Nitrogen requirement of sugar beet

1976 ◽  
Vol 87 (3) ◽  
pp. 549-558 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. R. J. Holmes ◽  
J. R. Devine
Keyword(s):  
Sugar Beet ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Summer Rainfall ◽  
Sugar Yield ◽  
Yield Response ◽  
Nitrogen Response ◽  
Nitrogen Requirement ◽  
Nitrogen Rates ◽  
Very High ◽  
Made In

SummarySeventy-four field experiments on the nitrogen requirement of sugar beet were made in eastern England in. 1966 to 1974. Considerable differences in sugar yield response to nitrogen were found between the six soil types used, and these differences were found (on five of the six soils) to be related to sugar yield. Nitrogen response was large on chalk and limestone soils in Lincolnshire, intermediate on East Anglian boulder clays and least on East Anglian chalk and light drift soils. On the lighter soils (limestones, East Anglian chalks and light drifts) nitrogen response was greater with high summer rainfall than with low. Fenland silt soils were very high yielding, but nitrogen response was moderate.Optimum nitrogen rates differed between soils, in the range 100 kg/ha on East Anglian chalks and light drifts to 180–200 kg/ha on Lincolnshire chalks and limestones.

Nitrogen requirements of sugar beet in relation to harvesting date

1976 ◽  
Vol 86 (2) ◽  
pp. 373-377 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. R. J. Holmes ◽  
J. R. Devine ◽  
F. W. Dunnett
Keyword(s):  
Sugar Beet ◽  
Nitrogen Fertilizer ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Sugar Content ◽  
Sugar Yield ◽  
Yield Response ◽  
Nitrogen Rate ◽  
Nitrogen Response ◽  
Oolitic Limestone ◽  
Early Harvest

SummarySeven field experiments were made on the effect of two harvesting dates on the nitrogen requirements of sugar beet. All were on Rauceby series soils overlying oolitic limestone in Lincolnshire.Nitrogen fertilizer increased sugar yield in all experiments, and yield was considerably higher at the mid-December harvest than in early October. On average, the sugar-yield response to nitrogen was greater at the late harvest, and the requirement for nitrogen was about 45 kg/ha higher then than at the early harvest. Sugar content was depressed less at the late harvest than at the early by increasing nitrogen rate.These results suggest that farmers should apply more nitrogen to fields that they plan to harvest late than to early-harvested fields; they also have implications for the conduct and interpretation of nitrogen response experiments on sugar beet.

The response of sugar beet to fertilizer and the effect of farmyard manure

1962 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 219-226 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. N. Adams
Keyword(s):  
Sugar Beet ◽  
Soil Analysis ◽  
Farmyard Manure ◽  
Mineral Fertilizer ◽  
Sugar Yield ◽  
Cereal Crops ◽  
Factorial Experiments ◽  
Local Conditions ◽  
Nitrogen Requirement ◽  
Made In

1. Forty-nine 33 factorial experiments in 1957–60 tested the response of sugar beet to 0·6,1·2, 1·8 cwt. N, 0·0,0·5,1·0 cwt. P2O5 and 0·8 1·6 2·4 cwt. K2O per acre. On forty-one of the sites, the experiment was repeated in the presence of 12 tons FYM per acre. There were also six trials in which the rates of mineral fertilizer had been altered to suit local conditions.2. Optimum dressings for sugar yield without FYM were 1·0 cwt. N, 0·5 cwt. P2O6 and 1·6 cwt. K2O per acre. This closely agrees with results of experiments made in 1934–39. Exceeding the optimum nitrogen dressing decreased sugar yield although the yield of tops was increased. The main value of dung for beet was in the N, P and K it provided. With FYM, optimum dressings were only 0·6 cwt. N, 0·0 cwt. P2O5 and 0·8 cwt. K2O per acre.3. Response to nitrogen differed greatly from field to field and the best guide to the nitrogen requirement of a field was the previous cropping. Beet which followed two or more cereal crops needed more nitrogen on average than beet which did not. Response to phosphate and potash did not differ much in different experiments and the national optimum would have been satisfactory for nearly all fields. The only use of soil analysis was to identify the very few fields which needed more than the average dressing of phosphate. The efficiency of phosphate and potash manuring could be slightly increased by taking soil type into account.

