 P 12.9 13.7 13.1 13.8 12.9 13.0 12.7 13.2 13.4 12.3 13.4 11.8 2R 14.5 15.0 14.0 15.5 15.5 14.7 13.3 14.4 12.2 15.3 15.0 16.0 %Fiber 1R 11.1 11.1 11.4 10.2 10.4 10.1 10.8 12.5 10.6 10.1 9.0 10.4 P 7.1 7.0 7.8 6.6 6.8 8.1 8.1 7.3 7.1 9.1 6.9 9.4 2R 10.6 10.8 11.0 10.2 9.7 10.6 11.0 10.1 11.0 10.3 9.6 10.1 Tch 1R 112 105 91 121 118 91 102 101 102 87 125 135 P 146 118 106 161 99 106 106 126 89 94 116 114 2R 68 56 83 68 65 77 83 81 65 41 62 70 P 19.0 16.0 14.0 22.0 13.0 14.0 14.0 17.0 12.0 12.0 16.0 14.0 Tsh 1R 15.0 13.0 13.0 16.0 17.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 14.0 13.0 15.0 18.0 2R 10.0 8.0 12.0 11.0 10.0 11.0 11.0 12.0 8.0 6.0 10.0 11.0 Note: P – plant, 1R – first ratoon, 2R – second ratoon From the data above, 2 varieties namely LF11-200 and LF11-268 were found to have better sugar yield than standards however LF11-233 was found to be physically more appealing.
After further assessments, LF11-233 was also found to be non-flowering, tall medium to thick stalk cane as well as self-trashing hence has been considered to further propagation and for farmer feel effect program.

LF2012 Series In 2018, 4 trials were evaluated in Rarawai, Drasa, Penang and Labasa.

Following table is the consolidated average for all mills.
Table 1.2.3: Consolidated biochemical data for LF2012 series Varieties LF12 - 112 LF12 - 114 LF12 - 153 LF12 - 154 LF12 - 2 LF12 - 22 LF12 - 233 LF12 - 253 LF12 - 255 LF12 - 276 LF12 - 282 LF12 - 31 LF12 - 34 %POCS P 13.3 14.0 13.6 11.7 14.4 13.2 12.6 12.5 12.6 14.4 13.2 11.4 13.3 %Fiber P 9.6 11.9 10.2 11.2 10.1 13.7 11.1 12.5 12.0 9.5 11.8 10.5 10.4 Tch P 46 59 65 42 60 72 59 52 60 61 65 70 38 Tsh P 6.0 9.0 9.0 6.0 9.0 9.0 7.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 9.0 8.0 5.0 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT Table 1.2.3: Cont’d Varieties LF12 - 40 LF12 - 63 LF12 - 74 LF12 - 76 MAN NAD RAG Note: P – plant %POCS P 13.3 12.3 12.1 13.6 13.3 14.2 14.9 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Page 31 %Fiber P 12.1 11.9 13.8 10.2 9.0 10.6 11.2 Tch P 47 56 51 55 57 63 62 Tsh P 6.0 7.0 6.0 8.0 8.0 9.0 9.0 With reference to above data table, none of the varieties could be identified that out- performed the commercial varieties (planted as standards) in terms of bio-chemical data.
The data will be re-looked in the 1st ratoon to identify any varieties with commercial attributes.

Farmer Feel Effect This program was established before release of Viwa and Qamea to assess farmer views as well as adaptability under routine farm management.
In 2019, following varieties from LF2009 series Stage 4 was planted in 2 farms in Naloto and Moto sector in Ba: Variety 2R 13.1 12.8 13.8 13.2 13.8 14.3 13.5 13.3 Note: P – plant, 1R – first ratoon, 2R – second ratoon LF09-1536 LF09-1558 LF09-1632 LF09-1707 LF09-635 MANA KABA NAIDIRI P 14.9 13.0 15.3 15.6 15.6 15.5 13.8 15.7 P 10.9 12.3 10.1 11.2 9.5 9.3 9.6 11.0 2R 8.4 8.4 8.0 8.5 8.2 7.2 9.0 9.4 %POCS 1R 7.2 13.8 14.5 10.5 5.9 9.7 7.9 7.7 %Fiber 1R 12.9 13.5 12.7 12.7 15.5 13.3 12.0 13.1 Tch 1R 105 122 114 125 104 128 118 102 P 122 111 104 144 106 125 133 92 Tsh 1R 5 13 12 10 7 9 6 6 P 18 14 16 22 17 19 18 14 2R 6 7 9 7 8 7 6 5 2R 44 52 62 57 59 49 46 35 These varieties will be continuously monitored in 2019 and possible promising varieties identified for further propagation and Large Mill Trial.
Conclusion Advance Stage trials as well as pre-release program involving Farmer Feel Effect and Large Mill trials forms a crucial part of Plant Breeding by providing data from adaptation trials as well as farmer observations during routine farm management.

One variety has been identified from LF2011 series and will be propagated for further farmer feel effect and large mill by 2021 whereas 7 varieties have been marked in LF2012 series Stage 4 to be reassessed in the 1st ratoon.
The 5 varieties for LF2009 series are in the farmer feel effect program and will be reassessed in 2019 to select varieties for large mill based on farmer feedback.

SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 32 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT 1.3 CROP MANAGEMENT 1.3.1 BIOCHEMICAL LAB The small mill crushed 1464 samples in the year 2018 which was about 50% more than 2017.

All the samples were analysed using the FT-NIR through the Spectracane 400.
The Sugar laboratory successfully carried out all the validation analysing of the Spectracane saved samples.

Along with the routine activity of analyzing sugarcane samples for research and breeding program a pre-crush validation analysis was carried out to verify the instruments performance.

Emphasis on sample validation and adopting new instruments and procedures to increase efficiency and throughput had been encouraged during the season.
The FT-NIR via Spectracane 400 analyses sugarcane samples for %POCS, %pol, %fibre, %purity and %brix In the case of sucrose deterioration, the biochemical result is obtained from the Spectracane but the main indicator for sucrose deterioration which are Dextran, Reducing Sugar (RS), Gums, and starch that are analysed using Lambda 365, UV Spectrophotometer.

One of the major indicators for sucrose deterioration is Dextran that is caused by Leuconostoc sp.
bacteria causing juice viscosity that affects mill efficiency and eventually reduces income for millers and growers.

The sugarcane samples that are analysed is from the respective areas of research including breeding program.

In 2018, the Lautoka sugar laboratory analysed 1464 samples from breeding trials and research projects including sucrose deterioration.

The Impact of the sucrose post-harvest deterioration by Leuconostoc sp.
bacteria on the Fijian sugar industry and profitability project was carried out on four varieties, Mana, LF91-1925, Naidiri & Qamea.

There were 504 samples crushed and biochemically analysed but for the impact of sucrose post-harvest deterioration only 168 samples were analysed.

The 168 samples were from one replication only.


The 168 samples were analysed for dextran, reducing sugars, gums and starch deterioration within 7 days’ period, dextran being the main indicator of sucrose deterioration either burnt or green (billet or whole stalk cane).

The data obtained from this post-harvest deterioration trial could not be interpreted to get any trends.

The small mill biochemical analysis data is used for selecting varieties through breeding stages.
Figure 1: Summary of Samples Anlyzed in 2018 7% 35% 58% Breeding Sucrose deterioration Agronomy 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT Table 1: Details of the analysed samples Trial Name Germplasm LF2012 - stage 4 LF2011 - stage 4 LF2013 - stage 3 Sucrose deterioration Agronomy Grand Total 1.3.2 FERTILIZER ADVISORY SERVICE 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Page 33 No.

of samples 640 80 48 60 540 96 Total 640 188 540 96 1464 Fertilizer advisory service for the institute is based on soil samples and foliar (leaf) samples.
Analysis of these samples produces fertilizer recommendation reports.

The details of both soil and foliar samples is explained in greater details in section 1.3.3 below.

1.3.3 ANALYTICAL LABORATORY SRIF provides essential analytical services to the sugar industry.

Growers benefit from the services by following farm-based fertilizer recommendations by the institute.

Apart from bio- chemical analysis of cane, the institute carries out soil and foliar analyses for the growers and the researchers.
Samples are received from all sectors and from SRIF research trials.

It is ensured that the documented procedures are followed.

Paramount importance is given to the quality assurance of the instruments, providing consistent and reliable information of the samples.

SOIL ANALYSIS Soil samples totalling one thousand and seventy-six were received for analysis comprising of nine hundred advisory soil samples and one hundred and seventy-six research soil samples.
Fertilizer recommendations are made available within two - six weeks after receiving the fertilizer samples.

The FSC’s extension staffs are responsible recommendation to the growers.

for delivering the Figure 2: Total number of soil samples received in 2018 l s e p m a s l i o s f o .
o N 265 200 434 Advisory Research 80 96 1 0 0 LAUTOKA RARAWAI PENANG LABASA Mill SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 34 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Sugar Industry Tribunal Request The Sugar Industry Tribunal (SIT) is responsible for issuing new cane contracts and occasionally seeks the Institute’s opinion on suitability of certain areas for planting cane.

In 2018, two requests were made by SIT, of which one was preliminarily analysed and a second opinion was sought for on this land.
Unfortunately, the applicant for this land could not be located thus no analysis was carried out.

The second site was located on reclaimed land in Labasa.

Fifty-one soil samples were taken from this site that has an area of 6.8ha by the Institute.

Recommendations on the suitability of this land for growing cane is summarised below.

pH The pH is a measure of acidity or alkalinity of soils.
It is an important property of a soil in that it has a significant effect on the availability of many nutrients, with high or low pH causing reduced availability.

The pH of all the composite samples indicates that the field is acidic in nature.

Table 2: pH range of composite soil samples pH range Less than 4.5 4.5 – 5.5 More than 5.5 Total No.

51 0 0 51 At pH levels below 5.6, increasing levels of exchangeable aluminium can occur, which is toxic to most plants and can severely restrict root development.
Since, the pH of the sample was less than 4.5, the Institute recommended that lime be applied at a rate of 2.7 tons/hectare.

This needs to be broadcasted and incorporated into the soil to increase the pH by 1 (one) unit.

The land must be left idle after the application of lime for at least 6 months.

This will allow for the lime to dissolve and react with the soil, given enough rainfall is received.

Samples must be taken at regular intervals (2 monthly) and the pH measured.
The moisture levels in the soil will influence the solubility of the lime.

Phosphorus Phosphorus is generally present in medium levels.

Table 3: Typical phosphorus rating Rating High Medium Low Very low Mod.

Truog-P (mg/kg) >60 20-60 10-20 <10 Table 4: Phosphorus range of composite soil samples (Lease No.

21498) Phosphorus range Less than 40 mg/kg 40 - 50 mg/kg More than 50 mg/kg Total No.
51 0 0 51 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Page 35 Extra phosphate additions and differing ways of applying the fertilizer (side-banding and split dressings) is to be followed if cane is planted.
Exchangeable Bases - Cations Based on ammonium acetate method, Calcium (Ca), Magnesium (Mg), Potassium (K) and Sodium (Na) levels are as follows; • Calcium – high • Magnesium – very high • Potassium – high • Sodium – low Electrical Conductivity The electrical conductivity (EC) rating (average of 165 mS/m) indicates that the top soil (0- 20cm) is generally non-saline and may not have serious effect on growth of sugarcane.
Table 5: Typical electrical conductivity rating & effect on cane EC (mS/m) 0 - 200 200 – 400 400 - 800 > 800 Rating Non-saline Slightly saline Moderately saline Highly saline Effect on cane None Slight Moderately serious Very serious Figure 3: Type of soil for reclaimed land in Labasa The site was visited by the Institute’s technical staff and the applicant was advised that major drainage work needs to be carried out on this land before cane can be planted.
A cover crop should be planted after incorporating lime and the cover crop should be ploughed into the soil to improve the organic matter content.

SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 36 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT LEAF ANALYSIS The analytical laboratory had received 315 plant samples for analysis.

The samples have been analysed and fertilizer recommendations sent for the next year’s ratoon crop.

Figure 4: Total number of foliar samples received per mill in 2018 80 88 l s e p m a s r a i l o f f o .
o N 29 64 54 0 0 0 LAUTOKA RARAWAI PENANG LABASA Mill Advisory Research Quality Assurance The laboratory continues to adhere to quality control (QC) checks in every analysis.

The laboratory conducts the QC checks by having standards as well as random control samples and referring to the accepted range of values for QC samples.

Any value out of the range is investigated and corrective measures are taken to ensure the criteria set for quality assurance is followed.
As a full-service laboratory, the institute is committed to meeting quality requirements with accuracy and efficient turnaround times.

1.3.2 NUTRIENT BUDGET FOR THE FIJIAN SUGARCANE CROP Introduction Sugar has been the major agricultural export from Fiji for over 125 years, as well as a source of employment and foreign exchange.

Sugarcane production peaked at about 4 million tons in the mid-1990 and has been about 2million tons in the recent years.
A number of reasons have been proposed for the decline in production, one of which is the fertiliser regime in use - the advice given to farmers and the practices of the farmers themselves.

There is comparative lack of data about fertiliser use and behaviour in Fiji.
In the event of determining the optimal fertiliser requirements for cane production under Fiji conditions there is much less focus paid to the issue of nutrient budgeting and the behaviour of nutrient elements within the various sectors of the industry as a whole.
Once the fertiliser leaves the factory, the situation becomes less clear, there is no certainty about how much fertiliser is added to a particular field and very limited information in how much nutrient is removed along with cane, enters and exits the mill either to local users or foreign markets.
This study will provide insight to the sugar industry as a whole on the cost 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Page 37 benefit of the practiced agronomic practices in response to crop yield and finally carryover to sugar and molasses yields.

Growers will be able to better understand the importance of nutrient management, while a quantification of carryover of nutrients into the final milling products is determined.
Objective The project is conducted to develop a nutrient budget which captures how much nutrients is received in the country through the sugar industry, and relate to how much is recycled within the industry and how much is lost that could not be recovered.

The effects of varying rates of nutrients applied on the cane yield will be determined, through trials established at the three mill districts (Labasa, Lautoka, and Rarawai).
Thus, through the trials established at each mill district a nutrient budget will be developed to verify the amount of fertiliser (nutrients) needed for optimum production, and indicating potential problems due to surplus accumulation or depletion risk of nutrients which may lead to reduce crop yield.

Methodology The project was carried out in all mill (Rarawai, Lautoka, Labasa) areas at nine locations.

Composite soil samples were taken out for analysis to determine the nutrient status of the soil.
In addition, a detailed study of the soil profile was carried out.

Soil samples were taken from different horizons up to 2 meters for analysis.

Soil horizons were identified based on physical and chemical characteristic of soil.

The trials were planted using RCB design comprising of four treatments and four replications.

The treatments were selected according to the current scenario to differentiate the nutrient deficit and surplus added by the farmers during the crop cultivation.
Treatments consisted of different fertilizer rates as per table below Table 1: Treatment allocation Treatment No.

T1 T2 T3 T4 Treatments – Fertilizer Nil Farmer practice (actual usage) 75% recommended rate Recommended rate Naidiri variety was used for planting.

The trials were planted in the replanting season of 2017.

Cultivation of plant cane was carried out using best agronomic practices.

Agronomic measurements were taken at 90, 150 and 210 days after planting (DAP).
Leaf samples were taken during grand growth phase from each treatment to determine phosphorous, nitrogen and potassium levels.

Cane samples were analysed prior harvesting for biochemical analysis.

Each plot was harvested and weighed separately.

Sugar and cane yield were determined and statistically analysed.

In addition to soil, rainwater samples were collected and analysed for pH, EC, phosphorus, calcium, magnesium, potassium, sodium, nitrogen and Sulphur as per rain days.
Mill products including mill mud, mill ash, sugar, molasses and wastewater were collected and sent overseas for analyses.

Results and Discussions a) Soil profile study Details of the farm used in the study are tabulated below.
SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 38 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Table 2: Location of trial sites Site Mill Area Farmer’s name 1 Rarawai Gyan Singh Farm No 6303 Area Sector Location Coordinates 0.2 ha Koronubu Rarawai FSC Rarawai estate 1696 0.2 ha Rarawai Rarawai Subar Mani estate 0.2 ha Rarawai Lautoka Rajendra Prasad 35 0.3 ha Drasa Lautoka Waqadra estate Lautoka Rajnesh Naicker 0.2 ha Waqadra estate 0.3 ha Lovu -17.589248, 177.730604 Koronubu flat near Ba river Field plot 2 Etatoko 18, -17.544892, 177.685602 17°31'13.3"S 177°41'26.5"E No.
18 road 17°34'31.5"S 177°31'15.4"E 17°46'32.5"S 177°26'38.4"E 17.36599, 177.29321 Waqadra estate Buabua Labasa Labasa Vinod Chand Sushil Chand 9126 3104 0.2 ha Solove 0.3 ha Waiqele Seaqaqa Waiqele Labasa Narayan Murthi 158 0.2 ha Wailevu Wailevu, Tiri 16.28’48.779” S 179.20’34.920” E Detailed soil profile studies were carried out at each site.

