Next Article in Journal
Characterization of GmABI3VP1 Associated with Resistance to Soybean Cyst Nematode in Glycine max
Previous Article in Journal
Enhancing Grassland Resilience and Productivity Under Climate Change
Previous Article in Special Issue
Methodologies for Agricultural Gypsum Application Recommendations in No-Tillage Systems on Tropical Sandy Soils
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Agronomy
Volume 15
Issue 8
10.3390/agronomy15082004
agronomy-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Effect of Organic and Mineral Phosphate Fertilization of the Plant Cane and First Ratoon on Agronomic Performance and Industrial Quality of the Second Ratoon in the Brazilian Cerrado Region

by
Evaldo Alves dos Santos
1,2,*,
Frederico Antonio Loureiro Soares
1,2,
Marconi Batista Teixeira
1,2,
Edson Cabral da Silva
1,2,
Antônio Evami Cavalcante Sousa
3 and
Luís Sérgio Rodrigues Vale
3
1
Hydraulics and Irrigation Laboratory, Federal Institute Goiano, Rio Verde Campus, Highway Sul Goiana, Km 01, Rio Verde 75901-970, Goiás, Brazil
2
Graduate Program in Agricultural Sciences—Agronomy, Federal Institute Goiano, Rio Verde Campus, Km 01, Rio Verde 75901-970, Goiás, Brazil
3
Graduate Program in Cerrado Irrigation, Federal Institute Goiano, Ceres Campus, GO-154, Km 218—Rural Zone, Ceres 76300-000, Goiás, Brazil
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agronomy 2025, 15(8), 2004; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15082004
Submission received: 1 July 2025 / Revised: 30 July 2025 / Accepted: 8 August 2025 / Published: 21 August 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Tillage Systems and Fertilizer Application on Soil Health)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

Sugarcane requires high doses of phosphorus to achieve high productivity. However, not all the phosphorus applied to crops is utilized. Therefore, it is believed that some remaining phosphorus can meet the nutrient demand of the ratoon crop. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of mineral fertilization with triple superphosphate (TSP) and organic fertilization with poultry litter (PL), applied to plant cane and the first ratoon, on the quality of second ratoon sugarcane. The experimental design was a randomized complete block design with a 5 × 5 factorial scheme with four replications. The treatments consisted of five TSP doses (0, 60, 120, 180, and 240 kg ha−1) and five PL doses (0, 2, 4, 6, and 8 t ha−1). Fertilization with TSP and PL applied in the two preceding cycles promoted an increase in plant height, stalk diameter, number of tillers, and productivity in the second ratoon. The doses of triple superphosphate and chicken litter applied in cycles preceding the second ratoon were able to increase the agronomic performance of the genotype IACSP95-5094. However, the highest subsequent combined doses of triple superphosphate and chicken litter resulted in a 27% increase in stalk productivity. In general, the preceding doses of chicken litter showed greater potential to enhance the technological attributes.

1. Introduction

In Brazil, a large portion of sugarcane cultivation is carried out on Oxisols [1,2,3]. Particularly in the Cerrado region, the climate is tropical, and the soils are highly weathered, with low pH, a predominance of 1:1 type clay minerals (kaolinite), iron (Fe) and aluminum (Al) oxides, and typically low organic matter content [4]. These soils generally exhibit lower phosphorus (P) use efficiency from fertilizers due to intense mineral weathering, which leads to strong P fixation in Fe and Al hydroxides, reducing its availability and often severely limiting crop productivity [5]. As a result, unused phosphorus is progressively accumulated in less labile forms, referred to as residual P.
Studies show that residual P can be found in tropical soils in moderately labile and non-labile forms [5,6,7,8]. However, there are still several important uncertainties regarding sugarcane’s ability to access these P pools. The adoption of different fertilization management systems capable of influencing soil organic matter content may help mitigate the P adsorption process [9,10,11]. This is because, in addition to supplying the nutrient, they promote the release of organic acids that reduce P adsorption and also exert a buffering effect [12], decreasing pH fluctuations [13] and thereby favoring greater P availability to plants [14].
Sugarcane grown on eutrophic Red Latosols under rainfed conditions has shown satisfactory yields [15]. However, high productivity in most Brazilian soils is associated with proper fertilizer management, especially phosphorus fertilization. Phosphorus (P) is a nutrient that contributes to increased productivity and the technological quality of sugarcane [16]. The phosphorus supplied through fertilizers can significantly increase the final yield of a crop [17] and benefit subsequent ratoon cycles [18].
Therefore, it is important to understand the effect of phosphate fertilization on subsequent crop cycles, such as sugarcane, since there is a need to rationalize phosphorus fertilization, which can reduce production costs [19]. The evaluation of subsequent phosphorus applications can be experimentally assessed on the basis of the response of the ratoon crop.
To meet the high nutritional demand of sugarcane, large amounts of mineral fertilizers are commonly used [19]. However, the growing need for resource optimization and efficiency in the production process has raised concerns about the high consumption of mineral fertilizers, especially those produced with imported raw materials, which significantly increase agricultural costs [20].
In this context, the use of organic residues as an alternative to replace or supplement mineral fertilization in sugarcane cultivation has emerged as a viable solution. This practice not only makes agricultural production more economical and sustainable by recycling phosphorus and other plant nutrients but also utilizes residues that would otherwise be discarded into the environment, providing a more appropriate destination for waste. The use of poultry litter as a substitute for mineral phosphorus-based agricultural inputs has increased [21,22,23].
The use of poultry litter as fertilizer can promote environmental sustainability by turning a potential pollutant into an option to enrich the soil [24]. This not only reduces the need for mineral fertilizers but also offers a more environmentally viable alternative. Additionally, it contributes to the physical and biological quality of the soil, increasing the organic matter content and cation exchange capacity, especially in tropical soils [25,26,27,28,29].
Despite the application of high doses of phosphorus at sugarcane planting, da Costa et al. [30] and Gopalasundaram et al. [31] refs. reported that the residual effect of this initial fertilization is not sufficient to meet the crop’s needs in subsequent years, resulting in a decline in sugarcane productivity; however, it may reduce the demand for mineral fertilizers to be applied.
Thus, mineral and organic phosphorus sources applied to plant cane and the first ratoon grown on Red Latosol were hypothesized to have remaining effects on the second ratoon, meeting the nutrient demand, and that the combination of phosphorus sources in previous applications maximized the agronomic performance and technological quality of the second ratoon.
Thus, the objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of mineral fertilization with triple superphosphate and organic fertilization with poultry litter applied to plant cane and the first sugarcane ratoon on the growth, productivity, and technological quality of the second ratoon.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Location of the Experiment

The experiment was conducted in the field at Destilaria Nova União S/A, which is located in the rural area of the municipality of Jandaia, state of Goiás, Midwest Brazil (17°15′52.6″ S and 50°08′23.2″ W, at 519 m altitude). The local climate is classified as Aw—Tropical Wet (dry winter and rainy summer) according to the Köppen–Geiger climate classification [32]. The soil of the experimental area is classified as typical eutrophic Red Latosol, Cerrado phase, with a history of forage cultivation for pasture.
According to data from the weather station installed in the experimental area, the average annual rainfall was 1207 mm. The experiment was conducted during the 2021–2022 growing season (second ratoon). Air temperature (°C), average air humidity (%), and rainfall (mm) were measured. The recorded climatological data were 23.80 °C, 68.41%, and 1151 mm (Figure 1).
Initially, samples were collected for the characterization of chemical [33] and physical [34] soil attributes in the 0.0–0.2 m layer, with the following results: organic matter = 27.10%; pH in H2O = 5.9; P (Resin) = 1.60 mg dm−3; K = 68.17 mg dm−3; S = 2.67 mg dm−3; B = 0.51 mg dm−3; Cu = 3.60 mg dm−3; Fe = 12.64 mg dm−3; Zn = 0.81 mg dm−3; Mn = 5.95 mg dm−3; Ca = 4.14 cmolc dm−3; Mg = 0.87 cmolc dm−3; Al = 0.00 cmolc dm−3; H + Al = 2.32 cmolc dm−3; Ca + Mg = 5.01 cmolc dm−3; sum of bases = 5.18 cmolc dm−3; cation exchange capacity = 7.50 cmolc dm−3; total organic carbon = 15.72%; base saturation = 68.23%; Clay = 440.23 g kg−1.
In March 2019, 1.5 t ha−1 of dolomitic limestone was applied across the entire area. The limestone had the following specifications: CaO = 31%, Mg = 18%, ECC (effective calcium carbonate equivalent) = 90%, and TNP (total neutralizing power) = 100%. The base saturation was increased to 70% according to the requirements for sugarcane cultivation, as reported by [35]. After application, the limestone was incorporated into the soil through subsoiling, plowing, and harrowing to a depth of 0.40 m. Sugarcane planting was carried out three months later.

