IJERDInternational Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2018) 9-2

Research article

Evaluation of Seed Cane Treatments on Sugarcane
Germination in Two Planting Methods

erd

KHAING THA ZIN OO*
Department of Agronomy, Yezin Agricultural University, Nay Pyi Taw, Myanmar
Email: kthazinoo5@gmail.com

AUNG MYO THANT
Department of Agronomy, Yezin Agricultural University, Nay Pyi Taw, Myanmar

KYAW KYAW WIN
Department of Agronomy, Yezin Agricultural University, Nay Pyi Taw, Myanmar

KYI TOE
Department of Plant Breeding, Physiology and Ecology, Yezin Agricultural University,Nay Pyi Taw, Myanmar

EI EI KHAING
Yezin Agricultural University, Nay Pyi Taw, Myanmar
Received 31 December 2017

Accepted 15 October 2018(*Corresponding Author)

Abstract The experiments were conducted in the glasshouse of Sugarcane Research andDevelopment Farm, Pyinmana to evaluate the effect of seed cane treatments on sugarcane
germination of K-95/84 variety in two planting methods from August-October 2015 andJune-August 2016. The glasshouse experiments were conducted in 2×4 factorial
arrangement in Randomized Complete Block Design (RCB) with three replications. Itevaluated two different planting methods (single budded setts and three budded setts) withpre-planting treatments by using different levels of lime (0, 7.5, 15, 22.5 g l-1), different
levels of topsin fungicide (0, 0.5, 1, 1.5 g l-1) and different degree of hot water (0, 50, 52,54 C). Single b dded e ga e he ea lie and highe pe cen age of ge mina ion han h eebudded setts. Among the pre-planting treatments, the earliest and higher percentage ofgermination was obtained from the lowest level of lime 7.5 g l-1 (L1), topsin fungicide 0.5 gl-1 (F1) and ho a e 50 C (H1) treatments. As a combined effect of two factors, single
budded setts with lime 7.5 g l-1 (SL1), topsin fungicide 0.5 g l-1 (SF1) and single budded setts
i h ho a e 50 C (SH1) gave maximum germination. Thus, this study highlighted thatthe single budded setts with lime 7.5 g l-1, topsin fungicide 0.5 g l-1 and ho a e 50 C
treatment should be used for the uniformity of germination.
Keywords sugarcane, planting method, pre-planting treatment, germination

INTRODUCTION
Sugarcane (Saccharum spp.) is one of the priority crops for many regions of the world including
Myanmar. Its domestic production, local consumption and international trade were graduallyprogressed in Myanmar (MOAI, 2005).
Seed material is one of the costlier inputs in sugarcane and accounts for nearly 25% of thetotal production. The conventional use of three-eye setts imposes high cost to the estate andgrowers resulting in the shortage of planting materials. The use of high planting rates also forces anincrease in the acreage of seed cane which competes for fertile land (Netsanet et al., 2014). Thesize of the cutting has a significant effect on both the percentage of germinated buds and the vigourof the cane plants (Croft, 2000).