Pits of dimension 2m x 2m x 2m were dug to study each soil profile.

Soil samples from each profile were collected for analysis of nutrients.
The profiles were described both physically and chemically.

Physical description of each trial site is tabulated below; Table 3a: Soil profile description at Nadi, Ba and Lautoka districts Profile No.

Described by SRIF- 1 Waqadra Seru, Nazeea, Mere, Doreen SRIF- 2 Buabua Seru, Nazeea, Mere, Doreen Nazeea, Doreen, Mere, Seru SRIF-3 Koronubu Date Location Landscape Topography 09.08.17 Waqadra alluvial basin along Nadi river west bank.

Approximately 200m west of Nadi backroad bridge and cement works.
Level floodplain surface Smooth, flat, ploughed, harrowed Land use/ Vegetation Sugarcane harvested and standing Parent Material Drainage Rockiness/ Stones Alluvial deposit from Nadi River with some colluvia from nearby hills Very good on surface None 09.08.17 Base of Buabua foothills near Lautoka 2km inland from the highway.
Rajnesh Naicker’s farm 17.08.17 Gyan Singh cane farm, Koronubu about 4.7 km southeast of Rarawai sugar mill where the Ba river meets the Nadrou drainage system Broad low angle outwash fan with pit along toe slope.
Very smooth gentle slope of 0.5 degrees sloping south towards north Mission grass and sugarcane with Sporadic pine trees on adjoining slopes of 10 -20 degrees Colluvia from 10 to 20 degrees slopes Very flat Sugarcane just harvested Alluvia from the Ba and Nadrou rivers Good on surface but imperfect deep down A few large black basalt conglomerates on the foothills but none on the pit site 100m away Very good on surface, imperfect deep down None but low ridges of soap stone just 100m to the South with steep basalt cliffs further south 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT Table 3a: Cont’d Soil colour Brown to reddish brown Cultivability Mechanical cane harvester Trafficability Very good but top soil is quite compact Very suitable if dry Suitable for cane trucks if dry Suggested improvements to the land a) Subsoiling along north- south lines b) Cane trash to be ploughed in plus green manuring c) Liming up to 1 tonne/ha plus NPK 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Page 39 Mealy coloured dusky red clay with fine white specks No impediments except wet weather Very suitable only when dry Brown top soil on reddish brown subsoil Ideal in dry season Suitable only when dry For lorries only in dry weather d) Vetiver grass hedges Lorries ideal in dry weather g) Sub soiling to make soil 50m apart across slope lighter e) Liming at 1 tonnes/ha f) Ploughing into soil of cane trash h) Green manuring i) Ploughing in of cane trash and liming with 0.5 tonne/ha Topsoil/ Subsoil texture Other observations Soil series Name FAO Soil Legend Soil Taxonomy (USDA, 2003) Sampling for analysis Soil pit description Clay loam on silty clay Clay loam on clay Clay loam over clay Nadi Drasa Very versatile land for horticulture using irrigation Vatuma Orthic Ferralsols Eutric Nitosols Hasplic Kastanozem Tropeptic Eutrustox clayey, mixed, isohyperthermic All horizons Ultic Haplustalfs, fine ferruginous Isohyperthermic All horizons Fluventic Haplustolls fine, mixed Isohyperthermic All horizons 2m x 2m x 2m pedon excavated by digger.
Profile typifies the soil of the Nadi flood plain with its mixture of alluvia and colluvia from crests, backslopes and dissected terraces of the Nadi terrace systems.

2m x 2m x 2m pedon dug by mechanical digger.

Represents the mix of alluvium and colluvium in the bottom lands of the Koronubu cliffs in the upper Ba region Table 3b: Soil profile description at Ba and Lautoka districts Profile No.
Described by Date Location SRIF – 6 Drasa SRIF- 5 Rarawai Sugar Mill SRIF – 4 Etatoko, Ba Town Doreen, Nazeea, Mere, Seru Mere, Doreen, Nazeea, Seru Mere, Doreen, Nazeea 17.08.17 Etatoko locality near the Wailailai River system between Vadravadra and Ba town, 400m west of highway going to Tavua 17.08.17 40 chains south east of Rarawai Sugar mill- 300 yards west of Ba- Koronubu road Rjendra’s cane farm Landscape Topography Parent material Alluvial flood plain Very flat and smooth River alluvium Alluvial flood plain Level River alluvium deposited by the Ba river, also the Veisaru river Alluvial flood plain Very flat and smooth River alluvium deposited by Matawalu river SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 40 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Table 3b: Cont’d Drainage Land use/ Vegetation Rockiness/ Stones Soil colour Trafficability Mechanical cane harvester Cultivability Improvements suggested Good but mottles are distinct showing a water table which moves up and down according to season Sugarcane in paragrass land None Imperfect water table at 200 cm imperfect water table Sugarcane and young karela seedlings Sugarcane Only four rounded rocks about 15cm diameter None Greyish brown Yellowish brown Brownish to reddish brown For trucks best when land is dry Risky for trucks in wet weather For trucks best when land is dry Best when land is dry Very good if land is dry Very good if land is dry Good but top soil is rather large and cloddy when ploughed Subsoiling to be taken seriously Cane trash to be ploughed in Aglime 1 tonne/ha and NPK Good but soil can be cloddy Good but soil can be cloddy Subsoiling very necessary for maximum yields Liming seems needed at 800kg/ha Ploughing in of cane trash Subsoiling very necessary Liming seems needed at 1 tonne/ha Cane trash to be ploughed in Clay throughout Topsoil/ Subsoil textures Soil series name Matavelo FAO Soil Map Legend Soil Taxonomy (USDA, 2003) Dystric Gleysols Aeric Epiaquept, fine, kaolinitic isohyperthermic Soil pit description 2m x 2m x 2m pedon dug by a mechanical digger.
The soils represent the wide flood plain north of Ba township.

Deep wide drains are overdue.

Mostly silty clay Clay throughout Veisaru Dystric Gleysols Drasa 2m x 2m x 2m pedon dug by a mechanical digger.

Aeric Epiaquept, fine, kaolinitic 2m x 2m x 2m pedon was excavated by a mechanical digger.

This soil may represent the bulk of soils in the main valley south of Ba town.

The drainage seems questionable and needs a more detailed assessment.
Fertilizer efficiency is closely correlated with good soil drainage.

Other observations Sampling for analysis More drains required and deeper All horizons All horizons All horizons 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Page 41 Table 3c: Soil profile description at Labasa and Seaqaqa districts Profile No.
SRIF 7 – Solove SRIF 8 – Wailevu SRIF 9 - Waiqele Described by RRK, MLV Date Location 25.08.17 Vunimako, Solove sector, Seaqaqa RRK, MLV 28.08.17 RRK, MLV 08.09.17 Movo, Tabia, Wailevu Sector Kaba road, Waiqele central, Waiqele sector Topography Hilly flat Very flat and smooth Hilly flat Land use/ Vegetation Long fallow (7 years) – Paragrass land Long fallow (5 years) – paragrass land Fallow for 7 years before planning rice last year Parent Material River alluvium River alluvium Good None Good None River alluvium Needs more drains None Reddish brown in colour Greyish brown in colour Greyish brown in colour Good – easily cultivated and top soil is friable Good but top soil is large and cloggy Good – easily cultivated.
Top soil is friable Best when land is dry Best when land is dry Best when land is dry Drainage Rockiness/ Stones Soil colour Cultivability Mechanical cane harvester Trafficability Best when land is dry Best when land is dry Best when land is dry Improvements suggested Minimum tillage Trash blanketing Aglime and NPK (Recommended rates) Subsoiling Aglime and NPK (Recommended rates) More drains needed Subsoiling Trash blanketing NPK (Recommended rates) Topsoil/ Subsoil texture Other observations Ferruginous (Sandy clay) Loamy clay Topsoil is moist and friable.
Sandy clay soil type More deeper drains required More deeper drains required More drains needed Control the spread of paragrass from neighboring fields Soil series Korovuli Tiri Labasa FAO Soil Legend Dystric Nitisols Thionic Fluvisols Dystric Gleysols Soil Taxonomy (USDA, 2003) Typic clayey, Typic Paleustults ferruginous, isohyperthermic Sulfaquept clayey over loamy, mixed, isohyperthermic fine Humic Epiaquepts clayey over sandy, mixed, isohyperthermic Sampling for analysis All horizons All horizons All horizons SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 42 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Soil profile at Solove trial site A B1 B2 B3 B4 C Table 4a providing description of each soil horizon at Solove trial site Layers Layer 1 Depth 0 – 11cm Horizon A Description Dark brown soil (7.5YR 4/2), moist sandy clay, soils are medium, granular and moderately formed, friable, clear horizontal boundary.
Layer 2 B1 11 – 48cm Layer 3 B2 48 – 81cm Layer 4 B3 81 – 101cm Layer 5 B4 101 – 120cm Layer 6 C 120 – 130cm Red soil (2.5YR 5/6), moist sandy clay, medium, granular and moderately formed, friable, indistinct horizontal boundary.

Reddish brown in colour (5YR 5/4), moist sandy clay, medium, granular and moderately formed, friable, distinct yellowish mottle, distinct horizontal boundary.
Red in colour (2.5YR 5/8), moist sandy clay, medium, granular and moderately formed, firm, small distinct yellowish-brown mottle.

Distinct horizontal boundary Reddish brown in colour (5YR 5/4), moist, sticky sandy clay, medium, granular and moderately formed, firm, wavy horizontal boundary.

Very dark grey in colour (7.5YR N3), moist and silty, medium, aggregates and strongly formed, very firm, clear horizontal boundary.

2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT Soil profile at Wailevu trial site.
1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Page 43 B1 Bg C1 C2 C 3 Table 4b providing description of each soil horizon at Wailevu trial site Layers Description Horizon Depth Layer 1 Layer 2 B1 Bg 0 - 47cm 47 – 69cm Layer 3 C1 69 – 99cm Layer 4 C2 99 – 130cm Layer 5 Cg 130 – 160cm Dark brown (10YR 3/3), moist, loamy clay, medium, granular and moderately formed, friable, distinct horizontal boundary.
Dark greyish brown (10YR 4/2), moist, loamy clay, medium, granular and moderately formed, friable, grey mottles visible, wavy horizontal boundary.

Brown in colour (10YR 5/3), very moist, heavy clay, medium, granular, moderately formed, sticky clay into shapes), clear (can easily be moulded horizontal boundary.
Reddish brown in colour (5YR 5/3), very moist and heavy clay, medium, granular and strongly formed, very sticky clay (can easily be moulded into shapes), greyish mottles visible, distinct horizontal boundary.

Greyish colour soil (5YR 6/1), very moist and heavy clay, medium, granular and strongly formed, very sticky clay (can easily be moulded into shapes), clear wavy boundary.
SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 44 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Soil profile at Waiqele site B 1 B 2 B 3 C 1 C3 C2 Table 4c providing description of each soil horizon at Waiqele trial site Layers Description Horizon Depth Layer 1 B1 0 - 32cm Layer 2 B2 32 – 64cm Layer 3 B3 64 - 76cm Layer 4 C1 76 - 86cm Layer 5 Cg 86 - 108cm Layer 6 C2 108 – 142cm Dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2), moist, clay, medium, granular and moderately formed, friable, clear horizontal boundary Brown in colour (7.5YR 5/3), moist, clay, medium, granular and moderately formed, friable, clear horizontal boundary.
Brown in colour (7.5YR 5/3), moist, clay, medium, granular and moderately formed, friable, black mottles, clear horizontal boundary.

Grayish brown in color (10YR 5/2), very moist, sticky and heavy clay, medium, granular, moderately formed, friable, grey mottles visible, clear horizontal boundary.

Brown in colour (10YR 5/3), very moist, sticky and heavy clay (can easily be moulded into shapes), small grey mottles visible, distinct horizontal boundary.
Brown in colour (10YR 5/3), very wet, sticky clay into shapes), clear (can easily be moulded horizontal boundary.
2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Page 45 b) Growth Attributes Table 5a Growth attributes at Waiqele site t n e m t a e r T 1 2 3 4 Tillers per stool Months 5 5 5 5 5 3 3 4 5 5 7 5 5 5 6 Population (103) Months 5 57 106 120 127 3 55 98 100 102 Stalk 7 51 83 90 112 Height (cm) Months 5 68 101 109 128 3 63 90 90 90 Table 5b Growth measurement at Koronubu site t n e m t a e r T 1 2 3 4 Tillers per stool Months Population (103) Months 5 2 3 2 2 7 3 3 3 3 5 24 34 27 32 Table 5c: Growth measurement at Rarawai site t t n e m a e r T 1 2 3 4 Tillers per stool Months 5 5 6 6 5 7 4 6 5 4 Table 5d Growth measurement at Etatoko site t t n e m a e r T 1 2 3 4 Tillers per stool Months 5 4 4 3 4 7 5 3 3 5 Population (103) Months 5 35 53 41 39 Population (103) Months 5 26 24 22 27 Stalk 7 35 38 32 35 Stalk 7 31 53 36 31 Stalk 7 54 62 66 57 Height (cm) Months 5 148 150 140 137 Height (cm) Months 5 145 165 153 147 Height (cm) Months 5 168 167 161 175 7 88 141 127 165 7 160 157 148 144 7 163 182 174 164 7 145 156 165 159 Table 5e: Growth measurement at Drasa site t n e m t a e r T 1 2 3 4 Tillers per stool Months 5 4 4 4 5 7 4 4 5 4 Population (103) Months 5 43 51 59 48 Stalk 7 51 45 37 40 Height (cm) Months 5 143 152 165 152 7 225 207 210 231 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Population (103) Months 5 51 55 44 45 Population (103) Months 5 52 68 53 59 Population (103) Months 3 55 98 100 102 5 57 106 120 127 Population (103) Months 3 45 60 58 72 5 56 77 83 96 Stalk 7 43 63 56 54 Stalk 7 55 69 55 62 Stalk 7 51 83 90 112 Stalk 7 62 91 94 104 Height (cm) Months 5 178 170 184 183 Height (cm) Months 5 120 134 123 131 Height (cm) Months 5 68 101 109 128 3 63 90 90 90 Height (cm) Months Page 46 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Table 5f: Growth measurement at Buabua site Tillers per stool Table 5g: Growth measurement at Waqadra site Months 7 3 3 3 3 t n e m t a e r T 1 2 3 4
6 5 5 Months 7 3 3 3 3 t n e m t a e r T 1 2 3 4 Tillers per stool Months 5 5 5 5 4 Table 5h: Growth measurement Tillers per stool t Months 5 5 5 5 5 3 3 4 5 5 Table 5i: Growth measurements Tillers per stool t Months 5 69 98 98 102 3 62 89 93 97 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 7 6 5 6 5 7 5 5 5 6 7 71 91 89 92 C) Yield and bio-chemical data 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Page 47 Table 6a: Yield and biochemical data at Waqadra site Yield Tph 49 59 56 61 Treatment 1 2 3 4 Fiber % 10.2 10.1 10.5 10.9 Table 6b: Yield and biochemical data at Buabua Treatment 1 2 3 4 Yield Tph 36 56 53 51 Table 6c: Yield and biochemical data at Rarawai Treatment 1 2 3 4 Yield Tph 34 39 34 30 Fiber % 10.4 10.7 10.3 10.2 Fiber % 11.1 11.4 9.6 10.3 Table 6d: Yield and biochemical data at Koronubu Treatment 1 2 3 4 Yield Tph 19 12 11 15 Fiber % 11.8 11.6 12.1 10.2 Table 6e: Yield and biochemical data at Waiqele Site Yield Tph 51 88 98 126 Treatment 1 2 3 4 Fiber % 11.1 12.3 12.8 11.7 Table 6f: Yield and biochemical analysis data at Solove site Treatment 1 2 3 4 Yield Tph 36 84 111 133 Fiber % 12.9 12.3 12.0 10.5 % Pocs 15.6 14.8 15.0 16.0 % Pocs 14.8 15.0 15.0 14.7 % Pocs 14.4 14.7 15.2 14.7 % Pocs 13.9 14.8 14.2 14.1 % Pocs 14.2 14.8 14.5 14.8 % Pocs 14.0 13.3 13.4 13.0 Tsh 7.8 8.7 8.5 9.8 Tsh 5.3 8.4 8.0 7.5 Tsh 5.0 5.8 5.2 4.4 Tsh 2.7 1.7 1.6 2.1 Tsh 7.2 13.0 14.2 18.6 Tsh 5.0 11.1 14.9 17.3 The results show that fertilizer added by using recommended rate from the lab gave better growth and sugar yield.
Farmer practices and 25% less than recommended rate was close in giving sugar yield but less than the recommended rate from the soil analysis.