2.2. Experimental Design and Treatments with Mineral and Organic Phosphorus Residues

The triple superphosphate used contained 46% P2O5 and 10% Ca, with granule sizes ranging from 2 to 4 mm. The poultry litter was sourced from a broiler farm located in the municipality of Palmeiras de Goiás, GO, Brazil. The organic fertilizer was analyzed, and the results (average of the applications) were as follows: moisture at 105 °C = 17.36%; mineral material = 326.90 g kg−1; organic material = 673.20 g kg−1; organic carbon = 413.00 g kg−1; N = 25.40 g kg−1; P = 7.40 g kg−1; K = 7.40 g kg−1; Ca = 0.19 g kg−1; Mg = 0.04 g kg−1; S = 15.20 g kg−1; B = 0.3 mg kg−1; Zn = 2.80 mg kg−1; Fe = 25.00 mg kg−1; Mn = 5.20 mg kg−1; and Cu = 3.40 mg kg−1.
Sugarcane was planted in June 2019 via the IACSP95-5094 genotype. The evaluations in this study correspond to the production of the second ratoon crop. Accordingly, a randomized complete block design was used in a 5 × 5 factorial scheme with four replicates, based on the combinations of application rates used in preceding cycles. The treatments consisted of combinations of five doses of the mineral fertilizer triple superphosphate (TSP), 0, 60, 120, 180, and 240 kg ha−1, and five doses of the organic fertilizer poultry litter (PL), 0, 2, 4, 6, and 8 t ha−1, totaling 100 experimental plots. The fertilizer rates were applied in the 2019/2020 growing season (plant cane cycle) and the 2020/2021 season (first ratoon cycle). In the second ratoon, no mineral or organic fertilizer rates were applied.
On the basis of the P content in the TSP and PL, the following amounts of P2O5 were supplied: 27.60, 55.20, 82.80, and 110.40 kg ha−1 from the TSP and 32.70, 65.40, 98.10, and 130.80 kg ha−1 from the PL in the plant cane and the first ratoon cycle. The TSP and PL doses applied to the plant cane and the first ratoon crop were determined on the basis of the fertilizer management practices adopted by Destilaria Nova União.
Planting was carried out vegetatively, using a 12-month sugarcane cultivation system. The planting density was 12 buds per linear meter. Each plot consisted of 10 sugarcane rows, each 10 m long, with 1.5 m spacing between rows.
The nitrogen and potassium fertilizers for both the plant cane and the first ratoon crop consisted of 90 kg ha−1 of N and 80 kg ha−1 of K2O per cycle, which were applied in the planting furrow during the plant cane phase. Thirty days after the cane plants were harvested, the recommended N and K doses, according to [36], were reapplied, along with the corresponding TSP and PL doses on the basis of the experimental design. Fertilizers were manually distributed along the planting row in the plant cane cycle (2019/2020) and on the soil surface in the first ratoon crop (2020/2021), on both sides of the row, approximately 0.25 m from the planting line, together with the nitrogen and potassium fertilizers. In the evaluated cycle, no applications of nitrogen and potassium fertilizers were performed.
For the present study, the effects of P2O5 dose applications in preceding cycles, in the form of triple superphosphate and poultry litter, were evaluated using production data from the second ratoon crop in the 2021–2022 growing season.

2.3. Cane Stalk Growth

To evaluate the growth of the second ratoon crop of sugarcane, 12 months after the first ratoon harvest, the following parameters were assessed: plant height (PH), average stem diameter (SD), and number of tillers (NT).
The PH was measured from the soil surface to the base of the +1 leaf using a measuring tape graduated in centimeters. The SD was measured on six consecutive stalks from the usable area of the plot, taking stem diameter measurements at the base, middle, and tip of each stalk with the aid of a digital caliper graduated in centimeters. The NTs were counted over a two-meter length of six consecutive central rows in each experimental plot.

2.4. Technological Quality of Sugarcane

In each experimental plot, subsamples containing 10 stalks from each replication were collected. The stalks were sent to the Technological Analysis Laboratory of Destilaria Nova União for determination of total recoverable sugars (TRSs), total soluble solids (°Brix), fiber content (FIBER), apparent juice purity (AJP), and juice pol (POL), according to the Consecana system [37].
The total recoverable sugar content was determined via the following Equation (1):
TRS = (10 × POL × 1.05263 × 0.915) + (10 × ARC × 0.915)
where
  • TRS is the total recoverable sugar (kg t ha−1);
  • 1.05263 is the stoichiometric coefficient for converting sucrose to reducing sugars;
  • 0.915 is the recovery coefficient accounting for 8.5% of industrial loss;
  • 10 × ARC are the reducing sugars per ton of cane.
The determination of soluble solids in the juice (Brix; %) was performed by direct reading of the juice via a bench refractometer (Bellingham + Stanley Ltd., Nottingham, UK) previously calibrated with distilled water.
The fiber content (%) of the sugarcane was determined using the residue from pressing 0.5 kg of stalks, which was immersed in water for 60 min to displace the air present in the intercellular spaces. After this period, the excess surface water was removed, the wet bagasse was weighed, and the fiber content was estimated using Equation (2):
F = 0.08 × PBU × 0.876
where
  • PBU = Weight of the wet bagasse from the press, in grams.
  • 0.08 = Empirical factor derived from calibration based on gravimetric methods.
  • 0.876 = Correction coefficient for the apparent density or average moisture content of the bagasse.
The apparent juice purity (AJP) was calculated according to the ABNT NBR 16,271 standard via Equation (3):
AJP = (POL ÷ BRIX) × 100
The quantification of the apparent sucrose percentage (Pol %) was performed following the NBR 16,271 standards via Equation (4):
Pol% = LPb × (0.2605 − 0.0009882 × Brix)
where
  • LPd is the saccharimetric reading obtained using lead subacetate.
The sugar and alcohol yields of the second ratoon crop of sugarcane were calculated according to the methodology described by Caldas [38] via Equations (5) and (6):
SY = (PCC × PC/100)
where
  • SY—sugar yield (t ha−1);
  • PCC—percentage of gross sugar contained in the stalks, determined in the laboratory;
  • TCH—tons of stalks per hectare (t ha−1).
    AY = ((PCC × F) + ARL) × Fg × 10 × PC
    where
  • AY—Gross alcohol yield (m3 ha−1);
  • F—Stoichiometric conversion factor of sucrose into one molecule of glucose plus one molecule of fructose, equal to 1.052;
  • ARL—Free reducing sugars %;
  • Fg—Gay-Lussac factor equal to 0.6475.

2.5. Productivity

Sugarcane productivity in tons of stalks per hectare (TCH) was measured 12 months after the first ratoon crop was harvested. The stalks were mechanically cut close to the ground via a harvester, transported by a truck with a digital scale attached, weighed in kilograms, and then converted to tons per hectare (t ha−1).

2.6. Data Analysis

The data were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) via the F test, followed by Tukey’s test (p < 0.05). In cases of significance, regression analysis was performed for the doses of TSP and poultry litter. Statistical analyses were conducted via the SISVAR® software version 5.8 (Build 92) [39].

