 |
Title : To
investigate the effect of using Urea-Acetaldehyde as a Nitrogen fertilizer for
sugarcane.
Author : R
.S.Sachan, A.T. Yaragattikar,P,Y,Keskar , R.G.Menon and H.L.Kulkarny.
An earlier pot
culture study had indicated that the loss of Nitrogen through leaching was significantly
lower when Urea-Acetaldehyde is the sourse of Nitrogen supply than when the source is
Urea. To verify this finding on a field scale and to work out the economics of using
Urea-Acetaldehyde as a nitrogenous fertilizer on a commercial scale for sugarcane an
experiment was laid out as per details furnished in Table XII.
The Nitrogen
status of the soil in each plot was determined before planting and after harvest of the
experiment. Cane samples were drawn and analysed for juice quality at harvest. The crop
was harvested on 15th December 1976 and the data recorded are summerised in Table XII.
Table XII.
Experiment Study on Slow Release Nitrogen Fertilizer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Variety
: Co 6415 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Replication
: Four |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Plot
size : 9 M. x 12 M. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Date
of Planting Nursery : 17th December 1975 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Date
of Transplanting: 10th Jan.l 1976 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Date
of Gap filling : 22nd Jan. 1976. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Date
of Harvest : 15th December 1976. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
(A-1 ) 250 Kg/ha N as Urea in 3 split doses 50 Kg at planting,
100 Kg at 8 weeks, 100 Kg at 15 weeks. |
| |
(A-2 ) 200 Kg/ha N as Urea in 3 split doses 50 Kg at planting, 75
Kg at 8 weeks, 75 Kg at 8 weeks. |
| |
(A-3 ) 150 Kg/ha N as Urea in 3 split doses 50 Kg at planting, 50
Kg at 8 weeks, 50 Kg at 15 weeks. |
|
(A-4 ) 100 Kg/ha N as Urea in 3 split doses 50 Kg at planting, 25
Kg at 8 weeks, 25 Kg at 15 weeks. |
| |
(B-1) 250 Kg/ha N as Urea - Acetaldehyde, all at planting |
|
|
|
|
| |
(B-2) 200 Kg/ha N as Urea - Acetaldehyde, all at planting |
|
|
|
|
| |
(B-3) 150 Kg/ha N as Urea - Acetaldehyde, all at planting |
|
|
|
|
|
(B-4) 100 Kg/ha N as Urea - Acetaldehyde, all at planting |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From the above it will
be seen that dose for dose, in terms of Nitrogen, there was no significant difference in
yield attributable to Urea-Acetaldehyde, at any of the levels included in the experiment.
The canes fertilized with ;Urea-Acetaldehyde, recorded higher purities than those
fertilized with ;Urea, excepting at the lowest level of N. The difference at the 250
Kg/N/ha was as much as seven units. This is possibly the effect of the extended period in
which nitrogen was applied in the latter case. There is no significant difference in the
residual nitrogen left in the soil between ;the two forms of nitrogen, dose for
dose. Presumably the slower rate of release of nitrogen from Urea- Acetaldehyde is just
about compensated by the effect of splitting the application of Urea. There is no
indication that for sugarcane, the use of Urea-Acetaldehyde holds any advantage over split
application of Urea, especially at current price levels.
|
|