Previous Article in Journal
Residual Effects of Wood Ash, Biochar, and Paper Mill Sludge on Crop Yield and Soil Physico-Chemical Properties
Previous Article in Special Issue
Effects of Long-Term Soil Management Under Alfalfa Cultivation on Soil Fertility and Salinity in Arid Agroecosystems of the Ziban Region, Algeria
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Soil Systems
Volume 10
Issue 2
10.3390/soilsystems10020023
soilsystems-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

Role of Pedoagroclimate Settings in Enhancing Sorghum Production in Indonesia

by
Yiyi Sulaeman
*,
Nana Sutrisna
,
Joko Pramono
,
Lilia Fauziah
,
Ahmad Suriadi
,
Heppy Suci Wulanningtyas
,
Eni Maftu’ah
,
Endang Gati Lestari
and
Anny Mulyani
Research Organization for Agriculture and Food, National Research and Innovation Agency, Jalan Jakarta-Bogor KM 46, Cibinong, Bogor 16915, West Java, Indonesia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Soil Syst. 2026, 10(2), 23; https://doi.org/10.3390/soilsystems10020023
Submission received: 3 November 2025 / Revised: 21 January 2026 / Accepted: 22 January 2026 / Published: 27 January 2026
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Integrated Soil Management: Food Supply, Environmental Impacts, and Socioeconomic Functions: 2nd Edition)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

Sorghum is a strategic crop for food, feed, and bioenergy. However, information on its cultivation area and agronomic profile in Indonesia remains limited. Therefore, this study aimed to identify, characterize, and evaluate sorghum cultivation in different agroecosystems and pedoagroclimatic settings in Indonesia. We surveyed published articles, newspapers, and other digital resources, collating a dataset that contained pedoagroclimatic characteristics. We then conducted a field survey to gather data on sorghum farming practices. The results show that sorghum is planted in 11 agroclimatic zones, mainly in D3, B1, and E4, and in seven soil types, mainly in Inceptisols, Mollisols, Vertisols, and Andisols. The cultivated varieties cover Bioguma 1, Bioguma 2, Bioguma 3, Numbu, Kawali, UPCA-S1, Suri 3 Agritan, Soper 9, and local varieties. Under smallholder farmers’ management, the average sorghum yield ranges from 3.6 to 7.5 Mg ha−1. The 15–68% of the yield gap can be closed by implementing site-specific technologies, including high-yielding varieties and soil management. These findings provide a baseline for supporting efforts to increase sorghum production and develop robust sorghum cultivation technologies.

1. Introduction

Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) is the fifth most consumed food ingredient worldwide after wheat, corn, rice, and barley [1]. Sorghum is rich in carbohydrates, fat, protein, calcium, magnesium, potassium, phosphorus, iron, and crude fiber, but low in calories [2,3,4]. Sorghum also contains various phenolic compounds and antioxidants, making it suitable for the development of functional foods and other applications [5,6,7]. In 2020, the world’s sorghum production reached 57 million tons, covering approximately 40 million hectares of arable land. The highest sorghum production is found in Africa (28 million tons) and the Americas (18 million tons); in Asia, it is 7.8 million tons. The world’s major sorghum production centers are located in the United States, Nigeria, and Ethiopia, whereas in Asia, they are primarily found in China and India [8].
In South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, sorghum is a staple food, while in the United States, most sorghum is used as a raw material for processed animal feed. Sorghum is consumed in various processed products, including sorghum rice and flour [9]. The physicochemical characteristics of sorghum flour can potentially substitute for wheat flour, making it a viable alternative as a processed ingredient. Foods prepared with sorghum flour, such as bread and noodles, are increasingly popular. Sorghum offers advantages over other food ingredients, primarily due to its antioxidant content [10]. The antioxidant activity of sorghum’s chemical compounds has been linked to various beneficial properties for human health, including reduced oxidative stress and anticancer, antidiabetic, and anti-inflammatory effects [11,12]. In addition, sorghum is a multifunctional plant because all of its parts can be used as food, animal feed, and bioethanol [13,14].
The population of Indonesia continues to increase yearly and is projected to reach 305 million in 2035 [15]. The increased population requires sufficient staple food; however, boosting staple food production, especially rice, is hindered by climate change, soil degradation, and the shrinking of arable land. Hence, alternative staple food sources are required to reduce or replace rice use, and sorghum could be an alternative. Sorghum cultivation is easy, cheap, and efficient and can be developed on marginal/suboptimal land [9]. Sorghum is adaptable to various soil conditions, including soil acidity, salinity, sodicity, high temperatures, and low rainfall (drought), and is more resistant to pests and diseases [1,16,17,18].
In 2020, the Indonesian Ministry of Agriculture launched sorghum development programs in several regions, aimed at producing food materials [3], feed [19,20], and bioenergy [21,22,23]. Wiloso et al. [24] elaborated on the use of sorghum as biopelet in electricity generation. Recently, the National Medium-term Development Plan for 2025–2029 placed sorghum as a national target for increasing production. Hence, this sorghum development program could support the country’s national food and energy security. However, information on its cultivation area and agronomic profile in Indonesia remains limited. Winarti et al. [25] evaluated the potential and challenges faced in developing sorghum as a staple food and raw material for industry in Nusa Tenggara Timur. Widodo et al. [26] assessed the economic value and strategies for developing sorghum in Central Java and Yogyakarta. Susilawati et al. [27] evaluated the potency of sorghum development in the wetlands of Central Kalimantan. Finally, Utomo et al. [28] predicted sorghum distribution across Indonesia.
Accordingly, this study aimed to characterize sorghum cultivation in Indonesia. The specific objectives were (i) to identify the spatial distribution of planting locations and characterize environmental growth based on auxiliary information, (ii) to identify yield gaps based on existing cultivation practices, and (iii) to evaluate farmers’ practices in sorghum cultivation with different agroecosystems and pedoagroclimates. The findings address knowledge gaps in sorghum cultivation and the enhancement of yield productivity through the formulation and adoption of technology.

2. Materials and Methods

First, we identified a sorghum planting area by browsing Google Search and Google Scholar using the keywords “sorghum” and “Indonesia”, or simply “sorghum”, in Bahasa Indonesia, from 2000 to 2024. This browsing yielded news and journal articles containing the two keywords (422 titles). Then, we reselected news and articles that provided information on the occurrence of sorghum planting sites at the village level (41 titles). The other recorded data covered sorghum variety and yield, planting extent, and sowing time, forming a browsing dataset. We also collected secondary maps, including the national village boundary map, soil map, land cover/use map, agroclimate map, agricultural climate resource map, and digital elevation model (Table 1). These maps are stored in Quantum GIS version 3.40.3 [29] and co-referenced using EPSG (European Petroleum Survey Group) code 4326.
The browsing data were entered into the national village map at a scale of 1:10,000 in QGIS [29], using the village name as a unique identifier. Then, this village map was superimposed on the land cover/use map and on the Bing Virtual Earth background of QGIS to obtain the coordinates of the sorghum area. In the field, sorghum is commonly grown in mixed home gardens, agricultural drylands, or paddy fields. Accordingly, we systematically selected coordinate points only within these land use types. We used a web application (https://coordinates-converter.com (accessed on 15 March 2025)) for coordinate conversion and to cross-check the coordinate location. In addition, we asked local extension workers to verify data on the occurrence of planting areas in the villages and land use types. These steps resulted in a location point map.
Subsequently, the location map was superimposed on soil maps at a scale of 1:50,000 and on DEMNAS, a countrywide digital elevation model with an 8 m spatial resolution (Table 1). The location map was superimposed on the soil map to extract the number of soil mapping units, dominant soil type, parent material, landform type, relief, and slope class. Soil classification was based on the Soil Taxonomy of the United States Department of Agriculture [30] up to the subgroup level and then generalized to the order level. Landform classification followed Marsoedi et al. [30] at the subgroup level and was generalized to the group level. The altitude of the location above sea level was extracted from DEMNAS using a location point map.
Table 1. List of overlayed data for the extraction of regional information.
Table 1. List of overlayed data for the extraction of regional information.
NoDataType, ScaleExtracted InfoSource
1.National Village Boundary MapPolygon, 1:10,000
-
Village boundary
https://tanahair.indonesia.go.id/portal-web/unduh (accessed on 20 February 2025)
2.Soil mapPolygon, 1: 50,000
-
Mapping unit number
-
Dominant soil type
-
Landform type
-
Parent material
-
Relief
-
Slope class
https://sdlahan.brmp.pertanian.go.id/informasi-publik/inasoil (accessed on 20 February 2025)
3.Land cover/use mapPolygon, 1:2,500,000
-
Land use types
https://onemap.big.go.id/peta (accessed on 22 February 2025)
4.National Digital Elevation Model (DEMNAS)Raster; resolution, 8 m
-
Elevation
https://tanahair.indonesia.go.id/portal-web/unduh (accessed on 20 February 2025)
5.Agroclimatic Zone MapVarious scales based on an island
-
Agroclimate zone
[31,32,33,34,35]
6.Agriculture Climate Resource MapPolygon, 1:1,000,000
-
Rainfall class
[36]
The location map was superimposed on the agroclimate map to identify the agroclimatic subzones for the locations. This map follows Oldeman’s [31] climate classification. The agroclimate zone consists of capital letters A (having >9 wet months consecutively), B (having 7, 8, or 9 wet months consecutively), C (having 5 or 6 wet months consecutively), D (having 3 or 4 wet months consecutively), and E (having <3 wet months consecutively). Subsequently, for letters other than A, this alphabet is followed by numbers 1 (an area with <2 dry months), 2 (an area with 2, 3, or 4 dry months), 3 (an area with 5 or 6 dry months), and 4 (an area with >6 dry months). For example, the B1 zone has 7, 8, or 9 wet months consecutively and <2 dry months. A wet month has 200 mm of rainfall or more, while a dry month has less than 100 mm of rainfall. The location map was also superimposed with the Indonesian Agriculture Climate Map to determine rainfall classes. These steps resulted in a pedoagroclimate dataset.
To gain insights into farming practices, we selected four locations representing different pedoagroclimatic settings: (i) Ciamis (West Java Province), representing the B agroclimatic zone with Inceptisols from volcanic materials; (ii) Demak (Central Java Province), representing the C2 agroclimatic zone on Vertisols from sediments; (iii) Lamongan (East Java Province), representing the D3 agroclimatic zone on Inceptisols from sedimentary rocks; and (iv) Lombok Timur (West Nusa Tenggara Province), representing C1 agroclimatic zone on Mollisols from limestones. We recorded management practices, prices, and site conditions by visiting locations and interviewing farmers and extension workers.
The data were subjected to bar plotting to determine the frequency distribution of planting locations based on pedoagroclimate factors. They were also subjected to multiple linear regression to measure factor contributions. This graphing and statistical analysis was assisted by the R program version 4.2.2 [37]. Yield gap calculation followed Sulaeman et al. [38]. The potential yield is the yield from the sorghum variety description (endorsed by the Indonesian Ministry of Agriculture) and the farmer’s yield. The absolute difference between the potential yield and the farmer’s yield is also expressed as the percentage of the potential yield, as the objective of sorghum cultivation is to achieve a yield close to the potential yield.

