Understanding and Managing the Late Time of Ratooning Effect on Cane Yield

Each year growers are faced with the decision of when to harvest individual blocks of sugarcane throughout the harvest season. This decision influences the yield of the current crop and can affect the yield in the following season. Growers must therefore decide which blocks to harvest early and which to harvest later in the harvest season. Usually, the latest harvested cane is the lowest yielding the following year (the �late harvest� effect). Block productivity data from Tully were used to determine the effects of harvest timing on cane yield of the current and subsequent crop. The results are tabulated to provide a ready reference to these time of harvest effects on the current and future crop in either a single year or over the full crop cycle for the Tully district.

The evaluation of the spatial and temporal stability of sugarcane farm performance based on yield and commercial cane sugar

In broader catchment scale investigations, there is a need to understand and ultimately exploit the spatial variation of agricultural crops for an improved economic return. In many instances, this spatial variation is temporally unstable and may be different for various crop attributes and crop species. In the Australian sugar industry, the opportunity arose to evaluate the performance of 231 farms in the Tully Mill area in far north Queensland using production information on cane yield (t/ha) and CCS ( a fresh weight measure of sucrose content in the cane) accumulated over a 12-year period. Such an arrangement of data can be expressed as a 3-way array where a farm x attribute x year matrix can be evaluated and interactions considered. Two multivariate techniques, the 3-way mixture method of clustering and the 3-mode principal component analysis, were employed to identify meaningful relationships between farms that performed similarly for both cane yield and CCS. In this context, farm has a spatial component and the aim of this analysis was to determine if systematic patterns in farm performance expressed by cane yield and CCS persisted over time. There was no spatial relationship between cane yield and CCS. However, the analysis revealed that the relationship between farms was remarkably stable from one year to the next for both attributes and there was some spatial aggregation of farm performance in parts of the mill area. This finding is important, since temporally consistent spatial variation may be exploited to improve regional production. Alternatively, the putative causes of the spatial variation may be explored to enhance the understanding of sugarcane production in the wet tropics of Australia.

Monensin supplementation of lactating cows fed tropical grasses and cane molasses or grain

Effects of monensin (Mon) on performance of Holstein-Friesian cows fed tropical grasses and cane molasses (M) or cereal grain were examined in three experiments. In experiment I (incomplete 4 x 4 Latin square), three rumen-fistulated cows [188 I I days in milk (DIM)] were fed mixed diets based on rhodes grass (Chloris gayana cv. Callide) bay where M was substituted for wheat grain (W) at rates of 0 (MO), 125 (M 125) or 250 (M250) g/kg dry matter (DM). A fourth diet contained M250 plus 0.02 g Mon/kg DM (M250 + Mon). Substituting M for W tended (P < 0.10) to decrease the ratio of rumen molar proportions of acetate+butyrate (Bu):propionate (Pr) (4.3 versus 3.8 and 4.0 for M0, M125 and M250, respectively). There were no treatment effects (P> 0.10) on intake, organic matter digestibility, milk production or liveweight (LW) change. In experiment 2, 48 cows (173 &PLUSMN; 28.3 DIM) grazing kikuyu (Pennisetum clandestinum cv. common) pastures and supplemented with maize silage and a grain-based concentrate were offered either M (2.6 kg DM/(cow day)) or barley grain (B) (2.7 kg DM/(cow day)). Within each supplement type, half were fed 0 or 320 mg of Mon/(cow day). There were Mon x supplement interactions (Mon x S; P < 0.05) on the rumen molar proportion of Pr and Bu at 15:00 h, with B + Mon having the highest value for Pr (0.259 mmol/mmol) and lowest value for Bu (0.121 mmol/mmol). A Mon x S effect (P < 0.05) on milk fat content was noted with Mon causing a lower value regardless of energy source (31 and 36 g/l versus 40 and 38 g/l for B + Mon, M + Mon, B - Mon and M - Mon, respectively). As a main effect, M as opposed to B, reduced yields of milk (P < 0.05; 16.21/(cow day) versus 18.01/(cow day)) and protein (P < 0.05; 479 g/(cow day) versus 538 g/(cow day)). Monensin reduced milk fat yield (P < 0.05; 669 g/(cow day) versus 562 g/(cow day)), raised milk protein concentration (P < 0.05; 31 g/l versus 29 g/l) and caused LW gain rather than loss (P < 0.05; +0.06 kg/(cow day) versus -0.30 kg/(cow day)). No treatment effects on pasture intake were noted. In experiment 3, 48 cows (91 &PLUSMN; 16.1 DIM) grazing kikuyu pasture and supplemented with grain-based concentrate, sugar cane silage and 2.7 kg DM(cow day) of M were supplemented with either 0 or 320 mg Mon/(cow day). Monensin reduced (P < 0.05) milk fat content (33 g/l versus 30 g/l) and tended (P < 0.10) to reduce milk protein content (29 g/l versus 28 g/l). No effects of Mon on other milk production parameters, LW change or pasture intake were noted. Feeding monensin to mid-lactation Holstein-Friesian cows offered diets based on tropical grasses, and cane molasses or grain, improves rumen fermentation efficiency, thereby improving energy efficiency resulting in higher LW gain. Monensin had no effect on milk yield, but reduced milk fat concentration.