Technological qualities of sugar beet root crops depending on fertilization and crop rotation

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21498/2518-1017.15.1.2019.162492

Keywords:

sugar beet, fertilizer rate, factory sugar output, loss of sugar in molasses, sugar content in roots, MB-factor, sugar yield

Abstract

Purpose. To study the peculiarities of technological qua­lity formation in sugar beet roots depending on the system of fertilization and crop rotation.

Methods. Field, laboratory and statistical.

Results. The studies were carried out on typical chernozems in the vetch-oats – winter wheat – sugar beet rotation. It was revealed that in the crop-replaceable and grain-tilled crop rotation on the background of the use of N100P100K100 + 50 t/ha of manure sugar losses in molasses was 1.11 and 1.08%, in the crop-replaceable rotation with 5 t/ha of straw plowing under + N100P100K100 it was 0.99%. With an increase in the dose of potash fertilizer to 150 kg/ha (N100P100K150) and the use of 50 t/ha of manure + K150 MB-factor was 13.93%, while in the case of plowing straw under together with mineral fertilizers it was 13.76%. In the grain rotation, the purity of normally purified juice was high against the background of the use of N100P100K100 + 50 t/ha of manure – 96.03%, whereas in the crop-replaceable and grain-tilled crop rotation – 95.35 and 95.56%, respectively; for an increase in the rate of fertilizers up to N160P200K200 + 50 t/ha of manure – 95.07%, and an increase in the dose of potassium in the fertilizer system – N100P100K150 + 50 t/ha of manure – 95.84%.

Conclusions. An increase in the rate of fertilizers in the vetch-oats – winter wheat – sugar beet rotation leads to an increase in sugar losses in the molasses. In the grain-tilled crop rotation for the introduction of N160P200K200 + 50 t/ha of manure, the factory sugar yield decreased to 13.74%, with an increase in the potassium dose in the fertilizer system to N100P100K150 + 50 t/ha of manure, this indicator grows by 0.36%. In the case of plowing straw under on the background of N100P100K100, in the crop-replaceable rotation, the factory sugar yield is 8.15 t/ha, which is not inferior to the organo-mineral background of the sugar beet fertilization. 

Author Biographies

Я. П. Цвей, Institute of Bioenergy Crops and Sugar Beet, NAAS of Ukraine

Yaroslav Tsvei

О. І. Присяжнюк, Institute of Bioenergy Crops and Sugar Beet, NAAS of Ukraine

Oleh Prysiazhniuk

С. О. Бондар, Institute of Bioenergy Crops and Sugar Beet, NAAS of Ukraine

Svitlana Bondar

С. М. Сенчук, Institute of Bioenergy Crops and Sugar Beet, NAAS of Ukraine

Svitlana Senchuk

References

Islamgulov, D. R., & Bakirova, A. U. (2017). Productivity and technological quality of sugar beet roots at diff erent harvest time. Saharnaâ svekla [Sugar beet], 6, 14–17. [in Russian]

Dutton, J., & Huijbregts, T. (2006). Root quality and processing. In A. P. Draycott (Ed.), Sugar beet (pp. 409–442). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publ. doi: 10.1002/9780470751114.ch16

Jabro, J. D., Stevens, W. B., Iversen, W. M., & Evans, R. G. (2010). Tillage Depth Effects on Soil Physical Properties, Sugarbeet Yield, and Sugarbeet Quality. Commun. Soil. Sci. Plant Anal., 41(7), 908–916. doi: 10.1080/00103621003594677

Theobald, K. (2016). Welches Fruchtfolgeintervall ist optimal? Zuckerrübe, 2, 14–15.

Minakova, O. A., Putilina, L. N., Tambovtseva, L. V., Aleksandrova, L. V., & Lazutina, N. A. (2016). Influence of use of fertilizers in the main entering and into top dressing on productivity and technological qualities of sugar beet. Saharnaâ svekla [Sugar beet], 7, 12–16. [in Russian]

Roik, M. V., & Kornieieva, M. O. (2017). Ecological stability and plasticity of promising sugar beet hybrids. Saharnaâ svekla [Sugar beet], 3, 4–8. [in Russian]

Karpuk, L. M., & Prysiazhniuk, O. I. (2014). Mathematical models of sugar beet growth and development depending on climatic factors. Tsukrovi buriaky [Sugar beet], 6, 13–15. [in Ukrainian]

Ivanina, V. V. (2016). Biolohizatsiia udobrennia kultur u sivo­zmi­nakh [Biologization of fertilization of crops in crop rotation]. Kyiv: Komprynt. [in Ukrainian]

Tsialtas, J. T., & Maslaris, N. (2005). Effect of N fertilization on sugar yield and non-sugars impurities of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris) grown under Mediterranean conditions. J. Agron. Crop Sci., 191(5), 330–339. doi: 10.1111/j.1439-037X.2005.00161.x

Kostin, V. I., Isaev, Yu. M., & Oshkin, V. A. (2017). Dependence of sugar and juice purity content on the amount of molassigenic substances. Saharnaâ svekla [Sugar beet], 7, 26–28. [in Russian]

Tsvei, Ya. P., Remeniuk, Yu. O., Honcharuk, H. S., & Nazarenko, H. I. (2010). Technological qualities of sugar beet roots depending on the characteristics of agricultural machinery. Nauk. pracì Ìnst. bìoenerg. kulʹt. cukrov. burâkìv [Scientific papers of the Institute of Bioenergy Crops and Sugar Beet], 11, 276–280. [in Ukrainian]

Tsvei, Ya. P., Shymanska, N. K., & Mazur, H. M. (2010). Dependence of technological quality of sugar beet from crop rotation and fertilization backgrounds. Nauk. pracìÌnst. cukrov. burâkìv [Scientific papers of the Institute of Sugar Beet], 11, 290–297. [in Ukrainian]

Yashchenko, L. A. (2003). Ahrokhimichne obgruntuvannia pidvyshchennia produktyvnosti tsukrovykh buriakiv na luchno-chornozemnomu karbonatnomu grunti Lisostepu Ukrainy [Agrochemical substantiation of increase of sugar beet productivity on meadow-chernozem carbonate soil of the forest-steppe of Ukraine] (Extended Abstract of Cand. Agric. Sci. Diss.). National Agrarian University, Kyiv, Ukraine. [in Ukrainian]

Tsvei, Ya. P. (2014). Rodiuchist gruntiv i produktyvnist sivozmin [Soil fertility and crop rotation productivity]. Kyiv: Komprynt. [in Ukrainian]

Schlinker, G. (2016). Stickstoffdüngung zu Zuckerrüben. Zuc­kerrübe, 1, 45–48.

Schönberger, H. (2015). Wie Viel Stickstoff brauchen die Zuc­kerrüben? Zuckerrübe, 2, 38–41.

Published

2019-04-04

How to Cite

Цвей, Я. П., Присяжнюк, О. І., Бондар, С. О., & Сенчук, С. М. (2019). Technological qualities of sugar beet root crops depending on fertilization and crop rotation. Plant Varieties Studying and Protection, 15(1), 99–104. https://doi.org/10.21498/2518-1017.15.1.2019.162492

Issue

Section

PLANT PRODUCTION

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>