3. Results

3.1. Pedoagroclimatic Setting

Figure 1 presents the distribution of 50 sorghum planting locations up to the village level. This map plots not only existing planting areas but also visited locations, differentiated by yield class. Current sorghum planting areas are located in the Java, Bali, Lombok, Sumbawa, Flores, Sumatra, Kalimantan, and Sulawesi Islands. Administratively, planting locations occur in Lampung, West Kalimantan, West Java, Central Java, East Java, Bali, West Nusa Tenggara, East Nusa Tenggara, and South Sulawesi Provinces. Planting locations span 0.01° to 8.87° in the southern hemisphere, suggesting different solar radiation intensities.
The existing planting areas are found across 11 agroclimatic zones. Nevertheless, most planting areas are in the B1 and D3 subzones (Figure 2A). In Java, 10 locations are in the D zone, 9 in the B zone, 8 in the C zone, 3 in the A zone, and 3 in the E zone. In Nusa Tenggara, most locations are in the E zone, while in Kalimantan, all locations are in areas with five or more wet months (the A, B, and C zones).
As many as 78% of sorghum planting sites (39 locations) are in plain landscapes, with slopes of 0 to 15% (Figure 2B), and 20% in hilly areas (15 to 40%). In Java, the dominant planting location is in plain areas (14 locations), and the rest (8 locations) are in hilly areas (Supplementary Table S1). In Nusa Tenggara, planting locations are predominantly in sloping areas (with a slope of 8–25%). Finally, in Kalimantan, planting locations are in flat to rolling regions. Slope position determines soil erosion and, hence, the need to apply soil conservation measures during the cropping season. The existing planting areas are mainly volcanic and alluvial landform types (Figure 2C). Sorghum grows on alluvial, karst, volcanic, tectonic, marine, and peat landforms (Supplementary Table S1). These landform types relate to geomorphic processes, substratum, and the land’s exposure time. The substratum (or soil parent material) determines soil quality regarding the water storage capacity, nutrient storage capacity, and nutrient availability. The karst landform is composed of limestone, resulting in soils with high pH and base saturation, good drainage, and high-quality soil. The tectonic landform, formed from acid sedimentary rocks, results in soils with low pH and poor fertility. Volcanic landforms formed from volcanic materials yield high-quality, friable soils suitable for agriculture. Alluvial landforms, formed by river activity, are composed of sediments that produce good soils. Marine landforms are formed and influenced by sea activities with saline to brackish water, whereas peat landforms consist of organic materials with varying degrees of decomposition, resulting in soils with distinct qualities and site-specific characteristics.
In sorghum farming, the cultivated soils are mostly Inceptisols (Figure 2D). In Java, farmers cultivate Inceptisols (22 locations), Vertisols (5 locations), Andisols (3 locations), Ultisols (2 locations), and Entisols (1 location). In Nusa Tenggara, the cultivated soils are Mollisols (4 locations), and in Kalimantan, the cultivated soils are Inceptisols (1 location), Ultisols (1 location), and Histosols (1 location). Supplementary Table S1 shows the distribution of locations by soil type, both at the order and subgroup levels.
Regarding the parent material, sorghum planting areas are mainly located on andesite and basalt (11 locations), clay and sand sediment (7 locations), clay sediment (7 locations), limestone (6 locations), andesite (4 locations), and breccia and lava (4 locations). Moreover, planting locations are predominantly at elevations of 0 to 200 m above sea level. Supplementary Table S1 provides the distribution of locations by parent material and elevation.

3.2. Cultivated Sorghum Varieties and Yields

Table 2 shows that sorghum yield varies by geographical location, variety, planting season, and pest infestations in the selected plots. Location controls sorghum yield based on climate variability, soil fertility, and farming management practices. The yield varies from 2.5 to 8.0 Mg ha−1, indicating considerable variation. The highest yield (8.0 Mg ha−1) was recorded in Margaharja Village (Ciamis Regency, West Java Province), and the lowest yield (2.5 to 3.9 Mg ha−1) was noted in Wareng Village (Gunung Kidul Regency, Yogyakarta Special Region). Sorghum-growing areas in Central Java and West Java Province exhibit higher yields, while the Yogyakarta Special Region and the West Nusa Tenggara Province demonstrate moderate to low yields.
Farmers commonly cultivate the Bioguma 1, Bioguma 2, Bioguma 3, Numbu, Kawali, UPCA-S1, Suri 3 Agritan, and Soper 9 sorghum varieties (Table 2). Other farmers grow local varieties, including Hitam Wareng, Plonco, Sorgum Putih, and Sorgum Merah. Farmers’ preferences determine which sorghum varieties are cultivated, leading to the zonation of varieties. Bioguma was found in Kuningan, Ciamis, Majalengka, and Pangandaran (West Java Province), yielding 3–8 Mg ha−1 (Table 2). Numbu and Kawali are cultivated in Pangandaran Regency (West Java Province), yielding 4 Mg ha−1. The UPCA—S1 variety is found in the Demak Regency (Central Java Province), producing yields of 6.0 to 7.5 Mg ha−1, while Suri 3 Agritan can be found in the Wonogiri Regency (Central Java Province), yielding 3 to 4 Mg ha−1. Besides Bioguma, farmers in West Nusa Tenggara Province grow the Soper 9 and Suri 3 Agritan varieties, yielding approximately 3 to 4 Mg ha−1.
Farmers grow sorghum in both wet and dry seasons but in different months (Table 2). Those in West Java and Central Java, who receive rainfall exceeding 2000 mm, typically begin wet-season sowing in September, October, November, or December. During the dry season, sorghum is generally planted in March, April, May, and June, coinciding with local rainfall patterns. Meanwhile, farmers in the Demak Regency begin sowing during the dry season, from April to June.