The practice of adding less fertilizer will contribute to detrimental effects to the soil and eventually to the sugarcane production.

The nutrients need to be evaluated for successive ratoon after which a nutrient budget will be formulated.
SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 48 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT 1.4 CROP PROTECTION 1.4.1 PATHOLOGY Fiji leaf gall disease Fiji leaf gall (FLG) was first described in Fiji and is widespread in the Fijian islands.

FLG threatened the existence of the Fijian Sugar industry in the late 1800s and there have been periodic outbreaks whenever a susceptible variety has been released.

The primary method of managing FLG is varietal resistance.
Resistant varieties have been successfully used in Australia and Fiji to manage outbreaks of FLG.

Mana the dominant variety in the Fijian sugar industry is intermediate to susceptible to FLG.

FLG is spread by a vector (disease carrying agent), called plant hopper (Perkinsiella vitiensis).

The aim of this routine project is to conduct screening of Saccaharum officinarum clones from stage 3 (LF 2015) series for Fiji leaf gall resistances.
A total of 30 cages of hoppers were collected and bred on Fiji10 (standard) varieties in the nursery.

Fiji10 variety is susceptible to FLG thus used as a standard to test new clones.

A total of 83 clones planted in the insectary were tested for FLG.

The test lasted for 100 days for the susceptible clones to show symptoms of FLG.

The 100 days screening showed no symptoms of FLG including standards thus the clones will be reassessed next year.
1.4.2 NEMATOLOGY A long history of association has existed between nematodes and sugarcane.

Plant parasitic nematodes have been identified in all the mill regions of sugarcane belt, which might be a contributing factor towards decline in sugarcane production in Fiji.

The survey of 2017 has showed nematode infestation in Penang mill 12%, Labasa mill 7%, Rarawai mill 35% and Lautoka 46% respectively.
Nematode infestation in crops can result in root damages, reduced water and nutrient uptake, stunted growth, reduced number of millable stalks and decreased stalk length.

Seven sugarcane varieties were screened against plant parasitic nematodes on treated and untreated soil.

Significant variations (p≤0.05) were observed in the response of sugarcane cultivars to nematode infestation (figure 1&2) at different days after planting.
The collected data at 40days after planting had shown that amongst the sugarcane varieties LF19-1925, Viwa and Mana were able to tolerate nematode infestation towards plant growth (figure 1) at 40 days in untreated soil.

Further studies on growth at 80 days after planting had shown that treated soil have the impact on growth of sugarcane.

This indicates that after 80days of planting sugarcane in untreated soil has negative impact on growth and reduces the plant height.
Among the sugarcane cultivars evaluated, LF19-1925 at 80 days after planting was classified as resistant since it supported the growth in untreated soil which recorded the same height in comparison with the treated soil (figure 2).
2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Page 49 Mean of forty days for Variety * Treatment ab abc abcd bcd abcd abcd abcd bcd cd d a cd ab ab Treatment ) m c ( s y a d 0 4 t a d e r u s a e m h t w o r G Varieties Figure 1: Effect of treated and untreated soil on growth of sugarcane at fortieth day after planting.

Bars headed by the same letters are not significantly (p≥0.03) different by least significant difference test.
Mean of eighty days for Variety * Treatment a abc abc abc ab abc abc abc ab bc bc c a abc Treatment ) m c ( s y a d 0 8 t a d e r u s a e m h t w o r G Varieties Figure 2: Effect of treated and untreated soil on growth of sugarcane at eighty days after planting.

Bars headed by the same letters are not significantly (p≥0.03) different by least significant test Nematode resistance and susceptibility are collectively terms used when a host plant allows nematode development and reproduction.
In this regard, root damage due to nematodes and their population densities, were used to establish the status of host resistance of selected sugarcane varieties to nematodes.

In this study, differences in plant growth were an indication of the varying levels of host resistance among the sugarcane varieties at different days.

While environment in itself may have contributed to the variations in root biomass, nematode population densities and reduced growth were significant (p=0.05).
Treated soil with zero plant parasitic nematodes resulted in an increase in plant growth.

The preliminary study has demonstrated that sugarcane cultivars LF19-1925 has variable host resistance status to nematodes at 80 after planting.
In view of the progress made in understanding nematode cultivar resistance, this study has helped to classify sugarcane cultivars in Fiji according to SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 50 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT their host response to plant parasitic nematodes in treated and untreated soil.

It is recommended that screening for plant nematodes are made mandatory for new cultivars.
1.4.3 ENTOMOLOGY – TERMITES, CWB & N-FIXING BACTERIA Termites The termite, Asian Subterranean Termites (AST) pest is a major concern to the Fiji Sugar industry which is a next key pest after sugarcane weevil borer (R.obscurus).

The cane infested with termite shows symptoms of yellowing and drying of leaves (spindle).

Millable canes are tunnelled and are filled with soil within the coning epidermis; termites feed on the inner tissues, the rind remains intact and is filled with moist soil.
The damage infestation by Coptotermes gestroi on sugarcane is approximately 60cm from the base of the millable stalk.

The objective of the project was to monitor infested farms and apply insecticide (Termidore powder).

A total of 17 farms were monitored all throughout the year on a fortnight basis with the Biosecurity Authority of Fiji.

The bait was changed fortnightly and Termidore powder applied accordingly.

Bait boxes were removed at the time of harvesting.


Integrated pest management of the Cane Weevil Borer Cane weevil borer, Rhabdoscelus obscurus is an introduced pest of sugarcane in Fiji.

It is estimated that overall loss caused by CWB is equivalent to $2 million Fiji dollars.

CWB is prevalent in all the sectors of the cane belt and is a major concern to the industry.

Infestation by CWB contributes to lowering purity of cane (%POCS).
The internal chewing and tunnelling of the borer larvae within the stalk internodes directly decrease the amount of juice that can be extracted and the percentage of sucrose that is present in the juice.

This leads to a corresponding decrease of juice purity and an increase in total organic non-sugars such as dextran.

Damaged stalks are lighter and do not keep as well as undamaged cane after they are cut for milling.
The objective of this project was: • To setup and monitor CWB traps in infested farms • To formulate entomopathogenic fungus to control the weevil borer population Ten farms in Lovu sector were randomly selected and placed with split bait traps for monitoring CWB population density on fortnightly basis.

Total of 403 adult males and 602 adult females were collected from the traps.
Table 1: Split bait traps placed in growers’ field in Lovu sector Farmer Name Rama Krishna Patro Abay Nand Hari Shankar Mun Sami Ramesh Kumar Ramesh Kumar Nakul Deo Vickamala Parbha Wati Total Farm No.

19052 19012 22111 177 178 164 166 160 19038 18179 Total Male trapped 42 45 36 32 23 36 88 44 30 27 403 Total Female Trapped 62 72 52 46 35 54 122 67 52 40 602 Nitrogen Fixing Bacteria Nitrogen in legumes originates from nitrogen in the air, as well as nitrate and ammonium in soil solution.
Much of the nitrogen required for plant growth is from fixed nitrogen.

The fixed nitrogen of soybean often comprises over 50% of the total nitrogen of the plant (Vincent, 1974).

Most fixed nitrogen is thought to come from nitrogen-fixing symbionts, such as 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Page 51 Rhizobium, Bradyrhizobium, Mesorhizobium, or Sinorhizobium, in the nodules of leguminous plants.
However, much nitrogen continues to be taken up by plants even after the flowering stage, at which stage the nitrogen fixation of nodules begins to decrease rapidly.

Nitrogen absorbed by legumes in the later stages are thought to be inorganic nitrogen compounds formed from decomposition of organic matter in the soil.
Presence of Nitrogen-fixing bacteria in sugarcane, diazotrophic bacteria belonging to the Beijerinckia genera have been found in large numbers in the rhizosphere (the soil volume adjacent to, or within a few millimetres from the root surface) and in the rhizoplane (the soil: root interface) of sugarcane (Döbereiner,1961.)
According to (Minamitani,1985) the amount of increase of nitrogen content in soil where plants grow and that the nitrogen-fixing potential of rhizosphere soil of soybean plants increases markedly after flowering.

The continuous increase in nitrogen of leguminous plants may suggest the presence of some species of diazotrophs, not nodule-forming but closely associated with the roots, that provide much fixed nitrogen to the plants.

Figure 1: Nitrogen fixing bacteria.


Source: Google Images Bio fertilizer is important in crop farming systems because it is an inexpensive source of nitrogen for higher yields of crops.

This process diminishes the need for expensive chemical fertilizer.

Thus, the extensive use of bio fertilizers would provide economic benefits to farmers, improve the socioeconomic condition of people and preserve natural resources.
To promote sugarcane growth and high yield of sugar, the transport of N from diazotrophic endophytes to the host plant is important in addition to the occurrence of high nitrogen fixation activity.

Living bacteria actively excrete fixed N into the apoplast of the host tissue and the plant cells then absorb the released N compounds.

The extraction of N- fixing soil microbes were successfully isolated.

A number of plates were sent to CABI for ID and was identified as Azotobacter and Rhizobium tropici.
Along with these N-fixing bacteria an aquatic bacteria of family Rhodobacteraecae, found in the marine was present, this could be the result of flooding, and however, further studies may be done in the future to calculate the impact of such bacteria on sugarcane health.

The identified N-fixing bacteria was mass produced and added to sterile compost, which acted as a carrier.

This was mixed with top soil and filled in pots.


Four commercial varieties (Naidiri, Mana, Kiuva, Viwa) and a promising variety (LF11-233) was planted.

Pot trials were conducted for which the results will be presented in 2019.

1.4.5 DISEASE CONTROL The major disease currently in Fijis sugar cane field is Fiji leaf gall (FLG) presently found only on the island of Viti Levu.
The principal method of controlling this disease is growing resistant SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 52 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT varieties combined with intensive rouging.

Since the 1920s, rouging to remove and destroy infected cane plants has been one of the main methods of controlling Fiji disease.

Each mill area has a Disease Control Unit whose daily task is to inspect cane stools row by row and rogue out diseased plants.

However, rouging has two limitations.


Firstly, stools that are infected but show no symptoms cannot be detected.

Secondly, rouging will succeed only where disease incidence is low and cannot really cope in areas where susceptible varieties are planted near to host plants (Duruka).

Although there is one dominant variety Mana in Viti Levu, the existing rouging system is able to keep diseases under acceptable control.
The objective of the project is to reduce the initial inoculum of Fiji disease and to decrease the rate of disease development through routine inspection in commercial farms (Rouging).

The roguing team covered an area of 5770ha during their crop inspection.

Of this total 1330ha plant crops and 4440ha were ratoon cane.
Table 3: Rouging Report from January-December 2018 Lautoka Nadi Sigatoka Ba/Tavua Penang Labasa s h t n o M Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total t n a l P a H The trend at which Fiji Leaf Gall Disease is increasing in the sugarcane farms is an indication that the disease can flare up at any time given the availability of the pathogen (Perkensiella vitiensis), weather conditions and planting of only one major variety – Mana.
Also, the planting of Saccharum edule –Duruka, an alternate host of Fiji Leaf Gall Disease planted along and near cane fields contributes to the increasing number of the disease found in some Districts.

Table 4: Summarized Rouging Report from January-December 2018 Mill District Lautoka Nadi Labasa Sigatoka Rarawai/Tavua Penang Total No.

of Farms Inspected 380 257 359 345 97 168 1606 Area Rouged (Ha) Ratoon 1488.8 875.3 714.7 768.1 393.5 199.5 4439.9 Plant 57.1 393.8 686.5 140.8 13.9 38.1 1330.2 No.
of FLGD stools Rouged 514 138 0 872 0 0 1524 This can be credited to disease free area or good field management practices used by farmers such as having a good, healthy and clean planting material.

Sigatoka has the most infected stools.

Out of the total 1606 farms inspected, 1524 stools were rouged.

2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 1.0 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Page 53 1.4.6 BIOSECURITY Sugar cane smut disease Sugarcane smut is a fungal disease caused by Sporisorium scitamineum (Ustilago scitamineum).
Smut, the most easily recognized disease of sugarcane has a black whip that is of pencil thickness.

It is sliver- greyish black in colour and powdery.

The nearest source of this disease is Australia and is a threat disease for Fiji.

On maturity it ruptures and a large number of the minute black smut spores (teliospores) are liberated and disseminated by the wind.

It causes a great deal of damage, leading to loss of yield in susceptible varieties.
The teliospores may survive in the soil for long periods, up to 10 years.

The spores and sporidia are also present in the infected plant debris in the soil.

The smut spores and dormant mycelium also present in or on the infected setts.

The primary spread of the disease is through diseased seed-pieces (setts).

Spores present in the soil also spread through rain and irrigation water and cause soil-borne infection.
The secondary spread in the field is mainly through the smut spores developed in the whips, aided by air currents.

Favorable Conditions -continuous ratooning and dry weather during tillering stage favors the disease.

Spore Trap Detection and contingency planning of possible sugarcane smut incursion is an ongoing routine project whereby visual and molecular studies will be done.
The Burkard Spore Trap (Burkard) is a volumetric air sampler that is one of the standard devices for monitoring airborne pollen and spores.

Spore identification is done by the two techniques: light microscopy and molecular tests.

A molecular test intensifies capacities of spore trapping and is a certain method for smut spore confirmation.

The polymerase chain reaction test will be used.

PCR can detect small amounts of sugarcane smut DNA extracted from spores fixed on the spore trap tape.
Three Spore traps were procured on the 16th of June, 2017.

Two of which were placed at the beginning of 2018; one at SRIF’’s premises and the other at Fiji Ports Authority.

The third one to be placed in the arrivals area at the Airports in Fiji.

The spore trap tape was changed every 7 days.

The tapes were brought back to the lab and diagnosed under microscope.

There were no positives from the tapes analysed.

This however, was not only difficult but unreliable data.
Molecular training was provided for a week with Biosecurity after which it was decided to seize the placements of trap until SRIF’s molecular lab was reconstructed for a directional workflow which most significantly would keep contamination minimal.

A Memorandum of Understanding was signed between SRIF and Biosecurity on 5th April, 2018.

A draft SMUT incursion plan for the Fiji Sugar Industry has been put in place to encounter the disease.
Figure 2: Type of spore trap that has been deployed by SRIF SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 54 2.0 CROP PRODUCTION 2.0 CROP PRODUCTION 55 SEED CANE PRODUCTION TISSUE CULTURE 57 59 FACP 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2.0 CROP PRODUCTION Page 55 2.1 SEED CANE PRODUCTION Good quality seed material is an important factor for yield improvement in plant and multi- ratoon cropping of sugarcane.

The potential cane yield that should be obtained will not be achieved if seed cane of poor quality is planted.
Seed cane quality is determined by freedom from diseases and pests and varietal purity.

The Fijian sugar industry has been fortunate that pests and diseases are kept under control by an active pest and disease control programme.

However, Ratoon Stunting disease (RSD) (Leifonia xyli subsp.

Xyli) is prevalent in Fiji (Johnson et al.2006) and can cause loss up to 27% in cane yield annually (Johnson and Tyagi, 2010).
In Fiji, risk of this disease spreading rapidly is very high due to the introduction of mechanical harvesters, planters and fertilizer applicators.

Absence of any standard hygiene operating procedures for these machines make it difficult to prevent this disease from spreading.

Therefore, adoption of hot water treated Seedcane is the only way to combat spreading of this major disease.
2.1.1 LABASA It is in the best interest of the farmers that they plant clean and quality seed materials in order to avoid cane and sugar yield loss through diseases and unapproved varieties.

SRIF has established a hot water treatment plant in Labasa with aid from European Union.