The effect of time of sowing and harvesting on growth, yield and nitrogen fertilizer requirement of sugar beet

1973 ◽  
Vol 81 (2) ◽  
pp. 267-275 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. P. Draycott ◽  
D. J. Webb ◽  
E. M. Wright
Keyword(s):  
Sugar Beet ◽  
Nitrogen Fertilizer ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Growth Yield ◽  
Growing Season ◽  
Sugar Yield ◽  
Growing Period ◽  
Stages Of Growth ◽  
Nitrogen Requirement ◽  
Fertilizer Requirement

SummaryFour field experiments (1968–71) investigated the effect of changing the length of the growing period on the nitrogen fertilizer requirement of sugar beet. The crop was sown on three occasions (March–May), harvested on three occasions (September–December) and given four amounts of fertilizer (0–225 kg N/ha). Plant samples were analysed at several stages of growth (1969–71) in an attempt to predict the amount of nitrogen fertilizer needed for maximum sugar yield and also at the end of the season to determine the nitrogen uptake. Increasing the length of the growing period increased sugar yield greatly but the amount of nitrogen fertilizer needed for maximum sugar yield was unchanged. The crop given the largest dressing of nitrogen and with the longest growing period contained most total nitrogen, but in every experiment, giving more than 75 kg N/ha neither increased nor decreased the sugar yield significantly. As a result of the small variations in nitrogen requirement, the plant analyses during the growing season were of little value in predicting the needs of the crop.

Nitrogen requirement of sugar beet in relation to irrigation

1976 ◽  
Vol 87 (3) ◽  
pp. 559-566 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. R. J. Holmes ◽  
J. D. Whitear
Keyword(s):  
Sugar Beet ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Sandy Loam ◽  
Published Data ◽  
Nitrogen Rate ◽  
Soil Moisture Deficit ◽  
Nitrogen Response ◽  
Moisture Deficit ◽  
Loam Soil ◽  
Nitrogen Rates

SummaryThree field experiments were carried out on sandy loam soil at Levington, Suffolk, on the effect of irrigation on nitrogen requirements of sugar beet. Four nitrogen rates (0, 67, 134, 201 kg/ha) were examined with and without irrigation. Nitrogen increased sugar yield each year, as did irrigation in 1969 and 1970, but not in 1968 when the soil moisture deficit was small. There was a significant nitrogen x irrigation interaction in 1970 only, but on average there was a greater response to nitrogen with irrigation than without it.These results and other published data suggest that on sandy soils in eastern England moisture deficit can restrict nitrogen response, and that the economic optimum nitrogen rate is appreciably higher with irrigation than without it.

Effect of previous cropping and manuring on the nitrogen fertilizer needed by sugar beet

1970 ◽  
Vol 74 (1) ◽  
pp. 147-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. P. Draycott ◽  
P. J. Last
Keyword(s):  
Sugar Beet ◽  
Winter Wheat ◽  
Nitrogen Fertilizer ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Potato Crop ◽  
Spring Barley ◽  
Maximum Yield ◽  
Sugar Yield ◽  
Fertilizer Nitrogen ◽  
Nitrogen Requirement