3.3. Farmer Cultivation Practices

Table 3 presents the technologies employed in sorghum cultivation across four locations with varying agroclimatic zones and agroecosystems, based on field survey data collected through direct observation and interviews with farmers. Farmers grow sorghum after rice in paddy fields and after maize in dryland areas. The varieties used, planting techniques, sowing and harvesting times, and fertilizer application vary by location.
Sorghum farming in Banjaranyar Village, Ciamis Regency (West Java Province), is primarily carried out in agricultural drylands and rainfed paddy fields. In these fields, sorghum is planted during the second season (April/May) following rice. In dryland areas, it is planted during the second season (April) after maize (Table 3). Farmers typically grow local sorghum varieties, but since the introduction of a government program, they have opted for the Bioguma 2 and 3 varieties.
Sorghum is grown in a monoculture, with seeds placed in holes based on soil fertility. In relatively fertile soil, such as rainfed paddy fields, a wider planting distance is used (70 × 30 cm), while in dryland regions, the spacing is narrower (70 × 20–25 cm). Sorghum receives both organic and inorganic fertilizers (Urea and NPK). Organic fertilizer—specifically, cattle manure at a rate of 5 Mg ha−1—is applied consistently to the area used for sorghum cultivation. It is placed in planting holes and used as a seed cover. Farmers utilize inorganic fertilizers such as urea and NPK Phonska, applying 50 kg ha−1 of urea and 100 kg ha−1 of NPK Phonska in dryland areas. In rainfed paddy fields, the application rates are 1000 kg ha−1 for urea and 100 kg ha−1 for NPK Phonska. Both urea and NPK are applied twice: once at 7 days after planting and again at 30 days after planting (after weeding). The harvest age of sorghum in Ciamis ranges from 110 to 115 days after planting, depending on soil conditions and local climate, as noted in the variety description. Bioguma 2 and Bioguma 3 can be harvested after 99 to 105 days. The sorghum productivity of farmers in Banjaranyar is low, averaging 4.5–7 Mg ha−1 of dry grain.
In Raji Village, Demak Regency (Central Java Province), sorghum cultivation primarily occurs in lowland irrigated and rainfed paddy fields, predominantly in areas with Vertisols (Table 3). In these paddy fields, the cropping pattern includes rice–rice–sorghum and rainfed paddy field/dryland shallot–shallot–sorghum. Sorghum cultivation is carried out using monoculture sowing at the beginning of the dry season, specifically in early April for rainfed paddy fields and in June for irrigated paddy fields following a second rice planting. Farmers in Demak prefer UPCA-S1 varieties, as they have a relatively short maturation period and can be harvested 95–100 days after planting. By contrast, Bioguma 1, Super-1, and Super-2 are less favored due to their longer maturation period (115 days after sowing), taller height (2 m), and higher productivity. Sorghum farming in Demak remains conventional. Seeds are planted in holes with a spacing of 40 cm × 40 cm or 20 cm × 60 cm, and farmers apply only 500 kg of urea per hectare.
Sorghum cultivation in Sambangun Village, Lamongan Regency (East Java Province), utilizes paddy fields in a rice–sorghum/corn/green beans/soybean cropping pattern (Table 3). The specific variety used is KD 4, which yields an impressive 6.2 Mg ha−1. Urea is applied at a rate of 150 kg ha−1 in two applications to meet nitrogen (N) requirements. By contrast, phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) fertilizers are applied at rates of 25 kg for P and 40 kg each for K. Additionally, foliar fertilizers are administered at 60 to 70 kg ha−1. Technical farming procedures include a planting configuration of 30 cm × 30 cm × 75 cm, designed to optimize light interception and minimize inter-plant competition. Planting occurs in April, with harvesting expected in August, aligning with the dry season when conditions are ideal for sorghum cultivation.
Sorghum cultivation in Pamongkong Village, Lombok Tumur (Nusa Tenggara Province), occurs in lowland rainfed paddy fields with Mollisols, planted after rice (Table 3). This area lies within the E3 agroclimatic zone, characterized by fewer than three wet months and an annual rainfall of less than 1000 mm. Farmers sow Bioguma 1 in a monoculture using a planting distance of 30 × 70 cm. The fertilizer application rate is 50 kg of urea and 150 kg of NPK (at 14 days after planting (dap)), decreasing to 15 kg of urea and 15 kg of NPK (at 25 dap), and then increasing to 40 kg of urea and 40 kg of NPK (at 59 dap). Sowing occurs in April and harvesting in August, the same period as in Sambangun Village; however, the harvest duration is longer (125 dap) than in Sambungan Village (90–100 dap), perhaps due to differences in varieties. Sorghum yield is the lowest among the sites.

3.4. Yield Gap and Controlling Factors

Table 4 presents sorghum yield by main soil type and agroclimate zone across 17 locations, combining Table 2 and Table 3. On average, sorgum yields range from 3.6 to 7.5 Mg ha−1. Yield tends to vary across soil types. Planting sorghum in Inceptisols produces higher yields in the B1 and D3 agroclimate zones and the lowest in C2. Meanwhile, sorghum planted in Ultisols and Vertisols yields 5.2–7.5 Mg ha−1.
Table 5 shows the pedoagroclimate’s contribution to sorghum yield variation. Soil type alone explains 39% of the variation in yield, and adding slope, PM (parent material), and landform type can explain 79%, 77%, and 91% of sorghum yield variation, respectively. However, adding landform increases the adjusted R2, indicating that landform type better predicts than soil type. Adding ACZ increases the R2 but decreases the Adj-R2, suggesting that it is a worse predictor than parent material. Model 2 (Soil Type + Slope), Model 4 (Soil Type + Landform), and Model 5 (Soil Type + Slope + PM) show significant statistical differences at an alpha value of 0.05.
Table 6 shows the importance of soil type and landform factors in determining sorghum yield. Regarding the soil type, Vertisols and Ultisols are more important than Mollisols, as indicated by higher coefficients and a statistically significant difference from zero at an alpha of 0.05. Planting sorghum in Vertisols results in a greater yield increase than in Ultisols and Mollisols. Regarding the landform, the volcanic ridges and colluvial land are the most significant, differing from zero at an alpha of 0.05. Planting in colluvial lands and volcanic ridges yields more than in volcanic plains and karst plains.
Table 7 presents sorghum yield variations and gaps. The yield gap is high (>35%) in most locations, with the highest in Inceptisols under old volcanic landforms in the B1 and C2 agroclimates on 15–25% and 1–3% slopes for the Bioguma 2 variety. A low yield gap is found only in Inceptisols under the BI and A agroclimate zones for Bioguma 2 and Nambu, respectively. Other locations show a negative yield gap, indicating that farmers’ yields are higher than potential yields, which is also true for old varieties (UPCA-S1, KD 4, and Nambu). Thus, environmental factors control the expression of a sorghum variety’s genetic potential, and in several locations, poor cultivation practices have resulted in lower yields than the potential genetic yield.

4. Discussion

4.1. Agroclimate and Planting Season

The A, B, and C zones are grouped as a wet zone (having five or more consecutive wet months), while the D and E zones are dry zones (having less than five consecutive wet months). Our findings indicate that as many as 26 planting locations are in the D and E regions (see Supplement Table S1), while the rest (24 locations) are in the A, B, and C regions. In the D and E zones, the planting locations are in D3 (14 locations) and E3 (3 locations), with 5 or 6 dry months, and even in E4 (5 locations), with >6 dry months. However, Table 4 indicates that sorghum planted in the dry zone (D and E zones) produces higher yields on average than that in the wet zone (A, B, and C zones). Sorghum requires less water and yields well under environmental stress, making it suitable for drier areas [13]. Sorghum can maintain high yields under water shortages and ensure food security in tropical regions [3,39]. This finding confirms sorghum’s adaptability to limited water resources.
Yield is even higher if combined with a suitable soil type (Table 4). Sorghum planted in Vertisols in the D zone shows a higher yield (6.5 Mg ha−1) than that planted in Inceptisols in the D zone (5.0 Mg ha−1). Vertisols are heavy clay soils; hence, they have a higher water storage capacity than Inceptisols and provide enough water for crop growth in the D zone. Medina-Mendez et al. [40] reported that sorghum on Vertisols with variety, fertilization, and plant density treatment yielded 5.8 Mg ha−1, 4.6 Mg ha−1, and 5.2 Mg ha−1, respectively. In contrast, Luvisols in the same region produced lower yields (1.5–2.5 Mg ha−1) due to poor moisture retention. Teshome et al. [41] reported that sorghum cultivated in Vertisols under a comprehensive fertilization regime achieved a maximum grain yield of 4.6 Mg ha−1. Conversely, the omission of fertilization, specifically nitrogen (N) fertilization, resulted in a significant yield reduction of 2.6–2.8 Mg ha−1.
The planting season also affects sorghum productivity. Farmers cultivate sorghum in both the wet and dry seasons, resulting in yield variations (Table 2). Planting sorghum in the dry season yielded higher yields (over 6 Mg ha−1), as recorded in the Ciamis and Demak Regencies (Table 2). By contrast, planting sorghum during the wet season yielded moderate yields (3 to 5 Mg ha−1) due to excessive rainfall that affected soil conditions and plant development. Patroti et al. [42] achieved 60–70% higher grain yields in dry-season genotypes through improved drought and pest resistance. During the wet season, high humidity and rainfall during the grain-filling and maturity stages led to fungal infections [43]. Then, during the dry season, there is typically less cloud cover. As a C4 plant, sorghum has a very high light-saturation point. Increased sunshine hours during the dry season allow for higher rates of photosynthesis compared to the overcast, cloudy days of the wet season. If moisture is managed (either through residual storage in Vertisols or supplemental irrigation), the plant can accumulate more biomass. In this situation, more sunshine hours may have led to greater photo-assimilation, higher radiation use efficiency, and ultimately higher grain yield [44].
Our findings also suggest that agroclimate conditions alone do not determine sorghum yield variation. Agroclimatic variation results in differences in water availability, moisture, and solar radiation, which ultimately determine crop growth and yield, as well as pests and diseases. Table 5 suggests that, among pedoagroclimatic factors, soil type and landform type contribute more to yield variation (p < 0.003). Table 6 provides more detailed insights: the yield increase is higher in Vertisols than in Ultisols, and it is also higher in volcanic ridges than in colluvial land. In the E zone with very low water supply from rainfall, sorghum growth is better if planted in Mollisols (Table 3). Mollisols are black soils with high organic carbon and are productive. Other controlling factors include soil type and fertility, as well as sorghum varieties [32,33] and cultivation–management systems [45,46,47,48,49,50,51].

