Agronomy Journal Grow Your Career With ASA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (15)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Glaz, B.
Right arrow Articles by Holder, D. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Glaz, B.
Right arrow Articles by Holder, D. G.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Glaz, B.
Right arrow Articles by Holder, D. G.
Related Collections
Right arrow Sugarcane
Agronomy Journal 94:624-629 (2002)
© 2002 American Society of Agronomy

SUGARCANE

Sugarcane Cultivar Response to High Summer Water Tables in the Everglades

Barry Glaz*,a, Serge J. Edme2,b, Jimmy D. Millera, Scott B. Milliganb and David G. Holderc

a USDA-ARS Sugarcane Field Stn., 12990 U.S. Hwy. 441, Canal Point, FL 33438
b United States Sugar Corp., P.O. Drawer 1207, Clewiston, FL 33440
c United States Sugar Corp., P.O. Drawer 1207, Clewiston, FL 33440

* Corresponding author (bglaz{at}saa.ars.usda.gov)



   ABSTRACT
TOP
 NOTES
 ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Sugarcane (interspecific hybrids of Saccharum spp.) in the Everglades Agricultural Area (EAA) in Florida is frequently subjected to periods of higher-than-desired water levels. This study was conducted to evaluate yields of nine sugarcane cultivars subjected to two higher-than-conventional water tables in the EAA during the summer rainy season from the plant cane through the second-ratoon annual crop cycles. Field experiments were planted in February 1997 and January 1998. During the summers from 1997 through 1999, we sought to maintain water <15 cm below the soil surface (BSS) in the wetter field and from 15 to 38 cm BSS in the drier field. Water tables for sugarcane in the EAA fluctuate from 40 to 95 cm BSS. Targeted water levels were achieved for 40 d in 1997, 104 d in 1998, and 96 d in 1999 in the wetter field and for 35 d in 1997, 96 d in 1998, and 82 d in 1999 in the drier field. The mean sugar per hectare in the wetter field was 91.7% that of the drier field. Yields of ‘Canal Point (CP) 72-2086’ and ‘CP 82-1172’ were not affected by water table. Cultivar CP 85-1308 had higher yields in the wetter field in two of five harvests. Sugar per hectare of ‘CP 80-1743’ was reduced by 25.1% in the wetter field. The variability among commercial cultivars to maintain yields at high water tables suggests that routine screening of promising sugarcane genotypes under high water tables would help identify more cultivars that maintain high yields in wetter conditions in the EAA.

Abbreviations: BSS, below soil surface • CP, Canal Point • EAA, Everglades Agricultural Area • TRS, theoretical recoverable sugar


   INTRODUCTION
TOP
 NOTES
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
THE EVERGLADES AGRICULTURAL AREA (EAA) is a 280000-ha basin of Histosols that lay on limestone rock in the northern region of the historic Everglades in Florida. Sugarcane is grown on about 144000 ha in the EAA (Glaz, 1999). Before construction of an extensive public–private drainage system of canals through the northern Everglades, the EAA was flooded most of the time (Snyder and Davidson, 1994). With this drainage system, farmers normally are able to maintain water levels appropriate for their crops. For sugarcane, desired water levels fluctuate from 40 to 95 cm below the soil surface (BSS) (Omary and Izuno, 1995).

Several factors have gradually made it more difficult for EAA farmers to consistently maintain desired water levels for some crop species. One factor has been the subsidence of the Histosols in the EAA, now occurring at a rate of 1.4 cm yr-1 (Shih et al., 1998). As subsidence continues, the depths of EAA soil profiles is reduced. This gradual soil loss has resulted in less space in the soil profile to store water, thus making it increasingly difficult to maintain desired water tables after normal rainfalls.

