Genetic variability for fodder quality traits among high biomass energy cane feedstock under rainfed conditions

Mintu Ram Meena; Govindaraj Perumal; Rajesh Kumar Meena; Arun Kumar Raja; Ravinder Kumar; M L Chhabra; S K Pandey Pandey; G. Hemaprabha Govind

doi:10.37580/JSR.2022.1.12.103-111

Authors

Mintu Ram Meena ICAR- Sugarcane Breeding Institute, Regional Centre, KARNAL
Govindaraj Perumal Sugar Research Institute of Fiji
Rajesh Kumar Scientist Sr Scale, ICAR-NDRI, Karnal
Arun Kumar Senior scientist(Plant Physiology), Room No.15, Plant Physiology Building, Crop Production Division, ICAR-Sugarcane Breeding Institute, Coimbatore, 641 007
Ravinder Kumar Sr Scientist, ICAR-SBIRC, Karnal
M L Chhabra Principal Scientist, ICAR-SBIRC, Karnal-132001
S K Pandey Principal Scientist, ICAR-SBIRC, Karnal
G. Hemaprabha ICAR-Sugarcane Breeding Institute, Coimbatore-07

https://doi.org/10.37580/JSR.2022.1.12.103-111

Keywords:

Energy canes; Fodder quality traits; Correlation coefficient; Hierarchical clustering

Abstract

Eighteen energy canes (Types I and II) were evaluated along with two popular varieties Co 0238 and CoS 767 under rainfed conditions of sub-tropical climate for their potential as fodder crop. The analysis of fodder quality parameters at the 10 month crop stage included crude protein content, dry matter intake (DMI), dry matter digestibility %, total digestible nutrients %, net energy of lactation, and digestible ﬁbre and energy. Sugarcane tops of type-I and type-II energy canes had similar crude protein percentages (5.95 % and 6.61 %). Energy canes; SBIEC 14002, SBIEC 11009, SBIEC 11003, SBIEC 13009, and SBIEC 11006 recorded dry matter intake % of 1.76%, 1.76%, 1.73% and 1.72%, 1.70% respectively, which was on par with sugarcane (1.71%). The digestible nutrient of SBIEC 11001 (49.43%) was higher than that of cultivated canes, whereas that of SBIEC 11009 (48.08%), SBIEC 11005 (48.64%) and SBIEC 14003 (48.50%) was similar to that of cultivated canes. The correlation coefficient between desirable fodder traits was calculated. A highly positive correlation (r=1.0) was observed among the ﬁve desirable traits, such as net available energy, metabolisable energy, dry matter digestibility, total digestible nutrient, and digestible energy, indicated there desirability for fodder value. Based on their traits, two-way cluster analysis separated Type-I and Type-II energy clones into two major groups. According to all parameters considered, energy-cane tops had acceptable fodder quality and were on par with cultivated sugarcane varieties.

Author Biographies

Mintu Ram Meena, ICAR- Sugarcane Breeding Institute, Regional Centre, KARNAL

Plant Breeding and molecular biology, ICAR- Sugarcane Breeding Institute, Regional Centre, KARNAL
Govindaraj Perumal, Sugar Research Institute of Fiji

ITEC expert, Sugar Research Institute of Fiji, Drasa, Lautoka, Fiji
Rajesh Kumar, Scientist Sr Scale, ICAR-NDRI, Karnal

Division- Agronomy, ICAR-NDRI, Karnal
G. Hemaprabha, ICAR-Sugarcane Breeding Institute, Coimbatore-07

Director, ICAR-Sugarcane Breeding Institute, Coimbatore-07

References

Aragon D, Suhr M, Kochorgin V. 2013. Evaluation of energy cane and sweet sorghum as feedstocks for conversion into fuels and chemicals. Sugar Industry. 138(10): 651–655.

Byrt CS, Grof CPL, Furbank RT. 2011.C Plants as 4 biofuel feedstocks: optimizing biomass production and feedstock quality from a lignocellulosic perspective. Journal of Integrated Plant Biology. 53:120–135.

Carvalho-Netto OV, Bressiani JA, Soriano HL. 2014. The potential of the energy cane as the main biomass crop for the cellulosic industry. Chemical and Biological Technologies in Agriculture 1:20. https://doi.org/ 10.1186/s40538-014-0020-2.

Da Silva JA. 2017. The importance of the wild cane Saccharum spontaneum for bioenergy genetic breeding. Sugar Tech. 19(3):229–240.

Fischer G, Teixeira E,Hizsnyik ET, van Velthuizen H. 2008. Land use dynamics and sugarcane production. In: Zuurbier P, van de Vooren J (eds) Sugarcane ethanol. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, pp 29–62.

Govindaraj P, Amalraj VA, Mohanraj K, Nair NV. 2014. Collection, characterization and phenotypic diversity of Saccharum spontaneum L. from arid and semi-arid zones of north-western India. Sugar Tech. 16: 36–43.

Govindaraj P. 2017. Energy canes as a feed stock for biofuel industries. Indian Farming. 67 (2): 61-63.

Govindaraj P. 2020. SBIEC 14006 – A high biomass energy cane for power, alcohol and paper industries. Journal of Sugarcane Research. 10(1): 100-106

Long SP, Karp A, Buckeridge MS. 2015. Feedstocks for biofuels and bioenergy. In: Souza GM, Victoria RL, Joly CA, VerdadeLM (eds) Bioenergy and sustainability: bridging the gaps. SCOPE/72, 302–346. http://bioenfapesp.org/ scopebioenergy/index.php

Meena, MR, Kumar R, Ramaiyan K. et al. 2020. Biomass potential of novel interspecific and intergeneric hybrids of Saccharum grown in sub-tropical climates. Scientific Report. 10: 21560. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-78329-8

Mohanraj K, Nair NV. 2014. Biomass potential of novel interspecific hybrids involving improved clones of Saccharum. Industrial Crops and Products 53:128–132.

Pérez, J., Muñoz-Dorado, J., de la Rubia, T. et al. Biodegradation and biological treatments of cellulose, hemicellulose and lignin: an overview. International Microbiology 5, 53–63 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10123-002-0062-3

Sanchez C. 2009. Lignocellulic residues: Biodegradation and bioconversion by fungi. Biotechnology Advances. 27: 185-194.

Ram B, S.K.Tomar, R.Karuppiyan. 2011. Evaluation of sugarcane tops of co clones for fodder quality traits. Journal of Sugarcane Research 1(1):39-47

Tew TL, Cobill RM. 2008. Genetic improvement of sugarcane (Saccharum spp.) as an energy crop.In:Wilfred V ( ed ) Genetic Improvement of Bioenergy Crops. Springer, New York.

Wickham H.2022. ggplot: An Implementation of the Grammar of Graphics. R Package Version 04 0. 2006. [(Accessed on 9 September 2022)].

Xandé X, Régnier C, Archimède H, Bocage B, Noblet J, Renaudeau D. 2010. Nutritional values of sugarcane products in local Caribbean growing pigs. Animal. 2010 May; 4( 5):745-54.doi:10.1017/S175173110999173X. PMID: 22444128.

Zhang P, Wenyu Liao, Aditya Kumar, Qian Zhang, Hongyan Ma. 2020. Characterization of sugarcane bagasse ash as a potential supplementary cementitious material: Comparison with coal combustion fly ash, Journal of Cleaner Production, 277, 2020,123834,ISSN0959-6526, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro. 2020.123834.