4.2. Yield Gap and Crop Management

Our study found that farmers’ yield is lower than the potential yield (Table 7). The potential yields of Bioguma 1, Bioguma 2, and Bioguma 3 are 9.26, 9.33, and 8.33 Mg ha−1, respectively, and the potential yields of Nambu, Kawali, and Suri 3 Agritan are 4.0–5.0, 4.0–5.0, and 6.0 Mg ha−1, respectively [52,53]. UPCA-S1 has a potential yield of 4.0 Mg ha−1 [53], while Soper 9 yields 10.07 Mg ha−1 [54]. Comparing potential yields with farmer yields indicates a yield gap of 1.0 to 6.4 Mg ha−1 or 15 to 68% (Table 7). Most locations have yield gaps of more than 35%, indicating a significant opportunity to boost sorghum production through the efficient implementation of farming technologies across both sorghum varieties and soil management.
Sorghum productivity can be boosted by utilizing high-yielding varieties. However, these are limited in Indonesia, where only 15 varieties were released between 1960 and 2001 [55,56]. High-yielding, drought-tolerant cultivars derived from local landraces could be introduced as a strategy to enhance resilience and productivity in drought-prone areas [57,58]. Managing factors that reduce yield is also crucial. For example, pest infestations limit sorghum yield (Table 2). Birds are the most common pests across all areas, posing a serious threat to grain development and yield. In some regions, such as Mekarjaya and Wareng Villages, rats, caterpillars, and long-tailed monkeys further exacerbate losses. Integrated pest management (IPM) strategies, including frightening tactics, netting, and controlled pesticide use, are essential to reducing yield losses. Areas with higher pest pressure exhibit lower crop productivity due to crop damage.

4.3. Soil Management

Our findings indicate that sorghum cultivation requires site-specific soil management, another strategy that can be used to close the yield gap. Sorghum soils are diverse, covering seven types, from most frequent to least: Inceptisols > Mollisols > Vertisols > Andisols > Ultisols > Entisols > Histosols. Of the identified planting locations, 64% are Inceptisols, 12% are Mollisols, 10% are Vertisols, and 6% are Ultisols, making these soils the predominant types in sorghum farming. However, sorghum yields differ between them (Table 3 and Table 4) based on average yield, in decreasing order: Vertisols (6.5–7.5 Mg ha−1) > Ultisols (5.2–5.5 Mg ha−1 > Inceptisols (3.6–5.0 Mg ha−1) > Mollisols (3.5–4.5 Mg ha−1). Soil type alone explains 39% of yield variation, and if combined with parent material, this explains 71% of yield variation.
Soil management should be tailored to soil properties—such as soil texture, pH, soil organic carbon content, and nutrient content—to provide favorable soil water capacity, soil nutrient capacity, and soil nutrient use efficiency. However, even in the same soil type, soil properties can vary due to differences in parent material. Our study reveals that Inceptisols originate from sediment (clay, sand, or organic), sedimentary rock (claystone, sandstone, or calcareous claystone), andesitic to basaltic volcanic material (lava, tuff, or breccia), and limestone; Mollisols originate from andesitic to basaltic material and limestone; Vertisols originate from clay sediment; and Ultisols originate andesitic to basaltic volcanic material, sandstone, and claystone. This setting variation contributes to yield variation (Table 4). However, detailed soil properties must be obtained through further laboratory analysis.
Table 3 shows a higher yield for Vertisols than Mollisols, possibly due to differences in soil organic matter, soil moisture, and soil nutrient management. Vertisols are high-clay, fertile soils, while Mollisols are high in organic carbon (0.6% SOC, by definition), but both are productive soils. Both are used for paddy soils, though Vertisols are more commonly used than Mollisols due to more abundant water (D3 for Vertisols and E for Mollisols). In Vertisols, sorghum is planted after rice (Table 3), with these preceding crops providing mulch nutrient residue. In Vertisols, nitrogen is generally deficient, so urea is applied in splits at 10 to 14 dap and 30 to 40 dap, at a rate of 100 to 250 kg ha−1. At Site 3 (Demak), water supply is sufficient, as annual rainfall ranges from 1500 to 2000 mm, with the wet season occurring for 5 or 6 consecutive months (C1 zone). With no water supply problems, farmers can cultivate several crops and tailor soil moisture to address swelling and fragility, the main issues with Vertisols.
In the sorghum cultivation area, Mollisols originate from limestone and andesitic to basaltic lava and tuff (see Supplementary Table S1). The properties of Mollisols are controlled by this parent material, providing Mollisols with a dark to black soil surface, indicating high soil organic carbon (>0.6% for mollic epipedon), good soil structure, and high base saturation (>50%). Mollisols in Lombok (Table 3, Site 4) originate from limestone; they have high soil organic carbon, and the soil texture is generally clay, but lighter than that of Vertisols, with high exchangeable Ca, resulting in good soil structure. These Mollisols fall under the E agroclimate zone, with less than 1000 mm of rainfall. Due to high organic matter content, water can be retained, which is sufficient for sorghum growth. As soil derived from limestone, the pH is neutral to alkaline, with high levels of calcium and magnesium. Most Mollisols have nutrient deficiencies, particularly phosphorus, and in this area, N, P, and K are applied as urea and compound fertilizers. Fertilizer is applied three times, 14 days after planting, with 50 and 150 kg of urea; 25 days after planting, with 50 kg of urea and 15 kg of NPK; and 59 days after planting, with 40 kg of urea and 40 kg of NPK. These rates are determined using soil testing. However, due to water-related issues, yields are lower than in Vertisols.
This study also identified two contrasting soil types: limestone-derived soils (6 locations) and volcanic material-derived soils (23 locations). Each has specific soil properties, leading to different fertilization strategies. Limestone-derived soil (Mollisols and Inceptisols; see Supplementary Table S1) has neutral to basic soil reactions, with Ca and Mg dominant in exchange complexes. This leads to phosphorus fixation, making it unsuitable for crop growth. Limestone-derived soil also has low nitrogen and potassium contents. Accordingly, complete N, P, and K fertilizers are required and applied in splits owing to nutrient use efficiency. In Lombok Timur (Table 3, Site 4), farmers apply urea and NPK, and split applications at 14 dap, 25 dap, and 59 dap.
By contrast, volcanic material-derived soils (Entisols, Inceptisols, Andisols, Mollisols, and Ultisols; see Supplementary Table S1) have a slightly acidic reaction (pH 5.5 to 6.5), which is optimal for nutrient availability. This leads to P readily available for crops, with no K deficiency due to abundant K-rich primary minerals. However, these soils are mostly deficient in N, and in Andisols, P can be fixed by allophanes. Hence, N is generally deficient, and urea is required. In Ciamis (Table 3, Site 1), only urea is applied at 7 dap and 30 dap. In volcanic-material-derived soils, fertility management involves more specific considerations of soil type. Wang et al. [59] reported that applying 180 kg N ha−1 in sorghum resulted in the highest yield (68.2% increase over the control), but exceeding this rate led to soil acidification and reduced bacterial diversity, ultimately lowering yield. Thapa et al. [60] recommended maintaining irrigation at 100% of crop evapotranspiration, in conjunction with a nitrogen application rate of at least 180 kg N ha−1, to optimize sorghum resilience and resource-use efficiency while ensuring production sustainability in semiarid environments.
Our data show that about 16% of planting locations are in hilly to mountainous regions with slopes of 25–40% or >40%, mostly in wet zones (Supplementary Table S1). This slope condition, combined with more than five consecutive wet months, can trigger significant soil erosion. Accordingly, soil conservation measures need to be implemented (e.g., terracing and planting following contours). In addition, these slopes limit the implementation of mechanization. Combining tied contours and infiltration pits with manure application significantly boosted yields compared to standard contouring alone [61].