A second factor that has complicated EAA drainage is the need to decrease P discharge to the Everglades. Best management practices to lower P discharge from the EAA often include strategies to reduce quantities and rates of pumping excess water from agricultural fields (Izuno and Capone, 1995). Decreasing microbial oxidation rates in the Histosols of the EAA may also decrease P in EAA discharge water. Morris (1975) estimated that soil oxidation accounted for 87 kg P ha-1 yr-1, or 400% of the mean rate of fertilizer P applied to sugarcane (Sanchez, 1990). Water levels necessary to sufficiently reduce pumping, and hence achieve reductions in P export, are often higher than growers consider optimum for sugarcane growth.

Another factor that complicates maintenance of optimum sugarcane water levels is the desire to grow crops such as flooded rice (Oryza sativa L.) near fields of sugarcane. In some such areas, it is necessary to maintain higher-than-desired water levels on sugarcane fields.

Several workers in Florida have studied sugarcane genotype response to water tables. In a field study on Pahokee muck soil (Euic hyperthermic Lithic Medisaprist), Kang et al. (1986) found that sugarcane genotypes at an intermediate stage in a selection program, grown at a water table 30 cm BSS, yielded 16.7% more sugar concentration and 26.4% more cane than at a water table 56 cm BSS. Gascho and Shih (1979) tested five sugarcane cultivars at water tables of 32, 61, and 84 cm BSS of a Pahokee muck soil in lysimeters. Overall, the highest yields occurred at the 61-cm water table. Two of the six cultivars, however, had equal cane yields at all three water levels. Although not significantly different from the yields at the two deeper water tables, both cultivars had their highest cane yields at the 32-cm water table.

LeCroy and Orsenigo (1964) measured cane tonnages and sugar concentrations of four sugarcane cultivars at six water table depths, ranging from 37 to 88 cm BSS. All four cultivars yielded well at the 37-cm water table, but the researchers reported variable cultivar responses to water table depth. Andreis (1976) reported that the yields of a plant cane through third-ratoon crop cycle at a 48-cm water table equaled those at a 94-cm water table. A preliminary study by Deren et al. (1991) found that variability among sugarcane genotypes was sufficient to warrant a long-term project to breed and select for flood-tolerant sugarcane. Florida researchers have identified sugarcane genotypes that yielded well at about 30 cm BSS since 1964. Sugarcane farming in the EAA would now be facilitated with cultivars that yield well under wetter conditions than water tables of 30 cm BSS.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate yields of nine sugarcane cultivars subjected to two higher-than-conventional water tables in the EAA during the summer rainy season from the plant cane through the second-ratoon annual crop cycles.


   MATERIALS AND METHODS
TOP
 NOTES
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Nine sugarcane cultivars were planted at the United States Sugar Corporation South Shore Plantation, about 10 km southwest of South Bay, FL. The cultivars were CP 70-1133, CP 72-2086, CP 73-1547, CP 78-1628, CP 80-1743, CP 80-1827, CP 81-1384, CP 82-1172, and CP 85-1308. These cultivars comprised 65.3% of Florida's sugarcane in 1997 although only about 1% of this hectarage was planted with CP 81-1384, CP 82-1172, and CP 85-1308 (Glaz, 1997). The first experiment was planted on 5 to 6 Feb. 1997 and the second experiment on 13 Jan. 1998. The first experiment was harvested in the plant cane (20 Jan. 1998), first-ratoon (18 Feb. 1999), and second-ratoon (2 Feb. 2000) crop cycles. The second experiment was harvested in the plant cane (19 Feb. 1999) and first-ratoon (3 Feb. 2000) crops.

Each experiment was planted on two fields; the soil in each field was a Histosol classified as Pahokee muck (Euic hyperthermic Lithic Medisaprist). A different water treatment was imposed on each field. The intent was to have one water treatment that fluctuated between flood and 15 cm BSS (wetter field) and another that fluctuated between 15 and 38 cm BSS (drier field) between 1 June and 1 Oct. in 1997 and 1998 and between 1 June and 31 Oct. in 1999. June through October are usually the months when the highest rainfall is recorded in the EAA. Both fields were maintained at the water level of the surrounding farm fields when water treatments were not imposed.