This treatment plant was used in 2018 to treat and plant 12 hectares of mother plot (estate and farmers field).
Figure 1: New hot water treatment plant Figure 2: Hot water plant in operation SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 56 2.0 CROP PRODUCTION The total hot water treated seed bed established in Vanua Levu in the Oct - Nov, 2018 planting window is shown in the table below: Table 1: Hot water treated seed bed Farm/Location Yenoos - Batanikama Variety Naidiri Hectare Planted 0.9 Estimate Tonnes 60 FSC NLDC - Estate Shusil - Waiqele SRIF Estate farm Batanikama farm Sanju Reddy Bucaisau Qamea Viwa Naidiri Ragnar Kiuva Kaba Naidiri Qamea 1.1 1.5 4.0 2.0 1.2 0.3 0.2 0.9 50 70-80 250 130 70 15-20 10-15 45-50 The planted seed bed will be used by the farmers in the coming planting window of 2019.
It is made convenient for the farmers to take the seed cane from the mother plot established in their sector and the team leaders are advised to monitor the planting and ensure that farmers utilize the seed cane from the seed bed in their sector.

Establishing the seed bed in the sectors reduces seed cane transportation cost for the farmers.

The picture below shows one of the seed beds established in the sector.
Figure 3: Viwa hot water treated seed bed at Waiqele 2.1.2 LAUTOKA Seedcane Nurseries One of the challenges we face in promoting adoption of quality seed cane is that majority of our seedcane nurseries are established in miller owned farm.

Due to transportation cost only close vicinity farmers are able to take seed cane from these nurseries, while majority find it cheaper to use seedcane from their own farms or neighbour’s farm.
Seedcane weighing is another major factor in remote sectors which contributes to low seedcane uptake from certified plots due to conflict related to quantity of seed cane between buyers and the sellers of seedcane.

Around 13.52 ha of Hot water treated seedcane was planted in Lautoka mill farm as well as surrounding farms in Lovu Sector through the European Union’s Annual Action Plan 2012 project funding.
Seedcane from this mother plot was used to establish the 10-grower demonstration plots in different locations.

Additionally, 150 tonnes of Seedcane from these mother plots were taken by nearby growers in Drasa and Lovu Sector.

2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2.0 CROP PRODUCTION Page 57 Figure 4: LEFT: Well-maintained Seed cane in Hot Water Treated (HWT) Mother plot in Drasa.
RIGHT: Harvested HWT seed material for planting Single Eye bud Nursery About 100,000 single eye bud seedlings were established in the greenhouse in Drasa.

The main purpose of this project was to have seedling for gap filling in Hot Water treated Mother plots.

FSC made a request for the production of single eye bud seedlings for gap filling in commercial farms where yield was very low.
As a result, an additional 100,000 polythene bags were supplied to FSC to have a single eye bud nursery at each of the sector office.

This was part of the demonstration for growers on how to raise single eye bud seedling on their own farms and to show farmers the importance of gap filling.

Gap filling (tum-tum) is a practice which has diminished over the years.

About 18,000, seedlings were planted at different sectors.
Figure 5: LEFT: Single eye bud seedling planted at Natova Sector office for gap filling.

RIGHT: Single eye bud seedling inside SRIF’s greenhouse.

2.2 TISSUE CULTURE The re-established tissue culture laboratory became operational in January 2018.

Dissection was carried out in six varieties that was suitable for tissue culture: Qamea, Viwa, LF 91-1925, Aiwa, Kaba and Naidiri.

Maximum growing percentage was noted in June and continuation with callus production was immobile due to high contamination rate.
The following table shows the monthly data of the cultures carried out with Multiplication stage and Initiation stage.
SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 58 2.0 CROP PRODUCTION Table 2: Monthly progress of tissue culture production by stages Month January February March April May June July August September October November December Total # of Cultures 241 200 83 183 152 260 244 232 172 133 103 116 Multiplication stage (M0-M4) - - - 10 8 40 35 31 30 33 40 58 Initiation stage (Io-I1) 241 200 83 173 105 133 160 180 132 100 63 58 Figure 6: Graph showing the growth trend throughout the year 500 400 300 200 100 0 s r e b m u n g n i l d e e S Total Number of Cultures Multiplication Initiation Training Due to the high number of contaminations observed in quick proliferation for callus and shoot tip culture, a training was conducted to ascertain two important factors.
First was to identify the cause of the contamination and second was hands-on training covering all aspects of tissue culture and combating contamination.

In addition, procedures for tissue culture were documented.
Figure 1: Tissue cultured plants (LEFT: shooting stage & RIGHT: Rooting stage) 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2.3 FIELD ACTIVITIES CROP PRODUCTION FIGURES 2.0 CROP PRODUCTION Page 59 Labasa Penang All mills 2017 2018 2017 2018 2017 2018 4,087 4,117 1,737 1,747 16,560 16,646 945,713 948,321 958,811 964,105 916,035 929,944 273,085 274,458 3,093,644 3,116,828 2018 5,357 2018 5,408 5,425 5,328 Lautoka 2017 Rarawai 2017 Appendix 1: Main features of 2018 season compared with 2017 Mill → Year → Total registrations (Numbers) Total farm basic allotments (tonnes) Total registered area (hectares) Total area cultivated (hectares) Total area harvested (hectares) Total farm harvest quotas (tonnes) Sugar makes actual (tonnes) 10,990 10,990 12,218 22,927 22,967 22,093 9,132 10,277 10,113 22,182 19,268 20,049 10,956 13,666 15,338 10,225 14,246 14,473 Open 8,017 8,069 72,305 73,267 3,428 3,497 40,302 40,781 3,404 3,275 38,040 37,105 N/A N/A N/A 174,102 57,856 N/A 176,199 60,256 54,174 57,856 55,596 38,017 70,620 64,332 Tonnes 94 N.T sugar 52,021 60,256 57,167 42,947 73,249 67,011 Yield tonnes 94 N.T.
sugar per hectare Tonnes cane per tonnes sugar 94 N.T.
%POCS Cane purity average for season 5.1 6.6 5.6 4.2 4.8 4.6 N/A N/A 5.1 8.4 11.8 83.2 10.5 10.6 80.6 8.7 11.4 82.2 11.2 10.1 77.3 9.2 11.2 82.3 9.3 11.1 82.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 8.8 11.4 82.5 5.1 9.9 10.9 81.3 Tonnes cane harvested 429,570 457,480 407,861 479,625 675,731 620,328 118,231 139,937 1,631,393 1,697,370 Tonnes cane crushed 429,570 457,480 499,806 466,233 675,371 620,328 NIL NIL 1,604,747 1,544,041 Appendix 2: Monthly rainfall(mm) for 2018 compared with long term average Mills No.
of years Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total Lautoka 2018 actual 109 yrs.

avg.

to 2018 Rarawai 2018 actual 132 yrs.

avg.

to 2018 Labasa 2018 actual 129 yrs.

avg.

to 2018 Penang 2018 actual 120 yrs.

avg.
to SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 60 2.0 CROP PRODUCTION Appendix 3: Crop production details Lautoka Rarawai Labasa Penang 2017 2018 2017 2018 2017 2018 2017 2018 All mills 2017 2018 1,309 475 809 7,685 10,277 62,516 22,794 35,295 287,256 407,861 58.8 59.8 54.1 48.1 50.1 756 653 478 7,245 9,132 44,428 39,011 25,896 348,146 457,480 Areas harvested (hectares) Plant 637 First ratoon 539 2nd ratoon 817 Other ratoons 8,120 Total 10,113 Cane harvested (tonnes) 34,740 Plant 28,068 First ratoon 37,577 2nd ratoon 329,185 Other ratoons Total 429,570 Yield tonnes cane per hectare (tch) 54.6 Plant 52.1 First ratoon 46.0 2nd ratoon 40.5 Other ratoons Avg.
yield/ha 42.5 Varieties crushed (% of total cane harvested) Ragnar Aiwa Beqa Galoa Kaba Mali Mana Naidiri Vatu Waya LF91-1925 Kiuva Qamea Viwa Expt./Others Total 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.2 2.5 0.0 91.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.5 0.2 nil 0.4 100 1.5 0.0 1.2 0.7 2.7 0.0 90.6 2.1 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.4 0.1 nil nil 100 0.4 0.6 nil nil 6.3 nil 89.5 1.0 nil 0.1 1.2 nil nil nil nil nil 6.0 0.3 90.3 1.2 nil 0.3 1.0 nil nil nil 0.3 100 48.3 51.0 44.3 47.3 47.4 21.0 0.2 nil 5.9 0.5 9.7 nil 40.7 12.4 6.4 2.2 0.5 nil nil 0.5 100 47.9 49.8 44.1 40.4 42.9 20.2 0.1 nil 5.5 0.5 8.9 0.0 45.4 10.3 5.4 2.7 0.3 nil 0.3 0.5 100 37.2 33.0 30.8 35.5 34.1 1.2 0.1 nil 0.1 0.4 0.1 94.6 2.8 nil 0.4 0.3 nil nil nil nil 100 35.7 58.9 58.3 40.7 42.7 0.7 nil nil nil 0.2 0.1 96.5 2.2 nil 0.1 nil nil nil nil 0.1 100 48.5 47.1 42.0 41.8 42.7 5.8 0.4 nil 1.8 2.5 2.5 68.8 11.7 3.1 1.7 1.3 0.3 nil 0.1 0.3 100 49.0 55.2 50.8 43.3 45.7 5.7 0.1 0.3 1.6 2.4 2.3 69.4 12.7 2.6 1.5 1.0 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.2 100 Appendix 4: Rainfall (mm) at mill centres Mill Lautoka Rarawai Labasa Penang For 12 months ended 31st December For 12 months ended 30th September SRIF ANNUAL REPORT Appendix 5: Rainfall distribution affecting 2018 crop(mm) Month Jul-17 Aug-17 Sep-17 Oct-17 Nov-17 Dec-17 Jan-18 Feb-18 Mar-18 Apr-18 May-18
 Jun-18 Period Early Mid Late Early Mid Late Early Mid Late Early Mid Late Early Mid Late Early Mid Late Early Mid Late Early Mid Late Early Mid Late Early Mid Late Early Mid Late Early Mid Late 2.0 CROP PRODUCTION Page 61 Rarawai Labasa Penang Lautoka Early - 1st to 10th of the month Mid - 11th to 20th of the month Late - 21st to end of the month SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 62 2.0 CROP PRODUCTION Appendix 6: Hectares harvested Mills Lautoka Rarawai Labasa Penang All mills Crop P R Total P R Total P R Total P R Total P R Total 1991/ 1995 1996/2000 2944 19701 22645 3164 14613 17777 2597 18348 20945 1120 4674 5794 9825 57336 67161 Average for period of five seasons 2001/2005 1042 19730 20772 1055 17585 18640 1269 15911 17180 542 4568 5110 3908 57794 61702 2006/2010 2011/ Last four seasons individually 2907
10122 403 9610 10013 1027 12423 13450 302 2907 3209 2247 35292 36794 2018 756 8376 9132 1799 8426 10225 1673 12800 14473 452 2823 3275 4680 32425 37105 Appendix 7: Tonnes of cane harvested Mills 1991/ 1995 Average for period of five seasons 2006/ 2010 763,321 738,316 695,728 213,253 2,410,619 2001/ 2005 971,454 878,509 840,388 239,044 2,929,395 1996/ 2000 1,216,597 957,507 1,017,061 309,205 3,500,370 Last four seasons individually 2011/ Lautoka Rarawai Labasa Penang All mills 1,283,569 1,017,374 1,166,055 29,1206 3,758,204 Appendix 8: Tonnes of cane per hectare harvested Mills Average for period of five seasons Lautoka Rarawai Labasa Penang All Mills Crop P R Total P R Total P R Total P R Total P R Total 1991/ 1995 64.7 51.2 52.4 61.2 48.1 50.1 59.3 50.4 51.3 57.2 43.1 46.0 61.2 48.1 50.2 1996/ 2000 64.2 51.4 53.7 62.1 52.9 53.9 56.5 47.4 48.6 62.6 51.2 53.3 61.8 50.0 52.1 2001/ 2005 63.9 45.9 46.8 59.6 46.4 47.1 59.7 47.6 48.9 54.2 46.4 46.8 58.3 46.0 47.5 2006/ 2010 67.2 47.6 49.1 58.8 44.8 46.5 56.7 43.5 45.8 56.3 48.3 49.1 59.5 45.8 47.3 2011/ 2015 57.7 44.3 45.2 56.7 43.8 44.8 53.4 41.4 42.7 50.6 48.4 48.6 55.3 43.5 44.5 Last four seasons individually SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2.0 CROP PRODUCTION Page 63 Appendix 9: Hectares harvested in relation to registered area and cultivated area (ha) Mills Lautoka Rarawai Labasa Penang Total Registered (1) 22967 22182 20049 8069 73267 2018 hectares (A) Cultivated (2) 10990 10956 15338 3497 40781 Hectares harvested as % of
 various categories "A" Harvested 9132 10225 14473 3275 37105 (1) 39.8 46.1 72.2 40.6 50.6 (2) 83.1 93.3 94.4 93.7 91.0 Appendix 10: Plant cane harvested as percentage of total cane harvested Mills Lautoka Rarawai Labasa Penang All mills 1991/ 1995 15.0 14.0 14.0 23.0 16.0 Average for period of five seasons 2006/ 2010 5.5 8.2 8.2 8.2 7.4 2001/ 2005 5.0 6.0 7.0 11.0 7.0 1996/ 2000 13.0 18.0 12.0 19.0 15.0 2011/ 2015 8.5 9.7 13.4 10.7 10.5 Last four seasons individually 2015 2016 2017 2018 10.7 11.1 15.6 17.8 13.2 6.8 5.3 8.7 10.6 6.1 8.1 15.3 14.4 7.1 11.2 9.7 20.1 12.9 11.5 13.6 Appendix 11: Plant, ratoon yields and percentage of total area harvested - 2018 Crop Mills First ratoon Plant Other ratoons tch 58.8 53.6 47.9 35.7 49.0 Area ha 756 1799 1673 452 4680 % of Area 8.3 17.6 11.6 13.8 12.6 tch 59.8 52.4 49.8 58.9 55.2 Area ha 653 1340 1908 193 4094 % of Area 7.2 13.1 13.2 5.9 11.0 tch 51.1 45.4 42.3 49.5 47.1 Area ha 7723 7086 10893 2630 28332 % of Area 84.6 69.3 75.3 80.3 76.4 Lautoka Rarawai Labasa Penang All Mills All cane Area ha 9132 10225 14474 3275 37106 tch 56.6 50.5 46.7 48.0 50.5 Appendix 12: Seasonal %POCS in cane Mills Rough average for period of five seasons Lautoka Rarawai Labasa Penang All Mill Avg.
1991/ 1995 12.5 12.9 12.1 12.6 12.5 1996/ 2000 11.4 11.4 11.1 11.1 11.2 2001/ 2005 11.5 11.9 11.5 11.9 11.7 2006/ 2010 10.8 10.9 10.7 11.1 11.0 2011/ 2015 11.4 11.3 11.5 11.1 11.4 Last four seasons individually 2015 2016 2017 2018 12.4 12.6 12.1 11.9 12.3 10.7 9.7 11.7 NIL 10.6 11.8 11.4 11.1 NIL 11.6 10.6 10.0 11.5 NIL 10.7 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 64 2.0 CROP PRODUCTION Appendix 13: Weekly POCS in cane 2018 season Week Season average Note – Penang mill did not operate damaged by Cyclone Winston Lautoka 10.2 10.1 10.5 10.7 11.2 11.4 11.8 11.1 11.2 11.4 11.4 11.4 11.5 11.5 10.9 10.4 10.4 10.0 10.2 9.7 9.6 8.5 8.0 7.8 10.5 Rarawai 9.2 10.4 10.5 10.6 10.6 10.7 10.7 10.7 10.8 10.8 10.5 10.0 10.1 10.1 10.4 10.2 10.0 10.1 10.1 9.8 8.3 8.0 7.4 10.0 Appendix 14: Sugar produced (tonnes 94 N.T.
equivalent) Mills Lautoka Rarawai Labasa Penang All mills 2010 43,384 31,580 40,943 18,530 134,436 2011 50,306 61,028 45,146 16,838 173,318 2012 48,129 45,732 45,398 19,908 159,166 Tonnes sugar 94 N.T equivalent 2015 63,784 61,083 82,744 18,731 226,342 2013 41,874 60,039 63,423 19,258 184,594 2014 76,456 68,277 69,647 21,684 236,065 Labasa 9.0 11.1 11.3 11.3 11.1 11.3 11.6 11.9 11.6 11.8 12.0 11.7 11.9 11.7 11.5 10.9 10.0 8.9 10.4 10.7 10.6 9.4 9.5 9.3 8.3 Week average 9.5 10.5 10.8 10.9 11.0 11.1 11.3 11.2 11.2 11.4 11.3 11.0 11.2 11.1 10.9 10.5 10.2 9.7 10.2 10.1 9.5 8.6 8.3 8.5 9.6 2016 40,595 25,979 76,466 N/A 143,040 2017 52,021 57,167 67,010 N/A 2018 60,256 42,708 64,332 N/A 176,198 167,296 Appendix 15: Sugar tonnes 94 N.T equivalent per hectare (tsh) Mills 1991/ 1995 6.2 6.3 6.0 5.5 6.1 Lautoka Rarawai Labasa Penang Average Average for period of five seasons 2006/ 2010 4.4 4.0 4.0 5.4 4.3 1996/ 2000 5.6 5.6 5.0 5.4 5.4 2001/ 2005 4.9 5.4 5.0 4.7 5.1 2011/ 2015 4.9 4.9 5.1 5.5 5.1 Last five seasons individually 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 6.9 5.6 5.6 6.5 6.1 5.9 5.2 6.4 5.2 5.8 4.0 2.6 5.7 NIL 3.9 8.4 8.7 9.3 5.7 8.0 10.5 11.2 9.3 NIL 10.3 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2.0 CROP PRODUCTION Page 65 Last four seasons individually Appendix 16: Length of season (weeks) - Start and finish of crushing (date) Average length of season (5 yearly) Mills 2001/ 2005 1996/ 2000 1991/ 1995 2006/ 2010 2011/ 2015 2015 Lautoka 28.0 29.7 27.6 27.0 Rarawai 25.3 26.5 24.2 28.0 22.1 Labasa 29.4 30.7 24.1 25.9 18.7 Penang 21.5 26.2 20.4 22.5 18.1 All mills 26.1 28.2 24.1 25.9 21.0 02/07/15 To 24/11/15 19.4 23/06/15 To 28/10/15 19.2 17/06/15 To 28/10/15 15.9 29/06/15 To 19/10/15 18.9 2016 2017 2018 21.0 20/06/16 To 16/11/16 19.0 20/07/16 To 31/11/16 20.4 16/06/16 To 06/11/16 19.1 06/06/17 To 17/10/17 20.5 07/06/17 To 28/10/17 24.4 01/06/17 To 19/11/17 24 09/07/18 To 17/10/18 22.9 17/07/18 To 24/12/18 26 19/06/18 To 12/12/18 No crushing No crushing No crushing 20.1 21.3 24.3 Appendix 17: Varieties Percent of hectares harvested Lautoka Rarawai Labasa Penang Varieties Ragnar Waya Mali Galoa Aiwa Mana LF91-1925 Kaba Vatu Beqa Naidiri Kiuva Qamea Viwa Exp.
Other var.
2017 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.7 91.0 1.5 2.5 0.0 0.1 2.4 0.5 0.2 - - 0.4 2018 1.5 0.1 0.0 0.7 0.0 90.6 0.4 2.7 0.1 1.2 2.1 0.4 0.1 - - All Mills Appendix 18: Area planted in hectares as % of registered and cultivated areas Hectares planted as % of registered area Hectares planted Mills Hectares planted as % of cultivated area Lautoka Rarawai Labasa Penang Total SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 66 2.0 CROP PRODUCTION Appendix 19: Percentage of total area planted by different varieties over three years Mali Vatu Aiwa Mana Waya Galoa Ragnar Year Varieties Qamea Others Naidiri Kiuva Kaba Beqa LF91-1925 Experiment Lautoka % Area ha - - 1.7 0.2 2.1 0.2 - - - - - - - - 831.4 93.2 829.4 96.3 - - 0.4 0.0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5.7 0.6 2.4 0.3 - - - - 0.7 0.1 - - 7.4 0.8 4.1 0.5 - - 32.5 3.6 7.1 0.8 - - - - 0.3 0.0 - - 7.2 0.8 6.2 0.7 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4.1 0.5 - - Rarawai % 0.3 0.1 - 1.1 0.2 0.2 85.5 92.7 97.7 - - - - - - - - - 0.6 0.0 0.2 - - - 8.4 5.2 1.8 1.9 1.1 0.0 - - - 1.3 0.4 0.1 - -
 0.1 0.9 Area ha 3.8 1.8 - 15.8 4.0 2.6 1240.7 2005.5 1666.5 - - - - - - - - - 8.3 1.0 3.2 - - - 121.8 112.2 30.0 28.0 24.3 0.6 - - - 19.0 7.9 1.3 - - 1.6 13.0 - - 0.3 - - 6.5 - Labasa % Area ha - - 291.0 13.5 169.4 8.3 - - 38.7 1.8 40.8 2.0 - - - - - - - - 79.8 3.7 57.8 2.8 - - 12.4 4.8 - 5.2 3.0 - 0.4 0.0 - 0.0 - - 0.3 0.2 - 62.3 72.7 - 0.2 0.4 - 6.3 4.8 - - 0.5 - - - - 1.1 - 97.8 - 112.7 60.8 - 0.0 0.2 - 0.0 - - 6.4 4.4 - 1347.0 1478.8 - 5.3 8.1 - 136.0 98.1 - - 11.1 - - - - 23.2 - 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT All mills % Area ha - - - 1.2 1.1 - 1.9 - 3.4 - Penang % Area ha - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 370.0 88.5 449.3 58.0 94.4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 36.8 8.8 5.6 26.9 29.8 - - - - 0.4 - - - 0.0 - - - - - - 1.8 - - - 0.4 - - 2.1 - - 0.3 0.8 0.1 0.0 0.2 - - - - - - - - - 171.5 - - 2945.2 - 57.8 - 97.8 - 60.8 5.8 0.7 38.5 1513.4 8.4 105.6 - - 13.8 - - - 2.0 CROP PRODUCTION Page 67 Appendix 20: Cane transport in Fiji (tonnes of cane harvested and actual method of delivery) Mills Delivered portable line Winch trailer or lorry to mainline Lorry direct to mill carrier Year Lautoka Rarawai Labasa Penang All mills Tonnes 3,964 9,491 2,065 12,464 1,436 nil 50 168 nil 25,106 23,586 14,772 22,054 14,006 12,032 8,189 5,577 1,132 nil 840 nil nil nil nil 12,012 nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil 29,070 33,077 17,677 8,630 15,442 12,032 8,239 1,776 1,132 % of Total 1.0 1.5 0.4 1.7 0.3 nil 0.0 0.0 nil 5.0 3.6 3.6 6.3 2.2 2.5 3.0 1.4 0.2 nil 0.2 nil nil nil nil 1.8 nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil 1.6 1.6 1.1 2.0 0.8 0.7 0.5 1.1 0.1 Tonnes 129,410 144,569 113,819 168,852 116,328 111,036 85,410 73,141 70,995 126,450 332,792 106,393 104,779 113,691 93,635 45,598 52,370 67,303 171,042 162,856 117,543 137,018
 149,353 181,420 178,355 130,502 164,846 44,447 55,422 38,712 40,797 36,454 31,707 nil nil nil 471,349 695,639 376,467 451,446 415,826 417,798 309,363 256,013 303,144 % of Total nil nil nil 26.5 33.2 24.3 26.2 22.7 22.7 21.7 15.7 17.9 Tonnes % of Total Total Tonnes % of Total SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 68 2.0 CROP PRODUCTION Appendix 21: Percentage burnt cane of total tonnes crushed Year Lautoka % 17.6 23.2 18.3 25.1 28.6 29.5 23.8 37.7 20.6 24.3 42.5 52.5 35.6 39.0 43.4 54.8
Total Rarawai Labasa % Total % Total Penang % Total 159,720
214,572 181,650 175,701 208,860 143,568 159,720 171,214 52,688 85,336 40,552 85,262 Average % Total SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 3.0 TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Page 69 3.0 TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER 70 LABASA TT LAUTOKA TT 76 85 CDP SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 70 3.0 TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Summary Technology transfer is a critical function in delivering research outcomes to the farmers and millers.
The success of the scheme is to bring about a long-term commitment and collaboration between growers, research scientists and extension personnel in assisting growers to adopt best management practices in order to raise cane and sugar yield on their farms.

