Registration of ‘L 97‐128’ Sugarcane

Gravois, K. A.; Bischoff, K. P.; Milligan, S. B.; Martin, F. A.; Hoy, J. W.; Reagan, T. E.; Kimbeng, C. A.; LaBorde, C. M.; Hawkins, G. L.

doi:10.3198/jpr2007.08.0489crc

Cited by 18 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Without ripener application, HoCP 04‐838 had moderate sugar content (TRS) (Table 7). Its TRS was greater than HoCP 96‐540 and L 99‐233, similar to ‘L 97‐128’ (Gravois et al, 2008), and less than L 99‐226, HoCP 00‐950, and L 01‐283. The application of glyphosate increased TRS in HoCP 04‐838 by an average of 11 g kg −1 in 2012.…”

Section: Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 89%

Registration of ‘HoCP 04‐838’ Sugarcane

Todd¹,

White²,

Dufrene³

et al. 2018

J of Plant Registrations

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

HoCP 04-838' (Reg. No. CV-181, PI 687221) sugarcane (interspeciic hybrids of Saccharum spp.) was selected and evaluated by scientists at the USDA-ARS, working cooperatively with the Louisiana State University Agricultural Center, and the American Sugarcane League, Inc., from a cross between the female parent 'HoCP 85-845' and the male parent 'LCP 85-384'. It was released to growers in Louisiana in May 2011. Yields from three crops (plant, irst ratoon, and second ratoon) at 12 farm locations compared well with HoCP 96-540, the most widely grown cultivar in Louisiana during that time. The plant-cane sucrose yield (Mg ha −1 ) of HoCP 04-838 was equivalent to HoCP 96-540, and cane yield was signiicantly higher than HoCP 96-540. HoCP 04-838 is earlier maturing than HoCP 96-540 but not as early as 'HoCP 00-950', the high sucrose standard cultivar. Mature stalk cold tolerance was similar to LCP 85-384, the cold tolerance standard. HoCP 04-838 is resistant to smut, mosaic caused by Sorghum mosaic virus, brown rust, and ratoon stunt. HoCP 04-838 is moderately resistant to leaf scald and is susceptible to Sugarcane yellow leaf virus. It is resistant to sugarcane borer. HoCP 04-838's high yield potential and cold tolerance make it a useful addition to existing commercial sugarcane cultivars in Louisiana.

show abstract

Section: Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 89%

Registration of ‘HoCP 04‐838’ Sugarcane

Todd¹,

White²,

Dufrene³

et al. 2018

J of Plant Registrations

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…That study utilized 35 cultivars grown in single-row plots, 4.9 m long and 1.8 m apart replicated four times, arranged in randomized complete blocks. For this experiment, samples from five recent cultivars were used: HoCP 00-950 [31], HoCP 96-540 [32], L 97-128 [13], L 99-226 [4], and HoCP 01-534. Four of these, HoCP 00-950, HoCP 96-540, L 97-128, and L 99-226 are in current production in Louisiana [14].…”

Section: First Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sugarcane Internode Composition During Crop Development

Lingle¹,

Thomson²

2011

Bioenerg. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The objective of the experiment was to determine the impacts of growing soybean during the conventional spring/summer sugarcane fallow period on subsequent sugarcane plant-cane yield in Louisiana. Two sugarcane varieties were chosen, 'HoCP 96-540' and 'L 97-128,' due to their slow and rapid emergence, respectively (10,31). Starter fertilizer was added as a treatment to offset possible negative impacts of the soybean crop on seedcane growth.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sugarcane Yield Response to Soybean Double-cropping in Louisiana

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Planting a soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr] crop during the fallow period between sugarcane plantings represents an economical opportunity for sugarcane growers in Louisiana. The objective of the experiment was to determine if soybean grown in the fallow period would affect the primary crop, sugarcane, through cane yield, theoretical recoverable sugar (TRS), and sugar yield. The experiment was conducted in two successive years (2004 and 2005) with two sugarcane varieties: ‘L 97‐128’ and ‘HoCP 96‐540.’ With and without starter fertilizer at the time of planting sugarcane was included to determine if potential yield loss associated with soybean could be mitigated with fertilizer. Soybean did not reduce cane yield, TRS, or sugar yield, with mean values of 48 tons/acre, 220 lbs/ton, and 10,400 lbs/acre, respectively. Plant‐cane yield was marginally higher in fields cropped to soybean (49 tons/acre) when compared to fallow (47 tons/acre) (P = 0.072). There was no sugarcane variety or starter fertilizer response observed. Across years soybean yielded 40 bu/acre, which at current commodity prices ($11.45/bu) make the crop worth $460/acre. Calculated total observed costs for the soybean crop were $214/acre, with a net profit of $246/acre. Overall, soybean cropped between sugarcane plantings provide an economic incentive to growers and does not affect subsequent sugarcane yields.

show abstract

Registration of ‘L 97‐128’ Sugarcane

Cited by 18 publications

References 6 publications

Registration of ‘HoCP 04‐838’ Sugarcane

Registration of ‘HoCP 04‐838’ Sugarcane

Sugarcane Internode Composition During Crop Development

Sugarcane Yield Response to Soybean Double-cropping in Louisiana

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About