After rain caused the water levels to rise, water in each field slowly dropped to minimum levels through evapotranspiration and culvert management. An out-flow pump was used during periods of excessive rain to maintain differences in water levels between the two fields. An in-flow pump was positioned near the wetter field in an adjacent canal to maintain minimum water levels. A float was calibrated to activate the in-flow pump when water in the canal approached minimum levels.

The two 8-ha fields, which were chosen because of their similar yield histories, were separated by an 8-ha transition field. All three 8-ha fields had comprised one 24-ha commercial block for decades before this study. They were well suited for this study due to this history and their separation into thirds by two field ditches, which facilitated water control. The percentage organic matter by weight was 83% in the wetter field and 82% in the drier field. Cultivars were planted in four-row plots that were 13 m long with 1.5 m between rows. Fertilizer applications were 13 and 168 kg ha-1 P and K, respectively, in both fields in the plant and ratoon crop cycles. Mocap1 20G (Ethrotop: 0-ethyl S,S-dipropyl phosphorodithioate) was applied at the rate of 22.4 kg ha-1 in the furrow during covering of sugarcane setts to control corn wireworm [Melanotus communis (Gyll.)], and atrazine1 [(2-chloro-4-ethylamino)-6-(isopropylamino)-s-triazine)] was applied as a pre-emergence herbicide at the rate of 4.5 kg ha-1 soon after each planting.

Cane and sugar yields were calculated by recording stalk number and using a 10-stalk sample to estimate stalk weight and sugar content. Theoretical recoverable sugar (TRS), measured as grams of sugar per kilogram of cane was calculated from a 10-stalk sample collected at the harvest date using a previously described procedure (Legendre, 1992). Cane yield, measured as megagrams of cane per hectare, was calculated by multiplying stalk number by stalk weight. Stalk weight was measured from the same sample of 10 stalks used to calculate TRS. Sugar yield (Mg sugar ha-1) was calculated as follows:

Dates on which stalk numbers were recorded were drier field, plant cane, 19 Sept. 1997 and 25 Aug. 1998; drier field, first ratoon, 11 Sept. 1998 and 12 Aug. 1999; drier field, second ratoon, 10 Aug. 1999; wetter field, plant cane, 18 Sept. 1997 and 26 Aug. 1998; wetter field, first ratoon, 11 Sept. 1998 and 11 Aug. 1999; and wetter field, second ratoon, 10 Aug. 1999.

Water levels were measured with pressure transducers in three of the four replications in each field. Data were transferred to data loggers and stored on memory modules in the fields. Data were usually downloaded from the memory modules every 7 to 14 d. Water levels were recorded hourly and reported as daily means. Several problems caused recorders to become inoperable, the most common of which were dead batteries and presumed lightning strikes. In some cases, dry wells caused the pressure transducers to lose their calibrations. Manual readings were also recorded twice weekly from June through October throughout the experiment, and the pressure transducers were calibrated to these manual readings when necessary.

Within each field, cultivars were planted in randomized complete block designs with four replications. For each crop year, analyses of variance were computed separately for the wetter field and the drier field. Also, analyses were computed that combined crop cycles for each planting for each of the water treatments. The percentage difference (PD) for a trait of a cultivar in the wetter field compared with the drier field was computed as:

This approach is similar to that used by Froehlich and Fehr (1981) and Kang et al. (1986) for identifying differences in genotypes between fields when circumstances also resulted in the confounding of treatments and fields. Significant differences were determined with the unprotected LSD at P <= 0.10. Type II errors in this study would have resulted in the failure to identify cultivars with yields affected by summer water tables 15 cm BSS in the EAA. We considered this a costly error, and therefore set {alpha} = 0.10.


   RESULTS
TOP
 NOTES
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Water Levels
Each year, we successfully achieved water treatment differences in the two fields, but the degree of success varied by year (Table 1). The in-flow pump was operable for only 69 d between 25 July and 1 Oct. 1997, but it was operable for longer durations in 1998 and 1999. In all 3 yr, there were several days when the water table of the drier field was <15 cm BSS. The major cause for this was that for approximately every centimeter of rainfall, the water in the soil profile rose 10 cm. Thus, growers could expect that with a target maximum water table of 38 cm BSS, their fields would be intermittently flooded during normal years in the EAA, and as we found, with a target water table of 15 cm BSS, fields would often be flooded.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 1. Dates, water levels, and number of days at several water levels for nine cultivars on two fields from 1997 through 1999.

