Correlation of soil chemical properties with sugarcane yield and CCS under different trash management practices

Introduction

Sugarcane is one of the important commercial cash crops, grown in India (Solomon, 2016; Chauhan et al., 2022) [2,1] . Sugarcane production depends greatly on soil fertility, nutrient availability, and proper crop management. Cane yield and Commercial Cane Sugar (CCS) are commonly used to assess crop performance because they indicate both the amount of cane produced and the potential sugar that can be recovered from it. Maintaining healthy soil and providing nutrients in the right balance are therefore important for improving cane yield as well as sugar recovery. Crop residues are a valuable source of biomass, but a large quantity around 93 Mt is still burned in the fields each year. In India, sugarcane generates about 12 Mt of residues annually, mainly in the form of tops and leaves, which account for nearly 2% of the total crop residues Bairwa et al. (2020) [3] . The regular burning of these residues results in the loss of valuable nutrients and organic matter that could otherwise be returned to the soil and help maintain soil fertility Ravish et al. (2025) [4] , Tandon et al. (2025) [5] . In India, a considerable amount of crop residue is left unused each year. Estimates show that about 140.84 Mt of crop residues are surplus, while nearly 92.81 Mt are burned in the fields annually (Pandey, 2018) [6] . Burning these residues causes significant losses, with more than 70 % of their organic matter and nutrients being released into the atmosphere (Mitchell et al., 2000) [7] . On the other hand, leaving the residues in the field allows these nutrients and organic matter to return to the soil. Research from northern Australia has also shown that retaining green cane trash can improve soil nitrogen, organic carbon, and nitrogen mineralization (Wood et al., 1991; Sutton et al., 1996) [9,8] . After crop harvesting, the leftover residues are sometimes burned directly in the field to clear the land for the next crop and short time. However, this practice can cause considerable losses of valuable plant nutrients, with as much as 44 kg of nitrogen, 5.4 kg of phosphorus, and 31 kg of potassium per hectare being lost during burning (Bhattacharjya et al., 2021) [10] . The study, conducted in sugarcane fields in Maharashtra, found that burning sugarcane trash resulted in higher soil pH and electrical conductivity (EC) compared with fields where the trash was trash retention Bramhe et al. (2024) [11] . Burning sugarcane trash can lead to significant nitrogen losses, mainly through volatilization during combustion. In contrast, retaining the trash in the field allows nitrogen to be recycled as the residues gradually decompose, thereby contributing to soil nitrogen availability and improving nutrient cycling (Basanta et al., 2003; Yadav et al., 1994; Graham et al., 2002) [12,13,14] . Nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium (K) are key nutrients required for the healthy growth and development of sugarcane. Along with these nutrients, soil characteristics such as pH, electrical conductivity (EC) and the availability of micronutrients iron (Fe), manganese (Mn), zinc (Zn) and copper (Cu) also influ ence nutrient availability and overall crop performance. Understanding the relationship between these soil properties and sugarcane yield and sugar recovery can help in developing more effective and efficient crop management practices. Correlation analysis is useful for understanding the strength and direction of relationships among soil chemical properties, sugarcane yield and Commercial Cane Sugar (CCS) Mavchi et al. (2015) [15] . These relationships may vary depending on the method of trash management, particularly between trash retention and trash burning, as well as among areas with different levels of sugar recovery. Therefore, the present study was undertaken to examine the relationships between soil chemical properties, sugarcane yield and CCS under trash retention and trash burning practices across high, medium and low sugar recovery zones.

Statistical analysis

The two treatments were compared using a paired t-test, the same samples were used for both treatments. The association between the different measured variables was examined using a correlation matrix.

Results

sugarcane trash management practices in high sugar recovery zone As shown in Table 1, N, P and K showed strong positive correlations with yield (r = 0.932, 0.935 and 0.948, respectively) and CCS (r = 0.727, 0.880 and 0.877, respectively). Yield also had a strong positive relationship with CCS (r = 0.893). In contrast, pH and EC showed negative correlations with yield (r = -0.348 and -0.302) and CCS (r = -0.217 and -0.373). The relationships of Fe, Mn, Zn and Cu with yield and CCS were generally weak (Cerri et al., 2012) [16] . As shown in Table 2, under trash management in the medium sugar recovery zone, N, P and K showed strong positive correlations with both yield and CCS. Yield was strongly correlated with N (r = 0.872), P (r = 0.974) and K (r = 0.978), while CCS showed similar positive relationships with N (r = 0.874), P (r = 0.977) and K (r = 0.969).