The major challenges for the institute is to disseminate the techniques developed by the research team for the farmers.
Under the Technology/Knowledge Transfer programs the following activities are undertaken SRIF portrays the solutions of the issues under concern through establishment of Grower Demonstration Trials, establishment of Green Manure Trials, Field Information Days, Seed Cane Production, Tissue Culture and distribute Factsheets.

Attending to farmer queries and complaints is also a part of SRIF’s on-going activities.
The new systems and methods developed by our institute takes into consideration the cost: benefit ratio and the impact it has on the environment.

3.1.

LABASA TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER The major challenge for the institute is to disseminate the techniques developed by the research team for the farmers.

The major issues in today’s farming is depleting soil health, weed management, use of appropriate varieties, adaptation to new machineries and their operations.
SRIF portrays the solutions of the issues under concern through planting demonstration plots and conducting field days in the sectors for the farmers.

These are effective tools through which we directly demonstrate the effectiveness as well as the benefits of new and improved technologies, which can be used to enhance sugarcane productivity, profitability and sustainability.

3.1.1 LABASA GROWER DEMONSTRATION A total of eleven demonstration plots were planted in 2018.
Seven field days have been conducted in the sectors.

The demonstrations conducted in Vanua Levu covered several topics such as: Varieties, Integrated weed management, Mechanization and Inter-cropping.

Varieties Varieties play vital role in the production of quality sugar.

SRIF is dedicated to continue breeding high sugar, disease resistance, drought tolerant and early maturing varieties.

The two new varieties released (Viwa and Qamea) has these characteristics.
Viwa is mid to late maturing and is highly suited for mechanical harvesting where as Qamea is early maturing and fast growing.

Three field days were conducted in Bulivou, Solove and Natua sector in Seaqaqa.

These two new varieties were introduced to the farmers and their characteristics were demonstrated on the farmer fields.

Farmers were advised to plant these varieties and also Naidiri as these are high sugar yielding and suitable for poor soil types.
2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 3.0 TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Page 71 Figure 1: Farmers observing Viwa variety in Solove sector, Labasa Figure 2: Farmers at the Qamea & Naidiri demonstration plot in Bulivou sector, Labasa SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 72 3.0 TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Figure 3: Farmers viewing Qamea variety and its characteristic in Natua sector, Labasa Integrated weed management Weed management is a very important cultivation aspect towards good yield.
Timely weeding and application of Pre and post emergent weedicides is very vital for sugarcane growth.

To create awareness amongst growers on the importance of integrated weed management, two field days were conducted.

Figure 4: Farmers having a discussion on IWM in Waiqele sector, Labasa 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 3.0 TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Page 73 Figure 5: Farmers at an IWM field in Bucaisau sector, Labasa Farmers visiting the integrated weed management field to witness the effects of timely weed management.
The fields were applied with pre-emergence weedicide after planting and then post emergence weedicide after 8 weeks of planting.

Followed by one round of tiller cultivation and spot weeding of para grass and guinea grass.

Figure 6: Field being planted using cutter planter in Bucaisau sector, Labasa Mechanization Farmers are turning to mechanization due to lack of labour force.
SRIF at this standpoint educates farmers on machinery such as planters, boom sprayers, fertilizer applicators, mill mud, lime applicator and other implements that requires minimum labour to operate.

A SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 74 3.0 TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER demonstration was carried out at a farmer’s field on how to use cutter planter and boom sprayer.

This made farmers aware and interested in the machines and its capacities.
Figure 7: Field being Sprayed with pre-emergent herbicide in Bucaisau sector, Labasa Figure 8: Farmers with cutter planter and boom sprayer demonstration in Bucaisau sector, Labasa Inter-cropping Soil fertility depletion is one of the leading factors responsible for low crop yields in Fiji.

Decades of mono-cropping combined with poor management practices such as burning of trash, keeping ratoons for too long and over cultivation have contributed to poor soil fertility.
This decline coupled with increasingly unfavourable weather and climate change poses a 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 3.0 TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Page 75 threat to the sustainability of Fiji Sugar Industry.

However, research has shown that Good agricultural practices, like the use of green manure crops increases soil fertility and crop yields.

Hence, these are very promising tools for farmers to improve their soil fertility and adapt to changing climate.

Sugarcane has been cropped as a mono crop for many years.
Sugarcane is a heavy feeder of nutrients and thus it exhausts the soil when continuously mono-cropped.

Soil is a living entity which needs time to replenish itself.

This can be done by fallowing the land, adding organic amendments and inter-cropping with sugarcane crop.

There was an inter-crop demonstration plot planted in Vunimoli sector.
The growers were shown how cowpea was planted in between the rows with sugarcane without having any effects on germination and growth stages of the cane, in addition to this, the benefits of planting legumes on soil health was highlighted.

Figure 9: Cowpea inter-cropping with sugarcane in Vunimoli sector, Labasa Figure 10: Discussion on inter crop demonstration at farmer’s house in Vunimoli sector, Labasa SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 76 3.0 TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER 3.2.
LAUTOKA TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER 3.2.1 LAUTOKA GROWER DEMONSTRATION Improving Soil Health: Green Manure Trials Green manure or cover crops play a major role in improving soil fertility and farm productivity.

This type of manure refers to as cover crops or plants that are grown between the main crops and during fallow periods to improve the quality of the soil.

Legumes such as urd, moong and cowpea are planted, to ensure adequate supply of good quantities of nitrogen into the soil.
This is through fixation of nitrogen in the roots of these legumes.

When ploughed back into the soil, the legumes ensure nitrogen and other nutrients are recycled (returned) into the soil.

The nutrients are released slowly to the soil as the dead plants rot.

Since legumes grow fast, they accumulate a lot of biomass within a short time that slowly improves soil organic matter content.

In 2018, 3 Green Manure trials were planted.

Two in SRIF Drasa estate and one in Nadi district.


Before planting soil samples was taken and analysed.

Results showed that the soil from these three sites had very low organic matter content(less 2%).

To achieve good yield and for sustainability, soils should have 4 to 10 % organic matter.

Green Manure is one of the means to improve soil health, however subsequent practices such as Green Cane harvesting, trash conversation, and soil conservation needs to be aligned.
Grower Demonstration Trials and Field information’s days The following Topics was covered, in the 10 Grower Demonstrations trials and respective field days, which were held; ➢ Importance of improving Soil Health through Green Manuring ➢ Good Land Preparation and Soil Sampling ➢ Quality Seedcane.

➢ Sugarcane Varieties.

➢ Mechanical Planting of Sugarcane using whole stalk cane planter.

➢ Mechanical spraying (pre-emergence and Post emergence).

➢ Importance of Blend A and Blend B application.


➢ Importance of changing farm layout to suit mechanical harvesting.

➢ Benefits of using Mill mud.

➢ Integrated weed Management ➢ Timeliness of operations ➢ Benefits of intercropping ➢ Irrigation 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 3.0 TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Page 77 Figure 1: Good Land preparation Demonstration in Raviravi, Drasa sector.

Figure 2: Quality Seedcane harvested from Hot water treated Mother Plot.
SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 78 3.0 TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Figure 3: Demonstration of Mechanical Planter in farm # 10726 in Nawaicoba Sector.

Figure 4: Mechanically planted sugarcane in farm # 10726 in Nawaicoba sector at 6 months 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 3.0 TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Page 79 Figure 5: Demonstration of pre-emergence application using a Boom Sprayer in farm # 8087 in Raviravi, Drasa Sector.
Figure 6: Growers observing a method of Green Manure incorporation using cotton King in Drasa estate SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 80 3.0 TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Figure 7: Growers witnessing Viwa variety during a field day in Qeleloa Sector, Farm # 2426 Figure 8: Demonstration of mill mud spreader in Drasa sector 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 3.0 TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Page 81 Figure 9: Weed free farm achieved through Integrated weed Management (IWM) in Drasa sector IWM Fallow Management Plant Cane Ratoons Crop Rotation Spray out weeds before weeds have set seed Control Weeds Cycle controls weeds Control weeds Figure 10: Integrated Weed Management Chart SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 82 3.0 TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Summary of Grower Demonstration Trials The table below summaries the grower demonstration trials that was carried out in 2018: ➢ 10 trials conducted; in addition to this, 3 Green Manure trials were conducted.
➢ Approximately 400 growers attended the demonstration trial field days ➢ 6 technology transfer meetings were held in Lautoka and Nadi, a total of 108 growers attend during the evening meetings.