 
Yields and Water Treatments
There were significant cultivar x crop cycle interactions for cane and sugar yields in the combined analysis of variance for the first planting (data not shown). There were no significant interactions in the combined analysis of the second planting. For a consistent presentation, cultivar means for each crop cycle and water treatment are emphasized. Differences between mean water treatments across years averaged across all cultivars, however, are also reported. For all nine cultivars, averaged across all years and crop cycles, cane yields were 5.7% lower, TRS yields 2.7% lower, and sugar-per-hectare yields 8.3% lower on the wetter than on the drier field (data not shown).

Plant Cane Crop
Averaged across all cultivars and both plant cane harvest years, cane yields were 5.8% higher and sugar-per-hectare yields 6.6% higher in the drier than in the wetter field (Table 2). In the 1998 plant cane harvest, the cane and sugar yields of CP 70-1133 and CP 78-1628 were negatively affected by the wetter field. In the 1999 plant cane harvest, water treatment had no effect on CP 70-1133 or CP 78-1628 cane or sugar-per-hectare yields. In 1999, the TRS of CP 78-1628 improved substantially, although not significantly, due to the wetter field. Improved yields of TRS due to higher water table are a logical means of seeking water tolerance in sugarcane because treatments that reduce cane yield sometimes increase yield of TRS. However, this response was not identified often in this study.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 2. Cane and sugar yields from plant cane crops harvested in 1998 and 1999 for nine sugarcane cultivars grown under two water treatments.

 
In the 1998 plant cane harvest, CP 73-1547 had higher cane and sugar yields in the wetter field (Table 2). In the 1999 plant cane harvest, however, CP 73-1547 had higher cane and sugar yields in the drier field (supported by yields, not percentage difference). In the 1998 harvest, CP 85-1308 was not affected by water table, but in the 1999 harvest, it responded favorably for all three traits in the wetter field. The plant cane sugar-per-hectare yields of CP 72-2086, CP 80-1827, CP 81-1384, and CP 82-1172 were not significantly affected by water management in the 1998 and 1999 harvests.

First-Ratoon Crop
Averaged across all cultivars and both first-ratoon harvest years, cane yields were 4.3% higher and sugar-per-hectare yields 8.3% higher in the drier than in the wetter field (Table 3). Two cultivars, CP 73-1547 and CP 80-1743, had higher cane and sugar-per-hectare yields in the drier field in both the 1999 and 2000 first-ratoon crops. The only cultivar in the first-ratoon crop that had significantly greater cane and sugar-per-hectare yields in the wetter field was CP 85-1308. These high yields in the wetter field occurred in 1999 for CP 85-1308. In the 2000 first-ratoon harvest, the yields of CP 85-1308 in the wetter fields also compared favorably to its yields in the drier field although they did not differ significantly.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 3. Cane and sugar yields from first-ratoon crops harvested in 1999 and 2000 for nine sugarcane cultivars grown under two water treatments.

 
Second-Ratoon Crop
Averaged across all cultivars, the cane yields were 8.4% higher and the sugar yields 11.5% higher in the drier than in the wetter field in the second-ratoon crop (Table 4). CP 80-1743 had higher yields for all three traits in the drier field (Table 4). No cultivar in the second-ratoon harvest had significantly higher yields in the wetter field than in the drier field. CP 70-1133, CP 72-2086, and CP 82-1172, however, had moderately higher (but not significantly different) cane and sugar-per-hectare yields on the wetter field in the second-ratoon crop. For CP 72-2086 and CP 82-1172, this completed a series of plant cane through second-ratoon harvests with numerically, but not significantly, higher cane or sugar-per-hectare yields in the wetter than the drier field.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 4. Cane and sugar yields from one second-ratoon crop harvested in 2000 for nine sugarcane cultivars grown under two water treatments.