3. Results

The analysis of variance revealed significant effects of the triple superphosphate (TSP) and poultry litter (PL) doses on plant height (PH), stalk productivity in tons per hectare (TCH), sugar yield (SY), and alcohol yield (AY) in the second ratoon crop of sugarcane (Table 1). Moreover, the average stalk stem diameter (SD) and fiber content (FIBER) were significantly influenced only by the TSP, whereas the total recoverable sugar (TRS), total soluble solids (°Brix), apparent juice purity (AJP), and juice pol (POL) contents were significantly affected by the use of poultry litter. The number of tillers (NT) was influenced by the interaction between the sources of triple superphosphate and poultry litter. Overall, the coefficients of variation fell within the range considered moderately low (<10%), according to Pimentel-Gomes et al. [40].
The analysis of variance revealed a significant interaction effect of TSP × PL dose on plant height (PH). However, when the TSP dose was reduced at each PL rate (Figure 2A), a significant effect was observed only at the 0, 2, and 4 t ha−1 PL doses. The PH results obtained in the absence of organic fertilization (0 t ha−1 PL rate) fit a quadratic model, with an R2 of 74.91%. At this rate, the greatest PH (209.11 cm) was observed in sugarcane plants, with previous doses of 240 kg ha−1 TSP applied during the plant cane and first ratoon cycles.
For the 2 and 4 t ha−1 PL doses, across all the TSP doses, the distribution pattern of the PH data followed a linear trend, with low R2 values (14.39% and 14.59%, respectively). In other words, 85.61% and 85.41% of the variation in PH was not explained by variations in the TSP and PL doses, respectively (Figure 2A). The lowest PHs for the 2 and 4 t ha−1 PL doses applied in the two previous cycles were 203.22 cm and 209.61 cm, respectively, which were observed at the 0 kg ha−1 TSP rate. In contrast, the highest PH values were 222.70 cm and 234.39 cm, which were observed at 60 and 120 kg ha−1 TSP doses applied to the plant cane and first ratoon. For the second ratoon sugarcane under 6 and 8 t ha−1 PL doses and varying TSP doses—both sources applied during the plant cane and first ratoon cycles—no significant model fit was observed, with mean PH values of 229.42 cm and 224.67 cm, respectively.
For the breakdown of PL doses within each TSP rate, with both sources applied in the previous cycles, the PHs of second-ratoon sugarcane under PL doses of 0, 2, 4, and 6 t ha−1 across TSP doses of 0, 60, 120, 180, and 240 kg ha−1 followed a quadratic distribution model, with average R2 values of 54.98%, 78.39%, 80.56%, and 52.80%, respectively (Figure 2D). According to the regression equations, the lowest PH was found at the 0 kg ha−1 PL rate (199.02, 183.19, 191.67, and 204.50 cm). In contrast, the PL doses that resulted in the highest PH were 6.44, 6.22, 6.33, and 23.43 t ha−1 PL (220.58, 227.48, 231.50, and 279.85 cm) at TSP doses of 0, 60, 120, and 180 kg ha−1, respectively.
In the breakdown of the 240 kg ha−1 TSP rate within each PL rate, a linear fit was obtained, with an R2 of 81.21% (Figure 2D). The highest PH observed was 230.91 cm at the 6 t ha−1 PL rate, whereas the lowest was 209.11 cm at the 0 t ha−1 PL rate.
Sugarcane stem diameter (SD) was significantly affected by the interaction between the TSP and PL doses applied in previous cycles. In the breakdown analysis of the TSP doses within each PL rate (Figure 2B), a significant effect on SD was observed for sugarcane plants under 0 and 2 t ha−1 PL doses, with the TSP doses applied in earlier cycles. The results obtained at the 0 and 2 t ha−1 PL doses fit a quadratic distribution model, showing low coefficients of determination (R2 = 42.06% and 30.31%, respectively).
According to the regression equations, the lowest SD values were 2.49 cm and 2.57 cm, which were observed at 140 and 122.93 kg ha−1 TSP doses, respectively (Figure 2B). In contrast, the 0 and 180 kg ha−1 TSP doses at 0 and 2 t ha−1 PL resulted in the highest SD values (2.74 cm and 2.68 cm, respectively). For the 4, 6, and 8 t ha−1 PL doses across the 0, 60, 120, 180, and 240 kg ha−1 TSP doses, the effect on the SD was not significant, with average SD values of 2.62 cm, 2.63 cm, and 2.57 cm, respectively.
The breakdown analysis of the PL doses at each TSP rate (Figure 2E) revealed that the SDs under PL doses of 0, 2, 4, 6, and 8 t ha−1 at 0 and 120 kg ha−1 TSP doses followed a linear model, with R2 values of 76.86% and 83.11%, respectively. The 0 t ha−1 PL rate at 0 kg ha−1 TSP resulted in the highest SD (2.74 cm), whereas the highest SD at the 120 kg ha−1 TSP rate was observed at the 6 t ha−1 PL rate (2.67 cm).
The SD at the 60 kg ha−1 TSP rate fit a quadratic model, with an R2 of 94.75% (Figure 2E). There was a 0.76% increase in the SD for each unit increase in the PL rate, reaching a maximum value of 3.87 t ha−1 PL (2.62 cm). The 180 and 240 kg ha−1 TSP doses across PL doses of 0, 2, 4, 6, and 8 t ha−1 had no significant effects, with average SD values of 2.67 cm and 2.60 cm, respectively.
The number of tillers (NT) was affected by the interaction between the TSP and the PL dose. In the breakdown analysis of the TSP doses at each PL rate (Figure 2C), NT was not significant, with average values of 13.87, 13.81, 13.58, 13.90, and 13.68, respectively.
When evaluating the breakdown of PL doses within each TSP rate on NT, significance was observed at the 120 kg ha−1 TSP rate (Figure 2F). The results fit a decreasing linear model with a low R2 (11.16%), where at the 6 t ha−1 PL rate, the 120 kg ha−1 TSP rate presented the highest NT (14.51). The TSP doses of 0, 60, 180, and 240 kg ha−1 were not significant, with average NT values of 13.73, 13.77, 13.89, and 13.76, respectively.
The effect of phosphate fertilization applied in previous cycles positively influenced the stalk productivity yield per hectare (TCH) in the second ratoon cycle, with a significant interaction observed between the factors under study (Table 1).
Concerning the interaction effect of the TSP dose with the PL dose, a linear relationship was observed (R2 = 98.49, 97.43, 93.73, 93.88, and 88.54%) (Figure 3A–E). The highest stalk yields per hectare (TCH) were recorded in plants treated with 240 kg ha−1 TSP at PL doses of 0, 2, 4, 6, and 8 t ha−1, both sources applied in previous cycles, with yields of 114.41, 114.42, 115.82, 115.60, and 119.36 t ha−1, respectively. The increase in TCH from the lowest to the highest TSP dose at each PL rate was 59.34%, 42.34%, 29.22%, 25.28%, and 26.88%, respectively, demonstrating the effect of fertilization with TSP and PL applied in previous cycles.
When the PL factor was broken down within each TSP rate, TCH at the 0, 120, and 240 kg ha−1 TSP doses responded with an increasing linear trend (Figure 3F,H,J). When the 0, 120, and 240 kg ha−1 TSP doses received 8 t ha−1 PL, the highest TCH values were obtained, measuring 94.08, 104.18, and 119.36 t ha−1 of sugarcane, respectively, whereas the lowest TCH occurred when the TSP doses received 0 t ha−1 PL (71.81, 98.15, and 114.41 t ha−1). This finding demonstrated that fertilization applied in previous cycles (plant cane and first ratoon) increased nutrition in the second ratoon, which was associated with increased stalk biomass accumulation.
The 60 kg ha−1 TSP rate showed the same increasing linear trend, but starting from the 6 t ha−1 PL rate, a decrease in TCH was observed (Figure 3G). The maximum TCH observed at the 6 t ha−1 PL rate with 60 kg ha−1 TSP was 93.68 t ha−1.
The TCH results obtained at the various PL doses and at the 180 kg ha−1 TSP rate fit a quadratic model. According to the regression analysis, at a dose of 3.99 t ha−1 PL, there was a 2.56% reduction in TCH compared with the result obtained at the 0 t ha−1 PL rate (106.41 t ha−1) (Figure 3I). Beyond this dose (3.99 t ha−1 PL), TCH increased, reaching 105.95 t ha−1, which is 0.9% lower than the highest productivity observed at the 0 t ha−1 PL rate under the 180 kg ha−1 TSP rate.
For sugarcane TRSs, significance was observed only for the PL dose (Figure 4A). The TRS varied according to the PL dose. The TRS results fit a linear model with an average R2 of 97.63%. According to the regression equation, the TRS increased up to a dose of 8 t ha−1 PL (166.77 kg t ha−1). The lowest TRS value was observed at the 0 t ha−1 PL rate (160.07 kg t ha−1), indicating that the use of poultry litter has a long-term effect, benefiting subsequent cycles.
The total soluble solids (°Brix) of sugarcane under the various PL doses fit a linear model with an R2 of 93.73% (Figure 4B). There was a 3% increase in °Brix in the treatment that did not receive PL compared with the 8 t ha−1 PL rate, with a maximum value of 21.97%.
An interaction effect of TSP × PL dose was observed on the fiber content of sugarcane (Table 1). In the breakdown of TSP doses within each PL rate, only the 0 and 8 t ha−1 PL doses were significant (Figure 4C). The 0 and 8 t ha−1 PL doses fit a quadratic equation model (R2 = 76.60 and 41.18%, respectively). At the 0 kg ha−1 TSP rate within the 0 t ha−1 PL rate, the highest fiber percentage was observed (11.64%), whereas at the estimated rate of 124.77 kg ha−1 TSP rate within the 8 t ha−1 PL rate, the fiber content was 11.50%.
At the 8 t ha−1 PL rate, the fiber content estimated via the regression equation was 11.50% at the 124.77 kg ha−1 TSP rate (Figure 4C). The fiber results obtained at the TSP doses within 2, 4, and 6 t ha−1 PL doses were not significant, with average values of 10.86%, 10.96%, and 10.89%, respectively.
The fiber content of sugarcane was significant only for the 0 and 120 kg ha−1 TSP doses in the breakdown of PL doses within each TSP rate (Figure 4D). At PL doses within the 0 kg ha−1 TSP rate, the data fit a decreasing linear model (R2 = 86.79%). The second ratoon sugarcane subjected to 0 t ha−1 PL at 0 kg ha−1 TSP presented the highest fiber content (11.64%).
For the fiber content at the PL doses within the 120 kg ha−1 TSP rate, the data showed a positive linear fit, with an R2 of 66.65% (Figure 4D). At this point, the lowest fiber content for the PL dose was 9.97%, which was observed at the 0 t ha−1 PL rate, whereas the highest was 11.12%, which was observed at the 8 t ha−1 rate. The fiber content results at the PL doses within the 60, 180, and 240 kg ha−1 TSP doses were not significant, with averages of 11.12%, 10.68%, and 10.84%, respectively.
The juice purity of the second ratoon sugarcane crop was significantly affected by the PL dose (Figure 5A). At the previous doses of the 8 t ha−1 PL dose applied in the two preceding cycles, the second ratoon sugarcane was purer (90.46%), representing an increase of 1.52% compared with the 0 t ha−1 PL dose (89.08%). The results fit a positive linear model, with an R2 of 97.29%.
The pol of the second sugarcane ratoon crop under the various PL doses fit a positive linear model with an R2 of 92.51% (Figure 5D). There was an increase of 4.46% in juice pol (16.82%) when subjected to the previous dose of 8 t ha−1 PL compared to the previous doses of 0 t ha−1 (16.07%).
With respect to sugar yield (SY), an interaction between the factors TSP × PL was observed (Table 1). In terms of the breakdown of the TSP dose at each PL dose, there was an increase in the SY of the sugarcane second ratoon crop (Figure 5B). The effect of previous doses of applying 240 kg ha−1 of TSP at doses of 0, 2, 4, 6, and 8 t ha−1 of PL resulted in increases of 37.83%, 29.94%, 23.97%, 22.43%, and 22.66%, respectively. In this interaction, the highest SY values obtained were 18.49, 18.53, 18.96, 19.43, and 20.35 t ha−1.
The PL doses at the TSP doses were significant for 0, 60, 120, and 240 kg ha−1 of TSP (Figure 5E). The PL dose at 60 kg ha−1 of TSP showed quadratic behavior (R2 = 91.82). At this TSP dose, the maximum PL dose estimated via the regression equation was 7.49 t ha−1, resulting in an estimated SY value of 15.41 t ha−1.
The PL doses at 0, 120, and 240 kg ha−1 of TSP showed positive linear trends (R2 = 96.13, 89.95, and 89.78%, respectively) (Figure 5E) for sugar yield. In the previous doses of 8 t ha−1 PL applied at the TSP doses of 0, 120, and 240 kg ha−1, the highest sugar yields were obtained (15.74, 17.26, and 20.35 t ha−1, respectively). These yields corresponded to increases of 36.90%, 9.55%, and 10.06% in sugar yield compared with those of the treatments that did not receive PL or TSP in the two preceding crops. This finding demonstrated that fertilization with previous doses of PL and TSP had an effect that positively reflected sugar yield.
The alcohol yield (AY) was affected by the interaction between the TSP and PL doses (Table 1). The TSP doses at 0, 2, 4, 6, and 8 t ha−1 of PL applied in the two preceding cycles (plant cane and first ratoon) presented positive linear trends, with R2 values of 98.63%, 97.10%, 94.37%, 93.38%, and 83.67%, respectively (Figure 5C). The effect of previous dose applications, 240 kg ha−1 of TSP at each PL dose, again stood out, with the highest AY performance.
The maximum AY values obtained at the doses of 240 kg ha−1 of TSP combined with 0, 2, 4, 6, and 8 t ha−1 of PL were 12.96, 12.99, 13.28, 13.60, and 14.27 m3 ha−1, respectively (Figure 5C). As the dose of TSP increased within each PL dose applied in the preceding cycles, the alcohol yield increased by 60.71%, 42.98%, 30.89%, 28.98%, and 29.32% compared with the lowest TSP dose (0 kg ha−1). This confirms that the sources applied in the previous cycles, namely, the plant cane and first ratoon, favored not only productivity, as previously demonstrated (Figure 3), but also its derivatives by enhancing technological attributes.
When the PL doses were broken down within each TSP dose, at TSP doses of 0, 60, 120, and 240 kg ha−1, the alcohol yield data fit a linear model, with R2 values of 95.70%, 82.13%, 87.94%, and 89.15%, respectively (Figure 5F). According to the regression equation, a linear increase in alcohol yield was observed for the PL doses at TSP doses of 0, 60, 120, and 240 kg ha−1.
The highest AY results were observed in the previous doses of 8 t ha−1 PL doses at TSP doses of 0, 120, and 240 kg ha−1, corresponding to 11.03, 12.14, and 14.27 m3 ha−1, respectively, as well as at the 6 t ha−1 PL dose with 60 kg ha−1 TSP (10.84 m3 ha−1). The AY results obtained at PL doses of 180 kg ha−1 TSP were not significant in the tested mathematical models, with a mean value of 11.96 m3 ha−1 (Figure 5F).