Table 1: Summary of grower demonstration trials No 1.
Sector /Location Drasa SRIF Estate Green Manure Topic Farm Mechanization Integrated Weed Management Green Manure and Varietal Spread Farm Mechanization + Varietal Spread Varietal Spread Intercropping/ Sugarcane Varietal Spread Sugarcane Varietal Spread Intercropping/ Farm Mechanization Theme/attendance Importance of improving soil health, Farm Mechanization Importance of Land preparation Timely weed control Importance of improving soil health Varietal Spread 51 farmers attended the field day Mechanical planting Varietal Spread Timely planting and operations 55 farmers attended the field day Mechanical planting Weed control Varietal Spread 100 farmers attended the 2-field day organized on this farm.
Field day pending, to be held in 2019 Field day pending, to be held in 2019 Field day pending, to be held in 2019 Field day pending, to be held in 2019 Mill mud trial Field day pending, to be held in 2019 2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

Drasa, Farm # 8087 Raviravi Meigunyah, Farm #: 2140 Nasau Qeleloa, Farm # 2426 Qeleloa Nawaicoba Farm # 10726 Nawaicoba Olosara Farm # 5695 Nawamagi Lomawai Farm # 11237 Tuva Olosara Farm # 5533 Lovu Farm # 19085 Vitogo Lovu Farm #18162 Anjaan Road 11.
Natova Intercropping Farm # 866 Field day pending, to be held in 2019 Trash Conservation The depleting soil health and crop productivity in the sugarcane cultivating areas of Fiji is a major concern.

This is evident from the national sugarcane productivity average being close to 44ton/hectare in the last couple of years compared to its potential yield of about 65 - 80 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 3.0 TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Page 83 ton/hectare.
Although soil fertility is closely linked to the physical and chemical characteristics of the environment, it is strongly, influenced by human management practices.

One such detrimental practice followed by farmers in Fiji is burning of trash after harvesting of sugarcane.

It is estimated that about 7 to 12 tons (depending on Variety) of trash can be obtained from 1 ha of sugarcane.

Every ton of sugarcane trash contains about 5.4 kg N, 1.3 kg P2O5, and 3.1 kg K2O and small quantities of micronutrients.
However, when sugarcane trash is burnt, most of the organic matter and nutrients in the trash are lost, leading to environment pollution.

Farmers usually burn trash with the opinion that its management is laborious, trash will reduce germination, crop will be burned and it will hinder routine ratoon cultivation practices.

The trash/organic matter decomposition is mostly dependent on the carbon to Nitrogen ratio (C: N).
When crop residues high in C: N ratio are added to the soil, extra N needs to be added to prevent immobilization in soil.

This is known as Nitrogen factor.

Nitrogen factor is, defined as the number of units of inorganic N that has to be supplied to 100units of organic material in order to prevent net immobilization of N from the soil (Source: University of New Castle).
A trial was conducted in SRIF Drasa estate on trash conservation using urea to enhance the decomposition of trash using two different treatments.

In treatment 1, 300 kg of Urea was applied in 600 litres of water per hectare.

This treatment was based using N factor as 2.29kg per every 100kg trash.

Estimated amount of trash per hectare was estimated to be around 6000kg (6 tonnes).
N content of Urea fertilizer is equal to 46% N. The second treatment was, based on a recommendation, from a farmer from New South Wales in Australia, Mr. Robert Quirk.

According to him, in Australia there has been lot of studies done to ascertain the correct amount of Urea to be applied in sugarcane trash to enhance decomposition.

His recommendation was 5kg Urea in 300 Litres of water per hectare, the rate that he has been using on his farm for last 10 to 15 years.
Three months after application, a physical observation was done, in the field to see the results of the two different treatments.

Both treatments had similar outcomes, in terms of trash decomposition, however based on economics and risk of losing excess Nitrogen into the environment, 5kg Urea in 300 Litres of water per hectare is recommended, which is sufficient for enhancing trash decomposition.
Figure 10: Spraying of Urea in sugarcane trash immediately after harvest in Lovu sector SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 84 3.0 TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Figure 11: Trash decomposition (LEFT: Before & RIGHT: After) Drip irrigation trial In sugarcane, germination and grand growth phase are the two important periods, which requires more water.

It needs about 1500-2500 mm of water throughout its growing period.
In Fiji, we receive adequate rainfall during the grand growth phase of sugarcane as it falls between November, to April annually.

Normally we receive 1800mm to 2200mm, of which 65 to 70 % is received between the months of November to April, which is simultaneous to the grand growing phase of sugarcane.

In recent years, Fiji has experienced some severe meteorological drought that affects the sugarcane during germination and tillering phase.

As a result, it had a drastic impact on sugarcane yield.
Considering the average rainfall for the last 10 years for each mill area and National average, it is evident that we received adequate rainfall during the grand growth period (November to April).

However, a lot of time, insufficient amount of rainfall is received during the planting and germination period, which is from May to October.

This is one of the main reasons, desired yields are not achieved, which was planted through cane planting grants in previous years.
A project on drip irrigation trial was initiated through partnership between Sugar Research Institute of Fiji, Fiji Sugar Corporation and Rivulis Australia.

Rivulis is a global company and has a rich history in the irrigation industry with more than 50 years of expertise developing, manufacturing and deploying micro irrigation products and solutions.

Rivulis Australia agreed to finance a 4ha drip irrigation trial in FSC Drasa Estate Farm.
Drip irrigation around the globe enables to double the yields (especially in India) while saving 20-40% water, 30% fertilizers compare to furrow irrigation.

Furthermore, drip irrigation accounts for the improvement in sucrose content compared to conventional furrow and Overhead sprinkler irrigation.

Drip system can be above surface or as sub-surface drip irrigation (SDI).

The SDI is gaining more popularity as it is more suitable for ratoon crop and mechanical harvesting (Source: NaanDanJain Irrigation).
However, it’s noted that India receives half the quantity of annual rainfall, which Fiji receives.

Supplementary irrigation is 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 3.0 TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Page 85 needed during planting and germination phase which falls in the dry months from May to October annually.

A four-hectare drip irrigation in FSC Drasa Estate, which was, established in early November, comprised of the following treatments: • 1.5 ha Plant cane on 1.5 m T-Tape spacing using 715-30-250 (one tape per row of cane).
• 1.5 ha Plant cane on 3m T-Tape spacing using 715-20-500 (one T-Tape / 2rows of cane).

• 1 ha Ratoon cane on 1.5 m T-Tape spacing (one T-Tape / row cane).

• 0.12ha plant cane on Gravity system with 1 tape per 2 rows.

Figure 12: Drip irrigation in plant sugarcane at the FSC Estate Drasa.

The sugarcane from this trial will be harvested in the coming year and a detailed report will be prepared together with cost benefit analysis, to ascertain the Return on Investment.
Once the report is finalized, SRIF will be in better position to make further recommendations regarding adoption of Drip irrigation system for Fiji Sugar Industry.

3.3 CANE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME A collaboration project with the Fiji Sugar Cooperation (FSC) started in October, 2017.

Meetings were conducted between stakeholders to discuss the way-forward of the joint project.

It was discussed that FSC will provide SRIF with 4 nil producers per sector.
Activity started with sector level introductory visits.

Gang and locality meetings were also attended with FSC extension team.

Any issues/queries/questions raised by the grower were noted and SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 86 3.0 TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER addressed immediately.

The main objective was to increase sugarcane production from the present 40 tons/ha to at least 70tons/ha.
Of all the farms selected and monitored by both FSC and SRIF, only 29% of the farmers succeeded in establishing cane on their fields.

These nil producers had other factors that affected the uptake of advice given, such as dispute over land, lack of labour and the diversion of tenants to other industries.

3.3.1 LAUTOKA A total of 24 farms have been visited within Lautoka District, comprising of Drasa, Lovu, Lautoka, Saweni and Natova sectors.
Five farms have completed land preparation and planting through the help of Sugarcane Development and Farmer Assistance Grant.

The common observations amongst farms visited is summarised in the table below; Table 1: Common observations amongst farms visited Farmer is not interested in cane farm.

Farmer is elderly but has shown interest in mechanical cultivation of cane.

Farmer has planted cane and has been advised on weed control measures.
Gap filling and appropriate weed control will be communicated to the farmer.

Farmer has joined cooperative and would be utilizing contractor to plant cane in her farm.

Farmer does not have access to labours.

Cane is damaged by animals from neighbouring farm Farmer works full time and is unable to look after farm.

Farmer has no access to farm machinery.

3.3.2 LABASA SRIF was involved in giving technical advice together with FSC staffs and follow-up was done with the farm’s operation.
Nil producing farmers in Labasa have either abandoned their land and settled elsewhere or have considered sugarcane farming a secondary source of income.

It is challenging for both SRIF and FSC to bring these farmers into production.

FSC has started a joint venture program to bring the farms into production where possible.
The common observations amongst farms visited is summarised in the table below; Table 2: Common observations amongst farms visited Farmer carrying out harvesting Farmer has planted cane and has been advised on weed control measures & fertilizer application Neither planting nor harvesting carried out Farmer committed to planting but waiting for favourable weather 3.3.3 PENANG Five farms were identified under the crop development program in Penang district.
During the visits, the farmers were advised on quality seed cane, timely fertilizer application, weed management, soil health management and varietal spread.
The common observations amongst farms visited is summarised in the table below; Table 3: Common observations amongst farms visited Farmer carrying out harvesting Farmer has planted cane and has been advised on weed control measures & fertilizer application Joint venture farming 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 4.0 SRIF ESTATES Page 87 4.0 SRIF ESTATES 4.1 DRASA ESTATE The total cane produced in 2018 was 1808 tonnes from an area of 26.5 hectares giving an yield of 68.2 tph.

Harvesting was carried out mechanically.


96.7% of cane was harvested green.

3.28% cane was sent burnt due to accidental fire.

The following table summarises the harvesting carried out in Drasa Estate from 2016-2018.
Table 1: Harvesting summary – Drasa Estate Year Total tons Burnt %Burnt Green %Green 99 2016 100 2017 97 2018 1202 1565 1749 1219 1565 1808 17 0 59 1 0 3 Rail %Rail 0 0 13 0 0 236 Lorry %Lorry Area (ha) Tph 36 1219 50 1565 65 1572 100 100 87 33 31 28 5.7 hectares of cane was planted for seed cane nursery comprising of Qamea, Viwa, Kaba and Mana varieties.

0.6 hectares were utilized for planting variety research trial.
4.2 LABASA ESTATE The major objective of the Labasa estate land is to produce hot water treated seed cane for the farmers.

By establishing seed bed that will ensure no unapproved and mixture of the varieties are planted by the farmers.

Labasa has an area of 13 hectares of land for research trials and hot water treated seed cane, out of which 8 hectares was fallowed and has been used for hot water treated seed bed planting for the year 2018 – 2019 season.
Total of 405 tonnes of cane was sent to mill for crushing.

Table 2: Harvesting summary – Labasa Estate Year Total tons 773 2016 654 2017 405 2018 Burnt %Burnt Green %Green Rail %Rail Lorry %Lorry Area (ha) Tph 77 82 58 60 30 30 267 437 257 505 218 148 100 100 100 10 8 7 40 70 70 - - - - - - - - - The growth of the seed cane was affected by drought but recovered during the rainy season.

Hot water treated seed cane should be available to the farmers in the coming planting season.
An area of 3.7 ha has been fallowed for the establishment of the hot water treated seed bed with a further 3.0 ha that has been cultivated for 2nd ratoon which will be used for seed cane in the March – April planting window of 2019.

An estimated 150 tonnes of seed cane will be available from this area.

A total area of 6.7 ha was fallowed for seed bed that was planted during Oct - Nov, 2018 season with the hot water treated seed cane.
Batanikama farm During 2018, 0.5 ha of hot water treated seed bed had been established.

The rest of the land is used for stage 4 seed bed and stage 4 trials when required.

Around 2 ha of land is under commercial cane.

Outsource SRIF provided services in Land preparation and cutter planting.

In 2018, fifteen farmers acquired the services from SRIF and 27.15ha was planted.
SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 88 5.0 MEDIA & PUBLICATION 5.0 MEDIA & PUBLICATION 5.1 MEDIA Media department is responsible for marketing SRIF’s activities to all stakeholders.

This involves updating SRIF’s website with current research, developing videos and pamphlets.

Information packages involving videos and pamphlets are provided to growers during the information day.

Information packages are also given to school students during educational tours to the institute.
Two videos were developed on leaf sampling and improving soil health through green manuring.

Videos on cane diseases including Smut, cane grub and Fiji Disease are being complied and will be published to the website.

The institute has a Facebook account that provide updates on a daily basis.
Figure 1: Sample social media platform presence of SRIF 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 6.0 APPROVED VARIETIES FOR 2019 PLANTING Page 89 6.0 APPROVED VARIETIES FOR 2019 PLANTING The list of sugarcane varieties approved for planting has been revised to include maturity trends.

Varieties that are no longer planted have been removed from the approved varieties list.