SUMMARYSix field experiments made between 1960 and 1968 determined the effect of previo cropping and manuring on the nitrogen requirement of sugar beet. Three were at Silsoe in Bedfordshire on soils developed over Lower Greensand and Gault Clay and three were at Broom's Barn (Suffolk) on Calcareous Drift soils over chalk. Each experiment lasted 2 years, a preparatory crop followed by sugar beet.Spring barley and potatoes were treatment crops in all the experiments and winter wheat, a ryegrass ley and barley undersown with trefoil were included in the Suffolk experiments. Nil, 0·6 or 1·2 cwt N/acre was tested on the sugar beet in the first three experiments and 0, 0·5, 1·0 or 1·5 cwt N/acre in later ones.All the experiments showed that previous cropping influenced the nitrogen requirement of the sugar beet. There was a linear relationship (r = – 0·86) between the amount of fertilizer nitrogen given minus that removed by the preparatory crop, and the quantity of nitrogen fertilizer needed by the sugar beet for maximum sugar yield. Sugar beet grown after barley or potatoes (each given 0·5 cwt N/acre) needed on average 1·0 cwt N/acre at both Broom's Barn and Silsoe for maximum sugar yield. Sugar beet after winter wheat or a ryegrass ley also needed 1·0 cwt N/acre at Broom's Barn. When the previous potato crop was given 1·5 cwt N/acre, 0·5 cwt/acre sufficed for maximum yield of sugar at both centres; also after ploughed-in trefoil, sugar beet needed only 0·5 cwt N/acre.

Effects of nitrogen fertilizer, plant population and irrigation on sugar beet: II. Nutrient concentration and uptake

1971 ◽  
Vol 76 (2) ◽  
pp. 269-275 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. P. Draycott ◽  
M. J. Durrant
Keyword(s):  
Sugar Beet ◽  
Nitrogen Fertilizer ◽  
Nutrient Concentration ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Nitrogen Concentration ◽  
Plant Size ◽  
Plant Population ◽  
Sugar Yield ◽  
Phosphorus Concentration ◽  
Wide Range

SUMMARYThe concentration of nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, sodium, calcium and magnesium was measured in the dry matter of sugar beet from four field experiments (1966–9). All combinations of four amounts of nitrogen fertilizer (0–1·8 cwt/acre), four plant populations (8800–54000 plants/acre) and irrigation were tested, which gave a wide range of plant size and yield. Nutrient concentration and uptake by the crop were also greatly affected by the treatments.Nitrogen fertilizer and irrigation increased uptake of nitrogen by the crop but increasing the plant population had little effect on uptake and decreased the concentration of nitrogen. Sugar yield was related to the total nitrogen concentration in tops and roots and to uptake. There were optimal values of nitrogen concentration for maximal sugar yield, but the optima were greatly affected by plant population. Leaf colour was a good guide to nitrogen concentration.Phosphorus concentration was affected little by the treatments but cation concentrations were greatly affected. In general, uptake of all the elements was increased by all treatments – the exception was sodium, which decreased as the plant population increased but this was balanced to somo extent by increased potassium uptake.

Pronamide Effects on Physiology and Yield of Sugar Beet

Weed Science ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 56 (3) ◽  
pp. 457-463 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kalliopi Kadoglidou ◽  
Chrysovalantis Malkoyannidis ◽  
Kalliopi Radoglou ◽  
Ilias Eleftherohorinos ◽  
Helen-Isis A. Constantinidou
Keyword(s):  
Sugar Beet ◽  
Leaf Area ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Leaf Growth ◽  
Sugar Yield ◽  
Growth Stages ◽  
Area Index ◽  
Vegetative Period ◽  
Leaf Stage ◽  
Photosynthetic Yield