4. Discussion

The plant height (PH) of second-year sugarcane increased exponentially with the interaction of the TSP and PL application doses. This can be attributed to the phosphorus supplied by TSP and PL during planting and the first ratoon cycle. Phosphorus is essential for the development of sugarcane roots [41]. A well-developed root system allows the plant to explore a larger soil volume for water and nutrient absorption, which is vital for growth. Crusciol et al. [19] reported that the use of organomineral fertilizer increases the availability of residual phosphorus, which can meet the nutritional requirements of sugarcane.
Vasconcelos et al. [42] reported that PH can be a limiting factor for higher sugarcane yields. Alternatively, in this study, plants subjected to the previous doses of 6.33 t ha−1 of PL combined with 120 kg ha−1 of TSP reached an average height of 231.50 cm. This performance corresponds to the combined use of organic and mineral fertilizers, which contributes to the mineralization of phosphorus, improving the availability of this element in the soil and enabling increases in PH [18].
The previous doses of TSP and PL affected the stalk stem diameter (SD) of the second ratoon sugarcane crop. In this study, the plants in the treatments that did not receive PL or TSP (2.74 cm) presented the greatest SD. However, the larger stem diameter did not translate into greater stalk productivity in the second ratoon or in its derivatives, sugar and alcohol, which will be discussed later, unlike PH. In the absence of phosphorus, the second ratoon of the IACSP95-5094 genotype presented a reduced PH and increased SD. Vitti et al. [43] reported that phosphorus deficiency causes reduced stalk development. Suboptimal soil phosphorus levels can lead to plant growth losses ranging from 5 to 15% of the maximum production [44,45,46].
According to Pavinato et al. [5], phosphorus (P) adsorption in the soil directly affects the ability to supply this nutrient to plants. Oxisols have a high adsorption capacity, in which P is adsorbed onto minerals in the clay fraction, especially iron (Fe) and aluminum (Al) oxides [4]. Phosphorus can form complexes with metallic ions present in the soil, such as calcium, iron, and aluminum, reducing its availability to plants. In addition, the precipitation of these metallic ions can also contribute to the reduction in P availability for plants [6].
The second ratoon of sugarcane responded to the interaction between the factors PL and TSP by increasing the number of tillers (NT). The low coefficient of variation for NT observed at PL previous doses under 120 kg ha−1 of TSP can be explained by the variation in phosphorus in the treatments studied.
Santos et al. [47] did not observe variation in tiller number under the residual effect of applying 2 t ha−1 of filter cake with 50 kg ha−1 of P2O5. The same authors concluded that the residual application of 100 to 200 kg ha−1 of P2O5 combined with 4.0 t ha−1 of organic compost applied at sugarcane planting promoted tillering in the ratoon crop.
Bokhtiar et al. [48] reported that P is essential for tillering in the second ratoon crop of sugarcane. The same authors concluded that to maintain soil fertility and maximize tillering in sugarcane ratoons, reapplication of both mineral and organic fertilizers is essential. Jaarsveld et al. [49] reported that residual phosphorus did not influence sugarcane tillering but had a positive effect on growth.
Additionally, Caione et al. [50] studied phosphorus sources and reported that the TSPs in the second ratoon crop had a lower residual effect and phosphorus availability in the soil. Phosphorus in sugarcane plays a crucial role in plant vigor and tillering and therefore in final productivity [42,51,52].
The stalk productivity yield per hectare (TCH) of the second ratoon crop of sugarcane was positively influenced by the interaction of the doses of TSP and PL. The treatments that received higher combined doses of TSP and PL resulted in greater TCH. These results are attributed to the mineralization of organic residues, which gradually release phosphorus into the soil, contributing to the improvement of second-ratoon sugarcane production. Crusciol et al. [19] reported that there is greater residual phosphorus availability with the use of organomineral fertilizer without affecting stalk or sugar production. Moreover, ref. [53] reported that the proper combination of organic and inorganic sources can increase fertilizer efficiency and ultimately the ratoon crop yield of sugarcane.
Yang et al. [54] reported that the use of organic compost is effective in reducing P losses. Ramos et al. [55] reported that the release of phosphorus from poultry litter occurs gradually through the mineralization process resulting from the activity of soil microorganisms. This likely occurred in this study, which favored plant growth and consequently increased the stalk yield per hectare (TCH). Bryndum et al. [56] reported that the application of poultry litter in agricultural production areas increases or maintains the soil organic matter content, thereby contributing to long-term agricultural sustainability.
Santos et al. [57] reported that the greater the dose of phosphorus applied, the greater the residual effect and, consequently, the greater the chances of the plant responding to fertilization. Raij and Quaggio [58] reported that significant responses in ratoon crops are only effective in soils with low P levels. Bokhtiar et al. [48] evaluated the residual effects of organic and inorganic fertilizers on the second ratoon of sugarcane and reported yields ranging from 68.2 to 76.5 t ha−1, which are lower than those reported in this study.
The concentrations of the parameters that affect the technological quality of the stalks from the second ratoon of sugarcane were significantly different among the treatments. However, differences between the evaluated factors were observed for some parameters. The linear response of TRS, °Brix, and POL to variations in PL doses applied during the two preceding cycles indicates that part of the phosphorus from this source remained in the soil and can be attributed to the direct influence of phosphorus on industrial quality.
The highest values of TRS, °Brix, and POL obtained at the dose of 8 t ha−1 of PL can be interpreted as a possible response to the effect of the higher PL in the previous doses, which positively impacts sugar accumulation. This may indicate stimulation of photosynthesis, respiration, energy storage and transfer, as well as cell division and growth, due to the adequate supply of phosphorus, an essential component for sugar synthesis and transport, which contributes to sucrose accumulation in the stalks [59,60,61].
According to CONAB [62], the average TRS in the State of Goiás is 137.33 kg t−1. In the present study, the maximum observed TRS value was 166.77 kg t−1. Costa et al. [63] evaluated the technological quality of plant cane and ratoon cane grown under phosphate fertilization in soils of different textures and obtained a maximum TRS of 162.99 kg t−1.
At an application rate of 114 kg ha−1 P2O5, Albuquerque et al. [64] reported a TRS of 161.6 kg t−1. Ref. [65] reported a reduction in TRS levels with phosphate fertilization, indicating potential losses in cane marketability.
P is a nutrient that influences the POL content in sugarcane juice [66]. The maximum POL observed in the present study was 16.82%. According to Consecana [37], the ratoon crop of the IACSP95-5094 genotype was at harvest maturity, since values above 12.25% are indicative of maturity. Simões Neto et al. [67] reported that greater increases in POL occurred in areas with high soil P availability. Thus, increasing POL values can improve the industrial yield of sugarcane [68].
According to Duarte et al. [69], °Brix is directly related to sugar and alcohol yields, with the ideal percentage ranging from 18 to 25%. The values obtained in this study ranged from 21.33% to 21.97%, falling within the appropriate range. Costa et al. [63] reported °Brix values of 23.00% and 22.10% when evaluating the industrial quality of plant cane and first ratoon, respectively.
An interaction effect of the TSP and PL doses on the fiber content was observed. Compared with the control treatment, the treatments that did not receive TSP or PL resulted in a greater fiber content, at 11.64%. Genotypes with high fiber contents have greater resistance to pest attack and stalk lodging [65]. However, the same authors noted that high fiber levels are undesirable for sugar and ethanol production, as they reduce the technological quality.
Fiber contents of up to 14% are desirable in sugarcane production [37,64,70]. Pedula et al. [71] demonstrated that the fiber percentage in sugarcane directly influences juice extraction efficiency, with higher fiber values resulting in lower extraction efficiency.
Juice purity is crucial for sugar production and has a direct effect on the technological quality of sugarcane [72,73]. A linear increase was observed with increasing PL dose, with the highest purity obtained at a dose of 8 t ha−1 PL (90.46%). Albuquerque et al. [64] studied sugarcane productivity under phosphorus doses and reported that the quality of the raw material improved with phosphate fertilization.
There was an interaction effect between the previous doses of TSP and PL on the sugar yield (SY), with SY increasing linearly under the effect of the previous doses of TSP and PL. As expected, this had a positive effect on productivity. However, only the PL dose combined with 60 kg ha−1 of TSP resulted in an exponential response. In this treatment, when 7.49 t ha−1 of PL was applied, an SY of 15.41 t ha−1 was achieved. In this study, the effect of the combination of previous doses of 240 kg ha−1 of TSP with 8 t ha−1 of PL resulted in an average SY of 20.35 t ha−1, the highest value obtained in this research.
The effect of the interaction between the TSP and PL previous doses on alcohol yield (AY) was determined via linear regression, which revealed a maximum AY of 14.27 m3 ha−1, with a previous doses of 240 kg ha−1 of TSP combined with 8 t ha−1 of PL. Since the phosphorus was applied in the planting furrow and as topdressing in the first ratoon, it is believed that the phosphorus content in the second ratoon remained high because of the residual effect in the soil [74].
The increase in SY is likely related to the increase in soil P content due to the high applications of TSP and PL received during the planting of the sugarcane and the first ratoon, since phosphorus plays an important role in root development and tillering in sugarcane, positively affecting stalk and sugar productivity [75,76].
Similarly, this study showed that the combination of mineral fertilizer with organic compounds can be more efficient, especially by reducing phosphorus adsorption onto aluminum and iron clay minerals, as demonstrated by other authors [77,78,79].
The combination of organic and mineral fertilization, along with sustainable agricultural practices, is essential for optimizing AY from sugarcane. Studies have shown that this approach increases productivity [80], improves alcohol quality [81] and reduces environmental impact [82].
Bokhtiar et al. [83] reported that the residual effects of organic fertilization applied to cane plants increase nutrient use efficiency in sugarcane ratoon crops. The same authors concluded that the combination of organic and mineral fertilizers increases phosphorus availability for plants, maintains and renews organic matter, and improves the physical and chemical properties of the soil, as well as sugarcane yield and juice quality.
Ball-Coelho et al. [84], evaluating phosphorus dynamics in the soil, concluded that organic fertilizer as a phosphorus source, when applied in the planting furrow at a depth of 0.20 m during sugarcane planting, promotes higher concentrations of the element in the more labile fractions, having a residual effect on the first ratoon crop. The same authors also reported that long-term applications of organic phosphorus sources lead to the accumulation of fertilizer phosphorus in the upper 30 cm of the soil, which favors the industrial yield of sugarcane.
Considering these results, the present study confirms that the application of TSP and PL represents a promising agronomic and economic alternative for sugarcane producers to meet phosphorus requirements. This approach can provide residual effects in subsequent cropping cycles and contribute to the longevity of the sugarcane field. The balance between mineral and organic sources can improve not only the soil’s chemical attributes but also its physical and biological properties, with positive effects on plant growth, development, productivity, industrial quality, and sugar and ethanol yields.
The results obtained in this study highlight the agronomic benefits of the combined use of mineral and organic fertilizers for phosphorus supply in sugarcane. It is important to highlight certain limitations that should be considered when interpreting and generalizing the data. This is especially relevant considering that sugarcane is cultivated in various regions of Brazil, under different soil and climatic conditions, and its cultivation has expanded into the Cerrado regions, where naturally low-fertility soils predominate, particularly Oxisols, which cover approximately 204 million hectares of the country [85]. However, considering the organic source, Brazil is the third-largest poultry producer in the world [86] and consequently generates large amounts of waste such as poultry litter, which contains a considerable amount of nutrients, including phosphorus.
Moreover, studies indicate that the use of organic sources enhances the availability of phosphorus in the soil when applied via mineral fertilizers by reducing the adsorption of P from labile forms [9,10,11]. Therefore, the application of this organic residue in sugarcane cultivation represents an excellent opportunity to recycle nutrients and provide a more sustainable destination for this waste.
In the present case, the experiment was conducted over a full crop cycle (second ratoon), encompassing applications made in two consecutive growing seasons (plant cane and first ratoon), under a single edaphoclimatic condition. This temporal and spatial scope may limit the extrapolation of the results to other regions with different soil, climate, and agricultural management characteristics. Factors such as annual climate variability, differences in soil texture and mineralogy, as well as the specific composition of the fertilizers used, can significantly influence phosphorus dynamics in the soil–plant system. Therefore, caution is recommended when generalizing the findings, and additional studies in different agricultural environments are necessary to validate and expand the applicability of the proposed recommendations.