Ⓒ ISERD

14

IJERDInternational Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2018) 9-2

The planting materials which have suitable sett size and seed rate, without any harmful effecton plant stand, may help in receiving higher cane yield with lower cost of production (Patel andRinku, 2014). Moreover, pre-planting treatments should be used to protect the crop from soil borne
diseases, sett rotting and damage to buds which affected the germination. It may be achieved about
60% by sett treatment which is quite simple and cheap (Sundara, 1998).
In Myanmar, most of the sugarcane farmers used to grow three-budded setts as planting
materials without pre-planting treatments. It seems that three-budded setts generally cannot givethe uniform germination as of an individual bud and damage to the setts can cause large gaps along
the cane rows. To overcome the poor germination and poor crop stand, the suitable cane treatments,cane sett size and planting methods are essential for commercial sugarcane planting. Based on theabove information, it seems that the evaluation of germination is still the critical component insugarcane cultivation as well as varietal assessment before releasing a new variety (Sanda Kyaw
Win and San Thein, 2006).
OBJECTIVESThis study aimed to find out the suitable seed cane treatment for uniform germination and crop
stand, and to compare germination percentage and vigorous of sugarcane affected by seed canetreatments and planting methods.
METHODOLOGY
The e gla ho e e pe imene e cond c ed in 2 4 fac o ial a angemen in Randomi edComple e Block (RCB) de ign i h h ee eplica ion in S ga cane Re ea ch and De elopmen
Fa m, P inmana. I e al a ed on o diffe en plan ing me hod ( ingle b dded e and h eeb dded e ) i h h ee p e-plan ing ea menhich incl de diffe en le el of lime (0, 7.5, 15,-1
22.5 g l ), diffe en le el of op in f ngicide (0, 0.5, 1, 1.5 g l-1) and diffe en deg ee of ho a e(0, 50, 52, 54 C). Ze o (0) le el in each e pe imen efe ed o a con ol ea men . The canee
ed in all ea mene e c in o ingle b dded e and h ee b dded e befo e plan ing.
The eo e of cane e c ing
e e oaked in each ol ion of diffe en p e-plan ing
ea men fo 30 min e .
The n mbe of hoo ge mina ed e e co n ed a 3 da in e al f om 4 o 45 da af eplan ing (DAP). The WGP and FGP e e calc la ed b he e a ion (1) and (2) (Al-M da i ,1998).
Weighted Germination Percentage WGP

rth n1+ r−1 th n +⋯+1th n15 10015(1)Whe e n1, n2, , n15 a e he n mbe of cane e ge mina ed on he 1 , 2nd and con e endan il 45 DAP in each hich i m l iplied b he co n ing ime , h ( p o 15 h co n in hie pe imen ). The eigh ed ge mina ion pe cen age (WGP) a calc la ed b gi ing ma im meigh o he eed ha ge mina ed fi and p og e i el leeigh o ha ge mina ed eb e en l . N i he o al n mbe of e e b d placed fo ge mina ion.
Final ge mina ion pe cen age - Ge mina ion co n i onl ba ed on he n mbe of e e-b dpe o , ega dle of he cane e leng h.
Final Germination Percentage FGP

inal n m er o hoot germinatedtotal n m er o e e d eeded

100(2)The da a e e bjec ed o anal i of a iance b
ing S a i i ( e ion-8) of a e andmean compa i on e e done b Lea Significan Diffe en (LSD) a 5% le el.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONⒸ ISERD

15

IJERDInternational Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2018) 9-2

Weighted Germination Percentage (WGP) and Final Germination Percentage of Lime
Experiment
The e a highlignifican diffe en in eigh ed ge mina ion pe cen age (WGP) in lime
e pe imen . In lime e pe imen , ingle b dded e ga e fa e ge mina ion peed, al o called
WGP han h ee b dded e o e all in Table 1, al ho gh hee e he ame ge mina ionpe cen age a la . The e a 482.02% in WGP in ingle b dded e plan ing he ea 360.25%
WGP in h ee b dded e plan ing me hod. Ho e e , he e a no diffe ence in he ge mina edb d a he end, hich bo h acco n ed fo nea l 87% of final ge mina ion pe cen age (FGP).
Acco ding o Singh and G p ee (2015), a mall ol me of i e and a ingle oo p imo dialadhe ing o he b d a e ade a e o en e ge mina ion of he b d. Thi finding a al o ob e edb Chen e al.1981 ha p e ea mench a oaking he eed c ing in ol ion of CaCO3,MgSO4, and KOH co ld enhance he ge mina ion ofga cane c ing
nde labo a ocondi ion .
Fig. 1 hoha diffe en le el of lime ea men e e a i icall ignifican in WGP in oplan ing me hod b no in FGP. The e a no no iceabl diffe en in WGP in each plan ing
me hod b ingle b dded e plan ing me hod ipe io o h ee b dded e plan ing. The lime
-1le el (7.5 g l ) ho ld be elec ed beca e of lo amo n of do age hich o ld be economical
fo he fa me .
Table 1 Comparison of WGP and FGP in different levels of treatments in two planting
methods
Lime E pe imen
F ngicide E pe imen
Ho Wa e E pe imen
WGP (%)
FGP (%)WGP (%)
FGP (%)WGP (%)
FGP (%)
Single b dded e
482.02 a87.77 a493.79 a
92.22 a367.22 a75.55 aTh ee b dded e360.25 b
87.22 a355.05 b83.88 b
321.82 a
81.66 a
LSD0.0542.87
10.49
33.23
7.86
51.37
9.47
P >F
<0.01
0.91
<0.01
0.04
0.08
0.19
CV%
11.63
13.70
8.94
10.20
17.03
13.77
Mean al e follo ed b he ame le e in each col mn a e no ignifican l diffe en a 5% LSD le el.
Plan ing Me hod