4.4. Practical and Policy Implications

Our findings indicate that variations in pedoagroclimatic conditions result in changes in farming practices and, ultimately, sorghum yield (Table 7). Farmers have only partially implemented the best cultivation technologies (Table 3). Acid soils, such as Inceptisols developed from claystone, require liming and organic fertilizer for optimal sorghum production, yet farmers often do not apply these (as in Site 3 of Table 3). Farmers use other technological components, such as superior varieties and inorganic fertilizers, but this varies by location (Table 2 and Table 3). Differences in soil type, crop variety, inorganic fertilizer rates, and yields across production areas indicate that a pedoagroclimate analysis is necessary to determine land suitability and technology input options for crop development [62].
The primary aim of national sorghum development is to establish a reliable source of food, feed, and biofuel (specifically, bioethanol) by utilizing superior varieties. Nonetheless, some farmers continue to rely on local varieties well adapted to specific pedoagroclimatic conditions (as illustrated in Table 2). Therefore, government initiatives aimed at enhancing sorghum cultivation should consider farmers’ perceptions of these local varieties.
In new cultivation areas, sorghum development can focus on producing feed and fuel while accounting for local agroecosystems. By contrast, in regions where sorghum is already cultivated, the emphasis should remain on food production. To this end, the government must exercise prudence when introducing new technologies, including varieties that align with both the pedoagroclimatic conditions (Table 7) and farmers’ perspectives. However, there is potential for developing sorghum for both feed and food in existing cultivation areas, provided that natural resources, infrastructure, and human resources are adequately supported.
Sorghum development should prioritize marginal lands, as this crop demonstrates considerable adaptability across varying conditions [26]. Sorghum is resilient to both drought and flooding, enabling it to thrive in less-than-ideal conditions [39]. However, current sorghum varieties developed through research initiatives do not adequately meet farmers’ needs. Government-released varieties often underperform in the field and fail to contribute to producers’ prosperity (Table 7). Therefore, an urgent focus for sorghum research should be the development of high-yielding varieties that can adapt to climate change for food, feed, and fuel applications.
For food production, cultivated sorghum varieties should yield high outputs that align with farmer perceptions. The application of advanced technologies in genetic engineering, including gene marking and gene sequencing, holds promise for enhancing the nutrient content of sorghum (fortification) and for reducing the time required to develop superior varieties. The recent study using landraces developes new genotypes that are naturally higher in protein, iron, and zinc. This genetic biofortification of sorghum aims to increase sorghum productivity, combat malnutrition, and improve the nutritional balance in human diets [63]. It is particularly relevant to areas focused on sorghum development for food, animal feed, and bioenergy. Identifying the folded microstructure of protein bodies that prevents the formation of enzyme-resistant disulfide bonds during cooking [64] is vital in food engineering. A significant quality barrier for sorghum is that its protein becomes less digestible after cooking, and this landmark study identifies a mutant with a unique protein structure that stays highly digestible
Our findings suggest that future sorghum development should begin with an analysis of the pedoagroclimatic conditions (Table 7) in the target development areas to ensure the efficient implementation of technology. Site-specific technologies, supported by research findings, encompass various aspects, including soil characteristics, climate conditions, sorghum genetics/varieties, cultivation practices, post-harvest processing, biomass processing, and environmental sustainability [58,65,66,67,68,69]. These elements are crucial for maximizing sorghum yield potential. This framework provides a roadmap for interdisciplinary research on sorghum and promotes a more comprehensive, sustainable approach to cultivation practices in Indonesia’s agricultural industry.

5. Conclusions

Our study employed survey research and geospatial analysis to identify existing sorghum production areas and examine farmers’ cultivation practices under varying pedoagroclimatic conditions. Pedoagroclimate variation leads to different technological implementations and, on average, yields ranging from 3.6 to 7.5 Mg ha−1. The existing sorghum production areas are predominantly in the D and E agroclimatic zones and are cultivated on diverse soil types, including Entisols, Inceptisols, Vertisols, Ultisols, Mollisols, and Andisols. Cultivated varieties cover local varieties (Hitam Wareng, Plonco, Sorgum Putih, and Sorgum Merah) and superior varieties (Nambu, Kawali, Bioguma, KD1, and UPCA-S1). The 15 to 68% yield gap could be closed by implementing site-specific technologies, including organic and inorganic fertilizers, liming, pest control, and high-yielding sorghum varieties. Implementing site-specific integrated technologies and superior adaptive varieties could increase sorghum production for food, feed, and bioenergy.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded from https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/soilsystems10020023/s1, Table S1: Pedoagroclimate factors of the existing sorghum planting areas.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Y.S. and N.S.; methodology, Y.S. and N.S.; software, Y.S.; validation, E.M., E.G.L. and A.M.; formal analysis, Y.S., A.S. and N.S.; investigation, N.S., J.P., A.S. and L.F.; resources, E.M. and H.S.W.; data curation, Y.S. and H.S.W.; writing—original draft preparation, Y.S., N.S., A.S., J.P., L.F. and H.S.W.; writing—review and editing, Y.S., N.S., A.S., J.P., L.F., H.S.W., E.M., E.G.L. and A.M.; visualization, Y.S.; supervision, E.M.; project administration, E.M.; funding acquisition, Y.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