Yield and CCS also had a very strong positive correlation (r = 0.982).

Fe and Mn showed a moderate positive relationship (r = 0.585), whereas Zn had weak negative correlations with yield (r = -0.297) and CCS (r = -0.306). by sugarcane trash management practices in low sugar recovery zone As shown in Table 3, under trash management in the low sugar recovery zone, N, P, and K showed strong positive relationships with both yield and CCS. Yield was strongly correlated with N (r = 0.965), P (r = 0.919) and K (r = 0.931), while CCS showed positive correlations with N (r = 0.830), P (r = 0.966) and K (r = 0.932). Yield and CCS were also strongly correlated (r = 0.861), indicating that higher cane yield was generally associated with better sugar recovery. While EC was moderately correlated with Mn (r = 0.536). Mn showed weak negative correlations with yield (r = -0.291) and CCS (r = -0.357), whereas the remaining soil properties showed weak or negligible relationships with yield and CCS. sugarcane trash burning practices in high sugar recovery zone

As shown in Table 4, under sugarcane trash burning in the high sugar recovery zone, N, P and K showed strong positive relationships with both yield and CCS. Yield was strongly correlated with N (r = 0.891), P (r = 0.956), and K (r = 0.965), while CCS showed similar positive correlations with N (r = 0.879), P (r = 0.950), and K (r = 0.916). Yield and CCS also had a strong positive correlation (r = 0.939), indicating that higher cane yield was generally associated with better sugar recovery. Fe and Mn showed a moderate positive relationship (r = 0.641), while Mn and Cu were strongly correlated (r = 0.770). In contrast, soil pH showed negative relationships with N (r = -0.527), P (r = -0.456), yield (r = -0.445), and CCS (r = -0.386). As shown in Table 5, under trash burning in the medium sugar recovery zone, N, P and K were strongly and positively related to both yield and CCS. Yield showed very strong correlations with N (r = 0.989), P (r = 0.967), and K (r = 0.941), while CCS was also strongly correlated with N (r = 0.969), P (r = 0.985) and K (r = 0.873). Yield and CCS were strongly related to each other (r = 0.950), suggesting that higher cane yield was generally associated with better sugar re-covery. Among the other soil properties, Fe showed moderate positive correlations with P (r = 0.580) and CCS (r = 0.563) and a strong positive relationship was observed between Fe and Mn (r = 0.653). Mg also showed moderate positive relationships with K (r = 0.526) and yield (r = 0.404). sugarcane trash burning practices in low sugar recovery zone As shown in Table 6, under trash burning in the low sugar recovery zone, N, P and K showed positive associations with both yield and CCS. Yield was strongly correlated with N (r = 0.809) and P (r = 0.864), while K also showed a positive relationship (r = 0.702).

Similarly, CCS was strongly associated with N (r = 0.819) and P (r = 0.790), whereas its relationship with K was moderate (r = 0.542). A strong positive correlation was also observed between yield and CCS (r = 0.888), indicating that higher cane yield was generally linked with better sugar recovery. Among the other soil properties, while Mn had moderate positive correlations with yield (r = 0.553).

Conclusions

The correlation analysis indicated that N, P and K had the strongest and most consistent relationships with sugarcane yield and CCS under both trash retention and trash burning practices across the different sugar recovery zones. A strong positive relationship was also observed between yield and CCS, suggesting that higher cane production was generally associated with better sugar recovery. In comparison, soil pH and EC showed weak to moderate negative relationships with yield and CCS, while the associations of most secondary and micronutrients were relatively weak and varied across the treatments. Collectively these results indicate that maintaining adequate nutrient availability and implementing effective trash management practices are essential for improving sugarcane yield and sugar recovery.