 

   DISCUSSION
TOP
 NOTES
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
 
The only practical means of conducting these experiments in fields was to use a separate field for each water treatment. Therefore, water treatments and fields are confounded, and differences for any cultivar trait can strictly be declared only between the two fields. However, because summer water table was the only major difference between these two fields, we propose that our water treatments were the cause for differences in performance of cultivars between the two fields.

An unexpected discovery during the course of this experiment was that during periods of low rainfall, more pumping of water was necessary than anticipated to maintain desired water tables. Two possible explanations are that the limestone rock beneath the soil was more porous in these experimental fields than in most other EAA fields, and/or water was being constantly drawn down to the level of the surrounding commercial fields. This issue may be important because the higher pumping levels and subsequent increase in water movement would probably not be indicative of flooded conditions in large-scale, commercial sugarcane fields in the EAA. The discussion that follows suggests applications of our results based on this constraint.

All of the cultivars tested in these experiments were commercial sugarcane cultivars grown in Florida. Our results did not clearly identify any one of the nine cultivars that we could recommend immediately for use under higher water tables. CP 85-1308, however, yielded significantly more sugar per hectare in one of two plant cane harvests and in one of two first-ratoon harvests in the wetter field. Although CP 85-1308 never yielded significantly less sugar per hectare in the wetter field, it came close to doing so in two harvests. Thus, CP 85-1308 was identified as a cultivar that at times responded with increased yields due to the wetter field, but it did not consistently respond positively. Geneticists seeking to improve sugarcane's water tolerance should note that the female parent of CP 85-1308 is R 567 from Reunion (Tai et al., 1995) and that CP 85-1308 was the only cultivar tested in these experiments with a non-CP parent.

Several cultivars were identified with yields that declined consistently and several with yields that were not consistently affected by a higher water table. Yields of CP 70-1133 and CP 78-1628 sometimes declined, yields of CP 73-1547 usually declined, and CP 80-1743 had substantially reduced yields in the ratoon crops due to the wetter field. CP 72-2086, CP 80-1827, CP 82-1172, and CP 81-1384 often yielded at least equally well in the wetter compared with the drier field.

In Florida, costs for planting are greater than for any other phase in the sugarcane production cycle (Alvarez and Schueneman, 1991). Therefore, Florida growers prefer to harvest at least three annual crops (a plant cane and two ratoon crops) before replanting. The large second-ratoon yield losses of CP 80-1743 and perhaps CP 78-1628 in the wetter field suggest that growers should try to manage their cultivars such that these cultivars are not subjected to high water tables for long durations in the second-ratoon crop. Further research will need to determine whether the wetter conditions of the plant cane and first-ratoon crops resulted in the lower yields in the second-ratoon crop for these two cultivars or only the wetter conditions during the second-ratoon crop.

Regulatory restrictions limit the quantity of water that can be pumped from sugarcane fields to public canals after heavy rainfalls. Growers who concurrently manage fields of sugarcane and vegetable crops often pump excess water from vegetable to sugarcane fields when they cannot pump all excess water from their farms to public canals. The results from this study can further refine this strategy. Growers with commercial fields of major cultivars such as CP 72-2086 and CP 80-1827 and minor cultivars such as CP 81-1384, CP 82-1172, and CP 85-1308 could plan to leave water tables higher in these fields than in other fields when faced with high water levels for long durations and pumping restrictions. Growers should plan to reduce water tables sooner in fields with CP 70-1133, CP 73-1547, and CP 80-1743 and CP 78-1628 in the second-ratoon crop. Also, growers should evaluate CP 85-1308, CP 72-2086, CP 80-1827, CP 82-1172, and CP 81-1384 on water tables moderately higher than current commercial water tables. These are the cultivars identified as most likely to yield well with water tables maintained moderately higher than the current commercial practice of 40 to 95 cm BSS. Incremental increases in water tables, while at least maintaining profits, would be useful to reduce both P export and soil oxidation rates (Glaz, 1995).