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

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of the data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Mundia, C.W.; Secchi, S.; Akamani, K.; Wang, G. A Regional Comparison of Factors Affecting Global Sorghum Production: The Case of North America, Asia and Africa’s Sahel. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Althwab, S.; Carr, T.P.; Weller, C.L.; Dweikat, I.M.; Schlegel, V. Advances in Grain Sorghum and Its Co-Products as a Human Health Promoting Dietary System. Food Res. Int. 2015, 77, 349–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Hossain, S.; Islam, N.; Rahman, M.; Mostofa, M.G.; Khan, A.R. Sorghum: A Prospective Crop for Climatic Vulnerability, Food and Nutritional Security. J. Agric. Food Res. 2022, 8, 100300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Frankowski, J.; Przybylska-Balcerek, A.; Stuper-Szablewska, K. Concentration of Pro-Health Compound of Sorghum Grain-Based Foods. Foods 2022, 11, 216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Kulamarva, A.G.; Sosle, V.R.; Raghavan, G.S.V. Nutritional and Rheological Properties of Sorghum. Int. J. Food Prop. 2009, 12, 55–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Rao, S.; Santhakumar, A.B.; Chinkwo, K.A.; Wu, G.; Johnson, S.K.; Blanchard, C.L. Characterization of Phenolic Compounds and Antioxidant Activity in Sorghum Grains. J. Cereal Sci. 2018, 84, 103–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Xiong, Y.; Zhang, P.; Warner, R.D.; Fang, Z. Sorghum Grain: From Genotype, Nutrition, and Phenolic Profile to Its Health Benefits and Food Applications. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2019, 18, 2025–2046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. FAO. World Food and Agriculture—Statistical Yearbook 2021; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2021; ISBN 978-92-5-134332-6. [Google Scholar]
  9. Suarni. Potensi Sorgum Sebagai Bahan Pangan Fungsional. Iptek Tanam. Pangan 2012, 7, 58–66. [Google Scholar]
  10. Istrati, D.I.; Constantin, O.E.; Vizireanu, C.; Dinică, R.; Furdui, B. Sorghum as Source of Functional Compounds and Their Importance in Human Nutrition. Ann. Univ. Dunarea Jos Galati Fascicle VI—Food Technol. 2019, 43, 189–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Lee, S.-H.; Lee, J.; Herald, T.; Cox, S.; Noronha, L.; Perumal, R.; Lee, H.-S.; Smolensky, D. Anticancer Activity of a Novel High Phenolic Sorghum Bran in Human Colon Cancer Cells. Oxid. Med. Cell. Longev. 2020, 2020, 2890536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Pontieri, P.; Troisi, J.; Calcagnile, M.; Bean, S.R.; Tilley, M.; Aramouni, F.; Boffa, A.; Pepe, G.; Campiglia, P.; Del Giudice, F.; et al. Chemical Composition, Fatty Acid and Mineral Content of Food-Grade White, Red and Black Sorghum Varieties Grown in the Mediterranean Environment. Foods 2022, 11, 436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Aruna, C.; Suguna, M.; Visarada, K.B.R.S.; Deepika, C.; Ratnavathi, C.V.; Tonapi, V.A. Identification of Sorghum Genotypes Suitable for Specific End Uses: Semolina Recovery and Popping. J. Cereal Sci. 2020, 93, 102955. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Miyazaki, H.; Gafur, N.A.; Sayuti, M.; Rachman, A.B.; Sahara, L.O.; Syahruddin; Tanaka, U. Evaluating Ratooning Sorghum Potential for Goat Feeding in Gorontalo, Indonesia. Millet Res. 2021, 36, 9–14. [Google Scholar]
  15. BPS. Proyeksi Penduduk Indonesia, 2010–2035; Badan Pusat Statistik: Jakarta, Indonesia, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  16. Bazié, D.; Dibala, C.I.; Kondombo, C.P.; Diao, M.; Konaté, K.; Sama, H.; Kayodé, A.P.P.; Dicko, M.H. Physicochemical and Nutritional Potential of Fifteen Sorghum Cultivars from Burkina Faso. Agriculture 2023, 13, 675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Kolozsvári, I.; Kun, Á.; Jancsó, M.; Palágyi, A.; Bozán, C.; Gyuricza, C. Agronomic Performance of Grain Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) Cultivars under Intensive Fish Farm Effluent Irrigation. Agronomy 2022, 12, 1185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Tovignan, T.K.; Basha, Y.; Windpassinger, S.; Augustine, S.M.; Snowdon, R.; Vukasovic, S. Precision Phenotyping of Agro-Physiological Responses and Water Use of Sorghum under Different Drought Scenarios. Agronomy 2023, 13, 722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. McCuistion, K.C.; Selle, P.H.; Liu, S.Y.; Goodband, R.D. Sorghum as a Feed Grain for Animal Production. In Sorghum and Millets; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019; pp. 355–391. ISBN 978-0-12-811527-5. [Google Scholar]
  20. Pujiharti, Y.; Paturohman, E.; Ikhwani. Prospect of Sorghum Development as Corn Substitution in Indonesia. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2022, 978, 012019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Rao, P.S.; Vinutha, K.S.; Kumar, G.S.A.; Chiranjeevi, T.; Uma, A.; Lal, P.; Prakasham, R.S.; Singh, H.P.; Rao, R.S.; Chopra, S.; et al. Sorghum: A Multipurpose Bioenergy Crop. In Agronomy Monographs; Ciampitti, I.A., Vara Prasad, P.V., Eds.; Soil Science Society of America: Madison, WI, USA, 2019; pp. 399–424. ISBN 978-0-89118-628-1. [Google Scholar]
  22. Stamenković, O.S.; Siliveru, K.; Veljković, V.B.; Banković-Ilić, I.B.; Tasić, M.B.; Ciampitti, I.A.; Đalović, I.G.; Mitrović, P.M.; Sikora, V.Š.; Prasad, P.V.V. Production of Biofuels from Sorghum. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020, 124, 109769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Zhang, C.; Xie, G.; Li, S.; Ge, L.; He, T. The Productive Potentials of Sweet Sorghum Ethanol in China. Appl. Energy 2010, 87, 2360–2368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Wiloso, E.I.; Setiawan, A.A.R.; Prasetia, H.; Muryanto; Wiloso, A.R.; Subyakto; Sudiana, I.M.; Lestari, R.; Nugroho, S.; Hermawan, D.; et al. Production of Sorghum Pellets for Electricity Generation in Indonesia: A Life Cycle Assessment. Biofuel Res. J. 2020, 7, 1178–1194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Winarti, C.; Arif, A.B.; Budiyanto, A.; Richana, N. Sorghum Development for Staple Food and Industrial Raw Materials in East Nusa Tenggara, Indonesia: A Review. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2020, 443, 012055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Widodo, S.; Triastono, J.; Sahara, D.; Pustika, A.B.; Kristamtini; Purwaningsih, H.; Arianti, F.D.; Praptana, R.H.; Romdon, A.S.; Sutardi; et al. Economic Value, Farmers Perception, and Strategic Development of Sorghum in Central Java and Yogyakarta, Indonesia. Agriculture 2023, 13, 516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Susilawati, S.; Surdianto, Y.; Erythrina, E.; Bhermana, A.; Liana, T.; Syafruddin, S.; Anshori, A.; Nugroho, W.A.; Hidayanto, M.; Widiastuti, D.P.; et al. Strategic, Economic, and Potency Assessment of Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench) Development in the Tidal Swamplands of Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. Agronomy 2023, 13, 2559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Utomo, S.W.; Lestari, F.; Adiwibowo, A.; Fisher, M.R. Prediction of Sorghum bicolor (L.) Distribution Ranges Provides Insights on Potential Sorghum Cultivation across Tropical Ecoregions of Indonesia. BMC Plant Biol. 2025, 25, 401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. QGIS Development Team. QGIS Geographic Information System, Version 3.40.3. Available online: https://www.qgis.org (accessed on 20 January 2024).
  30. Marsoedi, D.S.; Widagdo; Dai, J.; Suharta, N.; Darul, S.W.P.; Hardjowigeno, S.; Hof, J.; Jordens, E.R. Guidelines for Landform Classification; Techincal Report, Second LREP; Center for Soil and Agroclimate Research: Bogor, Indonesia, 1997. [Google Scholar]
  31. Oldeman, L.R. An Agroclimatic Map of Java; Contributions from The Central Research Institute for Agriculture Bogor 17; Center Research Institute for Agriculture: Bogor, Indonesia, 1975. [Google Scholar]
  32. Oldeman, L.R.; Las, I.; Darwis, S.N. An Agroclimatic Map of Sumatera Scale of 1:3.000.000; Contributions from The Central Research Institute for Agriculture Bogor 52; Central Research Institute for Agriculture: Bogor, Indonesia, 1979. [Google Scholar]
  33. Oldeman, L.R.; Las, I. Muladi Agro-Climatic Maps of Maluku and Irian Jaya, Bali, Nusa Tenggara Barat and Nusa Tenggara Timur; Contributions from The Central Research Institute for Agriculture Bogor; Center Research Institute for Agriculture: Bogor, Indonesia, 1981. [Google Scholar]
  34. Oldeman, L.R.; Darmijati, S. An Agroclimatic Map of Sulawesi, Scale 1:2.500.000; Contributions from The Central Research Institute for Agriculture Bogor 33; Center Research Institute for Agriculture: Bogor, Indonesia, 1977. [Google Scholar]
  35. Oldeman, L.R.; Las, I. Muladi Agroclimatic Map of Kalimantan, Scale 1:3.000.000; Contributions from The Central Research Institute for Agriculture Bogor; Center Research Institute for Agriculture: Bogor, Indonesia, 1980. [Google Scholar]
  36. Balai Penelitian Agroklimat dan Hidrologi. Atlas Sumberdaya Iklim Pertanian Indoensia Skala 1:1000000; Balai Penelitian Agroklimat dan Hidrologi: Bogor, Indonesia, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  37. R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing; R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  38. Sulaeman, Y.; Aryati, V.; Suprihatin, A.; Santari, P.T.; Haryati, Y.; Susilawati, S.; Siagian, D.R.; Karolinoerita, V.; Cahyaningrum, H.; Pramono, J.; et al. Yield Gap Variation in Rice Cultivation in Indonesia. Open Agric. 2024, 9, 20220241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Ariningsih, E.; Saliem, H.P.; Nurhasanah, A.; Gunawan, E.; Agustian, A. Saptana Challenges and Alternative Solutions in Developing Sorghum to Support Food Diversification in Indonesia. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2023, 1153, 012032. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Medina-Méndez, J.; Soto-Rocha, J.M.; Hernández-Pérez, M.; Gómez-Tejero, J. Technology for the Production of Sorghum for Grain in the Vertisols of Campeche, Mexico. Agric. Sci. 2021, 12, 666–683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Teshome, H.; Molla, E.; Feyisa, T. Identification of Yield-Limiting Nutrients for Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) Yield, Nutrient Uptake and Use Efficiency on Vertisols of Raya Kobo District, Northeastern Ethiopia. Int. J. Agron. 2023, 2023, 5394806. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Patroti, P.; Madhusudhana, R.; Sundaram, S.; Prasad, G.S.; Raigond, B.; Das, I.; Satyavathi, C.T. Development of High Yielding and Stress Resilient Post-Rainy Season Sorghum Cultivars Using a Multi-Parent Crossing Approach. Sci. Rep. 2025, 15, 17224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Aruna, C.; Audilakshmi, S.; Ratnavathi, C.; Patil, J. Grain Quality Improvement of Rainy Season Sorghums. Qual. Assur. Saf. Crops Foods 2012, 4, 149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Mubarik, M.K.; Hussain, K.; Abbas, G.; Altaf, M.T.; Baloch, F.S.; Ahmad, S. Productivity of Sorghum (Sorghum bicolar L.) at Diverse Irrigation Regimes and Sowing Dates in Semi-Arid and Arid Environment. Turk. J. Agric. For. 2022, 46, 1–18. [Google Scholar]
  45. Ardhani Pithaloka, S.; Kamal, M.; Futas Hidayat, K. Pengaruh Kerapatan Tanaman Terhadap Pertumbuhan Dan Hasil Beberapa Varietas Sorgum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench). J. Agrotek Trop. 2015, 3, 56–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Khairunnisa, L.R.R.; Irmansyah, T. Respon Pertumbuhan Dan Produksi Tanaman Sorgum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) Terhadap Pemberian Mulsa Dan Berbagai Metode Olah Tanah. J. Online Agroekoteknol. 2015, 3, 359–366. [Google Scholar]
  47. Kugedera, A.T.; Kokerai, L.K.; Nyamadzawo, G.; Mandumbu, R. Evaluating Effects of Selected Water Conservation Techniques and Manure on Sorghum Yields and Rainwater Use Efficiency in Dry Region of Zimbabwe. Heliyon 2024, 10, e33032. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Mabasa, H.Z.; Nciizah, A.D.; Muchaonyerwa, P. Short-Term Tillage Management Effects on Grain Sorghum Growth, Yield and Selected Properties of Sandy Soil in a Sub-Tropical Climate, South Africa. Sci. Afr. 2025, 27, e02556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Munthe, L.S.; Irmansyah, T.; Hanum, C. Respon Pertumbuhan Dan Produksi Tiga Varietas Sorgum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) Dengan Perbedaan Sistem Pengolahan Tanah. J. Online Agroekoteknol. 2013, 1, 95840. [Google Scholar]
  50. Musafiri, C.M.; Kiboi, M.; Macharia, J.; Ng’etich, O.K.; Okoti, M.; Mulianga, B.; Kosgei, D.K.; Ngetich, F.K. Does the Adoption of Minimum Tillage Improve Sorghum Yield among Smallholders in Kenya? A Counterfactual Analysis. Soil Tillage Res. 2022, 223, 105473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Tarigan, D.H.; Irmansyah, T.; Purba, E. Pengaruh Waktu Penyiangan Terhadap Pertumbuhan Dan Produksi Beberapa Varietas Sorgum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench). J. Online Agroekoteknol. 2013, 2, 86–95. [Google Scholar]
  52. Arvan, R.Y.; Aqil, M. Deskripsi Varietas Unggul Jagung, Sorgum Dan Gandum; Balai Penelitian Tanaman Serealia: Maros, Indonesia, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  53. Sulistyawati, S. Mengenal Genotipe Sorgum Lokal Jawa Timur; CV. Literasi Nusantara Abadi: Malang, Indonesia, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  54. BPSI Tanaman Serealia. Deskripsi Varietas Ungul Baru Jagung Dan Sorgum; Badan Standarisasi Instrumen Pertanian: Jakarta, Indonesia, 2024. [Google Scholar]