Field experiments were conducted in northern Greece during 2001 and repeated in 2002 and 2004 to evaluate the effects of pronamide on sugar beet. Total leaf area, leaf area index (LAI), leaf and root dry weights, photosynthetic yield (quantum yield of photochemical energy conversion in photosystem II), chlorotic index, and yield components of sugar beet were monitored after pronamide application. Three sugar beet cultivars, ‘Avantage’, ‘Dorothea’, and ‘Bianca’, requiring short, intermediate, and long vegetative periods, respectively, were subjected to treatment. Pronamide was applied on sugar beet either as a double application of 0.63 kg ai ha−1at the two- to four-leaf and 0.63 kg ai ha−1at the four- to six-leaf stage or as a single application of 1.26 kg ai ha−1performed at the latter leaf stage. Both application procedures were combined with a split application of phenmedipham at 0.04 kg ai ha−1plus desmedipham at 0.04 kg ai ha−1plus metamitron at 0.70 kg ai ha−1plus ethofumesate at 0.10 kg ai ha−1plus mineral oil at 0.50 L ha−1applied POST at the cotyledon–to–two-leaf as well as at the four-leaf growth stages. Pronamide (both single and double application) initially caused chlorosis and reduction of sugar beet growth. LAI and photosynthetic yield were also significantly affected for a 2-mo period following the final application, after which the negative effects caused by pronamide were ameliorated. At harvest, sugar beet root and sugar yield, sucrose, K+, Na+, and N-amino acid concentrations were not affected by the herbicide treatments compared with those produced in weed-free and herbicide-free plots, indicating that all cultivars managed to overcome the transient pronamide stress. Regarding sugar beet cultivars, root and sugar yield of Avantage and Dorothea at harvest were higher than that of Bianca, whereas sucrose concentration of Avantage was the lowest. There was not an apparent relationship between the order of sugar yield per cultivar (Dorothea > Avantage > Bianca) and the length of the vegetative period (Avantage < Dorothea < Bianca).

Effect of green manures on yield and nitrogen requirement of sugar beet

1981 ◽  
Vol 97 (1) ◽  
pp. 159-170 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. J. Last ◽  
A. P. Draycott ◽  
D. J. Webb
Keyword(s):  
Sugar Beet ◽  
Nitrogen Fertilizer ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Nitrogen Fertilizers ◽  
Late Winter ◽  
Soil Mineral Nitrogen ◽  
Green Manures ◽  
Nitrogen Requirement ◽  
Isobutylidene Diurea ◽  
Applied Nitrogen

SUMMARYFour field experiments in 1972–6 investigated the effect of undersowing trefoil or ryegrass in barley, and of fodder radish sown after barley, on yield and nitrogen requirement of following sugar beet. Autumn applications of isobutylidene diurea or glycoluril (slow-release nitrogen fertilizers) were also included for comparison with green manures. The plots were split in the following spring and dressings of 0, 50, 100 and 150 kg N/ha as ‘Nitro-Chalk’ tested on the sugar-beet crop.The undersown green manure crops slightly decreased the yield of barley but, at the time of ploughing, returned up to 3·7 t dry matter/ha and 50 kg N/ha. In the absence of spring-applied nitrogen fertilizer for the sugar beet, green manures increased root and sugar yield, but when more than 50 kg N/ha was applied for the sugar beet they had no effect on yield. Autumn applications of nitrogen fertilizers such as isobutylidene diurea decreased the requirement for nitrogen in spring, but yields were no greater than from spring-applied nitrogen alone. Top and subsoils sampled in late winter and early summer from plots where green manures had been grown showed no detectable increase in soil organic carbon or total nitrogen, but soil mineral-nitrogen concentrations were increased slightly by green manures as was the potentially available mineralnitrogen released in an incubation test. It is concluded that, on loamy soils, green manures decrease the nitrogen requirement of sugar beet but give no benefits in yield which cannot be obtained from nitrogen fertilizer in spring before sowing the crop. assistance and Miss G. Smith for statistical analyses.

Effects of nitrogen fertilizer and irrigation on sugar beet at Broom's Barn 1973–8

1983 ◽  
Vol 101 (1) ◽  
pp. 185-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. J. Last ◽  
A. P. Draycott ◽  
A. B. Messem ◽  
D. J. Webb
Keyword(s):  
Sugar Beet ◽  
Nitrogen Uptake ◽  
Nitrogen Fertilizer ◽  
Dry Matter ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Growth Yield ◽  
Sugar Yield ◽  
High Yield ◽  
Dry Matter Yield ◽  
Plough Layer