The varieties are recommended to growers on their soil type.
The growers have a choice of at least three varieties to plant on their farms as laid down in the Master Award.
Mill/Sectors Soil types Varieties recommended on maturity trends Early – mid maturing Mid – late maturing Lautoka/Nawaicoba Flat Fertile soils Lautoka/Olosara Lautoka/Cuvu Lautoka/Lomawai Lautoka/Yako Lautoka/Malolo Lautoka/Qeleloa Kaba, Mana, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Viwa Rich alluvial soils Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Medium soils LF91-1925, Qamea Poor soils Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Flat Fertile soils Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Medium soils LF91-1925, Qamea Poor soils LF91-1925 Sandy soils Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Flat Fertile soils Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Medium soils LF91-1925, Qamea Poor soils LF91-1925 Sandy soils Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Flat Fertile soils Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Medium soils LF91-1925, Qamea Poor soils LF91-1925 Sandy soils Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Ragnar, Kaba, Vatu, Kiuva, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Galoa Kaba, Mana, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Galoa Kaba, Mana, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Galoa LF91-1925, Qamea LF91-1925 Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Ragnar, Kaba, Vatu, Kiuva, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Viwa Poor soils Rich alluvial soils Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva Poor soils Sandy soils Flat Fertile soil Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 LF91-1925, Qamea Medium soils Medium soils Medium soils Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Lautoka/Meigunyah Flat Fertile soils Poor soils Lautoka/Legalega Lautoka/Natova Lautoka/Lautoka Medium soils Poor soils Flat Fertile soils Medium soils Poor soils Flat Fertile soils Medium soils Poor soils Sandy soils Flat Fertile soils Ragnar, Kaba, Vatu, Kiuva, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Viwa Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 LF91-1925, Qamea Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva,
 Viwa Ragnar, Kaba, Vatu, Kiuva, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Viwa LF91-1925, Qamea Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Ragnar, Kaba, Vatu, Kiuva, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Viwa LF91-1925, Qamea Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Ragnar, Kaba, Vatu, Kiuva, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Galoa LF91-1925, Qamea LF91-1925 Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 90 6.0 APPROVED VARIETIES FOR 2019 PLANTING Mill/Sectors Soil types Varieties recommended on maturity trends Early – mid maturing Lautoka/Lautoka Medium soils Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Mid – late maturing Ragnar, Kaba, Vatu, Kiuva, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Viwa Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 LF91-1925, Qamea Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Ragnar, Kaba, Vatu, Kiuva, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Galoa LF91-1925, Qamea LF91-1925 Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Ragnar, Kaba, Vatu, Kiuva, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Viwa LF91-1925, Qamea Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Ragnar, Kaba, Vatu, Kiuva, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Galoa LF91-1925, Qamea LF91-1925 Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Ragnar, Kaba, Vatu, Kiuva, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Viwa LF91-1925, Qamea Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Ragnar, Kaba, Vatu, Kiuva, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Viwa LF91-1925, Qamea Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Ragnar, Kaba, Vatu, Kiuva, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Viwa LF91-1925, Qamea Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Ragnar, Kaba, Vatu, Kiuva, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Viwa LF91-1925, Qamea Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Ragnar, Kaba, Vatu, Kiuva, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Viwa LF91-1925, Qamea Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Ragnar, Kaba, Vatu, Kiuva, Viwa
 Kaba, Mana, Viwa LF91-1925, Qamea Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Mana, Kaba, Vatu, Viwa LF91-1925, Qamea Naidiri, LF91-1925 Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Galoa Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Lautoka/Saweni Lautoka/Saweni Lautoka/Lovu Lautoka/Drasa Rarawai/Varoko Rarawai/Mota Rarawai/Naloto Poor soils Flat Fertile soils Medium soils Poor soils Sandy soils Flat Fertile soils Medium soils Poor soils Flat Fertile soils Medium soils Poor soils Sandy soils Flat Fertile soils Medium soils Poor soils Flat Fertile soils Medium soils Poor soils Flat Fertile soils Medium soils Poor soils Rarawai/Koronubu Flat Fertile soils Rarawai/Veisaru Rarawai/Rarawai Rarawai/Varavu Rarawai/Tagitagi Rarawai/Yaladro Medium soils Poor soils Flat Fertile soils Medium soils Poor soils Flat Fertile soils Medium soils Poor soils Flat Fertile soils Medium soils Poor soils Flat Fertile soils Medium soils Poor soils Saline areas Flat Fertile soils 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT Mill/Sectors Soil types Varieties recommended on maturity trends Early – mid maturing Rarawai/Yaladro Medium soils Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Rarawai/Drumasi Labasa/Waiqele Labasa/Wailevu Labasa/Vunimoli Labasa/Labasa Poor soils Flat Fertile soils Medium soils Poor soils Saline areas Flat Fertile soils Medium soils Poor soils Flat Fertile soils Medium soils Poor soils Saline soils Flat Fertile soils Medium soils Poor soils Flat Fertile soils Labasa/Labasa Medium soils Labasa/Bucaisau Poor soils Saline soils Flat Fertile soils Medium soils Poor soils Saline soils Labasa/Wainikoro Flat Fertile soils Labasa/Daku Medium soils Poor soils Saline soils Flat Fertile soils Medium soils Poor
 soils Labasa/Natua Poor soils Labasa/Solove Poor soils Labasa/Bulivou Poor soils Penang/Nanuku Flat Fertile soils Medium soils Poor soils 6.0 APPROVED VARIETIES FOR 2019 PLANTING Page 91 Mid – late maturing Ragnar, Kaba, Vatu, Kiuva, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Viwa Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Kaba, Mana, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Galoa LF91-1925, Qamea Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Mana, Kaba, Vatu, Viwa LF91-1925, Qamea Naidiri, LF91-1925 Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Ragnar, Kaba, Vatu, Kiuva, Viwa Kaba, Mali, Viwa Naidiri, LF91-1925, Qamea Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Ragnar, Kaba, Vatu, Kiuva, Viwa Kaba, Mali, Viwa Galoa, Vatu Naidiri, LF91-1925, Qamea Naidiri, LF91-1925 Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Ragnar, Kaba, Vatu, Kiuva, Viwa Kaba, Mali, Viwa Naidiri, LF91-1925, Qamea Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Ragnar, Kaba, Vatu, Kiuva, Viwa Kaba, Mali, Viwa Galoa, Vatu, Mali Naidiri, LF91-1925, Qamea Naidiri, LF91-1925 Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Ragnar, Kaba, Vatu, Kiuva, Waya, Viwa Kaba, Waya, Mali, Viwa Galoa, Vatu, Mali Naidiri, LF91-1925, Qamea Naidiri, LF91-1925 Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Ragnar, Kaba, Vatu, Kiuva, Waya, Viwa Kaba, Waya, Mali, Viwa Galoa, Vatu, Mali Naidiri, LF91-1925, Qamea Naidiri, LF91-1925 Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Ragnar, Kaba, Vatu, Kiuva, Waya, Viwa Kaba, Waya, Mali, Viwa Naidiri, LF91-1925, Qamea Aiwa, Naidiri,LF91-1925, Qamea Aiwa, Naidiri, Qamea Aiwa, Naidiri, Qamea Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Ragnar, Kaba, Vatu, Kiuva, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Viwa Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Mali, Viwa
 Ragnar, Kaba, Mali, Viwa Ragnar, Kaba, Mali, Viwa LF91-1925, Qamea LF91-1925, LF91-1925, SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 92 6.0 APPROVED VARIETIES FOR 2019 PLANTING Mill/Sectors Soil types Varieties recommended on maturity trends Early – mid maturing Mid – late maturing Penang/Nanuku Salt areas affected Naidiri, LF91-1925 Galoa Viti Vanua area Naidiri, LF91-1925, Qamea Mana, Kaba, Kiuva, Mali, Viwa Rich alluvial soils Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Ragnar, Kaba, Vatu, Kiuva, Mali, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Viwa Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 LF91-1925, Qamea Medium soils Penang/Malau Penang/Ellington Poor soils Salt areas Flat Fertile soils affected Naidiri, LF91-1925 Galoa Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 Ragnar, Kaba, Kiuva, Viwa Ragnar, Kaba, Vatu, Kiuva, Mali, Viwa Kaba, Mana, Viwa Aiwa, Beqa,Naidiri, LF91-1925 LF91-1925, Qamea Naidiri, LF91-1925 Galoa Medium soils Poor soils Salt affected areas 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 7.0 ABBREVIATIONS Page 93 7.0 ABBREVIATIONS SRIF FSC SIT SCGC SCGF MoS SPF FMS EU CIRAD POCS or pocs SUC or Suc NPK N P K RCBD Rep Trt or Trts Tph or Tpha Tsh or Tsha TC/TS or tc/ts - Tonnes cane per tonnes sugar (tonnes of cane required to - Sugar Research Institute of Fiji - Fiji Sugar Corporation Ltd - Sugar Industry Tribunal - Sugar Cane Growers Council - Sugar Cane Growers Fund - Ministry of Sugar - South Pacific Fertilizers - Fiji Meteorological Services - European Union - Centre de coopération internationale en recherche agronomique pour le - Pure obtainable cane sugar - - - Nitrogen - Phosphorus - Potassium - Randomized Complete Block Design - Replication - Treatment(s) - Tonnes cane per hectare - Tonnes sugar per hectare Sucrose Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Potassium AVG./Avg.
LF[YEAR] G x E FFE QBPS FSI ASPAC LBC FTIR CQD IMG UV-VIS RMSECV SOI ENSO IWM BAF produce 1 ton of sugar) - Average - Lautoka Fiji [year in which the fuzz was planted], e.g.
LF2014 - Genetic by Environment - Farmer Feel Effect - Quality Based Payment Scheme - Fijian Sugar Industry - Australian Soil and Plant Analysis Council - Lime Buffering Capacity - Frontier Transform Infra-Red - Cane Quality Department - Industry Management Group - Ultra violet visible light spectrum - Root Mean Square Error of Cross validation - Southern Oscillation Index - El Niño Southern Oscillation - - Biosecurity Authority of Fiji Integrated Weed Management SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 94 8.0 GLOSSARY Clones / Varieties Series Germplasm Fuzz Ratoon Plots Breeding Flowering Beds Gene Pool / Standards Brix G X E trials Supply Phytotoxic Farmorganix/Stand Up SummaGrow Spectra-Cane %brix Polarization (or Pol) %pol Fiber %fiber Purity 8.0 GLOSSARY The distinct individual sugarcane type that can be identified by numerous attributes or a combination of it, such as stalk color, stalk shape, leaf type, etc.
When used in the context of plant breeding, it refers to a set of clones or varieties distinguished by the year in which those clones or varieties were initially planted from fuzz (seed) stage.

A collection of clones that has recorded desirable traits such as high fiber, disease tolerant, etc.

Sugarcane seeds, not to be confused with seeds commonly referred to in the sugar industry as the stalks of sugarcane used for planting.
Seeds in this case are all different varieties, much like seeds of beans, cucumbers or chilies.

Commonly referred to the sugarcane crop that established or grew after the initial plant crop was harvested.

Small areas planted with sugarcane for the purpose of harvesting flowers from.

Basically, referring to the Germplasm from a genetics point of view.

Sugarcane varieties that have already been released to growers to plant for commercial use.
Measure of dissolved solids in sugar juice, liquor or syrup using a refractometer.

Genetic by Environment trials to test the interaction of the genetic attributes of varieties against environmental conditions.

The term is normally used when “supplying” seedcane referring to sugarcane field that have Poisonous to plants.

Brand names of new organic fertilizers being tested at SRIF.
High-speed fully automated sugarcane analyzer that uses Near-Infrared (NIR) to monitor the sugar content upon analyzing disintegrated cane.

The instrument requires minimal intervention from the operator once the sample has been fed into the disintegrator at the start of the process.

Total soluble solutes in cane juice The apparent sucrose content expressed as a mass percent measured by the optical rotation of polarized light passing through a sugar solution.
Percent total sucrose in cane juice The dry fibrous insoluble structure of the cane plant.

Generally taken to mean all insoluble material in the cane delivered to a mill, and therefore includes soil or other extraneous insoluble matter in cane.

Percent of fiber present in sugarcane The true purity is the sucrose content as a percent of the dry substances or dissolved solids content.
The solids consist of sugar plus non-sucrose components such as invert, ash and 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 8.0 GLOSSARY Page 95 colorants.

Apparent purity is expressed as polarization dived by refractometer Brix multiplied by 100.

Pure Obtainable Cane Sugar.

A measure of total recoverable sugar in the cane.

A formula based on assumption that sugarcane contains pure sugar, impurities, water and fiber only.
It assumes that only pure sugar is made, and that for every kilogram of impurities which goes to the factory, half a kilogram of sugar accompanies it.

Lime Buffering Capacity.

It is modified from the original method which is used for the purpose of agricultural crops.

It is a potentiometric method used for determining the amount of lime required for the soil to raise the pH based on the buffering capacity of the soil.
LBC is a more efficient routine determination as compared to pH buffering capacity method in regards to result throughput.

RMSECV: errors are calculated on test/train splits using a cross validation scheme for the splitting.

If the splitting of the data is done correctly, this gives a good estimate on how the model built on the data set at hand performs for unknown cases.
However, due to the resampling nature of the approach, it actually measures performance for unknown cases that were obtained among the calibration cases.

In simple, it is a formula used to build a model from a data set, as a validation of two data set.

Thus, confirms data set from a new approach against the data set of the original method validating the performance of the origin of the new data set as similar to the existing method.
The body within the Fiji Sugar Industry Tribunal charged with implementing the QBPS procedures.

A group set up within each mill area, comprising representatives of the mill owner, the cane growers and the Tribunal to act as a point of contact between the CQD and the local industry.

Ultra violet visible light spectrum instrument.

