2000
DOI: 10.2135/cropsci2000.0025rcv
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Registration of ‘CP 89‐2143’ Sugarcane

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
78
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 80 publications
(78 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
78
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Average stalk population and cane and sucrose yields across clones were the highest in 2011 and lowest in 2013. CP 78-1628 (Tai et al, 1991), CP 89-2143 (Glaz et al, 2000), CP 00-1101 (Gilbert et al, 2008) were major check cultivars in the Stage II fields and each had 23 to 27 replicated plots in each experimental year. Although data of rust diseases in Stage II for this study were not analyzed, orange rust and brown rust ratings in the first clonal stage (Stage I, adjacent to Stage II) of the CP program in 2012 and 2013 were higher than those in the previous several years (Zhao et al, 2015a,b).…”
Section: Yield Traitsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Average stalk population and cane and sucrose yields across clones were the highest in 2011 and lowest in 2013. CP 78-1628 (Tai et al, 1991), CP 89-2143 (Glaz et al, 2000), CP 00-1101 (Gilbert et al, 2008) were major check cultivars in the Stage II fields and each had 23 to 27 replicated plots in each experimental year. Although data of rust diseases in Stage II for this study were not analyzed, orange rust and brown rust ratings in the first clonal stage (Stage I, adjacent to Stage II) of the CP program in 2012 and 2013 were higher than those in the previous several years (Zhao et al, 2015a,b).…”
Section: Yield Traitsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The CP cultivars now account for more than 90% of the hectarage in Florida up from 14% in 1970. In 2012, the top six major sugarcane cultivars grown in Florida were 'CP 89-2143' (Glaz et al, 2000), 'CP 88-1762' (Tai et al, 1997), 'CP 00-1101' (Gilbert et al, 2008), 'CP 96-1252' (Edme and, 'CL 88-4730' (a cultivar of the United States Sugar Corporation) and 'CP 78-1628' (Tai et al, 1991) and their percent hectares were 20.7, 19.2, 10.2, 8.6, 7.4 and 7.3%, respectively (Rice et al, 2013).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In March, 2013, the 300 accessions selected from the WCSRG (Nayak et al 2014; as the diversity panel, along with nine commercial sugarcane cultivars (i.e., CP 00-1101 (Gilbert et al 2008)), CP 01-1372 (Edmé et al 2009), CP 03-1912(Gilbert et al 2011), CP 72-2086(Miller et al 1984, CP 78-1628 (Tai et al 1991), CP 88-1762 (Tai et al 1997), CP 89-2143 (Glaz et al 2000), CP 96-1252 (Edmé et al 2005), CPCL 00-4111 (Glynn et al 2011), and one high yielding sugarcane genotype (CP 01-2390) planted as checks, were established in 37 × 37 cm pots in a randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replicates per entry (March 2013). All pots were placed in containers (29 × 41 × 52.5 cm) with a drain hole 5 cm above the ground.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%