5. Conclusions

The tested hypothesis was confirmed: the second ratoon of sugarcane exhibits variable agronomic performance under different rates of triple superphosphate and poultry litter applied in previous cycles in a Red Latosol. Poultry litter has greater potential to enhance the technological attributes of subsequent sugarcane ratoons. In the absence of phosphorus fertilization, an increase in fiber content was observed in the second ratoon of the IACSP95-5094 genotype, negatively affecting industrial yield. However, at the highest application rates of triple superphosphate and poultry litter, crop productivity increased by 27%. The interpretation of these results not only deepens our understanding of second ratoon sugarcane cultivation but also provides valuable insights to guide more efficient and sustainable phosphorus fertilization practices in future ratoon cycles. This can help promote a more balanced and conscious approach, aiming for a more productive environment. Poultry litter emerges as a viable alternative for supplementing mineral phosphorus fertilization in sugarcane production. However, it is essential to acknowledge that the conclusions presented here are based on the evaluation of a single crop cycle, the second ratoon, under specific soil and climatic conditions. Therefore, caution is advised when extrapolating these results, and further studies should be conducted in different edaphoclimatic environments and over longer production cycles to enhance the applicability and robustness of the proposed recommendations.

Author Contributions

Formal analysis, investigation, resources, writing—original draft preparation: E.A.d.S.; conceptualization, writing—review and editing, project administration: F.A.L.S.; writing—review and editing, supervision, project administration: M.B.T.; formal analysis, investigation, writing—original draft, visualization: E.C.d.S.; writing—review and editing: A.E.C.S.; formal analysis, investigation, writing—original draft, preparation: L.S.R.V. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by Denusa Destilaria Nova União S/A, the Goiás State Research Support Foundation (FAPEG)—scholarship number 202110267000063, call/year: No. 18/2020, CEAGRE, and the Federal Institute of Education, Science and Technology of Goiano (IF Goiano)—Rio Verde Campus.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq); the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES); the Goiás State Research Support Foundation (FAPEG); the Funding Authority for Studies and Projects (FINEP); the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MCTI); the Irrigated Agriculture Research Group in the Cerrado (AGRICE); CEAGRE; the Federal Institute of Education, Science and Technology of Goiano (IFGoiano)—Rio Verde Campus for the financial and structural support provided for the development of this study; and the Research Directorate—Evangelical College of Goianésia for their support.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
PBUWeight of the wet bagasse from the press in grams
LPdSaccharimetric reading obtained using lead subacetate
PCCAmount of raw sugar (%) contained in the stalks
FStoichiometric conversion factor of sucrose into one molecule of glucose plus one molecule of fructose, equal to 1.052
ARLFree reducing sugars (%)
FgGay-Lussac factor equal to 0.6475
MSMean square
Int.Interaction
TSTriple superphosphate
PLPoultry litter
CVCoefficient of variation
DFDegrees of freedom
nsNot significant
PHPlant height
SDStem diameter
NTNumber of tillers
TCHStalk productivity in tons per hectare
TRSTotal recoverable sugar
°BRIXTotal soluble solids
FIBERFiber content
AJPApparent juice purity
POLJuice pol
SYSugar yield
AYAlcohol yield
t ha−1Ton per hectare
kg ha−1Kilogram per hectare
cmCentimeter
kg t ha−1kilograms per ton per hectare
%Percentage
m3 ha−1Cubic meter per hectare