Is used to determine analyte concentrations by the absorption of light across the ultraviolet and visible light wavelengths through sugar cane juice, sugar and sugar by-products.
The scientific study of nematode worms.
The science of the causes and effects of diseases %POCS LBC RMSECV CQD IMG UV-VIS spectrophotometer Nematology Pathology SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 96 9.0 FINANCIAL REPORT 9.0 FINANCIAL REPORT 1 DIRECTOR'S REPORT AUDITOR'S REPORT 3 6 STATEMENTS & NOTES 2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT Sugar Research Institute of FijiFinancial StatementsFor the year ended 31 December 2018 Sugar Research Institute of FijiContentsDirectors' report1 - 2Independent Auditor's Report3 - 5Statement of profit or loss and other comprehensive income6Statement of financial position7Statement of cash flows8Notes to the Financial Statements9 - 20 Sugar Research Institute of FijiDirectors' ReportBoard reportBoard membersThe Board members in office during the year end at the date of this report are:Professor Rajesh Chandra - Chairman (re-appointed 2 March 2018)Dr K.S Shanmugha Sundaram (term expired on 1 March 2018)Mr Daniel Elisha (term expired on 1 March 2018)Mr Sundresh Chetty (term expired on 1 March 2018)Mr Graham ClarkMs Reshmi KumariDr Sanjay AnandMr Raj Sharma (appointed on 12 June 2018)Mr Ashween Nischal Ram (appointed on 18 June 2018)Professor Ravendra Naidu (appointed on 13 March 2018)State of affairsPrincipal activityCurrent assetsReceivablesRelated party transactionsInaccordancewitharesolutionoftheBoardofDirectors,theDirectorsherewithsubmitthestatementoffinancialpositionofSugarResearchInstituteofFiji(the“Institute”)asat31December2018andtherelatedstatementofprofitorlossandcomprehensiveincomeandstatementofcashflowsfortheyearendedonthatdate and report as follows:IntheopinionoftheBoardtheaccompanyingstatementoffinancialpositiongivesatrueandfairviewofthestateofaffairsoftheInstituteasat31December2018andtheaccompanyingstatementofprofitorlossandothercomprehensiveincomeandstatementofcashflowsgiveatrueandfairviewoftheresultsandcashflows of the Institute for the year then ended.ThefunctionsoftheInstituteareoutlinedundertheSugarResearchInstituteofFijiActNo14of2005,whichincludespromotingbymeansofresearchandinvestigation,thetechnicaladvancement,efficiencyandproductivityofthesugarindustry,andtoprovideitsfunctions,powers,administrationandfinanceandfor related matters.The Directors took reasonable steps before the Institute’s financial statements were made out to ascertain that thecurrentassetsoftheInstitutewereshownintheaccountingrecordsatavalueequaltoorbelowthevaluethat would be expected to be realised in the ordinary course of business.Atthedateofthisreport,theDirectorsarenotawareofanycircumstanceswhichwouldrenderthevaluesattributable to the current assets in the financial statements to be misleading.All related party transactions have been adequately recorded in the financial statements.The Directors took reasonable steps before the Institute’s financial statements were made out to ascertain that all known bad debts were written off and adequate allowance was made for impairment losses.Atthedateofthisreport,theDirectorsarenotawareofanycircumstanceswhichwouldrendertheaboveassessment inadequate to any substantial extent.
1 Sugar Research Institute of FijiStatement of profit or loss and other comprehensive incomeFor the year ended 31 December 2018Note20182017$$Contributions and grants33,457,237 2,347,161 Estate income174,951 245,496 Other income4137,411 6,709 Total income3,769,599 2,599,366 Cost of operations5(2,624,869) (1,394,434) Administrative expenses6 (a)(1,161,750) (1,244,297) Deficit from operations (17,020) (39,365) Finance income717,739 39,365 Finance expense (719) - Deficit before tax- - Income tax benefit- - Balance at the beginning of the year- - Deficit for the year- - The notes on pages 9 to 20 are an integral part of these financial statements.6 Sugar Research Institute of FijiStatement of cash flowsFor the year ended 31 December 2018Note20182017$ $ Operating activitiesReceipts from stakeholders and donors4,772,793 1,916,203 Payment to suppliers and employees(3,379,672) (2,341,717) Interest received17,739 32,756 Net cash from / (used in) operating activities1,410,860 (392,758) Investing activitiesAcquisition of property, plant and equipment9(2,341,158) (359,845) Payment for intangible assets10- (2,453) Proceeds from sale of property, plant and equipment29,809 - Net cash used in investing activities (2,311,349) (362,298) Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents(900,489) (755,056) Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of the year2,240,430 2,995,486 Cash and cash equivalents at the end of the year111,339,941 2,240,430 The notes on pages 9 to 20 are an integral part of these financial statements.8 Sugar Research Institute of FijiNotes to and forming part of the Financial StatementsFor the year ended 31 December 20182.Basis of preparation and accounting policies (continued)(d)Functional and presentation currency(e)Foreign currency transactions(f)Property, plant and equipmentRecognition and measurementSubsequent costsDepreciationLand and building80 yearsComputers5 yearsFixtures and fittings10 yearsMotor vehicles6.67 yearsPlant and equipment6.67 - 10 yearsItemsofproperty,plantandequipmentaremeasuredatcostlessaccumulateddepreciationandimpairmentlosses.Costincludesexpenditurethatisdirectlyattributabletotheacquisitionoftheasset.Anygainandlossondisposalofanitemofplantandequipment(calculatedasadifferencebetweennetproceedsfromdisposal and carrying amount of the item) is recognised in profit or loss.Depreciationmethods,usefullivesandresidualvaluesarereassessedatreportingdateandadjustedifappropriate.Thecostofreplacingpartofanitemofproperty,plantandequipmentisrecognisedinthecarryingamountoftheitemifitisprobablethatthefutureeconomicbenefitembodiedwithinthepartwillflowtotheInstituteanditscostcanbemeasuredreliably.Thecostoftheday-to-dayservicingofproperty,plantandequipment are recognised in profit or loss as incurred.Depreciationiscalculatedtowriteoffthecostsofitemsofproperty,plantandequipmentlesstheirestimatedresidualvaluesusingthestraight-linemethodovertheirestimatedusefullives,andisrecognisedinprofitorloss.Theestimatedusefullivesofproperty,plantandequipmentforcurrentandcomparativeperiods are as follows:TransactionsinforeigncurrenciesaretranslatedtoFijidollarsatexchangeratesatthedatesofthetransactions.MonetaryassetsandliabilitiesdenominatedinforeigncurrenciesatthereportingdateareretranslatedtoFijidollarsattheexchangerateatthatdate.Theforeigncurrencygainsorlossesontranslation are recognised in profit or loss.ThefinancialstatementsarepresentedinFijidollars,roundedtothenearestdollar,whichistheInstitute'sfunctional currency, unless otherwise indicated.10 Sugar Research Institute of FijiNotes to and forming part of the Financial StatementsFor the year ended 31 December 20182.Basis of preparation and accounting policies (continued)(g)Intangible assetsRecognition and measurement AmortisationSoftware 5 years(h)(i) (j) (k) Impairment(l)Contributions and grantsTrade and other payablesAnimpairmentlossisreversedifmorehasbeenchargedintheestimatesusedtodeterminetherecoverableamountandisreversedonlytotheextentthattheasset'scarryingamountdoesexceedthecarryingamountthatwouldhavebeendetermined,netofdepreciationoramortisation,ifnoimpairmentlosshasbeenrecognised.Receivablesarestatedatcostlessallowancesfordoubtfuldebts.Thecollectabilityofdebtisassessedatbalancedateandspecificallowanceismadeforanyimpairment.Baddebtsarewrittenoffintheperiodthey are identified.
Receivables comprise receivables from related party, staff advances and deposits.Cash and cash equivalentsCash and cash equivalents comprises cash at bank and cash on hand.IntangibleassetsthatareacquiredbytheInstitutehaveafiniteusefullifeandaremeasuredatcostlessaccumulated amortisation and impairment losses.Intangibleassetsareamortisedonastraight-linebasisinprofitorlossovertheirestimatedusefullives,from the date that they are available for use.
The estimated useful life for the current and comparative years is as follows:ReceivablesTrade and other payables are obligations on the basis of normal credit terms and do not bear interest.Thecarryingamountofassetsarerenewedateachbalancedate,todeterminewhetherthereisanindicationofimpairment.Ifanysuchindicationexists,theassetsrecoverableamountsareestimatedateachbalancedate.Animpairmentlossisrecognisedwheneverthecarryingamountofanassetoritscashgeneratingamount exceeds its recoverable amount.
All impairment losses are recognised in profit or loss.GrantsarerecognisedinthestatementoffinancialpositioninitiallyasdeferredincomewhenthereisreasonableassurancethatitwillbereceivedandthattheInstitutewillcomplywiththeconditionsassociatedwiththegrant.Itisthenrecognisedintheprofitorlossasgrantincomeonasystematicbasisasthe Institute recognises expenses by achieving the relevant conditions of the grant.11 Sugar Research Institute of FijiNotes to and forming part of the Financial StatementsFor the year ended 31 December 20182.Basis of preparation and accounting policies (continued)(l)Contributions and grants (continued)(m)Employee benefitsSuperannuationEmployee entitlementsShort-term benefits(n)Receivable from related parties(o)Comparative figures3.Contributions and grants20182017$$Contribution from the Fiji Government594,366 544,795 European Union1,674,139 712,776 Fiji Sugar Corporation (FSC)594,366 544,795 Sugar Cane Growers594,366 544,795 3,457,237 2,347,161 Liabilityforannualleaveisrecognisedandmeasuredastheamountunpaidatthereportingdateatcurrentpay rates in respect of employee services up to that date.Aliabilityisrecognisedfortheamounttobepaidundershort-termbenefitiftheInstitutehasapresentorconstructiveobligationtopaythisamountasaresultofpastservicesprovidedbytheemployeeandtheobligations can be measured reliably.Theamountsreceivablefromrelatedpartiesarerecognisedwhenthereisacontractualreceivableorarightto receive.Short-termemployeebenefitobligationsaremeasuredonanundiscountedbasisandareexpensedintheprofit or loss as the related service is provided.Grantsthatrelatetotheacquisitionofanassetarerecognisedinprofitorlossastheassetisdepreciatedoramortised.TheInstitutechoosestopresentgrantincomeonagrossmethodthatis,recognisingentiregrantincome and than offsetting against expenses.ContributionsfromstakeholdersandgrantsthatcompensatetheInstituteforrevenueandcapitalexpenditure are recognised from deferred income as follows:Obligationsforcontributionstoadefinedcontributionplanarerecognisedasanexpenseinprofitorlosswhen they are due.Whennecessary,comparativefigureshavebeenadjustedtoconformtochangesincurrentyearpresentation.12 Sugar Research Institute of FijiNotes to and forming part of the Financial StatementsFor the year ended 31 December 2018201820174.Other income$$Gain on sale of fixed assets 29,809 - Outsource income 107,322 - Others 280 6,709 137,411 6,709 5.Cost of operationsAdvertising1,511 1,468 Amortisation496 27 Bank charges5,451 5,205 Consultancy fees21,015 - Depreciation389,023 306,026 Electricity47,568 39,777 EU Cost1,316,042 454,146 Communication expenses26,188 31,607 Material costs37,484 24,422 Motor vehicle running expenses107,194 156,357 Repairs and maintenances108,607 8,729 Subcontract expenses203,295 75,822 Travel - 400 Wages and salaries (refer note 6(b))360,995 290,448 Total cost of operations2,624,869 1,394,434 6.Expenses(a)Administrative expensesAuditors remuneration9,500 9,500 Accounting fees35,060 40,627 Accommodation and meals8,534 2,163 Annual leave expense13,449 7,554 Board allowance14,959 10,926 Cleaning and Landscaping 10,444 - Office security52,465 48,526 Office supplies21,774 - Director's fees78,935 79,109 Fiji National Provident Fund contributions105,028 96,437 Freight56,942 35,648 Fringe benefit tax6,531 13,174 General expenses13,011 142,141 Hire of services- 4,503 ICT consumables- 4,561 Balance carried forward426,632 494,869 13 Sugar Research Institute of FijiNotes to and forming part of the Financial StatementsFor the year ended 31 December 20186.Expenses (continued)20182017$$(a)Administrative expenses (continued)Balance carried forward426,632 494,869 Insurance46,443 60,241 Legal fees183 750 Land rent 12,419 - Loss on disposal- 19,276 Medical expense6,086 546 Media and publication17,753 2,335 Other expenses10,603 4,579 Postage623 897 Repair and maintenance39,867 2,119 Rent expense16,372 63,241 Staff expenses12,736 - Stationery5,155 998 Training and Productivity Authority of Fiji8,773 8,821 Travel7,026 - Utilities9,587 4,641 Wages and salaries (refer note 6(b))541,492 580,984 1,161,750 1,244,297 (b)Personnel expensesFiji National Provident Fund contributions105,02896,437Training and Productivity Authority of Fiji8,773 8,821Key management compensation - short term benefits99,326 99,687Wages and salaries803,161 771,7451,016,288976,690 7.Finance incomeInterest received17,739 39,365 8.Income tax benefit In 2012 the Fiji Revenue and Customs Services confirmed that the entity is not subject to income tax.14 Sugar Research Institute of Fiji Notes to and forming part of the Financial Statements For the year ended 31 December 2018 9.
Property, plant and equipment Cost Balance at 1 January 2017 Acquisitions Transferred during the year Balance at 1 January 2018 Acquisitions Disposal Balance as at 31 December 2018 Depreciation Balance at 1 January 2017 Depreciation charge Disposal Balance at 1 January 2018 Depreciation charge Disposal Balance at 31 December 2018 Carrying amount At 1 January 2017 At 1 January 2018 Land and building Fixtures and fittings Plant and equipment Motor vehicles Computers Work in Progress $ $ $ $ $ $ 2,877,822 - (20,835) 2,856,987 - - 2,856,987 165,378 32,223 (1,559) 196,042 31,875 - 227,917 130,939 9,181 - 140,120 22,199 - 162,319 40,530 11,452 - 51,982 13,706 - 65,688 2,002,944 226,689 - 2,229,633 703,545 - 2,933,178 975,233 211,855 - 1,187,088 236,003 - 1,423,091 1,203,909 116,752 - 1,320,661 317,459 (53,633) 1,584,487 1,114,152 28,310 - 1,142,462 76,768 (53,633) 1,165,597 357,634 7,223 - 364,857 63,040 - 427,897 285,380 22,186 - 307,566 30,671 - 338,237 2,712,444 90,409 1,027,711 89,757 72,254 2,660,945 88,138 1,042,545 178,199 57,291 - - - - 1,234,915 - 1,234,915 - - - - - - - - - Total $ 6,573,248 359,845 (20,835) 6,912,258 2,341,158 (53,633) 9,199,783 2,580,673 306,026 (1,559) 2,885,140 389,023 (53,633) 3,220,530 3,992,575 4,027,118 At 31 December 2018 2,629,070 96,631 1,510,087 418,890 89,660 1,234,915 5,979,253 15 Sugar Research Institute of FijiNotes to and forming part of the Financial StatementsFor the year ended 31 December 201810.IntangiblesSoftwareTotalCost$$Balance at 1 January 2017- - Acquisition2,480 2,480 Balance at 1 January 20182,480 2,480 Acquisition- - Balance at 31 December 20182,480 2,480 Accumulated amortisationBalance at 1 January 2017- - Amortisation27 27 Balance at 1 January 201827 27 Amortisation496 496 Balance at 31 December 2018523 523 Carrying amountsAt 1 January 20182,453 2,453 At 31 December 20181,957 1,957 2018201711.Cash and cash equivalents$$Cash at bank1,339,889 2,240,420 Cash on hand52 10 Cash and cash equivalents in the statement of cash flows1,339,941 2,240,430 12.Receivables and prepaymentsTrade receivables14,046 - Staff advances1,327 24,458 Deposits4,506 2,750 VAT receivable178,222 43,281 Interest receivable6,609 6,609 204,710 77,098 13.Deferred incomeStaff advances are recovered through payroll deductions.TheInstitute'sdeferredincomecomprisesofcashreceivedorreceivablefromthestakeholdersanddonoragencies.EachgrantreceivedorreceivablehasitsspecificconditionsthattheInstituteneedstocomply with.
The movement in deferred income is as follows:16 Sugar Research Institute of FijiNotes to and forming part of the Financial StatementsFor the year ended 31 December 201813.Deferred income (continued)20182017$$Balance at the beginning of the year11,144,379 10,393,323 Funds received or receivable during the period5,101,854 3,400,418 Utilised during the period(3,787,340) (2,649,362) Balance at 31 December12,458,893 11,144,379 This is comprised as follows:Fiji Government67,732 145,471 Fiji Sugar Corporation (FSC)6,399,043 6,297,062 Sugar Cane Growers 2,700,000 2,700,000 European Union grant2,834,061 1,869,154 Estate income248,515 130,834 Insurance income1,759 1,858 Other income207,783 - 12,458,893 11,144,379 14.Employee benefitsBalance at 1 January 18,716 11,162 Provision created / utilised during the year13,449 7,554 Balance at 31 December32,165 18,716 15.Trade and other payablesTrade payables42,010 25,200 Other payables72,965 60,618 114,975 85,818 16.Related parties(a)Board membersThe following are the Board members of the Institute during the financial year:Professor Rajesh Chandra - Chairman (re-appointed 2 March 2018)Dr K.S Shanmugha Sundaram (term expired on 1 March 2018)Mr Daniel Elisha (term expired on 1 March 2018)Mr Sundresh Chetty (term expired on 1 March 2018)Mr Graham ClarkMs Reshmi KumariDr Sanjay AnandMr Raj Sharma (appointed on 12 June 2018)Mr Ashween Nischal Ram (appointed on 18 June 2018)Professor Ravendra Naidu (appointed on 13 March 2018)RelatedpartiesoftheInstituteincludekeystakeholdersintheFijiSugarIndustry,namely,theGovernmentofFiji,FijiSugarCorporation,SouthPacificFertilizersLimited,SugarCaneGrowersFund and Sugar Cane Growers Council.Transactions with these parties and outstanding balances at year end are disclosed below.17 Sugar Research Institute of FijiNotes to and forming part of the Financial StatementsFor the year ended 31 December 201816.Related parties (continued)20182017$$(b)Amounts receivable from related partiesFiji Sugar Corporation - grant income6,424,999 6,267,499 Fiji Sugar
 Corporation - other income20,858 - Sugar Cane Growers 2,700,000 2,700,000 Allowance for uncollectability - Sugar Cane Growers(1,800,000) (1,800,000) 7,345,857 7,167,499 Reconciliation of Allowance for UncollectabilityBalance at the beginning of the year1,800,000 1,800,000 Provision created during the year- - Balance at the end of the year1,800,000 1,800,000 20182017$$(c)Amounts payable to related partiesFiji Sugar Corporation 2,265,685 2,265,685 2,265,685 2,265,685 (d)Outstanding debts owed from Fiji Sugar Corporation Limited$Balance at 31 December 20174,001,814 Contributions during the year900,000 Payments made in 2018(742,500) Balance at 31 December 20184,159,314 The payment terms were agreed as follow:(i)(ii)(iii)NetreceivablefromFijiSugarCorporationLimited("FSC")amountsto$4,159,314asat31December2018.Subsequenttoyearendon26February2019,aDeedofPaymentwassignedbetweentheInstituteandFSC.FSCagreedandacknowledgedthatitowedasumamountingto$4,009,314asat31October2018totheInstitutewhichwasFSC'scontributiontowardsSRIF'soperations as per Section 11(2) of the Sugar Research Institute of Fiji Act 2005.Theamountof$250,000willbepaidbyFSCin2019,with2equalinstalmentsof$125,000each payable on 30 August and 31 December respectively;Theremainingbalanceof$3,759,314willbepayablebyFSCoverthenext4years(2020-2023)in8equalinstalmentsof$469,914payableon30Augustand31Decembereachyear;the repayments will be at zero interest.Theamountstipulatedintheagreementis$4,009,314whichistheamountasat31October2018.Thenet receivable amount as at 31 December 2018 is $4,159,314 and is reconciled as follows:Receivables from related parties are interest free and receivable as and when required.18 Sugar Research Institute of FijiNotes to and forming part of the Financial StatementsFor the year ended 31 December 201816.Related parties (continued)(e)Transactions with related parties20182017Deferred income$$Grant income - Fiji Sugar Corporation681,193 825,688 Grant income - Fiji Government825,688 1,238,532 Grant
 income - Sugar Cane Growers825,688 825,688 Estate income - Fiji Sugar Corporation292,633 225,993 2,625,202 3,115,901 (f)Key management personnelKey management compensation is disclosed under Note 6(b).17.Capital commitments and contingencies18.Explanation of transition to IFRS for SMEs(a)Adjustments to statement of financial position as at 1 January 2017(b)Adjustments to statement of cash flows for 2017Capital commitments and contingent liabilities as at 31 December 2018 amounted to $Nil (2017: KeymanagementpersonnelincludetheChiefExecutiveOfficerandFinanceandAdministrationManager of the Institute.Transactionswithkeymanagementpersonnelarenofavourablethanthoseavailable,orwhichmightbe reasonably be expected to be available, on similar transactions to third parties on an arm's length.AsstatedinNote2(a),thesearetheInstitute’sfirstfinancialstatementspreparedinaccordancewithIFRS for SMEs.
In prior years, the Institute prepared its financial statements under IFRS.TheaccountingpoliciessetoutinNote2havebeenappliedinpreparingthefinancialstatementsfortheyearended31December2018,thecomparativeinformationpresentedinthesefinancialstatementsfortheyearended31December2017andinthepreparationofanopeningIFRSstatementof financial position at 1 January 2017 (the Institute's date of transition).InpreparingitsopeningIFRSforSMEstatementoffinancialposition,therewerenoadjustmentsrequiredbytheInstitutetothepreviouslyreportedamountsinthefinancialstatementsinaccordancewith International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS).
TherewerenodifferencesbetweenthestatementoffinancialpositionpresentedunderIFRSforSMEsand the statement of financial position previously reported under IFRS.TherewerenodifferencesbetweenthestatementofcashflowspresentedunderIFRSforSMEsandthe statement of cash flows previously reported under IFRS.19 Sugar Research Institute of FijiNotes to and forming part of the Financial StatementsFor the year ended 31 December 201819.Events subsequent to balance dateTherehasnotarisenintheintervalbetweentheendoftheyearandthedateofthisreportanyitem,transactionoreventofamaterialandunusualnaturelikely,intheopinionoftheBoardMembers,toaffectsignificantlytheoperationsoftheInstitute,theresultsofthoseoperationsorthestateofaffairsof the Institute in subsequent financial years.20 9.0 FINANCIAL REPORT Page 97 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Page 98 9.0 FINANCIAL REPORT © Sugar Research Institute of Fiji, 2018.
P. O.

Box 3560, Lautoka.

Ph: +679 8921839 Ph.

: +679 8921840 Email: info@srif.org.fj Website: www.srif.net.fj Rarawai (Ba) Office: +679 8907343.

Wairuku (Rakiraki) Office: +679 8907344.

Batinikama (Labasa) Office: +679 8907345.

2018 SRIF ANNUAL REPORT