Geneticists can use the cultivars identified in these experiments to make crosses between genotypes that are more and less tolerant to wetter-than-commercial conditions. This will probably be the most advantageous use of CP 82-1172, CP 81-1384, and CP 85-1308. These are promising cultivars that have not been used extensively by growers in Florida.

The yield responses of CP 72-2086 and CP 80-1743 to the two water treatments help illustrate practical uses of the results of this study. Both cultivars were widely used by farmers on organic soils in Florida (Glaz, 1999). The five-harvest mean sugar yields of CP 72-2086 were 22.1 Mg ha-1 in both the drier and wetter fields. The mean sugar yields of CP 80-1743 were 28.7 Mg ha-1 in the drier field and 21.5 Mg ha-1 on the wetter field, a 25.1% loss due to the wetter field. This knowledge of the susceptibility of CP 80-1743 to high water tables compared with the tolerance of CP 72-2086 could enhance management options for growers. For example, during periods of frequent rainfall and drainage restrictions, a grower with both CP 72-2086 and CP 80-1743 should drain fields of CP 80-1743 first. If restrictions are so severe that sufficient water cannot be sent to public canals from fields of CP 80-1743, the remaining standing water from fields of CP 80-1743 could be drained onto fields of CP 72-2086.


   NOTES
TOP
 NOTES
ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
2 S.J. Edme, current address: USDA-ARS Sugarcane Field Stn., 12990 U.S. Highway 441, Canal Point, FL 33438. Back

1 Mention of trade names or commercial products is solely for the purpose of providing specific information and does not imply recommendation or endorsement by USDA over others not mentioned. This publication reports research involving pesticides. It does not contain recommendations for their use nor does it imply that uses discussed here have been registered. All uses of pesticides must be registered by appropriate state or federal agencies or both before they can be recommended. Back


   REFERENCES
TOP
 NOTES
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Agron. J.Home page
R. A. Gilbert, D. R. Morris, C. R. Rainbolt, J. M. McCray, R. E. Perdomo, B. Eiland, G. Powell, and G. Montes
Sugarcane Response to Mill Mud, Fertilizer, and Soybean Nutrient Sources on a Sandy Soil
Agron. J., May 7, 2008; 100(3): 845 - 854.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Agron. J.Home page
R. A. Gilbert, C. R. Rainbolt, D. R. Morris, and A. C. Bennett
Morphological Responses of Sugarcane to Long-Term Flooding
Agron. J., November 6, 2007; 99(6): 1622 - 1628.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Agron. J.Home page
B. Glaz and R. A. Gilbert
Sugarcane Response to Water Table, Periodic Flood, and Foliar Nitrogen on Organic Soil
Agron. J., April 11, 2006; 98(3): 616 - 621.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Crop Sci.Home page
B. Glaz, D. R. Morris, and S. H. Daroub
Sugarcane Photosynthesis, Transpiration, and Stomatal Conductance Due to Flooding and Water Table
Crop Sci., September 1, 2004; 44(5): 1633 - 1641.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Agron. J.Home page
B. Glaz, D. R. Morris, and S. H. Daroub
Periodic Flooding and Water Table Effects on Two Sugarcane Genotypes
Agron. J., May 1, 2004; 96(3): 832 - 838.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Soil Sci.Home page
D. R. Morris, B. Glaz, and S. H. Daroub
Organic Matter Oxidation Potential Determination in a Periodically Flooded Histosol under Sugarcane
Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., May 1, 2004; 68(3): 994 - 1001.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (15)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Glaz, B.
Right arrow Articles by Holder, D. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Glaz, B.
Right arrow Articles by Holder, D. G.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Glaz, B.
Right arrow Articles by Holder, D. G.
Related Collections
Right arrow Sugarcane

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Crop Science Vadose Zone Journal
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education		 Soil Science Society of America Journal
Journal of Plant Registrations Journal of
Environmental Quality		 The Plant Genome