  55. Mukkun, L.; Lalel, H.J.D.; Kleden, Y.L. The Physical and Chemical Characteristics of Several Accessions of Sorghum Cultivated on Drylands in East Nusa Tenggara, Indonesia. Biodiversitas 2021, 22, 2520–2531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Talanca, A.H.; Andayani, N.N. Development of Sorghum Variety in Indonesia. In Sorghum: Innovation Technology and Development; Sumarno, Damardjati, D.S., Syam, M., Hermanto, Eds.; IAARD Press: Jakarta, Indonesia, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  57. Leiser, W.L.; Rattunde, H.F.W.; Piepho, H.; Weltzien, E.; Diallo, A.; Melchinger, A.E.; Parzies, H.K.; Haussmann, B.I.G. Selection Strategy for Sorghum Targeting Phosphorus-limited Environments in West Africa: Analysis of Multi-environment Experiments. Crop Sci. 2012, 52, 2517–2527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Nagesh Kumar, M.V.; Ramya, V.; Govindaraj, M.; Sameer Kumar, C.V.; Maheshwaramma, S.; Gokenpally, S.; Prabhakar, M.; Krishna, H.; Sridhar, M.; Venkata Ramana, M.; et al. Harnessing Sorghum Landraces to Breed High-Yielding, Grain Mold-Tolerant Cultivars with High Protein for Drought-Prone Environments. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 12, 659874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Wang, Q.; Huang, J.; Zhang, Y.; Li, Z.; Wei, L.; Yin, X.; Zhang, X.; Zhou, Y. Long-Term Excess Nitrogen Fertilizer Reduces Sorghum Yield by Affecting Soil Bacterial Community. Plants 2025, 15, 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Thapa, B.; Awal, R.; Fares, A.; Veettil, A.V.; Elhassan, A.; Rahman, A. Optimized Irrigation and Nitrogen Fertilization Enhance Sorghum Yield and Resilience in Drought-Prone Regions. Plants 2025, 14, 2913. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Kubiku, F.N.M.; Nyamadzawo, G.; Nyamangara, J.; Mandumdu, R. Effect of Countour Rainwater-harvesting and Integrated Nutrient Management on Sorghum Grain Yield in Semi-arid Farming Environments of Zimbabwe. Acta Agric. Scand. Sect. B–Soil Plant Sci. 2022, 72, 364–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Alam, M.M.; Hasanuzzaman, M. Enhancing Salt Stress Tolerance and Yield Parameters of Proso Millet Through Exogenous Proline and Glycine Betaine Supplementation. Bangladesh Agron. J. 2023, 26, 75–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Kumar, M.V.N.; Ramya, V.; Maheshwaramma, S.; Ganapathy, K.N.; Govindaraj, M.; Kavitha, K.; Vanisree, K. Exploiting Indian Landraces to Develop Biofortified Grain Sorghum with High Protein and Minerals. Front. Nutr. 2023, 10, 1228422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Oria, M.P.; Hamaker, B.R.; Axtell, J.D.; Huang, C.-P. A Highly Digestible Sorghum Mutant Cultivar Exhibits a Unique Folded Structure of Endosperm Protein Bodies. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2000, 97, 5065–5070. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  65. Appiah-Nkansah, N.B.; Li, J.; Rooney, W.; Wang, D. A Review of Sweet Sorghum as a Viable Renewable Bioenergy Crop and Its Techno-Economic Analysis. Renew. Energy 2019, 143, 1121–1132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Rashwan, A.K.; Yones, H.A.; Karim, N.; Taha, E.M.; Chen, W. Potential Processing Technologies for Developing Sorghum-Based Food Products: An Update and Comprehensive Review. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 110, 168–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Singh, H.; Sodhi, N.S.; Dhillon, B.; Chang, Y.-H.; Lin, J.-H. Physicochemical and Structural Characteristics of Sorghum Starch as Affected by Acid-ethanol Hydrolysis. Food Meas. 2021, 15, 2377–2385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. De Queiroz, G.C.M.; De Medeiros, J.F.; Da Silva, R.R.; Da Silva Morais, F.M.; De Sousa, L.V.; De Souza, M.V.P.; Da Nóbrega Santos, E.; Ferreira, F.N.; Da Silva, J.M.C.; Clemente, M.I.B.; et al. Growth, Solute Accumulation, and Ion Distribution in Sweet Sorghum under Salt and Drought Stresses in a Brazilian Potiguar Semiarid Area. Agriculture 2023, 13, 803. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Al-Salman, Y.; Cano, F.J.; Pan, L.; Koller, F.; Piñeiro, J.; Jordan, D.; Ghannoum, O. Anatomical Drivers of Stomatal Conductance in Sorghum Lines with Different Leaf Widths Grown under Different Temperatures. Plant Cell Environ. 2023, 46, 2142–2158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Soilsystems 10 00023 g001
Figure 1. Existing sorghum cultivation areas in Indonesia, as plotted on the agroclimate map. Supplementary Table S1 provides descriptions of the location numbers. The agroclimate map was redrawn from the regional agroclimate map of Sumatra [32], Java [31], Kalimantan [35], Sulawesi [34], Maluku and Irian Jaya, Bali, Nusa Tenggara Barat, and Nusa Tenggara Timur [33].
Figure 1. Existing sorghum cultivation areas in Indonesia, as plotted on the agroclimate map. Supplementary Table S1 provides descriptions of the location numbers. The agroclimate map was redrawn from the regional agroclimate map of Sumatra [32], Java [31], Kalimantan [35], Sulawesi [34], Maluku and Irian Jaya, Bali, Nusa Tenggara Barat, and Nusa Tenggara Timur [33].
Soilsystems 10 00023 g001
Soilsystems 10 00023 g002
Figure 2. Distribution of sorghum area (N = 50) based on six pedoagroclimate factors covering agroclimate zone (A), slope class (B), landform type (C), soil type (D), parent material (E), and elevation class (F). Elevation is in meters above sea level. Supplementary Table S1 provides more details on these distributions.
Figure 2. Distribution of sorghum area (N = 50) based on six pedoagroclimate factors covering agroclimate zone (A), slope class (B), landform type (C), soil type (D), parent material (E), and elevation class (F). Elevation is in meters above sea level. Supplementary Table S1 provides more details on these distributions.
Soilsystems 10 00023 g002
Table 2. Sorghum productivity, soil type, planting season, and main pests from 15 selected locations.
Table 2. Sorghum productivity, soil type, planting season, and main pests from 15 selected locations.
IdLocationSoil TypeVarietyYield
(Mg ha−1)		Coverage (ha)Planting SeasonMain Pest
4Mekarjaya Village, Kertajati District, Majalengka Regency, WJInceptisolsBioguma 24.25Dry season (April)Rats, Birds
6Jelat Village, Baregreg District, Ciamis Regency, WJInceptisolsBioguma 23.05Wet season (November)Birds
10Jenggala Village, Cidolog District, Ciamis Regency, WJUltisolsBioguma 25.0–6.05Wet season (October)Birds
11Cimanggu Village, Langkaplancar District, Pangandaran Regency, WJInceptisolsBioguma 2, Bioguma 34.050Wet season (November)Grasshoppers, Birds
12Cimerak Village, Cimerak District, Pangandaran Regency, WJInceptisolsNumbu, Kawali4.02.5Wet Season (December)Grasshoppers, Birds
16Raji Village, Demak District, Demak Regency, CJVertisolsUPCA-S17.510Dry season (April/June)Birds
17Mojopuro Village, Wuryantoro District, Wonogiri Regency, CJInceptisolsSuri 3 Agritan4.0–5.037Dry season (Mei/Juni)Birds
36Sekaroh Village, Jerowaru District, Lombok Timur Regency, WNMollisolsBioguma 1, Soper 9 Agritan, Suri 3 Agritan3.0–4.0100Wet season (April)Birds
44Jatibaru Village, Asakota District, Bima Regency, WNInceptisolsBioguma 1, Bioguma 2, Bioguma 3, Soper 9 Agritan, Suri 3 Agritan3.0–4.0100Wet season (November)Birds
45Wareng Village, Wonosari District, Gunung Kidul Regency, YSInceptisolsKawali, Plonco, Hitam Wareng,2.5–3.951Dry Season (March)Birds, Long-Tailed Monkeys, Rats
46Bandungrejo Village, Karanganyar District, Demak Regency, CJVertisolsUPCA-S16.0–7.05Dry season (April/June)Birds
47Rejosari Village, Mijen District, Demak Regency, CJVertisolsUPCA-S16.0–7.010Dry season (April/June)Birds, Caterpillars
48Wanasaraya Village, Kalimanggis District, Kuningan Regency, WJInceptisolsBioguma 23.0<1Wet season (November)Birds
49Margaharja Village, Sukadana District, Ciamis Regency, WJInceptisolsBioguma 28.01Dry season (March)Birds
50Banjaranyar Village, Banjaranyar District, Ciamis Regency, WJUltisolsBioguma 35.25Wet season (September)Birds
Note: Id refers to the location number in Supplementary Table S1. Provinces: WJ—West Java Province, CJ—Central Java Province, YS—Yogyakarta Special Region, WN—West Nusa Tenggara Province.
Table 3. Sorghum cultivation technologies as managed by smallholder farmers in four sample locations.
Table 3. Sorghum cultivation technologies as managed by smallholder farmers in four sample locations.
No.ParameterSite 1Site 2Site 3Site 4
1.VillageBanjaranyarRajiSambanganPamongkong
2.DistrictBanjaranyarDemakBabatJerowaru
3.RegencyCiamisDemakLamonganLombok Timur
4.ProvinceWest JavaCentral JavaEast JavaWest Nusa Tenggara
5.Agroclimate zoneB1C2D3E3
Dry month<225 to 65 to 6
Wet month7 to 95 to 63 to 4<3
Annual rainfall (mm)>20001500–20001000–1500<1000
6.Elevation (m asl a)20031114
7.Soil typeInceptisolsVertisolsInceptisolsMollisols
8.Parent materialVolcanic materialClay sedimentClaystone Limestone
9AgroecosystemDrylandPaddy fieldsPaddy fieldsRainfed paddy fields
10.Crop patternMaize–sorghum–fallowRice–rice–sorghum,
shallot–shallot–sorghum		Rice–rice–sorghumRice–sorghum–fallow
11.VarietyBioguma 3UPCA-S1KD 4Bioguma 1
12.Planting systemMonocultureMonocultureMonocultureMonoculture
13.Sowing dateSeptemberApril/JuneAprilApril
14.Planting distance25 cm × 75 cm40 cm × 40 cm or
20 cm × 60 cm		30 cm × 30 cm × 75 cm30 cm × 70 cm
15.Fertilizer
Application (kg ha−1)		At 7 dap b:
urea = 50		At 10 to14 dap:
urea = 100 to 250		At 15 dap:
Gandasil D (foliar)		At 14 dap:
urea = 50, NPK = 150
At 30 dap:
urea = 50		At 30 to 40 dap:
urea = 100 to 250		At 25 dap:
urea = 15, NPK d = 15		At 25 dap:
urea = 15, NPK = 15
At 59 dap:
urea = 40, NPK = 40		At 59 dap:
urea = 40, NPK = 40
16.Harvest monthDecemberJuly/SeptemberAugustAugust
17.Harvest age (dap)11595–10090–100125
18.Yield (Mg ha−1)4.5 to 5.56.0 to 7.56.0 to 7.04.0 to 5.0
19.Selling price (per kg dry grain)IDR. 4000 (USD 0.25) cIDR 3000–5000 (USD 0.2 to USD 0.3)IDR 5000 (USD 0.3) IDR. 4000 (USD 0.25)
Note: a asl—above sea level, b dap—day after planting, c USD 1= IDR 16,000, d NPK Phonska—a compound fertilizer (15-15-15).
Table 4. Sorghum productivity based on soil type and agroclimate zone (N = 17).
Table 4. Sorghum productivity based on soil type and agroclimate zone (N = 17).
Soil TypeAgroclimate ZoneYield (Mg ha−1)
RangeAverage
InceptisolsA4.0–4.04.0
B13.0–8.05.0
C23.0–4.23.6
C33.2–4.53.9
D33.5–6.55.0
MollisolsE33.5–4.54.0
UltisolsAn.a. *5.2
B1n.a.5.5
VertisolsC2n.a.7.5
D2n.a.6.5
D3n.a.6.5
* n.a.—not available, as only one location.
Table 5. Influence of pedoagroclimate factors on sorghum yield variations (N = 17).
Table 5. Influence of pedoagroclimate factors on sorghum yield variations (N = 17).
ModelPredictorR2Adj-R2F-Statp-Value
1Soil Type0.390.252.7320.086
2Soil Type + Slope0.790.590.3860.036 *
3Soil Type + PM0.770.482.6650.105
4Soil Type + Landform0.910.8711.5000.003 *
5Soil Type + Slope + PM0.980.8910.8200.037 *
6Soil Type + Slope + ACZ0.850.221.3410.456
7Soil Type + Slope + ACZ + Elev0.930.421.8100.412
Predictor: PM—parent material, ACZ—agroclimate zone, Elev—elevation. * Significance at alpha of 0.05.
Table 6. Coefficients of soil types and landform factors in predicting sorghum yield (N = 17).
Table 6. Coefficients of soil types and landform factors in predicting sorghum yield (N = 17).
PredictorCoefficientStandard Errort ValuePr(>|t|)
(Intercept)4.500.587.730.000 *
Soil Type:
-
Mollisols
0.400.580.690.518
-
Ultisols
1.850.583.180.019 *
-
Vertisols
2.330.673.470.013 *
Landform:
-
Alluvio-Colluvial Lands
−1.000.82−1.220.269
-
Colluvial Lands
2.000.822.430.051 *
-
Karst Plains
−0.900.71−1.260.256
-
Old Volcanic Hills
−1.000.71−1.400.210
-
Old Volcanic Plains
−1.500.82−1.820.118
-
Volcanic Plains
−0.300.82−0.370.728
-
Volcanic Ridges
3.500.824.250.005 *
* Statistical significance at alpha of 0.05. Residual standard error: 0.5819 on 6 degrees of freedom. Multiple R-squared: 0.9504; adjusted R-squared: 0.8677. F-statistic: 11.5 on 10 and 6 degrees of freedom; p-value: 0.003673.
Table 7. Sorghum yield gap based on pedoagroclimate factors.
Table 7. Sorghum yield gap based on pedoagroclimate factors.
IdSoil TypeLandform TypeSlope (%)Agroclimate
Subzone		VarietyYield (Mg ha−1)Yield Gap
PotentialFarmerDelta (Mg ha−1)%
4InceptisolsVP3–8C2Bioguma 29.394.25.255
6InceptisolsOVH15–25B1Bioguma 29.393.06.468
11InceptisolsOVH>40B1Bioguma 29.394.05.457
12InceptisolsKP1–3ANambu5.004.01.020
17InceptisolsAP1–3C3Suri 3 Agritan 6.004.51.525
22InceptisolsCL1–3D3KD 44.006.5−2.5
44InceptisolsACL3–8D3Bioguma 19.263.55.862
45InceptisolsKP3–8C3Kawali2.96 3.2−0.2
48InceptisolsOVP1–3C2Bioguma 29.393.06.468
49InceptisolsVR25–40B1Bioguma 29.398.01.415
35MollisolsKP3–8E3Bioguma 19.264.54.851
36MollisolsKP1–3E3Suri 3 Agritan 6.003.52.542
10UltisolsOVH25–40B1Bioguma 29.395.53.941
50UltisolsOVH25–40ABioguma 38.335.23.138
16VertisolsAP1–3C2UPCA-S14.007.5−3.5
46VertisolsAP<1D2UPCA-S14.006.5−2.5
47VertisolsAP<1D3UPCA-S14.006.5−2.5
Note: Id refers to the location number in the Supplementary Material. Landform: VP—volcanic plain, OVH—old volcanic hill, OVP—old volcanic Plain, KP—karst plain, AP—alluvial plain, CL—colluvial land, ACL—alluvio-colluvial land, VR—volcanic ridge. The yield gap is defined as the difference between potential yield and farmer yield [38]. A negative yield gap indicates that farmer practices have improved growth and yield. Year of variety release: UPCA-S1 (year 1972), KD 4 (year 1973), Kawali (year 2001), Nambu (year 2001), Suri 3 (year 2014), Bioguma 1 (year 2019), Bioguma 2 (year 2019), and Bioguma 3 (year 2019).
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