References

  1. Pellegrina, H.S. Comércio, Produtividade e Organização Espacial Da Agricultura: Evidências Do Brasil. Rev. Econ. Desenvolv. 2022, 156, 102816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Jordan, R.A.; Santos, R.C.; Freitas, R.L.; Motomiya, A.V.d.A.; Geisenhoff, L.O.; Sanches, A.C.; Ávalo, H.; Mesquita, M.; Ferreira, M.B.; Silva, P.C.; et al. Thermal Properties and Temporal Dynamics of Red Latosol (Oxisol) in Sustainable Agriculture and Environmental Conservation. Resources 2023, 12, 104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Pessoa, T.N.; Libardi, P.L. Physical-Hydric Properties of Oxisols as Influenced by Soil Structure and Clay Mineralogy. Catena 2022, 211, 106009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Schaefer, C.E.G.R.; Gilkes, R.J.; Fernandes, R.B.A. EDS/SEM Study on Microaggregates of Brazilian Latosols, in Relation to P Adsorption and Clay Fraction Attributes. Geoderma 2004, 123, 69–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Pavinato, P.S.; Gotz, L.F.; Teles, A.P.B.; Arruda, B.; Herrera, W.B.; Chadwick, D.R.; Jones, D.L.; Withers, P.J.A. Legacy Soil Phosphorus Bioavailability in Tropical and Temperate Soils: Implications for Sustainable Crop Production. Soil Tillage Res. 2024, 244, 106228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Pavinato, P.S.; Cherubin, M.R.; Soltangheisi, A.; Rocha, G.C.; Chadwick, D.R.; Jones, D.L. Revealing Soil Legacy Phosphorus to Promote Sustainable Agriculture in Brazil. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 15615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Maranguit, D.; Guillaume, T.; Kuzyakov, Y. Land-Use Change Affects Phosphorus Fractions in Highly Weathered Tropical Soils. Catena 2017, 149, 385–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Sandim, A.d.S.; da Silva, L.J.R.; Deus, A.C.F.; Penn, C.; Büll, L.T. Phosphorous Fractions in Weathered Tropical Soils After Application of Conventional and Alternative P Fertilizers. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2023, 23, 5621–5631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Mabagala, F.S.; Mng’ong’o, M.E. On the Tropical Soils; The Influence of Organic Matter (OM) on Phosphate Bioavailability. Saudi J. Biol. Sci. 2022, 29, 3635–3641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Guelfi, D.; Nunes, A.P.P.; Sarkis, L.F.; Oliveira, D.P. Innovative Phosphate Fertilizer Technologies to Improve Phosphorus Use Efficiency in Agriculture. Sustainability 2022, 14, 14266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Fontaine, S.; Abbadie, L.; Aubert, M.; Barot, S.; Bloor, J.M.G.; Derrien, D.; Duchene, O.; Gross, N.; Henneron, L.; Le Roux, X.; et al. Plant–Soil Synchrony in Nutrient Cycles: Learning from Ecosystems to Design Sustainable Agrosystems. Glob. Change Biol. 2024, 30, e17034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Takahashi, Y.; Katoh, M. Root Response and Phosphorus Uptake with Enhancement in Available Phosphorus Level in Soil in the Presence of Water-Soluble Organic Matter Deriving from Organic Material. J. Environ. Manag. 2022, 322, 116038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Wang, C.; Kuzyakov, Y. Soil Organic Matter Priming: The pH Effects. Glob. Change Biol. 2024, 30, e17349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Jindo, K.; Audette, Y.; Olivares, F.L.; Canellas, L.P.; Smith, D.S.; Paul Voroney, R. Biotic and Abiotic Effects of Soil Organic Matter on the Phytoavailable Phosphorus in Soils: A Review. Chem. Biol. Technol. Agric. 2023, 10, 29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. de Oliveira Junior, A.C.; dos Santos, L.N.S.; Reis, M.N.O.; Vitorino, L.C.; Bessa, L.A.; Teixeira, M.B.; Soares, F.A.L. Effect of Mineral and Organic Nitrogen Sources on Vegetative Development, Nutrition, and Yield of Sugarcane. Agronomy 2023, 13, 1627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Borges, B.M.M.N.; Strauss, M.; Camelo, P.A.; Sohi, S.P.; Franco, H.C.J. Re-Use of Sugarcane Residue as a Novel Biochar Fertiliser —Increased Phosphorus Use Efficiency and Plant Yield. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 262, 121406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Wu, Q.; Zhou, W.; Chen, D.; Cai, A.; Ao, J.; Huang, Z. Optimizing Soil and Fertilizer Phosphorus Management According to the Yield Response and Phosphorus Use Efficiency of Sugarcane in Southern China. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2020, 20, 1655–1664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Borges, B.M.M.N.; Abdala, D.B.; de Souza, M.F.; Viglio, L.M.; Coelho, M.J.A.; Pavinato, P.S.; Franco, H.C.J. Organomineral Phosphate Fertilizer from Sugarcane Byproduct and Its Effects on Soil Phosphorus Availability and Sugarcane Yield. Geoderma 2019, 339, 20–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Crusciol, C.A.C.; de Campos, M.; Martello, J.M.; Alves, C.J.; Nascimento, C.A.C.; Pereira, J.C.d.R.; Cantarella, H. Organomineral Fertilizer as Source of P and K for Sugarcane. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 5398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. de Moraes, E.R.; Mageste, J.G.; Lana, R.M.Q.; da Silva, R.V.; de Camargo, R.; de Moraes, E.R.; Mageste, J.G.; Lana, R.M.Q.; da Silva, R.V.; de Camargo, R. Sugarcane: Organo-Mineral Fertilizers and Biostimulants. In Sugarcane—Technology and Research; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2017; ISBN 978-1-78923-151-9. [Google Scholar]
  21. Ashworth, A.j.; Chastain, J.p.; Moore Jr, P.A. Nutrient Characteristics of Poultry Manure and Litter. In Animal Manure; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2020; Volume 67, pp. 63–87. ISBN 978-0-89118-371-6. [Google Scholar]
  22. Almeida, R.F.; Queiroz, I.D.S.; Mikhael, J.E.R.; Oliveira, R.C.; Borges, E.N. Enriched Animal Manure as a Source of Phosphorus in Sustainable Agriculture. Int. J. Recycl. Org. Waste Agric. 2019, 8, 203–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Nawaz, M.; Umer Chattha, M.; Chattha, M.; Ahmad, R.; Munir, H.; Usman, M.; Hassan, M.; Khan, S.; Kharal, M. Assessment of Compost as Nutrient Supplement for Spring Planted Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.). J. Anim. Plant Sci. 2017, 27, 283–293. [Google Scholar]
  24. Guimarães, G.; Lana, R.d.P.; Rei, R.d.S.; Veloso, C.M.; Sousa, M.R.d.M.; Rodrigues, R.C.; Campos, S.d.A. Produção de cana-de-açúcar adubada com cama de frango. Rev. Bras. Saúde Prod. Anim. 2016, 17, 617–625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Zuo, W.; Gu, C.; Zhang, W.; Xu, K.; Wang, Y.; Bai, Y.; Shan, Y.; Dai, Q. Sewage Sludge Amendment Improved Soil Properties and Sweet Sorghum Yield and Quality in a Newly Reclaimed Mudflat Land. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 654, 541–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Melo, W.; Delarica, D.; Guedes, A.; Lavezzo, L.; Donha, R.; de Araújo, A.; de Melo, G.; Macedo, F. Ten Years of Application of Sewage Sludge on Tropical Soil. A Balance Sheet on Agricultural Crops and Environmental Quality. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 643, 1493–1501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Barbosa, J.Z.; Poggere, G.C.; Dalpisol, M.; Serrat, B.M.; Bittencourt, S.; Motta, A.C.V. Alkalinized Sewage Sludge Application Improves Fertility of Acid Soils. Ciênc. Agrotec. 2017, 41, 483–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. da Silva, F.C.; Boaretto, A.E.; Berton, R.S.; Zotelli, H.B.; Pexe, C.A.; Bernardes, E.M. Efeito de lodo de esgoto na fertilidade de um Argissolo Vermelho-Amarelo cultivado com cana-de-açúcar. Pesq. Agropec. Bras. 2001, 36, 831–840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Nascimento, C.W.A.; Barros, D.A.S.; Melo, E.E.C.; Oliveira, A.B. Alterações químicas em solos e crescimento de milho e feijoeiro após aplicação de lodo de esgoto. Rev. Bras. Ciênc. Solo 2004, 28, 385–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. da Costa, D.B.; de Andrade, P.K.B.; da Silva, S.A.M.; Neto, D.E.S.; Freire, F.J.; de Oliveira, E.C.A. Adubação fosfatada em cana planta e soca em argissolos do nordeste de diferentes texturas. Rev. Caatinga 2014, 27, 47–56. [Google Scholar]
  31. Gopalasundaram, P.; Bhaskaran, A.; Rakkiyappan, P. Integrated Nutrient Management in Sugarcane. Sugar Tech 2011, 14, 3–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Alvares, C.A.; Stape, J.L.; Sentelhas, P.C.; de Moraes Gonçalves, J.L.; Sparovek, G. Köppen’s Climate Classification Map for Brazil. Meteorol. Z. 2013, 22, 711–728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Raij, B.V.; de Andrade, J.C.; Cantarella, H.; Guaggio, J.A. Análise Química Para Avaliação da Fertilidade de Solos Tropicais; Instituto Agronômico (IAC): Campinas, SP, Brazil, 2001; ISBN 85-85564-05-9.
  34. Teixeira, P.C.; Donagemma, G.K.; Fontana, A.; Teixeira, W.G. Manual de Métodos de Análise de Solo, 3rd ed.; Embrapa: Brasília, DF, Brazil, 2017; ISBN 978-85-7035-771-7. [Google Scholar]
  35. Xavier, M.A.; Landell, M.G.D.A.; Pires, R.C.D.M.; Rossetto, R.; Dinardo-Miranda, L.L.; Perecin, D.; do Prado, H.; Garcia, J.C.; Vitti, A.C.; Fracasso, J.; et al. Gemas Brotadas de Cana-de-Açúcar: Produção Sustentável e Utilização Experimental na Formação de Áreas de Multiplicação; Instituto Agronômico (IAC): Campinas, SP, Brazil, 2020; p. 52.
  36. Raij, B.V.; Cantarella, H.; Quaggio, J.A.; Furlani, A.M.C. Recomendações de Adubação e Calagem Para o Estado de São Paulo; Instituto Agronômico/Fundação IAC: Campinas, SP, Brazil, 1997.
  37. Consecana. Consecana Manual de Instruções; Consecana: Piracicaba, SP, Brazil, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  38. Caldas, C. Manual de Análises Selecionadas Para Indústrias Sucroalcooleiras; Sindicato da Indústria e do Álcool do Estado de Alagoas: Maceió, Brazil, 1998; p. 438. [Google Scholar]
  39. Ferreira, D.F. Sisvar: A Computer Statistical Analysis System. Ciênc. Agrotec. 2011, 35, 1039–1042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Pimentel-Gomes, F.; Garcia, C.H. Estatística Aplicada a Experimentos Agronômicos e Florestais: Exposição com Exemplos e Orientação Para Uso de Aplicativos; FEALQ: Piracicaba, Brazil, 2002; Volume 11, ISBN 85-7133-014-X. [Google Scholar]
  41. Arruda, B.; Rodrigues, M.; Soltangheisi, A.; Richardson, A.E.; Andreote, F.D.; Pavinato, P.S. Biological and Morphological Traits of Sugarcane Roots in Relation to Phosphorus Uptake. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2016, 16, 901–915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Vasconcelos, R.d.L.; Cremasco, C.P.; de Almeida, H.J.; Garcia, A.; Neto, A.B.; Mauad, M.; Gabriel Filho, L.R.A. Multivariate Behavior of Irrigated Sugarcane with Phosphate Fertilizer and Filter Cake Management: Nutritional State, Biometry, and Agroindustrial Performance. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2020, 20, 1625–1636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Vitti, G.C.; Mazza, J.A. Planejamento, Estratégias de Manejo e Nutrição Da Cultura de Cana-de-Açúcar. Informações Agronômicas 2002, 97, 1–16. [Google Scholar]
  44. Shenoy, V.V.; Kalagudi, G.M. Enhancing Plant Phosphorus Use Efficiency for Sustainable Cropping. Biotechnol. Adv. 2005, 23, 501–513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Zambrosi, F.C.B.; Ribeiro, R.V.; Marchiori, P.E.R.; Cantarella, H.; Landell, M.G.A. Sugarcane Performance under Phosphorus Deficiency: Physiological Responses and Genotypic Variation. Plant Soil 2015, 386, 273–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. da Silveira, G.; Costa, P.M.d.A.; Kist, V.; Almeida, C.d.F.; Baffa, D.C.F.; Barbosa, M.H.P. Genetic Variation Affecting Agronomic Traits in Sugarcane in Response to High and Low Phosphorus Availability. Agron. J. 2014, 106, 2296–2304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Santos, D.H.; Silva, M.d.A.; Tiritan, C.S.; Foloni, J.S.S.; Echer, F.R. Qualidade tecnológica da cana-de-açúcar sob adubação com torta de filtro enriquecida com fosfato solúvel. Rev. Bras. Eng. Agríc. Ambient. 2011, 15, 443–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Bokhtiar, S.M.; Paul, G.C.; Alam, K.M. Effects of Organic and Inorganic Fertilizer on Growth, Yield, and Juice Quality and Residual Effects on Ratoon Crops of Sugarcane. J. Plant Nutr. 2008, 31, 1832–1843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Jaarsveld, C.M.V.; Zharare, G.E.; Smit, M.A.; Preez, C.C.D. Availability of Residual and/or Applied Inorganic Phosphorus for Sugarcane Uptake and Growth in a Post-Mined Reconstituted Soil. J. Geosci. Environ. Prot. 2022, 10, 112–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Caione, G.; Fernandes, F.M.; Lange, A. Efeito residual de fontes de fósforo nos atributos químicos do solo, nutrição e produtividade de biomassa da cana-de-açúcar. Rev. Bras. Ciências Agrárias 2013, 8, 189–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Patil, K.B.; Tripathi, S.; Jangir, R.; Saini, L. Influence of Phosphorus Management on Growth, Development and Yield of Sugarcane. Ind. J. Pure App. Biosci. 2020, 8, 25–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Jiawen, G.; Yuebin, Z.; Shaochun, L.; Zhiming, L.; Jiayong, L.; Peifang, Z. Efeitos de diferentes níveis de fósforo no crescimento, estado nutricional e taxa fotossintética da cana-de-açúcar durante o estágio de perfilhamento. Rev. Agric. Sudoeste 2009, 2, 397–401. [Google Scholar]
  53. Kumar, V.; Mishra, D. Manurial Value of Press Mud Cake (Ganna-Khoi). Indian Farmers Dig. 1992, 25, 33–34. [Google Scholar]