Weighted Germination Percentage (WGP) and Final Germination Percentage (FGP) ofTopsin Fungicide Experiment
A in lime e pe imen , he o plan ing me hod e e highl ignifican l diffe en in WGP inop in f ngicide e pe imen (Table 1). Single b dded e plan ing me hod ga e he highe peed ofge mina ion han h ee-e e e . The WGP in ingle b dded ea 493.79% hich a almo
one- hi d highe han ha of h ee b dded e plan ing (355.05%).
The e a al o ignifican diffe en in final ge mina ion pe cen age in f ngicide e pe imen a
LSD 5% le el. Single b dded e plan ing ho ed he highe ge mina ion hich acco n ed fo
92.22% compa ed o he 83.88% in FGP of h ee b dded e plan ing (Table 1). Tal kde e al.
(2007) epo ed haemic f ngicide helped in imp o ing ga cane e ge mina ion b hep o ec ion f om he f ng di ea e and imila l ignifican l inc ea ed he cane ield.
In Fig. 2, i can be concl ded ha ingle b dded e plan ing a highe in WGP and FGP ineach diffe en le el of op in f ngicide ea men . None of op in f ngicide ea menee
ignifican l diffe en i h each o he in bo h WGP and FGP e cep he con ol ea men ( e ole el of f ngicide hich mean p a ing a e onl o he plan ). The efo e, he lo e le el of
op in f ngicide (0.5 g l-1) can be ecommended o ea he cane e befo e plan ing if hego ei hed o e f ngicide ea men .
Weighted Germination Percentage (WGP) and Final Germination Percentage (FGP) of Hot
Water Experiment
In hoa e e pe imen , he ee e noa i icall diffe en inⒸ ISERD

16eigh ed ge mina ion and final

IJERDInternational Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2018) 9-2ge mina ion in bo h plan ing me hod (Table 1).

Fig. 1 Weighted germination percentage (WGP) and final germination percentage (FGP) as
affected by different levels of lime treatment in two plating methods

Fig. 2 Weighted germination percentage (WGP) and final germination percentage (FGP) as
affected by different levels of topsin fungicide treatment in two planting methods

Fig. 3 Weighted germination percentage (WGP) and final germination percentage (FGP) as
affected by different degree of hot water treatment in two planting methodsⒸ ISERD17IJERDInternational Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2018) 9-2

