Spatio-temporal variability of sugarcane yield efficiency in the state of Sao Paulo, Brazil

The objective of this work was to assess the spatial and temporal variability of sugarcane yield efficiency and yield gap in the state of Sao Paulo, Brazil, throughout 16 growing seasons, considering climate and soil as main effects, and socioeconomic factors as complementary. An empirical model was used to assess potential and attainable yields, using climate data series from 37 weather stations. Soil effects were analyzed using the concept of production environments associated with a soil aptitude map for sugarcane. Crop yield efficiency increased from 0.42 to 0.58 in the analyzed period (1990/1991 to 2005/2006 crop seasons), and yield gap consequently decreased from 58 to 42%. Climatic factors explained 43% of the variability of sugarcane yield efficiency, in the following order of importance: solar radiation, water deficit, maximum air temperature, precipitation, and minimum air temperature. Soil explained 15% of the variability, considering the average of all seasons. There was a change in the correlation pattern of climate and soil with yield efficiency after the 2001/2002 season, probably due to the crop expansion to the west of the state during the subsequent period. Socioeconomic, biotic and crop management factors together explain 42% of sugarcane yield efficiency in the state of Sao Paulo.

Spatio-temporal variability of sugarcane yield efficiency in the state of São Paulo, Brazil

The objective of this work was to assess the spatial and temporal variability of sugarcane yield efficiency and yield gap in the state of São Paulo, Brazil, throughout 16 growing seasons, considering climate and soil as main effects, and socioeconomic factors as complementary. An empirical model was used to assess potential and attainable yields, using climate data series from 37 weather stations. Soil effects were analyzed using the concept of production environments associated with a soil aptitude map for sugarcane. Crop yield efficiency increased from 0.42 to 0.58 in the analyzed period (1990/1991 to 2005/2006 crop seasons), and yield gap consequently decreased from 58 to 42%. Climatic factors explained 43% of the variability of sugarcane yield efficiency, in the following order of importance: solar radiation, water deficit, maximum air temperature, precipitation, and minimum air temperature. Soil explained 15% of the variability, considering the average of all seasons. There was a change in the correlation pattern of climate and soil with yield efficiency after the 2001/2002 season, probably due to the crop expansion to the west of the state during the subsequent period. Socioeconomic, biotic and crop management factors together explain 42% of sugarcane yield efficiency in the state of São Paulo.

Eficiência agrícola da produção de soja, milho e trigo no estado do Rio Grande do Sul entre 1980 e 2008

Eficiência agrícola (EA) é utilizada como indicador do nível de desenvolvimento agrícola regional, expressando, por meio da relação entre as produtividades real e atingível, o nível tecnológico empregado nas culturas. Com base nisso, o objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar a EA das culturas da soja, do milho e do trigo para o estado do Rio Grande do Sul, entre os anos de 1980 e 2008, identificando os principais fatores que as condicionaram. A EA foi obtida pela relação entre a produtividade atingível (PA) e a real (PR). A PR foi obtida junto ao banco de dados do Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística (IBGE). A PA foi obtida pela estimativa da produtividade potencial (PPf), pelo método de Zona Agroecológica da FAO, deflacionada pelo déficit hídrico em cada uma das fases da cultura. Verificou-se que as EAs médias para as culturas do milho, da soja e do trigo para o RS foram iguais a 54, 61 e 43%, respectivamente. Nas localidades de Santa Rosa, São Borja e Veranópolis, a EA para a soja foi, ao contrário das demais localidades, negativa. Os principais fatores que contribuíram para o aumento da EA, na maioria das localidades, foram: mudanças no uso e fertilidade do solo; uso de mecanização agrícola; preços pagos pelas commodities; investimentos em pesquisa e desenvolvimento; adoção do zoneamento de risco climático; e melhoramento genético.