  54. Yang, Y.; He, Z.; Stoffella, P.J.; Yang, X.; Graetz, D.A.; Morris, D. Leaching behavior of phosphorus in sandy soils amended with organic material. Soil Sci. 2008, 173, 257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Ramos, L.A.; Lana, R.M.Q.; Korndorfer, G.H.; Silva, A.d.A. Effect of Organo-Mineral Fertilizer and Poultry Litter Waste on Sugarcane Yield and Some Plant and Soil Chemical Properties. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 2017, 12, 20–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Bryndum, S.; Muschler, R.; Nigussie, A.; Magid, J.; de Neergaard, A. Reduced Turning Frequency and Delayed Poultry Manure Addition Reduces N Loss from Sugarcane Compost. Waste Manag. 2017, 65, 169–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Santos, D.H.; Tiritan, C.S.; Foloni, J.S.S. Residual Effect of the Phosphate Fertilization and Filter Cake on the Sugarcane Ratoon Breaking; Universidade Federal da Grande Dourados: Dourados, MS, Brazil, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  58. van Raij, B.; Quaggio, J.A. Extractable Phosphorus Availability Indexes as Affected by Liming. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 1990, 21, 1267–1276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Zhou, W.; Chen, D.; Zeng, Q.; Tahir, M.A.; Wu, Q.; Huang, Y.; Jiang, Y.; Li, Q.; Ao, J.; Huang, Z. Differential Physiological Behavior of Sugarcane Genotypes in Response to Sparingly Soluble Phosphorus-Sources. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 2021, 184, 187–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Tarumoto, M.B.; de Campos, M.; Momesso, L.; do Nascimento, C.A.C.; Garcia, A.; Coscolin, R.B.d.S.; Martello, J.M.; Crusciol, C.A.C. Carbohydrate Partitioning and Antioxidant Substances Synthesis Clarify the Differences Between Sugarcane Varieties on Facing Low Phosphorus Availability. Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 13, 888432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Zambrosi, F.C.B.; Mesquita, G.L.; Tanaka, F.A.O. Assessment of Leaf Ultrastructure Offers Insights into Mechanisms Regulating Sugarcane Performance under Low-Phosphorus Stress. Acta Physiol. Plant. 2020, 42, 54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. CONAB Conab—Boletim da Safra de Cana-de-Açúcar. Available online: http://www.conab.gov.br/info-agro/safras/cana/boletim-da-safra-de-cana-de-acucar (accessed on 2 April 2025).
  63. da Costa, D.B.; Freire, F.J.; dos Santos, R.L.; Santos, H.C.; de Oliveira, A.C.; de Andrade, P.K.B. Qualidade tecnológica da cana planta e cana soca cultivadas sob adubação fosfatada em solos de diferentes texturas. Rev. Geama 2019, 5, 40–46. [Google Scholar]
  64. de Albuquerque, A.W.; Sá, L.d.A.; Rodrigues, W.A.R.; Moura, A.B.; Oliveira Filho, M.d.S. Growth and Yield of Sugarcane as a Function of Phosphorus Doses and Forms of Application. Rev. Bras. Eng. Agríc. Ambient. 2016, 20, 29–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Prado, E.; Vitorino, A.; Mauad, M.; Ensinas, S.; Paim, L. Características Tecnológicas Da Cana-de-Açúcar Sob Aplicação de Doses de Vinhaça Em Latossolo Vermelho Distroférrico. Rev. Ciências Agroveterinárias 2018, 16, 386–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Simões Neto, D.E.; de Oliveira, A.C.; Freire, F.J.; Freire, M.B.G.d.S.; do Nascimento, C.W.A.; da Rocha, A.T. Extração de fósforo em solos cultivados com cana-de-açúcar e suas relações com a capacidade tampão. Rev. Bras. Eng. Agríc. Ambient. 2009, 13, 840–848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Simões Neto, D.E.; de Oliveira, A.C.; da Rocha, A.T.; Freire, F.J.; Freire, M.B.G.d.S.; do Nascimento, C.W.A. Características agroindustriais da cana-de-açúcar em função da adubação fosfatada, em solos de Pernambuco. Rev. Bras. Eng. Agríc. Ambient. 2012, 16, 347–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Oliveira, D.M.S.; Cherubin, M.R.; Franco, A.L.C.; Santos, A.S.; Gelain, J.G.; Dias, N.M.S.; Diniz, T.R.; Almeida, A.N.; Feigl, B.J.; Davies, C.A.; et al. Is the Expansion of Sugarcane over Pasturelands a Sustainable Strategy for Brazil’s Bioenergy Industry? Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2019, 102, 346–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Duarte, A.; Salgado Jr, A.P.; Lemos, S.V.; de Souza Jr, M.A.A.; Antunes, F.d.A. Proposal of Operating Best Practices That Contribute to the Technical Efficiency in Brazilian Sugar and Ethanol Mills. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 214, 173–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Matsuoka, S. Free Fiber Level Drives Resilience and Hybrid Vigor in Energy Cane. J. Sci. Achiev. 2017, 2, 1–35. [Google Scholar]
  71. Pedula, R.O.; Schultz, N.; Monteiro, R.C.; Pereira, W.; de Araujo, A.P.; Urquiaga, S.; Reis, V.M. Growth Analysis of Sugarcane Inoculated with Diazotrophic Bacteria and Nitrogen Fertilization. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 2016, 11, 2786–2795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Eggleston, G.; Lima, I. Sustainability Issues and Opportunities in the Sugar and Sugar-Bioproduct Industries. Sustainability 2015, 7, 12209–12235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Shi, C.; Xie, C.; Zhang, Z.; Rackemann, D.; Wei, B.; Hang, F.; Lu, H.; Li, K.; Doherty, W.O.S. Sugar and Value-Added Products Derived from Retentate Concentrate of Sugarcane Juice. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 278, 123915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. de Oliveira, C.L.B.; Cassimiro, J.B.; Lira, M.V.d.S.; Boni, A.d.S.; Donato, N.d.L.; Reis, R.d.A.; Heinrichs, R. Sugarcane Ratoon Yield and Soil Phosphorus Availability in Response to Enhanced Efficiency Phosphate Fertilizer. Agronomy 2022, 12, 2817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Hansel, F.D.; Amado, T.J.C.; Ruiz Diaz, D.A.; Rosso, L.H.M.; Nicoloso, F.T.; Schorr, M. Phosphorus Fertilizer Placement and Tillage Affect Soybean Root Growth and Drought Tolerance. Agron. J. 2017, 109, 2936–2944. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Pina, J.C.; Bono, J.A.M.; de Oliveira, A.K.M.; Rufino, R.d.S.; Amorim, D.O. Organic Residues on Rooting and Yield of Sugarcane in Typic Quartzipsamments Soil. Rev. Bras. Eng. Agríc. Ambient. 2015, 19, 650–655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Moda, L.; Prado, R.; Caione, G.; Campos, C.; Silva, E.C.; Flores, R. Effect of Sources and Rates of Phosphorus Associated with Filter Cake on Sugarcane Nutrition and Yield. Aust. J. Crop Sci. 2015, 9, 477–485. [Google Scholar]
  78. Yan, X.; Wei, Z.; Hong, Q.; Lu, Z.; Wu, J. Phosphorus Fractions and Sorption Characteristics in a Subtropical Paddy Soil as Influenced by Fertilizer Sources. Geoderma 2017, 295, 80–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. de Campos, M.; Antonangelo, J.A.; Alleoni, L.R.F. Phosphorus Sorption Index in Humid Tropical Soils. Soil Tillage Res. 2016, 156, 110–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Teixeira, E.B.; Bolonhezi, A.C.; Fernandes, F.M.; Ribeiro, N.A.; Queiroz, C.J. Características tecnológicas do caldo de variedades de cana-de-açúcar cultivadas em solo de cerrado com diferentes níveis de adubação fosfatada. Científica 2016, 44, 23–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Yadav, S.P.; Singh, S.C.; Yadav, S.; Yadav, S.K.; Tiwari, A.K.; Sharma, B.L. Integrated Nutrient Management Approaches for Enhancing Production Potential and Sustainability of Sugarcane (Saccharum Spp. Hybrid) Plant–Ratoon System in North Region of India. Sugar Tech 2019, 21, 170–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Altieri, M. Agroecologia—Bases Científicas Para uma Agricultura Sustentável, 3rd ed.; Expressão Popular: Viçosa, MG, Brazil, 2012; ISBN 978-85-7743-191-5. [Google Scholar]
  83. Bokhtiar, S.M.; Sakurai, K. Effects of Organic Manure and Chemical Fertilizer on Soil Fertility and Productivity of Plant and Ratoon Crops of Sugarcane. Arch. Agron. Soil Sci. 2005, 51, 325–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Ball-Coelho, B.; Tiessen, H.; Stewart, J.W.B.; Salcedo, I.H. Short- and Long-Term Phosphorus Dynamics in a Fertilized Ultisol under Sugarcane. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 1993, 57, 1027–1034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. IBGE, Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics. IBGE Brazil in Brief Territory. Available online: https://brasilemsintese.ibge.gov.br/territorio.html (accessed on 28 July 2025).
  86. ABPA, Brazilian Association of Animal Protein. Annual Report 2025. Available online: https://abpa-br.org/abpa-relatorio-anual/ (accessed on 28 July 2025).
Agronomy 15 02004 g001
Figure 1. Air temperature, relative humidity, and rainfall during the 2021/2022 growing season. The gaps in the rainfall data indicate zero precipitation.
Figure 1. Air temperature, relative humidity, and rainfall during the 2021/2022 growing season. The gaps in the rainfall data indicate zero precipitation.
Agronomy 15 02004 g001
Agronomy 15 02004 g002
Figure 2. Plant height (A), average stem diameter (B), and number of tillers (C) in sugarcane as a function of the breakdown of previous doses of triple superphosphate in doses 0, 2, 4, 6, and 8 t ha−1 of poultry litter rate and plant height (D), average stem diameter (E), and number of tillers (F) as a function of the breakdown of doses of poultry litter in doses of 0, 60, 120, 180, and 240 kg ha−1 of triple superphosphate rate, applied in the previous cycles.
Figure 2. Plant height (A), average stem diameter (B), and number of tillers (C) in sugarcane as a function of the breakdown of previous doses of triple superphosphate in doses 0, 2, 4, 6, and 8 t ha−1 of poultry litter rate and plant height (D), average stem diameter (E), and number of tillers (F) as a function of the breakdown of doses of poultry litter in doses of 0, 60, 120, 180, and 240 kg ha−1 of triple superphosphate rate, applied in the previous cycles.
Agronomy 15 02004 g002
Agronomy 15 02004 g003
Figure 3. Stalk productivity yield per hectare of sugarcane as a function of the breakdown of triple superphosphate doses at doses 0 (A), 2 (B), 4 (C), 6 (D), and 8 (E) t ha−1 of poultry litter rate and stalk yield per hectare as a function of the breakdown of poultry litter doses at doses 0 (F), 60 (G), 120 (H), 180 (I), and 240 (J) kg ha−1 of triple superphosphate rate applied in the previous cycles.
Figure 3. Stalk productivity yield per hectare of sugarcane as a function of the breakdown of triple superphosphate doses at doses 0 (A), 2 (B), 4 (C), 6 (D), and 8 (E) t ha−1 of poultry litter rate and stalk yield per hectare as a function of the breakdown of poultry litter doses at doses 0 (F), 60 (G), 120 (H), 180 (I), and 240 (J) kg ha−1 of triple superphosphate rate applied in the previous cycles.
Agronomy 15 02004 g003
Agronomy 15 02004 g004
Figure 4. Total recoverable sugar in sugarcane as a function of poultry litter doses (A), total soluble solids in sugarcane as a function of poultry litter doses (B), fiber content in sugarcane as a function of the breakdown of triple superphosphate doses at 0, 2, 4, 6, and 8 t ha−1 of poultry litter rate (C), and fiber content in sugarcane as a function of the breakdown of poultry litter doses at 0, 60, 120, 180, and 240 kg ha−1 of triple superphosphate rate (D) applied in the previous cycles.
Figure 4. Total recoverable sugar in sugarcane as a function of poultry litter doses (A), total soluble solids in sugarcane as a function of poultry litter doses (B), fiber content in sugarcane as a function of the breakdown of triple superphosphate doses at 0, 2, 4, 6, and 8 t ha−1 of poultry litter rate (C), and fiber content in sugarcane as a function of the breakdown of poultry litter doses at 0, 60, 120, 180, and 240 kg ha−1 of triple superphosphate rate (D) applied in the previous cycles.
Agronomy 15 02004 g004
Agronomy 15 02004 g005
Figure 5. Apparent juice purity of sugarcane as a function of poultry litter dose (A), sugar yield (B), and ethanol yield (C) as a function of the breakdown of triple superphosphate doses at 0, 2, 4, 6, and 8 t ha−1 of poultry litter rate; juice yield of sugarcane as a function of poultry litter dose (D); and sugar yield (E) and alcohol yield (F) as a function of the breakdown of poultry litter doses at 0, 60, 120, 180, and 240 kg ha−1 of triple superphosphate rate, applied in the previous cycles.
Figure 5. Apparent juice purity of sugarcane as a function of poultry litter dose (A), sugar yield (B), and ethanol yield (C) as a function of the breakdown of triple superphosphate doses at 0, 2, 4, 6, and 8 t ha−1 of poultry litter rate; juice yield of sugarcane as a function of poultry litter dose (D); and sugar yield (E) and alcohol yield (F) as a function of the breakdown of poultry litter doses at 0, 60, 120, 180, and 240 kg ha−1 of triple superphosphate rate, applied in the previous cycles.
Agronomy 15 02004 g005
Table 1. Plant height (PH), average stalk stem diameter (SD), number of tillers (NT), stalk productivity in tons per hectare (TCH), total recoverable sugar (TRS), total soluble solids (°Brix), fiber content (FIBER), apparent juice purity (AJP), juice yield (POL), sugar yield (SY), and alcohol yield (AY) in the second ratoon crop cycle of sugarcane, due to the effect of triple superphosphate and poultry litter applications in the previous cycles.
Table 1. Plant height (PH), average stalk stem diameter (SD), number of tillers (NT), stalk productivity in tons per hectare (TCH), total recoverable sugar (TRS), total soluble solids (°Brix), fiber content (FIBER), apparent juice purity (AJP), juice yield (POL), sugar yield (SY), and alcohol yield (AY) in the second ratoon crop cycle of sugarcane, due to the effect of triple superphosphate and poultry litter applications in the previous cycles.
Ms
VariablesSource of Variation
TSPPLInt. TSP × PLBlockErrorCV (%)
DF4416372
PH375.25 **3107.00 **388.47 **183.68 **76.724.04
SD4.48 **1.18 ns1.93 **0.68 ns0.592.94
NT0.11 ns0.36 ns1.38 **1.25 **0.404.63
TCH2990.19 **255.27 **59.52 **18.41 **1.781.34
TRS21.97 ns128.40 **11.38 ns124.42 **22.972.93
°BRIX0.15 ns1.24 **0.08 ns2.21 **0.272.40
FIBER0.56 *0.09 ns0.58 **0.05 ns0.224.29
AJP2.41 ns5.26 *1.49 ns5.19 *1.651.43
POL0.13 ns1.68 **0.08 ns1.81 **0.283.24
SY85.83 **13.90 **1.42 **2.92 ns0.243.04
AY42.02 **6.82 **0.71 **1.37 ns0.113.01
MS: mean square; TSP: triple superphosphate; PL: poultry litter; Int.: interaction; DF: degrees of freedom; CV: coefficient of variation; ** and *: significant at the 1% and 5% probability levels; ns: not significant according to the F test at the 5% probability level.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Santos, E.A.d.; Soares, F.A.L.; Teixeira, M.B.; da Silva, E.C.; Sousa, A.E.C.; Vale, L.S.R. Effect of Organic and Mineral Phosphate Fertilization of the Plant Cane and First Ratoon on Agronomic Performance and Industrial Quality of the Second Ratoon in the Brazilian Cerrado Region. Agronomy 2025, 15, 2004. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15082004