References

1. Chauhan JS, Govindaraj P, Bakhshi RK, Singh J, Kumar S, Singh K, Choudhury P, Singh RK. Growth, varietal scenario and seed production of sugarcane in India: Status, impact and future outlook. Sugar Tech. 2022;24:1649-1669.
2. Solomon S. Sugarcane production and development of sugar industry in India. Sugar Tech. 2016;18:588-602.
3. Bairwa R, Mamta, Dhaker DL, Bagoria N. In-situ trash management induced sustainability of soil health to produce the qualitative products. International Journal of Agricultural Invention. 2020;5(2):249-254.
4. Ravish P, Chaudhry S. Evaluation of the impact of sugarcane trash in situ incorporation on soil health in North Haryana. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. 2025;10:197-1089.
5. Tandon V, Rani M, Kumar R, Lathwal M, Kalyan N, Kumar S, Kamboj A, Sushil, Kamboj P, Sharma A. The role of sugarcane trash in soil fertility and plant growth: A review. Asian Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition. 2025;11(1):67-79.
6. Pandey C. Management of crop residue for sustaining soil fertility and food grain production in India. Acta Scientific Agriculture. 2018;3:188-195.
7. Mitchell RDJ, Thorburn PJ, Larsen P. Quantifying the loss of nutrients from the immediate area when sugarcane residues are burnt. Proceedings of the Australian Society of Sugar Cane Technologists. 2000;22:206-211.
8. Sutton MR, Wood AV, Saffigna PG. Long-term effects of green cane trash retention on Herbert River soils. In Wilson JR, Hogarth DM, Campbell JA, Garside AL, editors. Sugarcane: Research towards efficient and sustainable production. Brisbane: CSIRO Division of Tropical Crops and Pastures; 1996:178-180.
9. Wood CW, Westfall DG, Peterson GA. Soil carbon and nitrogen changes on initiation of no-till cropping systems. Soil Science Society of America Journal. 1991;55:470-476.
10. Bhattacharjya S, Sahu A, Phalke DH, Manna MC, Thakur JK, Mandal A, Tripathi AK, Sheoran P, Choudhary M, Bhowmick A, Rahman MM. In situ decomposition of crop residues using ligno cellulolytic microbial consortia: a viable alternative to residue burning. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2021;28:32416-32433.
11. Bramhe SB, Surwase SA, Deshmukh PS. Effect of sugarcane trash burning on soil health and environmental indicators. International Journal of Advanced Biochemistry Research. 2024;8(8S):167-170.
12. Basanta MV, Dourado-Neto D, Reichardt K, Bacchi OOS, Oliveira JCM, Trivelin PCO, Timm LC, Tominaga TT, Correchel V, Cassaro FAM, Pires MV, Macedo IC. Management effects on nitrogen recovery in a sugarcane crop grown in Brazil. Geoderma. 2003;116(1-2):235-248.
13. Yadav RL, Prasad SR, Singh R, Srivastava VK. Recycling sugarcane trash to conserve soil organic carbon for sustaining yields of successive ratoon crops in sugarcane. Bioresource Technology. 1994;49(3):231-235.
14. Graham MH, Haynes RJ, Meyer JH. Soil organic matter content and quality: effects of fertilizer applications, burning and trash retention on a long-term sugarcane experiment in South Africa. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 2002;34(1):93-102.
15. Mavchi AV, Kadlag AD, Ahire DB. Correlation study between soil chemical properties and juice quality of sugarcane as influence by salt affected soils of Mula Command. Ecology, Environment and Conservation. 2015;21(1):585-590.
16. Cerri DGP, Magalhaes PSG. Correlation of physical and chemical attributes of soil with sugarcane yield. Pesquisa Agropecuaria Brasileira. 2012;47(4):613-62.
17. How to cite this article: Zodge R, Phalke D, Kamble B, Manna M, Patil S, Bachhav S, et al. Correlation of soil chemical properties with sugarcane yield and CCS under different trash management practices. International Journal of Research in Agronomy. 2026;9(9):1592-1596. doi: https://www.doi.org/10.33545/261806 0X.2026.v9.i9u.6737