Ho e e , he combined effec of plan ing me hod and diffe en le el of ho a e ea mene e ignifican l diffe en in bo h WGP and FGP (Fig. 1). The ho a e le el (52 C) ho ed hehighe pe cen age in WGP in bo h plan ing me hod hich a no a i icall diffe f om 50 Cof ho a e . The lo e peed of ge mina ion a ob e ed a he ho a e le el (54 C). T ippi
(1961) a ed ha he ge mina ion of he b d in ga cane c ing a im la ed b ho a eea men a 50 C. Simila l , Goodall (1998) epo ed ha a oon n ing di ea e i elimina ed andge mina ion i no nd l ad e el affec ed bing he ho ening hea ea men .
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, these experiments were conducted to determine the suitable seed cane treatment forsugarcane germination which will support for the farmers in choosing the seed cane treatment
before planting. In addition, the experiment can reveal the suitable planting method for the farmers
who normally familiar with the three budded sett planting techniques in Myanmar.
The results showed that single budded sett planting gave the higher germination percentage interms of speed and the final germinated buds. Single budded sett planting were higher in WGP thanthose of three budded sett planting method in both lime and topsin fungicide treatments.
Among the different levels of treatments, the lowest levels of lime, topsin fungicide and hot
water degree showed the higher percentage and speed of germination in both planting methods. Asa recommendation, this research should be undertaken for further study in different regions anddifferent seasons of the country to verify the strong result in sugarcane cultivation.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to thank Dr. Myo Kywe (Rector), Dr. Kyaw Kyaw Win (Head ofAgronomy) and the administrative team of Yezin Agricultural University for their cooperation
throughout this research. In addition, we appreciate a partial support of this research by Myanma
Awba Group Co. ltd. for funding and the Sugarcane Research and Development Farm, Pyinmanafor allowing to conduct experiments in their glasshouses.
REFERENCES
Al-Mudaris, A.M. 1998. Notes on various parameters recording the speed of seed germination. Der.
Tropenlandalrt, 2, 147-154.
Chen, J.B., Lo, C.C., Yang, C.P. and Ho, W.F. 1981. Effect of freshness and pretreatment on the germinationof seed cuttings of sugar cane variety ROC 1. Rept., Taiwan, Sug. Res. Inst., 93, 1-10.
Croft, J.B. 2000. Literature review of improving the germination of sugarcane. Sugar Research Australia Ltd.
Bureau of Sugarcane Experiment Stations Queensland, Australia. 15.
Dillewijn, V.C. 1952. Botany of Sugarcane. The Chronica Botanica Co., Waltham, Mass. 371.
Goodall, L.J. 1998. Factors affecting germnation and growth of sugarcane tranplants. Master of Science.
Department of Microbiology and Plant Pathology, University of Natal, 170, Pietermaritzburg.
MOAI. 2005. Myanmar agriculture planning. Master Plan from 1999-2000 to 2029-2030, Ministry ofAgriculture and Irrigation, Myanmar.
Netsanet, A., Abiy, G., Tadesse, N. and Zinaw, D. 2014. Effect of planting density on yield and yield effectof planting density on yield and yield. Scholarly Journal of Agricultural Science, 4 (12), 583-586.
Patel, D. and Rinku, P. 2014. Influence of sett size, seed rate and sett treatment on yield and quality ofsugarcane. The Bioscan, 9 (1), 55-57.
Singh, G. and Gurpreet, K. 2015. Infusion of single bud chip planting technique for sugarcane propagation.
Journal of Economics and Development, 11 (1), 10-15.
Sundara, B. 1998. Sugarcane cultivation. Vikas Publishing House Pvt. Ltd., 156-234, New Delhi.
Talukderr, I.M., Begum, F. and Azad, M.K.M. 2007. Management of pineapple disease of sugarcane throughbiological means. J. Agric. Rural Dev., 5 (1 and 2), 79-83.
Trippi, V.S. 1961. Action of hot and cold water on the germination of cane. Sugar Azucar, 56 (10), 38.
Win, K.S. and Thein, S. 2006. Effects of variety, methods of fertilizer placement, and seed-pieces treatmentsⒸ ISERD

18

IJERDInternational Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2018) 9-2

on germination response of sugarcane. Proceeding of Second Agricultural Research Conference, 236-237,
Yezin, Nay Pyi Taw.

Ⓒ ISERD19