AMA Style

Santos EAd, Soares FAL, Teixeira MB, da Silva EC, Sousa AEC, Vale LSR. Effect of Organic and Mineral Phosphate Fertilization of the Plant Cane and First Ratoon on Agronomic Performance and Industrial Quality of the Second Ratoon in the Brazilian Cerrado Region. Agronomy. 2025; 15(8):2004. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15082004

Chicago/Turabian Style

Santos, Evaldo Alves dos, Frederico Antonio Loureiro Soares, Marconi Batista Teixeira, Edson Cabral da Silva, Antônio Evami Cavalcante Sousa, and Luís Sérgio Rodrigues Vale. 2025. "Effect of Organic and Mineral Phosphate Fertilization of the Plant Cane and First Ratoon on Agronomic Performance and Industrial Quality of the Second Ratoon in the Brazilian Cerrado Region" Agronomy 15, no. 8: 2004. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15082004

APA Style

Santos, E. A. d., Soares, F. A. L., Teixeira, M. B., da Silva, E. C., Sousa, A. E. C., & Vale, L. S. R. (2025). Effect of Organic and Mineral Phosphate Fertilization of the Plant Cane and First Ratoon on Agronomic Performance and Industrial Quality of the Second Ratoon in the Brazilian Cerrado Region. Agronomy, 15(8), 2004. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15082004

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop