National Academy of Agricultural Sciences (NAAS)
|
PRINT ISSN : 2319-7692
Online ISSN : 2319-7706 Issues : 12 per year Publisher : Excellent Publishers Email : editorijcmas@gmail.com / submit@ijcmas.com Editor-in-chief: Dr.M.Prakash Index Copernicus ICV 2018: 95.39 NAAS RATING 2020: 5.38 |
Fifteen sugarcane clones including two checks 2003V 46 and CO 86032 were studied in two plant and one ratoon across three farming situations from 2022-23 to 2023-24 to identify clones tolerant to delayed harvest (10 to 13th months of crop age) and delayed crushing (0, 24,48 and 72 hrs) after harvest. Data was recorded on cane and estimated sugar yield at harvest. Juice quality parameters (Sucrose and purity) and juice quality deterioration characters (Dextrans and Reducing sugars) were determined at 10, 11, 12 and 13th months of crop age at 24 hrs interval (from immediately after harvest to 72 hrs after crop harvest. Among the test clones, the high cane and sugar yielding clones viz; 2016T 7, 2003V 46 TC, CO A 14328 in early and 2009V 89 and COA 19322 in midlate recorded low per cent reducing sugars and dextrans and higher per cent juice sucrose and purity compared to the check CO 86032 but on par with the best check 2003V 46 TC under delayed harvest and delayed crushing at each harvest in all the farming situations. Dextrans increased linearly among the clones upto 12th months of crop age and then decreased at 13th month of crop age while per cent reducing sugars increased progressively with the increase in the crop age (10 th to 13th month). Both per cent reducing sugars and dextrans progressively increased with increase in time lag intervals of crushing (0 to 72 hrs after harvest). Dextrans were found high in early clones while per cent reducing sugars were observed to be high in midlate clones. Dextrans were found to be high in ratoons whereas percent reducing sugars were high in plant crops. Among the three- farming situation FSI: Sandy soils with bore well irrigation followed by FSII: Garden lands with limited irrigation and FSIII: Wetlands with well irrigation were observed to be the favorable environments in quality retention for longer period.
Bhatia S, Jyoti Uppal S K, Thind K S and Batta SK. 2009. Postharvest quality deterioration in Sugarcane under different environmental conditions. Sugar Tech. 11(2):154-56 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12355-009-0023-7
Eggleston G, Legendre B and Richard C. 2001. Effect of harvest methods and storage time in sugarcane deterioration. International sugar Journal.103: 1232.
Eggleston G, Morel PG and Walford. 2008. A review of sugarcane deterioration in the United States Africa. Proceedings of the South African sugar Technologists’ Association. 81:72-85.
Eggleston G. 2002. Deterioration of cane juice – Sources and Indicators. Food Chemistry 78(1):95-103. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0308-8146(01)00390-9
Kim D and Robyt J F. 1995. Production, selection and characterization of mutants of Leuconostoc mesenteroids B742 constitutive of dextransucrase. Enzyme and Microbial Technology. 17:689-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/0141-0229(94)00021-I
Kouzi and Kontro M H. 2024. The relationship between harvesting methods and dextran formation in sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) and quality indices. South African Journal of Botany. 167: 190-196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sajb.2024.02.024
Magdum D N, Kadam S K and Patil M D. 1987. Post harvest deterioration of sugarcane under different storage conditions and consequent losses. Cooperative sugar.18 (70:453-460.
Meade G P and Chen J C P. 1977. Cane Sugar Handbook John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Miller ML. 1959. Use of Dinitrosalysic acid reagent for determination of reducing sugar. Annals of Chemistry. 81;72-85.
Naidu N V, Sreedhar M, Sabitha N, Hemalatha T M and Vajanta B. 2024. Parameters of juice quality deterioration in sugarcane. International Journal of Advanced Biochemistry Research. SP- 8(2):509-13. https://doi.org/10.33545/26174693.2024.v8.i2Sg.619
Panse V G. and Sukhatme P.V. 1985. Statistical Methods for Agricultural Workers. Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi.
Saxena P, Srivastava R P and Sharma M. L 2010. Impact of cut to crush delay and biochemical changes in sugarcane. Australian Journal of Crop Science 4(9):692-699.
Singh P, Singh M M and Singh J. 2020. Post harvest quality profiles of some promising sugarcane cultivars under sub- tropical conditions. Sugar Tech. 22: 933-938. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12355-020-00845-8
Singh P, Solomon S, Prajapati C P, Sanjay Kumar, Misra V and Chandra A. 2015. Deterioration of fresh and stale cane juice at high temperatures in relation to expression of invertases and the growth of Leuconostic sp. Agrica 4: 79-85. http://dx.doi.org/10.5958/2394-448X.2015.00014.0
Solomon S, Shrivastava A.K, Singh P, Singh I, Anita S and Prajapati C P. 2008. An assessment of postharvest sucrose losses in sugarcane billets under sub- tropical conditions. 110: 236-241.
Solomon S, Singh P and Shrivastava A. 2011. Physico- chemical methods of preserving sucrose in harvested cane at high temperature in Sub- tropical climate. Sugar Tech 1: 60-67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12355-011-0075-3
Solomon S. 2009. Postharvest deterioration of sugarcane. SugarTech 2:109-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12355-009-0018-4
Verma A K, Singh SB, Agarwal A.K and Solomon S. 2012. Influence of postharvest temperature, time and invertase enzyme activity on sucrose and weight loss in sugarcane. Postharvest Biology and Technology.73:14-21.
Citations |
 |
 |
 |
 |