SUMMARYDuring 1973–8 six field experiments examined the effect of 0, 41, 82, 124, 166 and 207 kg N/ha with and without irrigation on the growth, yield and quality of sugar beet. The culture of the crops was planned to produce a large yield in order to determine the optimal nitrogen application for the above-average crops which many growers are now seeking to produce. Ammonium nitrate was used as the nitrogen source, broadcast in one dose before sowing as was recommended practice in the early 1970s. The growth of the crop was monitored from the seedling stage to harvest in December, as was nitrogen uptake by the crop, and water removal from the soil using a neutron probe.In 3 years when the weather was dry after drilling, the fertilizer significantly depressed the number of plants which established but plant weights showed that some nitrogen fertilizer was needed early for rapid seedling growth. Changes in the method of applying fertilizer for sugar beet are therefore suggested and are being tested. Soil analyses in the plough layer during establishment (May–June) indicated an optimum concentration of mineral nitrogen of about 40 mg N/kg soil at this stage.Nitrogen fertilizer was very important for a high yield; throughout the growth of the crop it greatly increased total dry-matter yield and at final harvest this was reflected in sugar yield. Considering the six years together, sugar yield was linearly related to both dry-matter yield and total nitrogen uptake. However, within a year, increasing nitrogen uptake above 200 kg N/ha with nitrogen fertilizer did not increase sugar yield; maximum yields of sugar each year were normally obtained with 125 kg N/ha fertilizer or less, and irrigation had little effect on the optimum amount. Explanations for the lack of responsiveness of sugar beet to greater applications of nitrogen fertilizer are being sought in further more detailed analyses of the crop and its environment.

scholarly journals Effect of different single herbicide doses on sugar beet yield, quality and associated weeds

2021 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
E. M. Abd El Lateef ◽  
B. B. Mekki ◽  
M. S. Abd El-Salam ◽  
I. M. El-Metwally
Keyword(s):  
Sugar Beet ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Sugar Yield ◽  
Research Centre ◽  
Soil Conditions ◽  
Root Yield ◽  
Yield And Quality ◽  
Biological Yield ◽  
Yield Quality ◽  
Hand Weeding

Abstract Background The objective of this work is to identify the most proper herbicidal treatment on sugar beet to compare different single weed control herbicide doses on sugar beet traits and associated weeds as well as yield and quality under sandy soil conditions. Therefore, two field experiments were conducted during the winter seasons of 2017/2018 and 2018/2019 at the Experimental Farm of the National Research Centre, El-Beheira Governorate. Tigro at 1.0 and 0.750 l fed−1, Betasana-Trio at 0.675 and at 0.9 l fed−1, Select Super at 0.5 and 0.375 l fed−1 and Betanal MaxxPro at 0.5 l fed−1 besides the unweeded and hand weeded twice were used. Results The results showed that the herbicides Betasana-Trio at 0.9 l fed−1, Tigro at 1.0 l fed−1 and Betasana-Trio at 0.675 l fed−1 when sprayed twice could effectively and/or completely eliminate the broadleaved weeds associated with sugar beet plants. Moreover, the results indicated and confirmed that Tigro and Betasana-Trio herbicides are effective in controlling broadleaved weeds. Similar tendency was recorded for the narrow-leaved weeds, where Select Super or Betanal MaxxPro at 0.5 l fed−1 as well as Select Super at 0.375 l fed−1 could completely eliminate or minimize the narrow-leaved weeds associated with sugar beet plants. The greatest significant root length, root diameters and root yield plant−1 were recorded when hand weeding twice followed by Betanal MaxxPro at 0.5 l fed−1 without significant differences. Gross sugar % ranged between 12.08 and 15 .7% and extractable sugar % ranged between 8.97 and 13.8% for Betasana-Trio at 0.09 l fed−1 and Betanal MaxxPro at 0.5 l fed−1. Conclusion Betanal MaxxPro gave the highest values of root and biological yield ton fed−1. Betanal MaxxPro followed by hand weeding treatment twice resulted in the greatest sugar yield fed−1. The highest sugar yield resulted from the herbicidal treatment with Betanal MaxxPro or Tigro at 1.0 l fed−1, which gave the greatest gross and extractable sugar yield fed−1 and exceeded the hand weeding treatment by 10.4 and 7.8%.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document