Sulaeman, Y.; Sutrisna, N.; Pramono, J.; Fauziah, L.; Suriadi, A.; Wulanningtyas, H.S.; Maftu’ah, E.; Lestari, E.G.; Mulyani, A. Role of Pedoagroclimate Settings in Enhancing Sorghum Production in Indonesia. Soil Syst. 2026, 10, 23. https://doi.org/10.3390/soilsystems10020023

AMA Style

Sulaeman Y, Sutrisna N, Pramono J, Fauziah L, Suriadi A, Wulanningtyas HS, Maftu’ah E, Lestari EG, Mulyani A. Role of Pedoagroclimate Settings in Enhancing Sorghum Production in Indonesia. Soil Systems. 2026; 10(2):23. https://doi.org/10.3390/soilsystems10020023

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sulaeman, Yiyi, Nana Sutrisna, Joko Pramono, Lilia Fauziah, Ahmad Suriadi, Heppy Suci Wulanningtyas, Eni Maftu’ah, Endang Gati Lestari, and Anny Mulyani. 2026. "Role of Pedoagroclimate Settings in Enhancing Sorghum Production in Indonesia" Soil Systems 10, no. 2: 23. https://doi.org/10.3390/soilsystems10020023

APA Style

Sulaeman, Y., Sutrisna, N., Pramono, J., Fauziah, L., Suriadi, A., Wulanningtyas, H. S., Maftu’ah, E., Lestari, E. G., & Mulyani, A. (2026). Role of Pedoagroclimate Settings in Enhancing Sorghum Production in Indonesia. Soil Systems, 10(2), 23. https://doi.org/10.3390/soilsystems10020023

Article Metrics

Article metric data becomes available approximately 24 hours after publication online.
Back to TopTop